CBS News
진보 성향
기타
Residents near California chemical tank forced to flee: "You're freaking out"
Emergency crews raced overnight to prevent a tank holding a volatile industrial chemical from exploding at an aerospace facility in Southern California.
🇺🇸 미국 · "FORCED" · 총 97건
필터 보기현재 지수
50.0
0 = 부정 우세
50 = 중립
100 = 긍정 우세
최근 7일 기준 11,674건을 분석한 결과, 뉴스 심리지수는 50.0(균형)입니다. 긍정 1건(0.0%)·중립 11,672건(100.0%)·부정 1건(0.0%)이며, 중립 비중이 뚜렷하게 높습니다. 성향 지수는 종합 19.0(중도 균형)입니다.
Emergency crews raced overnight to prevent a tank holding a volatile industrial chemical from exploding at an aerospace facility in Southern California.
A leaking chemical tank in Cypress, California, is at risk of exploding, officials say, and at least 50,000 people have been forced to evacuate. Lana Zak has the latest.
“Social engineering” sounds like something out of a conspiracy thriller, charged with totalitarian control and fringe paranoia. More mundanely, it’s come to be associated with phishing and other scams, in which fraudsters manipulate people into disclosing personal information. Yet the concept is older and more benign: it is the deliberate shaping of human behavior, often at scale. It predates silicon—and became pervasive, and ungoverned, especially once its practitioners learned to hide it. Authoritarian regimes and more recently scammers and big companies have profited from it. To defend ourselves from bad actors, and to benefit from social engineering’s good side, we need to reclaim the name, and govern it prudently. The roots of engineering In 1894, Dutch entrepreneur Jacques van Marken urged companies to hire “social engineers” to manage human systems such as insurance, education, and profit sharing for workers as carefully as they did mechanical ones. Fifteen years later, reformer William H. Tolman published Social Engineering, describing how U.S. industrialists optimized workers’ conditions alongside manufacturing methods. If industrialists could shape steel and electricity on demand, why not society itself? By the 1920s, that confidence had spread. The architect Le Corbusier declared that dwellings were “machines for living in,” imagining cities as orderly lattices where people moved like parts on a conveyor belt. Civilization would run like a Swiss watch. The idea soon darkened. Authoritarian regimes pushed it to extremes, promising to fashion “the New Man.” In Nazi Germany, engineer Fritz Todt founded Organization Todt, a vast state engineering enterprise that emerged from the autobahn highway system and later operated concentration camps using slave labor. In the Soviet Union, leaders adopted U.S. scientific management techniques to plan factory-worker movements and classify populations through centralized records, feeding both rapid industrialization drives and the gulag system of forced labor. The same tools and managerial methods used to build highways and enact five-year plans worked for repression and mass control. By the 1950s, “social engineering” had become a contaminated phrase. The revelations of Nazi and Soviet abuses, along with Cold War critiques of grand social planning turned the term from a progressive slogan into a warning label. Banishing the words pushed the practice underground, making it harder to recognize when it resurfaced in new forms—such as organizational psychology and systems management that still relied on classification and behavioral influence techniques but under softer, less loaded labels. Social engineering’s more subtle spread In the postwar years, the new social-engineering lexicon included “human factors” and “urban planning,” all promising integration rather than command. As computing advanced, the language shifted again: “customer journey mapping” to track interactions, “user experience” to script them. Engineering, which began as a means of reshaping physical space, set its sights on shaping behavior. Digital design features embedded in our smartphones now target our attention and desire. Language helps conceal these modern forms of social engineering. “Data analytics” sounds neutral beside “surveillance.” “Personalization” flatters individuality while still sorting users into predictable categories. “Behavioral nudges” guide decisions without the sense of intrusion. We attach “social” as a favorable modifier to sciences, capital, and media, yet recoil when it meets “engineering.” That discomfort is a clue. Engineering implies control, and control prompts us to ask who directs whom, toward what ends, and with whose permission. Not all social engineering these days is hidden. Hackers don’t need to break a firewall if someone hands over their password. Romance scammers cultivate intimacy the way farmers cultivate crops. They succeed not through force but by exploiting trust. If even these obvious attacks work, the invisible kind, with roots in social engineering, are a shoo-in. Most of the social engineering we encounter is proprietary and beyond our control. Firms build recommendation algorithms tuned to boost engagement and profit with no hearings or right of appeal. Browser and cookie defaults decide what data we surrender. A single autoplay toggle can cost users hours and build unhealthy habits. These are acts of engineering as deliberate as laying a road or redrawing an electoral district. They create a kind of curated itch by which boredom never settles, and satisfaction never arrives. The results are predictable—users click on targeted ads, make purchases, form habits, and lock in opinions. Consent has transformed along with it. Once straightforward and revocable, it is now subtle and persistent, buried in defaults or opaque terms of service too quickly accepted. You remain free to opt out, much as you are free to refuse roads or electricity. Consent has become the preselected setting of modern life. When social engineering operated more in the open, citizens could contest it, at least in societies with responsive government. Today’s invisible version diffuses accountability so thoroughly that scrutiny becomes hard to direct. Despite recent congressional hearings on social media’s impact on youth mental health and juries agreeing that firms are knowingly designing algorithms that cause harm, pinpointing responsibility remains elusive. When the mechanism is buried inside a system used by billions, we cannot easily point to a single decision-maker or trace the precise moment of manipulation. Today’s social engineering is less overt and theatrical than its predecessors. Earlier versions arrived on public posters and loudspeakers for mass audiences. Today’s version is more intimate, delivered through personal devices and constant feeds tailored to the individual. The model succeeds because participation feels like freedom, not control. Not all social engineering is dystopian. Well-kept parks foster community, accessible buildings extend dignity, vaccines and seatbelts save lives. Even in the digital realm, positive examples exist: browser extensions that automatically block hidden trackers, search engines that refuse to build personalized surveillance profiles, and decentralized social platforms that give users greater control over their own data and feeds. The term “social engineering” still unsettles, though. But “asocial” engineering, which ignores human consequences entirely, is worse. Recognition of the human dimension to engineering is the beginning of repair. Only by seeing the machinery clearly and naming it honestly can we decide who engineers what and why. The machinery will not dismantle itself. Once named, it becomes subject to choice. That negotiation of purpose, power, and process are the defining political questions of any real democracy. We cannot ensure that social engineering serves and sustains society so long as we dodge the words.
A massive tank filled with a dangerous toxic chemical is at risk of exploding and has forced nearly 50,000 people from their Orange County, California, homes. Authorities are now trying to verify if a crack they found could potentially alleviate the pressure in the tank. NBC’s Steve Patterson reports for TODAY.
"I was like nervous someone was going to slip and fall down the bleachers, like all the elderly people."
A class-action lawsuit seeking accountability for the chemical tank that is threatening to explode and has forced 50,000 people out of their homes in California has been filed against GKN Aerospace.
Orange County prosecutors have launched an investigation into the aerospace company at the center of the Garden Grove chemical scare that forced tens of thousands from their homes as crews scrambled to stop a possible explosion.
An EasyJet flight from Egypt to England was diverted to Fiumicino Airport in Rome because a woman told crewmembers her portable power bank was charging in her luggage, posing a significant fire risk.
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) declared a state of emergency in California on Saturday as thousands of people were forced to evacuate their homes over a toxic chemical tank that, authorities say, will either leak or explode. NBC News' Steve Patterson is on the ground just outside the evacuation zone.
Kyrgyzstan has taken sweeping action to clamp down on companies suspected of circumventing Western sanctions imposed on Russia following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The Kyrgyz Justice Ministry has announced that 50 companies will be forced to suspend their activities after they had been flagged by Western partners. "After they report risks, we study them and respond. For example, the United States and the United Kingdom have made allegations regarding 51 companies," Deputy Prime Minister Daniyar Amangeldiev told state news agency…
Jon Bodwell says he moved into his Washington factory and rents out his home as rising costs and crime push his 48-year-old business out of state.
Stephen Colbert spent a decade obsessing over President Donald Trump. For his final “Late Show” appearance, the far-Left host wouldn’t so much as utter Trump’s name. By design, of course. Thursday’s CBS finale proved a bizarre affair, a forced repudiation of what Colbert & co. built over the show’s 11-year run. He pretended he was ...
The Trump administration announced that people with temporary visas seeking to adjust their immigration status to obtain green cards must return to their home countries to “do so through consular processing,” in a major change from current practice. NBC News' Jonathan Allen explains the impact and how the new requirement will be enforced.
SWAT damage, sloppy briefs, and forced confessions.
A manhunt for an armed suspect in Fulton County, Georgia, forced a polling location to close on Tuesday, delaying election officials from reporting results. CBS News' Skyler Henry and Anthony Salvanto have the latest.
Charter would have expanded member eligibility and focused on alleged injuries.
Commercial technologies are enabling the U.S. military and militaries around the world to operate with greater efficiency, speed, precision, and lethality. The benefits of commercial capabilities can be particularly impactful given the defense industrial base’s struggles to produce at the speed and scale needed to outmatch China, Russia, and other aligned adversaries. It is largely for these reasons that President Donald Trump mandated the Department of Defense to preference commercial solutions. Congress also reinforced efforts to prioritize commercially available solutions in Section 1214 of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.Commercial technologies are also a driving factor behind increasingly rapid evolutions in The post Rethinking Security Cooperation in the Age of Commercial Tech appeared first on War on the Rocks.