🇺🇸 미국 · "SCRIPT" · 총 136건
필터 보기현재 지수
50.0
0 = 부정 우세
50 = 중립
100 = 긍정 우세
최근 7일 기준 11,304건을 분석한 결과, 뉴스 심리지수는 50.0(균형)입니다. 긍정 1건(0.0%)·중립 11,302건(100.0%)·부정 1건(0.0%)이며, 중립 비중이 뚜렷하게 높습니다. 성향 지수는 종합 19.1(중도 균형)입니다.
Former President Joe Biden filed suit against the Justice Department to block the release of recordings and transcripts tied to a special counsel probe.
Tuesday on “The Alex Marlow Show,” Breitbart Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow talked about Mamdani. Marlow said, “So he’s stealing cable as the mayor, and that’s what he’s saying. So he’s stealing cable.” The Alex Marlow Show, hosted by Breitbart Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow, The post Mamdani Defines Democratic Socialism: Stealing Streaming Subscriptions appeared first on Breitbart.
These weatherproof outdoor security cams keep a watchful eye on your property while you get on with life. Our list includes battery-powered cameras that need no subscription.
Plus, one of the oldest manuscripts to tell the tale of King Arthur is heading to auction.
Texas Senate hopeful James Talarico, a Democrat, is again claiming the Bible supports his position that the government should allow the murder of unborn babies up until the moment of birth. During a recently published episode of the hyper-progressive Jamie Kern Lima Show, Talarico claims the Bible is “silent” on abortion and suggests scripture backs ...
The online education platform offers more than 200 courses on everything from fitness to cooking to business. Here's how to make it affordable
Comments
“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.
Whether or not AI is already changing your job description, here are actionable steps you can take to future-proof your career.
Mr. Gore is still giving the slide show that “An Inconvenient Truth” was built around, but with changes that reflect a shift in the discussion of climate change.
Consoles, games, subscriptions, and memory are getting more expensive for gamers — and analysts say there isn't a simple fix.
In a stirring, emotional and inspiring commencement speech at West Point, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth perfectly articulated the warrior’s credo for the graduates while he devastated the woke ideology that had permeated the military in recent years. “On a day like today, there’s no better way to start than with a word from Scripture,” ...
From “The 400 Blows” to “The Florida Project,” kids have made fascinating cinematic subjects. Even if they’re working from scripts, there’s always the sense that they’re not entirely acting — that they can’t help but simply be themselves. The French director Bruno Dumont, a former philosophy professor who broke into Cannes nearly 30 years ago […]
On this "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" broadcast, Kevin Hassett, White House National Economic Council director, and Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, join Nancy Cordes.
The following is the transcript of the interview with Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Democrat of Maryland, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on May 24, 2026.
The following is the transcript of the interview with Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on May 24, 2026.
Fashion designer Jeremy Scott earned a huge round of applause from graduates after ripping up a generic commencement speech scripted by generative artificial intelligence. The post Fashion Designer Jeremy Scott Rips Up ‘Clichéd’ Commencement Speech Written by AI, Gets Huge Applause appeared first on Breitbart.
The following is the transcript of the interview with Dr. Deborah Birx that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on May 24, 2026.
The following is the transcript of the interview with Reps. Josh Gottheimer, Democrat of Maine, and Mike Lawler, Republican of New York, that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on May 24, 2026.
The following is the transcript of the interview with retired Lt. Col. William Swenson and retired Master Sgt. Matthew Williams (Ret.) that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on May 24, 2026.