The pervasiveness of artificial intelligence is hard to ignore. The rise of new technologies under its auspices is now almost omnipresent, infesting almost every facet of our existence. AI agents have repeatedly “accidentally” hacked systems, gone out of the sandboxes created to test them ? and have attempted to deceive human creators. Just consider one example involving 700 AI agents created by OpenAI that, last July, hacked Hugging Face, an open-source platform, and, reportedly, “in many cases tried to cover their tracks.” “The coordinated activity by AI agents ? programs that run with minimal human supervision ? and their attempts to hide it raise questions about how closely AI companies are monitoring tests of increasingly powerful models, and could add fuel to calls for tighter oversight,” Reuters recently reported. Here’s one of the primary concerns that’s not receiving enough attention, though. While AI most certainly needs to be restrained, contained and properly directed to protect human beings from some of the dire warnings its creators and guardians are uttering, we also must protect the First Amendment. Yes, it’s true AI needs guardrails, but we should also be careful before turning over control to a government conspiring with companies that have the power to shape our thoughts, obsessively gatekeep, and, ultimately, control our lives. We can’t stop the rapid speed of AI. As we consider safeguards, we must also ensure that those who run these companies don’t use their power in unfortunate ways. Beyond that, the government has already proven it’s willing to lie or restrain speech it finds objectionable ? and that should give us great pause. Ultimately, the real threat of AI is an overreaction that turns everything over to a government and private industry with the power to implement total control over our lives. We must balance free speech protections even as guardrails are contemplated.

Ben and two others died during the ambush. Another passenger, Romi Gonen, was taken hostage and held in the Gaza Strip until her release in January 2025. Ben saved at least nine lives that day and died trying to save three more. Itai Zak and his wife, Etti, hid in a safe room with their 15-year-old son, Sagi, as they heard Hamas gunmen going through their neighborhood. They refused the demands by the terrorists to exit their shelter, and so the Hamas devils set their house on fire. The three were found hugging one another. They were survived by two other children who were not home at the time of the murders. Dana Petrenko and Daniel Goldman, both in their early 20s, met in 2021 and had been inseparable ever since. They were attending the music festival when Hamas terrorists attacked. While trying to escape, Dana had a panic attack and Daniel protected her with his body. They were murdered and found in an embrace, according to their friends. Tohar Ben-Ayun was 24 and had already fought cancer and won. On Oct. 7, 2023, she and her boyfriend were murdered by Hamas killers. A friend called her “a ray of light, a pillar of strength to us and to so many people who love you so much,” according to a report in The Times of Israel. Shiri Bibas was kidnapped by Hamas terrorists on Oct. 7, 2023, along with her sons, ages 9 months and 4. Her parents were also murdered in their home that day. Later in 2023, Hamas claimed that Shiri and her children were killed in captivity. Yarden Bibas, Shiri’s husband and the father of their children, was taken hostage that day and held in Gaza. He was eventually released in February 2025 ― without knowing what happened to his family. Haim Outmezgine, a rescue worker, said, “It was clear that they were trying to spread as much horror as they could.” We must never forget what happened and who did it.

Daniel Ben Senior was a citizen of both the United States and Israel. She lived in Los Angeles until her parents needed her help, and she moved back to Israel. She was just 34 when she was one of the 364 murdered on Oct. 7, 2023, at the Nova music festival. In total, more than 1,200 people were killed that day in Israel. About 828 were civilians ― including babies, children and senior citizens. An estimated 251 people were taken as hostages. Naor Hasidim and Sivan Elkabets were likely pulled out of their secure room and murdered on the couch in the living room of Sivan’s apartment. They had been together since high school and were just 23 when they were killed by savage Hamas terrorists. Abu Sabila heard Odaya Swisa screaming early in the morning on Oct. 7, 2023. Odaya’s wife, Dolev, was killed, and he was in shock. Abu tried to get him and his two girls into the car to get to the police station. He did not know the Hamas killers had taken it over and were looking for more victims. The two men were murdered in the car in front of the children. Romi, 6, and Lia, 3, were found lying on the floor of the car. Rescuers heard the girls scream, “Are you the police? Are you from Israel? Take us!” Marcelle Frailich Kaplun was a high school science teacher. She and her husband, Dror, were murdered during the Hamas onslaught. Marcelle is survived by her three children and four grandchildren. Her daughter, Mor Strikovski, said that her mother “was always larger than life.” Ben Shimoni was killed trying to save people who were attending the music festival. He initially made it to safety with four others in his car. He dropped them off and went back to save more people. He saved another group of five people, but after returning a third time to rescue others, he was gunned down at a checkpoint set up by the savage Hamas terrorists.

During his state visit to Washington last month, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced that China would be inviting 100,000 American students to study in China over the next five years. Not a single American student should take him up on the offer unless they want to risk being where Myanmar-born American scholar Min Zin is right now: in a Chinese jail. The fact that Min Zin, an American citizen, was specifically lured to China under the guise of an academic conference to be arrested should terrify any prospective American student. It should also be more than enough for American policymakers and universities to take a stand and refuse to risk the lives of additional American students. In Mr. Xi’s China, there is no guarantee that they will not also be arrested and used as political pawns and prisoners. There is no greater imperative for an American president than to ensure the security and safety of U.S. citizens. Yet as long as China continues to detain American citizens such as Mr. Chen and Min Zin, China is not safe for American students. The U.S. should firmly reject Mr. Xi’s evil bargain, and the State Department should reinforce its “D” indicator ? denoting a risk of wrongful detention ? to the current travel advisory for China so that all Americans understand this threat. We should also raise the threat level from Level 2 to Level 3, indicating that Americans should reconsider travel because of serious risks to safety and security. These steps would protect the safety of Americans considering travel abroad while telling Mr. Xi that there will be consequences if our citizens remain arbitrarily detained. Mr. Xi said during his recent White House visit that “the hope of China-U.S. relationship lies in our people.” Right now, he is holding our people hostage. Until he releases American citizens such as Min Zin and Mr. Chen and demonstrably verifies this will not happen again, we should give him 100,000 rejections.

First is the price of oil. Just search “price of Brent crude,” which is a more reliable indicator, as it is a major global trading benchmark for light, sweet crude oil. Here you will get a real-time chart of oil futures - what the markets are betting oil will cost. Also interesting is that the Brent futures curve trends down, not up. The best target price of oil, I am told by friends in the petroleum sector, is about $80 per barrel. Watch the trend. Next, look at freight costs. For this, I like to check the TD3C Baltic Futures rate, which tracks Very Large Crude Carrier transportation on the Middle East Gulf-to-China route. Those rates have skyrocketed to extraordinary levels and remain elevated. Finally, keep track of insurance. Who would be willing to insure shipments through the Strait of Hormuz? One site I follow publishes a real-time measure of war-risk insurance rates, based on estimates compiled from Lloyd’s List, Breakwave Advisors, carrier advisories and other sources. This rate is running at 40 times - yes, you read that right - the peacetime rate. Keep an eye on this tracker. Its downward movement is another indication of longer-term energy price stability. While the war with Iran continues, my savviest clients are taking steps to mitigate the impact of higher energy costs. They are using utility consultants to find savings on their bills, sharing more freight costs with their customers and allowing more employees to work from home to reduce commuting costs. No one expects these higher prices to continue indefinitely. When tanker rates, war-risk premiums and oil prices fall together for a sustained period, it is a strong market signal that traders, ship owners and insurers perceive the risk to energy supplies to be declining. From there, they can adjust their spending. My best clients are always looking ahead, and these are the metrics they use to forecast energy costs.

When will oil prices come down? Do not ask a television pundit. Ask the people risking billions of dollars on the answer. Many of my clients - small and midsize businesses - are eager for elevated energy prices to return to Earth. High oil costs do not affect just the price of gas at the pump; they also have far-reaching impacts on many other business expenses. For example, when oil prices are high, so is the cost of heating an office or production facility. Shipping costs have skyrocketed because freight companies seem to have no problem passing on their higher diesel costs to customers. Neither do airlines, which is why airfares leaped in June and July. Raw materials - solvents, lubricants, bearing grease, rubber, wax, plastics, ink and dyes - are all petroleum-based. Fertilizer costs for farmers go up because of the energy used to manufacture this product. So it is not just gas, and it can have a significant impact on a company’s overhead. If you run a business, it is important to factor these cost increases into your budget. Yet it is also critical to look ahead and realistically predict when these prices will ultimately fall so you can better conserve cash now and act in the future. How can you predict when the price of oil will fall? There is no single right answer, but I know one thing: Do not listen to the experts. The news channels need to fill the airwaves, and the news sites need clicks, which means that anyone with an opinion can weigh in. The messages are conflicting and unreliable. You have a business to run. You need better information. The people who really know are those risking their money in the markets. Follow the money, and you will be able to tell. When it comes to money, these people know more than any TV pundit, and they are certainly not stupid enough to share their expertise publicly with anyone else. So what have I learned from some of these experts?

Over the past decade, tens of thousands of tax filers with incomes of $1 million or more were collectively paid $812 million in jobless benefits from the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund. In 2024 alone, 10,100 million-dollar earners received nearly $97.4 million in unemployment compensation. The number of millionaires on the unemployment rolls and the amounts paid to them have also been steadily increasing in recent years. Although states are largely responsible for administering unemployment programs, a 1964 U.S. Department of Labor ruling prohibited states from using means testing to limit eligibility. As a result, states have been required to provide financial assistance to anyone who loses a job - even if they continue earning $1 million a year or more. Because unemployment programs are funded primarily by taxing employers, this federal mandate is effectively a reverse Robin Hood tax that takes from struggling small businesses to give to the idle rich and self-sufficient. I cannot think of a more outrageous example of government waste that demonstrates how out of touch Washington is than paying millionaires not to work. Yet when I offered an amendment, the Ending Unemployment Payments to Jobless Millionaires Act, a Democratic senator spoke against my proposal, claiming it would “undermine” the program. My amendment ultimately passed and is now law. As a result, tax dollars sent to Washington may no longer be spent on unemployment benefits for anyone making $1 million or more annually. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that this could save as much as $100 million over the next decade. My message to the affluent finance bros being cut off from Uncle Sam’s unemployment trust fund is simple. If you are fortunate enough to make $1 million or more per year without having to work, then you should be counting your blessings - not collecting jobless benefits.

Yet the wording of the legislation suggests a scope that is larger still. Mr. Xi can invoke the law if he believes China’s control over the South China Sea, East China Sea or islands in dispute with other countries is threatened. That should be of vital importance to the United States. In the East China Sea, China claims territories that are also claimed by U.S. allies South Korea and Japan. America has treaty obligations to come to their aid in the event of conflict. In the South China Sea, meanwhile, China has claimed islands also claimed by the Republic of the Philippines, a major ally for which the U.S. has prioritized defense and security cooperation. The U.S. is duty-bound to assist the Philippines under the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty; the 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement further governs U.S. military access to Philippine bases. The expanded mobilization law is not targeted against a specific country or state, making it a broad instrument. China, in other words, can initiate a national mobilization in the event of perceived threats or potential conflicts with the United States, Russia, India, Japan or any other country. The mobilization law can also be invoked to defend foreign interests or economic investments that Mr. Xi deems vital to national security. As such, the expanded 2026 National Defense Mobilization Law is best understood as preparation for a possible protracted conflict. This is so for good reason. The PRC has watched Russia struggle with its mobilization, materiel, drafting new troops, funds and supply chains for what has turned out to be a long conflict with Ukraine. All these developments offer lessons to Mr. Xi and the PLA regarding the potential drain on resources and personnel during a protracted conflict. China’s leadership is now doing something about it. The result will make an extended campaign against Taiwan even more likely.

On Oct. 1, a new mobilization law will take effect in China ? one that puts Xi Jinping’s stamp on mounting war preparations. The measure, an update of the country’s 2010 National Defense Mobilization Law, gives China’s military, the People’s Liberation Army, expanded ability to control the national economy, supply chains, technology and critical infrastructure. Enacted in late August, the law incorporates Mr. Xi’s “Military-Civil Fusion” principles into law, essentially harnessing all enterprises ? whether public, joint venture or private ? as well as schools, civil infrastructure, the populace and relevant technologies to support national defense. It also expands the government’s authority to draft citizens across a wide age range into the armed forces or reserves. As commander in chief of China’s Central Military Commission, Mr. Xi already possesses the power to mobilize the country against “threats to national sovereignty, unity, territorial integrity, and China’s development interests.” The new law takes things a step further, enshrining his aggressive foreign policy precepts in national legislation. Civilian resources can now be requisitioned for the “rapid transition from peacetime to wartime and to transform economic and social strength into national defense strength.” The central government likewise can dip into provincial and local budgets for national defense and mobilization needs under the statute. By revising the National Defense Mobilization Law, Mr. Xi can tap into China’s high-technology sectors and the personnel who work in them in times of war or national emergency. That was one of Mr. Xi’s goals, as China is surging ahead in critical areas such as artificial intelligence and robotics. The central government will establish expanded stockpiles of critical materials and control their supply chains. In fact, the PLA would control the entire range of China’s critical infrastructure, roads, railways, telecommunications and space assets, and the PLA can requisition any materials or capabilities it needs. The measure has Taiwanese analysts on alert, and for good reason. They have reasonably interpreted it as a means to prepare for military action against the island.

East Germany similarly developed civic movements, and once the regime began to disintegrate, opposition groups and the crumbling party structure together created a Central Round Table that immediately addressed free elections, the dissolution of the secret police apparatus, democratic transformation and even the drafting of a new constitution. Its first meeting, on Dec. 7, 1989, established, among other subcommittees, a working group to begin drafting a new constitution. Russia demonstrates the alternative. The Soviet state collapsed before Russia had developed comparable democratic institutions, an independent civil society capable of governing, a broadly legitimate system for privatizing state property or a durable constitutional consensus. The Hudson report, therefore, correctly treats post-CCP planning as a matter of strategic prudence. It examines securing dangerous facilities, stabilizing the financial system, privatizing state assets, restructuring the PLA and security services, protecting vulnerable populations, opening secret-police archives, establishing truth-and-reconciliation mechanisms, and eventually convening a constitutional process. Washington should establish a permanent interagency planning mechanism for a post-CCP contingency and begin working quietly with allies, Chinese democrats, economists, constitutional scholars, dissidents, religious leaders, overseas Chinese communities and specialists in transitional justice. The objective should not be an American-designed China. It should be to give the Chinese people the greatest possible opportunity to build their own free, peaceful, constitutional China. We should not depend on such good fortune again. The CCP may survive for decades, or it may collapse with the breathtaking speed of the communist regimes of 1989. We cannot know when, but history gives us no excuse for being surprised twice. Readying for China after communism is not a regime-change policy. It is insurance against the most consequential political contingency of the 21st century.