A "smart" product is generally a spying product, and that's true for cities too. In addition, their spy systems tend to be privatized, so there is no public accountability about what data they collect or how that data is used.

Supposedly the data collected in Stratumseind is "about crowds, not individuals" -- but what does that really mean, concretely? Does it mean that the record data do not permit identification of individuals, only of crowds? If so, maybe it is not a threat to human rights.

But it could mean that they collect and store data about lots of individuals but they are only interested when that data shows a crowd. If so, that is no protection at all, and no excuse. Tracking people's movements is a threat to human rights, and we must not stand for it except in very small and limited ways.

Why the nitrites used to cure meat are carcinogenic while the nitrites found in lettuce are not.

"Brazil's Amazon Protection Laws Invite Deforestation."

When a government says it arranges for a "balance" between the interests of the rich and the interests of humanity and/or wildlife, we should expect it to tip over and crush the latter at any moment.

Gas extraction in Groningen has caused hundreds of small earthquakes which have cumulatively damaged lots of buildings. The cost of compensating the owners of the buildings can be more than 5 billion euros, more than the worth of the gas and wells.

The oil company is clever about dragging its feet and pressuring homeowners to accept only partial compensation.

The Svalbard seed vault, meant to preserve many varieties of plants in case they are lost, will be upgraded to protect it from the effects of global heating.

Now if only we could upgrade all the places that plants live.