Connect with us

Latest

Maryland moves to ban surveillance pricing in grocery stores

Published

on

You grab a box of cereal off the shelf. Your neighbor grabs the exact same box at the exact same store on the exact same day. She pays less. You pay more. Why? Because the store’s algorithm decided you would.

That scenario sounds like a conspiracy theory. It isn’t. Retailers have been quietly using this kind of pricing for years, and now one state has finally had enough.

Maryland is set to become the first U.S. state to ban surveillance pricing in retail grocery stores and certain grocery delivery platforms. Governor Wes Moore has said he will sign the Protection from Predatory Pricing Act into law after the state legislature passed it, and the rule will take effect on October 1, 2026.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

WHAT HACKERS CAN LEARN ABOUT YOU FROM A DATA BROKER FILE

Surveillance pricing goes by a few names: dynamic pricing and personalized pricing are the common ones, but the concept is the same regardless of what you call it.

A store collects data on you as an individual shopper. It looks at how often you browse certain products, what neighborhood you live in and whether a competitor is nearby, what your income and family size appear to be, and your dietary habits. Then it uses all of that to decide how much you specifically are willing to pay and charges you accordingly.

One Kroger shopper in Oregon decided to find out exactly what her grocery store knew about her. She submitted a data request under a state privacy law and received a 62-page profile in return. Most of the inferences in that profile were wrong. That’s the part that should make your stomach drop. Retailers are charging people based on guesses, and those guesses are frequently inaccurate. 

The timing here matters. Maryland didn’t pass this bill in a vacuum. Major retailers, including Walmart, have been rolling out digital price tags on store shelves. Unlike paper tags, these electronic displays can update instantly. Pair that capability with predictive pricing software, and a store can change what you’re charged in real-time based on whatever the algorithm decides at that moment.

Governor Moore pointed to the financial pressure already squeezing working families and argued that new technology should not become another tool for squeezing them harder. Consumer Reports actively lobbied for the bill, which speaks to how significant the consumer protection concern really is. Still, the organization was honest about the result: the final version of the law falls short of what advocates originally wanted.

The Protection from Predatory Pricing Act sets some clear ground rules for large grocery retailers. Stores must keep their prices fixed for at least one full business day. That eliminates the possibility of prices spiking by the hour based on demand signals or individual shopper data.

Retailers are also prohibited from using surveillance data, shopping history, ethnicity or income to set different prices for different customers at the same time.

Loyalty programs and promotional offers are still allowed. That exemption was a concession to the retail industry, and it’s one of the places where critics say the law starts to lose its teeth.

RETAIL PRICES CAN JUMP IN SECONDS WITH HIGH-TECH STORE PRICE TAGS

Brick-and-mortar surveillance pricing gets most of the attention, but the same issue shows up in online grocery shopping.

Consumer Reports ran an investigation into Instacart’s pricing practices last December. Nearly 400 shoppers purchased the same basket of groceries from the same stores at the same time. The price differences were striking. Depending on the product, shoppers were paying up to 23% more than other shoppers for identical items. Across a full year of shopping, those gaps could add up to more than $1,200 per household.

After the investigation went public, Instacart announced it was ending the program responsible for those discrepancies. That outcome matters. It shows that consumer pressure and public scrutiny can drive real changes, even before a law requires them.

Maryland may have moved first, but it won’t be alone for long. California, Colorado, Illinois, New Jersey and other states are exploring similar legislation, while New York has already enacted a related pricing transparency law.

What happens next in those states will be telling. Advocates are hoping they avoid the exemptions that weakened Maryland’s version. Each new bill is an opportunity to close the loopholes the retail industry has worked hard to create.

Consumers have been subject to dynamic pricing in airlines, rideshares and e-commerce platforms for years. Grocery stores represent something different, a daily necessity where price manipulation hits people with the least financial flexibility the hardest.

No matter where you live, this law matters to your wallet. If you shop in Maryland, the change is immediate. Starting October 1, 2026, you have a legal right to the same shelf price as every other shopper who walks in that day, regardless of what data the store has collected on you. If you shop anywhere else in the country, pay attention because your state may not be far behind. California, Colorado, Illinois, New Jersey and other states are exploring similar legislation, while New York has already taken steps toward pricing transparency. The momentum is real, and Maryland just handed those states a working template to build from.

10 THINGS TO STOP PAYING FOR TO SAVE MONEY NOW

That said, wherever you shop right now, the exemptions in Maryland’s law are worth understanding. The Maryland Retail Alliance pushed hard against this bill and successfully carved out several exceptions during the legislative process. Consumer Reports flagged one irony in particular: loyalty program prices are exempt, which means stores could shift pricing in ways that favor members and potentially disadvantage non-members, effectively punishing non-members rather than rewarding members.

The enforcement side is also limited in ways that should concern any consumer. If a retailer violates the law, you cannot sue them yourself under these specific provisions of the law. Only the Maryland Attorney General has that authority. And before the AG can take action, the retailer gets a written notice and a 45-day window to correct the violation with no legal consequences. First-time violators face fines of up to $10,000. Repeat offenders face up to $25,000 in fines.

For a major grocery chain generating hundreds of millions in revenue, those fines barely register.

Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?

Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my quiz here: CyberGuy.com.

Maryland’s law is imperfect, and advocates said so publicly. But an imperfect first law still moves the needle. It establishes that surveillance pricing in grocery stores is a problem worth legislating, gives other states a legal framework to improve on, and puts retailers on notice that the political appetite for regulation is growing. The bill’s weaknesses are actually useful in that way. They show exactly where the next round of advocacy needs to focus: stronger enforcement, consumer standing to sue, and tighter language around loyalty pricing exemptions. And if you live outside Maryland? Watch what your own state legislators do next. The grocery industry will lobby hard to add the same loopholes everywhere. Knowing what those loopholes look like is half the battle. Change tends to start in one place before it spreads. Maryland went first. Your state could be next.

If a retailer already holds a 62-page profile on you and most of what’s in it is wrong, do you trust that the same technology is setting your prices fairly, and would you even know if it wasn’t? Let us know your thoughts by writing to us at CyberGuy.com.

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com.  All rights reserved.  

Continue Reading

Border & Security

Woke Judge Who Hid Illegal From ICE Learns Her Fate — Courtroom Erupts!

Published

on

Woke Judge Who Hid Illegal From ICE Learns Her Fate — Courtroom Erupts!

A federal judge dealt another setback to former Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan on Tuesday, upholding her conviction for helping an illegal immigrant evade federal immigration authorities and rejecting her request for reconsideration.

The ruling marks the latest development in a case that has become a flashpoint in the national debate over immigration enforcement and whether public officials can interfere with federal efforts to apprehend individuals living in the country illegally.

U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman declined to overturn Dugan’s conviction and also refused to establish a new sentencing date after previously postponing sentencing from June 3.

Dugan, a former Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge, was convicted in December on obstruction-related charges stemming from her actions involving Mexican national Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, an illegal immigrant whom federal authorities were attempting to arrest.

Her legal team argued that the conviction should be reconsidered based on a recent federal appeals court ruling in United States v. Hernandez. In that case, an immigrant detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement escaped custody, was later recaptured, and convicted of obstructing a pending immigration proceeding. The conviction was ultimately overturned on appeal.

Dugan’s attorneys argued that Flores-Ruiz was not involved in a pending proceeding at the time of the incident but was instead the subject of an arrest warrant.

In a statement following Tuesday’s decision, Dugan’s lawyers called Adelman’s ruling “wrong.”

However, the federal judge rejected the argument and found that the circumstances of Dugan’s case were significantly different.

“At oral argument, defendant noted that ICE goes out every day to try to arrest people on the street,” Adelman wrote in his ruling.

He further summarized the defense’s position by writing, “Given the estimated 10 million undocumented persons in the United States, does that mean there are 10 million pending proceedings?”

Adelman noted that Dugan “insists that there needs to be some formality, i.e., a proceeding before an agency involving parties trying to come to a determination, an adjudication.”

“The problem for the defense is that this case did not involve some random encounter on the street,” he continued.

“It was a targeted operation, conducted pursuant to agency procedures, including the issuance of an arrest warrant for a specific person, Eduardo Flores-Ruiz.”

The case drew national attention earlier this year after federal authorities accused Dugan of actively helping Flores-Ruiz avoid apprehension by federal agents.

According to prosecutors, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, along with agents from the FBI, DEA, and Customs and Border Protection, arrived at the courthouse on April 18 intending to arrest Flores-Ruiz following a scheduled court appearance.

Flores-Ruiz was facing three misdemeanor battery charges and was accused of assaulting two individuals.

Federal authorities alleged that after learning agents were waiting to take Flores-Ruiz into custody, Dugan directed law enforcement personnel away from the area and then escorted Flores-Ruiz and his attorney through a restricted jury door, bypassing the public exit where federal agents were stationed.

Prosecutors argued that the actions were intended to help Flores-Ruiz avoid arrest.

The controversy quickly escalated, leading to Dugan’s arrest and subsequent removal from judicial duties.

In April, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued an administrative order directing Dugan to be “temporarily relieved of her official duties” while the case proceeded.

The incident also drew sharp criticism from then-Attorney General Pam Bondi, who questioned how a sitting judge could allegedly interfere with a lawful federal arrest operation.

“We could not believe that a judge really did that,” Bondi said.

“You cannot obstruct a criminal case. And really, shame on her. It was a domestic violence case of all cases, and she’s protecting a criminal defendant over victims of crime,” Bondi added.

Bondi also highlighted the allegations against Flores-Ruiz, describing the violence that prosecutors say led to the criminal charges.

“[He] beat the guy, hit the guy 30 times, knocked him to the ground, choked him, beat up a woman so badly; they both had to go to the hospital,” she said.

With Adelman refusing to reconsider the conviction, Dugan now faces sentencing on the obstruction charge, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. While first-time offenders rarely receive the maximum sentence, the case has become a prominent example of the Trump administration’s broader emphasis on enforcing immigration laws and holding public officials accountable when they interfere with federal law enforcement operations.

Supporters of stricter immigration enforcement argue that the ruling sends a clear message that no one—including judges—is above the law when it comes to obstructing federal authorities carrying out their duties. As sentencing approaches, the case is likely to remain at the center of the national debate over immigration, public accountability, and the rule of law.

Continue Reading

Latest

Winner Announced In Hotly-Contested GOP Primary

Published

on

Winner Announced In Hotly-Contested GOP Primary

President Donald Trump scored another major political victory Tuesday night as Rep. Barry Moore cruised to victory in Alabama’s Republican Senate runoff, further cementing the president’s unmatched influence within the Republican Party.

Moore, a three-term congressman and longtime Trump ally, defeated former Navy SEAL Jared Hudson in a closely watched race to replace outgoing Sen. Tommy Tuberville, who is leaving the Senate to pursue Alabama’s governorship this November.

The race was viewed nationally as another test of Trump’s political strength heading into the midterm election cycle. Despite media speculation and polling that suggested a potentially close contest, Moore ultimately delivered a decisive victory, defeating Hudson by 18 percentage points and reinforcing the power of a Trump endorsement in Republican politics.

Trump’s backed candidates have enjoyed an impressive track record throughout the 2026 election season, with voters repeatedly rallying behind candidates who embrace the president’s America First agenda.

Following his victory, Moore thanked supporters and highlighted the close working relationship he has built with President Trump over the years.

“When I call him, he takes my calls,” Moore told supporters after the race was called.

The congressman also urged Republicans not to take future elections for granted despite the party’s recent success.

“We’ve got the White House. We’ve got a delegation that’s pretty conservative, but it’s vitally important that we show up and vote,” Moore said.

Moore has long been one of Trump’s most loyal supporters in Congress. As a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, he was an early supporter of Trump’s first presidential campaign and has consistently backed the president’s policy priorities throughout both administrations.

Just days before the runoff election, Trump delivered a strong endorsement that many political observers believe helped propel Moore to victory.

“Barry Moore has my complete and total endorsement. He’s the best America First candidate you can imagine,” Trump said.

Hudson entered the race as a political outsider and attempted to capitalize on voter frustration with Washington. The former Navy SEAL forced Moore into a runoff after a strong showing in the initial primary election and campaigned heavily on his military service and lack of political experience.

Throughout the campaign, Hudson argued that Alabama needed a fresh voice in Washington and frequently contrasted his military background with Moore’s congressional tenure.

Leaning heavily on his service record, Hudson pledged to be “a warrior for President Trump’s ‘America First’ agenda.”

“If you want the same thing over and over again, elect a career politician. If you want different results, somebody who can take your issues to Washington and not bring the stupidity of Washington back here to you, send a warrior to Washington,” Hudson said during a candidate forum in May.

Despite Hudson’s energetic campaign, Moore successfully convinced Republican voters that proven conservative leadership and a demonstrated record of supporting Trump mattered more than outsider credentials alone.

Throughout the race, Moore pointed to his voting record and conservative ratings as evidence that he has consistently delivered for Alabama voters.

“Look at my record, the most conservative member in the Alabama delegation, an ally of the president,” Moore said. “The president has endorsed me because he’s seen me in the fire. I never bow down.”

For many Alabama Republicans, experience and results ultimately proved decisive.

“He’s the best qualified, I can tell you that — no question,” said Bob Marshall, 91, after casting his ballot for Moore in Pike Road outside Montgomery.

Hudson continued to highlight his military accomplishments throughout the campaign, often noting that while he lacked a legislative scorecard, he had accumulated an impressive combat record.

Hudson has quipped that he doesn’t have a legislative scorecard, but has racked up a high score “against the Taliban in over 60 combat operations.”

Some voters found that message compelling.

“I like the fact that he was willing to put his life on the line for our country,” said Julian Metheny, 70, who voted for Hudson in Shelby County.

With Tuesday’s victory, Moore advances to the general election as the clear favorite in a deeply Republican state. The result also adds to a growing list of Trump-endorsed candidates who have prevailed this year, underscoring the president’s continued dominance within the GOP and the enduring appeal of the America First movement among Republican voters.

Continue Reading

Culture

Elon Musk Just Put A Deadline On Earth — ‘Mark My Words’

Published

on

Elon Musk Just Put A Deadline On Earth — ‘Mark My Words’

Elon Musk is warning that the future of artificial intelligence may not be on Earth at all.

During a recent podcast appearance, the billionaire entrepreneur and founder of SpaceX argued that the biggest obstacle facing the next generation of AI isn’t software, computing power, or engineering talent. Instead, Musk believes the limiting factor will be something far more basic: electricity.

As artificial intelligence systems become increasingly sophisticated, they require enormous amounts of energy to train and operate. Data centers powering advanced AI models already consume vast quantities of electricity, and demand continues to surge as companies race to develop more powerful systems.

According to Musk, that growth trajectory is rapidly approaching a point where existing power infrastructure simply won’t be able to keep pace.

Rather than viewing AI development as primarily a software challenge, Musk sees energy production as the critical bottleneck that could determine how far and how fast the technology advances in the coming years.

He pointed to America’s current power consumption as an example of the challenge ahead. The United States consumes roughly half a terawatt of electricity on average, and significantly increasing that capacity would require a massive expansion of power generation infrastructure.

Building enough new power plants to meet future AI demand would be expensive, time-consuming, and politically challenging. Environmental regulations, permitting requirements, and local opposition often slow major energy projects, creating additional hurdles for rapid expansion.

Musk believes these constraints will force technology companies to begin looking beyond Earth much sooner than many experts currently anticipate.

In fact, he predicts that within the next two to three years, it could become economically advantageous to operate large-scale AI systems in space rather than on the ground.

While the idea may sound like science fiction, Musk argues that the economics increasingly favor orbital computing facilities.

One of the biggest advantages is access to uninterrupted solar energy.

Solar panels on Earth lose efficiency due to weather, cloud cover, nighttime conditions, and atmospheric interference. Space-based solar arrays, by contrast, can receive nearly continuous sunlight while avoiding many of the energy losses associated with terrestrial systems.

As a result, orbital solar systems can generate substantially more power than comparable installations on the ground.

The implications for AI are enormous.

Modern AI systems require not only tremendous computing resources but also vast amounts of electricity to keep servers running around the clock. Data centers must also devote substantial energy to cooling systems that prevent processors from overheating.

Musk noted that one of the major benefits of operating in space is the ability to eliminate many of the energy storage challenges that exist on Earth.

When continuous solar power is available, the need for large battery systems is dramatically reduced. Eliminating battery infrastructure lowers costs, improves efficiency, and simplifies operations.

The comments come as AI companies continue investing billions of dollars into new data centers and computing infrastructure. Industry leaders have increasingly acknowledged that energy availability is becoming one of the most important factors influencing future AI development.

Major technology firms are already exploring partnerships with utilities, investing in nuclear energy projects, and securing long-term power agreements to meet anticipated demand.

Musk believes those efforts may ultimately prove insufficient if AI capabilities continue advancing at their current pace.

His prediction also aligns with SpaceX’s broader vision of expanding humanity’s presence beyond Earth. While discussions about colonizing Mars often capture headlines, Musk’s latest comments suggest that space-based computing and energy production could become a practical commercial reality much sooner.

If his forecast proves accurate, the next major leap in artificial intelligence may not come from a breakthrough algorithm or a new software model. Instead, it could come from moving the world’s most powerful computers beyond Earth’s atmosphere and into orbit, where virtually unlimited solar energy could fuel the next generation of technological innovation.

For Musk, the race to build smarter AI may ultimately become a race to find enough power to sustain it—and that race could soon lead straight into space.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 Political Signal