MCA San Diegos $105 M. Expansion Is An Odd, But Often Stunning Attempt To Create A More Inclusive Museum – ARTnews

After a four-year wait and a $105 million expansion, the Museum of Contemporary Art San Diegos reopening is a study in the changing shape of institutions.

Overlooking the Pacific Ocean in the seaside neighborhood of La Jolla, the newly renovated complex is essentially two different buildings joined at the hip.

On the right, youll find a composite of white-stuccoed boxes, punctuated by curved windows that riff on the surrounding buildings Mediterranean-inspired archways. The first box was designed by celebrated modernist Irving Gill in 1916, and in later decades, more boxes were added by architects Mosher & Drew and Venturi Scott Brown & Associates (VSBA).

On the left, meanwhile, architect Annabelle Selldorfs new expansion is roughly the same scale, but totally distinct in materiality. In lieu of stucco and curves, she chose a palette of glass walls, sandy-colored travertine, and aluminum beams joined at right angles.

All museum expansions, in a sense, are a type of rebranding, where new architecture coincides with a new public image.The two buildings odd union is emblematic of both the museums and the architects task: to align contemporary culture with a canonical history.

The goal of this project was to create a more inviting and inclusive museum with a greater connection to the community, the architect said at the ribbon-cutting ceremony last Tuesday.

When Selldorf joined the project in 2014, the MCASD had issues to resolve, primarily the lack of space for its 5,600-piece collection. But the building was also an iconic bit of architecture that had perplexed visitors for years. Its cartoonishly fat columns, designed in 1996 by the beloved postmodernists Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown, obscured the front door in a way that was both a practical and symbolic problem.

A museum can feel somewhat hard for people to enter in the first place, and then we hid the entrance, MCASD Board Chair Mark Jacobs explained in his remarks.

Despite the outcry from Venturi Scott Brown fans, Selldorf replaced the columns with an entrance that, she said, represents a true welcome for everyone.

Its glass walls are unobscured by a column-less aluminum brise-soleil, and the ticket counter is always visible from the outside. She and her team added 46,400 square feet of new build, effectively doubling the museums footprint while quadrupling its exhibition space. Skirting height restrictions on new construction, the existing auditorium was repurposed as a 20-foot-tall, 7,000-square-foot gallery.

If this isnt museum sized, I dont know what is, Selldorf said as she led a tour of the building.

A favorite of gallerists David Zwirner, Hauser & Wirth, and other high-profile members of the art world, Selldorf Architects operates with whats best described as an elegant pragmatism.

The MCASDs new galleries possess clear circulation paths and a minimalists grandeur, where natural light fills generously proportioned, open spaces. Tall, thin windows frame exterior landmarks individual palm trees, bell towers, and towering pines alongside top-notch examples from the museums collection.

Roughly organized by era, theres a triangular gallery of Color Field painters including Rothko, Morris, and Motherwell, and an enormous trapezoidal gallery for Light and Space artists like Gisela Colon, Larry Bell, and Peter Alexander. (Most galleries are normal rectangles, but these were pinched where the new construction connected to the old.)

Rather than construct a new traditional auditorium, Selldorf added a more current flexible events space, a hallmark of contemporary museum architecture that provides a blank slate for more varied public programming. Here, that includes a luxurious floor-to-ceiling view of the ocean.

The museums new luxurious Big Little Lies-esque views are not in fact distractions from the art, but complementary, Selldorf said twice during the museum preview, perhaps anticipating criticism.

For all of you who live here, the incredible light of Southern California and the incredible view of the Pacific Ocean is something you may take for granted, the New York-based architect said. We were thrilled to make it part and parcel of the experience. I think it will contribute to you remembering where you are, and what you have seen.

For the most part, the historically relevant architecture of the original building was left untouched, providing an interesting side-by-side study of how much the shape and culture of museums has changed. The interior has no demarcations between the old and new, though there is a distinct sensation of entering another era in the original space, a time when museums were perhaps considered less destinations than rarified containers for art.

On this older side, the relatively low-slung, windowless galleries with gray-and-white terrazzo floors form a warren thats decidedly confusing to navigate. And the original VSBA lobby, still adorned on the ceiling with the architects metal-and-neon fins, is intact, but will likely be challenging to program. It still reads very much like a lobby, only without an entrance.

The museum approached Selldorf Architects in 2014 seeking a new architecture that would reach our full potential as a community resource for culture and education, Kathryn Kanjo, MCASDs director and CEO, said during her walkthrough of the building.

Her sentiments and Selldorfs reflected the institutional reckoning thats been going on for a decade or more, as museums have acknowledged their own exclusivity and lack of representation. Corrective measures are architectural as well as curatorial. Honoring its proximity to the U.S.-Mexico-border, MCASD emphasizes its commitment to showing and collecting artists in the region. Its first year of programming also emphasizes solo shows of women artists, starting with Nikki de Saint Phalle, followed by Alexis Smith and Celia Alvarez Muoz.

The now-headlining Niki de Saint Phalle in the 1960s is a sprawling survey of the late San Diego resident, co-presented with The Menil Collection, a Houston museum that houses the art collection of oil tycoonsJohn andDominique de Menil. The show fills the enormous former auditorium gallery with Nanas, Saint Phalles sculptures of archetypal women in defiant poses, and large-scale Tirs, or shooting paintings, goopy assemblages where the artist buried bags of paint in globs of plaster and shot them with a rifle. The most fragile pieces took years to secure on loan from European institutions, according to Menil senior curator Michelle White

A lot of these works which are being shown in the United States for the first time may not come back, she said during the exhibition preview. We feel very lucky to have been able to bring together this group of work.

In the former VSBA lobby, a suite of works by various artists responding to the social and political tension on the San Diego-Tijuana border unfortunately recedes behind the spaces columns. Elsewhere, flanked by soaring galleries devoted to the movements of Pop Art and Hard-edge painting, the wall text in a modest mezzanine describes works from a group of Latinx artists from the broader Americas, made from the 1970s onward as engaging in a a range of issues these span Felipe Almadas altar of religious and secular objects, including a figurine of Bart Simpson, to the surrealist portraiture of Daniela Gallois.

I do wonder: As we retrofit art history with the underrepresented, will we categorize them as we did in the past, based on specific movements of formal exploration? Or will they be grouped by shared politics of representation, and broadly defined ethnic categories?

As values evolve, the way that the art and architecture of the present will be perceived by the future is anyones guess. When VSBA renovated the museum in 1996, critical of the previous Mosher & Drew overhaul, they described their own intervention cartoon columns and all as a restoration of Gills original vision that would be more inviting for visitors. Two decades later, Selldorf removed those columns citing the exact same reason, completing the cycle of modern to postmodern and back again.

Trumping MCASDs exquisite new building, and even its Primetime Emmy-caliber views, the museums must-see crown jewel remains the 1997 installation 1234 by San Diegos own Robert Irwin.

Its a simple premise: three squares cut from the brown-tinted glass of a gallery facing the beach, resulting in an extraordinary effect on the viewers perception. The squares frame landmarks in the distance, somehow bringing them closer, while simultaneously making the sky bluer, as the ocean breeze and smell of salt permeate the gallery.

Selldorf was rightthe windows here are extremely memorable.

View original post here:
MCA San Diegos $105 M. Expansion Is An Odd, But Often Stunning Attempt To Create A More Inclusive Museum - ARTnews

Which are the best technology and stacks for blockchain development? – Medium

Blockchain

Were not going to try and sell you on anything, just a list of the best places to start learning blockchain development. This is meant for people who already know how to code in some form or are interested in finding out more about blockchain engineering. Well be looking at popular blockchains and stacks that are being used for the development of various smart contracts.

This is not a list of the best programming languages, although you dont need to speak SQL. Im also pushing back on the idea that you need to know concurrency, multithreading, or any other aspect of what makes blockchain interesting. It just so happens that a lot of talks are getting around things like state reconciliation and whatnot, but it isnt necessary. We wont be touching on those topics at all; there are plenty of guides and videos available online if you want to learn more about them.

Figure out what you want to create and then pick the stack that lets you create it. This list looks at common transactions, what technologies are being used to build different smart contracts and dApps, and the general order of importance. Ill start by looking at basic blockchain concepts before moving on to more complex things like Turing complete blockchains and RSK Rootstock smart contract development. Were not going to get into specific examples, but this should give you a good place to start when learning about blockchains.

This is where we should start looking at how blockchains work from an engineering perspective. A lot of blockchain technology is about the transactions that occur within each block, and you should start with the basics. You can find more advanced blockchain topics later on in this post.

Ethereum and Solidity: The Complete Developers Guide

If youre interested in Ethereum smart contracts development, then this is a must-read. It covers how to create a smart contract, as well as deploy it to the main Ethereum network. There are also plenty of Ethereum specific examples to get your feet wet with Solidity (Ethereums programming language).

Learn Blockchain By Building Your Own

This guide is a free course that teaches you the basics of blockchain development through the use of an IDE. Youll learn how to deploy your first smart contract, as well as blockchain testing and debugging.

In this section, were going to look at some of the most popular alternatives for blockchain development in areas like smart contracts, IoT, Big Data, and more. Not only will we take a look at how specific dApps or contracts are built on different blockchains, but well also talk about what stack they utilize.

Ethereum and Solidity Development: The Complete Developers Guide

We already talked about this book earlier, but were repeating it because it is something you should read. It covers how to create smart contracts on the Ethereum network using Solidity, which is the language of choice for most decentralized applications. This will teach you how to deploy a smart contract, and even what to do if things go wrong. You can also read this guide as an ebook for free on Github or Amazon.

Ethereum Development Guide for Dummies

This Ethereum guide is meant for people who are interested in learning about the Ethereum blockchain from a developers perspective. It goes into detail about how Ethereum works and what you can do with each block. This guide is not meant to be a deep dive into smart contract creation, but it will give you a good understanding of how the network functions overall. You can download the ebook here.

Zcash and Zcash Parity Tech Stack Guide: Everything You Need to Know

This guide explains how to utilize Parity to run the Zcash node implementation. This includes a brief overview of BigChainDB, which is used for storage purposes by many blockchains. In this guide, youll also learn how to create a private and public chain.

Maidsafe and SAFE Network: Decentralized Cloud Technologies

The SAFE network is built on top of the MaidSafe stack, which is used for decentralized cloud storage solutions. This guide will introduce you to both the MaidSafe and SAFE networks. It covers topics like distributed hash table (DHT) operations, data redistribution, and more. You can find the source code here or download the ebook as a PDF.

Quorum: The Future of Private Transactions Technology in Financial Services?

Quorum is a distributed ledger technology that runs on JVM (Java Virtual Machine). It is used in conjunction with JPMorgan, and other financial institutions. It can be used for on-chain and off-chain transactions. This guide talks about Quorum and how it could potentially be used for private financial transactions. You can also find the source code for this guide here.

BigchainDB Blockchain Database Technology For Everyone

This overview of BigchainDB explains how exactly blockchain technology works to create an immutable database that can be easily accessed by anyone with a web browser. BigchainDB is a blockchain database that supports multiple companies and their private networks, as well as individual developers working on smart contracts. The bulk of this guide goes into explaining how to interact with BigchainDB using dApps like Ethereum, and it also explains chain interoperability. You can find the source code for this guide here.

So far, weve only looked at the Ethereum blockchain in a lot of detail. It is by far the most powerful, or Turing complete blockchain that exists today. But just because Ethereum isnt particularly useful for development doesnt mean other blockchains arent as well. The following sections go over some of the most popular alternatives for smart contract development today.

Ripple and XRP: A Guide for Newcomers

This guide goes into detail about Ripple technology and how it can be used to exchange currency. Ripple is considered a distributed ledger technology and is often compared to the blockchain as well. This guide goes over the basics of how Ripple works as well as describes XRP (Ripples native digital asset). You can find the source code for this guide here on Github.

Golem Project Development Status Report: Yellow Paper v0.10.0

The Golem Project is a decentralized global network that allows users to spend computing resources from their own devices. It is built on top of Ethereum smart contracts and cryptography. This guide goes into detail about the golem stack and what you can do with it. You can find the source code for this guide here on Github.

Ethereum Smart Contract Tutorials: The Bare Essentials

This guide covers the fundamentals of creating a smart contract using Solidity, which is the programming language for the Ethereum blockchain. In this tutorial, we cover the whole process, from beginning to end. We also cover contract creation, deployment, and testing in detail. You can find the source code for this tutorial here on Github.

Ethereum Book: Beginners Guide to Smart Contracts

This is a very technical guide that covers all the ins and outs of writing smart contracts. It goes into detail about the Ethereum blockchain and how it works, as well as how smart contracts work. You can find the source code for this guide here on Github.

Before we break things down into individual projects and tools that work with specific blockchains, lets first look at what the most popular platforms are used for. There are many different open-source blockchain frameworks that developers use to create dApps or decentralized applications. Some of the most popular platforms are:

Ethereum Formerly known as Ethereum Classic, this is also the most popular blockchain in existence. It allows developers to create smart contracts using Solidity, which is a programming language for smart contract developers.

Hyperledger Fabric This is a permissioned blockchain framework that was invented and designed by IBM. It comes with its ecosystem. The Hyperledger Project was created to enable diverse business blockchain technologies and platforms to connect and communicate with each other.

R3 Corda R3 Corda is another permission distributed ledger (blockchain) that runs on Java, similar to Quorum. This platform enables users to create new financial systems using blockchain technology.

Developers need the proper tools to use the technology. They need to be able to access it and test changes, as well as create more advanced applications. This is why open source tools and platforms are so widely used. In this section, we will discuss the tools you can use to create blockchain applications with:

Ethereum Wallet: Where To Store Your Ether & NEO-GAS Tokens

This guide will cover the different Ethereum wallet options you have today and how they can be used for storing your ETH (Ethereums native token). It also covers NEO-GAS, which is also known as Red Pulse tokens. You can find the source code for this guide here on Github.

Read the original:
Which are the best technology and stacks for blockchain development? - Medium

Glenn Greenwald says Edward Snowden is the ‘happiest person’ he’s ‘ever met’ at bitcoin conference – Fox Business

Check out what's clicking on Foxbusiness.com.

MIAMI Journalist Glenn Greenwald said Thursday that Edward Snowden is the "happiest person" he's "ever met" at the Bitcoin 2022 conference during a panel that linked the cryptocurrency to libertarian and third-party ideals.

"When people ask me who's the happiest person I know, I always say it's Edward Snowden even though he's an exile in a country he never chose to be in for eight years, and probably the rest of his life," Greenwald said to applause from the audience. "Because every day that he puts his head on the pillow to sleep, he knows that when faced with the choice of what he was going to be and what he was going to do, he made the right choice, and there's just no substitute for that in terms of happiness."

Greenwald, who notably broke the Snowden-NSA civilian surveillance story for The Guardian in 2013, recalled that when he first met the former NSA agent in Hong Kong, he expected an "old, ragged, national security guy in his 60s" who had already fulfilled his life goals. In reality, Snowden was very different from what Greenwald had envisioned during their online correspondence.

Glenn Greenwald speaks during the Bitcoin 2022 conference (Audrey Conklin / Fox News)

"When he walked up to me and my colleague he looked like a kid out of a video store and I was shocked," Greenwald said while answering a question. "And I spent that whole first day trying to figure out why somebody like this, who has his whole life ahead of him who had a very good job for Booz Allen making a lot of money, had a girlfriend who loved him, a family that was supportive why would somebody like that be willing to risk their entire life?

BITCOIN TRADES AROUND $43,000 AS MIAMI CONFERENCE GETS UNDERWAY

"He ultimately said to me, You know were all going to die, and the only question really is, how are we going to live?'"

Bitcoin 2022 conference entrance (Audrey Conklin / Fox News)

The journalist recalled the meeting as "a really profound experience."

Greenwald's reporting won a Pulitzer Prize for public service in 2014. A film based on his reporting, "Citizenfour" by Laura Poitras, won an Oscar.

AARON RODGERS, SERENA WILLIAMS, ODELL BECKHAM JR. TALK BITCOIN AT CONFERENCE: IM BETTING ON BITCOIN'

"My life changed in a lot of ways that I had never expected," Greenwald said. "Doors flew open. There's a huge kind of incentive system that's designed to kind of co-opt you. They offer you a lot of money to go to these events. You sit at cocktail parties with people you've accused of being war criminals, who you believe are war criminals, and suddenly, all of these incentives are supposed to lure you out of this dissident space."

Bitcoin bull at Bitcoin 2022 conference entryway (Audrey Conklin / Fox News)

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

That experience, he said, made him unafraid to dissent from the norm and voice support for ideas like bitcoin that are often criticized by high-profile figures.

An estimated 25,000 people attended the Bitcoin 2022 conference in South Beach, Miami, to learn more about cryptocurrency and fintech companies, network with like-minded individuals and discuss the future of bitcoin as a more mainstream form of currency.

Read the original:
Glenn Greenwald says Edward Snowden is the 'happiest person' he's 'ever met' at bitcoin conference - Fox Business

Joe Rogan’s Morning Routine Is As Active As You’d Imagine – KnowYourMobile

The reality that Joe Rogans morning routine is so busy is probably not a surprise to anybody who is familiar with him from his UFC commentary work, his renowned podcast, his acting work, or his overall internet presence

Im sitting here trying to write an introduction to who Joe Rogan is, and it might be one of the most difficult writing tasks Ive faced to date. Usually, the problem is finding the information I need, but with Joe, its knowing where to begin.

Joe Rogan was born in Newark, New Jersey, in 1967. Since then, hes done a bit of everything within the entertainment industry. Acting, comedy, sports commentary, TV entertainment, radio, and, well, contemporary radio in the form of a very successful podcast. Its arguably the latter career choice that provides the most memorable moments of his career.

Hes shared a joint with Elon Musk, chatted about Big Data with fugitive whistle-blower Edward Snowden, and discussed politics with Senator Bernie Sanders, among other things. Guests with celebrity status like these have contributed to Joe Rogans podcast being one of the most popular podcast programmes on the airwaves today.

Hes been a busy bloke, so as you can imagine, many aspects of his personal lifestyle are pretty busy, too, including his morning routine.

Before we get to the morning part, its important to note that, due to the nature of the work he does, theres no strict sleep schedule. He has, however, mentioned that he does aim to get 8 hours of sleep from whenever he manages to finally get to bed.

As a result, he wakes up anywhere between 10 a.m. and noon, depending on the previous nights activities. Hell hydrate and prepare for the rigorous exercise ahead with alkaline water and a pinch of pink Himalayan salt, followed by a cup of coffee to fight off any hunger that may try to slow him down.

Joe Rogan likes to work out before breaking his night fast, so theres no need for a quick, one-eye-still-closed breakfast like the rest of us. Anyone who has listened to his podcast knows how much he enjoys lifting weights and how often he talks about the physical and emotional advantages of doing so. He describes himself as an exercise addict who uses it to cope with stress. He becomes agitated and unhappy if he does not exercise.

When it comes to home gyms, he has everything you need. He works out for up to three hours every day, using everything from free weights to kettlebells and aerobics.

Joe breaks his fast after his exercise with a smoothie or a steak with eggs on the side, depending on how he feels that day. He only eats wild wildlife that he has hunted and killed personally. His Instagram account is full of photos of deer and elk dinners.

Joe prefers to podcast in the afternoon, although he will start earlier if he has numerous guests or other activities planned for later that day.

He returns home after completing his podcast duties for supper, which generally consists of elk meat and veggies or Kimchi. He isnt frightened of the odd trip to McDonalds, however.

Evenings are expended at home with his girls and wife, watching movies more often than not. Hell start writing when everyone else has gone to bed. He feels that the time he spends writing is what has made him successful, therefore he takes this seriously and writes till the wee hours of the morning.

Every gym routine Joe Rogan does during the week is pre-planned on the previous Sunday. This saves time and mental energy when it comes to actually getting around to doing them. Each Sunday, hell decide how many times hes going to lift weights, do yoga, or crack out the cardio.

As a renowned martial arts enthusiast, he tries to work in some Jiu-Jitsu or some Kung Fu at some point throughout the week as well.

Rogan, a lifetime athlete, has bulked up owing to a rigorous weightlifting routine centred on kettlebells, and he recently spoke about how he handles lifting.

He follows the Pavel Tsatsouline protocol, which means that if he can do ten repetitions of anything, he will only do five. Even if he could definitely perform ten clean press squats while carrying 90 pounds over his head, hell probably just do four or five.

As of writing this article, there are just over 1,800 episodes in the collection of the Joe Rogan Experience Podcast.

Not many people would argue with me if I said the most memorable moment from all of these was during episode 1,169, back in 2018, when Elon Musk took a toke from a joint.

Joe subsequently said that he spent the first half of the podcast just attempting to calm Elon so they could have a constructive chat. However, after the two had calmed down, the talk really got going, leading to an episode that lived up to the lofty expectations that had been put on it due to the guests prominence.

Rogan then presents what has since become one of the most memorable moments in the history of the podcast by lighting up a joint in front of Tesla CEO Elon Musk at roughly two hours and ten minutes into the programme. Musk enquires about the legality of smoking cannabis and then takes a puff on the joint, much to the amazement of watchers at the moment.

Despite consuming booze throughout the podcast, the outspoken billionaires one toke on a joint sparked widespread outrage in the mainstream media, causing Tesla stock to plummet 10%. Regardless of the long-term consequences, the picture of Musk clutching the blunt will go down in podcast history.

Jake McEvoyJake is a professional copywriter, journalist, and life-long fan of technology. He covers news and user guides for KnowYourMobile.

Read this article:
Joe Rogan's Morning Routine Is As Active As You'd Imagine - KnowYourMobile

‘Absolute horror’: Nicolas Cage’s initial reaction to The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent – Contactmusic.com

Nicolas Cage reacted with "absolute horror" to the first pitch for 'The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent'.

The 58-year-old actor plays a fictionalised version of himself in the new meta-action comedy blockbuster which sees big screen star Nick Cage close to retirement when he accepts a birthday party invitation from a billionaire fan (Pedro Pascal), who is actually a crime boss.

Cage told Variety: "There was no muscle in my body that told me I should play a character named Nick Cage, it was absolute horror.

However, the director wrote me a very intelligent, sensitive letter, and in that letter I knew he was a true film enthusiast that likes some of the earlier work.

"He wanted to make a movie that was about people, not about caricatures or cartoons.

The actor was won over by filmmaker Tom Gormican, who was keen to show Cage how "seriously" he and co-writer Kevin Etten were taking the project.

Gormican added: "[Cage] just wanted to make sure we werent out to make fun of him or make fun of the things hes done.

"We took it seriously, and once he understood that, he became more and more comfortable with [co-writer Kevin Etten] and I as filmmakers. I think he was a little put off until he understood.

"We said to him, There are ideas people have of who you are and theres actually who you are, and somewhere in the middle were gonna find the movie. "

The director noted how he painted the movie as an opportunity for the actor to take control of his own "narrative".

He said: "We said this entire thing is the chance to take the reins of that narrative and become a big piece of performance art. Once he looked at it that way, he started to come around.

Read more from the original source:
'Absolute horror': Nicolas Cage's initial reaction to The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent - Contactmusic.com

Big Brother is watching your every move – Press TV

As if the NSA, the FBI and the DHS spying on American citizens were not sufficiently outrageous, the CIA, which is supposed to operate outside of the country, has now joined the pack and is spying on US citizens as well.

Mass surveillance of US citizens is being conducted by the CIA. The National Security Agency was known to be collecting bulk data with the cooperation of big tech firms.

So does privacy really exist in the country? Do Americans even know who is watching them? Are they aware their privacy is being compromised and in what areas of their lives are they being spied upon?

Big Brother is everywhere

A number of different US intelligence agencies are spying on Americans, including the CIA, which is proscribed from operating on American soil.

How much do Americans know about the type of data being collected from them, and how can they protect their privacy, and how does Washington get away with spying on American citizens?

It has been revealed that the CIA has been conducting mass surveillance on US soil and has been spying on American citizens for years.

A newly declassified letter by two Democratic senators shows that the United States Central Intelligence Agency has been collecting bulk data for years; they say that the data can affect American citizens and their privacy and that the CIA has been collecting these compromising data without a warrant.

There's a secret CIA surveillance programme, and it's allegedly been collecting data in bulk, including information about lots of Americans.

That's the accusation from two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senators Ron Wyden and Martin Heinrich say the programme has been operating without any oversight, and they're now accusing the CIA of hiding the details about it from the public and from the Congress.

The senators are calling on the agency to declassify the information about the programme.

CNBC Host

Ron Wyden of Oregon and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico were the senators who revealed this information in a letter which has not yet been completely declassified.

In the letter they asked Admiral De Haynes, Director of National Intelligence, and William J. Burns, the director of the CIA, to declassify these activities and explain the rules and regulations governing the collection of data and information about US citizens.

Why is the CIA collecting data from US citizens in the first place?

That sounds like an easy question, but it's actually a difficult one. First of all, the CIA legally is not allowed to collect information on US citizens or anyone called a US person, which is anybody in the country legally on a green card or on an immigrant visa.

But since 911, it is as though, it's as though the rules, the laws, have just gone out the window. And so all the CIA has to do, whether it's in the courts or before the oversight committees on Capitol Hill, is to say the words national security, and then they're essentially allowed to do anything they want.

In this case, what they're doing is vacuuming up as much bulk data as they possibly can, whether it's data from an American or US person or a foreign national, they're storing it in huge Cray computers in the desert in Utah, and they just will deal with the legality of it later [sic].

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

After the letter by the two senators exposed that the CIA programme was completely outside any kind of statutory framework, or without any form of oversight from the judicial, congressional or executive branch, the American Civil Liberties Union set out in a statement that these reports raise serious questions about what information of ours the CIA is mining, indiscriminately, and how the agency exploits that information to spy on Americans. This invasion of our privacy must stop.

How can Americans protect themselves from this systemic invasion of privacy?

The only protection we do have is the fact that they collect so much, massive amounts of information, that they're constantly looking for needles in a haystack. You know, no, American should assume that he or she has a bit of privacy in anything we do.

It is a kind of surveillance state that we live under that under. For example, the Stasi (notorious East German Security force), or the Soviet Union; they couldn't even imagine having this kind of surveillance that we have in the United States, because the technology wasn't there.

We have the technology. And we know now from Snowden, we know from this recent letter that was sent by two senators, talking about this secret bulk collection of the CIA of Americans [sic.], we know from all of these sources, going back to the church commission back in the 70s in the United States, the extent to which we are all under surveillance, by our own government, the government that is supposed to be working for us, is actually spying on us.

Daniel McAdams, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Edward Snowden famously leaked highly classified information from the US National Security Agency in 2013, uncovering massive surveillance by the NSA and the Five Eyes intelligence alliance with the cooperation of tech companies.

We are about to witness an enormous political debate in which the spy agencies and their apologists on TV tell us that there is nothing wrong with this and that the CIA doesn't know how many Americans are in the database or even how they got there in the first place, but this is neither normal nor acceptable.

Do Americans have any privacy?

The Americans have no privacy, none. None whatsoever, whether it's on your phone, in your emails, in your text messages, on social media or anytime you're in public, there is no expectation of privacy. You know, there's a court case right now saying that the law about privacy and communications was written before the internet was created.

And the law says that the government cannot open your mail. Well, it doesn't say anything about email because email hadn't been invented.

Well, the government is arguing that when you write an email and you send it to someone, the company that runs the email or that owns the email, Google, Microsoft, Apple, whatever, they have access to the email to the contents of it, and so if they have access, the government should have access as well, and so as a result, there is no such thing as privacy in communications.

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

Glenn Greenwald the American journalist who first received information from Snowden and then exposed it in The Guardian also wrote on Twitter that the CIA is a criminal organization. Their interference in US politics is particularly pernicious.

Maybe news outlets should stop hiring all of the people who run this agency to help "analyze and report the news".

Maybe journalists should be skeptical of their planted stories.

Well, it's a good question the CIA was set up in 1947 under the National Security Act of 1947. The purpose of setting up the CIA was to create an organization that could in one stop, inform the President about things that were happening overseas. It was in response to the end of World War Two and the beginning of the Cold War, and after World War Two, there were scattered intelligence agencies through the military and elsewhere. The OSS, of course, during World War Two.

So the idea of this was to consolidate the intelligence collection and analysis capabilities of the US government in one area, and this was signed by President Truman. President Truman did say in his memoirs, if he had known what would have happened to the CIA what it would have become, particularly in terms of its covert action, he never would have approved it, never would have signed it, never would have brought it into being.

Daniel McAdams, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

It is nothing new that intelligence agencies in the US spy and gather all the information they can from their citizens.

Snowden revealed in 2013 that the NSA was spying on Americans, and later he was forced to seek refuge in Russia for fear of persecution and imprisonment.

At the time, the NSA had gained direct access to the systems of US Internet giants like Facebook, Google and Apple, as well as other companies.

This access was part of the PRISM programme that the NSA used to collect internet communications from various US internet companies.

Has anything changed since then?

Well, very little has changed because members of Congress and Senators, very, very few of them have shown any stomach whatsoever to challenge what we call the national security state in the United States. And that includes the CIA, parts of the FBI and others. You know, when the Snowden revelations came out there was an uproar, there was a lot of loud noise and there was some calls for reform. [sic.]

But you know reform in Washington always means that you get to keep doing the stuff you were doing, you just call it something else. And so they renamed the Patriot Act, but they kept all of the worst aspects of the Patriot Act, and called it the Freedom Act. There's just an example of what they did. So short answer to your question is very little changed at all after the revelations because Congress had no stomach for it and the American people are very, very easily distracted by other things.

Daniel McAdams, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Under the PRISM programme, officials were collecting material which included, but was not limited to, search history, content of emails, file transfers, and live chats.

These collections were made directly from the servers of major service providers. The actions were made possible by changes to US surveillance laws, which were introduced by former President George W. Bush, and later renewed by former US President Barack Obama in December 2012.

Are Americans aware what type of data is being collected from them?

I think most Americans realize what the government is doing the problem is, I think, most Americans don't care what the government is doing. You know, Joseph Goebbels said something in the 1930s why are you worried about it if you haven't done anything wrong? Well, that's exactly the opposite of what our position should be.

Our position should be that the government has no business in our communications. It has no business collecting our data, unless it has evidence that a crime has been committed, and it goes through the proper channels to acquire that data. But in the meantime, it shouldn't be gathering any information on Americans who have not been accused of a crime in a court of law.

You know, we can we can extend that we can we can say that. It's not just our communications but in virtually every aspect of our lives. The government is involved now, you know, it's not just the the intelligence agencies, either it's, it's every aspect of government, whether it is DARPA or the FBI or the Drug Enforcement Administration or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms or the border agencies. We have no privacy.

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

The programme was not only for Americans living in the US, but also targeted any customer that participated with these tech firms, whether living in or outside the United States. This spying doesn't stop there, either.

Because the United States is also a party in a multilateral agreement, which is an intelligence Alliance comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the US. This alliance is called the Five Eyes also known as FVEY.

This is a special kind of alliance, a special kind of relationship. And when I say special, what I mean is that these five countries share with each other literally everything. It's not unusual, for example, to have representatives of the Five Eyes intelligence services, working in each other's buildings, in each other's headquarters.

They give each other complete access to files and to data and technology. They don't spy on one another. It's it's a relationship of open sharing.

Now, that's very dangerous if you ask me because not only do I have to worry about my government, intercepting my phone calls, my emails, my text messages, but I have to worry about them sending all of my personal data to the Five Eyes countries, which have even less of a right to my information than my own government does.

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer

The Five Eyes alliance goes back to World War Two, some of the activities of this alliance was revealed by Snowden, indicating that the intelligence agencies within the FVEY have been spying on one another's citizens and then sharing the information they have collected with the other members in order to thwart preventive and restraining regulations on surveillance of citizens and essentially leaving the spying to the intelligence organizations of their allies.

The CIA is forbidden by law from spying on American citizens. But one way they get around this is by leaking some of the information to, for example, the Australian intelligence services, and then that is picked up as foreign surveillance.

So the Five Eyes are very useful for when the CIA wants to spy on Americans, but technically is not allowed to do that. They go around; they go around the other side. So I think Americans should assume that literally everything they do is being watched and listened to and recorded; for potential future use. It's kind of a pre crime.

Daniel McAdams, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Some politicians have spoken up against these invasions of privacy. Utah, Republican Representative, Chris Stewart, recently said that Congress needs to reassert control over the intelligence community's activities inside America. Stewart added "if you want to build an American KGB, if you think that's a good idea then keep going down this road".

Stewart's worry is mostly because he believes US intelligence agencies are going after white supremacists who are, by and large, in favour of the Republican Party.

The CIA is not allowed under law to spy on Americans directly as such. However, for example, our conversation right now because you're not in America, that's fair game for them to listen in on. And we must assume that they are listening in on this call, and any other overseas call. And even if it's not something they're actively looking [sic.], they'll just simply sift it up.

And they have massive, massive storage facilities. They'll just store for a future date. They want to build a case on someone down the road 10 years, well, they can always look back and see what they were doing 10 years previous.

So Americans should assume that they have zero privacy until they wake up and demand that their members of Congress do something to restore it.

I mean, it's very ironic that America goes around the world, blowing things up and lecturing people on how they need to have a democratic government and privacy and civil liberties. When in fact, at home, we have a scarcity of all of these things, and no one seems to give a darn about it. And that's the sick part.

Daniel McAdams, Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Consequently, many feel that the US is essentially a police state. In the courts, Prosecutors claim to have information and evidence against a defendant that is classified and that defendant is not allowed to view said evidence.

They collect evidence and information by whatever means they please and as they know the courts may reject the case due to legal technicalities, such as lack of evidence, they conduct reverse engineering and collect information they already have through other means and use the alleged data source to prosecute and charge defendants with evidence that they cannot defend themselves against.

Original post:
Big Brother is watching your every move - Press TV

Why the third time wont be the charm for a new U.S.-EU data-sharing agreement – The Daily Dot

A new data transfer agreement to facilitate companies safely and legally moving data across the Atlantic has been in the works for nearly two years.

During a week of NATO, G7, and European Council summits in Brussels last month, where Ukraine dominated the agenda, the U.S. and the E.U. revealed a new deal for underpinning digital trade between the two economies. Activists and privacy experts still have major concerns about how vigorous the agreement will be in guarding Europeans from U.S. mass surveillance.

The fact that President Joe Biden and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen made the announcement in a joint press conference alluded to the significance of the deal, even though, for now, it is only an agreement in principle.

The legal status of data transfers across the Atlantic has been tumultuous.

Safe Harbor, a framework first instituted in 2000, was struck down by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 2015 over its lack of protection for European data from mass surveillance by U.S. authorities. Its attempted successor Privacy Shield met the same fate in July 2020.

Since then, data transfers, which Facebook, Microsoft, and many tech giants rely on, existed in legal limbo as officials in the EU and U.S. scrambled to negotiate yet another agreement.

In the interim, companies rely on a series of alternative but complex mechanisms, called standard contractual clauses (SCCs), to keep data flowing. Agreements like this new one are pivotal as the EU only permits data to flow to countries and jurisdictions that have an equivalent level of data protection to Europe.

While it seems the discussions are beginning to bear fruit, for industry and privacy activists alike, the concern is still palpable about whether Europeans data will be free from U.S. scrutiny.

The tech industry was quick to welcome the latest agreement in principle. DigitalEurope, a lobby group for Meta, Amazon, Google, and more, said the agreement is necessary for preserving almost 1 trillion worth of EU-U.S. commerce every year.

Director general of DigitalEurope Cecilia Bonefeld-Dahl said in a statement that the details will need to deliver an agreement that stands the test of time.

With its predecessors collapsing after legal challenges, building a framework for the long haul will be the ultimate test for this agreement to avoid EU-U.S. data flow falling into disarray again.

At the core of these challenges is surveillance and privacy, going back to the disclosures of Edward Snowden and the revelations of U.S. mass surveillance across the globe.

The European Court of Justice found that both Safe Harbor and Privacy Shield lacked robust mechanisms for ensuring that a Europeans data transferred to a server in the U.S. would not be unlawfully caught up in a dragnet.

The courts findings shined a light on the discrepancies between EU and U.S. privacy rights. Since then, the EU has only strengthened data protection, most notably with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which provide sweeping rules for safeguarding peoples data. The U.S. has no such law on a federal level.

Privacy activist Max Schrems led the legal challenge against both agreements.

After the Snowden revelations, Schrems first challenged Meta in the European courts over the legality of transferring data to the U.S. The case sought to uncover how a persons data is treated when it leaves Europe and enters the U.S. The court found that Safe Harbor, the framework Meta was using, wasnt up to snuff in protecting this data from unlawful surveillance. This ultimately led to the downfall of Safe Harbor and kickstarted this long-running saga.

The Austrian, who has dubbed the new deal lipstick on a pig, told the Daily Dot in an email that there remains a fundamental clash between the EU and U.S. when it comes to the surveillance question.

He said he expects that it too will collapse under the scrutiny of activists, lawyers, and ultimately the Courts of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

Either we (if it is really bad) or someone else will probably bring it back to the CJEU again. This time just much faster than before, he said.

Schrems is not alone in his assessment.

Estelle Masse, Europe legislative manager at Access Now, said the announcement by Biden and von der Leyen was a disappointment as there is still a lack of detail on the meat of the agreement that will ensure that it is a durable deal and one that would resist a challenge in front of the court.

Once again, surveillance is the problem.

Both the EU and the U.S. stated that there would be safeguards to ensure only necessary and proportionate access to data by U.S. intelligence authorities along with the establishment of a Data Protection Review Court for Europeans to take cases against the U.S. if they believe they have been subjected to unlawful surveillance.

Previous attempts to assuage European concerns included establishing an ombudsperson to field complaints, but the Trump administration took years to nominate a permanent official for this role.

This new court is a fresh attempt to provide Europeans with means for redress, but Masse raised concerns about how independent this court will be given that it will be established via executive order.

Its not actually a right to remedy, so it doesnt satisfy the criteria that the [European] court has set, so a right to remedy in practice still does not exist, Masse said. There is no indication in none of the announcements that the U.S. would actually commit to stop bulk surveillance.

The scope of U.S. surveillance that is still happening today remains a controversial issue.

The sentiments raised in Europe are echoed by Ashley Gorski, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Weve maintained that U.S. legislative reforms are essential to ensure an agreement that will survive judicial scrutiny by the [European] Court of Justice. The announcement was made even though there has not been any legislative reform, Gorski told the Daily Dot.

The Data Protection Review Court will likely face a great deal of examination amid concerns about satisfying EU legal requirements for independence.

The ACLU has proposed that the most straightforward way to deal with this disconnect that exists between EU and U.S. law is to have Congress make a couple of changes that would make it easier for individuals to bring surveillance challenges in Article III federal courts because those courts are already equipped to review these kinds of claims, she added.

As all of these questions swirl, Masse said that it is most likely the agreement will be sent in front of the court much like its predecessors. If a remedy doesnt meet the standards set by the EU, the framework could collapse a third time.

Article 19, another digital rights organization, told the Daily Dot that more needs to change on the U.S. side of things to truly make the agreement worknamely a federal data protection law akin to the EUs GDPR.

The lack of a U.S, data protection law is the real problem, and the collection of half-baked agreements, two of which have already been rejected by the [courts], that fail to provide any concrete rights or guarantee anything, doesnt solve anything with regard to this matter, a spokesperson said.

In reality, unless the U.S. passes legislation curbing their intelligence gathering, it will be as flawed as the previous Privacy Shield.

Despite these concerns flagged by activists, industries will be pushing hard to get this new data transfer deal over the line to end the legal questions that have hung over transatlantic data transfers for nearly two years.

Lisa Sotto, a cybersecurity and privacy lawyer, said that companies have struggled to navigate the legality of their data transfers since Privacy Shield was struck down. The alternative data transfer mechanism has been a headache to implement.

She said the agreement needs to be passed and implemented swiftly but conceded that legal challenges are inevitable.

I expect Max Schrems to bring an action against whatever agreement is reached. I hope we will ultimately reach a sensible place. Not having this sort of mechanism in place for data transfers has been crippling to businesses.

The ACLUs Gorski added that the objectives are clear but the routes to get there are still muddled.

This is really just about ensuring that people have the opportunity to seek meaningful redress when theyve been subject to unlawful surveillance, she said.

Right now folks are eager to see what the actual text looks like. We have an agreement in principle, we have factsheets, but the text itself will matter. However, it is difficult to see how this agreement will survive judicial scrutiny in the EU in the absence of U.S. legislative reform.

Go here to read the rest:
Why the third time wont be the charm for a new U.S.-EU data-sharing agreement - The Daily Dot

Stopping the next Hunter Biden laptop cover-up – The Spectator

Hunter Biden reportedly paid over $1 million in back taxes for income he never claimed, but which was found in his emails the ones from his laptop that had been dismissed by the mainstream media as Russian disinformation.

The FBI is conducting an ongoing investigation into Hunters business activities based on the contents of the laptop. It was only the Bureau's use of the laptop as evidence that finally forced the New York Times this month to admit that what it said last year was false.

See, as the New York Post broke the story that a laptop full of Hunter Biden's files indicated a potential pay-for-play scenario involving then-candidate Joe Biden just ahead of the 2020 presidential election, almost in real time more than 50 former senior intelligence officials signed a letterclaiming the emails have all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation. The signers said their national security experience made them deeply suspicious the Russian government played a significant role in this case. If we are right this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this.

The letter played off prejudices from 2016 that the Russians manipulated an American election. In fact, most of the letter's signatories James Clapper and John Brennan among them had played key roles in misdirecting public opinion around the DNC server hack and later the whole of Russiagate. In the hands of the mainstream media, the meme quickly morphed into the laptop is fake, ignore it. Twitter and Facebook quickly banned all mentions of the laptop, and the story disappeared in the mainstream media. Until now.

During my 24-year State Department career, I was exposed to foreign disinformation, and as a journalist today, I read the Hunter Biden emails. There is no way experienced intelligence officers could have mistaken the contents of the Biden laptop for fake, produced material.

The most glaring reason is that most of the important emails could be verified by simply contacting the recipient and asking him if the message was real. Disinfo at this level of sophistication would never be so simple to disprove.

In addition, the laptop contents were about 80 per cent garbage and maybe 20 per cent useful (dirty) information, a huge waste of time if you are trying to move your adversary to act in a certain way. Such an overbearing amount of non-actionable material also risks burying the good stuff, and if this is disinfo you want your adversary to find the good stuff. It is also expensive to produce information that has no take attached to it, and fake info of any kind is at risk of discovery, blowing the whole operation. Lastly, nothing on the laptop was a smoking gun. You need the disinfo to lead fairly directly to some sort of actionable conclusion, a smoking gun, or your cleverness will be wasted.

Compare the alleged Russian disinfo of the Biden laptop to the Christopher Steele Russiagate dossier. To begin, Steele put classified markings on his document. That signals amateur work to the pros but causes the media to salivate.

Steele never names his sources, to prevent verification by the media (a major tell). Steele also finds a way to push the important info up front, in his case a summary. If Biden's laptop was disinfo, the makers could have included an Index, or Note to Self where Hunter called out the good stuff. Or maybe even a fake email doing the same. Steeles dossier is also concise, at 35 typed pages. Hunters laptop is a pack rats nightmare of jumbled stuff: thousands of pages, receipts, info on cam girls and the like.

But the real giveaway is who was out there peddling the information. Ideally you want the stuff to come from the most reliable source you can find to give it credibility. Steele, as a professional intelligence officer, used multiple, overlapping sources. Those pushing the dossier eventually includedselected patsy journalists, the State Department, John McCain and even the Department of Justice (FBI and DOJ officials).

For the Biden laptop, it is understood the whole messy thing was shopped all across the mainstream media by Rudy Giuliani, about the most mistrusted man available for the purpose. The source must be reputable for the gag to work, and there is no way a full-spectrum Russian disinformation operation would use Rudy. That alone should have ended the discussion among those 50 letter-signing intelligence officials.

Lastly, everything on the laptop was verifiable in an hour or two by an organisation like the NSA. They could have had an intern verify the emails, bank statements, wire transfers, etc. using about half the capabilities Edward Snowden revealed they have. James Clapper and John Brennan knew this, and knew equally well that the media, if they picked up the story at all, would not ask any such questions, and the NSA, et al, would never weigh in. It would be our little secret.

So we'll call that letter claiming the Biden emails were potential Russian disinfo a lie, a fabrication, made-up, fake stuff designed to influence an election. That's disinformation by any definition, and evidence the only disinformation op in 2020 was run against the American voters by their own intelligence community working with the media and on behalf of the Democrats.

Almost halfof Americans now believe Trump would have won a second term if the media had fully reported on the laptops revelations. The scam worked. You know some of its hallmarks now, so keep a sharp eye out in 2024.

Continued here:
Stopping the next Hunter Biden laptop cover-up - The Spectator

Social media company Minds and Daryl Davis tell Joe Rogan …

Minds.com co-founder Bill Ottman and activist Daryl Davis went on the "Joe Rogan Experience" to unveil their #ChangeMinds deradicalization initiative.

The team at blockchain-based social network Minds and Davis published a research paper outlining how "deplatforming actually intensifies extremism," and argue how a new approach to online moderation is necessary.

One part of the discussion had Davis outlining his experiences on having debates with others on the Minds platform. While Rogan brings up how Davis convinced members of the KKK to change their viewpoints on raceas explored in his previous appearancehere the longtime activist refines his main point.

In explaining how a hypothetically intense discussion plays out, Davis highlights the importance of having the other person's "walls come down." That is to say, if Davis and a racist who hates black people can listen to each other's viewpoints, at all whatsoever, it can have a significant impact on the racist in the long run.

Internet entrepreneur and Minds CEO Bill Ottman builds off the "walls coming down" point by adding how neuroscientist Sam Harris previously studied people's actual brain waves with regards to how an individual subconsciously reacts to being presented with ideas or concepts they don't like.

The key to #ChangeMinds, according to Ottman and Davis, is building long-term relationships between people of opposing viewpoints as its own main objective.

In describing the research paper, Minds staffers stated that their "paper examines the adverse effects of social media censorship and proposes an alternative moderation model based on free speech and Internet freedom."

An excerpt from the paper's introduction says:

"The research found significant evidence that censorship and deplatforming can promote and amplify, rather than suppress, cognitive radicalization and even violent extremism. Shutting down accounts accused of violating hate-speech policies and misinformation often shifts those banned individuals to alternative platforms where their narrative of long-suffering victimhood is further refined."

Davis wrote in the foreword of the research paper about how the means of expressing opinions as a member of the general public has significantly evolved from the pre-Internet days. Davis urges that a further change in thinking is needed in the age of technological liberation for individualism.

The timing of the unveiling is relevant in the case of show host Rogan. The world's leading podcast program faced a cavalcade of censorship efforts by the far-left and corporate media who brigaded the Spotify platform and demanded they essentially "tame" Rogan's ability to discuss controversial topics freely, or outright ban him.

It was a debacle that amounted to Rogan being featured in an episode of "The Simpsons" that aired on Sunday and satirized cancel culture.

See the article here:

Social media company Minds and Daryl Davis tell Joe Rogan ...

Social media has a serious disinformation problem. But it can be fixed – The Indian Express

Social media platforms have effectively supplanted traditional information networks in India. The dialectical relationship between online content, traditional media and political networks means that the messages propagated online effectively touch even those who are not yet online.

This ubiquity could have been a golden moment for India democratising access to information, fostering community, increasing citizen participation and reducing the distance between ordinary people and decision-makers. However, social media platforms have adopted design choices that have led to a proliferation and mainstreaming of misinformation while allowing themselves to be weaponised by powerful vested interests for political and commercial benefit. The consequent free flow of disinformation, hate and targeted intimidation has led to real-world harm and degradation of democracy in India: Mainstreamed anti-minority hate, polarised communities and sowed confusion have made it difficult to establish a shared foundation of truth.

Organised misinformation (disinformation) has a political and/or commercial agenda. However, even though there is growing recognition of the political motivations and impact of disinformation, the discourse in India has remained apolitical and episodic focused on individual pieces of content and events, and generalised outrage against big tech instead of locating it in the larger political context or structural design issues. The evolution of the global discourse on misinformation too has allowed itself to get mired in the details of content standards, enforcement, fact checking, takedowns, deplatforming, etc a framework which lends itself to bitter partisan contest over individual pieces of content while allowing platforms to disingenuously conflate the discourse on moderating misinformation with safeguards for freedom of expression. However, these issues are adjunct to the real issue of disinformation and our upcoming report establishes that the current system of content moderation is more a public relations exercise for platforms than being geared to stop the spread of disinformation.

A meaningful framework to combat disinformation at scale must be built on the understanding that it is a political problem: The issue is as much about bad actors as individual pieces of content. Content distribution and moderation are interventions in the political process. There is thus a need for a comprehensive transparency law to enforce relevant disclosures by social media platforms. Moreover, content moderation and allied functions such as standard setting, fact-checking and de-platforming must be embedded in the sovereign bipartisan political process if they are to have democratic legitimacy. If this is not to degrade into legal sanction for government censorship, any regulatory body must be grounded in democratic principles its own and of platforms.

Given the political polarisation in our country (and most others), the constitution of such a regulator and its operational legitimacy is difficult. However, the failure of a polarised political ecosystem to come to a consensus is not a free pass for the platforms. Platforms are responsible for the speed and spread of distribution of disinformation and the design choices, which have made disinformation ubiquitous and indistinguishable from vetted information. It is thus the responsibility of the platforms to tamp down on the distribution of disinformation and their weaponisation. We argue that platforms are sentient about the users and content they are hosting and bear responsibility for their distribution choices. Moreover, just as any action against content is seen as an intervention in the political process, the artificial increase in distribution of content (amplification) too has political and commercial value.

We recommend three approaches to distribution that can be adopted by platforms: Constrain distribution to organic reach (chronological feed); take editorial responsibility for amplified content; or amplify only credible sources (irrespective of ideological affiliation). The current approach to misinformation that relies on fact-checking a small subset of content in a vast ocean of unreviewed content is inadequate for the task and needs to be supplemented by a review of content creators itself.

Finally, as the country with the largest youth population in the world, it is important that we actively think of how we want our youth to engage in our democratic processes and the role of social media platforms in it. There are three notable effects of social media on our politics, which require deliberation.

First, social media has led to a dislocation of politics with people weighing in on abstractions online while being disengaged from their immediate surroundings. Second, social media has led to a degradation of our political discourse where serious engagement has been supplanted by hot takes and memes. Third, it has obscured the providence of consequential interventions in our

political discourse because of opacity in technology.

Meaningful politics, especially in democracies, is rooted in local organisation, discussion and negotiation. However, the structure of social media has facilitated a perception of engagement without organisation, action without consequence. This wasnt and isnt inevitable there are more thoughtful ways to structure platforms, which would help connect and root people in their own communities instead of isolating them locally while connecting them virtually.

Instead of moving towards more grounded communities, there is an acceleration towards greater virtuality through metaverse. Social media cannot be wished away. But its structure and manner of use are choices we must make as a polity after deliberation instead of accepting as them fait accompli or simply being overtaken by developments along the way.

This column first appeared in the print edition on April 11, 2022 under the title Politics of disinformation. Gupta is founder of the Future of India Foundation

See the original post:

Social media has a serious disinformation problem. But it can be fixed - The Indian Express