We produce happy and angry expressions more rapidly than sad expressions – Tech Explorist

Perceiving and deciphering is a vital part of social interaction. While we comprehend the spatial qualities of an expression how the mouth moves in a smile, for example the speeds at which expressions are produced are often overlooked.

The ability to get on and quickly decipher these signs could likewise assist individuals with deciding facial expressions even when mask-wearing might limit other visual cues.

A recent study quantified the speed of changes in distance between key facial expressions. Conducted by the University of Birmingham, scientists found that people tend to produce happy and angry expressions more rapidly, while sad expressions are made more slowly.

Lead author Dr. Sophie Sowden said,Better understanding how people interpret this important visual cue could give us new insights into the diagnosis of conditions such as Autism Spectrum Disorder or Parkinsons Disease. This is because patients with these conditions often recognize facial expressions differently, or exhibit expressions differently.

In the examination, people were asked to generate facial expressions directed at a camera. They used an open-source programming program called OpenFace to track their facial movement. They estimated the speed of movement in regions of the face known to be significant in producing expression, including around the eyebrows, the nose, and the mouth, just as across the face in general.

During the first part of the experiment, scientists studied the average speed at which participants produced different expressions. In this part, participants were asked to produce posed expressions, as well as expressions during the speech, and spontaneous expressions were recorded in response to emotion-inducing videos. Interestingly, they showed differences in speed across emotions depends on the region of the face and the type of expression being considered.

In a second phase of the study, the team investigated what would happen if they captured schematic versions of facial expressions produced and manipulated the speeds involved. In this experiment, the scientists found that people would get better at recognizing it as happy or angry as the expression was speeded up. In contrast, if it were slowed down, people would more accurately identify it as sad.

Scientists believe that this study could pave the way towards diagnosing autism and Parkinsons disease. It could also be useful in a range of artificial intelligence applications such as facial recognition software.

The rest is here:
We produce happy and angry expressions more rapidly than sad expressions - Tech Explorist

Containers: Learning from the pioneers – ComputerWeekly.com

Todays modernity is tomorrows legacy. Very few established businesses are blessed with homogeneity when it comes to the technologies and suppliers that support their IT operations. Applications are developed according to prevailing programming and deployment models. Virtualised servers allow enterprises to run established core applications on modern hardware and so avoid the potentially significant costs, risks and disruption of rebuilding.

Organisations regularly talk of transforming their operations to support new ways of engaging. Within this, the demand for modernised applications features prominently as a desired goal.

The Covid-19 pandemic has further sharpened a focus on what many see as the core of a modern application. It needs to be resilient, consistent and secure, architected as a lightweight modular programming model for rapid deployment and scalability.

Containers, with Kubernetes, the open source container orchestration and management platform, offer a modern, lightweight application model for quick deployment of operations based on modular, transient and immutable services. They are becoming more popular as they meet the demand for applications that can scale as necessary, whether on-premise in a managed datacentre or deployed to a public or private cloud.

Importantly, containers offer consistency and resilience, and form part of the technologies built for cloud-native delivery, multicloud and broader hybrid IT operations.

However, there is a tendency for every narrative about modern applications to be framed in the context of container technology. The reality is that containers have their place in delivering optimal capabilities but only for the right application.

To gain some insight into where containers play best, CCS Insight, commissioned by Red Hat, conducted a research study in January and February 2021. The goal was to understand the development, deployment and use of container applications and services. One of the top uses for container deployments was to simplify the integration and consistency of internal systems and components.

In fact, many of the top usage scenarios were as expected, such as providing autoscaling services for existing solutions and enabling the sharing and reuse of resources across an organisation. And although containers were being used for e-commerce services as you might expect, given their scaling needs in the wider market, containers are not always the chosen technology for modern app builders.

Undoubtedly, containers and Kubernetes offer many operational benefits that place them at the heart of modern application development strategies. Their ability to provide a consistent and immutable scaling model, regardless of the technology stack, highlights the productivity benefits on offer and the scope for some level of portability.

Adoption of the technology is growing, with the rise in cloud-native and cloud-first strategies as the primary focus for new application development and deployments. In another CCS Insight survey in mid-2020 that questioned IT leaders about their investment plans, 42% of 736 respondents had opted for a cloud-native or cloud-first approach. However, the same survey also revealed that only 10% had made a container-first model their top priority.

The reality is that containers, and in particular the Kubernetes container orchestration platform, have proved to be a challenging technology to navigate, implement and administer. There are many facets to containers and their management that must be addressed.

CCS Insights survey for Red Hat reflects many of the challenges that face the implementation of any new technology, such as a lack of skills and training, and not knowing where best to implement.

CCS Insights study differs from other similar public surveys because the respondent profile featured a more experienced set of technical skills operating with progressive processes and IT systems. Respondents maturity in DevOps and cloud development and deployment was notably high, as was their mix of deployment platforms.

Those embarking on a container strategy should take note of this maturity and the way pioneers have invested in education and training, allowing them to draw on a broad range of skills and technologies.

The immutable nature of container-based services, which can be deleted and redeployed when a new update is available, highlights the flexibility and scale they present. But while containers may come and go, there will be critical data that must remain accessible and with relevant controls applied.

For the growing number of developers embracing the container model, physical computer storage facilities can no longer be someone elses concern, for example. Developers will need to become involved in provisioning storage assets with containers. Being adept with modern data storage, as well as the physical storage layer, is vital to data-driven organisations.

Bola Rotibi is a research director at CCS Insight

Read more:
Containers: Learning from the pioneers - ComputerWeekly.com

Young people are hungry for good sex education. I found a program in Mexico that gets it right – The Conversation AU

More than 30,000 people have signed a petition, launched by ex-Sydney school girl Chanel Contos, demanding for consent to be at the forefront of sexual education in schools. The text in the petition states:

Those who have signed this petition have done so because they are sad and angry that they did not receive an adequate education regarding what amounts to sexual assault and what to do when it happens.

The petition encouraged a growing number of harrowing testimonies from young women throughout Australia about their experiences of sexual assault at parties.

School principals, particularly in all-boys schools, have responded by acknowledging the need for a cultural shift. Some schools have gathered students for sessions about consent, others addressed the topic in the classroom, some have asked parents to engage their children in discussions about sexual consent and social norms.

But studies show one-off conversations or education sessions about consent and rape are unlikely to influence long-term change. Interventions need to systematically and gradually address the harmful social norms that underpin a host of interrelated issues including rape culture, intimate partner violence and homophobic bullying.

I evaluated a sexuality education program in Mexico City. My evaluation highlighted a number of factors that can help shift harmful beliefs and behaviours related to gender, sexuality and relationships.

Evidence from around the globe suggests that to transform the harmful gender norms that contribute to violence and sexual assault, programs should promote critical reflections about gender, relationships and sexuality. Evidence also shows such reflection takes time.

Read more: Let's make it mandatory to teach respectful relationships in every Australian school

A community-based organisation providing sexual and reproductive health services throughout Mexico adapted their sexuality course in 2016. It was a 20 hour course, delivered weekly over one semester to 185 students in one school. Each group of 20 participants aged 14 to 17 had one facilitator.

The facilitators in the course were young people (under 30 years of age). They were trained as professional health educators, and to facilitate activities that promote critical reflection among students about entrenched beliefs and social norms.

Such conversations can be about things like the nature of love and behaviours that are good and bad in a relationship.

In the program, students engaged in debates about romantic jealousy, and whether it was a sign of love. One student told me:

they told us [] about what is love and what is not love. I told my boyfriend, they told us that jealousy is bad, and he replied, thats right, because it means a lack of trust, and in this way, we sometimes talked about the course.

Vignettes that were relevant to the students lived experiences stimulated debates about gender roles and social norms. For example, student said:

One of the things my classmate said stayed with me. He said that the man has to work and the woman should stay in the house. It made me, like, think. I think that a woman doesnt need to always be at home [] as if it were a prison. I think you need to give freedom to both people in a relationship.

These group conversations can be challenging. They may also be upsetting to participants, and could even provoke verbal harassment or violence.

One facilitator described bullying and violence during some sessions of the course.

The group started to verbally attack each other, and it was one corner of the room against the other.

This means facilitators need training not only on the concepts of gender, sexuality and relationships, but also on how best to directly address comments that may reinforce harmful gender norms or other types of violence in the classroom and use those as teaching moments to highlight the consequences of harmful social norms.

I saw the students become more comfortable talking about relationships and sexuality as the course progressed. One young man said:

before the course, it made us a bit embarrassed to talk about sexual and reproductive health. But afterwards we understood, with the course, that it was, like, very natural to talk about it. Its like any other thing, and so I now feel fine talking about it.

As a result of the program, some students said they directly addressed negative behaviours in their own relationships. And some even left controlling relationships.

One student said:

You know the information they told us about relationships? I was thinking about that, and then I decided to talk to my girlfriend about her controlling behaviour.

The students also developed trust in the course facilitators over time. One young man said:

As time passed, they gave me confidence that if at any moment I need something I can ask them for help, it wont be a problem.

The facilitators made referrals to health care, provided advice and support, and in one case accompanied a participant to obtain care.

In Australia, the quality and extent of implementation of sexual education is often left up to individual teachers or schools. But many teachers called on to deliver sexuality education feel unprepared to go beyond factual biological instruction.

A government mandate as seen in a handful of countries such as the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands is needed to ensure high quality sexuality education is delivered to all young people in Australia.

Read more: Relationships and sex education is now mandatory in English schools Australia should do the same

But even when mandated, implementation at a national scale is challenging. To effectively deliver such programs, resources should be put towards developing a large cohort of health educators who are trained and supported to deliver quality sexual education.

A nation-wide program could be implemented through a partnership between national and state governments and community-based organisations already experienced with sexuality education.

As shown in the quotes above, the young people in the Mexico City course discussed topics from their sexuality course with peers, partners and parents.

This suggests that, even if parents feel unprepared to educate their children about sexual health, sexuality education can provide a bridge to open and reflective conversations. These can be a two-way exchange so parents need not serve as the educator, and can themselves benefit along with their children.

Read more: Not as simple as 'no means no': what young people need to know about consent

My research on prevention programming, as well as reviews of school-based interventions more broadly, reinforces the centrality of schools, both as settings in which violence is perpetrated, and as a site for its prevention.

Schools are often heteronormative institutions and can perpetuate toxic masculinity and rape culture. Investing in good quality sexual education can prevent the downstream effects we are seeing now in the testimonials about sexual assault in schools and in the national parliament.

Originally posted here:
Young people are hungry for good sex education. I found a program in Mexico that gets it right - The Conversation AU

Julian Assange: What you need to know about the WikiLeaks …

On January 4, a British court blocked a United States request to extradite WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange.

The US has charged him with hacking government computers and espionage after he obtained and published hundreds of thousands of classified documents between 2010 and 2011.

District Judge Vanessa Baraister said extradition would be oppressive taking into account Assanges mental health, saying he was at risk of suicide.

Assange was arrested in April 2019 by UK police from the embassy of Ecuador in London, where he had been granted asylum since 2012.

Here is what you need to know:

Assange is an Australian-born computer programmer and founder of WikiLeaks an international, non-profit whistle-blowing organisation that was created in Iceland in 2006.

The 49-year-old, a father, is WikiLeaks publisher and former editor-in-chief. In 2018, Icelandic journalist Kristinn Hrafnsson took over as editor.

Assange came to prominence in mid-2010 after WikiLeaks published US military logs from Afghanistan and Iraq, and US cable leaks in November that year.

Former US military personnel Chelsea Manning sent the information to Assange.

Manning was charged and sentenced to 35 years imprisonment in 2013 for violating the Espionage Act of 1917, and other offences.

The Espionage Act was passed to deter any interference in US military operations and prevent individuals and groups from supporting enemies of the United States.

Mannings sentence was commuted in January 2017, days before then-US President Barack Obama left office.

WikiLeaks shot to fame in April 2010 after the website released a 39-minute video of a US military Apache helicopter firing over and killing more than a dozen Iraqis, including two Reuters journalists.

The footage leaked by private Manning led to global outrage, reigniting a debate over the USs occupation of Iraq and wider presence in the Middle East.

In July that year, WikiLeaks, together with several media outlets, such as the New York Times, published more than 90,000 US military documents related to the War in Afghanistan.

These included previously unreported details about civilian deaths, friendly-fire casualties, US air raids, al-Qaedas role in the country, and nations providing support to Afghan leaders and the Taliban.

Former US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning [File: Ford Fischer/News2Share/Reuters]Months later, WikiLeaks published 391,832 documents related to the Iraq War. The reports, also referred to as The Iraq War Logs, provided on the ground details as reported by US troops, dating from January 2014 to December 2019.

The leaks were the single largest in US military history, exposing huge civilian casualties.

In November 2010, WikiLeaks published hundreds of thousands of US diplomatic cables, in what is now better known as the Cablegate scandal.

Some 250,000 reports were released, dating back to 1996 up until February 2010. The cables provided analysis and insights from more than 270 US embassies and consulates from around the world.

After Assange was arrested, a grand jury in the state of Virginia charged him with one count of computer intrusion/hacking for allegedly assisting Private Manning in accessing classified documents.

In May 2019, Assange was further charged under the US Espionage Act of 1917 on 17 counts for soliciting, gathering and publishing US military and diplomatic documents in 2010, all provided by Manning.

Assange is the first publisher to be charged under the act.

The leaks highlighted in the indictment include the US diplomatic cables, information on Guantanamo Bay prison detainees and Iraq and Afghanistan activity reports.

The US government has said it will appeal the British courts January 4 decision, with some expecting the trial to go all the way up to the UK Supreme Court.

If Assange is extradited to the US and charged under the Espionage Act, he could face up to 175 years in jail. On the less serious charge of computer intrusion, the WikiLeaks founder would receive a maximum of five years.

Extradition between the UK and the US is rare.

In 2012, a request from the US to extradite UK hacker Gary Mackinnon for hacking into US military databases was rejected. Similarly, the US refused a request from the UK earlier this year to hand over Anna Sachoolas, the wife of a US intelligence officer accused of killing a British citizen due to dangerous driving.

The US indictment against Assange does not include any charges of rape, of which he was accused of by two Swedish women in 2010. Assange has repeatedly denied the accusations.

A Swedish court issued an international warrant for his arrest in 2010 so he could be extradited back to the nordic country. After being released on bail in the UK, Assange was granted asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in June 2012 by then-President Rafael Correa, where he resided for nearly seven years.

On November 19, 2019, all rape charges against Assange were dropped.

While supporters of the Wikileaks publisher have welcomed the UK courts decision, many have expressed caution noting that the case was not decided on the grounds of press freedom.

According to rights groups, Assanges possible extradition and sentencing in the US would be a serious threat to free-speech rights and to the work of investigative journalists around the world.

Amnesty International has said the effect of Assange being convicted on investigative journalists, publishers and anyone who publishes classified government material would be immediate and severe.

US lawyers argue that charges against Assange could be challenged under the USs First Amendment law, which protects the right to freedom of speech and expression.

See original here:

Julian Assange: What you need to know about the WikiLeaks ...

Sarah Palin calls for Julian Assange’s pardon

Julian Assange has an unlikely new defender: Sarah Palin, one of his best-known victims.

I am the first one to admit when I make a mistake, the former Alaska governor said in a two-minute video posted to YouTube Saturday.

Wikileaks, the website Assange ran to disseminate purloined data, posted family photos, private messages, and government emails hacked from Palins Yahoo.com account in 2008, weeks after Sen. John McCain named her as his vice-presidential running mate.

I made a mistake some years ago, not supporting Julian Assange thinking that he was a bad guy, Palin continued in the clip. And Ive learned a lot since then He deserves a pardon.

The conservative favorite went on to praise Assange for what he has done in the name of real journalism, and thats getting to the bottom of issues that the public really needs to hear about and benefit from.

Its a 180-degree turnaround from the Republican stance of 12 years ago, when GOP stalwarts vilified Assange for what they saw as a dirty campaign trick.

Hacking strikes at the heart of our democracy, Long Island Rep. Peter King, a top McCain-Palin surrogate, said at the time. You cant go invading someones privacy that way.

Getty Images

AP

Joe Judge choosing Colt McCoy on Sunday night against the...

But since then and particularly after Wikileaks published material that embarrassed Hillary Clinton and the Democrats in 2016 some conservatives have developed a strange new respect for Assange, who faces espionage charges for his release of secret American military documents in 2010.

President Trump, who heaped praise on Assange during his 2016 presidential campaign, is reportedly mulling a pardon.

Palins plea for mercy was first published on the Gateway Pundit website.

Read the original:

Sarah Palin calls for Julian Assange's pardon

Elon Musk Is the Ultimate Villain in the Korean Sci-Fi Film Space Sweepers – TheStranger.com

"I'm hiding from an Elon Musk-like character..." Netflix

The character, a white man named James Sullivan (Richard Armitage), is the CEO of a corporation, UTS, that controls suburbs that orbit the earth. The company has big plans to relocate all of humanity to Mars, which it privately owns. UTS corporation dwarfs Tesla, the future-oriented company owned by the South African-born Elon Musk, the richest man on our earth until mid-Februaryhe goes back and forth with Jeff Bezos for this title.

Directed by Jo Sung-hee, Space Sweepers is set in 2092, maintains a fast pace, includes plot twists and turns that are not always easy to track, features lots of explosions, lots of robots, and that raw examination of capitalist class structures we have come to expect from the best of South Korea's directors (The Housemaid, Piet, Train to Busan, Parasite, and so on).

Indeed, the space sweepers in Space Sweepers are basically space janitors. (Incidentally, according to Wikipedia, the show should really be called Space Victory, as that's the literal translation of the film's Korean title, Seungriho.) The janitors are in the risky business of cleaning the space junk that swirls around earth. They are clearly essential workers, but they are paid peanuts.

And so, on one side we have these broke janitors (mostly POCsAsians, Africans, South Asians), and on the other we have a white CEO, who looks to be in his late 40s but who is, in fact, 152-years-old. The rich die hard.

Aditya Mani Jha of Mint Lounge has this to say about it:

But there is one big difference between Musk and Sullivan. Musk wants humans to move to earth because of a solar catastrophe that will happen millions (if not billions) of years from now. The distance between us and that catastrophe is unlikely to get anyone excited about living on another world with another sky, another sun, another year. Sullivan knows this is the key problem in his commercial plans for the Red Planet. Most humans would just prefer stay on earth. The solution to the obstacle? It cannot be said without a SPOILER ALERT.

To get into the mood of what Sullivan has in mind for earthlings who do not want to become totally privatized Martians, let's read one of the best passages in W. G. Sebald's 1998 book The Rings of Saturn:

Can you feel that? If so, then you will easily see what Sullivan has in store for the only living planet in our solar system. By destroying earth's livability, he can force humans to colonize Mars on the terms of a contract. The problem with earth is that everyone (humans, other animals, and also plants) has a right to it, can still lay claim to it, is still attached to the billions of years that formed its biosphere. The contract can only go so far, earthlings. But the mad dream of capitalism has been the creation of a zone that is much like what Dubai is for foreign workers. A zone where citizenship is replaced by the contract.

This is how Daniel Brook describes the guest-worker system in Dubai in his book, A History of Future Cities:

But there is still worker unrest in Dubai, because Dubai is still on earth, the planet that is shared by every living thing. Mars, on the other hand, can be owned by the CEO who makes it livable. And those who are forced to call it home owe everything to the corporation that bankrolled its livability.

Elon Musk will eventually stop this talk about the sun burning the earth to a crisp in an unimaginably distant future and start siding with Sullivan's view of the Mars colonization problem: The essence of earth is irredeemably anti-capitalist.

View original post here:

Elon Musk Is the Ultimate Villain in the Korean Sci-Fi Film Space Sweepers - TheStranger.com

Britain proudly announces a plan to protect journalists but if it really cared it would free Julian Assange – RT

The UK Governments new action plan to protect journalists will do little to burnish the credentials of a would-be champion of media freedom that continues to imprison the worlds most famous dissident journalist.

Continuing to promote itself as the soi-disant global defender of journalistic freedom, the UK Government has just grandly unveiled a National Action Plan for the Safety of Journalists to protect newsmen and women from harassment and threats. UK journalists have apparently suffered abuse and attacks while going about their work, and the government is selflessly riding to their rescue. The plan involves new training for police officers as well as aspiring and existing journalists, and commitments from social media platforms and prosecution services to take tough action against abusers.

Facebook and Twitter, we are told, are on board, promising to respond promptly to complaints of threats to journalists safety. The government makes no mention of the threat Facebook and Twitter pose to journalism. During the past few years, Twitter and Facebook have been closing down, or threatening to close down, the accounts of journalists, and with cheerful abandon. Moreover, during the 2020 US presidential election, the two social media giants interfered with the work of journalists by preventing the sharing of New York Postsunflattering articles about Hunter Biden, son of then-candidate Joe Biden. Twitter went further and locked the newspapers account for the two critical weeks before the election.

Prime Minister (and former journalist) Boris Johnson issued a statement nobly declaring: "Freedom of speech and a free press are at the very core of our democracy, and journalists must be able to go about their work without being threatened. The cowardly attacks and abuse directed at reporters for simply doing their job cannot continue. This action plan is just the start of our work to protect those keeping the public informed, and defend those holding the government to account."

For all the self-congratulatory verbiage emanating from the government, its hard to discern very much in this plan other than a promise to collect data about the supposed ongoing harassment of journalists.

Among the journalists the government of Boris Johnson will not be rushing to collect data about is of course Julian Assange. Assange has been languishing for nearly two years in HMP Belmarsh, a maximum-security prison dubbed Britains Guantanamo Bay. Its detainees include serial killers, child rapists and child killers, the 2013 murderers of a British Army soldier in Woolwich, the Manchester Arena bomber and the London nail bomber.

Julian Assange has been convicted of nothing other than the minor, procedural crime of skipping bail. Assange did not of course skip bail. In November 2010, Swedish prosecutors obtained a European Arrest Warrant, demanding that Assange be detained in the UK so that he could be questioned in relation to the sexual offense allegations made by two women with whom he had had brief sexual relations and who wanted him to be tested for HIV. Assange had to be questioned in person, and only in Sweden.

Assange fought the extradition request, suspecting that it was a ruse to get him to Sweden, from where he would be swiftly extradited to the United States, which, in all likelihood had prepared a secret indictment against him. The British courts consistently ruled against Assange and in favor of the Swedish extradition request. On June 15, 2012, following the British Supreme Courts dismissal of his challenge to the Swedish extradition request, Assange walked into the Ecuadorian embassy in London and asked for political asylum.

We learned subsequently from e-mail exchanges between the Swedish prosecutors and the UK Crown Prosecution Service, whose head at the time was current Labor Party leader Sir Keir Starmer, the British were encouraging the Swedes to refuse to come to London to interview Assange.

Though Sweden announced in May 2017 that it was discontinuing the investigation of Assange, the British authorities insisted that Assange would still face arrest the moment he stepped out of the embassy on the charge ofbail skipping.

On April 11, 2019, the government of Ecuador withdrew Assanges asylum status, and invited the British authorities to enter the embassy and seize him. Assange was rushed before a judge and immediately sentenced to prison for 50 weeks. Within minutes of his arrest, the United States confirmed what Assange had said all along. It announced that it would seek his extradition on the basis of a secret indictment that had been prepared a year earlier. The charge was that Assange had conspired with Chelsea Manning to hack into a secure computer system. A month later, the United States announced 17 additional charges against Assange under its Espionage Act.

Within a month, UK Home Secretary Sajid Javid signed the extradition warrant that would allow the extradition of Assange to the United States. Javid did this even though the 2004 extradition treaty between the US and the UK explicitly states that Extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense. Assanges offense publication of government documents detailing war crimes and official abuses of power is about as political as any offense can get.

In early January 2021, Judge Vanessa Baraitser denied the US extradition request for Assange on the grounds that the inhuman conditions in a US Supermax prison could drive Assange to suicide. Then, with extraordinary inconsistency, she ordered Assange to remain in Belmarsh, the UKs Supermax, while the US appealed her decisiona legal process that could last for years.

Yet even as Assange was languishing in prison, amidst a global pandemic and among some of the worst criminals in the land, the UK Government was launching a campaign to promote itself as the global champion of journalistic freedom and the scourge of unenlightened regimes resisting transparency.

In July 2019, one month after the Home Secretary had signed off on the USs extradition request, the UK Government co-hosted, with Canada, a Global Conference on Media Freedom, part of an international campaign to shine a global spotlight on media freedom and increase the cost to those that are attempting to restrict it. In the spirit of shining a spotlight on media freedom, the UK Foreign Office refused to permit RT and Sputnik to attend the conference. We have not accredited RT or Sputnik because of their active role in spreading disinformation, the Foreign Office explained.

Without a trace of irony, UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt declared to the conference attendees: We are on the side of those who seek to report the truth and bring the facts to light. We stand against those who suppress or censor or exact revenge.

Scarcely a day goes by without the UK Governments sounding off on the persecution of journalists somewhereother than in the UK of course. Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has weighed in on the persecution of journalists in Belarus. He was disturbed by, yes, the denial of accreditation. The Belarusian authorities, he tweeted out in August 2020, are continuing to target @BBCNews, local and international media by cancelling their accreditation to report in Belarus. The UK championed the cause of Svetlana Prokopyeva, who was convicted on charges of justifying terrorism, even though she was not sent to prison. During the recent protests over the trial and imprisonment of Alexey Navalny, Raab sternly warned Russia not to target journalists.

The UK Governments self-congratulatory commitment to media freedom notwithstanding, its own record is rather unimpressive. Journalist advocacy organization Reporters Without Borders publishes an annual survey of the state of journalistic freedom in the world. According to the most recent World Press Freedom Index, the UK has slipped to number 35 in the world. Among the issues Reporters Without Borders raised were the continued imprisonment of Assange, as well as the criminal probe of the July 2019 publication of embarrassing diplomatic cables. The documents, like those of WikiLeaks, were clearly genuine since their appearance in print led to the swift resignation of the UK ambassador to Washington.

The governments action plan is not only self-serving, but also disingenuous. Why do journalists get special protections denied to others? Anyone in the public eyepoliticians, lawyers, judges, athletes, actors, TV celebritiesis likely to experience abuse, personal insults and threats. This rush to single out journalists for special protection smacks of governmental unctuousness, a heavy-handed attempt to flatter journalists by suggesting that they are doing something frightfully dangerous, something likely to provoke powerful interests. Very few journalists do any such thing. Indeed, that the government is so eager to tout the virtues of journalists would surely indicate that it has little to fear from them. The kind of journalist who does indeed take risks, who does dedicate his life to bringing transparency to governmenta Julian Assange, in other wordsis not the sort of journalist the UK Government will do anything to protect. On the contrary, it will aid and abet in his persecution.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Go here to read the rest:

Britain proudly announces a plan to protect journalists but if it really cared it would free Julian Assange - RT

Time to cut off the influence of the party’s ‘big swinging dicks’ and for PM to listen – The Mandarin

Yesterday morning Prime Minister Scott Morrison said Christian Porter is an innocent man under our law.

The PM previously decided there shouldnt be an inquiry into the suitability of Australias first law officer to keep his position after a series of allegations of sexism, sexual misconduct and rape. Porter strenuously denies the allegations.

Morrison based his decision on absolutely zero expert opinion and didnt seek out the solicitor-generals advice. His own two cents (and we can assume Jens guidance) was enough to do away with the serious claims put forward by a woman who later took her own life.

This is the latest display of Liberal men protecting their pack. And this pack, former foreign affairs ministerJulie Bishop said on Monday, is a group with such disgusting machismo they called themselves the big swinging dicks.

The group name was firstouted in 2009byThe AustraliansGlenn Milne. Members reportedly included Christopher Pyne, Steven Ciobo, Greg Hunt, Peter Dutton, Jamie Briggs, Mathias Cormann, Michael Keenan and Morrison.

The claim wasrepeatedby former minister Sharman Stone last month. Bishop said a decade ago and now that this group tried (and failed) to thwart her career. Liberal men have denied the existence of this group in 2009 and today.

Whether the group existed or not, the macho pack mentality it encapsulated certainly still does. Just take a look at who leads them.

On Julian Assanges extradition, Morrisonjokedabout how plenty of his mates have asked me if they can be my special envoy to help sort out the issue with Pamela Anderson. On International Womens Day in 2019 he said thatwomen should rise but not at the expense of [men].

He suggested he needs to contextualise alleged rape victims as his daughters to muster an iota of empathy. He interrupted Social Services Minister Anne Ruston when she was asked about what its like to be a woman in Parliament. When Labors Jim Chalmers said he cried in Kevin Rudds office, Morrisonmocked himfor being sensitive.

Morrison has previously denied his party had a women problem.

Get the Juice - the Mandarin's free daily newsletter delivered to your inbox.

Youll also receive special offers from our partners. You can opt-out at any time.

Liberal women have been abandoning their ranks in droves. Most recently, Nicolle Flint stepped down after previouslycalling out sexist abuse. Julia Banks, having previously called out a culture of bullying, said the political system was stuck in time. Bishop resigned after saying the workplace culture was untenable. Former senator Lucy Gichuhi said that male bullies of the Liberal Party need tostop beating up our women.

While women are pushed out of the party after being ruthlessly mocked and bullied by men on the same side as them, there is apack of dudeswho seem to be protected in their positions.

Theres Angus Taylor, who remains in Parliament after the watergate scandal,among other incidents. Duttons pork-barrelling allegations and au pairs have largely been forgotten. Alan Tudge holds his seat even after the alleged poor treatment of and affair with a female staffer. Stuart Robert was brought back even after robotdebt. Paul Fletcher faced nothing forland overpayment.

Lets not forget Porter who alsostacked the Administrative Appeals Tribunalwith his Liberal mates. He was promoted by Malcolm Turnbull just weeks after being reprimanded for being drunk in the company of young women.

The list goes on.

Meanwhile, former Nationals deputy leader and agriculture minister Bridget McKenzie is the only senior Coalition MP to ever face a consequence since Morrison became PM following the sports rorts affair.

Of the men alleged to be in the big swinging dicks group, few remain though they left for different reasons to recent Liberal women.

Pyne and Ciobo left after the 2018 leadership spill, Keenan left in 2019 to spend time with family, and Cormann left last year to pursue a career at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Briggs is one of the few Liberal men to lose his position,resigning in 2015after complaints about his behaviour on a night out in Hong Kong by a female staffer.

All this does little for female representation in Parliament. In the House of Representatives, just31% of members are female a statistic dragged down by the fact women represent just 19.5% of the Coalition party room.

The huge difference in treatment and accountability (and the ignorance to the gender implications that drive this) shows the mentality of the big swinging dicks group is still alive and well.

This article is curated from our sister publication Crikey.

READ MORE

Does the public sector really care about fairness?

Strengthening emotional intelligence helps to create a healthier workplace

Is it the role of staff to be managing the managers? The Select Committee

Excerpt from:

Time to cut off the influence of the party's 'big swinging dicks' and for PM to listen - The Mandarin

The EU wants to build its first quantum computer. That plan might not be ambitious enough – ZDNet

EU Commission vice president Margrethe Vestager and commissioner Thierry Breton presented a new roadmap for the next 10 years - the '2030 digital compass'.

The European Union is determined to remain a competitive player in the quantum revolution that's expected in the next decade, and has unveiled plans to step up the development of quantum technologies within the bloc before 2030.

EU Commission vice president Margrethe Vestager and commissioner Thierry Breton have presented a new roadmap for the next 10 years, the '2030 digital compass', which sets out targets for digital transformation across many different fields, in an effort to reassert the bloc's relevance in a range of technologies.

New objectives were set for quantum technologies, with the Commission targeting a first computer with quantum acceleration by 2025, paving the way for Europe to be "at the cutting edge" of quantum capabilities by 2030.

SEE: IT Data Center Green Energy Policy (TechRepublic Premium)

The ultimate goal, according to the roadmap, is for the EU to be able to develop quantum computers which are highly efficient, fully programmable and accessible from anywhere in Europe, to solve in hours what can currently be solved in hundreds of days, if not years.

Sophisticated quantum computing capabilities will be used to enable faster development of new drugs and cancer treatments, the Commission said; quantum computers will also solve highly complex optimisation problems for businesses, while helping with the design of energy-saving materials, or finding the cheapest combination of renewable sources to supply an energy grid.

Although the target is to develop the EU's first quantum computer in the next five years, the complexity of the device has not been specified. Most analysts expect that a large-scale quantum computer capable of resolving real-world problems faster than a classical device is still at least a decade away. It's likely, therefore, that the Commission is aiming for a somewhat less sophisticated device.

"It seems more likely that the quantum computer may be a noisy intermediate-scale type of quantum computer. In other words, not an all-singing-all-dancing fully fault-tolerant quantum computer, but a smaller, noisier quantum computer optimised to perform a specific computing task," Andrew Fearnside, senior associate specialising in quantum technologies at intellectual property firm Mewburn Ellis, tells ZDNet.

"That seems far more achievable to me, and also more deliverable and, therefore, more likely to show quantum-sceptical technology investors and industry that quantum computing can truly improve their business."

Alongside targets that are specific to quantum computing, the Commission also announced the goal to develop an ultra-secure quantum communication infrastructure that will span the whole of the EU. Quantum networks will significantly increase the security of communications and the storage of sensitive data assets, while also keeping critical communication infrastructure safe.

The EU's interest in quantum technologies is not new: the Commission launched a 10-year quantum flagship in 2018, which, with a 1 billion ($1.20 billion) budget, was described as one of the bloc's most ambitious research initiatives.

Since then, individual member states have started their own quantum programs: Germany, in particular, has launched a 2 billion ($2.4 billion) funding program for the promotion of quantum technologies, far surpassing many other nations; but France, the Netherlands, and Switzerland are all increasingly trying to establish themselves as hubs for quantum startups and research.

This has established Europe as a strong leader, with a high concentration of quantum-relevant talent and innovative quantum startups. However, the bloc's best efforts, in the context of a fast-moving quantum race,have not always been enough.

"When it comes to operationalising quantum technology knowledge, Europe is falling behind the US and China to create IP, secure VC funding, and establish a mature startup and industry ecosystem," Ivan Ostojic, partner at research firm McKinsey, tells ZDNet. "Europe needs to find innovative ways to accelerate the development and scaling of breakthrough applications of quantum technologies to fully capture the economic potential."

SEE: 5G and edge computing: How it will affect the enterprise in the next five years

Since the US signed in the National Quantum Initiative Act in 2018, which came with a $1.2 billion budget, researchers and businesses across the Atlantic have flourished; the country is widely considered the biggest competitor in quantum, and has already established a mature ecosystem for the technology.

China, for its part, has a long-established interest in quantum technologies. Earlier this week, in fact, the Chinese government revealed itseconomic roadmap for the next five years, which features aggressive objectives for quantum, including the development of a long-distance and high-speed quantum communications system, and building up computers that can support several hundred qubits.

Although the EU Commission's new roadmap reflects a desire to establish the bloc as a leading global power in quantum technologies, Ostojic argues that without a well-defined strategy, it will be difficult for Europe to compete against other nations.

"The question is if the strategy is limited to the creation of quantum computing assets, or if it includes a full ecosystem," he says. "There are critical areas to be considered across the entire value chain, from cooling technologies through quantum analytics and software to industry applications. Such a strategy should also include an answer on how to boost competitiveness from education through IP creation, company creation, funding, and industry partnerships."

Alongside the objectives it sets for quantum technologies, the Commission's roadmap lays out some aggressive milestones for the bloc in the next decade always with a vision to establish the EU as a leading player on the international scene.

SEE: BMW explores quantum computing to boost supply chain efficiencies

According to the document, the coronvirus crisis has highlighted Europe's "vulnerabilities" in the digital space, and the bloc's increased reliance on non-EU based technologies. The Commission aims, for example, to double the weight of European microprocessor production in the global market to reach a 20% share by 2030, up from the European semiconductor industry's current 10% share.

Similarly, the Commission highlighted that much of the data produced in Europe is stored and processed outside of the bloc, which means the EU needs to strengthen its own cloud infrastructure and capacities. By 2030, the Commission hopes that 10,000 secure edge nodes will be deployed to allow data processing at the edge of the network.

Cloud technologies have been a sticking point in the EU for many years. To resist the dominance of US-based hyperscalers, such as Microsoft and AWS, the bloc has been working on a European cloud provider dubbed GAIA-X, which launched last year, butis showing little promise of success.

The Commission's new roadmap suggests that the EU is still actively willing to claim the bloc's digital sovereignty in the face of increasing international competition. Commissioner Thierry Breton said: "In the post-pandemic world, this is how we will shape together a resilient and digitally sovereign Europe. This is Europe's Digital Decade."

The next few months will see the targets laid out in the roadmap debated and discussed, before an official 'digital compass' is adopted at the end of 2021. Then, the Commission proposes carrying out an annual review of each member states' performance in meeting the targets to keep track of the bloc's progress.

View post:
The EU wants to build its first quantum computer. That plan might not be ambitious enough - ZDNet

In battle with U.S., China to focus on 7 ‘frontier’ technologies from chips to brain-computer fusion – CNBC

GUANGZHOU, China China is looking to boost research into what it calls "frontier technology" including quantum computing and semiconductors, as it competes with the U.S. for supremacy in the latest innovations.

In its five-year development plan, the 14th of its kind, Beijing said it would make "science and technology self-reliance and self-improvement a strategic pillar for national development," according to a CNBC translation.

Premier Li Keqiang said on Friday that China would increase research and development spending by more than 7% per year between 2021 and 2025, in pursuit of "major breakthroughs" in technology.

China's technology champions such as Huawei and SMIC have been targeted by U.S. sanctions as tensions between Beijing and Washington have ramped up in the past few years.

As such, China has concentrated on boosting its domestic expertise in areas it sees as strategically important, such as semiconductors. And now it has laid out seven "frontier technologies" that it will prioritize not just for the next five years, but beyond too.

China plans to focus on specialized chip development for AI applications and developing so-called open source algorithms. Open source technology is usually developed by one entity and licensed by other companies.

There will also be an emphasis on machine learning in areas such as decision making. Machine learning is the development of AI programs trained on vast amounts of data. The program "learns" as it is fed more data.

AI has been a key field for Chinese companies and the central government over the last few years. Major companies such as Alibaba and Baidu have been investing in the technology.

China and the U.S. are competing for AI dominance. A group of experts chaired by former Google CEO Eric Schmidt said China could soon replace the U.S. as the world's "AI superpower."

Semiconductors are a critical area for China and one it has invested a lot in over the past few years but the country has struggled to catch up to the U.S., Taiwan and South Korea.

The problem is the complexity of the semiconductor supply chain. Taiwan's TSMC and South Korea's Samsung are the two most advanced chip manufacturers but they rely on tools from the U.S. and Europe.

Washington has put SMIC, China's biggest chip manufacturer, on an export blacklist called the Entity List. SMIC cannot get its hands on American technology. And the U.S. has reportedly pushed to stop Dutch company ASML from shipping a key tool that could help SMIC catch up to rivals.

Since China doesn't have the companies that can design and make the tools that its chip manufacturers require, it relies on companies from other countries. This is something China wants to change.

In its five-year plan, China says it will focus on research and development in integrated circuit design tools, key equipment and key materials.

Chips are incredibly important because they go into many of the devices we use such as smartphones but are also important for other industries.

China plans to research areas such as how to stop diseases of the brain.

But it also says that it plans to look into "brain-inspired computing" as well as "brain-computer fusion technology," according to a CNBC translation. The five-year plan did not elaborate on what that could look like.

China laid out seven "frontier" technologies in its 14th Five Year Plan. These are areas that China will focus research on and include semiconductors and brain-computer fusion.

Yuichiro Chino | Moment | Getty Images

However, such work is already underway in the U.S. at Elon Musk's company Neuralink. Musk is working on implantable brain-chip interfaces to connect humans and computers.

With the outbreak of the coronavirus last year, biotechnology has grown in importance.

China says it will focus on "innovative vaccines" and "research on biological security."

China's research will concentrate on understanding the progression of cancer, cardiovascular, respiratory and metabolic diseases.

The government also says that it will research some "cutting-edge" treatment technologies such as regenerative medicine. This involves medicine that can regrow or repair damaged cells, tissues and organs.

China says it will also be looking at key technologies in the prevention and treatment of major transmissible diseases.

Space exploration has been a top priority for China recently. Beijing said it will focus on research into the "origin and evolution of the universe," exploration of Mars as well as deep sea and polar research.

In December, a Chinese spacecraft returned to Earth carrying rocks from the moon. It was the first time China has launched a spacecraft from an extraterrestrial body and the first time it has collected moon samples.

And in July, China launched a mission to Mars called Tianwen -1.

CNBC's Iris Wang contributed to this report.

Here is the original post:
In battle with U.S., China to focus on 7 'frontier' technologies from chips to brain-computer fusion - CNBC