Senior Lecturer in Cybersecurity job with UNIVERSITY OF GREENWICH | 231405 – Times Higher Education (THE)

School of Computing & Mathematical Sciences

Location: GreenwichSalary: 40,322 to 49,553 plus 3706 London weighting per annumContract Type: PermanentClosing Date:Thursday 26 November 2020Interview Date: To be confirmedReference:2461

The University is seeking to recruit a Senior Lecturer in Cybersecurity, who wishes to embark on an academic career conducting quality research and lecturing on postgraduate and undergraduate programmes. Candidates will have a background that would complement our existing activities (IoT security, Cryptography, mobile systems). Outstanding candidates in other areas of Cybersecurity will also be considered.

The successful candidate will work closely with departmental academic teams and be expected to contribute to existing teaching and research. The role has a strong emphasis on, and support for, research and enterprise activity, including participation in projects jointly launched by other members of the Department and Faculty. Candidates will be expected to join our Internet of Things and Security Research Centre, which is host to a number of H2020 and EPSRC projects.

You will be able to demonstrate a strong teaching and research profile, and some experience of project management and grant applications would be desirable. You will have a good first degree (1stor 2:1) in a relevant subject together with a PhD.

Should you have any queries please contact the HR Recruitment Team on HR-Recruitment@gre.ac.uk

We are looking for people who can help us deliver our mission of transforming lives through inspired teaching and research, through ourvalues.

Read this article:
Senior Lecturer in Cybersecurity job with UNIVERSITY OF GREENWICH | 231405 - Times Higher Education (THE)

Weekend Roundup: Facebook, Twitter, and the Battle Over Section 230 – Dice Insights

Its the weekend! Before we call it a week, lets revisit some of the biggest tech stories of the past few days, including Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerbergs comments at a Congressional hearing that might hint at the future of the web.

Will the U.S. Government revamp Section 230, changing the internet as we know it in the process? That was the question hovering overa major U.S. Senate Commerce Committee hearingthis week. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg were among those testifying, and they pushed back against Senators accusations that Section 230 is encouraging bad behavior on the part of the tech industry.

In essence, Section 230 spares websites and social networks from having to take responsibility for potentially defamatory content; for example, you cant sue Facebook because a user posts a mean comment about you on their profile page. However, website and social-network administrators also have a responsibility to moderate traffic in some waysotherwise, blatantly illegal and harmful content would spread online.

During the hearing, Republican senators argued that tech CEOs and administrators have overstepped their bounds by de-platforming or blocking political content (especially Twitter, which has blocked links to articles about political controversies, and posted fact-checking messages next to President Trumps Tweets).

While many technologists are aggressively in favor of Section 230, Zuckerberg used the hearing to suggesthes open to additional legislation:We support the ideas around transparency and industry collaboration that are being discussed in some of the current bipartisan proposals.

In theory, we could see legislation passed that would force websites and social networks to open up their moderation policies to public scrutiny, as well as move quickly to obey any court orders about removing content. In turn, that could have a substantial impact on how everyone from website administrators to web developers do their jobs.

As if there wasnt already enough going on, hospitals are reportedly facing a wave of cyberattacks.According toThe New York Times, hackers based in Russia are targeting 400 hospitals. The FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Health and Human Services have already issued warnings.

What do the hackers want? Money. Experts hypothesize this latest round of attacks might be retaliation for the takedown of Trickbot, a notorious botnet. Microsoft and government agencies collaborated on Trickbots dismantling, which in turn may have irritated the hackerswho depended on it for revenue.

Even as Google faces government anti-trust scrutiny over its search-engine dominance, Apple might be moving to build a search engine of its very own.

According to TechCrunch, theres some evidence that Apples at least kicking the tires on a full-fledged engine: The most visible change is the fact that in iOS 14, Apple is now showing its own results when you type queries in the home screen. In addition, there seems to be an increase in activity from Apples web crawler.

Three years ago, Apple also hired Googles head of search,John Giannandrea, although his official role is A.I. and Siri. And given the companys cash reserves, they could hire pretty much all the talent they needed to launch a web crawler.

ButshouldApple compete with Google in search? Its worth remembering that Google currently pays Apple billions of dollars to be the default search engine on iOSmoney that Apple wouldnt want to give up except in the most extreme circumstances. And unlike Facebook, Apple doesnt compete directly with Google for ad dollars, so theres not a lot of financial incentive to spin up a search rival.

On the other hand, Apple is a company whose guiding ethos has always been to do everything in-house. Thats why Apple launched a Maps app, rather than continuing to rely on Google. So its possible to see a future where Apple decides to launch its own search productespecially if the U.S. government does something to curtail Googles reach.

Have a great weekend, everyone! Stay safe.

Want more great insights?Create a Dice profile today to receive the weekly Dice Advisor newsletter, packed with everything you need to boost your career in tech. Register now

View post:

Weekend Roundup: Facebook, Twitter, and the Battle Over Section 230 - Dice Insights

Open source jobs are in high demand, but wait–what’s an open source professional? – TechRepublic

Commentary: A new Linux Foundation report suggests it's a great time to be an open source professional. Matt Asay argues that an open source professional is no one and almost everyone.

Image: Getty Images/iStockphoto

The Linux Foundation just released its 2020 Open Source Jobs Report, and Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols has done a great job of dissecting the reporton ZDNet (a sister site of TechRepublic). What's missing from the report is some sort of definition of what an "open source job" is. Because, as near as I can tell, "open source professional" doing an "open source job" simply translates to "developers writing code."

Yes, really.

As Linux Foundation executive Chris Aniszczyk said, "The world is changing where open source is just the defacto standard for a good portion of software, and folks are expected to have the background to work on projects and in upstream communities." With nearly all software including at least some open source code, and upwards of 80% of all software codebases actually being open source, according to WhiteSource analysis, there's arguably no such thing as a distinct category of "open source professional."

SEE:How to build a successful developer career (free PDF)(TechRepublic)

Reading through the Linux Foundation jobs report, there are all sorts of statistics that suggest the value of open source skills and open source professionals:

93% of hiring managers report difficulty finding sufficient talent with open source skills, up from 87% two years ago. [Sounds bad!]

56% of hiring managers plan to increase their hiring of open source professionals in the next six months compared to the last six months. [Sounds good!]

4% of hiring managers surveyed said they have laid off open source professionals due to the pandemic, and a further 2% furloughed open source staff. [Sounds?]

Hiring managers report knowledge of open cloud technologies has the most significant impact, with 70% being more likely to hire a pro with these skills, up from 66% in 2018. [Sounds.What exactly are these "open cloud technologies"? Is that Envoy? Kubernetes? If so, isn't that just...the cloud technologies that everyone uses?]

It's hard to know exactly what these statistics mean without knowing what the terms mean. Fortunately, in June 2016 the Linux Foundation defined what an "open source professional" is:

Professionalizing and scaling the open source space requires specialized tools, licensing regimes, project governance, expert training, credible certifications and events that enable collaboration. In other words, a similar support ecosystem to that which has long been the standard for proprietary software, but operating on open source principles such as collaboration and open governance. Open source professionals are the individuals who make this happen. They include not only the Administrators and Engineers who deploy and manage systems and the developers who write the code, but also attorneys that ensure compliance with open source licenses, educators who teach new and existing professionals how to use the tools available to them, management teams that evaluate which projects to both invest in and implement and so many more.

In other words, an "open source professional" with "open source skills" is "someone who works in software and has to interact with open source." It's...almost everyone.

Yes, you used to be able to get by in tech without ever having to say the words "open source," but we don't live in that world anymore. At a previous company where I worked, we did an inventory of the open source code we used in our products. This was a proprietary software company, and everyone assumed most of the code included in our products was also proprietary. Nope. While it differed from product to product, on average 60 to 70% of the code in our products was open source.

This was a proprietary software company that depended on proprietary licensing for its revenue. Most companies aren't like that, and may well use an even higher percentage of open source code.

SEE: 10 ways to prevent developer burnout (free PDF) (TechRepublic)

This means, of course, that there are really not "open source professionals." There are just "software professionals." That said, it is true that succeeding with open source software requires a different mindset, if not skill set. If you're a developer, it pays to understand how to contribute to an open source project, thereby putting your employer in a better position to support itself, rather than depending on vendors. (At the employer I mentioned, we ran the numbers and discovered we'd save tens of millions of dollars staffing up to support ourselves with an open source database, rather than paying for support.) And if you're not a developer, it still pays to understand the nuances of open source licenses and norms, so that you can better support developers as they build.

But, to Aniszczyk's point, this is not really a distinct thing anymore. It's just a matter of successfully living and working in the open source world we live in.

Disclosure: I work for AWS, but the views expressed herein are mine.

You don't want to miss our tips, tutorials, and commentary on the Linux OS and open source applications. Delivered Tuesdays

Go here to read the rest:
Open source jobs are in high demand, but wait--what's an open source professional? - TechRepublic

Why Malaysias AmBank is embracing open source and DevOps – ComputerWeekly.com

Malaysias AmBank Group has trained its sights on open source, DevOps and data science to serve the growing needs of customers and enhance their overall banking experience, said one of its top executives.

Our ambition is to do things completely digitally and as remotely as possible for all our customers, whether retail or small and mid-sized enterprises [SMEs], Iswaraan Suppiah, group chief operations officer of AmBank Group told Computer Weekly during a panel discussion at Red Hat Forum in Kuala Lumpur last week.

Suppiah said banking services are currently not fully digitised and customers still need to interact physically with banks, which is becoming increasingly cumbersome for customers amid the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.

Noting that customers have more worries on their minds today than before, Suppiah said AmBank wants to help all segments of the market, especially SMEs, to bank conveniently and alleviate any anxieties they may experience during these tough times.

Suppiah explained that consumers and SME business owners still need to be physically present at the bank to facilitate the know your customer (KYC) process as well as to sign documents.

Some banks do reach out to customers in-person to make it easier for customers, but from what I observe there isnt a totally digital and remote way of doing things yet, he said.

Today, I dont see anyone leading in this space, and so our ambition is to be the first to totally facilitate, say, an opening of a bank account in a completely touchless, remote way.

Quizzed further as to what open source, DevOps and data science would mean to AmBank, Suppiah singled out the advantages of open source software.

With open source, Suppiah said the bank can engineer its software from ground-up to suit its needs, rather than customise off-the-shelf products.

The innovation and intellectual property are ours, said Suppiah. This way, change management is also smoother and subsequent features and functions can be quickly and easily added, which translates into being able to keep our first-mover advantage.

AmBank participated in the Red Hat Open Innovation Labs programme, which helped it create applications and standard operating procedures to manage agile application development projects.

The bank also used Red Hat OpenShift to build a continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipeline for its applications.

Asked if AmBank is willing to work with other open source software suppliers besides Red Hat, Suppiah said the bank is not exclusively tied up with the Rayleigh, North Carolina-based software supplier.

Were open to work with any open source player as long as its trusted and it is able to serve enterprise-grade solutions, he said. Being a bank, we cant be too cowboy in our approach and we cannot be used as guinea pigs to try things on. The open source software we use must be market tested.

What we like about Red Hat is that it has, to some extent, a management layer and an established open source community for us to turn to, and this gives us confidence.

In a wide-ranging interview, Suppiah revealed that AmBanks goal is to create bespoke solutions for broader market segments, akin to how private banking has met the needs of high net-worth individuals.

He said that in private banking, dedicated human officers can be used to serve such customers because the base is small and the fees are lucrative. But this kind of service was not possible for a larger base of customers, he added.

The same concept can, however, be applied to a broader market, Suppiah said, noting that there must be a targeted and intelligent use of technology for this to happen.

Traditionally, banks have tailor-made their solutions based on income, he said. But using technology, we can create bespoke products to serve the mass market without having to use as many resources to do so.

Suppiah said this was why AmBank is focused on capturing customer data and is planning to use advanced data analytics and machine learning to sort out the information and create the right solutions for a broader range of customers. We want to provide customers with solutions that perhaps even they dont know they want yet, he said.

On how AmBank is planning to invest in such initiatives, Suppiah said banks today are spending about 30-40% of their budgets on critical compliance infrastructure, such as anti-money laundering and cyber security initiatives.

If you exclude that, we will spend almost 70% of our budget balance on all our digital initiatives, which, among other plans, include the aforementioned.

View original post here:
Why Malaysias AmBank is embracing open source and DevOps - ComputerWeekly.com

Open Source Software Market Analyzes The Impact Followed By Restraints And Opportunities And Projected Developments (2020-2027)| Intel, Epson, IBM,…

A detailed research study on the Open Source Software Market was recently published by DataIntelo. This is a latest report, covering the current COVID-19 impact on the market. The pandemic of Coronavirus (COVID-19) has affected every aspect of life globally. This has brought along several changes in market conditions. The rapidly changing market scenario and initial and future assessment of the impact is covered in the report. The report puts together a concise analysis of the growth factors influencing the current business scenario across various regions. Significant information pertaining to the industry analysis size, share, application, and statistics are summed in the report in order to present an ensemble prediction. Additionally, this report encompasses an accurate competitive analysis of major market players and their strategies during the projection timeline.

The latest report on the Open Source Software Market consists of an analysis of this industry and its segments. As per the report, the market is estimated to gain significant returns and register substantial y-o-y growth during the forecast period.

Request a Sample Report of Open Source Software Market at: https://dataintelo.com/request-sample/?reportId=92455

According to the report, the study offers details regarding the valuable estimations of the market such as market size, sales capacity, and profit projections. The report documents factors such as drivers, restraints, and opportunities that impacts the remuneration of this market.

An Outline of the Major Key Points of the Open Source Software Market Report:

Ask for Discount on Open Source Software Market Report at: https://dataintelo.com/ask-for-discount/?reportId=92455

The Geographical Landscape of the Market Include:

Buy Your Exclusive PDF Copy Now @ https://dataintelo.com/checkout/?reportId=92455

Some of the Major Highlights of TOC Covers:Chapter 1: Executive Summary

Chapter 2: Methodology & Scope

Chapter 3: Market Insights

Chapter 4: Company Profiles

For More Information on this report, Request Inquiry At: https://dataintelo.com/enquiry-before-buying/?reportId=92455

About DataIntelo:DATAINTELO has set its benchmark in the market research industry by providing syndicated and customized research report to the clients. The database of the company is updated on a daily basis to prompt the clients with the latest trends and in-depth analysis of the industry. Our pool of database contains various industry verticals that include: IT & Telecom, Food Beverage, Automotive, Healthcare, Chemicals and Energy, Consumer foods, Food and beverages, and many more. Each and every report goes through the proper research methodology, validated from the professionals and analysts to ensure the eminent quality reports.

Contact Info:Name: Alex MathewsAddress: 500 East E Street, Ontario,CA 91764, United States.Phone No: USA: +1 909 545 6473Email: [emailprotected]Website: https://dataintelo

Link:
Open Source Software Market Analyzes The Impact Followed By Restraints And Opportunities And Projected Developments (2020-2027)| Intel, Epson, IBM,...

Linux Foundation Public Health wants to combat COVID-19 with free apps – Business Insider – Business Insider

The Linux Foundation has formed a new group to provide public health authorities with free technology for tracking the spread of the coronavirus and future epidemics.

Linux Foundation Public Health, launched in July to focus on using open source software to respond to the pandemic, has so far hosts two apps that notify users if they've been in contact with someone who has tested positive with COVID-19. A volunteer team of over 40 developers at Shopify in Canada built one, called COVID Shield, while a team at Irish enterprise software developer NearForm built another, called COVID Green. Both codebases were then contributed to Linux Foundation Public Health.

Since these apps are open source, people can contribute code and customize them, allowing regions with similar needs to collaborate, general manager at Linux Foundation Public Health, Dan Kohn, told Business Insider. Developers that want to build an app off these projects can access or download the source code.

These apps take advantage of technology launched by Apple and Google , which can be integrated into any app, that uses Bluetooth on people's smartphones to track who a user has been in close proximity with, without identifying the specific people. If anyone tests positive for COVID-19 and uploads that information to a database run by a local public health authority, any user who has been in close contact with that person will get a notification through their app saying they may have been exposed again, without identifying who has COVID-19. If someone knows that they may have been exposed, they can either self-quarantine or get tested.

"Essentially we think exposure notification could have a big impact on reducing the overall rate of exposure," Kohn said.

An Oxford University study in April said that if about 60% of the population used a contact tracing app, it could grind the diseases spread to a halt. Researchers on the team also found that digital contact tracing can cut down spread even at much lower levels of usage. Another recent study from Oxford that focused on Washington state found that if 15% of the population participates in using exposure notification, it could reduce infections and deaths by approximately 8% and 6%, although this study has not yet been peer-reviewed.

At this point, exposure notification apps have not been widely used in the US, but Kohn believes that the initiative from Linux Foundation Public Health could help with adoption because being open source makes them free and flexible for developers and public health authorities to work with.

"It's definitely been an issue that states have been quite slow in rolling out those apps," Kohn said. "I'm optimistic for speeding that up."

Read more: Companies are looking to hire open source talent particularly with DevOps skills but they're having a hard time finding qualified candidates, according to a new survey

While Apple and Google say their technology focuses on preserving privacy by allowing users to turn it on and off at any time, randomizing Bluetooth identifiers, and ensuring that people who test positive are not identified by the system, trust and privacy concerns could be one of the reasons for sluggish adoption of exposure notification apps so far. Also, this technology can only be integrated into an app developed by a public health authority. Kohn says there's "constant discussion going on" in the projects about Bluetooth interference and how to bolster privacy.

Public health authorities in Ireland, Canada, and 12 US states are using source code hosted by the Linux Foundation Public Health in their applications today, though they are not mandated by state governments. Still, Colorado had 10% adoption with the first week of launching, the foundation says.

While these apps are for exposure notification meaning that people can get notified if they may have been exposed to someone with COVID-19 the foundation also plans to build apps that further help with contact tracing, providing information about getting tested, and later on, information on vaccinations.

Got a tip?Contact this reporter via email atrmchan@businessinsider.com, Signal at646.376.6106,Telegram at @rosaliechan, orTwitter DM at@rosaliechan17. (PR pitches by email only, please.) Other types of secure messaging available upon request.

See the rest here:
Linux Foundation Public Health wants to combat COVID-19 with free apps - Business Insider - Business Insider

Deplatforming the Campaign to Deplatform the Jews | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com – Algemeiner

Signs at a pro-BDS protest in New York following the US decision to move its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Photo: Reuters / Carlo Allegri.

The news that Zoom has once again denied service to a webinar featuring the infamous Palestinian terrorist Leila Khaled following protests from advocacy groups was very welcome, but it also raises an issue and a tactic that has become ever more controversial with time: deplatforming.

Deplatforming is a very simple, indeed somewhat simple-minded phenomenon. It is essentially a means of political protest and activism that involves denying specific forums usually but not always of the prestigious variety to certain speakers or movements. This means things like disinviting or picketing speakers, disrupting events (sometimes violently), pushing social media companies to ban offensive accounts and, perhaps most effectively, convincing companies and corporations to fire people who engage in offensive speech or espouse offensive ideas.

There are many synonyms for deplatforming political correctness and cancel culture likely being the most popular but they all raise a simple dilemma: what precisely constitutes offensive speech or ideas? To a great extent, of course, offensive is in the eye of the beholder. For supporters of trans rights, for example, the claim that biological sex is immutable is offensive speech. For opponents, it is simple common sense. Indeed, as many critics have pointed out, the very idea of codifying offensive speech for the purposes of deplatforming is in many ways a violation of the right to free speech.

Ironically, Khaleds leftist and Islamist defenders immediately leapt on the free speech bandwagon once she was threatened with deplatforming. The US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, which is promoting the terrorists webinars, quickly began fulminating an antisemitic conspiracy theory, shrieking in ridiculously overwrought rhetoric that the deplatforming was emblematic of the corporate takeover of our universities and the influence of Zionist and right-wing organizations and individuals, along with the power of information capital, to set the agenda for what can and cannot be said or taught in a public university.

October 29, 2020 5:35 pm

The irony of this is that pro-Palestinian, anti-Zionist, and antisemitic forces on university campuses have been perhaps the foremost practitioners of deplatforming anywhere in the United States. Pro-Israel events are regularly disrupted, pro-Israel and even simply Jewish speakers are harassed and shut down, and Jewish and pro-Israel students are systematically subjected to campaigns of hate, violence and intimidation.

This has gone so far as to force Jewish students off campus; as was the case with the CUNY law student Rafaella Gunz, whose horrible odyssey was reported by this publication. And often, these acts of violence are enabled and supported by faculty and administrators.

The obvious goal of all this is to violate precisely those principles Khaleds defenders claim to advocate and thus brutalize Israel and Judaisms campus defenders into surrender and silence. In other words, they want to deplatform the Jews. The question, then, is whether we ought to do the same to them.

On the one hand, it is an uncomfortable question, given that many of us disapprove of deplatforming itself and oppose attempts to deplatform the Jews on precisely that basis. But that is essentially an argument over ideals, and we do not live in an ideal world. Whether we like it or not, the other side has laid down the rules of the game. When student mobs, faculty and administrators collaborate in an attempt to deplatform the Jews, it is no longer an issue of free speech. It is an issue of power: who has it and who doesnt. And is only by empowering ourselves that we can fight back, as was successfully done against Khaled and her supporters.

Moreover, if the deplatformers, whether students or faculty, wish to continue using the tactic, they must be consistent. They claim hate speech is an actual threat to life and limb, the moral equivalent of physical violence and even murder. By this definition, groups like Students for Justice in Palestine that incite violence against Israel and Jewish students, and often call for the outright genocide of Israels Jewish population, are unquestionably hate groups, and thus certainly qualify for deplatforming according to the deplatformers own standards. Against this, our opponents can simply have no argument. They have chosen to live by that sword, and can hardly complain when they die by it.

Of course, it could be said that if we start to live by that sword, we will also die by it. But we are already dying by it, and it is only by seizing it for ourselves that we can effectively defend ourselves. These are the values, after all, that those who ought to know better have embraced, and it appears that, sadly, it is only by adopting them that we can force them to act according to those values, which they allegedly hold so dear.

Benjamin Kerstein is a columnist and Israel Correspondent for The Algemeiner. His website can be viewed here.

Original post:

Deplatforming the Campaign to Deplatform the Jews | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com - Algemeiner

POP Network Brings Decentralized Streaming to the World’s Largest Peer-to-Peer Protocol – PR Web

POP Network Masternode

SINGAPORE (PRWEB) October 30, 2020

POP Network, a leader in decentralizing the streaming economy, today released a multiplatform upgrade to its POP Network Masternode, the feature-rich software which makes streaming on the decentralized web easy, accessible, and intuitive. The new POP Masternode adds Mac and Linux to the existing Windows distribution.

The POP Network Masternode leverages the largest peer-to-peer network in the world, with over 90 million active users, to let anyone embed decentralized streaming video on their website through simple drag-and-drop, copy-and-paste functionality.

As an alternative to using YouTube or Facebook embedded video this means viewers still consume the video on the content creators site but, critically, the video itself streams from the decentralized web. This ensures the value they collectively create is not automatically forfeited to those centralized corporations, effectively ends the threat of deplatforming, and serves as the foundation for a more equitable blockchain-based streaming economy.

With the rise of generalized blockchain storage solutions like Filecoin aiming to decentralize the web, purpose-built peer-to-peer streaming services like POP Network are a natural extension of that movement, said Valerian Bennett, Managing Director of The Pop Network Foundation. POP Network is like Filecoin for streaming. What Filecoin is to S3 or Dropbox, POP Network is to CloudFront or Akamai.

Mr. Bennett added, This latest release marks a major milestone as we build the future where people become owner-operators of the Internet, rather than just a commodity within it.

Plans to reward Masternodes with cryptocurrency, the POP Network Token (POP), will be announced at a later date. In anticipation of this imminent event, POP is currently being distributed exclusively on ProBit, a global exchange based in South Korea.

About POP Network

POP Network is a decentralized media platform helping creators, their communities, and crypto node operators capture value in the streaming economy. Platform components include decentralized peer-to-peer content distribution, an ultra-fast scalable blockchain, and artificial intelligence to defend the network from harmful content.

For more information, please visit https://thepopnetwork.org

Share article on social media or email:

See the rest here:

POP Network Brings Decentralized Streaming to the World's Largest Peer-to-Peer Protocol - PR Web

Soviet-style thought-policing has come to America, outsourced to Big Tech corporations – RT

Social media were supposed to democratize speech, liberating the people of the world from the tyranny of gatekeepers. They failed. Seduced by vanity and ideology, theyve become censors themselves, a Soviet-style thought police.

Once upon a time, Googles motto was Dont be evil, Facebook was all about connecting people, and Twitter executives proclaimed it the free speech wing of the free speech party. Fast-forward to 2020, and theyre all about deplatforming voices the legacy media and the political establishment has denounced as unworthy of being heard.

Who the hell elected you? thundered Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) at Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, during Wednesdays hearing, expressing frustration over the platforms crackdown on a story about a major political scandal. In attempting to suppress the story of Hunter Bidens dubious business dealings, Twitter has locked the account of Americas oldest publishing newspaper, and even gone after White House officials and members of Congress.

Yet anyone who didnt see this coming in the months after the 2016 US election simply hasnt been paying attention. The greatest irony is that Cruz and his fellow Republicans enabled it themselves, partly by preferring sound bites over legislative action, but also by validating the Russian meddling conspiracy theories peddled by their political opponents in an effort to delegitimize the presidency of Donald Trump.

Make no mistake, Russiagate is how Big Tech was pushed onto the path of censorship. By way of just one example, the Cambridge Analytica scandal was used to bludgeon Facebook into hiring censors and partnering with outside fact-checkers. When it eventually turned out there had been no scandal and the whole thing was a manufactured outrage by self-serving whistleblowers and the media there wasnt so much as an apology, and the mechanisms stayed in place.

Silicon Valley has been more than eager to go down that path, too. Public records show the vast majority of their employees donate to Democrats, while their executives have poured millions into the campaigns of Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden this year.

Nobody needed to pressure Google into embracing the role of the good censor, its executives and employees did so themselves. Not surprisingly, the president of their parent company at the time, Eric Schmidt, had been fully invested in Clintons campaign.

It took a mere suggestion of a crackdown by an influential Senate Democrat for Twitter to ban all RT advertising and overhaul its entire advertising policy, back in October 2017. Not surprisingly, the proposal by Senator Mark Warner (D-Virginia) went nowhere, but its purpose had been accomplished.

Like the proverbial frog being slowly boiled, the pressure to censor objectionable content steadily rose over the course of the Trump presidency. It marched on regardless of the revelations that Russiagate was a scam and that the real collusion was between the spies, police, prosecutors, media, and the political establishment.

Things almost boiled over when the platforms started deleting any mention of the alleged whistleblower who kick-started the Democrats impeachment proceedings against Trump even those made by Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky).

The Covid-19 pandemic the very next month saw an expansive effort to ban misinformation about the virus meaning anything not coming from authorities, even as those very authorities kept changing their line over time! That was probably when the frog first began noticing the boiling water.

By then, however, Twitter had begun openly censoring Trump this spring. Condemning riots? Glorifying violence,restricted. Putting rioters on notice they cant set up a lawless autonomous zone in Washington, DC? Abusive behavior, threatening harm,restricted.

Oh, granted, the same insane standard was later applied to a metaphorical statement by a self-identified socialist, but whether that was the exception that proves the rule or an effort to both sides the issue, at the end of the day, Twitter had appointed itself arbiter of acceptable speech and that was the point.

How can this happen in a country where free speech is the very first enumerated in the Constitutions Bill of Rights? Because, as both Democrats and libertarian-minded NeverTrump Republicans have been quick to argue, the First Amendment applies only to the government, not to private companies! This is manifestly absurd, but hasnt been challenged in the courts just yet.

This sophistry has enabled the champions of corporate thought-policing to argue that technically, the US doesnt have the kind of censorship of word and thought once attributed to the Soviet Union. Because it has Big Tech, it doesnt have to! Meanwhile, some lawmakers certainly arent shy about demanding for more censorship, either.

If you think the comparisons to the KGB or the Stasi are too much, note Twitters insistence that the New York Post founded by Alexander Hamilton in 1801 needs to delete the offending tweet before its account can be unlocked, but it will supposedly be free to repost it then, because the rules have since changed.

In order to truly work, submission must be voluntary. Thats why Americans still file their tax returns, even though the IRS has been withholding taxes from their wages since the Second World War. That is why in George Orwells 1984, Winston Smith couldnt just be broken he had to love Big Brother. That is why Twitter forces you to bend the knee before they will allow you to speak.

What started as anyones ability to compete with the New York Times, Washington Post, or CNN on equal footing has morphed into the neutral platform choosing to promote their non-stories while shutting down legitimate lines of thought and inquiry under the guise of protecting our democracy and fighting (phantom) Russian disinformation.

It didnt have to be this way. It doesnt have to stay this way. But it will take more than just strong words to make speech in America free again.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

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

Link:

Soviet-style thought-policing has come to America, outsourced to Big Tech corporations - RT

Joe Rogan Clarifies the Controversy Surrounding Alex Jones Appearance on the Joe Rogan Exper … – EssentiallySports

UFC commentator Joe Rogan took to Instagram and commented on the most recent controversy that has surrounded his podcast platform. The host of the Joe Rogan Experience podcast recently featured right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones for a sit-down. As a result, Spotify, who signed a deal of up to $100 million with Joe Rogan, has come under heavy fire.

Chiefly, Spotify and other major platforms came in at de-platforming Alex Jones for Hate Speech back in 2018. Jones is a magnet for controversy as he has built a career around his fiery hot takes and conspiracy theories. His show Infowars was at this helm of the brand that Alex had created.

Spotify users have called out the streaming service for double standards, as theyre wondering why Jones is back on their platform. The companys chief legal officer and head of global affairs in Horacio Gutierrez spoke out on the situation, saying that Spotify wouldnt ban specific individuals.

The long-time UFC broadcaster used his massive social media platform to provide some clarity to the situation. In addition to the aforementioned contention, the episode that Jones appeared on swiftly disappeared from the site. This understandably caused the pot to boil over, and Rogan was quick to lay it out.

Whats more, he also clarified a controversial aspect of their discussion involving the COVID-19 vaccine. The two debated the possible dangers of consuming the vaccine in the test phase, and Alex Jones had some interesting things to say. Jones views once again stirred up a larger conversation, and Joe Rogan shared an IGTV clip that sees Bill Gates corroborate some of his information.

The situation surrounding Jones appearance on the Podcast has led to some much-expected chatter around the same. The increased exposure largely stems from the fact that Rogan has the biggest podcasting platform in the world. Furthermore, as his viewership grows, there is no doubt that the future holds more fervent conversations around Joes content.

Continue the conversation on the app, join other MMA fans on MMA Fans App

Here is the original post:

Joe Rogan Clarifies the Controversy Surrounding Alex Jones Appearance on the Joe Rogan Exper ... - EssentiallySports