Assembly to look at limiting First Amendment rights of therapists and clients – Must Read Alaska

ANCHORAGE COULD BAN SOME FORMS OF THERAPY FOR GAY CLIENTS

On Tuesday, the Anchorage Assembly will take up an ordinance that would prohibit counselors and therapists from helping young clients who are struggling with unwanted homosexual thoughts, gender dysphoria, or other gender identity or sexual variations.

Offered by three gay members of the Anchorage Assembly, the ordinance would mandate that if a minor wants counseling for unwanted sexual urges or expressions, therapists would have to end the counseling session and show their client the door. Families could, of course, travel to Palmer or Wasilla for such counseling, but it would not be available in Anchorage.

Opponents of the measure say the ordinance would infringe on the First Amendment rights of both patients and therapists, and put a chill on therapists who believe a young person is experiencing a temporary identity problem and want to explore what may be going on in that young persons life.

The ordinance leans on the authority of a three-part story by the Anchorage Press that says persons who are homosexual are discriminated against. In the third part of the series, the Anchorage Press calls gender therapy Conversion, The real hell, focusing on two minors who had therapy forced on them by their parents.

The ordinance would not prevent pro-gay counseling and hormone therapies to assist a young person in presenting as the opposite sex or following romantic attractions with the same sex, but would prevent a counselor or therapist from any communication that would discourage that road for their patients.

In an Alaska Family Council workshop for pastors and others concerned that their religious freedoms or patient-therapist relationships are being infringed upon, Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council warned that sexuality among minors can change as children grow in or out of experimentation phases.

He said that the ban on counseling is a form of viewpoint discrimination by a governing body, and that is a constitutional infringement on many levels.

Going to counseling is deeply personal experience that involves viewpoints, perceptions, and emotions, and if therapists think they are going to be sued because they ask questions of their patients, it will make therapists suppress their own viewpoints.

Sprigg added that parents are in charge of the health care and development of their children, something that has been upheld numerous times at the U.S. Supreme Court, and that there are minors who do want to undergo counseling for homosexual urges.

He also faulted the ordinance because it refers to licensed counselors, but doesnt say who the licensing authority is. In some cases, churches sanction or license counseling services through ordination.

[The entire ordinance in its current form is at this link.]

The meeting starts at 5 pm, but the public is not allowed to attend, per an order by Mayor Ethan Berkowitz. You can find the full agenda and watch the proceedings at this link.

Like Loading...

Follow this link:

Assembly to look at limiting First Amendment rights of therapists and clients - Must Read Alaska

Losing the Human Touch to Protect Data – Infosecurity Magazine

Human nature means that we tend to default to the easiest option when faced with difficult and serious issues, and this can be the case when it comes to securing our data and information systems.

In the early days ofinformation security, we focused on preventing access to the data we valued. We installed firewalls to protect ourperimeters and boughtanti-virus software to identifyand preventmalware that mightsneak through.If we had taken a more data-centric approach from the start, maybe we would have avoided many of the breaches that have hit the headlines over the last 30 years.

Encryptionhas been around for centuries and used by the Greeks and Romans to protect information if it fell into the wrong hands. Protecting electronic data has proven to be a more complex problem and it is us humans again who havebeen the Achilles heel of most encryption solutions.

Humans were never meant to worry about data security or havingto make decisions about what is important to encrypt and protect and what is not.What was needed at the very start was a philosophythatmakes security aninherent property of data that is Invisible from those who generate and use it every day.Inherent and Invisible security allows users to act as normal withoutrulesor technologyto get around that would introduce risk.

Itsnot too late though: most encryption solutions rely onsymmetricencryption which uses the same key to encrypt and decrypt. Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) enables Asymmetric Encryption which uses two keys: apublickey to encrypt and a uniqueprivatekey to decrypt. PKIencryption allows forsimple and natural file sharing across user groups, networks and in the cloud.

This is a major advantage,butindividuals will find other ways of achieving something if the proper way isdifficult,soPKI-based encryptionhas tobeboth inherent and invisibletoavoid these risks.This can be achievedby making the encryption processes work at the file system level so that humans arent even aware that theyre going on.

In addition, tightly binding authentication with encryption of the data inside the filesensures that even if information falls into the wrong hands whether by accident, through insider theft or by malware attack it remains encrypted and useless to anyone.

Number crunching

Technically, PKI-based file encryption is a complicated process and is a slow and mathematical task which takes many processor cycles. However, modern CPUs include some dedicated instructions for encryption operations, eliminating performance problems and user frustrations.

The other important factor is that there must be no disruption to the waypeople and applications work. For example, data must remainencrypted at all times on disk,even when files are being edited. If an unauthorized individual attempts to open a file that is not encrypted for them, they will then find that the data is unreadable even if they take a copy of the file outside the network.

So,how isit different?

There are plenty of encryption systems on the market, but full disk encryptionsystems like BitLocker, for example,only protect data when the system is switched off so anyone or anything can access any file on a running system.

File and folder encryption, as well as dataclassifications,rely on the user making a security choice. Users must actively choose to encrypt files and rememberadditionally to delete the originals. This method assumes the useror administratorwill make the right classification choice.If everything isencrypted, however, the need to make user decisions is removed and individuals cannot also decidenotto encrypt some data.

By building authentication into each file alongside encryption we can be sure that only authorized individuals can access the data. This approach defeats insider data theft because any stolen information remains encrypted and therefore useless once outside the control of the organization.

This individual security shield is maintained on every file, no matter how it is used, where it is stored and on which media it is copied. That means even if someone has the correct ID, passwordand token,andhastheauthority to open a fileencrypted with theirpublic key,the filestillremains encrypted.

What about the admins?

In conventional encryption, privileged users such as IT administratorsarestill able to access information, which presents a risk. With authenticated encryption, adminscan still do their job, but they will be unable to decrypt files they do not have the authority to open.

It is also irrelevant where files are copied because each one has its own inherent security. To have access toany of thedata, the administrator needs the file, the user credentials, their private keyand the decryption filter.Asa result, it is not possible to decrypt a file outside of the organization, even if an individual is authorized to decrypt the filewhen at work.

Mind the gap

Itstime to take a fresh look at data security. Rather than trying to fill in the security gaps to protect the increasingly disparate perimeter defenses, we need to take a data-centric approach to security and protect it at the mostbasiclevel, which is the fileat rest, in use or in motion.We need to step back fromsolutionsthatprotect some of the data some of the time, focus on compliance rather than security, or add complexitythat can introduce risk itself.

Most importantly, we needto remove the human element ofdatasecurity entirely, rather than try to account foritor change it. Training and monitoringdoesntwork all the timeand human nature has shown thatif the solution is notinstinctive or logical,wewill createourown, insecure methods.How many people leave the front door key under the pot by the door?

Peopleshould be able to work just as they want to or need to, without additional considerations and obvious pressuresand similarly, usabilityneedntbe sacrificed to strengthen our data security.

Excerpt from:
Losing the Human Touch to Protect Data - Infosecurity Magazine

Resistance for Real: The Moment Has Come BillMoyers.com – BillMoyers.com

In a morally and politically arresting column last week,The New York Times MichelleGoldberg noted that unidentified federal forces were snatching protesters from Portlands streets without warrants. Can we call it fascism yet?she asked,citingthe historian Timothy Snyders warning, in histruly arrestingOn Tyranny:Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century,that When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come.

It has come, indeed, unless we stop iten masse. Now. Not from behind our computers but in the streets and in public buildings and in massive but disciplined non-compliance with government edicts that flout the rule of law. But disciplined non-compliance requires organizing and communicating effectively enough to dissuade protesters (and outside provocateurs) from giving Trumpists and sensationalist media reasons to to call the protests riots.

Days before his inauguration in 2017, Donald Trump started in on creating his own private security force, independent of the military and Secret Service. Discovering that a president has command of the National Guard unit in the District of Columbia, as governors do in their states, Trumps transition team informed the DC units commander that his dismissal would be effective at noon on Inauguration Day, in the middle of the ceremony, so that he wouldnt even be able to supervise his troops return to their quarters. The American Prospectcalled the movea precedent-breaking decision that raises troubling questions about transparency and accountability.

Some of us had seen something like thiscoming evenin 2014,when public massacres and murders of unarmed young blacks by whites were rising, and again in 2016, as candidateTrump announcedthathe could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue without losing his supporters. Ever since, he has exciteda roiling horde of militia members, authoritarian police, enthusiasts of Stand Your Ground and Concealed Carry laws and border walls.

***

Last week, three days afterGoldberg cited Snyder on fascism, heoffered a thoughtful, historically rich explanation of why it is indeed upon us: Unidentified federal officers are testing the boundaries of government by, of, and for the people not just because the Department of Homeland Security is reliving 9/11 but because its overreach reflects a subtler but more devastating assault on the American people and their republic.

Drawing on his research on how fascism came to Germany less than a century ago, Snyder noted that it can come to any country not just when armed cadres of villains pop up but, long before that, when powerful social and commercial currents that seem morally and politically neutral and that many of us ride on and seek to profit from have hollowed out democratic and republican habits of the heart, leaving a political vacuum that authoritarians and desperate losers can sweep in to fill.

At that point, Snyder noted,citizens who cherish freedom have no alternative but to stand up in an organized fashion against their own elected officials and law-enforcement agenciesen masse,with discipline and clear purpose, to recreate democracy itself. This happened in British India, in apartheid South Africa, throughout the Soviet bloc, and in the segregationist American South, an authoritarian society that covered its brutality with syrupy affectations of civility.

***

Portlands Wall of Moms and its emulatorshave stood up. Theyve set an example that well need to follow, not merely by liking, tweeting, and signing petitions or attending gala celebrations of artistic resistance or otherwise scribbling our thoughts and sentiments online, as Im doing right now, but by engaging personally, at some risk to our bodies and immediate material interests, in strategically coordinated civil disobedience. Americans from Nathan Hale to Rosa Parks to Edward Snowden and countless others unsung have done that. Will we?

***

To understand whatboundariesTrump istesting, know that nearlytwothousand years agothe Roman Senate granted the republics first complete emperor, Augustus, whatEdward Gibbon characterizedas an important privilege: By a dangerous exception to the ancient maxims, he was authorized to preserve his military command, supported by a numerous body of guards, even in time of peace, and in the heart of the capital.

Augustus Praetorian Guard metastasized from somethinglike our Secret Service into a force thatroamed the empirehunting down the emperors personal enemies, including Roman senators themselves.Gibbon wrotethatRoman citizens became accustomed to the dark, seductive shift from republican ardor and eloquence to submission to force and fraud in political life. Theyno longer possessed that public courage which is nourished by the love of independence, the sense of national honor, the presence of danger, and the habit of command. They received laws and governors from the will of their sovereign, and trusted for their defense to a mercenary army.

Severalfounders of the American republic read Gibbon.AsBen Franklin voted for the new Constitution in 1787, he warned that it can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall have become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other. Founder Richard Henry Lee warned that History does not more clearly point out any fact than this, that nations which have lapsed from liberty, to a state of slavish subjection, have been brought to this unhappy condition, by gradual paces.

Gibbon might as well have been describing many people we know nowwhen he wrote that The rich and polite Italians enjoyed the present blessings of ease and tranquility, and suffered not the pleasing dream to be interrupted by the memory of their old tumultuous freedom. With its power, the senate had lost its dignity; many of the most noble families were extinct.

Analogies to ancient Rome or Nazi Germany can be facile and even dangerous, but it would be just as dangerous to ignore historys cautions unless were bent on repeating its follies. To avoid that, we need to confront not only Trump but the Ivy-bred Good Shepherds the rich and polite people, in Gibbons account whove shepherded us through a decades-long disintegration of civil society and republican governance, leaving New Orleans with Hurricane Katrinas perfect storm of unchecked global warming, failed infrastructure, and corrupt politics in 2005, when the devastated city was patrolled by the private military Blackwaterguards.

Trumpism has discredited conservatives who fantasize about restoring the capitalism of Adam Smith and John Locke, and it has sucked the wind out of the sails of leftists who fantasize that a precariat-proletariat will rise again. But the Wall of Moms (and now, of Dads, grandparents, and others) is standing up for a civic-republican way of life in which, as a commenter put it beneath one of my articles years ago, all parties have a fundamental allegiance to getting along, and specifically to handling losses without developing longstanding brutal grudges. If a small group had ever gotten together and made an agreement to subvert the system and behave destructively in a coordinated manner, they could have done a lot of damage before the rest of us figured out what was happening and then our only alternative would have been to terminate the system Strong as our constitutional system is, I dont think it was ever intended to resist a large-scale, long-term, tightly-organized effort to subvert it from within.

Were confronting not only a tightly organized effort that made its first move toward establishing a Praetorian Guard on Inauguration Day, 2017. Were also confronting aregime within which CEOs, members of Congress, mindless administrators, and credulous strivers, some of them in our own families and, perhaps, in our hearts, are betraying the civic-republican ethos Ive just sketched.

We can give it a new birth of freedom, as democrats have done against what seemed overwhelming odds in British colonial India, apartheid South Africa, the Soviet bloc, Jim Crow in our own South, and even in the sexism that the Wall of Moms has discredited unforgettably by staring down federal operatives dressed like Ninja Turtles and carrying big guns.

Its important that demonstrations be well disciplined and ready for the worst. Trump is desperate to find his Reichstag fire, an American equivalent of the torching of Germanys parliament building that gave Hilter an excuse to declare an emergency and assume dictatorial powers. Protesters must be told by credible leaders that any broken window or offensive graffiti, let alone looting, arms their oppressors. The civil-rights movement had to sideline Eldridge Cleaver and Kwame Toure; the anti-Vietnam War movement had to disown the Weathermen. The hard lesson is true power lies in massive non-compliance, not in handing photo-ops to authoritarians who want to shift the blame for violence.

For historical, conceptual, and practical guidance, I suggest the late Jonathan SchellsThe Unconquerable World: Power, Nonviolence, and the Will of the People, which shows how people in places like those just mentioned, and in the American Revolution, have transformed established power that was flouting real democracy.

Read more here:
Resistance for Real: The Moment Has Come BillMoyers.com - BillMoyers.com

Artificial intelligence needs an update on ethics to be able to help humanity in times of crisis – Economic Times

Currently ethics for AI focuses too much on high-level principles. Using AI to deal with crises would mean anticipating problems before they happen and building safety and reliability into it. Plus, ethics should be part of how AI is built and used, not an add-on or afterthought. Researchers and engineers need to think through the implications of what they build.

By Will HeavenJess Whittlestone at the Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence at the University of Cambridge and her colleagues published a comment piece in Nature Machine Intelligence this week arguing that if artificial intelligence is going to help in a crisis, we need a new, faster way of doing AI ethics, which they call ethics for urgency. For Whittlestone, this means anticipating problems before they happen, finding better ways

AbcSmall

AbcMedium

AbcLarge

Access the exclusive Economic Times stories, Editorial and Expert opinion

Already a Member? Sign In now

Sharp Insight-rich, Indepth stories across 20+ sectors

Access the exclusive Economic Times stories, Editorial and Expert opinion

Clean experience withMinimal Ads

Comment & Engage with ET Prime community

Exclusive invites to Virtual Events with Industry Leaders

A trusted team of Journalists & Analysts who can best filter signal from noise

Read more from the original source:
Artificial intelligence needs an update on ethics to be able to help humanity in times of crisis - Economic Times

Americans to Buy Bitcoin With Their Second Stimulus Checks After Initial Investment Turned in 50% Profit – Bitcoin News

U.S. investors may be planning to use their second $1,200 stimulus money to buy bitcoin again.

The U.S. government is, on Monday, expected to approve plans for this second payout, White House officials have confirmed. The bailout is intended to cushion families against the covid-19 fallout.

Instead of buying groceries or paying rent, many Americans opted to invest in the top cryptocurrency when they received their first stimulus checks in April.

And the gamble ditching inflationary government money for deflationary crypto is paying off. Those that converted the free money to bitcoin have raked in up to 54% in profit in three months as the price of BTC barrelled past $10,700 on July 27.

At the time when the checks were first issued, each bitcoin traded for around $7,000. Today, each $1,200 check invested in BTC is worth about $1,829, a gain of more than $600.

Now, history may be about to repeat itself.

Straight to the BTC, straight to the cold storage wallet, said Reddit user Limited-Visibility, while responding to a thread started by Wocketman0351, who asked: Who else is converting their free government money straight to BTC?

Another Redditor, Rapierce0238, stated: What I do get will go straight to bitcoin, just like last time.

Its really the easiest way to avoid hitting the inflation from the stupid Fed continuously printing money, opined Girafferage.

Someone else claimed: I will be buying more car parts and bitcoin. We have plenty of food because weve been stocking up all summer.

According to U.S. government officials, the latest stimulus checks are expected to be paid out sometime in August. White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told CNN that families will receive this second $1,200 payout as part of a $1 trillion stimulus package.

When the government first paid out the stimulus money in April, large cryptocurrency exchanges Coinbase and Binance reported a spike in exactly $1,200 equivalent deposits on their platforms.

Brian Armstrong, chief executive officer of Coinbase, said at the time that the number of $1,200-worth deposits and buys on the exchange climbed by nearly 400% that month.

Will more Americans buy bitcoin with their stimulus checks? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, or a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services, or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal, or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.

See the original post:
Americans to Buy Bitcoin With Their Second Stimulus Checks After Initial Investment Turned in 50% Profit - Bitcoin News

Global Open Source Software Market Projected to Reach USD XX.XX billion by 2025- Intel, Epson, IBM, Transcend, Oracle, Acquia, etc. – Owned

This thorough, meticulously crafted research report is in place to aid vital market-specific decisions amongst relevant stakeholders who remain key influencers in directing favorable growth trajectory in the Global Open Source Software Market more specifically under the concomitant developments, affecting the Open Source Software market in a myriad tangible ways.

This detailed and well synchronized research report about the Open Source Software market is the most significant, up-to-date, ready-to-refer research analysis that allows readers to draw substantial market specific cues that eventually remain crucial growth influencers in the Open Source Software market.

The study encompasses profiles of major companies operating in the Open Source Software Market. Key players profiled in the report includes:

IntelEpsonIBMTranscendOracleAcquiaOpenTextAlfrescoAstaroRethinkDBCanonicalClearCenterCleversafeCompiereContinuent

This special research documentation is a thoughtfully instrumented marker review such that report readers can well comprehend the various forces that have a collective influence in furthering tangible growth in the aforementioned Open Source Software market. Thoroughly accepted and internationally approved analytical tools such as PESTEL and SWOT analytical tools that aid in decoding the nitty gritty of the market forces that set the growth course soaring in the Open Source Software market.

This mindfully crafted research offering encompassing minute details of the Open Source Software market presents a systematic overview of the ongoing, dominant and also critically examines the forces that largely shaped the growth course of the Open Source Software market in the previous years. Based on these vital and peculiar market specific information, market players can well deliver highly lucrative business strategies that potentially reckon high investment returns in the Open Source Software market.

Access Complete Report @ https://www.orbismarketreports.com/global-open-source-software-market-growth-analysis-by-trends-and-forecast-2019-2025?utm_source=Puja

By the product type, the market is primarily split into SharewareBundled SoftwareBSD(Berkeley Source Distribution)

By the end-users/application, this report covers the following segments BMForumphpBBPHPWind

The key regions covered in the Open Source Software market report are:North America (U.S., Canada, Mexico)South America (Cuba, Brazil, Argentina, and many others.)Europe (Germany, U.K., France, Italy, Russia, Spain, etc.)Asia (China, India, Russia, and many other Asian nations.)Pacific region (Indonesia, Japan, and many other Pacific nations.)Middle East & Africa (Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and many others.)

Place Inquiry for Buying or Customization of [emailprotected] https://www.orbismarketreports.com/enquiry-before-buying/80775?utm_source=Puja

Some Strategic Factors Coated in Desk of Content of Global Open Source Software Market:Chapter 1: Introduction, market driving drive product Objective of Study and Analysis Scope.Chapter 2: Exclusive Summary the fundamental info of the Global Open Source Software Market.Chapter 3: Displaying the Market Dynamics- Drivers, Trends and Challenges of the Global Open Source Software Market.Chapter 4: Presenting the Global Open Source Software Market Factor Evaluation Porters Five Forces, Supply/Value Chain, PESTEL evaluation, Market Entropy, Patent/Trademark Analysis.

Further, as the report advances, it keep the readers engaged and inquisitive about the competition spectrum of the Open Source Software market. A thorough profiling of the leading players, complete with their background analysis encompassing company and product portfolios have been presented in the report to influence a beneficial outcome in the Open Source Software market.

(*If you have any special requirements, please let us know and we will offer you the report as you want.)

About Us : With unfailing market gauging skills, has been excelling in curating tailored business intelligence data across industry verticals. Constantly thriving to expand our skill development, our strength lies in dedicated intellectuals with dynamic problem solving intent, ever willing to mold boundaries to scale heights in market interpretation.

Contact Us : Hector CostelloSenior Manager Client Engagements4144N Central Expressway,Suite 600, Dallas,Texas 75204, U.S.A.Phone No.: USA: +1 (972)-362-8199 | IND: +91 895 659 5155

Read more:
Global Open Source Software Market Projected to Reach USD XX.XX billion by 2025- Intel, Epson, IBM, Transcend, Oracle, Acquia, etc. - Owned

Coinbase CEO Says Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Must Evolve to Reach Mass Adoption – The Daily Hodl

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong thinks Bitcoin and crypto must evolve and become easier to use before widespread adoption can take place.

In a new interview with Peter McCormack, the host of the What Bitcoin Did podcast, Armstrong, who co-founded the leading US crypto exchange, says BTC needs to follow the internets lead in terms of usability.

We have not taken any unnecessary risks with [Bitcoin], and we have ensured that it is going to probably survive the test of time as the gold standard, and we may find other solutions with scalability with layer two. I guess the other way to look at it is, What would have happened if we had found a way to safely scale it? Maybe we would not have had a need for some of these other chains that have come up and divided focus.

I do think it has harmed the usability of cryptocurrency a little bit that even when people come to Coinbase, and there are so many different coins, they have to think about, Well, if I want to use DeFi Ive got to find this other protocol and learn about it. It has increased the learning curve for new people to get into cryptocurrency. And one of my big beliefs is we need to actually make it dramatically easier to use before it will get to a billion people. And I really want it to get to a billion people.

It is kind of like the internet if you needed to understand IP addresses and DNS to even use the internet, probably not that many people would have. They needed to get it so simple where it is just like click a link on a web browser.

McCormack also grilled Armstrong about Coinbases controversial decision to sell its blockchain analytics software to the U.S. Secret Service. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) have alsoexpressedinterest in using Coinbase Analytics to identify criminals relying on cryptocurrencies to move money or obscure their activities.

Armstrong says he recognized selling that software to the government wasnt going to be popular among some elements of the crypto community. The CEO says hes a big supporter of privacy and thinks encryption should be the default in finance like it is on the internet. He also says hes supportive of people who want to take their Bitcoin off Coinbase and have self-custody of it.

But he also notes that the government will inevitably get their hands on the data whether Coinbase sells the software or not.

One of these unfortunate realities of the world we did not create it is that the AML regulations out there are increasingly expecting blockchain analytics. It is important to note that blockchain analytics companies there are a bunch of them out there, Chainalysis and others are essentially selling data that is publicly available. They are packaging it up. They are looking at all the public blockchains, and they are saying, What kind of patterns do we see? And they are selling that.

So thats what Coinbase Analytics is doing too. The reason we brought that in-house is that we always try to avoid sharing customer data with third parties.

Armstrong says he wouldnt be opposed to an external audit of the Coinbase Analytics code to verify the companys claim that it is only relying on publicly available data and not any personal identifying information.

The CEO also says Coinbase is working on an internal project called Project Pamplona, which is focused on scalability and avoiding future website crashes during periods of high volatility.

I

Read more from the original source:
Coinbase CEO Says Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Must Evolve to Reach Mass Adoption - The Daily Hodl

Rep. Matt Gaetz Says Zuckerberg Lied Under Oath About Facebook Conservative Censorship, calls on DOJ to Open Criminal Investigation – The Jewish Voice

By Jared Evan

In a letter to Attorney General William Barr, Florida Rep Gaetz alleged that Zuckerberg made false statements to Congress about Facebooks content moderation during two hearings two years ago.

The letter said: On both occasions, members of Congress asked Mr. Zuckerberg about allegations that Facebook censored and suppressed content supportive of President Donald Trump and other conservatives. In his responses, Mr. Zuckerberg repeatedly and categorically denied any bias against conservative speech, persons, policies, or politics Mr. Zuckerberg also dismissed the suggestion that Facebook exercises any form of editorial manipulation.

The congressman continued: As a member of this body, I question Mr. Zuckerbergs veracity, and challenge his willingness to cooperate with our oversight authority, diverting congressional resources during time-sensitive investigations, and materially impeding our work, Gaetz, a House Judiciary Committee member, wrote. Such misrepresentations are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal and fraudulent.

Gatzs ammunition to this latest accusation against Facebook and Zuckerberg is a series of recent investigations from Project Veritas. He mentioned in the letter to Barr: recent reports from Project Veritas, featuring whistleblowers who worked as Facebooks content moderators, have shown ample evidence of Facebooks purported bias and manipulation against conservative speech.

Left leaning outlets like Business Insider were quick to besmirch Project Veritas and its founder. James Okeefe. Business Insider sloppily and biasedly wrote Project Veritas is a right-wing activist group that frequently traffics inmisinformationandpropaganda, in an effort to minimalize the impact of Gatz requests to AG Barr.

It is true that Project Veritas investigates subjects that conservatives would be interested in exposing, such as Planned Parenthood, Bernie Sanders staff members and Facebook bias. However, not a single investigation has ever been proven to be fraudulent. OKeefe carefully crafts investigations, staffs professional actors and sends them out undercover equip with recording devices to capture evidence on camera and audio. The goal is do destroy the credibility of Project Veritas, albeit with no proof.

Gatz expanded on the Project Veritas expose in the letter: according to the Veritas report and undercover footage, the adjudicators were outspoken about their political bias against Republicans, and actively chose to eliminate otherwise-allowable content from the platform and from public view simply due to its political orientation, Gaetz wrote to Barr.

This arbitrary and capricious behavior is not done in good faith and falls outside of the express intent of 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which affords Facebook liability protection as long as the platform moderates content in good faith.'

It is yet to se seen if Barr will take any action and look further into Gatz requests. This topic is nothing new to The Jewish voice, which has been tenaciously reporting on Facebook and social media censorship, and shadow banning since 2018.

In 2018, the first major banning of a conservative figure took place.

TJV reported in 2018 :

The permanent suspension of flamboyant and controversial, conservative political speaker, writer, and former Breitbart technology editor Milo Yiannopoulos from Twitter was what many consider a watershed moment in social media censorship. Yiannopoulos had several million followers on Twitter and had used social media to build his name and career to his advantage. His local appearances at college campus bring giant protests from hard left protestors as evidently free speech is no longer acceptable at universities; but it was not any radical political viewpoints that got him banned from Twitter, no it was simply insulting actress and comedian Leslie Jones.

It is at this point; the floodgates were opened. Immensely popular radio host and owner of popular alternative news site Alex Jones was methodically removed from all social media. In 2018, YouTube began suspending his account, by mid-2019, Alex Jones was 100% removed from social media. The same happened to Jewish fire-brand right-wing personality Laura Loomer, removed from all social media. There have been countless others, outright banned. The more edgy sometimes conspiratorial social media personalities are outright banned, while something sneaky frequently happens to more straight forward news entities that lean conservative: the shadowban

Shadow-banning is a clever trick designed to drive traffic and impact down of conservative outlets. Breitbart, one of the most popular news sites in America, was an early victim of shadow-banning. When you are shadowbanned on Facebook, the induvial user who may be following Breitbart, will not see any updates from the outlet on their news feed. The user has to go directly to their favorite news outlets Facebook page to see their updates. Without knowing this, one can simply forget outlets like The Jewish Voice, Daily Caller or Breitbart still exist, as the updates to do not show up when one logs into Facebook. This is a sneaky way to cause damage to media outlets not favored by Silicon Valley.

The Jewish voice can attest to the impact of shadowbanning. Since 2018, TJV has seen our traffic coming from Facebook essentially vanish. According to Facebook statistics, which one receives when running a Facebook page for a company; we witnessed the clear pattern of our posts being shadowbanned. The average post went from on average 6-7 thousand viewers seeing the post, to on average 200-300 people per post. TJV did not lose large amounts of followers, but our exposure has dropped like a rock. Many people who follow The Jewish Voice, have pointed out to us, they no longer see us on their Facebook News Feed. Our Twitter interaction has slowed to a crawl as well.

I hope Mr Barr takes this seriously and looks into not only the outright banning of conservative media figures and outlets, but the shadow banning as well, which is sneaky, unfair and negatively effects our business The Jewish Voice publisher David Benhooren told me after learning about Gaetz efforts.

View original post here:

Rep. Matt Gaetz Says Zuckerberg Lied Under Oath About Facebook Conservative Censorship, calls on DOJ to Open Criminal Investigation - The Jewish Voice

UK fights obesity with ad bans, more calorie labels – The Straits Times

LONDON (BLOOMBERG, REUTERS) - The UK imposed strict new limits on junk food advertising as ministers seek to control the country's growing obesity problem, which has also been identified as a factor in coronavirus deaths.

Under theBetter Health campaign unveiled on Monday (July 27), the government said it would tackle the obesity time bomb by banning advertising of foods high in fat, sugar and salton television and online before 9.00pm. andending buy one get one free deals and putting calories on menus.

It wouldalso end buy-one-get-one-free promotions on sugary treats and require calorie labels on more products in stores as well as in restaurants.

It's starting a consultation on putting calorie counts on alcoholic beverages.

"Losing weight is hard, but with some small changes we can all feel fitter and healthier," Prime Minister Boris Johnson said in a statement.

"If we all do our bit, we can reduce our health risks."

The curbs pile more pressure on food, retail, advertising and media industries already suffering from the economic lockdown imposed to control the coronavirus pandemic, with thousands of jobs under threat.

They're also a change of tack for Johnson, who's previously complained about "nanny state" meddling in the lives of ordinary people.

But the pandemic and his own brush with death in April persuaded him of the need to act on obesity.

In a video clip on Twitter, Johnson said: Ive always wanted to lose weight for ages and ages and like many people I struggle with my weight, I go up and down."

"But since I recovered from coronavirus I have been steadily building up my fitness.

Im at least a stone down, Im more than a stone down but when I went into ICU (intensive care) when I was really ill, I was way over weight ... and, you know, I was too fat, he said, adding that he hoped the new campaign was not excessively bossy or nannying.

Advertising trade body ISBA said it was deeply disappointed by the announcement, saying in an emailed statement that it will cost families more at the checkout, denies small businesses the targeted local online advertising on which they now rely, and risks jobs at a time when government has elsewhere shown them support.

Almost two-thirds of British adults are overweight and one in three children leave primary school weighing too much, the health department said.

Being too heavy also puts people at greater risk from coronavirus and places additional strain on the National Health Service.

See the article here:

UK fights obesity with ad bans, more calorie labels - The Straits Times

OCC Gives Banks Keys to the Crypto Kingdom – JD Supra

On July 22, 2020, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) published an Interpretive Letter (the Letter) declaring that national banks and federal savings associations (collectively, national banks) may provide cryptocurrency-related custody and other services.[1] The announcement marks a revolutionary moment for the cryptocurrency industry where, until now, custody has been provided by crypto-specialist firms, typically under a state trust license.

In the Letter the OCC notes that, although providing custody for cryptocurrencies differs in several respects from other custody activities[2], such services are a modern form of traditional bank activities. As an example, there is no physical possession of cryptocurrencies. Instead, a national bank holding cryptocurrencies on behalf of a customer is actually taking possession of the cryptographic access keys to that unit of cryptocurrency, that is, private keys. According to the OCC, by providing these services, banks can continue to fulfill the financial intermediation function they have historically played.

Moreover, national banks crypto custody services may extend beyond passively holding private keys. As expressed by the OCC, the custody function is a gateway to providing a whole host of other cryptocurrency services that are appropriate for custody customers. National banks may also facilitate customers cryptocurrency and fiat currency exchange transactions, transaction settlement, trade execution, recording keeping, valuation, tax services, and reporting. Basically, national banks may become full service cryptobanking providers. We note, however, that the Letter does not authorize national banks to open FDIC-insured deposit accounts denominated in cryptocurrencies.

The OCC cautions national banks that comprehensive control systems need to be in place to manage risks of this business. In addition, as part of its ordinary supervisory process, any national bank looking into conducting cryptocurrency custody services should consult with the OCC supervisors.

Furthermore, it should be noted that additional requirements may apply depending on the nature of the cryptocurrency being custodied. As the Letter notes, different cryptocurrencies may also be subject to different OCC regulations and guidance outside of the custody context, as well as non-OCC regulations. For example, cryptocurrencies that are considered securities for purposes of federal securities laws may be subject to the OCCs regulations on recordkeeping and confirmation requirements for securities transactions, as well as securities laws and regulatory requirements overseen by the SEC and FINRA.

Importantly, the OCC is authorizing these services within the existing authorities that national banks possess. There is no new regulation or guideline or other new law that needs to be put into place before this authority can be relied upon.

The Party is Just Getting Started Whos invited?

National banks now need to decide how to enter this new line of business. The OCC notes that depending on their risk appetite and business model, national banks may offer to store copies of their customers private keys while permitting the customer to retain their own copy, while others may generate new private keys which would be held solely by the institution on behalf of the customer. National banks may provide these services in non-fiduciary capacity, meaning merely holding a customers private key and related records, or in a fiduciary capacity, such as an investment advisor, a trustee, an executor of a will, or any similar capacity in which the bank possesses investment discretion on behalf of the customer. Due to the undeveloped financial infrastructure presently available for cryptocurrency, custodying in a fiduciary capacity presents both major business opportunities for national banks as well as compliance and technology challenges.

In the past, money center banks have been cautious in dealing with cryptocurrency counterparties, in part due to the perception that the regulators held a skeptical view of the industry and would, at exam time, be tougher on such relationships. The OCC has tried to head this view off by specifically stating in the Letter that national banks can work within any lawful business and that cryptocurrency custody actives constitute such a lawful business. We believe that this shift in a key regulators tone can have consequences also in other financial institutions who may now take a more positive attitude towards cryptocurrencies.

What about state-chartered banks? Because many state laws, New York included, have so-called wildcard statutes that permit state banks to conduct all the same activities as national banks, the Letter has broader application than just national banks. Nonetheless, the prudential conditions stated in the Letter demonstrate that banks will need to devote a serious effort to perform these services.

We expect that those few banks already servicing the cryptocurrency business will quickly move to take full advantage and expand their services. Larger banks with existing robust institutional custody businesses are likely to follow suit.

The Letter provides opportunities also for many foreign banks that have branches in the U.S. While most branches do not have trust powers, the OCC letter allows for non-trust related use of this express authority with respect to nonfiduciary custody services.

One of the roadblocks in the security token market has been the lack of qualified custodians, such as banks and brokerdealers. Qualified custodians are important actors with respect to cryptocurrencies deemed to be securities under federal securities laws, such securities tokens, that require in certain cases the use of a qualified custodian for maintaining client funds and securities. Here again, national banks have an opportunity to play a role. We also expect that expanding the universe of qualified custodians will provide a necessary boost to the budding securities token market.

Frenemies Warming Relationship

Given that Brian Brooks, Acting Comptroller of the Currency and head of the OCC, hails from the virtual currency world, it is not a shock that the OCC would be supportive of the industry and as banks become more expert in the complexities of the cryptocurrency business we expect that this first step will presage a number of new bank and cryptocurrency opportunities.

The Letter may stand as a turning point in the notorious frenemy relationship between banks and cryptocurrency. Banks entering the industry full pelt could have two significant consequences. First, it is possible that more merchants and consumers will find a lower barrier to using cryptocurrencies in everyday transactions. Second, it may rebuff those prognosticators who have maintained that banks would be made obsolete and disintermediated by new cryptocurrency-related businesses and technologies. If you cannot beat them, join them.

We recommend that any institutions looking to take advantage of the Letter and its direct and indirect consequences carefully consider the new business opportunities available and be attentive to applicable laws, rules, and standards in this highly regulated area.

* * * * *

[1] The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Interpretive Letter #1170, July 22, 2020, available at https://www.occ.treas.gov/topics/charters-and-licensing/interpretations-and-actions/2020/int1170.pdf.

[2] In general custody involves the holding, directly or indirectly, client funds or securities, or having any authority to obtain possession of them. See, for example, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 Rule 206(4)-2(d)(2).

Read the original:
OCC Gives Banks Keys to the Crypto Kingdom - JD Supra