The Old Guy: On America, and celebrating, in 2020 – SILive.com

Bill Pullmans speech, in part from Independence Day:

Mankind. That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom. Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution but from annihilation. We're fighting for our right to live. To exist.

It was a good day. Bright and shiny, like a dime. Joan and I got to play music for two hours outside, fully masked, with our friends Russ and Ali. Then, it was time to go home. All of the supermarkets we usually go to where closed. Joan offered to make me a special meal and I went upstairs to write.

And, I started thinking about Independence Day. This year. 2020. A guy that works at a local deli told me it would be the last one we would celebrate and that, after this year, there would be a new world order. I was pretty sure he wasnt referring to an 80s band. He was referring to a different New World Order.

Its always easier to blame the state of the world on outside forces and things beyond our control. Im always amazed at how willing we are to cede over our responsibilities to ourselves and others to some mystical power or cabal. Every human interaction we have changes the world in sometimes infinitesimal ways.

A couple of years ago, Joan and I walked over to Front Street to view the fireworks. There was limited space and we couldnt really see anything because Urby, which had been recently erected, blocked a vast amount of the skyline. I usually like fireworks, but this year, Im not feeling it. That, plus the fact that weve heard them every night since June, took the polish off the apple.

The President had an event at Mount Rushmore the day before. Hundreds of people crammed together without masks, proclaiming their freedom, while putting themselves and their loved ones at risk for contracting a virus. A lot of folks stayed home and watched Hamilton after forking over $12.99 for the Disney+ channel.

Joan and I watched TV. We binged Cougar Town and Bobs Burgers, because thats just how we roll now. We watch documentaries and comedies. We try to stay away from the news because its just too dammed depressing. As Paul Simon once sang : I gather all the news I need from the weather report.

Im thinking about kids who were separated from their parents, still in cages, still not receiving proper care. Im thinking about inmates in prisons, a perfect storm for CV19 contagion. Im thinking about Elijah McClain, a young man who loved playing violin, who was placed in a chokehold and eventually died. Im thinking about an entire race of people that leave their houses every day and dont know whether theyre going to return.

David Bowie sings in my head: This is not America/ This is not/ Sha-nah-nah-nah-nah. This year, Im having a really difficult time reconciling explosions in the sky that sound like bombs and John Wayne and Mount Rushmore and Native American land and willful ignorance and any reason to celebrate.

Id like to. Id like to believe that we are one nation, indivisible, where all people are created equal and all of us share equal access to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Im just not sure that that is, indeed, the case. And so, I ask the question again: What are we celebrating today? Is it the dream? Is it the reality? Because they are definitely not in synch with each other.

Lets start with the idea of civil rights. Lets go back to that idea of life, liberty and happiness as a right, not a privilege. Dont we all deserve that?

Then, why dont we all have it? And who gets to decide who gets to participate in the American dream and who doesnt?

I got into an ongoing argument online with some friends who want certain films and songs to be expunged from the face of the Earth because they find them offensive and give a very skewered picture of life, usually from a male perspective.

My problem is this: censorship in any form, for whatever the reason, good or bad is still censorship. Somebody is not going to see or read or hear something because somebody else decided it might be bad for them. Remember when you were told not to read A Catcher In The Rye because the lead character was amoral, or listen to I Want To Hold Your Hand because of that and when I touch you line or view The Last Temptation Of Christ because it was going to destroy your faith? How did that make you feel? Were all grown-ups here. We get to pick and choose what we want to read and watch and listen to, otherwise we wind up becoming those other folks that were not too fond of.

So, again, what are we celebrating? Maybe its enough that were a little more than halfway through one of the worst years this country has ever experienced. Its like every bad thing that ever happened to us happening all at once.

But, I have hope. I have to. Its the only way out of this darkness. And though my candle is small and will not last the night, its light can get me a little further down the road and towards the greater light beyond.

Hope your fourth was safe and happy. Hold those grey heads up!

Comments on this and all my columns may be submitted to Talk To The Old Guy on Facebook. Like and follow. Peace!

Visit link:

The Old Guy: On America, and celebrating, in 2020 - SILive.com

Letters to the editor for July 25, 2020 – Opinion – Sarasota Herald-Tribune

Vote by mail

We enter a time of some turmoil, and for reflection in many areas. Changes some accomplished, some still to develop are often met with uncertainty. We look for means to address and calm concerns and have, and should express, hope for certainty in the future.

Either to solidify a position or advocate for change, our voice is heard and recorded in the single most effective way the opportunity to cast our vote. Its easy. Call your Supervisor of Elections at 352-374-5252, email kbarton@alachuacounty.us or go to http://www.votealachua.com and have them send you your absentee ballot in the mail.

And theres no postage due to return it. Just ask then vote.

Bill Salmon, Gainesville

What took so long?

In the span of six days, the first African-American leader of a U.S. military service was confirmed (General Charles Q. Brown as Air Force chief of staff), the Navys first black female fighter pilot completed her training (LTJG Madeline Swegle), and the first woman joined the U.S. Army Green Berets (unnamed for security reasons). These are tremendous accomplishments, and should be lauded as such.

I have just one question: What took so long?

The ban on women in combat was lifted almost 30 years ago, in 1993. The U.S. military was desegregated more than 70 years ago in 1948.

While the accomplishments of General Brown, LTJG Swegle and the unnamed Green Beret deserve recognition, it is with a heavy heart that we must also acknowledge that these achievements come far too late for a nation that espouses the equality of all mankind.

Will Atkins, Gainesville

Questionable decisions

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at a few recent letter writers claiming the Obama administration was scandal-free, because that statement is untrue.

Barack Obama also wasn't free from some questionable decisions. Remember when the Benghazi tragedy started from a video? Do the IRS scandal, Operation Fast & Furious, leaving Iraq and allowing ISIS to be born, the moving Syria "red line," waging war on Libya without Congress consent, ransoms paid for hostages with foreign currency and an unmarked plane in the middle of the night, the Bowe Bergdahl swap, the veto of the 9/11 crime bill, claiming Affordable Care Act coverage and doctors wouldn't change if you wanted to keep them, his 2008 and 2016 apology tours, the Veterans Affairs scandal, the Colorado environmental disaster and commuting the sentences of Chelsea Manning and Oscar Lopez Rivera ring any bells?

When the current investigation by John Durham is completed, we may have to add the spying and criminalizing of Michael Flynn.

Cathy Anderson, Williston

Significant achievements

A recent letter writer complained about what he considers a lack of significant achievements during the Obama administration. So let me educate the author of this letter.

Despite the fact that President Obama inherited a terrible economy during the great recession, the stock market tripled and the unemployment rate decreased from over 10% at the beginning of his administration to less than 5% at its end. Significant legislative achievements include the Affordable Care Act, through which 20 million people received health insurance; the Dodd-Frank Act, which limited the ability of banks to participate in the risky financial transactions that caused the great recession; and establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Regarding the war on terrorism, many al-Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, were terminated during the Obama administration.

President Obama also tried his best to combat climate change and improve environmental conditions for future generations.

T.J. Ronson, Micanopy

Write a letter

Letters to the editor should be emailed to letters@gainesville.com. Letters should be 150 words or fewer and include the writers full name, city of residence and contact information.

Link:
Letters to the editor for July 25, 2020 - Opinion - Sarasota Herald-Tribune

Today in History: Puerto Rico becomes self-governing commonwealth of the United States – Lompoc Record

Today is Saturday, July 25, the 207th day of 2020. There are 159 days left in the year.

Highlight in History:

On July 25, 1866, Ulysses S. Grant was named General of the Army of the United States, the first officer to hold the rank.

On this date:

In 1814, the Battle of Lundys Lane, one of the bloodiest battles of the War of 1812, took place in present-day Niagara Falls, Ontario, with no clear victor.

In 1898, the United States invaded Puerto Rico during the Spanish-American War.

In 1952, Puerto Rico became a self-governing commonwealth of the United States.

In 1956, the Italian liner SS Andrea Doria collided with the Swedish passenger ship Stockholm off the New England coast late at night and began sinking; 51 people 46 from the Andrea Doria, five from the Stockholm were killed. (The Andrea Doria capsized and sank the following morning.)

In 1960, a Woolworths store in Greensboro, North Carolina, that had been the scene of a sit-in protest against its whites-only lunch counter dropped its segregation policy.

In 1972, the notorious Tuskegee syphilis experiment came to light as The Associated Press reported that for the previous four decades, the U.S. Public Health Service, in conjunction with the Tuskegee Institute in Alabama, had been allowing poor, rural Black male patients with syphilis to go without treatment, even allowing them to die, as a way of studying the disease.

In 1985, a spokeswoman for Rock Hudson confirmed that the actor, hospitalized in Paris, was suffering from AIDS. (Hudson died in October 1985.)

Original post:

Today in History: Puerto Rico becomes self-governing commonwealth of the United States - Lompoc Record

Us Federal Court Ruling Bitcoin Is a Form of Money | News Bitcoin News – Bitcoin News

A US Federal Court said Friday that bitcoin is a form of money covered under the Washington D.C., Money Transmitters Act (MTA).

The court made this conclusion as it denied a motion to dismiss criminal charges against Larry Dean Harmon, the operator of an underground bitcoin trading platform.

In December 2019, a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia indicted Harmon for conspiracy to launder monetary instruments, in violation of state laws. However, Harmon moved to dismiss citing failure to state an offence.

Harmons move forced the court to determine if bitcoin met the definition of money for purposes of the District of Columbias MTA.

In its conclusion, the court states:

After examination of the relevant statutes, case law, and other sources, the Court concludes that bitcoin is money under the MTA and that Helix, as described in the indictment, was an `unlicensed money transmitting business under applicable federal law.

The court also points out that Harmon himself never disputes that bitcoin is money as that term is ordinarily used.

Harmons motion to dismiss all charges against him was denied.

According to court documents, Harmons operation, Helixa darknet serviceenabled customers, for a fee, to send bitcoins to designated recipients in a manner which was designed to conceal and obfuscate the source or owner of the bitcoins.

Helix was shut down in 2017 while Harmon was arrested in February 2020.

Meanwhile, the documents also reveal that before the launch of Helix, Harmon had written stating that the service was designed to be a bitcoin tumbler that cleans bitcoins by providing customers with new bitcoins which have never been to the darknet before.

Between 2014 and 2017, Helix was used to exchange approximately 354,468 bitcoins the equivalent of approximately $311 million.

What does this decision mean for bitcoin? Tell us your thoughts in the comments section below.

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons

See the original post:
Us Federal Court Ruling Bitcoin Is a Form of Money | News Bitcoin News - Bitcoin News

Bitcoins price will more than double following the OCC decision – Crypto News Flash

Source: R.Danyliuk - Shutterstock

The past few weeks have seen perhaps the biggest news of the year for the crypto space. As CNF reported, the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) published a letter clarifying that all licensed banks in the US are allowed to offer cryptocurrency custody services. Specifically, the U.S. authority stated that every bank in the country may store and manage cryptographic keys for its customers.

Even if Bitcoin reacted with a slight upward movement the BTC price is close to USD 9,600 at the time of writing the long-term effects could be massive. In a series of tweets, the founder of Capriole Investments, Charles Edwards, described why the OCCs decision is so important. As Edwards explained, the decision will trigger a domino effect:

US financial institutions drive much of global financial actions. This will be a global domino effect, and enable:

Increased public awareness & trust in Bitcoin

Multiple new demand and on-boarding streams

Furthermore, Edwards also pointed out that it is now clear that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies can no longer be banned.

Exhibit: legalisation in Germany, India, Korea earlier in 2020now USA. This cant be stopped.

Edwards also said that the Bitcoin price could explode quickly if banks put only 1% in the market. According to the Digital Asset Manager of Capriole Investments, Bitcoin could more than double under the above condition. To substantiate this, Edwards referred to a diagram of the Federal Reserve, which shows that US commercial banks have assets of 20 trillion US dollars:

Just 1 NASDAQ stock (Grayscale) already owns 2% of circulating Bitcoin supply today.

Its not hard to see where this is going.

Source: https://twitter.com/caprioleio/status/1286237259658919936

Already last month, Messari researcher Ryan Watkins explained that an institutional allocation of a total of 1% for Bitcoin could slightly increase the total value of Bitcoin to over $1 trillion (1,000 billion) USD. Watkins called it a perfect storm that could drive the Bitcoin price above $50,000 USD. According to the report, the storm would be driven by a phenomenon Messari describes as a Fiat amplifier:

Flows in and out of an asset do not necessarily cause one-to-one movements in the price of the asset and can be amplified to much larger price movements.

If foundations, family offices, sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, and mutual funds were to invest only a small amount of between $20 and $480, depending on the institution, the investment could double up to 22 times, as the table below shows, due to the higher liquidity and reflexivity.

Source: https://twitter.com/RyanWatkins_/status/1275426694237741057/photo/1

OCCs decision could thus lay the foundation for a massive bull run for Bitcoin.

View original post here:
Bitcoins price will more than double following the OCC decision - Crypto News Flash

Twitter bans Project Veritas ads over old video exposing …

November 26, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) Twitter has banned the conservative investigative group Project Veritas from advertising on the social media platform, apparently in retaliation for a two-year-old investigation that implicated the social media platform in the controversial practice of shadow-banning.

Project Veritas president James OKeefe explained the situation via Twitter on Monday, starting with footage from a 15-second ad that Twitter approved just weeks ago. The ad, which solicits applicants to work as undercover journalists, simply asks, Go undercover? Wear a camera? Put on a wire? Do you have what it takes?

However, days ago, Veritas received an email revealing the ad had been rejected for inappropriate language. The email identified nothing objectionable in the ad itself, but came with a link to a differenttwo-year-old video that shows Twitter Trust & Safety policy manager Olinda Hassan saying were trying to get the shitty people to not show up, and contains former Twitter software engineer Abhinav Vadrevu admitting, our strategy is to shadow ban so that you have ultimate control.

Shadow-banning refers to the practice of preventing a users content from appearing in other users feeds, but giving the target no indication that his account has been flagged, restricted, or otherwise affected. Last year, Twitter came under fire over revelations that numerous prominent Republicans had been excluded from its drop-down menu meant to simplify searching for specific people (with the victims Democratic counterparts not being similarly affected).

So you guessed it: a tweet about Twitter shadow-bans is the thing in the hundreds of videos that weve done, that Twitter is considering the reason why we shouldnt be approved for Twitter Ads, OKeefe said, noting that the video has been quoted as evidence in Congressional hearings about social media bias.

OKeefe then displayed a follow-up email from Twitterinforming Veritas that the group had been deemed ineligible to participate in Twitter Ads entirely, on the basis of unspecified inappropriate content.

The incident is only the latest in a long series of examples fueling conservative suspicion of Twitters motives. The company defines misgendering someone as hateful conduct, yet has let stand violent and hateful tweets directed at conservatives. There has been a long series of bans and suspensions affecting non-violent, non-hateful, non-obscene tweets from right-of-center perspectives (including LifeSiteNews), and Twitter insiders have admitted to intentionally targeting conservative accounts and topics.

OKeefe expressed confidence that Twitters apparent attempt to undermine Project Veritas would ultimately backfire. So Twitter thinks theyre going to stop people from applying to work here, stop us from advertising, but this is all gonna blow up in their face and even more people are gonna apply, he predicted.

Project Veritas undercover investigations have caught people within numerous organizations admitting to unflattering views or incriminating actions, or contradicting the public statements from those organizations. Past subjects include Google, CNN, ABC News, and the campaign office of Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Missouri).

See the article here:

Twitter bans Project Veritas ads over old video exposing ...

What Is Shadow Banning on Twitter? – Lifehacker

Last week the president, alluding to a poorly researched article by VICE News, accused Twitter of shadow banning prominent Republicans. Twitter didnt shadow ban anyone. But they did hide some Republican politicians accounts, not because they were Republicans, but for two more embarrassing reasons.

The president is wrong (!)Twitter doesnt intentionally hide accounts based on political affiliation. But there actually was something screwy happening to certain accounts, including those of some Republican figures. And if its affecting a lot of Republican users, Twitter implied in a blog post, thats because those users are linked to patterns of abuse.

A shadow ban, used on sites such as Reddit and Craigslist, is a form of ban that isnt immediately obvious to the user. The user is allowed to keep posting, but their posts dont show up to anyone but themselves.

A shadow ban buys the sites moderators a little time: If the user doesnt immediately notice that no one is responding to their posts, they might spend more time harmlessly posting into the void, instead of creating a new account and posting their unwanted content. So a shadow ban is a tool against abuse and spam.

In a blog post about the supposed shadow ban, Twitter says no:

We do not shadow ban. You are always able to see the tweets from accounts you follow (although you may have to do more work to find them, like go directly to their profile). And we certainly dont shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.

G/O Media may get a commission

You could say that Twitter is untrustworthy, but theres no real reason to believe that. The site has the ability to ban obvious Nazi accounts, but it only consistently bans those accounts in countries where its forced to by law.

The company bends over backward to placate the right wing, to an extent that some might call cowardly or collaborationist. It would be out of character, and even less strategic than usual, for the service to shadow ban sitting members of Congress. This is the company that decided not to ban the president for open threats of violence that obviously violate Twitters terms of service.

Twitter does make some accounts easier to discover than others. Their search results, the company says, favor popular tweets, and disfavor tweets from bad-faith actors who intend to manipulate or divide the conversation. Thats a pretty loaded description, so Twitter unpacks some factors that go into identifying bad-faith actors:

The specifics are still mysterious, partly for the good reason that if Twitter explained every detail of the algorithm, it would be easier to circumvent it. But Twitter defends the practice with a killer line: We know this approach is working because we see fewer abuse reports and spam reports.

It sure sounds like Twitter is implying something: If a famous account seems to disappear from search results and follower suggestions, its probably because theyre linked to abuse and spam. (Twitter recently started blocking all users with Elon Musk in their display name, because Musk fans fell for scam tweets from fake Musk accounts. Again, why dont they use this on the Nazis?) So gee, maybe prominent Republicans need to stop encouraging abusive behavior!

But then things got confusing when a Twitter bug temporarily blocked a lot of accounts from being auto-suggested in search results. Twitter says this no one got blocked from normal search results. But to be fair to the complainers, auto-suggest matters a lot more on Twitter, where usernames can be hard to remember. Auto-completing usernames is more immediately noticeable than auto-completing words in a Google search.

But this impact was not limited to a certain political affiliation or geography, says Twitter. Some Democratic politicians were not properly showing up within search auto-suggestions as result of this issue. And most accounts affected had nothing to do with politics at all.

Again, if they were lying, that would be very out of character. If the company wants to punish right-wingers, it has many more effective ways to do so. Instead the company avoids punishing politicians accounts even for straightforward violations. But breaking the site with a bug is in character.

But this article wont convince some people, who interpret everything as a conspiracy against them, partly because they dont understand how the world works. Recently, Republican celebrity and former Milwaukee County sheriff David Clarke temporarily took his account private. You cant retweet a private account. But Clarkes followers immediately tweeted that Clarke, who brags when Twitter doesnt ban him for threatening violence, had been shadowbanned.

Crying shadow ban! is an old complaint from people who want more attention, especially extremists. They use it as an excuse when people arent listening to them, because they refuse to accept that everyone is just over their shit. A 2011 Urban Dictionary definition for shadowban includes this satirical example sentence: Ive been posting right-wing crap all over the forum, but no one is biting. I think Ive been shadowbanned.

So dont worry about getting shadow banned. But if you dont want to get de-prioritized in search results, consider being less of an abusive pain in the ass.

Continued here:

What Is Shadow Banning on Twitter? - Lifehacker

The Law and You: Women’s right to vote hard fought for – Plattsburgh Press Republican

August 26 is the 100th anniversary of women in the United States achieving the right to vote in federal elections.

That is the date the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, prohibiting denial of the right to vote on the basis of sex, and August 26 is celebrated yearly as Womens Equality Day. Before the 19th Amendment, women could vote only in some state elections, including New York beginning in 1918.

August 1920 is often described as when women were given the vote. Characterizing this as a gift could not be farther from the truth. Women fought for more than 70 years to gain this fundamental right. They gave speeches, signed petitions, organized, lobbied, marched in parades with tens of thousands of male and female supporters, picketed the White House, and went to jail.

Yes, at least 168 women were jailed in 1917-19 because they silently stood outside President Woodrow Wilsons White House holding banners. Some simply said: Mr. President, How Long Must Women Wait for Liberty? Others were more political. No one had picketed the White House before the women suffragists did so; now it is common to express First Amendment rights there.

The little I learned about President Wilson in my school years gave me the impression that he was an intellectual who had been Princetons president, an isolationist who did not want to bring the United States into World War I, and an idealist who founded the unsuccessful League of Nations after that war. More recently, I have learned that he forced black employees out of the federal civil service, and refused for years to support passage of a constitutional amendment expanding the right to vote to women. Instead, he sought to silence and remove the picketers who sought his endorsement.

The first Womans Rights Convention was in 1848, in Seneca Falls, New York. Among other declarations, it called for women to have the right to vote. At the time, this seemed extremely far-fetched to some. For years thereafter, many efforts were made to have the law recognize women as voters.

In the 1872 presidential election, Susan B. Anthony and 14 other women actually voted in Rochester, New York, being permitted to do so by the local officials. The women who voted and the election inspectors who allowed it were all arrested on federal warrants. They were prosecuted, tried and convicted. A $100 fine was imposed on the illegal voters, which they refused to pay. Three election inspectors were jailed, until President Ulysses S. Grant pardoned them after a month.

In 1875, the United States Supreme Court ruled in a Missouri case that women had no federal right to vote under the U.S. Constitution, even when their state granted it. As western territories became states, several included women as voters. The first was Wyoming in 1869, then Utah 1870, Colorado 1893, and Idaho 1896.

Along with efforts to have states extend the right to vote, a U.S. Constitutional Amendment was introduced. By 1885, the Grange, a farmers organization, supported womens suffrage; in 1886, the Womens Christian Temperance Union sent a petition to Congress with 200,000 signatures. Even so, Congress voted against such an amendment in 1887. Gradually, more and more states permitted women to vote, but there was still opposition. In 1915, suffrage bills were defeated in Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, and the US Congress again voted against the woman suffrage amendment.

Both men and women made efforts to change this on multiple fronts. Finally, in 1917, New York voters authorized women to vote. The White House picket lines started in January 1917, with the goal of convincing President Wilson to support the 19th Amendment. It took him two more years, but he finally did so. The presidential election of 1920 was the first one that women could vote in.

Although many assumed that women who could vote could also serve on juries, that did not necessarily follow. Women were not regularly allowed on juries nationwide until 1968. Some states still had optional jury service for women, instead of it being automatic, as it was with men, until the Supreme Court ruled against that practice in 1979.

______________

Resource

The Fight for Womens Suffrage . . . and What They Never Told Us! http://youtu.be/rmAWkijpdr4 a slideshow of old photographs and articles prepared by Penelope Clute

We are making critical coverage of the coronavirus available for free. Please consider subscribing so we can continue to bring you the latest news and information on this developing story.

The rest is here:

The Law and You: Women's right to vote hard fought for - Plattsburgh Press Republican

Judge: Names of Tallahassee officers who used deadly force not shielded by Marsys Law – Tampa Bay Times

In a decision of statewide importance during a time of heightened police scrutiny, a Leon County Circuit judge ruled Friday that the unnamed Tallahassee police officer who shot and killed Tony McDade and another unnamed officer involved in a separate deadly force case are not shielded by Marsys Law, and therefore can be named publicly.

Judge Charles Dodson wrote in the order that law enforcement officers acting in their official capacity are not protected by Marsys Law, a constitutional amendment passed by 61.61 percent of Florida voters in 2018.

Among other things, the amendment created a bill of rights for crime victims that give them the right to prevent disclosure of information that could be harmful to them and their families.

Dodsons ruling clarified that the law does not apply in McDades killing, a high-profile use-of-force case that became a flash point in the nationwide weeks of protest against brutality following the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

Law enforcement officers have a unique public duty to enforce the laws of our State, he wrote in a brief five-page order. The public has a vital right to evaluate the conduct of our law enforcement officers, who are empowered to arrest people and use deadly force.

The Miami Herald Media Company was an intervening party in the case.

The ruling marks a major moment for Marsys Law, as it could set the first legal precedent on the laws boundaries and its application in police use-of-force cases.

The Florida Police Benevolent Association, which sued the city last month to block it from releasing the officers names, filed notice of its intent to appeal Friday.

Attorneys for the police union argued that the officers were protected by Marsys Law because they were victims of aggravated assault.

McDade, a 38-year-old Black transgender man, was killed in late May after stabbing a next-door neighbor to death and fleeing to a nearby apartment building, according to the Tallahassee Democrat. Police officials have said one of the two responding officers used deadly force after McDade pointed a gun at him.

In the other deadly force case, the judges order said, a suspect wielding a knife was shot and killed by police.

A spokeswoman for Marsys Law for Florida declined to comment specifically on the ruling but wrote in a statement that police officers who have become victims of crime deserve the same constitutional rights as everyone else. But police officers who have committed crimes cannot hide behind Marsys Law.

Marsys Law grants constitutional rights to all victims of crime, in the same way that all persons accused of a crime in Florida have constitutional rights, spokeswoman Jennifer Fennell wrote. Victim status in Florida is granted to all victims of crime, without discrimination.

The ruling is considered a win for First Amendment advocates.

Mark Caramanica, an attorney for news outlets including the Miami Herald, called the ruling a win for public oversight and police accountability.

The court correctly found that Marsys Law is not a vehicle to hide police action from the public, he wrote in a statement.

Follow this link:

Judge: Names of Tallahassee officers who used deadly force not shielded by Marsys Law - Tampa Bay Times

GPT-3: The Next Revolution in Artificial Intelligence – Analytics Insight

The internet is buzzing about the new AI interactive tool which is called Generative Pertained Transformer-3 (GPT-3). This is the third generation of the machine learning model and it can do some amazing things.

The third era of OpenAIs Generative Pretrained Transformer, GPT-3, is a broadly useful language algorithm that utilizes machine learning to interpret text, answer questions, and accurately compose text. It analyzes a series of words, text, and other information then focuses on those examples to deliver a unique output as an article or a picture.

GPT-3 processes a gigantic data bank of English sentences and incredibly powerful computer models called neural nets to recognize patterns and decide its standards of how language functions. GPT-3 has 175 billion learning parameters that empower it to perform practically any task it is assigned, making it bigger than the second-most remarkable language model, Microsoft Corps Turing-NLG algorithm, which has 17 billion learning parameters.

A parameter is a computation in a neural system that applies an extraordinary or lesser weighting to some part of the information, to give that aspect greater or lesser importance in the general estimation of the data.

GPT-3s language abilities are amazing. When appropriately processed by a human, it can compose creative fiction; it can produce working code; it can make sensible business memos; and substantially more. Its possible uses are limited only by our minds.

GPT-3 is much more advanced and evolved than its predecessor. In the year 2019, OpenAI published their discoveries and results on their unaided language model, GPT-2, which was trained in 40Gb texts and was fit for recognizing words in the vicinity. GPT-2, a transformer-based language applied to self-consideration, permitted experts to create exceptionally persuasive and coherent writings.

The system, which is a general-purpose language algorithm, utilized AI to remodel the language processing abilities. However, it created quite a controversy as a result of its capability to create very realistic and reasonable fake news articles dependent on something as simple as an initial sentence, making it inaccessible for the public at first.

At its core, GPT-3 is an incredibly sophisticated text indicator. A human gives it a piece of text as information and the model produces its best investment regarding what the next piece of text should be. It would then be able to repeat this procedure, taking the first information along with the recently produced text, regarding that as new input, and creating a subsequent piece, until it arrives at a length limit.

GPT-3 can figure out how to carry out a task with a single brief, better, at times, than different variants of Transformer that have been calibrated, so to speak, to specifically perform just that task. Subsequently, GPT-3 is the victory of an all-encompassing all-inclusive statement. Simply feed it a huge amount of text till its loads are perfect, and it can proceed to perform entirely well on various specific duties with no further interruption.

A question which most people are asking that why GPT-3 is so hyped? The answer is pretty simple. GPT-3 is trained on a dataset of a large portion of close to a trillion words; therefore GPT-3 can identify and distinguish between the linguistic patterns contained in all that data.

However, there are certain downsides to GPT-3. GPT-3 comes up short on the capacity to reason drastically; it lacks the presence of mind. When confronted with ideas, concepts, or if, the system faces challenges to determine the correct action which needs to be undertaken. It is a demerit to ask GPT-3 basic questions that it cant deal with intelligence.

A related drawback comes from the way that GPT-3 produces its output word-by-word, based on the immediately encompassing text. The outcome is that it can struggle to keep up a rational narrative or convey a meaningful message over a few passages. Compared to humans, who have a steady mental mindset, a perspective that dwells from second to second, from day to dayGPT-3 is amnesiac, constantly straying off confusingly after a couple of sentences.

Keeping the problems aside, GPT-3 has been a major leap in transforming AI by reaching the highest level of human-like intelligence through machine learning. There is no arguing that the GPT-3 has the potential to completely revolutionize the language processing abilities of cognitive systems. The world of AI is constantly evolving and is getting closer to human intelligence day by day. In this scenario, the GPT-3 plays a significant role in understanding human intellect and trying to displace it.

This technology is still in its budding stages and there is a lot of scope for improvement. However, it has surely generated a lot of attention in the industry and it has certainly paved the desire for bigger and better neural networks.

View post:
GPT-3: The Next Revolution in Artificial Intelligence - Analytics Insight