‘Assange Leaks’ put WikiLeaks publisher on opposite side …

A website described as a successor to WikiLeaks published documents on Tuesday it called secret evidence in the U.S. governments case against the others founder, Julian Assange.

The Distributed Denial of Secrets released a collection of more than two dozen documents involving WikiLeaks and its inner workings, including transcripts of online chats and emails.

Among the documents are material referenced in the superseding indictment the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed last month expanding on its Assange case.

With the Justice Departments superseding indictment against Assange, public access to the evidence becomes critical, reads a message posted on the site where they appear.

The documents, released under the name AssangeLeaks are not meant to blow anyones mind, Distributed Denial of Secrets publisher Emma Best said on Twitter.

Its meant to give context for one of the most important cases of the century. If that doesnt interest you or fit your narrative, then Im sorry. The truth doesnt have to be/isnt supposed to be sexy. It only has to be true, they said.

Assange, a 49-year-old Australian, was charged last year with crimes related to having published classified U.S. documents through his WikiLeaks website nearly a decade earlier.

In announcing the superseding indictment filed last month, the Justice Department said it was not bringing any new counts against Assange but was broadening the scope of a conspiracy to commit computer hacking charge he already faced.

Among the documents leaked by Distributed Denial of Secrets are copies of online conversations involving people associated with the Anonymous hacktivist movement. The Justice Department alleged in the latest indictment that Assange and his associates recruited Anonymous to commit computer intrusions that would benefit WikiLeaks.

The material also includes several transcripts of chats involving an individual alleged to be Assange, as well as internal WikiLeaks emails and documents.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorneys Office in Alexandria, Virginia, where Assange faces the charges, declined to comment.

Distributed Denial of Secrets, or DDoS, was launched in 2018 by a former WikiLeaks insider. More recently, the site faced scrutiny last month for releasing a trove of leaked law enforcement documents belonging to various U.S. police agencies. The Associated Press subsequently reported last week that German authorities recently seized a computer server belonging to DDOS at the behest of the FBI.

Read the rest here:

'Assange Leaks' put WikiLeaks publisher on opposite side ...

Is cancel culture silencing open debate? The perils of shutting down disagreeable opinions and arguments – ABC News

Last week, 150 high-profile authors, commentators, and academics signed an open letter in Harpers magazine claiming that open debate and toleration of differences are under attack. Signatories included J.K. Rowling, Margaret Atwood, Stephen Pinker, Gloria Steinem, and Noam Chomsky.

While prefacing their comments with support for current racial and social justice movements, the signatories argue there has been a weakening of the norms of open debate in favour of dogma, coercion, and ideological conformity. They state, an intolerance of opposing views, a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.

Rowlings own participation comes in the wake of widespread backlash against her controversial comments on transgender issues and womanhood. Actor Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter himself) joined the chorus of disapproval over her comments, arguing they erased the identity and dignity of transgender people. Employees at Rowlings publisher subsequently refused to work on her forthcoming book.

The Harpers letter invokes similar cases of what it sees as punitive overreactions to unpopular views, suggesting they formed part of a larger trend:

Editors are fired for running controversial pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on certain topics; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy mistakes.

The reference to editors being fired is perhaps the most well-known recent incident. Last month, the New York Times published an opinion piece by Republican Senator Tom Cotton calling for the military to provide an overwhelming show of force to restore order in US cities during the protests over the killing of George Floyd. The pieces publication attracted immediate criticism for promoting hate and putting black journalists in danger.

In response, the editorial page editor emphasised the newspapers longstanding commitment to open debate and argued the public would be better equipped to push back against the senators policy if it heard his view. This defence failed, and within days he resigned.

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the Harpers letter has received spirited critique. Some commentators noted past cases where the signatories had themselves been censorious. Others argued that any perceived threat was overblown. Indeed, the link the open letter draws between a repressive government and an intolerant society may seem a long bow to draw. There is a world of difference between the legal prohibition of speech and a wave of collective outrage on Twitter.

Yet, it is nevertheless worth considering whether important ethical goods including those commonly invoked in free speech arguments are threatened in a culture of outrage, de-platforming, and cancelling.

Want the best of Religion & Ethics delivered to your mailbox? Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Almost everyone would agree some types of speech are beyond the pale. Racial slurs dont deserve careful listening and consideration. They require calling out, social censure, and efforts at minimising harm.

Rather than objecting to outrage per se, the Harpers letter asserts there is a broadening in the scope of views that attract punitive responses. This seems plausible. In recent scholarly work on the tensions between censorship and academic freedom on university campuses, both sides of the dispute acknowledge that in the current environment virtually all utterances offend someone.

And yet, perhaps there are good reasons for this broadening of scope. In each of the cases raised in the letter, there were seemingly sensible reasons for applying social sanctions. These included judgements that:

For someone who is genuinely concerned that speech is wrong in these ways, it will seem not just morally permissible to take action against the speaker. It will feel obligatory. But several concerns arise when we attach punitive consequences to peoples speech based on its perceived moral wrongfulness (as opposed to simply arguing it is mistaken or false):

If we think a persons view is wrong and immoral, we might suppose there is no great loss about a debate being derailed and the person sanctioned. But there are genuine ethical concerns here.

First, even if we think harmful or offensive speech deserves punishment or silencing, we still need to make sure the punishment fits the crime. For example, in a given case, calling out speech as intolerant, tone deaf or racist, and withdrawing ones support for a person, might be clearly justified. But stronger consequences like personal abuse, continued hounding, doxing, enforcing social ostracism, refusing to work with the speaker (if they are a colleague), demanding their removal from their position, or issuing threats may be quite inappropriate and even wrongfully harmful themselves.

Similarly, once we start moving to the harsher types of punishment, what we might call rule of law considerations become increasingly relevant. These require that norms be clear and proscriptive, and that the process of guilt finding is done impartially and with procedural safeguards. Without attention to such matters, abuse of power can occur, and a chilling and anxiety-ridden climate can ensue. One of the core ethical attractions of cancel culture lies in its ability to create consequences and accountability for wrongdoers. But as we all know, those wielding coercive power and issuing punishments to ensure accountability must themselves be accountable in how they use that power. Otherwise fears of mob rule, arbitrary power, and bullying arise.

Second, public deliberation is itself a critical source of legitimacy. The fact that different views are widely heard and inclusively considered provides a reason for accepting collective decisions. This can happen in a local way, where a family, group or team discusses a matter. Even if they dont resolve their disagreements, a constructive deliberation where everyones views are considered may still help the group move forward consensually. But inclusive deliberation is also important for maintaining the legitimacy of larger institutions. Democracy itself assumes citizens can hear different arguments, evidence, and perspectives. If significant parts of the political spectrum are no longer tolerated in public discourse, then social institutions lose this important type of legitimacy.

Third, listening to others with different opinions, and engaging with them, can help us understand their views and develop more informed versions of our own positions. On the flipside, being consistently outraged by opposing viewpoints provides a ready reason not to consider them. Indeed, we currently have a surfeit of challenges that we can level at a view we dislike by saying it is offensive, harmful, unhelpful, dog-whistling, said in bad faith, driven by ulterior motives, punching down, drowning out other voices or suffers guilt by association. Use of these easily available options can entirely remove the hard work of trying to understand and then to interrogate and perhaps refute our opponents arguments. When used in a pervasive and widespread fashion, such challenges feed directly into major concerns with political tribalism, confirmation bias, group-think, and group polarisation effects.

Fourth, shaming people can cause a persuasive boomerang to occur. When people feel others are trying to control them, they can become even more attached to the view others are trying to combat. Perversely, our actions can encourage the very belief we are trying to eliminate.

None of these concerns categorically rule out attaching punishing consequences to hateful or harmful speech. But they do imply the open letter has a point worth serious attention. Seeing mistaken views as intolerable speech carries genuine ethical costs.

Hugh Breakey is a Senior Research Fellow in moral philosophy at Griffith Universitys Institute for Ethics, Governance and Law. Since 2013, he has served as President of the Australian Association of Professional and Applied Ethics. An abbreviated version of this piece appeared in The Conversation.

Follow this link:

Is cancel culture silencing open debate? The perils of shutting down disagreeable opinions and arguments - ABC News

Global Email Encryption Software Market To Witness Comprehensive Growth by 2027 – Cole of Duty

According to Global Marketers Study, the global market for Email Encryption Software Market is expected to grow at a CAGR of roughly xx% for the next 5 years and will achieve xx million US$ in 2027 from xx million US$ in 2019. This report, in particular, makes a specialty of the Email Encryption Software inside the global market, mainly in North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific, South America, Middle East, and Africa. This Email Encryption Software market data segmented the industry primarily based on manufacturer(price, sales, revenue, and global marketplace percentage), regions, type, and application.

This study offers a 360-degree assessment of the competitive view of the Global Email Encryption Software market. Then, in addition, a part of the studies report examines the size and valuation of the global market within the future forecast period 2020-2027. The report also provides a detailed qualitative and quantitative records help to improve evaluation and affecting the projected effect of these factors on the markets future boom prospects.

Ask Here For The Free Sample PDF Copy Of The Report:https://www.reportspedia.com/report/others/2015-2027-global-email-encryption-software-industry-market-research-report,-segment-by-player,-type,-application,-marketing-channel,-and-region/59774#request_sample

Key highlight Of the Email Encryption Software Industry Research Report:

Industry Upstream and Downstream Analysis

Key Raw Materials Analysis

The proportion of Manufacturing Cost Structure

Manufacturing Process Analysis

Downstream End Users Analysis

Email Encryption Software Industry Chain Analysis

Past 5 Years of historic data and Future 5 Years Forecast Data.

Global Market Share of top key Players

Describes the Email Encryption Software product Scope, market opportunities, market driving force and risks.

Top producer profile analysis, with price, sales, and revenue.

Email Encryption Software Industry Top Manufacturers global market share Analysis for the yr 2018 and 2019.

Email Encryption Software market sales, Revenue, Growth evaluation by means of regions.

Forecast analysis of Email Encryption Software market by regions, application, and type with sales, Revenue from 2020 to 2027

Global Email Encryption Software market Value and Growth Rate from 2015-2027

Ask For Discount: : https://www.reportspedia.com/discount_inquiry/discount/59774

Based on application, type, the worldwide market for Email Encryption Software has been segmented into numerous types. The growing usage of the worldwide market in these applications is anticipated to look proper for the growth of the market in coming years.

Global Email Encryption Software Market Segment by Manufacturers, this file covers

ProofpointEnlockedZixPauboxSendincRMailTrend MicroSymantecHPE SoftwareStartMailVaporstreamVirtruPrivateSkyPKWareMicrosoft ExchangeCisco SystemsDigital Guardian

Global Email Encryption Software Market Segment by using Type, covers

BusinessEnterprisePersonal

Global Email Encryption Software Market Segment by Applications may be divided into

BFSIHealthcareGovernmentRetailIT and TelecomEducationManufacturingOthers

Do you want any other requirement or customize the report, Do Inquiry Here: https://www.reportspedia.com/report/others/2015-2027-global-email-encryption-software-industry-market-research-report,-segment-by-player,-type,-application,-marketing-channel,-and-region/59774#inquiry_before_buying

The assessment of the leading players of the Email Encryption Software industry explained inside the report offer an in-depth evaluation of the market stocks of the companies profiled in this research report. The report blends an analysis of the business enterprise profiles in addition to the enterprise styles for the Email Encryption Software market used transversely over various end-person businesses.

Region-wise, the report segments the market into the United States, Europe, Japan, China, India, and Southeast Asia. The market is possible to witness productive growth in the United States due to the developing adoption of Email Encryption Software within the country.

North America

Europe

China

Japan

Middle East & Africa

India

South America

Rest of the World

In this extensive research report data including the leading manufacturer including of their price, sales, revenue, product portfolio, and global market share, commercial enterprise segmentation, and economic assessment have been included. The updated study report examines the worldwide Email Encryption Software market in a detailed manner by describing the key elements of the market that are expected to have a quantifiable impact on its developmental prospects over the forecast period 2020-2027.

Explore Detailed Table Of Content With Table Of Figures:https://www.reportspedia.com/report/others/2015-2027-global-email-encryption-software-industry-market-research-report,-segment-by-player,-type,-application,-marketing-channel,-and-region/59774#table_of_contents

The rest is here:
Global Email Encryption Software Market To Witness Comprehensive Growth by 2027 - Cole of Duty

Is satire in political cartoons fully protected? Ask the lawyer – The Daily Breeze

Q: This is an election year. I saw a cartoon about Trump that was just plain offensive. Does anything go legally, its all OK?

-D.H., Hawthorne

A: Political speech is a right fundamentally defended by the First Amendment. Unless actual malice can be proven with regard to a depiction, the public figure or politician is fair game. An important case in this regard was decided in 1970 about former Los Angeles Mayor Sam Yorty. He sued the Los Angeles Times and its publisher for a caricature done by the well-known editorial cartoonist Paul Conrad, arguing it represented that Yorty was insane and should be placed in a straight jacket. In denying his claim for libel, the court held that opinions about the fitness of a person for public office are protected even though (the) view are those of a political adversary and are presented in rhetorical hyperbole. In addition, the court held the cartoon was not intended to be a literal depiction, and that reasonable readers would know.

Q: Can a tweet, or an online post, actually lead to a defamation claim?

-K.B., Long Beach

A: Defamation is a publication to a third person, which is not privileged (in other words, subject to some legal protection), that is false and damages a persons reputation. There are two kinds of defamation: Slander, which is oral, and libel, which is written. A post on twitter, or online generally, can rise to the level of defamation for the simple reason it may meet the definition. There is nothing about social media that is all that different from libeling someone in a letter (a writing) that is false and has been sent to one or more others.

This is a well-established procedure in California, which stands for Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. The law is intended to prevent people from using the courts, and potential threats of a lawsuit, to intimidate those who are properly exercising their First Amendment rights. The way it works is if a person is sued, he or she makes a motion to strike the case because it involves speech on a matter of public concern. The plaintiff, or plaintiffs, then has the immediate burden of showing the court a probability he or she will prevail in the suit. This means, often very early on, having to show evidence that a favorable outcome for plaintiff is likely; if the plaintiff cannot do so, thats the end of that claim and the plaintiff may have to pay attorney fees to the other side.

Ron Sokol is a Manhattan Beach attorney with more than 35 years of experience. His column, which appears in print on Wednesdays, presents a summary of the law and should not be construed as legal advice. Email questions and comments to him at RonSEsq@aol.com.

See the article here:

Is satire in political cartoons fully protected? Ask the lawyer - The Daily Breeze

What is the EARN IT Act? The bill that has privacy advocates worried, explained – Digital Trends

A proposed piece of legislation called the EARN IT Act is currently making its way through the Senate, and despite its innocuous name, the bill has drawn criticism from a variety of activist groups who warn that it could have dire consequences for the future of the internet.

To help understand what the act says and how it would affect the web if passed, heres a quick rundown of the most important parts.

The Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act of 2020 (shortened to EARN IT) is a bill sponsored by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) designed to fight child sexual exploitation online.

The bills first step is to establish a National Commission on Online Child Sexual Exploitation Prevention. The commission would consist of three agency heads the attorney general, secretary of Homeland Security, and chairman of the Federal Trade Commission along with 16 other members chosen by the leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The commissions role is to come up with best practices that internet companies should follow in regard to child sexual abuse material online. These best practices could be broad, and thats a problem for free speech and cybersecurity activists, who worry the commission will use its broad scope to target encryption, given that Attorney General William Barr has argued in favor of government backdoors into encrypted files. Graham has criticized encryption as well.

Originally, the bill required internet companies to follow the commissions best practices in order to earn the protections granted by Section 230 of the Federal Communications Act. Section 230 is a crucial law in the development of the internet as we know it, shielding internet companies from liability for content users post on their platforms.

The recently amended bill removes the earn it idea entirely, however. The commissions best practices would now be voluntary, however, states would be able to bring criminal or civil charges against companies that violate them.

Despite the bills stated intent to crack down on child sexual abuse material, activist groups including Human Rights Watch have spoken out against the EARN IT Act. What exactly is the problem?

Critics of the bill focus on a couple issues: That the bill curbs free speech by threatening platforms protection under Section 230, that it wont actually do much to protect children, and that the bill is a stealth attempt at ending end-to-end encryption.

Riana Pfefferkorn, associate director of surveillance and cybersecurity at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, writes that the EARN IT Act is a bait and switch that uses widespread resentment about Section 230 to stage an attack on encryption. Pfefferkorn argues that encryption, particularly end-to-end encryption, is likely to be targeted as being contrary to best practices for preventing [child sexual abuse material], because if a provider cannot see the contents of files on its service due to encryption, it is harder to detect [child sexual abuse material] files.

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) introduced an amendment to the bill specifically to protect encryption, but according to critics, it doesnt go far enough. Pfefferkorn says that Leahys amendment essentially gives providers a defense against liability, which is less strong than the a priori immunity from liability in the first place that Section 230 currently provides.

In a statement for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Joe Mullin said: Sen. Leahys amendment prohibits holding companies liable because they use end-to-end encryption, device encryption, or other encryption services. But the bill still encourages state lawmakers to look for loopholes to undermine end-to-end encryption, such as demanding that messages be scanned on a local device, before they get encrypted and sent along to their recipient.

According to the EFF, all 50 states would be able to craft their own laws, any of them capable of pressuring companies to weaken privacy protections like encryption. In that legal landscape, tech companies could err on the side of caution, gutting privacy protections to avoid running foul of state child sexual abuse material laws.

The American Civil Liberties Union also took a stand against the bill in an open letter to the committee, saying these legal standards could force platforms to undermine or weaken their own encryption and privacy practices in order to avoid legal liability because plaintiffs could argue that end-to-end encryption, itself, is reckless or negligent conduct. Such liability claims could be bolstered if the advisory committees best practices recommend that platforms create encryption backdoors or otherwise take steps to weaken the encryption of their services.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), who has advocated for digital privacy before, criticized the new version of the EARN IT Act, saying that by allowing any individual state to set laws for internet content, this bill will create massive uncertainty, both for strong encryption and free speech online.

After unanimous approval by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the next step for the bill is a debate on the floor of the Senate. Blumenthal told Politico that he and Graham want to see the Senate take up the bill this year, and that the House would be developing its own version of the bill soon.

If you have opinions or concerns about the bill, consider reaching out to your senator or representative.

Read this article:
What is the EARN IT Act? The bill that has privacy advocates worried, explained - Digital Trends

How Palantir and Peter Thiel might lead the biggest tech IPO of the year – Vox.com

In the earlier days of the Covid-19 pandemic, many of the countrys public health departments, still reliant on fax machines, were woefully unprepared for the massive amounts of data they needed to process. Looking for a tidy private sector solution to a messy government problem, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) paid a shadowy Silicon Valley company with ties to the Trump administration to build something new. That company is called Palantir Technologies, and if you dont know much about it, thats by design.

Palantir specializes in data-gathering and analysis, most of which it does for government agencies. It has about $1.5 billion in federal government contracts alone, including, recently, with the Space Force and the Navy. Now, as new Covid-19 case numbers break records daily, Palantir is trying to help organize the information with a new platform called HHS Protect, which will be run by another private company called TeleTracking. This partnership has effectively replaced the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions (CDC) National Healthcare Safety Network, per the Trump administrations orders to hospitals to stop reporting their information to it. HHS Protect, which is not accessible to the general public, is now the only source for this information.

Today, the CDC still has at least a week lag in reporting hospital data, Michael Caputo, assistant secretary of the HHS for public affairs, told the New York Times. America requires it in real time. The new, faster, and complete data system is what our nation needs to defeat the coronavirus.

Palantir, the architect of this complete data system, isnt a household name like its Palo Alto peers, but the 17-year-old company founded by Peter Thiel is one of the most valuable private companies in Silicon Valley. That anonymity is a feature, not a bug: Palantir does most of its work for the government, including national security and intelligence operations. In recent years, headlines about the company have stressed its access to everything about all of us, which privacy advocates have long criticized. Palantirs data-mining software has been credited with killing Osama bin Laden (a claim that has never been confirmed) and blamed for tearing unauthorized immigrant families apart.

Now the notoriously secretive surveillance startup that the White House is entrusting with the nations coronavirus data is about to go public.

Palantir was founded in 2003 by venture capitalist and Paypal co-founder Peter Thiel along with Joe Lonsdale, Stephen Cohen, Nathan Gettings, and Alex Karp, its eccentric CEO who has a law degree and a PhD in neoclassical social theory and keeps 20 identical pairs of swimming goggles in his office. The companys name comes from J.R.R. Tolkiens palantri, which are magical orbs that let their possessors see anything happening in the world at any time. The name fits, too, as Palantirs vision has always been to create software that can mine and analyze large and disparate data sets, putting them all in one place and finding connections between them.

The company came together not long after 9/11, when Palantir was pitched as a tool that could have identified and stopped the hijackers and would prevent similar attacks from happening in the future. Sure enough, by 2011, Bloomberg Businessweek was calling Palantir an indispensable tool employed by the US intelligence community in the war on terrorism. The magazine added, Palantir technology essentially solves the Sept. 11 intelligence problem.

Indeed, the CIA was one of Palantirs earliest investors through its venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel (yes, the CIA has a venture capital arm). It was Palantirs only customer for years as the company refined and improved its technology, according to Forbes. By 2010, Palantirs customers were mostly government agencies, though there were some private companies in the mix. Having managed to quietly work its way toward a $1 billion valuation, it was then one of the most valuable startups in Silicon Valley. By 2015, Palantir was valued at $20 billion.

I think its worth keeping in mind that Palantir sees itself not alongside Uber, Twitter, and Netflix, but alongside Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Booz Allen, said the Intercepts Sam Biddle, who has covered Palantir for years. Palantir wants to be a defense contractor, not a Silicon Valley unicorn.

Palantir has grown into a company with roughly 2,500 employees, most of them engineers who write the software that collects data, and embedded analysts who work on site with Palantirs customers to make sense of it. Company culture has been described as cult-like, big on T-shirts and Care Bears, and more Google than Lockheed. Employees are called Palantirians.

One of Palantirs product demonstrations, as described in Bloomberg Businessweeks 2011 article, presents a fictional example of the softwares capabilities: A terrorist leaves a trail of data across Florida, including one-way plane tickets, condo rentals, bank withdrawals, phone calls to Syria, and security camera footage from Walt Disney World. Taken separately, these details dont add up to much, but Palantirs software ties together thousands of databases across various agencies and helps clients see connections across them. In this case, actions that are innocuous on their own are much more suspicious when combined, and the CIA could identify and stop a terrorists plan to attack a theme park.

Again, that was a hypothetical product demonstration, but Palantirs technology has been credited with saving its financial institution customers hundreds of millions of dollars, being used to detect Chinese spyware on the Dalai Lamas computer, thwarting Pakistani suicide bombers, and unraveling Bernie Madoffs Ponzi scheme. Its customers have included the CDC, police departments in America and abroad, and large corporations like JPMorgan and Home Depot. Palantir even sued the US Army in 2016 to force it to consider using its intelligence software after the Army chose to go with its own. Palantir won the suit, and then it won an $800 million contract.

Despite its high valuation and lucrative contracts, however, Palantir has yet to make a profit.

Palantirs work, the government agencies that contract it, and the relative lack of details about the companys inner workings mean its often seen as secretive, all-knowing, and even malevolent. Seven years after touting Palantirs terrorism-fighting abilities, Bloomberg Businessweek ran a feature on the company with the headline Palantir Knows Everything About You. In a book with the phrase destroying democracy in the title, Robert Scheer called Palantir a monstrous government snoop, mining our most intimate data. The companys software has been criticized for its dragnet ways, pulling in records about millions of innocent people so it can catch a few possible criminals.

Palantirs data-mining software is used to analyze vast amounts of personal data held by the federal government to make determinations that affect peoples lives with little to no oversight, said Jeramie D. Scott, senior counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), which successfully sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to get records on its work with Palantir. Palantir analyzes databases containing telephone numbers, email addresses, financial data, call transaction records, and social media information. ... The documents EPIC obtained showed that ICEs Palantir-based databases could analyze call records and GPS data as well as conduct social network analysis of the information linking different individuals.

The company suffered one of its first rounds of bad press in 2011 when a hacker discovered it was part of a proposal to Bank of America to sabotage Wikileaks. In response, Palantir issued a public apology, created a Council of Advisors on Privacy and Civil Liberties, and suspended but did not fire the engineer responsible.

The post-9/11 world that Palantir was born into in 2003 then changed considerably in 2013 when leaks from Edward Snowden revealed that the National Security Agency used the directive of protecting the country at all costs in order to mass-collect the phone records of millions of Americans, leading to widespread outcry and some reforms. Palantir denied working with the NSA on that particular project but has worked with the agency on others, according to an internal video that was leaked to BuzzFeed News.

Palantirs work with various police departments across the country has also brought renewed scrutiny to the company, especially in light of recent protests against police brutality. Palantirs software powers the Los Angeles Police Departments predictive crime program, called Operation LASER, which tries to identify and target potential criminals for increased surveillance. The program ended in 2019 amid doubts that predictive policing was an effective crime deterrent, as well as criticism from civil rights organizations that it unfairly targeted minority communities. Its hard to get exact numbers on how many police departments Palantir has contracts with, but New Orleanss and New Yorks police departments are known customers, and Palantir boasts on its website of its work with the Salt Lake City Police Department.

Palantir declined Recodes request for comment, but the company has said its technology is built with protections for privacy and civil liberties. While the companys software obviously collects and works with data for its clients, the company says it doesnt collect or use any of that data for itself.

Palantirs less-than-great public image has come with some consequences. In the past few years, nonprofits have dropped Palantir as a corporate sponsor, and students regularly protest Palantir-related campus events and recruiting sessions. In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Karp noted that a small group of protesters regularly assembles outside Palantirs offices, and hes said that his own home is the site of near-daily protests. He has a personal security guard at all times. The Investor Alliance for Human Rights criticized Palantirs work with the government and ICE, saying it was failing to fulfill its human rights responsibilities and noting that its use of personal data came with legal risks and could be in violation of state laws.

That reputation has followed Palantir even as its technology seems to be doing some good during the Covid-19 pandemic. The company is providing its services at almost no cost to the United Kingdoms National Health Service (NHS), but headlines focused on how much patient data the company was getting access to in order to do that work and what it would do with it. The NHS has also provided patient data to other companies, including Microsoft and Amazon.

Stateside, theres HHS Protect another example of Palantirs expansion into how the government collects and manages data and whom it trusts to do it (and, it seems, whom it does not). A spokesperson for HHS told NBC News last month that ICE would not have access to HHS Protect and that all information in it was de-identified anyway. But some politicians have still expressed their concerns about if and how patients personal health information will be protected, and that it wont be shared with other federal agencies. Theyve specifically cited Palantirs work on the project as one of their issues.

Our concerns that HHS Protect could be misused in this way are compounded by the fact that Palantir has a history of contracting with ICE, including two active awards worth over $38 million in total, they said in a June letter to HHS Secretary Alex Azar.

Palantir is also controversial because its co-founder and board chair, Peter Thiel, is controversial. Thiel, who was one of Facebooks first outside investors and maintains a position on its board of directors, has seen his share of criticism over the years, but the libertarian billionaire really came into the public eye in 2016 when he revealed himself as the money behind Hulk Hogans privacy lawsuit against Gawker (which would ultimately kill the site) and an early Trump supporter.

As most of liberal Silicon Valleys big names publicly came out against Trump, Thiel was one of relatively few public figures who supported his candidacy. After speaking at the Republican National Convention, he gave the Trump campaign $1.25 million, and when Trump won the election, New York magazine said he was poised to become a national villain. Thiel has been rewarded for his support: He was chosen to be a member of the presidents transition team; in the early days of the Trump presidency, Politico dubbed Thiel Donald Trumps shadow president in Silicon Valley; and Thiels chief of staff and protg, Michael Kratsios, served as the White Houses chief technology officer from 2017 until this month, when he was named acting undersecretary for research and engineering at the Department of Defense. Thiels Trump support is said to have changed going into the 2020 election, however, and he hasnt donated to Trumps campaign since October 2018.

Due, in part, to Thiels Trump links, the company has faced a new round of scrutiny. Its contract with ICE caused numerous civil rights organizations to blame Palantir for helping the agency find and deport unauthorized immigrants. While other companies were ending their relationships with certain government agencies over purported ethical concerns, Palantir renewed its ICE contract in 2019 despite reported opposition even from its own employees, some of whom left the company over it. Palantirs CEO, on the other hand, has said its not his companys place to decide how its software is used.

For a while, it suited Palantir to paint itself as this lean and mean secretive startup, said Biddle, who used to work at Gawker. Now that theyre established and have clearly weathered popular outrage over their work with ICE and a lifetime association with Peter Thiel, its time to cash in.

Karp famously and repeatedly said that he would never take his company public, believing that staying private gave Palantir an edge its public company competitors didnt have.

The minute companies go public, they are less competitive, Karp said in 2014. You need a lot of creative, wacky people that maybe Wall Street wont understand. They might say the wrong thing all the way through an interview. You really want your people to be focused on solving the problem.

But Karp has seemed more amenable to the idea in the last few years. When Palantir added its first female board member in June, a public filing seemed all but certain according to California law, public companies must have at least one female board member. Palantir filed its initial paperwork with the SEC on July 6 in a confidential filing that allowed it to avoid revealing much about its inner workings to the public. Twitter, Uber, and Spotify, among other startup giants, have done the same thing. Theres no timeline for when the company might actually go public.

Despite Palantirs enormous valuation, the company has reportedly never made a profit and struggled to live up to its hot startup image, as the Wall Street Journal said in 2018. Bloomberg reported last year that Palantirs valuation had plummeted to half, maybe even a quarter, of its 2015 peak, as investors wrote down the value of their holdings and the company offered discounted shares to employees to boost morale. Big corporate clients such as Coca-Cola, American Express, Hershey, Nasdaq, Home Depot, and JPMorgan have dropped the service, as has the NSA, according to BuzzFeed News.

But 2020 has been mostly good to Palantir, if to no one else. The company says its on track to make $1 billion in 2020 and turn a profit for the first time. It has that $800 million contract with the Army and is said to be increasing its corporate customer base with its Foundry product, which requires significantly less time, money, and employees to set up than the companys custom-built solutions. Meanwhile, as evidenced by its recent work with HHS, the pandemic has increased worldwide demand for its software. Investors and employees alike have been itching for a return on their investment for years, and now might be the best time to make their wishes come true.

The market right now is crazy, Ashu Garg, a partner at venture capital firm Foundation Capital, told Recode. Theres a junk rally for tech stocks in the public markets, and most tech stocks are very richly valued without a lot of discrimination around quality.

Going public will mean Palantirs opaque business practices will have to be more transparent, and the company may not be able to simply wave off public outcry over its work as it has in the past. But experts and advocates seem to doubt much will really change on either of those fronts.

Going public might make some additional information public, but it does not guarantee oversight or accountability, Scott said.

Garg doesnt think Palantirs work with agencies like ICE and the resulting bad publicity will be too much of a detriment in the market, given how interwoven that work is and has always been with the companys business model not the case for, say, the Facebooks and Ubers and Zooms of the world.

Palantirs core business, and probably its most profitable business, is its government business especially work for three-letter agencies and the Department of Defense, Garg said. I dont think thats going to change.

What remains to be seen, then, is if Palantirs ability to marry 21st-century Silicon Valley disruption to 20th-century defense contracting will live up to its valuation when it hits the stock market. At a time when Big Tech companies are trying to make their data collection practices more transparent and say theyll give consumers more control over them (and are facing increased pressure from lawmakers to do so), Palantir has been able to keep much of its work with our data secret. A successful IPO will only give it more reasons and opportunities to do so.

Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.

Support Voxs explanatory journalism

Every day at Vox, we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you, and our audience around the world, with information that has the power to save lives. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower you through understanding. Voxs work is reaching more people than ever, but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles, videos, and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today.

More here:
How Palantir and Peter Thiel might lead the biggest tech IPO of the year - Vox.com

Global Cryptocurrency Mining Software Market Projected to Reach USD XX.XX billion by 2024 : Genesis Mining, NiceHash, Awesome Miner, MinerGate,…

This coherent research report is an amalgamation of all relevant data pertaining to historic and current market specific information that systematically decide the future growth prospects of the Global Cryptocurrency Mining Software market. This section of the report further aims to enlighten report readers about the decisive developments and catastrophic implications caused by an unprecedented incident such as the global pandemic that has visibly rendered unparalleled implications across the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market.

This report is well documented to present crucial analytical review affecting the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market amidst COVID-19 outrage. The report is so designed to lend versatile understanding about various market influencers encompassing a thorough barrier analysis as well as an opportunity mapping that together decide the upcoming growth trajectory of the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market. In the light of the lingering C OVID-19 pandemic , this mindfully drafted research offering is in complete sync with the current ongoing market developments as well as challenges that together render tangible influence upon the holistic growth trajectory of the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market.

The study encompasses profiles of major companies operating in the Cryptocurrency Mining Software Market. Key players profiled in the report includes:Genesis MiningNiceHashAwesome MinerMinerGateWinMinerElectroneumBTCMinerHashFlareAIOMinerDroidMinerCudo MinerBitminterCoinImp

Available Sample Report in PDF Version along with Graphs and [emailprotected] https://www.orbismarketreports.com/sample-request/71429?utm_source=puja

The aim of the report is to equip relevant players in deciphering essential cues about the various real-time market based developments, also drawing significant references from historical data, to eventually present a highly effective market forecast and prediction, favoring sustainable stance and impeccable revenue flow despite challenges such as sudden pandemic, interrupted production and disrupted sales channel in the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market.

Access Complete Report @ https://www.orbismarketreports.com/global-cryptocurrency-mining-software-market-growth-status-and-outlook-2019-2024?utm_source=puja

By the product type, the market is primarily split into Desktop-WindowsDesktop-MAC OSMobile-iOSMobile-Android

By the end-users/application, this report covers the following segments Personal UseLarge EnterprisesSMEsOther

Besides presenting a discerning overview of the historical and current market specific developments, inclined to aid a future-ready business decision, this well-compiled research report on the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market also presents vital details on various industry best practices comprising SWOT and PESTEL analysis to adequately locate and maneuver profit scope. Therefore, to enable and influence a flawless market-specific business decision, aligning with the best industry practices, this specific research report on the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market also lends a systematic rundown on vital growth triggering elements comprising market opportunities, persistent market obstacles and challenges, also featuring a comprehensive outlook of various drivers and threats that eventually influence the growth trajectory in the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market.

Global Cryptocurrency Mining Software Geographical Segmentation Includes: North America (U.S., Canada, Mexico) Europe (U.K., France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Central & Eastern Europe, CIS) Asia Pacific (China, Japan, South Korea, ASEAN, India, Rest of Asia Pacific) Latin America (Brazil, Rest of L.A.) Middle East and Africa (Turkey, GCC, Rest of Middle East)

Some Major TOC Points: Chapter 1. Report Overview Chapter 2. Global Growth Trends Chapter 3. Market Share by Key Players Chapter 4. Breakdown Data by Type and Application Chapter 5. Market by End Users/Application Chapter 6. COVID-19 Outbreak: Cryptocurrency Mining Software Industry Impact Chapter 7. Opportunity Analysis in Covid-19 Crisis Chapter 9. Market Driving ForceAnd Many More

Continued

Global Cryptocurrency Mining Software Market Report: Research Methodology

In this latest research publication on the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market, a thorough overview of the current market scenario has been portrayed, in a bid to aid market participants, stakeholders, research analysts, industry veterans and the like to borrow insightful cues from this ready-to-use market research report, thus influencing a definitive business discretion. The report in its subsequent sections also portrays a detailed overview of competition spectrum, profiling leading players and their mindful business decisions, influencing growth in the Cryptocurrency Mining Software market.

Do You Have Any Query or Specific Requirement? Ask Our Industry [emailprotected] https://www.orbismarketreports.com/enquiry-before-buying/71429?utm_source=puja

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

Original post:
Global Cryptocurrency Mining Software Market Projected to Reach USD XX.XX billion by 2024 : Genesis Mining, NiceHash, Awesome Miner, MinerGate,...

Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Overview with Detailed Analysis, Competitive landscape, Forecast – Cole of Duty

Data Bridge Market Research report titledGlobal Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Marketprovides detailed information and overview about the key influential factors required to make well informed business decision. 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. Our data has been culled out by our team of experts who have curated the report, considering market-relevant information. This report provides latest insights about the markets drivers, restraints, opportunities, and trends. It also discusses the growth and trends of various segments and the market in various regions.

Get Free Sample Report + All Related Graphs & Charts of Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Report @https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/request-a-sample/?dbmr=global-artificial-intelligence-in-aviation-market&skp

Our analysts monitoring the situation around the Globe explain that after COVID-19 crisis the market will generate remunerative prospects for producers. The goal of the report is to provide a further illustration of the current scenario, economic slowdown and effect of COVID-19 on the industry as a whole. This is the 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 are covered in the report.

Important Features of the Global Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Report:

1) What all companies are currently profiled in the report?

2) What all regional segmentation covered? Can specific country of interest be added?

Currently, research report gives special attention and focus on following regions:

North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific etc.

** One country of specific interest can be included at no added cost. For inclusion of more regional segment quote may vary.

3) Can inclusion of additional Segmentation / Market breakdown is possible?

Yes, inclusion of additional segmentation / Market breakdown is possible subject to data availability and difficulty of survey. However, a detailed requirement needs to be shared with our research before giving final confirmation to client.

** Depending upon the requirement the deliverable time and quote will vary.

Our analysts drafted the report by gathering information through primary (through surveys and interviews) and secondary (included industry body databases, reputable paid sources, and trade journals) methods of data collection. The report encompasses an exhaustive qualitative and quantitative evaluation.

The study includes growth trends, micro- and macro-economic indicators, and regulations and governmental policies.

Some of the Major Highlights of TOC covers:

Chapter 1: Methodology & Scope

Chapter 2: Executive Summary

Chapter 3: Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Industry Insights

Chapter 4: Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market, By Region

Chapter 5: Company Profile

Get Free Table of Contents with Charts, Figures & Tables @https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/toc/?dbmr=global-artificial-intelligence-in-aviation-market&skp

Region wise analysis of the top producers and consumers, focus on product capacity, production, value, consumption, market share and growth opportunity in below mentioned key regions:

North America U.S., Canada, Mexico

Europe: U.K, France, Italy, Germany, Russia, Spain, etc.

Asia-Pacific China, Japan, India, Southeast Asia etc.

South America Brazil, Argentina, etc.

Middle East & Africa Saudi Arabia, African countries etc.

The subject matter experts analysed various companies to understand the products and/services relevant to the market. The report includes information such as gross revenue, production and consumption, average product price, and market shares of key players. Other factors such as competitive analysis and trends, mergers & acquisitions, and expansion strategies have been included in the report. This will enable the existing competitors and new entrants understand the competitive scenario to plan future strategies.

The Report Provides:

In This Study, The Years Considered to Estimate the Market Size of the Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Are as Follows:

**Moreover, it will also include the opportunities available in micro markets for stakeholders to invest, detailed analysis of competitive landscape and product services of key players.

Important Key Questions Answered in The Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Report:

Thank you for reading this article. You can also get chapter-wise sections or region-wise report coverage for North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Latin America, and Middle East & Africa.

About Data Bridge Market Research:

An absolute way to forecast what future holds is to comprehend the trend today!Data Bridge set forth itself as an unconventional and neoteric Market research and consulting firm with unparalleled level of resilience and integrated approaches. We are determined to unearth the best market opportunities and foster efficient information for your business to thrive in the market.

Contact:

US: +1 888 387 2818

UK: +44 208 089 1725

Hong Kong: +852 8192 7475

[emailprotected]

See the rest here:
Artificial Intelligence In Aviation Market Overview with Detailed Analysis, Competitive landscape, Forecast - Cole of Duty

U.K., U.S. and Canada report Russian cyberspies may be trying to steal vaccine research – Seattle Times

LONDON Hackers linked to a Russian intelligence service are trying to steal information from researchers working to produce coronavirus vaccines in the United States, Britain and Canada, security officials in those countries said Thursday.

The hackers, who belong to a unit known variously as APT29, the Dukes or Cozy Bear, are targeting vaccine research and development organizations in the three countries, the officials said in a joint statement. The unit is one of the two Russian spy groups that penetrated the Democratic Partys computers in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election.

It is completely unacceptable that the Russian intelligence services are targeting those working to combat the coronavirus pandemic, British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said.

The announcement comes as reported coronavirus cases globally have topped 13.5 million, deaths have surpassed the half-million mark, and the stakes for being first to develop a vaccine are high.

Officials did not divulge whether any of the Russian efforts have been successful, but, they said, the intention is clear.

APT29 has a long history of targeting governmental, diplomatic, think tank, health-care and energy organizations for intelligence gain, so we encourage everyone to take this threat seriously and apply the mitigations issued in the advisory, said Anne Neuberger, cybersecurity director for the U.S. National Security Agency.

Moscow has denied the allegations.

We have no information on who could have hacked pharmaceutical companies and research centers in Britain, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told the Tass state news agency. We can only say this: Russia has nothing to do with these attempts.

U.S. officials say a desire for global prestige and influence also is driving nations actions.

Whatever countrys or companys research lab is first to produce that [vaccine] is going to have a significant geopolitical success story, Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers said earlier this year.

Canadas Communications Security Establishment, responsible for gathering foreign signals intelligence and the Canadian equivalent of the NSA, said the attacks serve to hinder response efforts at a time when health-care experts and medical researchers need every available resource to help fight the pandemic.

A CSE bulletin said that a Canadian biopharmaceutical company was breached by a foreign actor in mid-April, almost certainly attempting to steal its intellectual property.

The agency also said in May that it was investigating possible security breaches at Canadian organizations working on coronavirus-related research, but did not indicate whether the alleged breaches were state-sponsored.

Weve seen some compromises in research organizations that weve been helping to mitigate, Scott Jones, head of the CSEs Cyber Center, told a parliamentary committee. Were still continuing to look through whats the root cause of those.

The joint announcement comes two months after the FBI and Department of Homeland Security warned that China was also targeting covid-19 research, and that health-care, pharmaceutical and research labs should take steps to protect their systems.

Its not unusual to see cyber activity traced to China soon after a pharmaceutical company or research institution makes an announcement about promising vaccine research, FBI Director Christopher A. Wray said last week. Its sometimes almost the next day.

Attorney General William P. Barr said Thursday that Beijing, desperate for a public relations coup, is perhaps hoping to claim credit for any medical breakthroughs.

The biggest thing to keep in mind is Russias not alone, said John Hultquist, director of intelligence analysis for the cybersecurity firm FireEye. Weve seen Iranian and Chinese actors targeting pharmaceutical companies and research organizations involved in the covid-19 response. This is an existential threat to almost every government on Earth and we can expect that tremendous resources have been diverted from other tasks to focus on this virus.

U.S. officials say Russian government hackers have penetrated energy and nuclear company business networks

The Russian hacker group scanned computer IP addresses owned by the organizations and then deployed malware to try to gain access, officials with Britains National Cyber Security Centre said. In some cases, the hackers used custom malware known as WellMess and WellMail to conduct further operations on a victims system, British officials said.

Paul Chichester, director of operations at the NCSC, said in a statement that APT29 launched despicable attacks against those doing vital work to combat the coronavirus pandemic.

The World Health Organization reports that of the more than 160 vaccines being developed, 23 have begun clinical trials in humans including top candidates being developed by academics, national laboratories and pharmaceutical companies in Britain, Canada and the United States.

Russia is developing 26 vaccines, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova said Wednesday, but only two are undergoing clinical trials. A month-long trial on 38 people for one of the vaccines concluded this week. Kirill Dmitriev, head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, the countrys sovereign wealth fund, told reporters that a larger trial with several thousand people is expected to begin in August.

We will produce 30 million doses of the vaccine in Russia, or 50 million if necessary, which means that Russia may complete vaccinations early next year, Dmitriev said.

Alongside their legitimate efforts, the Russians are probably cheating, Western analysts say.

I have absolutely no doubt that if there was the slightest probability of stealing it, the Russians would do it, said Jonathan Eyal, international director at the Royal United Services Institute, a London-based think tank.

Mr. Putin has not had a good pandemic, Eyal said. He has devolved the handling of it to regional governments to try and escape responsibility. Hes nowhere to be seen. The figures about the numbers who have died are clearly manipulated.

The Russian hacking group APT29 is well known to cyber experts. U.S. intelligence officials say it is part of the SVR, Russias foreign intelligence service. That outfit hacked the White House and State Department email systems in 2014. It also infiltrated the Democratic National Committee servers in summer 2015, many months before the Russian military spy agency GRU did, investigators said.

The GRU funneled hacked emails to the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks, which released them online, in an attempt to sow discord in the party. The SVR, by contrast, hacked the partys servers apparently for classic espionage purposes to glean insights into the plans and policies of the potential next U.S. president.

They quietly steal information from their targets, and if you are hit by this actor, you may never know it, Hultquist said. Were talking about an intelligence collection operation where Russia quietly leverages the research of others to advance their own.

How the Russians hacked the DNC and passed its emails to WikiLeaks

Britains Raab also told a parliamentary intelligence committee Thursday that Russian actors sought to interfere in the United Kingdoms 2019 general election by acquiring unpublished documents used in trade talks between the U.S. and Britain, and then leaking the material via social media.

Sensitive government documents relating to the U.K.-U.S. Free Trade Agreement were illicitly acquired before the 2019 General Election and disseminated online via the social media platform Reddit, Raab said in a written statement to Parliament.

The foreign secretary added, It is almost certain that Russian actors sought to interfere in the 2019 General Election through the online amplification of illicitly acquired and leaked Government documents.

Moscow called the charges of election interference unfounded.

The British administration is making the same anti-Russian mistake again and thus not only further undermining bilateral relations with Moscow, but also its own authority, Leonid Slutsky, head of the Russian State Dumas foreign affairs committee, told reporters Thursday, according to the Interfax news agency.

Raab is using the phrase highly likely again, Slutsky said. That is, a criminal case is again being initiated on the basis of highly likely, in the absence of specific evidence, which the head of the Foreign Office admits. What happened to the presumption of innocence? Where is the evidence?

After the trade documents emerged online, they were used during the December 2019 election by the opposition Labour Party and its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who accused Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Conservative Party of preparing to sell off precious access to the National Health Service to U.S. companies.

The charges were a hot-button issue at the time but did not change the outcome: Johnson won the election in a landslide.

A much-delayed report into allegations of wider Russian interference in Britains democracy is due next week.

Booth reported from London and Coletta from Toronto. The Washington Posts Isabelle Khurshudyan in Moscow, Karla Adam in London and Adam Taylor in Washington contributed to this report.

Read the original here:

U.K., U.S. and Canada report Russian cyberspies may be trying to steal vaccine research - Seattle Times

$6M Worth of Tether on the Bitcoin Cash Chain Highlights the Benefits of SLP Tokens | Technology Bitcoin News – Bitcoin News

During the first week of July, crypto supporters noticed that Tether issued 1,010 stablecoins via the Simple Ledger Protocol (SLP) framework on Bitcoin Cash. Now theres a much larger amount of SLP-based tethers in circulation as the company has minted a total of 6 million on the Bitcoin Cash blockchain.

Digital currency enthusiasts have been watching the Tether project grow for years now and to-date the firm has $9.8 billion in total liabilities according to the companys transparency page. The USDT stablecoin is spread across various blockchains including Ethereum, Tron, Algorand, and EOS. Just recently, USDT was migrated onto the Bitcoin Cash blockchain by leveraging the Simple Ledger Protocol.

Bitcoin Cash supporters are now aware that there are over 6 million SLP-based USDT in circulation today. Data stemming from simpleledger.info and a BCH blockchain explorer shows that SLP-based tethers are circulating quite frequently. A number of BCH supporters have been discussing the benefits of SLP-based stablecoins and the Cointext CTO, Vin Armani, discussed the subject on July 11.

Armani tweeted a link from news.Bitcoin.com, which reported on millions of dollars worth of USDT stablecoins frozen in 40 addresses. You cant stop me from using a Bitcoin address for which I have the key(s). Theres no freeze address function on Bitcoin, as has been added to these Ethereum stablecoin contracts, Armani said. The Cointext founder further stated:

USDT is now available as *uncensorable* SLP tokens on BCH.

In addition to the permissionless benefits the Bitcoin Cash chain offers, the network fees needed to interact with SLP-based USDT on the BCH chain is quite minimal. A typical fee on the BCH network is only $0.003 per transaction or a third of a U.S. penny. Just recently, members of the Reddit forum r/cryptocurrency discussed how interacting with ERC20s on the Ethereum chain was quite costly. The author of the original post shared a gas fee which was $16 and said and you guys were complaining about high BTC fees WTF!? One commenter responding to the post wrote:

Sending transactions on ETH is still cheap. Interacting with smart contracts is another story

Another concept that stems from the mind of Vin Armani could essentially do away with the already inexpensive gas fees needed to push SLP-based transactions. For instance, the crypto community could leverage the Simple Ledger Postage Protocol Armani invoked in November 2019. The Postage Protocol allows SLP-based tokens to be sent without using fees (generally known as gas) to complete transactions.

In essence, the Postage Protocol allows users to pay for their miner fees using the SLP token itself, Armani explained last year. This is accomplished through the use of an intermediary server called a post office. The user sends the post office the requisite value of the needed BCH as an additional output in a transaction. Upon receiving and validating the otherwise invalid transaction, the post office attaches additional input containing native BCH (stamps) and then broadcasts the postage paid (valid) transaction to the network.

The fact of the matter is, stablecoins and any types of tokens like non-fungible assets are much cheaper to send via the Bitcoin Cash chain. Many BCH supporters believe that in time, the market will realize this fact and migrate and build token infrastructure using the Simple Ledger Protocol. Besides being cheaper, SLP-based tokens are also permissionless and anyone from anywhere around the world can have full control over their tokens if they possess the private key(s).

What do you think about the $6 million worth of tether on the Bitcoin Cash chain? Let us know what you think about this subject 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.

View original post here:
$6M Worth of Tether on the Bitcoin Cash Chain Highlights the Benefits of SLP Tokens | Technology Bitcoin News - Bitcoin News