The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Category Archives: Transhuman News
Drug Helps Fight Breast Tumors Tied to ‘Cancer Genes’ – Sioux City Journal
Posted: June 6, 2017 at 5:43 am
SUNDAY, June 4, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- A twice-daily pill could help some advanced breast cancer patients avoid or delay follow-up sessions of chemotherapy, a new clinical trial reports.
The drug olaparib (Lynparza) reduced the chances of cancer progression by about 42 percent in women with breast cancer linked to BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations, according to the study.
Olaparib delayed cancer progression by about three months. The drug also caused tumors to shrink in three out of five patients who received the medication, the researchers reported.
"Clearly the drug was more effective than traditional chemotherapy," said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society.
"This is a group where a response is more difficult to obtain -- a young group with a more aggressive form of cancer -- and nonetheless we saw a close to 60 percent objective response rate," he said.
The study was funded by AstraZeneca, the maker of Lynparza.
Olaparib works by cutting off the avenues that malignant cancer cells use to stay alive, said lead researcher Dr. Mark Robson. He's a medical oncologist and clinic director of Clinical Genetics Service at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City.
The drug inhibits PARP, an enzyme that helps cells repair damaged DNA, Robson said.
Normal cells denied access to PARP will turn to the BRCA genes for help, since they also support the repair of damaged DNA, Robson said.
But that "backup capability" is not available to breast cancer cells in women with BRCA gene mutations, Robson said.
"When you inhibit PARP, the cell can't rescue itself," Robson said. "In theory, you should have a very targeted approach, one specifically directed at the cancers in people who have this particular inherited predisposition."
Olaparib already has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in women with BRCA-related ovarian cancer. Robson and his colleagues figured that it also should be helpful in treating women with breast cancer linked to this genetic mutation.
The study included 302 patients who had breast cancer that had spread to other areas of their body (metastatic breast cancer). All of the women had an inherited BRCA mutation.
They were randomly assigned to either take olaparib twice a day or receive standard chemotherapy. All of the patients had received as many as two prior rounds of chemotherapy for their breast cancer. Women who had hormone receptor-positive cancer also had been given hormone therapy.
After 14 months of treatment, on average, people taking olaparib had a 42 percent lower risk of having their cancer progress compared with those who received another round of chemotherapy, Robson said.
The average time of cancer progression was about seven months with olaparib compared with 4.2 months with chemotherapy.
Tumors also shrank in about 60 percent of patients given olaparib. That compared with a 29 percent reduction for those on chemotherapy, the researchers said.
Severe side effects also were less common with olaparib. The drug's side effects bothered 37 percent of patients compared with half of those on chemo. The drug's most common side effects were nausea and anemia.
"There were fewer patients who discontinued treatment because of toxicity compared to those who received chemotherapy," Robson said. "Generally it was pretty well tolerated."
Only about 3 percent of breast cancers occur in people with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations, the researchers said in background notes.
Despite this, the results are "quite exciting," said Dr. Julie Fasano, an assistant professor of hematology and medical oncology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.
Olaparib could wind up being used early in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer as an alternative to chemotherapy, and future studies might find that the drug is effective against other forms of breast cancer, Fasano said.
"It may be a practice-changing study, in terms of being able to postpone IV chemotherapy and its associated side effects" like hair loss and low white blood cell counts, Fasano said.
Lichtenfeld noted that olaparib also places less burden on patients.
"It may be easier for women to take two pills a day rather than go in for regular chemotherapy," Lichtenfeld said. "Clearly, this is a treatment that will garner considerable interest.
The findings were scheduled to be presented Sunday at the American Society of Clinical Oncology's annual meeting, in Chicago. The study was also published June 4 in the New England Journal of Medicine.
More here:
Drug Helps Fight Breast Tumors Tied to 'Cancer Genes' - Sioux City Journal
Posted in Gene Medicine
Comments Off on Drug Helps Fight Breast Tumors Tied to ‘Cancer Genes’ – Sioux City Journal
IT’S A START: Newly approved gene therapy may help 4 percent of cancer patients – Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Posted: at 5:43 am
By Laurie McginleyThe Washington Post
The oncologist was blunt: Stefanie Joho's colon cancer was raging out of control and there was nothing more she could do. Flanked by her parents and sister, the 23-year-old felt something wet on her shoulder. She looked up to see her father weeping.
"I felt dead inside, utterly demoralized, ready to be done," Joho remembers.
But her younger sister couldn't accept that. When the family got back to Joho's apartment in New York's Flatiron district, Jess opened her laptop and began searching frantically for clinical trials, using medical words she'd heard but not fully understood. An hour later, she came into her sister's room and showed her what she'd found.
"I'm not letting you give up," she told Stefanie. "This is not the end."
That search led to a contact at Johns Hopkins University, and a few days later, Joho got a call from a cancer geneticist co-leading a study there.
"Get down here as fast as you can!" Luis Diaz said. "We are having tremendous success with patients like you."
What followed is an illuminating tale of how one woman's intersection with experimental research helped open a new frontier in cancer treatment with approval of a drug that, for the first time, targets a genetic feature in a tumor rather than the disease's location in the body.
The breakthrough, now made official by the Food and Drug Administration, immediately could benefit some patients with certain kinds of advanced cancer that aren't responding to chemotherapy. Each should be tested for that genetic signature, scientists stress.
"These are people facing death sentences," said Hopkins geneticist Bert Vogelstein. "This treatment might keep some of them in remission for a long time."
A pivotal small trial
In August 2014, Joho stumbled into Hopkins for her first infusion of the immunotherapy drug Keytruda. She was in agony from a malignant mass in her midsection, and even with the copious amounts of OxyContin she was swallowing, she needed a new fentanyl patch on her arm every 48 hours. Yet within just days, the excruciating back pain had eased. Then an unfamiliar sensation hunger returned. She burst into tears when she realized what it was.
As months went by, her tumor shrank and ultimately disappeared. She stopped treatment this past August, free from all signs of disease.
The small trial in Baltimore was pivotal, and not only for the young marketing professional. It showed that immunotherapy could attack colon and other cancers thought to be unstoppable. The key was their tumors' genetic defect, known as mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency akin to a missing spell-check on their DNA. As the DNA copies itself, the abnormality prevents any errors from being fixed. In the cancer cells, that means huge numbers of mutations that are good targets for immunotherapy.
The treatment approach isn't a panacea, however. The glitch under scrutiny which can arise spontaneously or be inherited is found in just 4 percent of cancers overall. But bore in on a few specific types, and the scenario changes dramatically. The problem occurs in up to 20 percent of colon cancers and about 40 percent of endometrial malignancies cancer in the lining of the uterus.
In the United States, researchers estimate that initially about 15,000 people with this defect may be helped by this immunotherapy. That number is likely to rise sharply as doctors begin using it earlier on eligible patients.
Joho was among the first.
Even before Joho got sick, cancer had cast a long shadow on her family. Her mother has Lynch syndrome, a hereditary disorder that sharply raises the risk of certain cancers, and since 2003, Priscilla Joho has suffered colon cancer, uterine cancer and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin.
Stefanie's older sister, Vanessa, had already tested positive for Lynch syndrome, and Stefanie planned to get tested when she turned 25. But at 22, several months after she graduated from New York University, she began feeling unusually tired. She blamed the fatigue on her demanding job. Her primary-care physician, aware of her mother's medical history, ordered a colonoscopy.
When Joho woke up from the procedure, the gastroenterologist looked "like a ghost," she said. A subsequent CT scan revealed a very large tumor in her colon. She'd definitely inherited Lynch syndrome.
She underwent surgery in January 2013 at Philadelphia's Fox Chase Cancer Center, where her mother had been treated. The news was good: The cancer didn't appear to have spread, so she could skip chemotherapy and follow up with scans every three months.
By August of that year, though, Joho started having relentless back pain. Tests detected the invasive tumor in her abdomen. Another operation, and now she started chemo. Once again, in spring 2014, the cancer roared back. Her doctors in New York, where she now was living, switched to a more aggressive chemo regimen.
"This thing is going to kill me," Joho remembered thinking. "It was eating me alive."
Genetics meets immunology
Joho began planning to move to her parents' home in suburban Philadelphia: "I thought, 'I'm dying, and I'd like to breathe fresh air and be around the green and the trees.' "
Her younger sister wasn't ready for her to give up. Jess searched for clinical trials, typing in "immunotherapy" and other terms she'd heard the doctors use. Up popped a trial at Hopkins, where doctors were testing a drug called pembrolizumab.
"Pembro" is part of a class of new medications called checkpoint inhibitors that disable the brakes that keep the immune system from attacking tumors. In September 2014, the treatment was approved by the FDA for advanced melanoma and marketed as Keytruda. The medication made headlines in 2015 when it helped treat former President Jimmy Carter for melanoma that had spread to his brain and liver. It later was cleared for several other malignancies.
Yet researchers still don't know why immunotherapy, once hailed as a game changer, works in only a minority of patients. Figuring that out is important for clinical as well as financial reasons. Keytruda, for example, costs about $150,000 a year.
By the time Joho arrived at Hopkins, the trial had been underway for a year. While an earlier study had shown a similar immunotherapy drug to be effective for a significant proportion of patients with advanced melanoma or lung or kidney cancer, checkpoint inhibitors weren't making headway with colon cancer. A single patient out of 20 had responded in a couple of trials.
Why did some tumors shrink while others didn't? What was different about the single colon cancer patient who benefited? Drew Pardoll, director of the Bloomberg-Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at Hopkins, and top researcher Suzanne Topalian took the unusual step of consulting with the cancer geneticists who worked one floor up.
"This was the first date in what became the marriage of cancer genetics and cancer immunology," Pardoll said.
In a brainstorming session, the geneticists were quick to offer their theories. They suggested that the melanoma and lung cancer patients had done best because those cancers have lots of mutations, a consequence of exposure to sunlight and cigarette smoke. The mutations produce proteins recognized by the immune system as foreign and ripe for attack, and the drug boosts the system's response.
And that one colon-cancer patient? As Vogelstein recalls, "We all said in unison, 'He must have MMR deficiency!' " because such a genetic glitch would spawn even more mutations.
When the patient's tumor tissue was tested, it was indeed positive for the defect.
The researchers decided to run a small trial, led by Hopkins immunologist Dung Le and geneticist Diaz, to determine whether the defect could predict a patient's response to immunotherapy. The pharmaceutical company Merck provided its still-experimental drug pembrolizumab. Three groups of volunteers were recruited: 10 colon cancer patients whose tumors had the genetic problem; 18 colon cancer patients without it; and 7 patients with other malignancies with the defect.
The first results, published in 2015 in the New England Journal of Medicine, were striking. Four out of the 10 colon cancer patients with the defect and 5 out of the other 7 cancer patients with the abnormality responded to the drug. In the remaining group, nothing. Since then, updated numbers have reinforced that a high proportion of patients with the genetic feature benefit from the drug, often for a lengthy period. Other trials by pharmaceutical companies have shown similar results.
The Hopkins investigators found that tumors with the defect had, on average, 1,700 mutations, compared with only 70 for tumors without the problem. That confirmed the theory that high numbers of mutations make it more likely the immune system will recognize and attack cancer if it gets assistance from immunotherapy.
For Joho, now 27 and living in suburban Philadelphia, the hard lesson from the past few years is clear: The cancer field is changing so rapidly that patients can't rely on their doctors to find them the best treatments.
"Oncologists can barely keep up," she said. "My sister found a trial I was a perfect candidate for, and my doctors didn't even know it existed."
Her first several weeks on the trial were rough, and she still has some lasting side effects today joint pain in her knees, minor nausea and fatigue.
"I have had to adapt to some new limits," she acknowledged. "But I still feel better than I have in five years."
See the original post here:
IT'S A START: Newly approved gene therapy may help 4 percent of cancer patients - Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Posted in Gene Medicine
Comments Off on IT’S A START: Newly approved gene therapy may help 4 percent of cancer patients – Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Home Science Research Scientist Discovered a Catfish Gene, When activated in a Rodent Brain, Can… – TrendinTech
Posted: at 5:43 am
Scientist in Baltimore has discovered a catfish gene that, when activated in a rodent brain, can sense electromagnetic fields. There are numerous animals, throughout all types and species, expect humans (supposedly), that can sense the feeble network of Earths electromagnetic global field. The glass catfish is one of those animals and Galit Pelled, the lead researcher and associate professor at John Hopkins University School of Medicine and Kennedy Kreiger Institute, plus his team are hoping its electromagnetic perceptive gene (EPG) will one day be used to manipulate heart and brain cells. This non-evasive wireless technique of controlling human cells could replace pacemakers, treat epilepsy, or even help create an interface between the human brain and a machine.
Previously, researchers discovered similar genes in bacteria and birds but those created a chemical compound responsible for sensing the magnetic fields. This recent discovery, which was presented by Pelled at the 2017 International IEEE EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, is different since the gene works alone for function and is, therefore, simpler to manipulate.
By injecting different strands of the catfish gene into frog eggs, Pelled and his lab mates were eventually able to discover which eggs responded to magnets and which bits of DNA were responsible for the electromagnetic perception.
While Assaf Gilad, co-author of the study and an associate professor of radiology at Johns Hopkins Medicine, says We dont know exactly what the protein is doing, they do know the end result. The responsible protein adheres to a cell surface and then the cell is filled with calcium. In heart cells and neurons, a sudden flush of calcium turns the cell on, so it begins to beat or fire. By expressing the genes in a group of brain cells, and later, a living rat brain, the team of researchers could activate the neural cells with only an electromagnetic field and no other devices.
Currently, doctors are able to treat conditions such as epilepsy and depression, ailments related to misfiring neurons, using invasive deep brain stimulation. Gilad hopes that with EPGs, delivered by gene therapy or transplants, these illnesses could be eased through wireless manipulation instead. Similarly, electromagnetic genes have the likelihood to be useful for heart conditions too, replacing traditional pacemakers with a biological one made EPGs. The ability to remotely control neuronal activity is big, says Gilad. But its still in the early, experimental stages.
At the moment, researchers have only identified one part of the glass catfishs electromagnetic sensing abilities and their current focus is understanding the system in general with immediate medical applications as their goal.
More News to Read
comments
Read the original post:
Home Science Research Scientist Discovered a Catfish Gene, When activated in a Rodent Brain, Can... - TrendinTech
Posted in Gene Medicine
Comments Off on Home Science Research Scientist Discovered a Catfish Gene, When activated in a Rodent Brain, Can… – TrendinTech
Trump’s travel tweets do not hurt the legal case for his executive orders – Washington Post
Posted: at 5:43 am
A fairly bizarre series of tweets by President Trump criticizing the Justice Department for its handling of his executive orders on visas has lead most observers to conclude that he has cemented the constitutional challenge to his own policies, blown up the governments case and confirmed his own bigotry.
But reading the actual tweets reveals absolutely none of this: To the contrary, they may actually buttress the governments defense of the travel restrictions in the Supreme Court. Certainly any reading of them as confirming a Muslim ban policy reads them through the same presumption of animus that informed the lower court readings of his campaign statements. However, animus is the thing to be proven and it cannot be found in these tweets.
Trumps tweets were certainly Trumpian in tone, and the criticism of his own Justice Department for submitting an executive order he signed does not make him look good. But there is nothing in these tweets that should weaken the Solicitor Generals case before the Supreme Court, or that supports the view that the policies were unconstitutional because of an impermissible motive on the presidents part.
First, he says that the measure is a travel ban. That seems both obvious and uncompromising. Not issuing visas, capping refugee quotas and suspending travel by some foreigners obviously bans travel by those falling with the scope of the measure. But that is not remarkable; President Barack Obama did it too. The ACLU has tried to equate travel ban with Muslim ban but obviously that is not what the tweet says, or even hints at.
Next, he says that the new executive order is watered down and politically incorrect. This is all merely descriptive. The second measure is less broad and more limited than the first executive order; that is a fact. The first orderwas watered down to respond to judicial and political opposition. They took something and made it less strong. That can also make it quite different, from a legal perspective.
Commentators are reacting as if Trump said that the revised versionis a watered down Muslim ban. He did not. He said it is a watered down version of the first order, which everyone already knew.
Nor is it a constitutional offense to be politically incorrect. The first order was clearly politically incorrect, in the sense that it contradicted established pieties, as demonstrated by the reaction to it. But if the courts conclude that political incorrectness constitutes a violation of the equal protection clause, they will be taking an even more unprecedented leap than when they held the executive orders unconstitutional because they were issued by Trump.
Finally, the tweets may actually bolster the governments legal case (rather than purposefully undermine it, as Jack Goldsmith suggested). The tweets imply that Trump had little or no role in the drafting of the current executive order the Justice Departmentis responsible. If we accept that, then any animus that may infect him would not attach to the order of which he is not the author, unless one is to say the administration is generally disabled from carrying out non-permissive immigration policies with respect to a quarter of the worlds nations. And if one does not take his statement that the Justice Department is responsible for the order to mean the most it can mean, how can one read his campaign statements for their maximal, and worst, possible meaning?
Original post:
Trump's travel tweets do not hurt the legal case for his executive orders - Washington Post
Posted in Politically Incorrect
Comments Off on Trump’s travel tweets do not hurt the legal case for his executive orders – Washington Post
How Will Emmy Voters React to Bill Maher’s Racial Slur Gaffe? – Variety
Posted: at 5:43 am
Bill Maher has long been the Susan Lucci of the Emmys variety series category: His ABC platform Politically Incorrect landed eight straight nominations in the 1990s, while HBOs Real Time with Bill Maher has enjoyed a 10-year streak. But hes never won.
Meanwhile, the variety landscape has become even more cluttered, so much so that the TV Academy split it into two fields: talk and sketch. The talk category is as bustling as ever, so the last thing anyone looking to land a nomination needs is a faux pas like the one Maher unleashed on last weeks episode of Real Time.
Speaking with Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, Maher quipped, Im a house n, in response to Sasse playfully suggesting the host come work in his states fields. In the wake of Kathy Griffins controversial photo stunt last week, reaction to Mahers remark was swift. HBO released a statement calling the hosts use of the racial slur completely inexcusable and tasteless, and Maher himself later apologized as well. Meanwhile, at least one prominent frequent guest, Al Franken, has backed out of an upcoming appearance.
Maher has supporters in the controversy, including other frequent guests like rapper Killer Mike and Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson. Many, however, are calling for his dismissal from the cable network. And Hollywood will have a chance to respond as well, as Emmy ballots are set to go out to TV Academy voters next week.
Awards may not seem to matter here, but in the bigger systemic picture, which affords someone like Maher the kind of privilege that allows him to think he could have gotten away with what he said to begin with, they do have an impact. The #OscarsSoWhite movement was about representation, for example. You cannot underestimate what Moonlights best picture victory, sullied as it was in the moment, meant for under-served voices. Choices made by these organizations are being scrutinized more than ever, so with Emmy season in full swing, the timing could not be worse.
Of course, the 61-year-old Maher has been in hot water before. Politically Incorrect was canceled in 2002 largely due to controversial remarks he made on the show within a week of 9/11. We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away, Maher said at the time. Thats cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building, say what you want about it not cowardly. Major brands pulled advertising from the show and soon enough, Sinclair Broadcast Group dropped Politically Incorrect from its ABC-affiliated stations.
But Real Time has been a haven from that kind of disruption. HBO has provided a much less restrictive platform for Maher, so its not entirely surprising that he would eventually stick his foot in his mouth to this degree. He and his shows format have obviously done a lot of good in the socio-political discourse, but many have picked up that ball and run with it, whether Comedy Centrals The Daily Show (which trumped Real Time at the Emmys for most of its run) or TBS Full Frontal with Samantha Bee or HBOs own Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, the reigning champ in the category.
So Emmy voters, already facing a wealth of choices, will simply have to ask themselves whether Fridays gaffe was a disqualifying moment. Should Real Time be excluded as a statement about what is and is not acceptable, or should its ongoing legacy and content otherwise be the driving force of consideration?
See more here:
How Will Emmy Voters React to Bill Maher's Racial Slur Gaffe? - Variety
Posted in Politically Incorrect
Comments Off on How Will Emmy Voters React to Bill Maher’s Racial Slur Gaffe? – Variety
Theresa May’s Call for Internet Censorship Isn’t Limited to Fighting Terrorism – Reason (blog)
Posted: at 5:43 am
Andy Rain/EPA/NewscomYou'd think Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg himself was the driver of the van that plowed into pedestrians on London Bridge Saturday, the way U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May is talking about the attack. He isn't, but everybody across the world, not just in the United Kingdom, needs to pay close attention to how May wants to respond to the assault.
May believes the problem is you and your silly insistence that you be permitted to speak your mind and to look at whatever you want on the internet. And she means to stop you. And her attitude toward government control of internet speech is shared by President Donald Trump (and Hillary Clinton), so what she's trying to sell isn't isolated to her own citizenry.
In a speech in the wake of this weekend's attack, May called flat-out for government authority to censor and control what people can see and access on the internet:
We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breedyet that is precisely what the internet, and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide. We need to work with allied democratic governments to reach international agreements to regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning.
Note that May appears to be trying to narrowly pitch a regulatory regime that focuses entirely on censoring speech by terrorists. One might argue that even America's First Amendment would not protect such speech, since such communications involve planning violence against others.
But May and the Tories really want to propose much broader censorship of the internet, and they know it. May is using fear of terrorism to sell government control over private online speech. The Tories' manifesto for the upcoming election makes it pretty clear they're looking to control communication on the internet in ways that have absolutely nothing to do with fighting terrorism. BuzzFeed took note:
The proposalsdotted around the manifesto documentare varied. There are many measures designed to make it easier to do business online but it's a different, more social conservative approach when it comes to social networks.
Legislation would be introduced to protect the public from abuse and offensive material online, while everyone would have the right to wipe material that was posted when they were under 18. Internet companies would also be asked to help promote counter-extremism narrativespotentially echoing the government's Prevent programme. There would be new rules requiring companies to make it ever harder for people to access pornography and violent images, with all content creators forced to justify their policies to the government.
The manifesto doesn't seem to acknowledge a difference between speech and activity, Buzzfeed adds:
"It should be as unacceptable to bully online as it is in the playground, as difficult to groom a young child on the internet as it is in a community, as hard for children to access violent and degrading pornography online as it is in the high street, and as difficult to commit a crime digitally as it is physically."
New laws will be introduced to implement these rules, forcing internet companies such as Facebook to abide by the rulings of a regulator or face sanctions: "We will introduce a sanctions regime to ensure compliance, giving regulators the ability to fine or prosecute those companies that fail in their legal duties, and to order the removal of content where it clearly breaches UK law."
The United Kingdom already has some very heavy content-based censorship of pornography that presumes to police what sorts of sexual fantasies are acceptable among its populace. Reason's Elizabeth Nolan Brown has written repeatedly about the British government's nannying tendencies in trying suppress pornography.
In a manner similar to this censorship push, May and the British government sold the Investigatory Powers Actalso known as the Snooper's Charterto the public as a mechanism to fight terrorism. But the massive legislation, now in place as law, actually demands that internet companies store users' online data to investigate all sorts of activities that have nothing to do with terrorism at all.
The European Union is also hammering out regulations that would require social media companies to censor their services. But the E.U. plan is currently much more limited than what the ruling party in the U.K. is demanding. The European Union wants to force companies only to delete videos that contain hate speech or incitements to violence.
So be warned: This isn't even a slippery-slope risk that a government that claims the authority to censor terrorist communications might broaden that scope to other areas. May and her government already want those broader powers. They're just using the fear of terrorism to sell the idea.
More:
Theresa May's Call for Internet Censorship Isn't Limited to Fighting Terrorism - Reason (blog)
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on Theresa May’s Call for Internet Censorship Isn’t Limited to Fighting Terrorism – Reason (blog)
Viewpoint: Censorship at the library | Evanston Now – Evanston Now
Posted: at 5:43 am
Evanston Now | Viewpoint: Censorship at the library | Evanston Now Evanston Now On Friday June 2, the Evanston Public Library held a hearing that may lead to the firing of librarian Lesley Williams this week. Her alleged crime? Posting a ... |
See the original post:
Viewpoint: Censorship at the library | Evanston Now - Evanston Now
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on Viewpoint: Censorship at the library | Evanston Now – Evanston Now
LGBT Activist: Progressives Must Oppose BDS Censorship, Support Tel Aviv Film Festival – TheTower.org
Posted: at 5:43 am
A leading activist in Florida denounced the campaign to boycott an international LGBTQ film festival that took place in Tel Aviv last week, calling on theLGBTQ and progressive ally communities to take a stand against censoring, and against anti-semitism, in an op-ed published Saturday in The Miami Herald.
James Moon, a board member of both the LGBTQ group A Wider Bridge and South Floridas Outshine Film Festival, and said that he felt at home during his first visit to Israel and sees no difference between the American and Israeli LGBTQ communities.
While his trip centered aroundTLVFest, which was held June 1, he also toured across Israel andthe West Bank, meeting with political, artistic and advocacy leaders.
However, he said that proponents of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign who denounced TLVFest aspinkwashing cast an ugly pall over the event. The term means that any person or organization that promotes or even acknowledges the progress of LGBTQ rights in Israel is really a mouthpiece for Israeli propaganda, Moon wrote. He dismissed thecharacterization as a slanderous allegation.
BDS and those that hate Israel are playing a zero-sum game where any achievement by Israel or any community or person in or from Israel cannot be tolerated or recognized, he explained. A recent example of this was the banning of the film Wonder Woman in Lebanon because it starred Israeli actress Gal Gadot.
It is morally unacceptable to block internationalLGBTQ-themed films from Israeli audiences because you cannot advocate for LGBTQ rights without supporting Israeli LGBTQ rights, Moon wrote.And you cannot advocate for progressive values and not stand against bald bigotry when confronted with it.
Moon concluded by asking the LGBTQ community to support TLVFest because, if you do not stand now, your festival may be the next target of the BDS movement.
There is currently a crowdfunding campaignto raise $10,000 in support of TLVFest.
[Photo: A Wider Bridge / YouTube ]
See the original post:
LGBT Activist: Progressives Must Oppose BDS Censorship, Support Tel Aviv Film Festival - TheTower.org
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on LGBT Activist: Progressives Must Oppose BDS Censorship, Support Tel Aviv Film Festival – TheTower.org
Evergreen, Portland, And The Censorship-Violence Nexus – The Daily Caller
Posted: at 5:43 am
At the Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, anti-racist protests spilled over once again into threats of violence. Every year at Evergreen, minority students play virtue-signal hooky to highlight racial inequities. They call it the Day of Absence. When this years Day of Absence turned into the Day-That-Evergreen-Students-Demand-That-All-Whites-Leave-Campus, Professor Bret Weinstein disobeyedshades of Thoreau!and calmly explained the difference between Evergreens past clarion calls to anti-racist righteousness and this years diktat to discrimination: The first is a forceful call to consciousness which is, of course, crippling to the logic of oppression. The second is a show of force, and an act of oppression in and of itself.
Heres the rub: Weinstein has deluded himself if he thinks the Day of Absence was ever about crippling oppression. Todays student demands are about power exercised through threatened and actualized violence.
Its everything to do with Evergreen students fascistic beliefs and threatsso severe that the Olympia chief of police told Professor Weinstein it was unsafe for him to go to the colleges campusand nothing to do with equality or equity.
You might be wondering where the Mayor of Olympia is in all this, or why the damn police arent getting in gear. Because left-leaning professional politicians, increasingly isolated on the coasts, choose to abstain from the free speech fracas unless theyre dragged in. The party being banded to a coastal sliver means theyre hardened by the demands of a homogeneous progressivist base.
A little south of the Evergreen fray, in Oregon, Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler announced that he would not issue any permits for alt-right events scheduled to take place in the weeks following the Portland stabbing carried out by Joseph Christian.
To support his position, Wheeler used the same canard about there being a hate speech exception to the First Amendment that Howard Dean peddled in justifying Ann Coulter being barred from Berkeley. Lets call it the Wheeler-Dean Theory of the First Amendment. Heres the proposition: A) Right-wing political positions are hateful and disfavored by progressives; B) that which is hateful is not protected by the Constitution; therefore, C) the spoken political positions of the Right are unconstitutional.
Howard Dean, completely ignorant of the history he thinks supports his position, is fond of citing the WWII-era case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, the source of the fighting words doctrine (which doesnt apply to hate speech).
Deans discursus conveniently omitted how vile the Chaplinsky case really was. Chaplinsky was a Jehovahs Witness being accosted by a town mob. He was arrested for opposing the war and calling a police officerbrace yourselfa damn fascist.
Citing Chaplinsky proves nothing other than that Mayor Wheeler and Howard Dean both unthinkingly draw from the well of authoritarianism. Its a bad case.
Inconvenient truths like the true story of Chaplinsky are obscured by a supine media who obsess over the apparition of white-race-hatred. Notice that white supremacy is the catch-all term used to justify the most outrageous behaviors, including Evergreen College students using physical intimidation to confine administrators. The willingness of Evergreen College president George Bridges to give in to their every babyish demand doesnt help much either.
The concern for white supremacist activity overwhelming society is, of course, absurd. Joseph Christian, for instance, is more crazed hobo than calculating hater; he was swigging from a bladder of purple-drank sangria before he attacked, he hadnt had a permanent address in years, he once robbed a convenience store because the guy there d[id]nt sell any winning lottery tickets.
Calling Christian a white supremacist is a misdirect, a red herring, a tactic used to raise the stakes so that restrictions applying to only one side of the political spectrum can be justified.
Will more violence come in our cultural Cold Civil War? If it does, it wont be frivolous. It also wont be the doing of the criminally insane like Joseph Christian. If violence comes, it will be a return to the insecurity of the 1970s, when 1,470 terror attacks resulted in the deaths of 184 people. It will be terror and political violence.
The sum-total of terrors tollmortality, fearwill rattle us. And if there is a John Brown moment, a Wall Street Bombing moment, or anything of the kind, the Cold Civil War is going to heat right up. The bloodshed will come on the heels of censorship. The Battle of Berkeley is so much evidence.
Free speech is, as Dr. Jordan Peterson puts it, the mechanism by which we keep our society functioning. The apparatus to which Peterson refers is a safety release valve, a kill switch on combat.
People need to feel like they have an outlet; they need to know they can jettison the frustration (and even the poison) that accumulates in their mind. But today, the institutions of civil societywhats left of it, anywayhave formed an anti-speech coalition: students against speech, politicians against speech, intellectuals against speech, journalists against speech, and on and on.
Youll remember that The Washington Post assumed a new taglineDemocracy Dies in Darknesswhich like most contemporary clichs is not true at all and means nothing. As a matter of fact, democracy dies in the blazing solar heat of the public forum, where the wrong ideas swelter in the hot box, awaiting a heatstroke-induced death, while the emboldened authoritarians of the left wait in the cool shade.
This will cause incalculable damage. And lots more violence.
See the rest here:
Evergreen, Portland, And The Censorship-Violence Nexus - The Daily Caller
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on Evergreen, Portland, And The Censorship-Violence Nexus – The Daily Caller
You can’t fight terrorism with online censorship – Spiked
Posted: at 5:43 am
As we reel from the third terror attack in Britain in as many months, politicians are scrambling to come up with strategies to make the public feel safer. Amid rows over police cuts, the old debate about online safety has inevitably been revived. Theresa May said, in her speech on Sunday, that internet giants were providing a safe space for extremists online. We need to work with allied democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning, she said.
Yesterday, culture secretary Karen Bradley found time in a series of cringeworthy interviews where she refused to be drawn on police numbers to reiterate the same censorious point. She urged companies like Google and Facebook to tackle extremist content. We know it can be done and we know the internet companies want to do it, she told the BBC.
But all of the big internet firms and social-media networks already regulate their content. Google said it was already planning an international forum to accelerate and strengthen our existing work in this area. In any case, as some commentators have pointed out, any state or international regulation of online content would do little to tackle the problem of terrorism.
The Open Rights Group, a campaign group for online free speech and privacy, said increased regulation could risk pushing terrorists vile networks into darker corners of the web. Dr Shiraz Maher from the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation (ICSR) at Kings College London said terrorist groups and their supporters have already moved to more clandestine methods. This is the reality of the situation. However scary it is to know that you can Google a guide on bomb-making, forcing internet companies to remove and regulate such content would simply push it on to the Dark Web or similar, where it becomes harder for security services to investigate sources and followers. There are also no guarantees that being forced to use more clandestine sites would deter would-be terrorists. As Professor Peter Neumann, an ICSR director, tweeted: Blaming social-media platforms is politically convenient but intellectually lazy.
Home secretary Amber Rudd has also taken the opportunity to insist once again that tech firms provide a back door into their end-to-end encryption. She first suggested this in March, after it was discovered that the Westminster attacker, Khalid Masood, had sent a WhatsApp message minutes before carrying out his murderous act. WhatsApp uses end-to-end encryption, so that only the sender and recipient can read their messages. As tech firms are quick to point out, any back door into encrypted messages, which allows the state to hack into a terrorists phone, means the same hacking is possible on anyones phone. Thus encryption becomes pointless.
Read more:
You can't fight terrorism with online censorship - Spiked
Posted in Censorship
Comments Off on You can’t fight terrorism with online censorship – Spiked