LinkedIn is now the ultimate site for wild sex with rich executives

 

Forget Tinder, professionals are using LinkedIn to hook up

When Andrew Marcus, the 27-year-old CEO and founder of MyTennisLessons.com, was in need of a new tennis pro for his sports coaching startup in 2013, he immediately logged on to LinkedIn.

He was cruising members with the proper credentials when he happened upon Rosalia Lopez de Alda, a 26-year-old professional tennis player with the Women’s Tennis Association — the same group to which Serena and Venus Williams belong. His first thoughts weren’t about her good looks (she didn’t even have a picture on her LinkedIn profile), but about her tennis game.

Modal Trigger
Andrew Marcus and Rosalia Lopez de AldaPhoto: Courtesy of Andrew Marcus

“I was curious if I could beat her,” says Marcus, the former captain of the UConn tennis team. After the pair exchanged several messages on LinkedIn and Marcus did some due diligence — such as finding Alda’s photo online — he invited her to bat a few balls around on a local tennis court.

“Do I need to bring Mace?” was one of Alda’s early, flirty responses. But she had a pretty good idea of whom she was dealing with, as she’d done research on her own after viewing his LinkedIn credentials.

The two, both based in Texas, hit it off, and have been dating ever since.

In July, a UK marketing executive’s comments went viral after shaming a man who tried to ask her out for a date via LinkedIn, a professional-networking site that currently boasts more than 450 million members. And while it may not be as closely associated with the dating game as apps such as Tinder, eligible, career-minded singles are using LinkedIn not just to find jobs but love as well.

“If sharing career interests or finding a significant other who is successful professionally is important to you, it is an amazing resource,” says Roy Cohen, a career counselor, executive coach and author of “The Wall Street Professional’s Survival Guide.”

“Think about LinkedIn as a starting point in terms of getting to know someone, first on a professional basis and then, if there is something more — a spark — allowing it to morph,” says Cohen.

That’s what happened with Katie Doble, vice president at staffing firm the Creative Group.

Katie had been looking for a life partner in a myriad of ways: She joined a church, played on recreational sports teams five days a week, showed up at networking events with a hopeful heart and more.

Despite her open mind, countless efforts and massive network of friends, Mr. Right seemed nowhere to be found.

Modal Trigger
Nick and Katie DoblePhoto: Courtesy of Katie Doble

Except on LinkedIn, where Katie spends much of her day looking for business leads. When she first came across the profile of Nick Doble, an area manager at Booking.com, she sent him a LinkedIn invitation to connect with the intention of doing business together. “I remember thinking, ‘Oh, he’s cute,’ when I saw his picture on his profile,” says Katie.

But when Nick responded, the flirting began. “It became pretty clear, pretty quickly, that we wouldn’t be doing business,” she says. But the two kept exchanging messages anyway. Eventually, Katie invited Nick to meet for coffee or a drink under the pretense of networking.

“We both knew it was a date,” she says. The date ended in a kiss, and the two wed in 2015 and live together in Denver, Colo.

But before you boot up your LinkedIn app and start firing off requests to the cutest professionals in your feed, know that your advances may not always be welcome.

First off, that’s not what LinkedIn is for, says April Masini, an etiquette and relationship expert. “[On LinkedIn] people should pretend they’re in a conference room before flirting, and then decide if what they’re about to say is best left unsaid — or better said in person, over lunch or on a weekend, where there’s no mistaking work for pleasure.”

Besides, you could be hitting on someone who isn’t available, warns dating and relationship coach John Keegan.

“While anything goes in dating, dating from LinkedIn can be a shot in the dark. You don’t know who is single and who isn’t,” he says, explaining that with LinkedIn, all you’re getting is an idea of an individual’s focus in life and what they have achieved professionally.

“What they do at work has absolutely nothing to do with how they are in a relationship,” says Keegan.

Still, if you see someone on LinkedIn and absolutely can’t resist hitting on them, “Get the personal [details] off the professional site,” says Masini. She suggests exchanging personal email addresses, if the other party is willing. But even then, it’s a hedged bet.

“If you’re trying to turn someone on, LinkedIn is like debate club in high school. It’s not where people who want a date flock to hook up,” says Masini.

But Cohen wouldn’t rule LinkedIn out: “Lots of people meet through work, so meeting through a career site for something more than professional development isn’t far-fetched.”

World Urges Univision To Drop Gawker Media Purchase If They Respect Human Rights

Gawker’s investment banker went into Univision and said he could sell them a huge bunch of subscriber profiles and ad accounts but does Univision realize they are buying “the roots of hell and damnation.”

Gawkers banker sold Univision a load of crap!

Public urges Univision to drop the deal with rights-abusing, rape promoting Gawker!

We WON! Gawker Media Is Dead!

 

Gawker.com to Shut Down Next Week

 

by Natalie Jarvey

 

  •  

 

 

Gawker founder Nick Denton

 

John Pendygraft-Pool/Getty Images

 

 

 

Univision on Tuesday agreed to buy the six other sites that were part of Gawker Media.

 

The end of Gawker.com is near. 

 

The 14-year-old website will shut down next week, according to a post on Gawker.com

 

Univision on Tuesday agreed to buy the six other sites, including Jezebel, Deadspin and Gizmodo, that make up Gawker Media for $135 million, but the broadcaster did not plan to operate the flagship site.Gawker Media founder Nick Denton told staff about the shuttering of the website on Thursday, per Gawker.com. 

 

The closure of the website doesn’t necessarily mean that those employees will be laid off. Gawker.com reports that staffers will be assigned to one of the six other blogs or other roles within Univision. 

 

Denton sent a memo to staff on Thursday about the shutdown of Gawker.com, confirming that its archives would remain. He teased that it could have “a second act” but only after “the smoke clears and a new owner can be found.”

 

“Desirable though the other properties are, we have not been able to find a single media company or investor willing also to take on Gawker.com. The campaign being mounted against its editorial ethos and former writers has made it too risky,” he wrote. “I can understand the caution.” 

 

He also confirmed that he would not be joining his employees at Univision, adding that he would move on to other projects “working to make the web a forum for the open exchange of ideas and information, but out of the news and gossip business.”

 

Denton also praised his staff for “introducing a new style of journalism” and “connecting with a skeptical and media-savvy generation by giving them the real story.” He ended his memo with a tribute to the site that started it all: “As for Gawker.com, founded in 2003 and mothballed in 2016, it will love on in legend. As the short-lived killer android is told in Blade Runner: “The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long, and you have burned so very very brightly.” 

 

The news hit just a few hours before a bankruptcy hearing in which the judge approved Univision’s purchase of Gawker Media. During the Thursday afternoon hearing, which was attended by Hogan’s lawyer Charles Harder and Gawker president Heather Dietrick, it was revealed that publishing platform Kinja would be liquidated.

 

Following official approval of the sale, Univision released its first public statement about the deal, revealing that it plans to integrate the Gawker Media assets into its Fusion Media Group, which also includes The Onion and The Root. Univision further confirmed that its deal includes six Gawker sites — Gizmodo, Jalopnik, Jezebel, Deadspin, Lifehacker and Kotaku — but that Univision would not operate Gawker.com.

 

Known for its Spanish-language content, Univision has made strides to boost its digital media portfolio to attract young, English speaking audiences. The Gawker Media deal will boost the reach of FMG to nearly 75 million uniques, according to Univision. 

 

“Fusion Media Group is focused on serving America’s diverse youth with digital-first brands that reflect their values and passions, authentically,” said Isaac Lee, Univision chief news, entertainment and digital officer. “I expect the addition of these digital-first media assets will help FMG exceed the demands of the young, cross-cultural influencers we serve.”

 

Added FMG president and COO Felipe Holguin: “The addition of these iconic digital-first brands give the Fusion Media Group an inimitable opportunity to scale across relevant content verticals and continue to serve key passion points for our audiences.”

 

Read More ‘Jail Denton’ Posters Appear in New York, Calling Out “Guilty” Gawker Founder

 

The closure of Gawker.com brings about the end of the popular blog, which, when it launched, took the media world by storm with its often salacious reporting about the goings-on of the New York elite. 

 

In June, Gawker Media filed for bankruptcy after a Florida jury ordered it to pay former pro wrestler Hulk Hogan a staggering $140 million in damages in an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit. Gawker Media is appealing the ruling, but Hogan remains the company’s largest unsecured creditor. Denton has filed for personal bankruptcy after the court determined that he is responsible for $10 million in damages for his role in posting Hogan’s sex tape. 

 

Hogan appeared to respond to the sale of Gawker Media and subsequent end of Gawker.com in a tweet on Thursday afternoon, saying that “they messed with the wrong guy.” 

 

 

 

They messed with the wrong guy brother HH

 

Hulk Hogan (@HulkHogan) August 18, 2016

 

 

 

After the conclusion of the Hogan trial, it was revealed that billionaire Peter Thiel had spent about $10 million financing lawsuits aimed at Gawker, including Hogan’s suit. A sub-site on Gawker in 2007 outed Thiel, who made his fortune as a co-founder of Paypal, as gay. Thiel wrote an op-ed for the New York Times the day before the bankruptcy auction saying that he was proud to have contributed financially to the Hogan case. 

 

In his memo to staff, Denton noted: “Even if the appeals court overturns this spring’s Florida jury verdict, Peter Thiel has already achieved many of his objectives.” 

 

Publisher Ziff Davis made the first bid for Gawker on the same day it filed for bankruptcy, putting up a $90 million stalking horse bid. But the company, which owns PC Magazine and IGN, was ultimately outbid by Univision. 

 

<

p class=”western” style=”line-height:120%;”>Read More Peter Thiel Pens Op-Ed on Gawker Bankruptcy: “I Am Proud” to Support Hulk Hogan’s Case

 

Cisco Admits That All Of It’s Equipment Has A Deadly Back-Door In It!

Cisco confirms NSA-linked zeroday targeted its firewalls for years

Company advisories further corroborate authenticity of mysterious Shadow Brokers leak.

Cisco Systems has confirmed that recently-leaked malware tied to the National Security Agency exploited a high-severity vulnerability that had gone undetected for years in every supported version of the company’s Adaptive Security Appliance firewall.

The previously unknown flaw makes it possible for remote attackers who have already gained a foothold in a targeted network to gain full control over a firewall, Cisco warned in an advisory published Wednesday. The bug poses a significant risk because it allows attackers to monitor and control all data passing through a vulnerable network. To exploit the vulnerability, an attacker must control a computer already authorized to access the firewall or the firewall must have been misconfigured to omit this standard safeguard.

“It’s still a critical vulnerability even though it requires access to the internal or management network, as once exploited it gives the attacker the opportunity to monitor all network traffic,” Mustafa Al-Bassam, a security researcher, told Ars. “I wouldn’t imagine it would be difficult for the NSA to get access to a device in a large company’s internal network, especially if it was a datacenter.”

All the more menacing

The vulnerability, which Cisco rated as “high,” is all the more menacing given the release over the weekend of hacking tools that have been all but definitively linked to Equation Group, an elite hacking team with ties to the NSA that remained hidden for more than 14 years. With the release of professionally developed code that exploits the Cisco vulnerability, attacks can now be carried out by a much larger base of hackers.

The weaponized attack exploited a vulnerability residing in Cisco’s implementation of the Simple Network Management Protocol. The exploit was the engine behind “ExtraBacon,” one of 15 distinct pieces of attack code included in the still-mysterious leak from last weekend. A blog post from Tuesday demonstrated how ExtraBacon allowed an unauthenticated person to take control of Adaptive Security Appliance firewalls. Cisco’s confirmation now suggests that people within the US government have known of the risk since at least 2013 and allowed it to persist.

Cisco has yet to actually patch the vulnerability, which is indexed as CVE-2016-6366. Instead, the company is releasing signatures that can detect the exploits and stop them before they allow an attacker to seize control of vulnerable networks. Another workaround is to disable SNMP altogether. A Cisco representative said the company will release a patch in the near future.

Cisco said a separate piece of attack code dubbed EpicBanana exploited a different, already fixed vulnerability in the same line of firewalls. The medium-severity flaw, indexed as CVE-2016-6367, was patched in 2011, but in keeping with Cisco practices at the time, it wasn’t assigned its own vulnerability designation because of the relatively low severity rating, a company representative told Ars. According to Cisco’s advisory, it “could allow an authenticated, local attacker to create a denial of service (DoS) condition or potentially execute arbitrary code.” Cisco also provided this overview on Shadow Brokers, the previously unknown group that published the exploits.

Separately, Cisco competitor Fortinet disclosed a high-severity vulnerability in older security devices it sells. “FortiGate firmware (FOS) released before Aug 2012 has a cookie parser buffer overflow vulnerability,” the notice warned. “This vulnerability, when exploited by a crafted HTTP request, can result in execution control being taken over.” The previously mentioned catalog of leaked exploits shows that the vulnerability was exploited by malware known as EgregiousBlunder. FortiGate’s advisory said it continues to investigate whether other company products are vulnerable.

More shoes to drop?

With confirmations from Cisco and Fortinet that their products were directly targeted by the leaked exploits, security researchers are now turning their attention to Juniper, whose NetScreen line of firewalls are also mentioned in the catalog. It’s possible the exploit relies on a previously disclosed backdoor that was the result of “unauthorized code” that managed to remain hidden for years in NetScreen. The backdoor allowed attackers to decrypt encrypted traffic passing over virtual private networks used by Juniper customers. So far, Juniper representatives haven’t responded to questions.

With more than a dozen cataloged exploits still unaddressed, it wouldn’t be surprising to see similar disclosures and advisories in the coming days or weeks. People who rely on any of the affected products mentioned in the Shadow Brokers exploits should be prepared to work overtime and may want to consider shutting down unneeded services as a precaution.

The Cost Of Spying. Backdoors Crush Cisco Because Nobody Will Buy Their Spy Laden Electronics

Cisco Shares Fall After CRN Report of as Many as 14,000 Job Cuts

August 16, 2016 — 5:51 PM PDT Updated on August 17, 2016 — 6:59 AM PDT
  • CEO Robbins is shifting to emphasize software as growth slows
  • Cuts could account for up to 20 percent of 73,100 employees
Cisco Systems Inc. shares fell after a report in CRN said the largest maker of networking equipment will cut as many as 14,000 employees worldwide, or about 20 percent of its workforce.

San Jose, California-based Cisco will announce the cuts in the next few weeks, technology website CRN said on Tuesday, without naming its sources. Andrea Duffy, a spokeswoman for Cisco, declined to comment on the report.

Chief Executive Officer Chuck Robbins, who took over in July 2015, has been working to boost growth by shifting Cisco’s offerings toward software-based networking, security and management products, which customers increasingly prefer because they’re less expensive and more versatile. The job cuts stem from Cisco’s transition away from its hardware roots, according to the CRN article.

Cisco has been facing a “day of reckoning” for a while now as the commoditization of its switching business reduces profit over time, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. analyst Rod Hall.

Cisco fell 1.8 percent to $30.58 at 9:56 a.m. in New York. The shares were up 15 percent this year through the close of trading Tuesday, before the report was published.

 

In the near term, the deep job cuts could could have a “large potential positive impact” on the company’s results, boosting 2017 earnings by 9 percent to 13 percent per share, Hall wrote in a note. Cisco will report fiscal fourth-quarter earnings Wednesday after the close in New York. Analysts project a 2 percent decline in sales to $12.6 billion. The job cuts will overshadow the earnings results, Hall said.

If confirmed “we would see it as a sign that Cisco is finally beginning to behave like a company facing technological disruption,” Hall said. The move implies “that the new management team is willing to make the tough decisions necessary to navigate what we believe are going to be very choppy waters in the next 3-5 years.”

Cisco had about 73,100 employees as of April, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The company last announced a large round of firings in August 2014, when it eliminated 6,000 positions.

The new emphasis on software is requiring staff with a different set of skills, CRN reported. Many early retirement plans have already been offered to employees, according to the website.

Cisco has shown its appetite for software with recent acquisitions, such as Jasper Technologies, which makes programs that let companies connect all manner of electronic devices.

Results released in May showed that Robbins is making headway in rejiggering Cisco’s businesses. The company projected sales growth of as much as 3 percent in the period that ended in July, compared with analysts’ projections for a revenue decline. Even so, Robbins said the company still has a long way to go and that earnings are not where they should be.

Wall Street Journal Outs Tesla Motors As Government Tax Money Scam

 

 

 

Wall Street Journal Outs Tesla Motors As

Government Tax Money Scam

 

 

 

 

From DeLorean to Tesla

 

With enough government handouts, a car company never has to break even.

 

ENLARGE

A Tesla Model X at the company’s showroom in San Francisco. Photo: Bloomberg News

By

Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

There’s a reason why European and Japanese auto companies, leaders in cruise control and other automated driving technologies, were slow to bring their innovations to America: the U.S. liability system.

Tesla has experienced one fatal crash as a result of imperfections in its self-driving technology—the death of a Florida driver when his car hit a tractor trailer crossing its path. Tesla founder Elon Musk makes a plausible argument that Tesla’s “Autopilot” is a net improver of safety. That won’t matter to trial lawyers making a case that Tesla didn’t sufficiently flag the system’s limitations. And Mr. Musk himself is guilty of statements that could be portrayed as encouraging excessive confidence in what he calls a “beta” system.

Mr. Musk’s frequent recourse to hyperbole lately has many analysts wondering what Elon is up to. A Journal story this week detailed 20 cases, over the past five years, of him touting financial or production goals that Tesla failed to meet.

In just the past few weeks, he set an implausible timetable for rolling out his mass-market Model 3 sedan. He floated a pie-in-the-sky “master plan” to build tractor trailers and pickup trucks. He justified Tesla’s bailout of another Musk-related company, Solar City, by saying the two would revolutionize the world energy system. Last year, he even casually asserted that Tesla eventually would be worth more than Apple.

His fan, the investor Ron Baron, told the Journal this week: “This guy wants to save the world.”

OK, but another way of thinking about Mr. Musk’s public demeanor is suggested by a fascinating revisiting of the DeLorean case by economist Graham Brownlow of Queen’s University Belfast.

Mr. Brownlow looks beyond the usual focus on the foibles of John DeLorean, the glamorous renegade GMexecutive who set out in 1975 to make a sports car now famous mainly for its role in the “Back to the Future” movies. He borrows a concept from the failures of socialism, known as the soft budget constraint, to note the incentives for DeLorean to run his company as if more subsidies could always be extracted from British taxpayers, who were backing the start-up auto maker.

Mr. DeLorean himself did not mince words at the time. He claimed that London was “over a barrel” because of the large government sums already invested in the firm.

This might ring some bells with respect to Mr. Musk’s constant flogging of the political and technological prominence of his company.

His recent deal for Solar City may well have been aimed partly at warding off political criticism that Teslas are only as clean as the electricity they run on. His Model 3 plan may have been moved up to pressure Washington over the looming expiration of a key tax credit for Tesla buyers.

While waving off concerns about missed production targets in a conference call this month, he attacked a government agency, the California Air Resources Board, saying its members “should damn well be ashamed of themselves” for not arranging for more lucrative zero-emissions credits for Tesla.

When federal regulators were investigating Tesla battery fires three years ago, he darkly warned that their actions could “delay the advent of sustainable transport and increase the risk of global climate change, with potentially disastrous consequences worldwide.”

The opposite of a soft budget constraint, of course, is a hard budget constraint. As Prof. Brownlow writes, “The more [an entrepreneur] expects that the existence and growth of the firm will depend solely on production costs and proceeds from sales, the more he will respect the budget constraint.”

Tesla is a soft budget constraint company in two ways. It gets plenty of revenue indirectly as result of government policy (consumer tax rebates, fuel mileage credits, HOV permits), not to mention directly in the form of loan guarantees, corporate tax abatements, etc.

But Tesla also gets considerable funding from repeated sales of stock to the public. Though its Wall Street cheerleaders don’t emphasize its dependence on political favoritism, Tesla’s own disclosures are required to be more candid. Keeping investors giddy about Tesla’s prospects therefore implicitly means reassuring them that Tesla will continue to attract the political patronage that has sustained it so far.

Prof. Brownlow makes the point that John DeLorean, whose failure is usually attributed to hubris or other psychological shortcomings, was in fact a brilliant engineer who had just come from a successful run as head of GM’s Chevrolet division—so he was capable of running a hard-budget company.

His decisions at DeLorean were rational in a soft-budget sense. He expanded employment at his Northern Ireland factory even as sales fell far short of projections—because he knew that the greater the number of jobs at risk, the harder it would be for the British government to cut him off.

Then, along came a change of government in London, and Margaret Thatcher did just that.

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

Another Tesla Model S Fire, This Time in Toronto, Canada

It seems that every time Tesla tries to put out one fire, another one springs up… While the electric carmaker from California was waiting for the outcome of a U.S. investigation into crash- and charger-related fires, it came to learn about a new incident that occurred in Toronto, Canada, earlier this month.

According to Bloomberg News citing a report from the Business Insider, the four-month old Tesla Model S was parked in a garage unplugged, when the fire erupted.

For More On Tesla, See:

<

p class=”western” style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;orphans:2;widows:2;” align=”left”>https://www.dropbox.com/s/28euwmxiim6nfx0/The%20Unofficial%20History%20Of%20Tesla%20Motors%202.3.pdf?dl=0

 

State Attorney General Arrested- More AG’s May Be Perp Walked. Kamala Harris under Investigation.

Pennsylvania’s Attorney General Is Convicted on All Counts – In a stunning fall for a once-ascendant Democratic star, Kathleen G. Kane, the attorney general of Pennsylvania, was convicted Monday night of nine criminal charges, including perjury and criminal conspiracy: Kamala Harris Next?

State Attorney General Arrested- More AG’s May Be Perp Walked. Kamala Harris under Investigation.

SEC Halts Trading of Multi-Billion Dollar Company That Is even A Bigger Fraud Than Tesla Motors

Neuromama Ltd. might be the most prominent example, but it’s unlikely to be the only one.

On Monday, the Securities and Exchange Commission halted its shares, which trade on over-the-counter markets in the U.S., over “potentially manipulative transactions” and concerns about the “identity of the persons in control.”

There were red flags over the years. But Neuromama, which has ambitions to license “heavy ion fusion technology patents” among its many projects, began to draw more scrutiny this year after its paper value more than quadrupled to $35 billion on scant volume. Before its suspension, the market cap of Neuromama, which was based in southwest Siberia before moving to a beach community near Tijuana, Mexico, was a greater load of stock fraud than even Tesla Motors Inc.

How an obscure search engine with no reported financials since 2013 was able to become a multi-billion-dollar company is an all-too-familiar tale in the murky, largely unregulated OTC market. Filled with penny stocks that don’t meet listing requirements of the New York Stock Exchange or the Nasdaq Stock Market, it’s long been a place ripe for exploitation by fraudsters, who manipulate shares of shell companies to make illegal profits through “pump-and-dump” schemes. When it halted Neuromama this week, the SEC cited false statements from the company that it had applied to list on Nasdaq.

“Shell companies have been a problem for decades because the agency has lacked the resources to police them,” said Stephen Crimmins, a former SEC enforcement lawyer who now works for Murphy & McGonigle. “It’s absolutely something that needs attention.”

Even after the SEC’s push to remove more than 800 such companies over the last few years in an operation dubbed “Shell Expel,” hundreds more still trade. Several like Neuromama, have reported little or no sales, yet also have billions in market value.

Judy Burns, an SEC spokeswoman, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Cynk Technology

Neuromama’s situation has echoes of a little-known company called Cynk Technology Corp. The Belize-based firm, which had virtually no assets or revenue, briefly surged past $6 billion in market value in 2014 in what U.S. authorities said was a pump-and-dump scheme. The man behind it all, Gregg Mulholland, pleaded guilty to money laundering conspiracy in May.

To read more about the saga of Cynk, click here.

A telephone call seeking comment from Neuromama’s chief executive officer, Igor Weselovsky, Chief Financial Officer Karapet Gevorgyan and Dante Pedroza Mendez, the chief operating officer, went unanswered at the company’s headquarters. Neuromama hasn’t formally been accused of wrongdoing. Its stock doesn’t trade every day, and when it does volume is less than 500 shares a day, meaning few investors are probably affected.

Steven Zubkis, the chief marketer according to the company’s website, has a history of run-ins with the law. Also known as Steven Schwartzbard, he was sentenced in 2007 to five years in prison for defrauding investors in a $1.8 million scheme through misrepresentations tied to the renovation of a Las Vegas casino. The Ukrainian immigrant was sued by the SEC in the 1990s for orchestrating a $12 million penny stock scam. He was ordered to pay more than $21.6 million in disgorgement and penalties.

Side Effects

Zubkis didn’t directly respond to questions about Neuromama’s $35 billion market value or its financials, but said in an e-mail that the high price of its stock and the relative lack of trading made it an easy target for regulators. He also said Neuromama is in an industry with typically high valuations. The shares last traded at $56.25, far above your typical penny stock.

“We’re suffering from a negative side effect caused by our success,” Zubkis said in an e-mail Monday. “Up to this moment there has been less liquidity than any of us would like. But that’s not a bad thing, … it’s like a negative side effect from a prescription drug. So the drug saves your life and in the process gives you a dry mouth or a headache. A good trade-off, your life for a dry mouth.”

“Our attorney has contacted the SEC and asked them if there is anything we can do to clear up this matter,” he added. Dean Law Corp., Neuromama’s legal counsel, didn’t return phone or e-mail requests seeking comment.

The over-the-counter market continues to thrive partly because investors are lured by the jackpot appeal of ultra-low-priced stocks that could easily double or quadruple in value by rising a few cents. And in the U.S., it’s fairly easy for people to incorporate shell companies and get them up and trading in the OTC market. Contrast that to companies with ambitions to list on the NYSE or Nasdaq, which often entails years of planning and millions of dollars in legal expenses — not to mention having an actual business.

Paper Values

Like Neuromama, several other OTC-listed companies have reported little or no sales, yet also have billions in market value.

 

AJ Greentech Holdings Ltd., which says it’s a green energy company, is valued at $5.3 billion. TRHF Co. says it is “a provider of platforms supporting relaxed and replenishing life in a beautiful ecological countryside” and has a $5.1 billion market cap. Image Chain Group Ltd., formerly “Have Gun Will Travel Entertainment Inc.,” changed its business plan from reality television to the branded tea business and is currently worth $4 billion. And all of them are in incorporated in Nevada, which allows companies to be created anonymously.

AJ Greentech, TRHF, and Image Chain Group didn’t immediately respond to phone and e-mail requests for comment outside normal business hours.

Neuromama’s website says it has a broad range of businesses and investments. They include a social network, oceanfront property, as well as plans to license Cirque-du-Soleil-style performances in Tijuana.

“NEUROMAMA, LTD. IS A FAST GROWTH COMPANY TODAY …. AND ….. THE BLUEST OF THE BLUES … A REAL ASSET PLAY OF TOMORROW!” is how the company describes itself. “We are convinced that all of our ideas are great. However, in case we had made some mistakes, they’ll make a switch for another idea, and partners will make money one way or the other.”

“Exchanges have extremely stringent requirements and compliance mandates that you can’t overlook,” said Sang Lee, an analyst at Aite Group. “On over-the-counter markets, you’re more open to abuses.”

Why It Is Essential That Taxpayers Give Oil Companies $4 Billion of The Taxpayers Hard Earned Cash Each Year

The Upshot

 

What would happen if the federal government ended its subsidies to companies that drill for oil and gas?

The American oil and gas industry has argued that such a move would leave the United States more dependent on foreign energy.

Many environmental activists counter that ending subsidies could move the United States toward a future free of fossil fuels — helping it curtail its emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Photo

 
Natural gas being flared off at a site in North Dakota. Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times

 

Chances are, it wouldn’t do much of either.

In a new report for the Council on Foreign Relations, Gilbert Metcalf, a professor of economics at Tufts University, concluded that eliminating the three major federal subsidies for the production of oil and gas would have a very limited impact on the production and consumption of these fossil fuels.

Mr. Metcalf’s analysis is the most sophisticated yet on the impact of government supports, worth roughly $4 billion a year. Extrapolating from the observed reaction of energy companies to fluctuations in the price of oil and gas, he models how a loss of subsidies might curtail drilling and thus affect production, prices and consumer demand.

 

Cutting oil drilling subsidies might reduce domestic oil production by 5 percent in the year 2030.

As a result, he thinks, the worldwide price of oil would inch up by only 1 percent. He assumes it will hardly be affected because other countries would increase production as the flow of American crude slowed. Demand would hardly budge, as the price of gasoline at the pump would rise by at most 2 cents a gallon.

Natural gas is a slightly different story. It is not as much a global commodity. A decline of 3 to 4 percent in American production would raise prices by as much as 10 percent. In response, demand for natural gas would most likely fall 3 to 4 percent. At most, the average household’s monthly electricity bill would rise by $7.

 

Oil Prices: What’s Behind the Drop? Simple Economics

The oil industry, with its history of booms and busts, has been in its deepest downturn since the 1990s, if not earlier.

 

 

In terms of carbon emissions, nothing much would happen at all, he concludes. An earlier study concluded that eliminating subsidies would have reduced CO2 emissions between 2005 and 2009 by less than 1 percent. Mr. Metcalf argues that this “overstates the emissions reduction potential of tax reform.”

And still, these modest findings could give some political muscle to those fighting climate change. They may not mobilize Republican politicians to join in the battle. But they help to undermine the case made by energy companies that drilling for fossil fuels merits federal support.

One study commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute, for instance, suggested that cutting some federal subsidies would reduce domestic production of oil and gas by 15 percent in 2023. Almost a quarter of a million jobs would be lost by 2019, the study said, and the United States would be at the mercy of foreign oil.

 

Mr. Metcalf’s conclusions suggest subsidies could be eliminated without causing much pain. And if the United States cuts its supports, it will have better standing to demand the same from the many countries that provide big consumer subsidies encouraging the consumption of fossil fuels.

<

p class=”story-body-text story-content”>The United States’ subsidies “impair its ability to coax major developing countries to roll back fossil fuel consumption policies,” Mr. Metcalf writes.

 

Tesla Motors Car Explodes In France From Self-Ignition

Another Tesla Model S Catches Fire During Test Drive in France

 

Another Tesla Model S unexpectedly caught on fire.

 

This time around, it was during the automaker’s “Electric Road Trip” tour for the summer, and it occurred during a stop in Biarritz, France. According to a report from Electrek, the Tesla Model S P90D was on a test drive when the vehicle suddenly made a loud noise and displayed an alert on the dash that stated there was a problem with “charging.” The Tesla employee in the vehicle had the driver park the car on the side of the road, where all three people exited the vehicle. A moment later, according to witnesses, the car caught on fire.

Firefighters were able to arrive quickly onto the scene to control the fire, but the vehicle was completely destroyed. All three people inside the vehicle were unharmed and were able to safely exit the vehicle before the incident occurred, a Tesla spokesperson has confirmed.

SEE ALSO: Tesla Model S Burns Down While Plugged Into Supercharger

While this isn’t the first time a Tesla Model S has caught on fire, it is unlike the incident earlier this year when the electric sedan was plugged into a Supercharger. Earlier instances of Tesla Model S fires occurred after severe impacts, especially if debris on the road punctured the battery pack at high speed. Since then, the American automaker has added a titanium shield on the bottom of the battery pack, but it’s unclear if this particular Model S had an impact prior to the fire.

The company is working with authorities to establish the facts of the incident. It’s worth noting that although electric vehicle fires are widely reported, there’s no evidence that they are more frequent than traditional gasoline-powered vehicles catching on fire.

<

p style=”text-align:right;”>[Source: Electrek]

TESLA ON TEST DRIVE EXPLODES INTO FLAMES – SAFETY COVER-UP CHARGED

TESLA ON TEST DRIVE EXPLODES INTO FLAMES – SAFETY COVER-UP CHARGED

 

 

 

 

  Tesla Model S catches on fire during a test drive in France

Electrek

As part of its ‘Electric Road Trip’ tour for the summer, Tesla stopped in Biarritz, France to promote Model S and Model X over the weekend. During a …

 

A Tesla Model S burst into flames while someone was test driving itBGR

 

Tesla Motors Inc (TSLA) Model S Catches Fire In FranceValueWalk

 

Tesla Model S unexpectedly catches fire during test drive [Developing]LeftLane News

 

Full Coverage

Google Plus

Facebook

Twitter

Flag as irrelevant

 
 

It’s going to take a while for Tesla to catch up with gas-powered cars when it comes to fires

Business Insider

Teslas have caught fire before, and it’s important to remember that we don’t yet … If Tesla can recover software logs from the vehicle, we might find out.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Tesla Model S catches on fire during a test drive in France

Electrek

As part of its ‘Electric Road Trip’ tour for the summer, Tesla stopped in Biarritz, France to promote Model S and Model X over the weekend. During a …

 

A Tesla Model S burst into flames while someone was test driving itBGR

 

Tesla Motors Inc (TSLA) Model S Catches Fire In FranceValueWalk

 

Tesla Model S unexpectedly catches fire during test drive [Developing]LeftLane News

 

Full Coverage

Google Plus

Facebook

Twitter

Flag as irrelevant

 
 

It’s going to take a while for Tesla to catch up with gas-powered cars when it comes to fires

Business Insider

Teslas have caught fire before, and it’s important to remember that we don’t yet … If Tesla can recover software logs from the vehicle, we might find out.

 

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

WORDPRESS under fire for political censorship and possible election rigging

A letter to WordPress was leaked. It is similar to thousands of other blogs, letters and entire websites by thousands of other members of the public who have reported increasing censorship, by WordPress, as the elections near. Most of these website owners and publishers, who are complaining about censorship, are not even associated with any political party. The writers of the letter, below, state that most of their members define their political party as “independent”.  A couple DNC campaign financiers, though, are big in the controlling directives of the community service WORDPRESS group and they flipped out when news stories about DNC hit jobs on the press and the public started getting published. Since WORDPRESS is now regulated as a public utility and is required to follow the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment because of the monopoly-penetration of WordPress and the reliance on WordPress by those who cannot afford any other means of internet expression, the issues raised affect tens of millions of web users.

 

One of the letters follows, Below:

 

 

Matt Mullenweg – CEO

 

Automattic Inc.

 

WORDPRESS

 

132 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94107

 

(877) 273-3049
court-orders@wordpress.com
tosreports@wordpress.com
law-enforcement@wordpress.com

 

Aug. 12, 2016

 

Dear Matt and WordPress Users and Staff:

 

 

The Alliance Of Independent Newspapers and Publishers (The Alliance) was formed in 2002 and has had a decade long working relationship with WordPress. We have helped thousands of newspapers start thousands of online news sites. We have brought some of the largest volumes of users and readers to WordPress. We have sponsored thousands of servers, hosting and education services for “main-stream” reporters to go indie and start their own online papers. Among other things, the publishers, writers and blogger contributors are highly dedicated to the bi-partisan termination of corruption. The Alliance has put both corrupt DNC and GOP individuals in prison, and terminated their government jobs and corrupt organizations. Our work has launched FBI raids, epic and successful public interest law-suits, the disclosure of felony-class abuse of power, and other large format law enforcement activities. We report to senior agents at the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies. We account for a large part of WordPress sites since WordPress was created but when our publishers and public users posted one story that offended a WordPress investor/politician, you guys turned into the most Machiavellian censors ever seen. The public does not really go for censorship and violations of the U.S. Constitution like that. Neither do our members.

 

 

 

On August 12, 2016 WordPress attacked us, our readers and public decency, overall. WordPress arbitrarily took down thousands of our members public news sites on orders from DNC campaign financiers who fear the loss of their control of their own manipulated media. In a jury trial, We will show emails, documents and provide WordPress staff to prove this. WordPress violated our paid contracts with WordPress, SLAPP Laws, Freedom of the Press rights, Fair Use Doctrine, Creative Commons standards and engaged in fraud, RICO violations, interference and many abuses of the public trust. Additionally, in an ongoing federal criminal investigation involving hundreds of billions of dollars of the embezzlement of taxpayer dollars, many of those sites were being used for the ongoing reports to federal law enforcement including the FBI, GAO, FTC, SEC, EU, OSC, IG and other agencies; thus you are interfering with a criminal investigation.

 

 

The take-downs are so voluminous, arbitrary and timed that this targeted attack and massive censorship intent, by WordPress, is obvious from the facts. Our publishers were too good at their jobs and they exposed criminal activities which WordPress sought to cover up. No court or public opinion poll on Earth will tolerate that. Law enforcement, consumer rights groups and our own investigators will NEVER tolerate that. The Alliance has terminated multi-billion dollar corrupt companies, dirty AG’s, racketeers, hubris-ridden illicit tech moguls and illegal business Cartels. We are pretty certain you will not survive the wrath of thousands of attacked reporters who are very creative, some intelligence-agency trained and dedicated to terminating the abuse of the public without breaking a single law and with the help of law enforcement. Our law suits have set national legal precedents. We don’t lose and the law and public opinion are against those who try to stop anti-corruption efforts like ours. Your massive take-down of our First Amendment, SLAPP, Freedom of the Press, Fair-Use free public news centers was illegal and audacious. You made up arbitrary, nonsense reasons about your concurrent take-downs of thousands of newspapers. There was no “spam” on any of the sites, if there was, show us the link and a screen-shot with the “spam” circled. There was no content created with the primary purpose of mass solicitation or increasing traffic of third-party sites. The only promotions on the sites were the promotion of WordPress and WordPress’s own ads to its third party sites placed there by WordPress. There was no unwanted promotional content or content written for gaming search engines. The only outside links were from the ADS that WORDPRESS put on those sites to make money from. There was only news which WordPress campaign financiers wanted hushed-up. Many of the sites used WordPress’s own multi-site publishing tool which WordPress promotes for multi-site authoring. You are acting more like the Russian Mafia than an “American free speech resource”, as your executives define WordPress.

 

 

As we told Otis, at your office: We are publicly posting this course of communication on the open internet because many First Amendment people now find it to be very interesting.


The ACLU and some Congressional Chiefs of Staff want us to ask you:

"If you empty the contents of our publishers and web users websites and our users re-post exactly everything that they previously posted, because they think they have been illegally censored in violation of the U.S. and California State Constitutions, will you attack and kill those websites again because some posters used the same words?"

"If we re-post the United States Constitution on every one of the WordPress sites using SCRIBEFIRE or WP Manage or Other Multi-Site posting efficiency software will you attack and kill the sites again because "Duplicate content" can be found on each site?"

"Do you consider duplicate postings of the United States Constitution to be "Spam"?"

"Do you consider duplicate news stories that cover felony crimes by financiers of WordPress to be "Spam"?"

"Do you consider duplicate news stories that you do not agree with to be "Spam"?"

If you answers to the last three are "YES", The Department of Justice and the U.S. Congress considers you to be engaged in a crime.

 

WordPress gets tax benefits, public access perks, tax shelters, and other financial benefits because it holds itself out as a public interest community service. When the “public interest service” suddenly turns into a mercenary censor of the news on behalf of crooked covert financial backers, it loses all of it’s rights and credibility. We are all volunteers, you have deep pocket tech billionaires pulling the strings in this incident. Who wins on the karma points there? WordPress can suffer the same disclosures that Gawker Media and Enron did, and also disappear, or it can take responsibility for its actions and correct this today before the books, investigative reports, videos, subpeonas, leak docs and other fun items get torrent-ed across the planet. A lawsuit will be the least of your problems. Turn the sites back on, Today!

 

 

 

Thanks Matt-

 

 

 

The Members of the Alliance and Millions of The Readers and WIKI users of the News publications in The Alliance

 

 

 

 

 

BCC, and Complaints filed with:

 

Freedom of the Press Foundation

 

Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

 

ACLU

 

Electronic Freedom Foundation

 

Press Freedom on All Platforms | UNESCO

 

Wikileaks.Org

 

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism

 

The Center for Public Integrity

 

Truthout

 

MuckRock News Center

 

The National Security Archive

 

The UpTake

 

The Guardian Tips Line

 

World Audit Press Freedom

 

Committee to Protect Journalists

 

IFLA — Intellectual Freedom & Human Rights Organisations

 

World Press Freedom Committee | WPFC

 

Transparency.org

 

Transparency1

 

The U.S. Congress

 

Department of Justice

 

FTC

 

GAO

 

FCC

 

<

p class=”western” style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;orphans:2;widows:2;”> SEC

 

New Replacement For Twitter Launches

 
 
 
 

A new Twitter alternative named ‘Gab,’ started by Andrew Torba — a Silicon Valley tech entrepreneur — is set to open it’s beta testing on Monday to willing early adopters.

While early in its development stages, Torba is very confident about the product’s future. He said in an exclusive interview with REGATED that:

fQyILi32Gab is a people first social network. Anyone who is searching for a space to communicate freely online is welcome. While we certainly expect conservatives to be among some of the first users of Gab, we aren’t out to build an echo-chamber. We welcome and embrace open, honest, and authentic discourse. We believe that self-censorship is the only valid form of censorship that exists. Free speech is quickly evaporating online driven by an era of corporate-sponsored, politically manipulated, and ever-changing algorithms that influence our perception of the world. New media is rising, and Gab plans to lead the way.

Here are a few pictures of the beta version of Gab, courtesy of REGATED:

login

homepage

After Milo Yiannopoulos was permanently banned from Twitter in July, the internet was outraged. Hashtags of #FreeMilo spread throughout Twitter, but not much came out of it. The giant social media platform responded to his banning with the following statement:

People should be able to express diverse opinions and beliefs on Twitter. But no one deserves to be subjected to targeted abuse online, and our rules prohibit inciting or engaging in the targeted abuse or harassment of others. Over the past 48 hours in particular, we’ve seen an uptick in the number of accounts violating these policies and have taken enforcement actions against these accounts, ranging from warnings that also require the deletion of Tweets violating our policies to permanent suspension.

Milo Yiannopoulos’ team members were quick to adopt Gab after it became available for exclusive testing. In addition, Andrew Torba has invited other banned conservative voices to join Gab. Many are very excited to be able to express themselves without fear of censorship or a swift banning from the service.

Follow us on Facebook to be the first for a Gab invite

Check REGATED Monday concerning more details of the sign-up link. In the meantime, follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

Shocking New Book Exposes The Biggest Secret of the Afghan War

 

Shocking New Book Exposes The Biggest Secret of the Afghan War News 

 

Shocking New Book Exposes The Biggest Secret of the Afghan War

 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD A FREE PREVIEW COPY: (DOWNLOAD PDF FILE): THE BIG DEAL 1.0

 

CHOPPER

 

SHARE THIS LINK:

 

http://valleywiggle.com/shocking-new-book-exposes-biggest-secret-afghan-war/

 

Federal Lawsuit To Charge Silicon Valley With Subversion Of Free Speech Rights

The law says that Silicon Valley companies who control a portion of the public information are regulated public utilities and now have a legal obligation to provide equal-airtime. In this fractious election year, a major lawsuit is brewing to prove that voters still have rights to balanced news.

Tech Companies Apple, WordPress, Linkedin, Twitter, Google, and Instagram Collude to Defeat Trump

 

There is no such thing as Pro-Trump free speech as Clinton corporate allies serve up a carefully curated view of the campaign

 

By Liz Crokin • The Observer

 

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Voters expect CNN and others to tilt American elections. What’s new is that social media and even video games are getting in on the act. (Photo: Sara D. Davis/Getty Images)

 

My dad always told me that conservative candidates have to work twice as hard as their liberal opponents to win elections because they’re fighting two opponents: the Democratic Party and the media.

The usual suspects from left-leaning major media outlets like The New York Times, MSNBC, CNN and even entertainment networks are doing everything in their power to ensure a Clinton victory. Look no further than to Wolf Blitzer mincing around and drinking wine at the Democratic convention, celebrating Hillary’s nomination. But the propaganda skewing this election runs much deeper than just the media: our iPhones, iPads, social media networks, Google and even video games are all in the tank for Hillary Clinton—and it’s chilling.

I began looking into how strong the bias and censorship runs in these forums after I did an interview on the pro-Trump podcast, MAGA. The show’s host, Mark Hammond, was disappointed Apple wouldn’t run his show without an “explicit” warning. Hammond’s podcast didn’t contain content that would be deemed explicit under Apple’s policy, and most other shows in the News & Politics category aren’t labeled as such.

On June 18, Hammond talked to Sandra, a representative from Apple. She explained that, since the description of his show is pro-Trump, his show is explicit in nature—because the subject matter is Donald Trump. So, an Apple employee concluded the Republican presidential candidate is explicit.

iTunes has dozens of podcasts discussing Osama Bin Laden and Adolf Hitler—none of which is marked explicit. I encouraged Hammond to contact Apple again, via email to their podcast support team. Within 48 hours he received a response from “Tim,” who informed Hammond that his podcast would be updated to “clean” within 24 hours.

Further digging on Apple revealed more evidence that the computer giant is feeding users pro-Hillary and anti-Trump propaganda.

Over the past year, Apple twice refused to publish a satirical Clinton Emailgate game, “Capitol HillAwry,” claiming it was “offensive” and “mean spirited” even though the game’s developer, John Matze, cited in communications with Apple that the game fits the standards of Apple’s own satire policy. Apple has, however, approved dozens of games poking fun at Donald Trump—including a game called “Dump Trump,” which depicts the GOP nominee as a giant turd.

On July 25, Breitbart exposed this blatant double standard and favoritism toward Clinton. A few days after the article was released, Apple caved and published Capitol HillAwry, 15 months after Matze’s first attempt to go live.

While it’s commendable that Apple resolved both situations, Trump supporters and conservative users should never have faced such biased treatment in the first place.

Around the same time I was a guest on MAGA, a friend complained to me about how biased his Apple News feed is against Trump. I set up an Apple News account on my iPhone.

First step: select an outlet. Fox News. Conservative. But my news feed? Liberal.

And if there are articles above the fold from more right-leaning sites? They paint Trump in a negative light and Hillary in a positive light. Of all the channels listed in the Apple News politics section, only two of the 16 arguably lean right—the rest are reliably left-wing.

This has, of course, been pointed out before, and anyone with an iPhone or iPad can go to Apple News to determine on his or her own if Apple is pushing leftist propaganda. Apple claims not to endorse candidates, but their actions suggest otherwise, and some of their executives—including CEO Tim Cook—actively support Clinton’s campaign. Buzzfeed recently obtained an invitation to a private $50,000-per-plate fundraiser Cook is hosting for Clinton with his Apple colleague, Lisa Jackson, at the end of this month.

Apple isn’t the only corporation doing Clinton’s bidding. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said Clinton made a deal with Google and that the tech giant is “directly engaged” in her campaign. It’s been widely reported Clinton hired Eric Schmidt—chairman of Alphabet, the parent company of Google—to set up a tech company called The Groundwork. Assange claims this was to ensure Clinton had the “engineering talent to win the election.” He also pointed out that many members of Clinton’s staff have worked for Google, and some of her former employees now work at Google.

So it should come as no surprise that there have been multiple reports accusing Google of manipulating searches to bury negative stories about Clinton. SourceFed details how Google alters its auto-complete functions to paint Clinton in a positive light.

For example, when you type “Hillary Clinton cri” into other engines like Yahoo! or Bing, the most popular autofills are “Hillary Clinton criminal charges” but in Google it’s “Hillary Clinton crime reform.” Google denies they changed their algorithm to help Clinton, and insists the company does not favor any candidate. They also claim their algorithms don’t show predicted queries that are offensive or disparaging.

But Google has gotten into hot water on multiple occasions for connecting Trump to Adolf Hitler. In June, when users searched “when Hitler was born” it generated the expected information on Hitler but also an image of Trump. In July, searches for Trump’s book, Crippled America, returned images of Adolf Hitler’s manifesto Mein Kempf. Google has since fixed both—but again, why do these issues always conveniently disparage Trump and help Clinton?

Twitter is another culprit. The company has gotten a lot of slack for banning conservatives and Trump supporters such as Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos and, most recently, rapper Azealia Banks after she came out in support of Trump. Twitter has provided vague answers as to why conservative voices have been banned while they’ve allowed other users to call for the killing of cops.

Just yesterday, Buzzfeed revealed that the social media giant’s top executive personally protected the President from seeing critical messages last year. “In 2015, then-Twitter CEO Dick Costolo secretly ordered employees to filter out abusive and hateful replies to President Barack Obama.”

This year, Twitter isn’t just banning conservatives—the platform also changed its algorithms to promote Clinton while giving negative exposure to Trump.

The founders of some of the most popular pro-Trump Twitter handles—including @USAforTrump2016 and @WeNeedTrump—insist Twitter is censoring their content. They’ve pointed out that Twitter changes trending hashtags associated with negative tweets about Clinton (which has been reported before). On August 4, shortly after the hashtag “HillaryAccomplishment” began trending, it was taken over by anti-Clinton users, who used it to mention Benghazi or Emailgate. Eric Spracklen, @USAforTrump2016 founder, noticed the hashtag was quickly changed—pluralized to #HillarysAccomplishments.

“They take away the hashtag that has negative tweets for Clinton and replace it with something that doesn’t so the average person doesn’t see what was really trending,” Spracklen said. “This happens every day.”

Jack Murphy, founder of @WeNeedTrump, says followers complain they often aren’t able to retweet his pro-Trump tweets.

Instagram has also banned accounts that depict Clinton in a negative light. In June, a conservative comedy group called Toughen Up America was banned with no warning or explanation. Last week, the popular Australian-based graffiti artist, Lushsux, was banned from Instagram after he posted photos of a bikini-clad Clinton mural he painted.

“I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist with a tin foil hat, but the timing of the Hillary Clinton mural posting and the deletion that ensued can’t just be a coincidence,” he told the Daily Mail Australia. Lushsux has posted photos of way more graphic murals, including a topless Melania Trump and a naked Donald with his package in full sight. These images did not trigger any censorship from Instagram.

Facebook has a long history of shutting down pages and blocking conservative users while promoting progressive voices like Black Lives Matter activists. The problem became so transparent that Sen. John Thune sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg asking him to explain their practices.

Facebook denies it discriminates against “any sources of ideological origin” and Zuckerberg did meet with conservatives in an attempt to resolve this issue. While some walked away from the meeting encouraged that Zuckerberg wants to repair their relationship, other prominent conservatives rejected the invitation as a publicity stunt. It should be noted that Facebook employees have donated more to Clinton than to any other candidate.

Many conservatives have come to expect this kind of thing from the mainstream media. CNN, which paints itself as the centrist antidote to right-leaning Fox News and left-leaning MSNBC, has actually been among the most disingenuous offenders during this cycle, fully earning its derisive nickname “Clinton News Network.” For example, as NewsBusters pointed out for just one day, “CNN set aside nearly half of its air time on Wednesday’s New Day to various recent controversies involving the Trump campaign — 1 hour, 24 minutes, and 18 seconds over three hours. By contrast, the program clearly didn’t think much of the Wall Street Journal‘s revelation that the Obama administration secretly airlifted $400 million in cash to Iran. John Berman gave a 27-second news brief to the report, but didn’t mention that the payment was sent on “an unmarked cargo plane.” New Day, therefore, devoted over 187 times more coverage to Trump than to the millions to Iran.”

Another favored CNN trick is to present a “balanced” panel comprised of two Republicans, two Democrats and a host, as they did on the afternoon of July 29, just to name one instance of a hundred. However, the Republican side always features one Trump supporter and one “Never Trump” Republican, with the host grilling the Trump Supporter—often a beleaguered Jeffrey Lord—in what amounts to a 4-on-1. So much for balance.

Right now, CNN has a story on its site called “Which Republicans oppose Trump and why?” There’s no corresponding story about Democrats who oppose Clinton, even though her underdog challenger in the primary lasted far longer and received far more votes than any of Trump’s Republican challengers.

No Republican willing to criticize Trump is too insignificant to merit coverage on CNN. When a minor Christie staffer announced on her personal Facebook that she’d be backing Hillary, she somehow merited a 1200 word story on CNN’s website and euphoric coverage on the air by Brooke Baldwin for “splitting with her party.”

So that’s the traditional media. But this new strand, where one cannot even search for alternative viewpoints amid technology companies who stand to benefit from the free-trade policies and eased immigration regulations of a Clinton presidence, represents a dangerous sea change. There’s absolutely no question the digital forums we use every day are censoring conservatives and favoring Clinton. You can’t simply scroll through photos on Instagram, look for a video game in the App Store or do a quick Google search without being fed anti-Trump and pro-Clinton propaganda.

These companies are engaging in activity that can quickly lead down a very dangerous slippery slope and this should concern all freedom-loving Americans—not just conservatives. If you don’t know when the election is, no problem! Just Google it and see for yourself what comes up…

 

Google, before adjustments were made to the ‘when is the election’ search. (Screenshot: Google)

 

Disclosure: Donald Trump is the father-in-law of Jared Kushner, the publisher of Observer Media.

 

<

p class=”western” style=”line-height:120%;orphans:2;widows:2;” align=”left”>Liz Crokin is an award-winning author, journalist, political pundit and an advocate for sex crime victims. Her work has appeared in the RedEye Edition of the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times: Splash, Townhall, Elite Daily, Marie Claire and Us Weekly. Follower her on Twitter and Instagram @LizCrokin.

 

Tech Companies Apple, WordPress, Twitter, Google, and Instagram Collude to Defeat Trump

Tech Companies Apple, WordPress, Twitter, Google, and Instagram Collude to Defeat Trump

There is no such thing as Pro-Trump free speech as Clinton corporate allies serve up a carefully curated view of the campaign

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Voters expect CNN and others to tilt American elections. What’s new is that social media and even video games are getting in on the act. (Photo: Sara D. Davis/Getty Images)

My dad always told me that conservative candidates have to work twice as hard as their liberal opponents to win elections because they’re fighting two opponents: the Democratic Party and the media.

The usual suspects from left-leaning major media outlets like The New York Times, MSNBC, CNN and even entertainment networks are doing everything in their power to ensure a Clinton victory. Look no further than to Wolf Blitzer mincing around and drinking wine at the Democratic convention, celebrating Hillary’s nomination. But the propaganda skewing this election runs much deeper than just the media: our iPhones, iPads, social media networks, Google and even video games are all in the tank for Hillary Clinton—and it’s chilling.

I began looking into how strong the bias and censorship runs in these forums after I did an interview on the pro-Trump podcast, MAGA. The show’s host, Mark Hammond, was disappointed Apple wouldn’t run his show without an “explicit” warning. Hammond’s podcast didn’t contain content that would be deemed explicit under Apple’s policy, and most other shows in the News & Politics category aren’t labeled as such.

On June 18, Hammond talked to Sandra, a representative from Apple. She explained that, since the description of his show is pro-Trump, his show is explicit in nature—because the subject matter is Donald Trump. So, an Apple employee concluded the Republican presidential candidate is explicit.

iTunes has dozens of podcasts discussing Osama Bin Laden and Adolf Hitler—none of which is marked explicit. I encouraged Hammond to contact Apple again, via email to their podcast support team. Within 48 hours he received a response from “Tim,” who informed Hammond that his podcast would be updated to “clean” within 24 hours.

Further digging on Apple revealed more evidence that the computer giant is feeding users pro-Hillary and anti-Trump propaganda.

Over the past year, Apple twice refused to publish a satirical Clinton Emailgate game, “Capitol HillAwry,” claiming it was “offensive” and “mean spirited” even though the game’s developer, John Matze, cited in communications with Apple that the game fits the standards of Apple’s own satire policy. Apple has, however, approved dozens of games poking fun at Donald Trump—including a game called “Dump Trump,” which depicts the GOP nominee as a giant turd.

On July 25, Breitbart exposed this blatant double standard and favoritism toward Clinton. A few days after the article was released, Apple caved and published Capitol HillAwry, 15 months after Matze’s first attempt to go live.

While it’s commendable that Apple resolved both situations, Trump supporters and conservative users should never have faced such biased treatment in the first place.

Around the same time I was a guest on MAGA, a friend complained to me about how biased his Apple News feed is against Trump. I set up an Apple News account on my iPhone.

First step: select an outlet. Fox News. Conservative. But my news feed? Liberal.

And if there are articles above the fold from more right-leaning sites? They paint Trump in a negative light and Hillary in a positive light. Of all the channels listed in the Apple News politics section, only two of the 16 arguably lean right—the rest are reliably left-wing.

This has, of course, been pointed out before, and anyone with an iPhone or iPad can go to Apple News to determine on his or her own if Apple is pushing leftist propaganda. Apple claims not to endorse candidates, but their actions suggest otherwise, and some of their executives—including CEO Tim Cook—actively support Clinton’s campaign. Buzzfeed recently obtained an invitation to a private $50,000-per-plate fundraiser Cook is hosting for Clinton with his Apple colleague, Lisa Jackson, at the end of this month.

Apple isn’t the only corporation doing Clinton’s bidding. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange said Clinton made a deal with Google and that the tech giant is “directly engaged” in her campaign. It’s been widely reported Clinton hired Eric Schmidt—chairman of Alphabet, the parent company of Google—to set up a tech company called The Groundwork. Assange claims this was to ensure Clinton had the “engineering talent to win the election.” He also pointed out that many members of Clinton’s staff have worked for Google, and some of her former employees now work at Google.

So it should come as no surprise that there have been multiple reports accusing Google of manipulating searches to bury negative stories about Clinton. SourceFed details how Google alters its auto-complete functions to paint Clinton in a positive light.

For example, when you type “Hillary Clinton cri” into other engines like Yahoo! or Bing, the most popular autofills are “Hillary Clinton criminal charges” but in Google it’s “Hillary Clinton crime reform.” Google denies they changed their algorithm to help Clinton, and insists the company does not favor any candidate. They also claim their algorithms don’t show predicted queries that are offensive or disparaging.

But Google has gotten into hot water on multiple occasions for connecting Trump to Adolf Hitler. In June, when users searched “when Hitler was born” it generated the expected information on Hitler but also an image of Trump. In July, searches for Trump’s book, Crippled America, returned images of Adolf Hitler’s manifesto Mein Kempf. Google has since fixed both—but again, why do these issues always conveniently disparage Trump and help Clinton?

Twitter is another culprit. The company has gotten a lot of slack for banning conservatives and Trump supporters such as Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos and, most recently, rapper Azealia Banks after she came out in support of Trump. Twitter has provided vague answers as to why conservative voices have been banned while they’ve allowed other users to call for the killing of cops.

Just yesterday, Buzzfeed revealed that the social media giant’s top executive personally protected the President from seeing critical messages last year. “In 2015, then-Twitter CEO Dick Costolo secretly ordered employees to filter out abusive and hateful replies to President Barack Obama.”

This year, Twitter isn’t just banning conservatives—the platform also changed its algorithms to promote Clinton while giving negative exposure to Trump.

The founders of some of the most popular pro-Trump Twitter handles—including @USAforTrump2016 and @WeNeedTrump—insist Twitter is censoring their content. They’ve pointed out that Twitter changes trending hashtags associated with negative tweets about Clinton (which has been reported before). On August 4, shortly after the hashtag “HillaryAccomplishment” began trending, it was taken over by anti-Clinton users, who used it to mention Benghazi or Emailgate. Eric Spracklen, @USAforTrump2016 founder, noticed the hashtag was quickly changed—pluralized to #HillarysAccomplishments.

“They take away the hashtag that has negative tweets for Clinton and replace it with something that doesn’t so the average person doesn’t see what was really trending,” Spracklen said. “This happens every day.”

Jack Murphy, founder of @WeNeedTrump, says followers complain they often aren’t able to retweet his pro-Trump tweets.

Instagram has also banned accounts that depict Clinton in a negative light. In June, a conservative comedy group called Toughen Up America was banned with no warning or explanation. Last week, the popular Australian-based graffiti artist, Lushsux, was banned from Instagram after he posted photos of a bikini-clad Clinton mural he painted.

“I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist with a tin foil hat, but the timing of the Hillary Clinton mural posting and the deletion that ensued can’t just be a coincidence,” he told the Daily Mail Australia. Lushsux has posted photos of way more graphic murals, including a topless Melania Trump and a naked Donald with his package in full sight. These images did not trigger any censorship from Instagram.

Facebook has a long history of shutting down pages and blocking conservative users while promoting progressive voices like Black Lives Matter activists. The problem became so transparent that Sen. John Thune sent a letter to Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg asking him to explain their practices.

Facebook denies it discriminates against “any sources of ideological origin” and Zuckerberg did meet with conservatives in an attempt to resolve this issue. While some walked away from the meeting encouraged that Zuckerberg wants to repair their relationship, other prominent conservatives rejected the invitation as a publicity stunt. It should be noted that Facebook employees have donated more to Clinton than to any other candidate.

Many conservatives have come to expect this kind of thing from the mainstream media. CNN, which paints itself as the centrist antidote to right-leaning Fox News and left-leaning MSNBC, has actually been among the most disingenuous offenders during this cycle, fully earning its derisive nickname “Clinton News Network.” For example, as NewsBusters pointed out for just one day, “CNN set aside nearly half of its air time on Wednesday’s New Day to various recent controversies involving the Trump campaign — 1 hour, 24 minutes, and 18 seconds over three hours. By contrast, the program clearly didn’t think much of the Wall Street Journal‘s revelation that the Obama administration secretly airlifted $400 million in cash to Iran. John Berman gave a 27-second news brief to the report, but didn’t mention that the payment was sent on “an unmarked cargo plane.” New Day, therefore, devoted over 187 times more coverage to Trump than to the millions to Iran.”

Another favored CNN trick is to present a “balanced” panel comprised of two Republicans, two Democrats and a host, as they did on the afternoon of July 29, just to name one instance of a hundred. However, the Republican side always features one Trump supporter and one “Never Trump” Republican, with the host grilling the Trump Supporter—often a beleaguered Jeffrey Lord—in what amounts to a 4-on-1. So much for balance.

Right now, CNN has a story on its site called “Which Republicans oppose Trump and why?” There’s no corresponding story about Democrats who oppose Clinton, even though her underdog challenger in the primary lasted far longer and received far more votes than any of Trump’s Republican challengers.

No Republican willing to criticize Trump is too insignificant to merit coverage on CNN. When a minor Christie staffer announced on her personal Facebook that she’d be backing Hillary, she somehow merited a 1200 word story on CNN’s website and euphoric coverage on the air by Brooke Baldwin for “splitting with her party.”

So that’s the traditional media. But this new strand, where one cannot even search for alternative viewpoints amid technology companies who stand to benefit from the free-trade policies and eased immigration regulations of a Clinton presidence, represents a dangerous sea change. There’s absolutely no question the digital forums we use every day are censoring conservatives and favoring Clinton. You can’t simply scroll through photos on Instagram, look for a video game in the App Store or do a quick Google search without being fed anti-Trump and pro-Clinton propaganda.

These companies are engaging in activity that can quickly lead down a very dangerous slippery slope and this should concern all freedom-loving Americans—not just conservatives. If you don’t know when the election is, no problem! Just Google it and see for yourself what comes up…

Google

Google, before adjustments were made to the ‘when is the election’ search. (Screenshot: Google)

Disclosure: Donald Trump is the father-in-law of Jared Kushner, the publisher of Observer Media.

Liz Crokin is an award-winning author, journalist, political pundit and an advocate for sex crime victims. Her work has appeared in the RedEye Edition of the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times: Splash, Townhall, Elite Daily, Marie Claire and Us Weekly. Follower her on Twitter and Instagram @LizCrokin.

PUBLIC NOTICE TO WORDPRESS ON CENSORSHIP

 

Matt Mullenweg – CEO

 

Automattic Inc.

 

WORDPRESS

 

132 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94107

 

(877) 273-3049
court-orders@wordpress.com
tosreports@wordpress.com
law-enforcement@wordpress.com

 

Aug. 12, 2016

 

Dear Matt and WordPress Users and Staff:

 

 

The Alliance Of Independent Newspapers and Publishers (The Alliance) was formed in 2002 and has had a decade long working relationship with WordPress. We have helped thousands of newspapers start thousands of online news sites. We have brought some of the largest volumes of users and readers to WordPress. Among other things, the publishers, writers and blogger contributors are highly dedicated to the bi-partisan termination of corruption. The Alliance has put both corrupt DNC and GOP individuals in prison, and terminated their government jobs and corrupt organizations. Our work has launched FBI raids, epic and successful public interest law-suits, the disclosure of felony-class abuse of power, and other large format law enforcement activities. We report to senior agents at the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies.

 

 

On August 12, 2016 WordPress attacked us, our readers and public decency, overall. WordPress arbitrarily took down thousands of our members public news sites on orders from DNC campaign financiers who fear the loss of their control of their own manipulated media. In a jury trial, We will show emails, documents and provide WordPress staff to prove this. WordPress violated our paid contracts with WordPress, SLAPP Laws, Freedom of the Press rights, Fair Use Doctrine, Creative Commons standards and engaged in fraud, RICO violations, interference and many abuses of the public trust. Additionally, in an ongoing federal criminal investigation involving hundreds of billions of dollars of the embezzlement of taxpayer dollars, many of those sites were being used for the ongoing reports to federal law enforcement including the FBI, GAO, FTC, SEC, EU, OSC, IG and other agencies; thus you are interfering with a criminal investigation.

 

 

The take-downs are so voluminous, arbitrary and timed that this targeted attack and massive censorship intent, by WordPress, is obvious from the facts. Our publishers were too good at their jobs and they exposed criminal activities which WordPress sought to cover up. No court or public opinion poll on Earth will tolerate that. Law enforcement, consumer rights groups and our own investigators will NEVER tolerate that. The Alliance has terminated multi-billion dollar corrupt companies, dirty AG’s, racketeers, hubris-ridden illicit tech moguls and illegal business Cartels. We are pretty certain you will not survive the wrath of thousands of attacked reporters who are very creative, some intelligence-agency trained and dedicated to terminating the abuse of the public without breaking a single law and with the help of law enforcement. Our law suits have set national legal precedents.

 

You made up arbitrary, nonsense reasons about your concurrent take-downs of thousands of newspapers. There was no “spam” on any of the sites, if there was, show us the link and a screen-shot with the “spam” circled. There was no content created with the primary purpose of mass solicitation or increasing traffic of third-party sites. The only promotions on the sites were the promotion of WordPress and WordPress’s own ads to its third party sites placed there by WordPress. There was no unwanted promotional content or content written for gaming search engines. There was only news which WordPress campaign financiers wanted hushed-up. Many of the sites used WordPress’s own multi-site publishing tool which WordPress promotes for multi-site authoring.

 

 

WordPress gets tax benefits, public access perks, tax shelters, and other financial benefits because it holds itself out as a public interest community service. When the “public interest service” suddenly turns into a mercenary censor of the news on behalf of crooked covert financial backers, it loses all of it’s rights and credibility. We are all volunteers, you have deep pocket tech billionaires pulling the strings in this incident. Who wins on the karma points there? WordPress can suffer the same disclosures that Gawker Media and Enron did, and also disappear, or it can take responsibility for its actions and correct this today before the books, investigative reports, videos, subpeonas, leak docs and other fun items get torrent-ed across the planet. A lawsuit will be the least of your problems. Turn the sites back on, Today!

 

 

Thanks Matt-

 

 

 

The Alliance

Internet censorship – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, … Censors may create their own online publications and Web sites to guide online opinion.

Beating Internet Censors With BitTorrent’s Maelstrom …

BitTorrent Inc, the company behind the popular file-sharing client uTorrent, hopes to start a new revolution with its people-powered browser Maelstrom. https://torrentfreak.com/beating-inter[…]-bittorrents-maelstrom-browser-150419/

Censors Big Story About Government …

Related posts from other siteshttp://olduvaiblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/30/directing … Also Reddit censors any …

 

This was BLOCKED from my site. WordPress Censors at Work …

I tried from the original post and from a reblogged site, both were CENSORED by WordPress. Beware, the scumbags are at work. I copied it …

google cached
 

Mirroring a Censored WordPress Blog

Mirroring a Censored WordPress Blog, a guide by Global Voices Advocacy … This guide is for bloggers with self-hosted WordPress blogs who believe their sites

Striking Back Against Censorship — WordPress.com News

 Create a free website or easily build a blog on WordPress.com. Hundreds of … Unfortunately, we also see many cases of censorship aimed at …

 

WORDPRESS.COM BEGINS DELETING THOUSANDS OF WEBSITES ON ORDERS FROM CAMPAIGN FINANCIERS

WORDPRESS.COM, long presumed to be the free public website that could help shift the information age, has now begun shutting down tons of websites which make statements in conflict with certain campaign financiers political business interests.

This is “Beyond simple censorship” say website owners with vast numbers of loyal readers. This is the precise and tactical elimination of public information.

Most of these sites are WIKI’s or public news sites where non-mainstream news and comments are published.

The public is urged to email WORDPRESS at: tosreports@wordpress.com  and tell them to stop censoring the public news and information for political purposes.

WORDPRESS is using the most fantastical interpretations of their TOS to justify taking down any news websites that irritate their campaign finance bosses.

 

Did the Epic DNC hacked Email Trove Force Ariana Huffington to quite HuffPo?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Huffington will leave the company in coming weeks to run Thrive Global, a company focused on working with employers to improve the well-being of their staffers, the Wall Street Journal first reported. When the venture secured Series A funding last week, Huffington said it became clear she could not carry on with both ventures.

 

“I really thought I could do both, but as we started building it up, I realized that it really needed my full attention,” she told the Journal. “It is important to know when one door closes and another opens and I felt that moment had arrived.”

 

Huffington broke into the health business with a string of books focused on better living. Her latest, “The Sleep Revolution,” was published in April.

The 66-year-old Greek native co-founded Huffington Post in 2005 with Kenneth Lerer, Jonah Peretti, and the late Andrew Breitbart, each of whom went on to become major players in digital media except Breitbart is thought to have been killed with shellfish toxins which simulate a heart attack.

Election 2016: BREAKING: THE HACKERS HAVE “ALL OF THE DNC INFO”!!!

Election 2016: BREAKING: THE HACKERS HAVE “ALL OF THE DNC INFO”!!!

 

 

  • “October Surprises” will come in waves, like a Tsunami, and may devastate DNC, Obama and Clinton.

  • Dirty deals and illegal campaign financing to be exposed

 

Hack of Democrats’ Accounts Was Wider Than Believed, Officials Say

 

By ERIC LICHTBLAU and ERIC SCHMITT – NEW YORK TIMES

 

Photo

 

 

Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz at the Democratic National Convention last month. She resigned as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee after a trove of hacked internal emails was released. Credit Jim Wilson/The New York Times

 

WASHINGTON — A Russian cyberattack that targeted Democratic politicians was bigger than it first appeared and breached the private email accounts of more than 100 party officials and groups, officials with knowledge of the case said Wednesday.

 

The widening scope of the attack has prompted the F.B.I. to broaden its investigation, and agents have begun notifying a long list of Democratic officials that the Russians may have breached their personal accounts.

 

The main targets appear to have been the personal email accounts of Hillary Clinton’s campaign officials and party operatives, along with a number of party organizations.

 

Officials have acknowledged that the Russian hackers gained access to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is the fund-raising arm for House Democrats, and to the Democratic National Committee, including a D.N.C. voter analytics program used by Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign.

 

But the hack now appears to have extended well beyond those groups, and organizations like the Democratic Governors’ Association may also have been affected, according to Democrats involved in the investigation. However, in a statement Thursday, the governors association said it “was informed that our analytics data was not compromised as part of the D.N.C. breach that affected the Clinton campaign.”

 

The group added that “we have no reason to believe that any D.G.A. emails were compromised by the D.N.C. breach.”

 

Democrats say they are bracing for the possibility that another batch of damaging or embarrassing internal material could become public before the November presidential election.

 

The attack has already proved politically damaging. On the eve of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia last month, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigned as D.N.C. chairwoman after WikiLeaks released a trove of hacked internal emails showing party officials eager for Mrs. Clinton to win the nomination over Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

 

American intelligence agencies have said they have “high confidence” that the attack was the work of Russian intelligence agencies. It has injected a heavy dose of international intrigue into an already chaotic presidential campaign as Democrats have alleged that the Russians are trying to help tilt the election toward the Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump.

 

Mr. Trump stunned Democrats and Republicans when he said last month that he hoped Russian intelligence services had successfully hacked Mrs. Clinton’s email, and encouraged them to publish whatever they may have stolen, although he said later that he was being sarcastic.

 

Intelligence and law enforcement officials, however, are taking the issue seriously.

 

F.B.I. officials briefed staff members of House and Senate Intelligence Committees last week on the investigation into the theft of emails and documents from the Democratic National Committee. Briefings for other congressional committees are expected in the coming days.

 

Donald Trump By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 1:06 Trump Urges Russia to Locate Clinton Emails

 

Video

 

Trump Urges Russia to Locate Clinton Emails

 

Donald J. Trump encouraged Russia at a news conference on Wednesday to find Hillary Clinton’s missing correspondence.

 

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS on Publish Date July 27, 2016. Photo by Todd Heisler/The New York Times. Watch in Times Video »

 

 

 

Much of the briefing to the committee staff focused on the fact that American intelligence agencies have virtually no doubt that the Russian government was behind the theft, according to one staff member, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss elements of the confidential briefing.

 

The extension of the hack’s scope beyond the D.N.C. and the House Democratic committee added a troubling new element to the case, the staff member said.

 

American authorities remain uncertain whether the electronic break-in to the committee’s computer systems was intended as fairly routine cyberespionage or as part of an effort to manipulate the presidential election.

 

Russian motives are still an open question, said a federal law enforcement official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity.

 

There is no evidence so far that the theft penetrated the emails of lawmakers or staff members who serve on the Intelligence Committees, two staff members said.

 

The F.B.I. says it has no direct evidence that Mrs. Clinton’s private email server was hacked by the Russians or anyone else. But in June, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said that intruders had tried, and that any successful intruders were probably far too skilled to leave evidence of their intrusion behind. Law enforcement officials said he had the Russians in mind.

 

Mrs. Clinton’s aides were concerned about the possibility of an outside breach after a hacker calling himself “Guccifer” got into the email account in 2013 of Sidney Blumenthal, a longtime confidante of Mrs. Clinton’s who often emailed her on her private server, according to new documents released Wednesday.

 

Cheryl D. Mills, a lawyer and adviser for Mrs. Clinton, said she discussed the 2013 hack with the technician who ran Mrs. Clinton’s private server and considered “whether this event might affect Secretary Clinton’s email,” according to a written account Ms. Mills provided to Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group that is suing the State Department.

 

So far, it does not appear that the Russian hackers sought or gained access to any computer systems used by Mr. Trump, who is known to avoid email, officials said.

 

Since news of the D.N.C. hack broke in June, a number of Democratic organizations have been scrubbing their files to determine what internal information might have been compromised. They have also been shoring up their cybersecurity defenses to guard against another attack.

 

An official with the D.N.C., speaking on condition of anonymity, said the committee took the threat very seriously, but would not comment on specific security steps taken.

 

WikiLeaks, the group that put out the D.N.C. emails publicly last month, interjected itself into the hacking case again this week when it offered a $20,000 reward for information on the shooting death last month of a former D.N.C. staff member, Seth Rich, outside his Washington home. His killing fueled speculation on the internet that he was somehow tied to the hacked emails, but the police have not given any credence to that speculation.

 

The WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, has made it clear that he would like to hurt Mrs. Clinton’s bid for the White House, opposing her candidacy on policy and personal grounds. He has hinted that he has more material about the presidential campaign that he could release.

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

Today’s Tech Oligarchs Are Worse Than the Robber Barons

 

 

Photo Illustration by Kelly Caminero/ The Daily Beast

 

Joel Kotkin

 

Joel Kotkin

 

Our Silicon Valley Robber Barons

 

Today’s Tech Oligarchs Are Worse Than the Robber Barons

 

Yes, Jay Gould was a bad guy. But at least he helped build societal wealth. Not so our Silicon Valley overlords. And they have our politicians in their pockets.

 

A decade ago these guys—and they are mostly guys—were folk heroes, and for many people, they remain so. They represented everything traditional business, from Wall Street and Hollywood to the auto industry, in their pursuit of sure profits and golden parachutes, was not—hip, daring, risk-taking folk seeking to change the world for the better.

 

Now from San Francisco to Washington and Brussels, the tech oligarchs are something less attractive: a fearsome threat whose ambitions to control our future politics, media, and commerce seem without limits. Amazon, Google, Facebook, Netflix, and Uber may be improving our lives in many ways, but they also are disrupting old industries—and the lives of the many thousands of people employed by them. And as the tech boom has expanded, these individuals and companies have gathered economic resources to match their ambitions.

 

And as their fortunes have ballooned, so has their hubris. They see themselves as somehow better than the scum of Wall Street or the trolls in Houston or Detroit. It’s their intelligence, not just their money, that makes them the proper global rulers. In their contempt for the less cognitively gifted, they are waging what The Atlantic recently called “a war on stupid people.”

 

 

I had friends of mine who attended MIT back in the 1970s  tell me they used to call themselves “tools,” which told us us something about how they regarded themselves and were regarded. Technologists were clearly bright people whom others used to solve problems or make money. Divorced from any mystical value, their technical innovations, in the words of the French sociologist Marcel Mauss, constituted “a traditional action made effective.” Their skills could be applied to agriculture, metallurgy, commerce, and energy.

 

In recent years, like Skynet in the Terminator, the tools have achieved consciousness, imbuing themselves with something of a society-altering mission. To a large extent, they have created what the sociologist Alvin Gouldner called “the new class” of highly educated professionals who would remake society. Initially they made life better—making spaceflight possible, creating advanced medical devices and improving communications (the internet); they built machines that were more efficient and created great research tools for both business and individuals. Yet they did not seek to disrupt all industries—such as energy, food, automobiles—that still employed millions of people. They remained “tools” rather than rulers.

 

With the massive wealth they have now acquired, the tools at the top now aim to dominate those they used to serve. Netflix is gradually undermining Hollywood, just as iTunes essentially murdered the music industry. Uber is wiping out the old order of cabbies, and Google, Facebook, and the social media people are gradually supplanting newspapers. Amazon has already undermined the book industry and is seeking to do the same to apparel, supermarkets, and electronics.

 

Past economic revolutions—from the steam engine to the jet engine and the internet—created in their wake a productivity revolution. To be sure, as brute force or slower technologies lost out, so did some companies and classes of people. But generally the economy got stronger and more productive. People got places sooner, information flows quickened, and new jobs were created, many of them paying middle- and working-class people a living wage.

 

This is largely not the case today. As numerous scholars including Robert Gordon have pointed out, the new social-media based technologies have had little positive impact on economic productivity, now growing at far lower rates than during past industrial booms, including the 1990s internet revolution.

 

Much of the problem, notes MIT Technology Review editor David Rotman, is that most information investment no longer serves primarily the basic industries that still drive most of the economy, providing a wide array of jobs for middle- and working-class Americans. This slowdown in productivity, notes Chad Syverson, an economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, has decreased gross domestic product by $2.7 trillion in 2015—about $8,400 for every American. “If you think Silicon Valley is going to fuel growing prosperity, you are likely to be disappointed,” suggests Rotman.

 

 

One reason may be the nature of “social media,” which is largely a replacement for technology that already exists, or in many cases, is simply a diversion, even a source of time-wasting addiction for many. Having millions of millennials spend endless hours on Facebook is no more valuable than binging on television shows, except that TV actually employs people.

 

At their best, the social media firms have supplanted the old advertising model, essentially undermining the old agencies and archaic forms like newspapers, books, and magazines. But overall information employment has barely increased. It’s up 70,000 jobs since 2010, but this is after losing 700,000 jobs in the first decade of the 21st century.

 

Tech firms had once been prodigious employers of American workers. But now, many depend on either workers abroad of imported under H-1B visa program. These are essentially indentured servants whom they can hire for cheap and prevent from switching jobs. Tens of thousands of jobs in Silicon Valley, and many corporate IT departments elsewhere, rent these “technocoolies,” often replacing longstanding U.S. workers.

 

Expanding H-1Bs, not surprisingly, has become a priority issue for oligarchs such as Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and a host of tech firms, including Yahoo, Cisco Systems, NetApp, Hewlett-Packard, and Intel, firms that in some cases have been laying off thousands of American workers. Most of the bought-and-paid-for GOP presidential contenders, as well as the money-grubbing Hillary Clinton, embrace the program, with some advocating expansion. The only opposition came from two candidates disdained by the oligarchs, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump.

 

Now cab drivers, retail clerks, and even food service workers face technology-driven extinction. Some of this may be positive in the long run, certainly in the case of Uber and Lyft, to the benefit of consumers. But losing the single mom waitress at Denny’s to an iPad does not seem to be a major advance toward social justice or a civilized society—nor much of a boost for our society’s economic competitiveness. Wiping out cab drivers, many of them immigrants, for part-time workers driving Ubers provides opportunity for some, but it does threaten what has long been one of the traditional ladders to upward mobility.

 

Then there is the extraordinary geographical concentration of the new tech wave. Previous waves were much more highly dispersed. But not now. Social media and search, the drivers of the current tech boom, are heavily concentrated in the Bay Area, which has a remarkable 40 percent of all jobs in the software publishing and search field. In contrast, previous tech waves created jobs in numerous locales.

 

Get The Beast In Your Inbox!

 

 

Daily DigestStart and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.

 

Cheat SheetA speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don’t).

 

By clicking “Subscribe,” you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

 

This concentration has been two-edged sword, even in its Bay Area heartland. The massive infusions of wealth and new jobs has created enormous tensions in San Francisco and its environs. Many San Franciscans, for example, feel like second class citizens in their own city. Others oppose tax measures in San Francisco that are favorable to tech companies like Twitter. There is now a movement on to reverse course and apply “tech taxes” on these firms, in part to fund affordable housing and homeless services. Further down in the Valley, there is also widespread opposition to plans to increase the density of the largely suburban areas in order to house the tech workforce. Rather than being happy with the tech boom, many in the Bay Area see their quality of life slipping and upwards of a third are now considering a move elsewhere.

 

Once, we hoped that the technology revolution would create ever more dispersion of wealth and power. This dream has been squashed. Rather than an effusion of start-ups we see the downturn in new businesses. Information Technology, notes The Economist, is now the most heavily concentrated of all large economic sectors, with four firms accounting for close to 50 percent of all revenues. Although the tech boom has created some very good jobs for skilled workers, half of all jobs being created today are in low-wage services like retail and restaurants—at least until they are replaced by iPads and robots.

 

What kind of world do these disrupters see for us? One vision, from Singularity University, co-founded by Google’s genius technologist Ray Kurzweil, envisions robots running everything; humans, outside the programmers, would become somewhat irrelevant. I saw this mentality for myself at a Wall Street Journal conference on the environment when a prominent venture capitalist did not see any problem with diminishing birthrates among middle-class Americans since the Valley planned to make the hoi polloi redundant.

 

Once somewhat inept about politics, the oligarchs now know how to press their agenda. Much of the Valley’s elite–venture capitalist John Doerr, Kleiner Perkins, Vinod Khosla, and Google—routinely use the political system to cash in on subsidies, particularly for renewable energy, including such dodgy projects as California’s Ivanpah solar energy plant. Arguably the most visionary of the oligarchs, Elon Musk, has built his business empire largely through subsidies and grants.

 

Musk also has allegedly skirted labor laws to fill out his expanded car factory in Fremont, with $5-an-hour Eastern European labor; even when blue-collar opportunities do arise, rarely enough, the oligarchs seem ready to fill them with foreigners, either abroad or under dodgy visa schemes. Progressive rhetoric once used to attack oil or agribusiness firms does not seem to work against the tech elite. They can exploit labor laws and engage in monopoly practices with little threat of investigation by progressive Obama regulators.

 

In the short term, the oligarchs can expect an even more pliable regime under our likely next president, Hillary Clinton. The fundraiser extraordinaire has been raising money from the oligarchs like Musk and companies such as Facebook. Each may vie to supplant Google, the company with the best access to the Obama administration, over the past seven years.

 

What can we expect from the next tech-dominated administration? We can expect moves, backed also by corporate Republicans, to expand H-1B visas, and increased mandates and subsidies for favored sectors like electric cars and renewable energy. Little will be done to protect our privacy—firms like Facebook are determined to limit restrictions on their profitable “sharing” of personal information. But with regard to efforts to break down encryption systems key to corporate sovereignty, they will defend privacy, as seen in Apple’s resistance to sharing information on terrorist iPhones. Not cooperating against murderers of Americans is something of fashion now among the entire hoodie-wearing programmer culture.

 

One can certainly make the case that tech firms are upping the national game; certain cab companies have failed by being less efficient and responsive as well as more costly. Not so, however, the decision of the oligarchs–desperate to appease their progressive constituents–to periodically censor and curate information flows, as we have seen at Twitter and Facebook. Much of this has been directed against politically incorrect conservatives, such as the sometimes outrageous gay provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos.

 

There is a rising tide of concern, including from such progressive icons as former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, about the extraordinary market, political, and culture power of the tech oligarchy. But so far, the oligarchs have played a brilliant double game. They have bought off the progressives with contributions and by endorsing their social liberal and environmental agenda. As for the establishment right, they are too accustomed to genuflecting at mammon to push back against anyone with a 10-digit net worth. This has left much of the opposition at the extremes of right and left, greatly weakening it.

 

Yet over time grassroots Americans may lose their childish awe of the tech establishment. They could recognize that, without some restrictions, they are signing away control of their culture, politics, and economic prospects to the empowered “tools.” They might understand that technology itself is no panacea; it is either a tool to be used to benefit society, increase opportunity, and expand human freedom, or it is nothing more than a new means of oppression.

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

DOJ Officials Caught Seeking To Sabotage Criminal Investigation Of Clinton Financiers

 

Justice Department officials pushed for Clinton Foundation probe

 
Top Justice Department officials pushed for a public corruption probe of the Clinton Foundation earlier this year, but were overruled by their colleagues after a bank alerted the FBI to the “suspicious activity” of a foreign donor to the charity.

Three Justice Department field offices agreed that the agency should pursue the investigation at the behest of the FBI, CNN reported Thursday.

During a previously unreported meeting earlier this year, high-ranking Justice Department officials clashed over the possibility of pursuing a public corruption investigation. According to CNN, the agency had already looked into the Clinton Foundation in 2015 following the publication of a book, Clinton Cash, that detailed allegations of influence peddling.

Hillary Clinton’s involvement in the activities of foundation donors while serving as secretary of state has raised questions about whether she followed the ethics requirements imposed on her and her husband at the outset of her tenure.

While the FBI announced last month its intention to close a year-long probe of Clinton’s private email use without recommending charges, the law enforcement agency had remained silent on the existence of a separate, rumored investigation into the Clinton Foundation.

Silicon Valley’s WORDPRESS Blacklisted the site: https://siliconvalleyblacklisting.wordpress.com/ about Blacklisting

Silicon Valley’s WORDPRESS Blacklisted the site: https://siliconvalleyblacklisting.wordpress.com/ about Blacklisting

..because that site disclosed BlackListing by Silicon Valley companies.

WordPress executives were at a loss to demonstrate any logical TOS violations. WIKI members are seeking comment from WordPress as well but said that they “hoped it was all a misunderstanding”. Organizers had helped organize the Silicon Valley No Poaching Class Action lawsuit which Silicon Valley companies lost.

Old-School Newspapers digital efforts sputter as Open Source News takes over the world

Old-School Newspapers digital efforts sputter as Open Source News takes over the world

 

Six old white guys used to control all of the news. They decided what you got to know about and what you should think about the filtered pre-digested mush they fed the public in order to push their own agenda. As Redstone goes senile, Aisles gets booted and the rest of them fade into the past, ten thousand new news outlets have risen up to replace them and they are thriving. As the old school news dies, the new news as risen to the call.

 

The mainstream news outlets are mired in their routines, their fear of change and their absolute and utter lack of any innovation. They wander through their day on a numb-eyed treadmill of predictability operated by executives who dare not “shake the boat”. Their faces glaze over in fear if anyone mentions “change”. The vast conveyor belt of “approved” content must never vary from the standard.

 

Now that the public has had a taste of the sirloin of free open source news, that public does nor want to go back to eating the plain, and clone-like, Wonder Bread.

 

Pretty girls and square jawed “news-casters” on 6PM local Network affiliate News are now called “Propaganda Readers”. Nobody believes them or cares about their overt corporate filtering. The world has Voat.co, Reddit.com. Blogs and other free and un-manipulated news sources, most with almost no ads.

 

 

AFP

 

By Rob Lever

 

 

 

 

Washington (AFP) – Paywalls were supposed to help rescue newspapers from the crisis of sinking print circulation as readers shifted to getting their news online.

But with a few exceptions, they have failed to deliver much relief, prompting some news organizations to rethink their digital strategies.

Newspapers in the English-speaking world ended paywalls some 69 times through May 2015, including 41 temporary and 28 permanent drops, according to a study by University of Southern California researchers.

Paywalls “generate only a small fraction of industry revenue,” with estimates ranging from one percent in the United States to 10 percent internationally, the study in July’s International Journal of Communication said.

“People are far less willing to pay for online news than for print,” said USC journalism professor Mike Ananny, an author of the study.

Newspapers are in a difficult spot, he added, because online advertising generates a fraction of print’s revenue, and news organizations are already pressured by falling print circulation.

Alan Mutter, a former Chicago and San Francisco newspaper editor who now consults for media organizations, said the research confirms that paywalls have value in relatively rare circumstances.

View gallery

A survey this year by the American Press Institute showed 77 of the 98 US newspapers with circulatio …

– Free news –

The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Financial Times have been relatively successful with paywalls because of their unique content, he said.

“It’s hard for a general-interest website to charge for news that you can get for free with a few clicks.”

Paywalls can backfire also “because they put a barrier between the newspaper and the casual reader,” he added.

“They are truncating the size of the digital market, when the most important factor for digital is scale.”

A survey this year by the American Press Institute showed 77 of the 98 US newspapers with circulations above 50,000 used some type of online subscription, which could be a “hard” paywall that fences off all content or allows some free.

View gallery

Newsweek lifted its paywall for most content in February, …

Newsweek lifted its paywall for most content in February, limiting the number of free magazine featu …

But a number of English-language news organizations have dropped their paywalls in recent months, including the Toronto Star, and British dailies The Independent and The Sun.

Among US dailies, the San Francisco Chronicle dropped its paywall in 2013. The Dallas Morning News did the same in 2014 before reinstituting a “metered” system allowing up to 10 free articles.

Newsweek lifted its paywall for most content in February, limiting the number of free magazine features for nonsubscribers.

A study this year by Oxford University’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism found only 10 percent of readers in English-speaking countries were willing to pay for digital news.

That number rose to 15 percent in Denmark and Finland, 20 percent in Poland and Sweden and 27 percent in Norway.

“English-language publishers face a more difficult task in trying to build a large paywall business because there is so much free English content,” Mutter said.

View gallery

Newspapers in the English-speaking world ended paywalls some 69 times through May 2015, including 41 …

– Notable exceptions –

Of the paywalls erected in the past few years, many have delivered lackluster results, said Ken Doctor, a media consultant who writes the blog Newsonomics.

“The ones that were launched in 2012 to 2014 had good early results and they all largely stalled,” he said.

“They are no longer gaining much in the way of new digital subscriptions, and their print is in rapid decline.”

But there are some notable successes in addition to the most prominent newspapers, Doctor said.

The Boston Globe raised its digital subscription price sharply to $1 a day and kept 90 percent of its subscriber base, and the Minneapolis Star-Tribune has also had success boosting digital circulation revenues, he said.

View gallery

The Boston Globe raised its digital subscription price sharply to $1 a day and kept 90 percent of it …

Succeeding with paywalls means taking a long view and investing in journalism as well as technology, Doctor said.

“A publisher focused on the long term will recognize that it is reader revenue that is going to have to get them through this disruption,” he said.

“That means they need a large and experienced enough newsroom so the audience feels they are getting something sufficient and something unique,” he added.

“They also need to invest in the digital products so the experience is better.”

However, Mutter argues that paywalls run counter to the goal of boosting readership, and that news organizations need to think differently.

“Print is failing and digital is hard,” he said.

Although newspapers are losing online ad revenues to online platforms, they have the advantage of knowing their local markets and businesses.

“They have to work hard at being local marketing partners in the markets they serve,” Mutter said.

USC’s Ananny said news organizations need to find creative ways to develop pay models that don’t put readers off. He also expressed concern that expanding paywalls may lead to a new “digital divide” where information is available only to those who can afford to pay.

The research suggests that “news organizations serve themselves and readers best when paywalls are fluid,” he said.

Many papers open up free content during major news events or emergencies, fulfilling a civic role, he noted. Others charge readers for access to special features or content.

“News organizations had better understand why they are dropping or raising paywalls,” he said.

“If it’s done in an ad hoc or random manner, it doesn’t help.”

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

Nick Denton Outreach Program Demands That Denton Go To Jail For Abuse, Tax Evasion, Corruption, Defamation…

‘Jail Denton’ Posters Targeting Gawker Founder Appear Around New York City

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

 

Posters calling for Gawker Media founder Nick Denton to be jailed have sprung up around New York City.

Denton, considered a pariah by many due to his media company’s track record of political public shaming and violating the privacy of private individuals, recently joined his company in declaring bankruptcy following Hulk Hogan’s successful lawsuit against the company.

Someone in New York, however, believe that Denton has yet to fully answer for his crimes. The following posters were spotted earlier today in New York, and are being spread on social media by a newly-created Twitter account, “@jail_denton.”

28859065626_c638a9785c_z 28274871953_7a430ba18a_z 28859017956_118717c5dd_z 28889914955_509f71b175_z 28814375841_8a28d7c2d6_z 28784204442_15cc464378_z

A full gallery of high-res photos of the posters at various locations in New York can be found on Flickr.

One of the people behind the poster campaign, who did not wish to be identified, gave the following comment to Breitbart Tech.

Nick Denton deserves prison for numerous crimes, including revenge porn, tax evasion, and child pornography.

GamerGate cost Gawker millions. We see that record as something to rival should Ziff Davis keep up its bid.

The Twitter account @jail_denton continues to post updates on social media. In one tweet, the account threatens to reveal the names of all the companies and advertisers, who, like Ziff Davis, have expressed an interest in buying Gawker.

Another tweet promises “justice” for Sam Biddle, a particularly notorious Gawker journalist whose 2013 article about communications manager Justine Sacco became the example du jour of online public shaming, and is even cited by the Society of Professional Journalists as an example of what not to do. Nick Denton recently appealed directly to Peter Thiel, who funded Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit, to stop pursuing retribution against Biddle.

Hulk Hogan may have won his lawsuit against Gawker, but he’s just one person in a vast list of the beleaguered blogging empire’s victims. Even bankrupt, Gawker is unlikely to know peace.

Let’s get these posters put up in every City say organizers.

Denton and other Gawker honchos gave speeches. Judging by the accounts relayed to Morning Media, a good time was had by all as they faced their imminent extinction for running a political character assassination service. “The fact that Gabriel Snyder, Anna Holmes, Dodai Stewart, Choire Sicha, Jess Coen, Chris Mohney, Elizabeth Spiers, Emily Gould, Lockhart Steele, Andrew Krucoff, Max Read, Tom Scocca, John Cook and lots more were in the same room at once, let alone, for some of them ever, is mind-blowing,” one attendee and Gawker alumnus told us. “That whole pack of hatchet jobbers should be indicted and placed under permanent IRS investigation”.

Is Peter Thiel behind all of this..or Sean Parker..Or Sandy Montenegro…or The Palins..Or a famous movie Director.. or Mitt Romney..or…

https://nickdentonandgawkermedia.wordpress.com

 

Google’s Offices Discovered To Contain The Single Largest Collection Of Assholes On Earth

Google’s Offices Discovered To Contain The Single Largest Collection Of Assholes On Earth

 

 

Washington, DC – Aside from their smug attitudes, their constant embroilments in sexual scandals and hooker controversies, the bizarre deaths connected with Google employees and their unbridled insistence on controlling U.S. Government policy, new revelations expose the ass-holiness of Google like never before.

 

 

The following links demonstrate a clear corporate mission, on the part of the entire management staff and major shareholders of Google, to dive as deep into the dark crevasse of hell as possible. While most of the public has come to realize that Google is, at least, a do-over of the Franklin Roosevelt “Business Plot” that Smedley Butler over-threw, the new reality is far worse.

 

 

Google takes new fedora wearing, BS-bearded Millennial’s and puts them through a Scientology-like cultish “mindfulness” indoctrination designed to germinate new assholes.

 

 

Take a look:

 

 

 

Silicon Valley — Where The Assholes Are – Decline of the Empire

 

I believe Silicon Valley is where the biggest group of assholes lives. … and others are recruiting more monkeys at the google bus stops:.

 

http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2013%5B…%5Dcon-valley-where-the-assholes-are.html

 

 

 

The New Google: ‘All the Assholes Have Left’ but they have not in reality- Recode

 

Bruno Bowden describes Google’s top ranks in a very Google-y way. With stats. “In leadership at Google, you have to be three-plus standard deviations better than …

 

http://www.recode.net/2015/10/23/11619[…]-new-google-all-the-assholes-have-left

 

 

 

 

 

They’re Bigger Assholes Than You Ever Thought | …

 

“Recently, our nation’s financial chieftains have been feeling a little unloved. Venture capitalists are comparing the persecution of the rich to the …

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeNZAzRxIXk

 

 

 

 

 

The No Asshole Rule – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’ t is a book by … Companies who are listed as having appropriate recruitment policies include: Barclays Capital, Google, JetBlue and Men’s Wearhouse.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_No_Asshole_Rule

 

 

 

Are there any assholes that work at Google? – Quora

 

I’ve never met any in the five years that I’ve been here. There are occasional temporary conflicts between two specific people, but that’s life. I think some…

 

https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-assholes-that-work-at-Google

 

 

 

 

 

If You Wear Google’s New Glasses You Are An Asshole – Gawker

 

He was inspired by the assholes who talk in Amtrak’s quiet car, but this reasoning also perfectly explains why those who use Google’s new …

 

http://gawker.com/5990395/if-you-wear-[…]googles-new-glasses-you-are-an-asshole

 

 

Unsold Google Glass Units To Be Donated To Assholes In Africa

 

MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA—Following the company’s announcement that it would discontinue public sales of the wearable technology, Google …

 

http://www.theonion.com/article/unsold[…]s-units-to-be-donated-to-asshole-37798

 

 

 

Google’s Remarkably Close Relationship With the Obama …

 

According to an analysis of White House data, the Google lobbyist with the most White …. The Wall Street Journal noted that Google’s White House visits …… owns or controls — Civis Analytics, The Groundwork, and Tomorrow …

 

https://theintercept.com/2016/04/22/go[…]h-the-obama-white-house-in-two-charts/

 

Report finds hundreds of meetings between White House and Google

 

Google and affiliates have had meetings with the Obama White House at least 427 times. … The data, gleaned from White House meeting logs, showed that in all, 169 …. He who controls the information controls the world.

 

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/2[…]eetings-between-white-house-and-google

 

Who Controls Google? | Who Controls America?

 

Google Inc.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google. Executive Officers: https://www.google.com/about/company/facts/management/#section-executives. Larry Page(Ashkenazi

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;”>https://thezog.wordpress.com/who-controls-google/

 

ELON MUSK’S TOXIC GIGAFACTORY COVER-UP

ELON MUSK’S TOXIC GIGAFACTORY COVER-UP

 

 

 

By YOUKYUNG LEE

 

 

SAMSUNG AND PANASONIC ARE THE SECRET AGENTS BEHIND MUSK’S NEVADA FACTORY

 

 

In this April 22, 2016 photo, Hwang Sang-gi, father of Hwang Yu-mi, a former Samsung factory worker… Read more

 

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — As a high school senior, Hwang Yu-mi went to work bathing silicon wafers in chemicals at a Samsung factory that makes computer chips for laptops and other devices. Four years later, she died of leukemia. She was 22.

 

After Yu-mi’s death in 2007, her father, Hwang Sang-gi, learned a 30-year-old worker at the same semiconductor line also had died of leukemia. Convinced they died because of their work, the taxi driver launched a movement demanding the government investigate health risks at Samsung Electronics Co. factories.

 

When Hwang sued after his first claim for government compensation was denied, he struggled to get details about the factory environment. A government document he received about his daughter’s workplace had a section for listing the chemicals used there, but that space was left blank because Samsung did not release that information to worker-safety officials.

 

 

An Associated Press investigation has found South Korean authorities have, at Samsung’s request, repeatedly withheld from workers and their bereaved families crucial information about chemicals they were exposed to at its computer chip and liquid crystal display factories. Sick workers are supposed to have access to such data through the government or the courts so they can apply for workers’ compensation from the state. Without it, government officials commonly reject their cases.

 

 

 

The justification for withholding the information? In at least six cases involving 10 workers, it was trade secrets. Court documents and interviews with government officials, workers’ lawyers and their families show Samsung often cites the need to protect trade secrets when it asks government officials not to release such data.

 

“Our fight is often against trade secrets. Any contents that may not work in Samsung’s favor were deleted as trade secrets,” said Lim Ja-woon, a lawyer who has represented 15 sick Samsung workers.

 

Lim’s clients have been unable to get access to full reports on facility inspections, which are produced by third parties to comply with South Korean law, but remain the property of Samsung. Only excerpts of some independent inspections can be found in some court rulings, he said.

 

South Korea law bars governments and public agencies from withholding corporate information needed “to protect the lives, physical safety, and health” of individuals on trade-secrets grounds, but there are no penalties for violations. Lim said the law on occupational disease compensation also obligates Samsung to give workers the data they need to make claims.

 

Government officials openly say corporate interests take priority, that evaluating trade-secrets claims is difficult, and that they fear being sued for sharing data against a company’s will.

 

“We have to keep secrets that belong to our clients,” said Yang Won-baek, of the Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, or KOSHA. “It’s about trust.”

 

Asked why he used the word “clients” to describe companies his government agency helps regulate, Yang said it’s probably because he treats those companies “as I treat clients.” He said the companies KOSHA evaluates also review the agency, and the finance ministry considers those reviews when it sets agency budgets.

 

When asked for comment, Samsung emailed a statement saying it never “intentionally” blocked workers from accessing information and that it is transparent about all chemicals it is required to disclose. It also said there was no case where information disclosure was “illegally prevented.”

 

However, documents from courts and the labor ministry show that as recently as last year, Samsung asked the government not to disclose details of chemical exposure levels and other inspections — even at judges’ request for use in workers’ compensation lawsuits.

 

In a letter to regulators signed by the company’s CEO, Samsung said that if factory details including “types and volumes of substances” were released for a workers’ compensation case, “it is feared that the technology gap with rivals at home and overseas would be reduced and our company’s competitiveness would be lowered. For that reason they are trade secrets that we treat strictly as secrets, we request not to disclose.”

 

Although the company no longer omits lists of chemicals as it did in Hwang Yu-mi’s case, it has recently withheld details about exposure levels and how its chemicals are managed.

 

Samsung is South Korea’s biggest company by far, with about 100,000 workers. Its market capitalization is more than five times greater than the No. 2 company in this country of 50 million. It employs about 45,000 people in its South Korean semiconductor and LCD departments, though not all of them are factory workers.

 

The worker safety group Banolim, known as SHARPS in English, has documented more than 200 cases of serious illnesses including leukemia, lupus, lymphoma and multiple sclerosis among former Samsung semiconductor and LCD workers. Seventy-six have died, most in their 20s and 30s.

 

Since 2008, 56 workers have applied for occupational safety compensation from the government. Only 10 have won compensation, most after years of court battles. Half of the other 46 claims were rejected and half remain under review.

 

People who have claimed they got sick because of work they did for other major South Korean manufacturers, including Hyundai Motor, have received help from their unions in advancing their claims. Hyundai Motor now must get union approval before introducing new chemicals into its manufacturing processes. Samsung’s workforce is not unionized.

 

Families of the victims, mostly working-class youths from the countryside, often use up their life savings and sell their homes to pay hospital bills, ending up in subsidized housing. Some of the workers ended up incapacitated and unable to work.

 

Left with few options, more than 100 families accepted a compensation plan Samsung proposed last year, which covered some medical fees and some income for workers with any of 26 diseases. Some families rejected the deal.

 

Government policies have generally been friendly toward Samsung and other “chaebols,” corporate conglomerates that helped drive South Korea’s rapid industrialization under dictatorships after the 1950-53 Korean War.

 

Samsung overtook Japanese memory-chip makers in the early 1990s and through aggressive cost-cutting, bold investment and rapid construction of new factories has dominated the market for two decades.

 

But that success involves use of toxic and often carcinogenic chemicals such as arsenic, acetone, methane, sulfuric acid and heavy metals such as lead, well-known risks in the production of semiconductors, mobile phones and LCDs.

 

Kong Jeong-ok, an occupational health physician who works with Banolim, said new chemicals often are used before the risks from them, and from the toxic byproducts created by mixing them, are fully investigated.

 

Korean companies using such chemicals are required to strictly manage them, submit biannual reports showing exposure levels and give employees that information.

 

Samsung states on its website that its chemical management system is “rigorous” and “state-of-the art.” It has had “real-time 24/7 chemical monitoring” in all facilities since 2007, the year the government began inquiries into Yu-mi’s death.

 

Yet Samsung began monitoring some toxic byproducts in the air only after a 2012 inspection detected benzene and formaldehyde — both known carcinogens — at its chip factories.

 

Baik Soo-ha, a Samsung Electronics vice president, told the AP that Samsung has redacted trade secrets in documents given to individuals only when their requests appeared not “purely” meant to determine occupational diseases.

 

“We have a right to protect our information from going to a third party,” he said. Baik did not elaborate on what sort of ulterior motives Samsung believes might be behind some requests.

 

Samsung said it sometimes lacks information about chemicals because its own suppliers, also citing trade secrets, refuse to disclose details. It said suppliers must certify any such materials are non-toxic.

 

The entire semiconductor industry has longstanding health concerns: The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration is reviewing its own standards to better control exposure to chemicals in computer chip production. The OSHA website notes that U.S. laws control maximum allowable exposure on fewer than 500 of the thousands of chemicals used in manufacturing.

 

Worker safety advocates want South Korea’s courts and government to more flexibly interpret links between workplace conditions and diseases, since the exact causes of many ailments suffered by the factory workers are unknown even to the medical community. They also want thorough disclosure of workplace hazards.

 

Hwang Sang-gi said Samsung offered him 1 billion won ($864,000) in 2007 to not pursue a case over his daughter’s death. He said no, founded Banolim and joined four former Samsung semiconductor workers suffering from various blood cancers in filing for workers’ compensation.

 

In 2014, seven years after Yu-mi’s death, an appeals court affirmed a lower court’s finding of “a significant causal relationship” between Yu-mi’s leukemia and her likely exposure to benzene, other chemicals and ionized radiation at work. Hwang Sang-gi received nearly $175,000 from the government.

 

Also in 2014, Samsung’s CEO issued a statement expressing regret that “a solution to this delicate matter (of sick workers) has not been found in a timely manner.” It said the company “could have been more diligent” in addressing their “hardship and sorrow.” Two years later, the company promised to provide necessary documents to workers seeking government compensation. Earlier this year an ombudsman committee was set up to oversee independent inspections of some Samsung factories.

 

But some sickened workers and their relatives want a more complete apology and changes to how compensation is awarded. Hwang and other campaigners regularly camp outside Samsung’s complex in Gangnam to protest. They view suing Samsung as a poor option; the standard of proof would be higher than in workers’ compensation cases, and they could not seek punitive damages under South Korean law.

 

Workers and their bereaved families say it remains difficult to obtain details about their working conditions:

 

— When asked for records from Samsung’s LCD factory in Cheonan, where 32-year-old Lee Hee-jin worked from 2002 to 2006 before falling ill with multiple sclerosis, the labor ministry sent a report in 2014, but from a different factory, in Asan. Even that report could have shed light on the case of Lee and other display workers because it was a rare record of display factory working conditions. But it was heavily redacted by Samsung on grounds of protecting trade secrets. When asked about the heavy redaction, Samsung told the AP that the report was not related to her case because it was not from the place Lee was employed. The Supreme Court is considering Lee’s appeal after lower courts rejected her compensation claim.

 

— Citing “business confidentiality,” the labor ministry refused to give chemical-exposure data for Lee Beom-woo, an engineer who died of leukemia after working from 1986 to 2014 at Samsung’s Onyang semiconductor plant. Lee’s case is under review. About 50 of the plant’s workers have contracted serious environment-related diseases, according to Banolim.

 

— Cho Eun-joo, a Samsung display plant worker, died last year at age 22 of blood cancer. Her mother, Kim Kyung-hee, and her lawyer, Lee Eun-jeong, said Samsung officials denied the possibility that Cho was sickened by the workplace conditions, so they pieced together information from Cho and her friends to make their case, which is under government review.

 

— Sohn Kyung-joo, a former manager at a semiconductor contractor to Samsung, died of leukemia at age 53 after working in chemicals-intensive cleanrooms for about six years. Cleanroom entrance logs, the sole way to prove his exposure to toxins at work, were destroyed after only three months because they are kept only for security purposes. Sohn’s family has filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the government’s refusal of compensation.

 

Hwang Kyu-seok, a deputy director at the labor ministry’s industrial health department, said disclosures of data on chemical exposure are made on a case-by-case basis.

 

The government “usually accept companies’ requests to withhold details on trade-secrets grounds,” said Goo Ja-hwan, head of a regional labor ministry team in charge of occupational disaster prevention.

 

“We generally accept (their requests) because it is difficult to evaluate whether their arguments are wrong,” said Goo, who is based in Cheonan, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) south of Seoul. “We cannot evaluate whether things that companies have hidden as secrets are real trade secrets or not.”

 

Baskut Tuncak, the U.N. special rapporteur on hazardous substances and waste, said in a phone interview that no government should say it’s unable to determine what corporate information should be kept confidential.

 

“That simply allows their abuse of the system where information about hazardous substances is hidden from the public from victims under claims of confidentiality,” he said.

 

Recently, there has been some movement toward greater transparency.

 

In June, for the first time, the government’s worker safety agency formally designated a case of malignant lymphoma as an occupational disease at a Samsung semiconductor factory, despite Samsung’s refusal to hand over exposure data and other information. Samsung cited trade secrets, but also said it lacked some data.

 

Banolim praised the ruling as a step forward, because the agencies did not hold the absence of data against the workers.

 

“It didn’t rely on the company and made an independent evaluation,” said Lee Jong-ran, a labor lawyer with Banolim. “But it took three years and eight months. It took too long.”

 

___

 

Lee can be reached on Twitter: www.twitter.com/YKLeeAP

 

Her previous works can be found on: http://bigstory.ap.org/content/youkyung-lee

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

The Father Of The Internet Is Telling Google and Facebook to “SUCK IT”!

How the father of the World Wide Web plans to reclaim it from Facebook and Google

 

 

 

 

When the World Wide Web first took off in the mid 1990s, the dream wasn’t just big, it was distributed: Everyone would have their own home page, everyone would post their thoughts – they weren’t called “blogs” until 1999 – and everyone would own their own data, for there was no one around offering to own it for us. The web consisted of nodes joined by links, with no center.

Oh, how times have changed.

Now a handful of companies own vast swaths of web activity – Facebook for social networking, Google for searching, eBay for auctions – and quite literally own the data their users have provided and generated. This gives these companies unprecedented power over us, and gives them such a competitive advantage that it’s pretty silly to think you’re going to start up a business that’s going to beat them at their own game. The fact that Facebook already has the data in 1.7 billion users’ profiles and, more important, the history of its users’ interactions means that you’re probably not going to attract a lot of savvy investors. Plus that’s where all your friend are already. Vendor lock-in is real.

Solid could make the web’s information noticeably smarter.

This has inspired an effort to re-decentralize the web. Two of the more important efforts – some would count blockchain as a third contributor – are architecturally very promising. The question is whether architecture will be enough.

The first comes from Tim Berners-Lee who invented the web and gave it to us as a gift, without patents, copyrights, or trademarks. Berners-Lee’s new project, underway at his MIT lab, is called Solid (“social linked data”), a way for you to own your own data while making it available to the applications that you want to be able to use it.

With Solid, you store your data in “pods” (personal online data stores) that are hosted wherever you would like. But Solid isn’t just a storage system: It lets other applications ask for data. If Solid authenticates the apps and — importantly — if you’ve given permission for them to access that data, Solid delivers it.

For example, you might keep your personal information in one or several pods: the sort of data about yourself that you put into your Facebook profile; a list of your friends, family, and colleagues; your banking information; maps of where you’ve traveled; some health information. That way if someone built a new social networking application—perhaps to compete head-on with Facebook, or, more likely, to offer specialized services to people with shared interests—you could join by giving it permission to access the appropriate information in your pod. Your data in your pod would remain your own in every sense of the word: completely under your control, stored where you prefer, and usable only by apps that you’ve given permission to.

Solid is designed from the bottom up to enable the discovery and sharing of information. That’s why there’s “linked data” in the “LID” part of its name. Linked Data is another Berners-Lee invention, a way of expressing data that makes it easy to, well, link up across repositories. While Linked Data can be tough to master, Solid could make the web’s information noticeably smarter. For example, if you wanted to, you could give permission to a travel site or to a climate action group to access the information in your pods about your demographics and the trips you’ve taken. That group could mash that information up with data from other people’s pods to get an updated picture of where people are traveling and how that’s affecting local economies, carbon emissions, and perhaps national attitudes toward foreigners.

Will Solid and IPFS re-decentralize the Web?

Solid does all this without having to centralize information in hands that we may not—and often should not—fully trust.

The InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) takes a different approach. It starts from the conviction that even having web pages identified by a pointer to the server that stores them is too centralized. Why not instead go the way of BitTorrent and let multiple computers supply parts of a page all at the same time? That way, if a web server goes down, it won’t take all of the pages on it with it. IPFS should make the web more resilient, and less subject to censorship.

To use IPFS at this point, you can install extensions to Chrome and Firefox, or resort to the more techie command-line approach. IPFS hopes, though, that its standards will be accepted by the W3C and IETF, the groups that decide what counts as an official part of the web and internet. That would help motivate the browsers to build in native support for the new protocol.

Will Solid and IPFS re-decentralize the Web? It comes down to demand: Are people going to care enough that they’ll put up with what may feel like a temporary step back? For example, it’s unlikely that new social networking apps based on Solid are going to launch with all of the sophistication and polish of Facebook. On the other hand, social networking services better designed for particular types of people – scientists, researchers, collaborative artists – might find it easier to get started. And it seems quite plausible that organizations that care about the long-term preservation of their web materials will find IPFS quite attractive, as might people sharing content that takes too long to load over the normal Web.

So, there’s some hope. These short-term scenarios do not have to displace the current giant hubs, just provide some alternatives to them. Ultimately the question is whether the forces that caused the web to become a series of centralized hubs will be pushed back by architectures and protocols that enable it to re-decentralize itself. The answer I suspect is no — unless we, the users of the web, demand it.

 

Hillary Clinton Strategist says DNC should kill even more people…this time: Julian Assange

Hillary Clinton Strategist says DNC should kill even more people…this time: Julian Assange

Dead DNC Enemies List of actually dead people who pissed off DNC & Hillary financiers:

David Bird- National Energy Reporter

Rajeev Motwani- Creator of Google (Which funds DNC)

Gary D. Conley – Solar Energy and Hydrogen CEO and whistle-blower

Seth Conrad- DNC Staffer

John Ashe – DNC Witness

Victor Thorn – DNC expose author

Shawn Lucas – Anti-DNC attorney

Ravi Kumar – DNC Financier who knew too much

Forest Hayes – Google executive who knew too much

Doug Bourn- Tesla engineer who knew too much

and over FIFTY MORE…

Hillary Clinton strategist says “kill” Julian Assange, because “a dead man can’t leak stuff” [Video]

CNN Host says the way to deal with Julian Assange is to “Illegally shoot the son of a bitch.”

Democratic strategist, CNN Host, former Fox News Host, and Hillary Clinton supporter Bob Beckel…

 

has figured out how to deal with the Julian Assange thorn, that is in Clinton’s side…

Julian Assange’s latest revelation that has Bob Beckel calling for his assassination…the DNC email hack (that the Clinton machine cleverly diverted into a Putin-Trump imaginary bromance) was most likely leaked, not by Russians, but by 27 year old Democratic staffer Seth Rich, who was mysteriously (and conveniently) murdered right after the DNC leak.

Here is what Bob Beckel said…

“The way to deal with this is pretty simple. We’ve got special-op forces.

I mean — A dead man can’t leak stuff.

This guy’s a traitor, a treasonous — and — and he — he has broken every law of the United States, The guy ought to be — and I am not for the death penalty, so if I am not for the death penalty, their is only one way to do it…

Illegally shoot the son of a bitch.”

What if a Trump surrogate or supporter had said this, or something remotely like this?

Meanwhile, Clinton murdering Assange may not be too far fetch, as bodies in and around the Hillary campaign are starting to pile up as Zerohedge documents…”Five in just under six weeks – four convenient deaths plus one suicide…”

1) Shawn Lucas, Sanders supporter who served papers to DNC on the Fraud Case (DOD August 2, 2016)

2) Victor Thorn, Clinton author (and Holocaust denier, probably the least credible on this list) shot himself in an apparent suicide. Conspiracy theorists at Mystery Writers of America said some guys will do anything to sell books. (DOD August, 2016)

3) Seth Conrad Rich, Democratic staffer, aged 27, apparently on his way to speak to the FBI about a case possibly involving the Clintons. The D.C. murder was not a robbery. (DOD July 8, 2016)

4) John Ashe, UN official who allegedly crushed his own throat while lifting weights, because he watched too many James Bond films and wanted to try the move where the bad guy tries to…oh, never mind. “He was scheduled to testify against the Clintons and the Democrat Party.” (DOD June 22, 2016)

5) Mike Flynn, the Big Government Editor for Breitbart News. Mike Flynn’s final article was published the day he died, “Clinton Cash: Bill, Hillary Created Their Own Chinese Foundation in 2014.” (DOD June 23, 2016)

20160809_dncdead_0

Microsoft Has Epic Software Disaster and Releases the Keys To All Microsoft Powered Stuff: Hackers Have Melt-Down

Microsoft leaks its Golden Key, unlocking Windows Secure Boot and exposing the danger of backdoors

 

Microsoft has demonstrated why the FBI’s desire for “Golden Key” backdoors allowing “good guys” to bypass security is such a bad idea: it inadvertently released its own keys to Windows tablets, phones, HoloLens and other devices using UEFI Secure Boot.

Microsoft created a convenience key to bypass UEFI security, then leaked it

As noted by Charlie Osborne for Zero Day, the ability to bypass Windows Secure Boot using the profiles Microsoft made public not only allows users to replace their Windows OS with something else such as Linux, but also “permits the installation and execution of bootkit and rootkits at the deepest level of the device.”

Security researchers MY123 and Slipstream published a detailed explanation of how Microsoft bungled its security keys, and then failed to correctly patch for the issue, resulting in an ongoing issue that “may not be possible to fully resolve.”

“A backdoor,” the researchers noted, “which MS put in to secure boot because they decided to not let the user turn it off in certain devices, allows for secure boot to be disabled everywhere!”

Evidence for the FBI to examine

Over the past winter, the FBI has locked horns with Apple over its efforts to bypass the boot security system of iOS, with the intent to make it easier to decrypt data on iPhones and other devices.

In February, Apple’s chief executive Tim Cook issued a statement in response to FBI demands, writing that, “We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good. Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them.

But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.”“the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone” – Tim Cook

Cook concluded, “while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.”

Sure enough, after Microsoft did create a backdoor for Windows Phone and other Secure Boot devices, it subsequently leaked the tools for unlocking that backdoor.

The researchers involved in documenting Microsoft’s screwup observed, “About the FBI: are you reading this? If you are, then this is a perfect real world example about why your idea of backdooring cryptosystems with a “secure golden key” is very bad!

“Smarter people than me have been telling this to you for so long, it seems you have your fingers in your ears. You seriously don’t
understand still? Microsoft implemented a ‘secure golden key’ system. And the golden keys got released from MS own stupidity. Now, what happens if you tell everyone to make a ‘secure golden key’ system? Hopefully you can add 2+2…”

At this week’s BlackHat security conference, Apple engineer Ivan Krstić provided new details about how Apple’s own security system works on iOS devices, noting that iOS lacks any sort of backdoor mechanism that would allow Apple or others to bypass device security the way Microsoft’s Secure Boot for Windows does.

Apple’s serious approach to security has enabled the company to take a leading roll in supplying computing devices to enterprise buyers, one of the markets Windows Phone has made very little progress in, and a market segment that has purposely shunned the sloppy security associated with Google’s Android.

Facebook Doubles Down On the Abuse of It’s Users and Violates Even More User Rights

How did Facebook get my number? And why is it giving my name out to strangers?

Silhouette of a person using the Facebook app in front of the Facebook logo
I never gave Facebook my phone number, yet people can use it to find me on the social network Credit: Reuters

Facebook thrives on data, prodding users to provide it with their memories, cherished moments and relationships. And for years, it has badgered users into handing out their phone numbers.

More recently, however, it has taken a different tack – taking mobile numbers from other, less direct, sources and adding them to profiles. Users who don’t willingly give the company their mobile number are now asked to verify one that Facebook “thinks” is yours.

This has shocked some users who, having not given the app permission to see their contacts, wondered how it had got hold of their numbers. 

But perhaps less widely-known is that these numbers, even if unconfirmed, can be used to discover your name and appearance without you knowing, as I found out recently.

How did Facebook get my number?

I was content with ignoring Facebook’s continued prompts and never provided it with my mobile number. But recently, when digging into Facebook’s settings, I found that it not only knew my phone number, but was using it as a public identifier for me.

In the Notification Settings part of the app I noticed that Facebook had saved my phone number in the Text Messaging Settings with the words “Confirm” and “Remove” next to it. Curious to know how the app had got my number, given that it didn’t have access to my contacts, I asked Facebook.

Facebook number verification request
Even though I am yet to verify my number on Facebook it can be used by other people to find my profile Credit: Facebook

Based on what the company told me, it’s almost impossible to stop it knowing your phone number. If you haven’t given it to Facebook directly, the service can retrieve it from a variety of places, including the number stored in the phone or tablet that you’re using, your mobile operator, or if you provided it at some point in the past. 

Even if it doesn’t have it from these sources, Facebook friends who have given the app access to their own contacts book may also have given it your number. Given that most of us have hundreds of friends on Facebook, the chances of this happening are pretty reasonable.

As Facebook says in its online Help Centre

When we ask you to add your phone number, you may see your number automatically suggested so that it’s easier for you to add. This might be based on your phone or tablet, your mobile operator, contact information provided by others on Facebook, or other sources. We also might have your number because you gave it to us in the past, but haven’t confirmed it.

The number will only be added to your account if you choose to confirm and verify it.

Giving my name away

Facebook says it only adds a phone number to an account if users confirm it, but it turns out that even unconfirmed numbers can be used to identify people. After finding Facebook knew my number, I discovered that a colleague could easily find me on the network via my phone number, even though I hadn’t verified it.

Here’s how. When a Facebook user tries to add new friends on their mobile app, one way to do so is by importing numbers saved on their phone. Facebook matches these numbers to profiles, and suggests adding those profiles, displaying the user’s picture and full name. 

Even though I haven’t confirmed my phone number to Facebook (which had obtained it without my knowledge),it appears anyone with that number can find out my name and see my profile picture.

Other ways of finding people using their phone number – for example, by pasting the number into Facebook’s search bar – don’t work if a phone number hasn’t been verified, so being able to find them via the smartphone contact book in this way appears inconsistent.

To see just how visible I was, I set up a fake Facebook account on a phone that didn’t have my number stored on it. As soon as I saved the number in the phone – even under the fake name “Fred” – I was able to find my real Facebook profile by logging into the fake account and importing contacts.

On the mobile app you can reach this section by going to Settings -> Privacy -> Who can look me up? 
On the mobile app you can reach this section by going to Settings -> Privacy -> Who can look me up?  Credit: Facebook

I checked Facebook’s settings and noticed that it had automatically set “Who can look you up using the phone number you provided?” to “Everyone”. Admittedly I hadn’t changed the privacy of this setting, but I also hadn’t provided a number or verified the one it had lifted. Given that I hadn’t granted Facebook my phone number in the first place, I didn’t suspect I would have to stop Facebook using it.

Facebook said it wants to make it easy for people to find their contacts on the social network, which is why it allows people to see your account if they have your number. 

But in my situation, I had not given Facebook my number, was unaware that it had found it from other sources, and did not know it could be used to look me up.

 

Why it scared me 

A  lot of people have my mobile number that don’t know identifying details about me, such as my full name, where I work and what I look like. 

If for example you gave your number to a taxi, delivery company or restaurant, they could look you up on Facebook and immediately know your name, what you look like and some basic details about you – depending on your privacy settings. And if your name is in anyway unique, like mine, that opens up the possibility of a lot more information being available, such as where you work. 

Another time that you might share your phone number without intending to give away your name is on a dating app or at a party. It’s acceptable to give a potential date your first name and number without and expect that you’ll maintain a relative amount of anonymity. 

Criminals looking to build up a profile about individuals could also do so using randomly generated phone numbers, or numbers that they found online but which came without any other identifying information.

 

A similar number look-up is available on other social networks and messaging services, such as WhatsApp and Telegram. But on WhatsApp you only see the person’s username once they reply to a message, meaning unsolicited texters can’t find out your full name. 

Telegram recently came under fire after security researchers found hackers had managed to confirm the accounts of 15 million Iranian users. The news sparked fears among privacy conscious users, many of whom favour Telegram for its security and end-to-end encryption. 

Aral Balkan, a privacy expert who runs Ind.ie, said: “You have the right to choose what you keep to yourself and what you share with others. It doesn’t mean that you have to isolate yourself, it simply means you have the right to choose who has your phone number and who doesn’t. But you have no privacy on Facebook.” 

How to hide your mobile number from Facebook 

It’s unclear if there’s a way to stop Facebook from finding out your phone number in the first place. But if it indicates that it thinks it knows your number you can ask it to remove the suggestion by going to Settings -> General -> Phone.  

On the mobile app to Settings -> General -> Phone to see if Facebook has a confirmed number for you
On the mobile app to Settings -> General -> Phone to see if Facebook has a confirmed number for you Credit: Facebook 

To control who can find you on the social network using your number go to Settings -> Privacy -> change “Who can look you up using the phone number you provided to friends or friends of friends. It isn’t possible to turn this off completely so if you want to keep your number separate from your Facebook friends keep it off in the first place. 

In a blog post in 2012 about Facebook and its pursuit of users’ numbers, security expert Graham Cluley said: “My advice is always be careful what phone numbers you share with websites.

“There may be a case for keeping an old phone in a drawer, with a pay-as-you-go SIM. That throwaway phone can be used for websites that demand a phone contact, but you don’t feel they really need it.” 

There are also apps that can create second numbers for you, such as Burner, which gives users a temporary second phone number to use when they want to protect their privacy. 

For more advice on how to improve your privacy on Facebook, here are five simple tips.

A history of Facebook Play! 02:02

 

 

ISIS Intel Was Cooked, House Panel Finds (thedailybeast.com)

ISIS Intel Was Cooked, House Panel Finds (thedailybeast.com)

White House Denies Intel Data was “Cooked To Make Obama Look Good”

 

 

written by

Nancy A. Youssef

Shane Harris Burnt 08.09.16 5:00 PM ET ISIS Intel Was Cooked, House Panel Finds A leading U.S. general pressured his intelligence analysts into playing down the ISIS and al Qaeda threats, according to a congressional task force. A House Republican task force has found that officials from the U.S. military’s Central Command altered intelligence reports to portray the U.S. fight against ISIS and al Qaeda in a more positive light than lower-level analysts believed was warranted by the facts on the ground, three officials familiar with the task force’s findings told The Daily Beast.

A roughly 10-page report on the controversy is expected to be released by the end of next week, two officials said. While it contains no definitive evidence that senior Obama administration officials ordered the reports to be doctored, the five-month investigation did corroborate earlier reports that analysts felt the leaders of CENTCOM’s intelligence directorate pressured them to conclude that the threat from ISIS was not as ominous as the analysts believed, the officials said.

“The investigation is ongoing but the report substantiates the claims” that intelligence reports were altered, one official familiar with the report explained to The Daily Beast. Another official said that the investigation could remain open even after report is released.

The task force, led by members of the House Armed Services and Intelligence committees and the  Defense Appropriations subcommittee, was created after The Daily Beast first reported that more than 50 analysts had filed a formal complaint alleging their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials. Some told The Daily Beast they felt they were working in a hostile, toxic office where they felt “bullied” to draw conclusions not supported by the facts.

Some of the intelligence made its way into briefings presented to President Obama. However, administration officials have consistently said that they have confidence in CENTCOM’s reports and that they don’t believe White House policy was guided by false or misleading analysis.

The House committee cannot directly punish officials found to have acted inappropriately. But the fact that the appropriations committee was part of the investigation implies that if the military doesn’t respond to the findings, lawmakers could punish CENTCOM by curtailing funds.

CENTCOM officials told The Daily Beast they cannot comment on the report as they have yet to receive it. There also is separate Department of Defense Inspector General investigation into the claims which is ongoing and could release its findings as early as this fall, one official said. The DoD IG report could make recommendations that CENTCOM must act on.

But some of CENTCOM’s intelligence analysts already are concerned that the DoD IG report will not have as much teeth as the House Republican task force report. These military analysts told The Beast that the head of CENTCOM’s intelligence directorate, Maj. Gen. Steven Grove, and his civilian deputy, Gregory Ryckman, had deleted emails and files from computer systems before the inspector general could examine them.

Even the House Republican investigation faced obstacles to its work. Analysts told The Daily Beast, that CENTCOM officials were, at times, in the room while they spoke to House investigators, making some feel they could not speak candidly.

What remains unclear is what led CENTCOM to call for more positive conclusions. Was it a decision by Grove or Ryckman or did come from higher up?

As part of a normal deployment rotation, Grove left CENTCOM’s intelligence directorate this summer and now is stationed at the Pentagon as director of the Army Quadrennial Defense Review Office. He has been replaced by Maj. Gen. Mark R. Quantock. Ryckman remains in the same position.

After the analysts’ complaints emerged publicly, President Obama, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and current CENTCOM commander Army Gen. Joseph Votel have called for what Carter described as “unvarnished intelligence.”

“GET ME OFF THE GOOGLE” Rages UC Davis Chancellor Katehi As PR Hype Campaign Takes The Wrong Turn To Hell

Get me off the Google,’ UC Davis Chancellor Katehi urged communications staff

 
 

UC Davis aide: Worse than pepper spray

Newly released documents show how UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi’s aides scrambled to respond to the public relations crisis that engulfed her administration earlier this year. Katehi was suspended in April pending the outcome of a UC investigation.

Sam Stanton The Sacramento Bee

 

Controversy not an unfamiliar companion for UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi

UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi has undergone significant scrutiny and criticism during her tenure at the university, stemming from incidents such as the pepper-spraying of peacefully protesting students to her service on corporate boards.

Patty Couse-Baker The Sacramento Bee

Ghostbusters OFFICIALLY sucks Eggs.. $70M Loss and worse…

‘Ghostbusters’ Heading for $70M-Plus Loss, Sequel Unlikely

‘Ghostbusters’
Courtesy of Sony Pictures
 

Confronted by tepid box office for the reboot, the studio will instead focus on animated spinoffs.

Immediately upon the opening of Ghostbusters in mid-July, top Sony executives boldly declared a sequel to PaulFeig’s all-female reboot of Ivan Reitman’s 1984 classic was a given. “While nothing has been officially announced yet, there’s no doubt in my mind it will happen,” said RoryBruer, president of worldwide distribution at Sony.

That was the studio’s last public mention of a sequel. As of Aug. 7, Ghostbusters had earned just under $180 million at the global box office, including $117 million domestic. The film still hasn’t opened in a few markets, including France, Japan and Mexico, but box-office experts say it will have trouble getting to $225 million despite a hefty net production budget of $144 million plus a big marketing spend. The studio has said break-even would be $300 million.

Sony hardly is alone in suffering from audience rejection of sequels this summer. But film chief TomRothman and his team, along with partner Village Roadshow, had high hopes for launching a live-action Ghostbusters “universe.” Now they are preparing for steep losses (think $70 million-plus) and an uncertain future for the franchise.

Sony won’t comment on whether it has banished a sequel to the netherworld, but perhaps tellingly, a rep says the studio actively is pursuing an animated Ghostbusters feature that could hit theaters in 2019 and an animated TV series, Ghostbusters: Ecto Force, which is eyeing an early 2018 bow. Both are being guided by Reitman, who firmly is back in charge of the Ghostbusters empire via Ghost Corps., a subsidiary with a mandate to expand the brand across platforms. (It was former Sony film chief AmyPascalwho first embraced Feig’s vision for the live-action reboot, not Reitman or Rothman.)

 

“We’re very proud of the bold movie Paul Feig made, which critics and audiences loved,” a studio rep tells THR. “It has enlivened a 30-year-old brand and put it into the modern zeitgeist. As a result, we have many ideas in the works to further exploit the Ghostbusters universe.”

Feig hasn’t said whether he’ll return. Stars MelissaMcCarthy, KristenWiig, LeslieJones and KateMcKinnon are said to be signed for two potential sequels, and initially they said they were game. But now? “Ghostbusters is on ice until further notice,” says box-office analyst JeffBock. “I just can’t fathom the creative talents behind it — Feig, McCarthy, Wiig, etc. — slogging out another one when the reception to the first one was so mediocre.”

Sony disputes the amount of the potential loss, insisting that revenue streams from merchandising and such attractions as a new Ghostbusters exhibit at Madame Tussauds and a theme park ride in Dubai will help defray any deficit. The studio also notes that the number of people renting the 1984 film has soared over the summer.

“This loss calculation is way off,” says the Sony rep. “With multiple revenue streams, including consumer products, gaming, location-based entertainment, continued international rollout, and huge third-party promotional partnerships that mitigated costs, the bottom line, even before co-financing, is not remotely close to that number.”

Insane Silicon Valley Billionaires Want To Be Immortal And Plague Us With Their Narcissism Forever

Silicon Valley’s fascination with a fountain of youth

By Michelle Quinn,

 

Hang around Silicon Valley for awhile and the obsession with immortality is clear. Techies want to solve that granddaddy of problems: Death.

 
 

Peter Thiel, the billionaire investor behind Facebook and co-founder of PayPal, recently made headlines for his reported personal and professional interest in whether blood transfusions from younger people can improve and even extend life for older people.

 
 

Ewww. Vampire alert.

 
 

Ghoulish and ethically questionable as it may seem, Thiel’s interest in young blood and other life extension gambits shouldn’t come as a surprise.

 
 

In the eyes of many technologists, the human body is just another machine that can be tinkered with and tweaked.

File photo: Venture capitalist Peter Thiel is seen in his offices at the Presidio in San Francisco on Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2014.

File photo: Venture capitalist Peter Thiel is seen in his offices at the Presidio in San Francisco on Tuesday,
 
 
 

“Why are tech leaders interested in immortality? It’s a combination of scientism and extraordinary wealth,” said Adam Gollner, author of “The Book of Immortality.” “Are Silicon Valley CEOs investing millions into physical immortality any different from the fantastically rich and all-powerful emperors in the Tang dynasty of China who died taking mercury-based elixirs of never-ending life? Time will tell.”

 
 

That interest in immortality is a good thing. A generation of tech billionaires are funding the most cutting-edge research in science and medicine. Their support could result in a longer and healthier life for all of us.

 
 
 

“Biology has become an engineering project, and a lot of tech people are engineers,” said Sonia Arrison, author of “100 Plus,” a book on longevity research and the implications of people living longer. Thiel wrote the introduction.

The idea of extending people’s healthy years “used to be a pipe dream,” said Arrison. But it is “no longer a crazy idea. It’s not something that’s unattainable. Society has the tools to make our lives longer and healthier.”

In 2004, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs spoke movingly of his own brush with mortality in a commencement speech at Stanford. He concluded that “death is very likely the single best invention of life. It is life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new.”

But that view is in sharp contrast to some of this generation’s tech moguls.

Thiel, for example, has railed against Zen-like acceptance of life ending.

“The way people deal with aging is a combination of acceptance and denial,” he told MIT Technology Review. “They accept there is nothing they can do about it, and deny it’s going to happen to them.”

Thiel has not only funded anti-aging and longevity research, but is also taking steps to live to 120, his stated goal. He takes human growth hormone and has said he will participate in cryonic freezing upon his death. A spokesman for Thiel declined to comment.

Larry Ellison, Oracle’s co-founder and executive chairman, has long held an interest in funding life extension, primarily through the Ellison Medical Foundation. He, too, appears to maintain an almost childlike rage about accepting death.

“Death makes me very angry,” he has said. “It doesn’t make any sense to me. Death has never made any sense to me. How can a person be there and then just vanish, just not be there?”

Bill Maris, chief executive of GV, the venture arm of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, told Bloomberg that science has the tools to slow aging, reverse disease and extend life.

“I just hope to live long enough not to die,” he quipped.

That is Groucho Marx funny. But it also speaks to the opportunity that science, technology and medicine have right now to push for new discoveries.

Literature is full of the vain and misguided who lost their souls pursuing immortality. And yes, holding on to a youthful ideal does seem empty — and expensive. Ambrosia, the Monterey firm doing the young-person blood plasma infusion trial is reportedly charging participants $8,000 each.

But when it comes to the wealthy technologists who are trying to take on death, battle dementia, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, cancer and every other disease the Grim Reaper throws at us as we age, why shouldn’t we be rooting for them?

Follow her at Twitter.com/michellequinn.

Qualcomm has a hacker back-door in 900 Million Android Phones…But Why?

Android bug fear in 900 million phones

 
Image caption The flaws affect devices containing Qualcomm chips

Serious security flaws that could give attackers complete access to a phone’s data have been found in software used on tens of millions of Android devices.

The bugs were uncovered by Checkpoint researchers looking at software running on chipsets made by US firm Qualcomm.

Qualcomm processors are found in about 900 million Android phones, the company said.

However, there is no evidence of the vulnerabilities currently being used in attacks by cyberthieves.

“I’m pretty sure you will see these vulnerabilities being used in the next three to four months,” said Michael Shaulov, head of mobility product management at Checkpoint.

“It’s always a race as to who finds the bug first, whether it’s the good guys or the bad.”

Affected devices included:

  • BlackBerry Priv
  • Blackphone 1 and Blackphone 2
  • Google Nexus 5X, Nexus 6 and Nexus 6P
  • HTC One, HTC M9 and HTC 10
  • LG G4, LG G5, and LG V10
  • New Moto X by Motorola
  • OnePlus One, OnePlus 2 and OnePlus 3
  • US versions of the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Samsung S7 Edge
  • Sony Xperia Z Ultra

Mr Shaulov said six months of work to reverse engineer Qualcomm’s code revealed the problems.

The flaws were found in software that handles graphics and in code that controls communication between different processes running inside a phone.

Exploiting the bugs would allow an attacker to gradually be able to take more control over a device and gain access to its data from anywhere on Earth

John Podesta’s Buddy Runs Part Of The Russian Mafia Says Moscow Press

John Podesta’s Buddy Runs Part Of The Russian Mafia Says Moscow Press

 

 

 

Deputy Head of Russian Central Bank Linked to Moscow Mafia – Reports

 

By John R. Schindler and Ivan Shchnegler

 

 

 

The deputy head of Russia’s Central Bank provided instructions to members of the Moscow-based Taganskaya crime syndicate on how to launder money through banks and real estate in Spain, according to a report by the Bloomberg news agency on Tuesday.

 

Torshin reportedly occupied a higher position in the organization than its leader Alexander Romanov, who called the Central Bank deputy head “godfather” or “boss,” Bloomberg reported, citing a report by Spanish investigators.

 

The allegations are based on recordings of phone conversations between Romanov and Torshin in 2012 and 2013, and documents seized from Romanov’s villa in Spain. Torshin denies any connection to the Taganskaya syndicate, claiming that he had “purely social” ties to Romanov.

 

Torshin claims that he met Romanov at the beginning of 1990s and that they later worked together at the bank. He told Bloomberg he hadn’t spoken to Romanov since he was was arrested in 2013.

 

Romanov was sentenced to four years in prison in Spain in May over illegal transactions worth 1.65 million euros ($1.83 million) and $50,000. Torshin was appointed deputy head of Central Bank in January this year. Before that, he was a senator in the United Russia party representing the republic of Marii-El.

 

Bloomberg noted that Torshin wasn’t charged by the Spanish authorities. According to an unidentified Spanish official, “prosecuting Torshin isn’t worth the effort because Russia doesn’t cooperate in cases involving high-ranking officials.”

 

In June, the Spanish Civil Guard detained six Russian citizens and a Ukrainian suspected of money laundering. The move was described by the media as “a new blow to the Russian mafia in Spain.” According to the El Mundo newspaper, the suspects had ties to United Russia officials.

 

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Photo: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)

 

The revelations of the so-called Panama Papers that are roiling the world’s political and financial elites this week include important facts about Team Clinton. This unprecedented trove of documents purloined from a shady Panama law firm that arranged tax havens, and perhaps money laundering, for the globe’s super-rich includes juicy insights into how Russia’s elite hides its ill-gotten wealth.

 

Almost lost among the many revelations is the fact that Russia’s biggest bank uses The Podesta Group as its lobbyist in Washington, D.C. Though hardly a household name, this firm is well known inside the Beltway, not least because its CEO is Tony Podesta, one of the best-connected Democratic machers in the country. He founded the firm in 1998 with his brother John, formerly chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, then counselor to President Barack Obama, Mr. Podesta is the very definition of a Democratic insider. Outsiders engage the Podestas and their well-connected lobbying firm to improve their image and get access to Democratic bigwigs.

 

Which is exactly what Sberbank, Russia’s biggest financial institution, did this spring. As reported at the end of March, the Podesta Group registered with the U.S. Government as a lobbyist for Sberbank, as required by law, naming three Podesta Group staffers: Tony Podesta plus Stephen Rademaker and David Adams, the last two former assistant secretaries of state. It should be noted that Tony Podesta is a big-money bundler for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign while his brother John is the chairman of that campaign, the chief architect of her plans to take the White House this November.

 

Sberbank (Savings Bank in Russian) engaged the Podesta Group to help its public image—leading Moscow financial institutions not exactly being known for their propriety and wholesomeness—and specifically to help lift some of the pain of sanctions placed on Russia in the aftermath of the Kremlin’s aggression against Ukraine, which has caused real pain to the country’s hard-hit financial sector.

 

It’s hardly surprising that Sberbank sought the help of Democratic insiders like the Podesta Group to aid them in this difficult hour, since they clearly understand how American politics work. The question is why the Podesta Group took Sberbank’s money. That financial institution isn’t exactly hiding in the shadows—it’s the biggest bank in Russia, and its reputation leaves a lot to be desired. Nobody acquainted with Russian finance was surprised that Sberbank wound up in the Panama Papers.

 

Since the brothers are destined for very high-level jobs if the Democrats triumph in November, their relationship is something they—and Clinton—need to explain.

 

Although Sberbank has its origins in the nineteenth century, it was functionally reborn after the Soviet collapse, and it the 1990s it grew to be the dominant bank in the country, today controlling nearly 30 percent of Russia’s aggregate banking assets and employing a quarter-million people. The majority stockholder in Sberbank is Russia’s Central Bank. In other words, Sberbank is functionally an arm of the Kremlin, although it’s ostensibly a private institution.

 

Certainly Western intelligence is well acquainted with Sberbank, noting its close relationship with Vladimir Putin and his regime. Funds moving through Sberbank are regularly used to support clandestine Russian intelligence operations, while the bank uses its offices abroad as cover for the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service or SVR. A NATO counterintelligence official explained that Sberbank, which has outposts in almost two dozen foreign countries, “functions as a sort of arm of the SVR outside Russia, especially because many of its senior employees are ‘former’ Russian intelligence officers.” Inside the country, Sberbank has an equally cosy relationship with the Federal Security Service or FSB, Russia’s powerful domestic intelligence agency.

 

Ukraine has pointed a finger at Sberbank as an instrument of Russia’s aggression against their country. In 2014, Ukraine’s Security Service charged Sberbank with “financing terrorism,” noting that its branches were distributing millions of dollars in illegal aid to Russian-backed separatists fighting in eastern Ukraine. Kyiv’s conclusion, that Sberbank is a witting supporter of Russian aggression against Ukraine, is broadly supported by Western intelligence. “Sberbank is the Kremlin, they don’t do anything major without Putin’s go-ahead, and they don’t tell him ‘no’ either,” explained a retired senior U.S. intelligence official with extensive experience in Eastern Europe.

 

In addition, Ukrainian intelligence has alleged that the FSB collaborated with Sberbank in the bombings of two of the bank’s branches in Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, in June 2015. The attacks caused no casualties but got major coverage in Russian state media as “proof” of Ukraine’s instability and violent anti-Russian nature. Although the notion that Russian spies would plant bombs as a provocation, what the Kremlin terms provokatsiya, may sound outlandish to those unacquainted with espionage, in fact Russian spies have been doing such things since tsarist times. What I’ve termed “fake terrorism” is a longstanding Kremlin core competency, and it can only be pulled off with logistical support, including with finances.

 

Predictably, Sberbank has blown off the Panama Papers revelations as nothing of consequence, but the fact that they are an arm of the Kremlin and they do plenty of shady things in many countries is a matter of record. As is the fact that the Podesta Group is their lobbyist in America.

 

Among the Sberbank subsidiaries that the Podesta Group also represents are the Cayman Islands-based Troika Dialog Group Limited, the Cyprus-based SBGB Cyprus Limited, and the Luxembourg-based SB International. As reported this week by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, a consortium of journalists exploring the Panama Papers leak, Sberbank and Troika Dialog are used by members of Mr. Putin’s inner circle to shift public funds into sometimes questionable private investments. In other words, this is top-level money laundering of a brazen kind. As the OCCRP stated plainly, “Some of these companies were initially connected to the Troika Dialog investment fund, which was controlled and run by Sberbank after the bank bought the Troika Dialog investment bank. Troika and Sberbank declined to comment.”

 

Adding to shadiness of all this, the Podesta Group is playing along with the useful charade that Sberbank is simply a private financial institution, rather than the state-owned bank that it is, since that would require the lobbyists to register as agents of the Russian government under the Foreign Agent Registration Act.

 

John and Tony Podesta aren’t fooling anyone with this ruse. They are lobbyists for Vladimir Putin’s personal bank of choice, an arm of his Kremlin and its intelligence services. Since the brothers Podesta are presumably destined for very high-level White House jobs next January if the Democrats triumph in November at the polls, their relationship with Sberbank is something they—and Hillary Clinton—need to explain to the public.

 

 

Comment

 

Filed under: Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, News & Politics, panama papers, Russia, Sberbank, The Podesta Group, Vladimir Putin

 

ALERT: Oracle’s Global Cash Register Network Has been hacked!

Epic Data Breach At Oracle’s MICROS Point-of-Sale Division

A Russian organized cybercrime group known for hacking into banks and retailers appears to have breached hundreds of computer systems at software giant Oracle Corp., KrebsOnSecurity has learned. More alarmingly, the attackers have compromised a customer support portal for companies using Oracle’s MICROS point-of-sale credit card payment systems.

ocAsked this weekend for comment on rumors of a large data breach potentially affecting customers of its retail division, Oracle acknowledged that it had “detected and addressed malicious code in certain legacy MICROS systems.” It also said that it is asking all MICROS customers to reset their passwords for the MICROS online support portal.

MICROS is among the top three point-of-sale vendors globally. Oracle’s MICROS division sells point-of-sale systems used at more than 330,000 cash registers worldwide. When Oracle bought MICROS in 2014, the company said MICROS’s systems were deployed at some 200,000+ food and beverage outlets, 100,000+ retail sites, and more than 30,000 hotels.

The size and scope of the break-in is still being investigated, and it remains unclear when the attackers first gained access to Oracle’s systems. Sources close to the investigation say Oracle first considered the breach to be limited to a small number of computers and servers at the company’s retail division. That source said that soon after Oracle pushed new security tools to systems in the affected network investigators realized the intrusion impacted more than 700 infected systems.

KrebsOnSecurity first began investigating this incident on July 25, 2016 after receiving an email from an Oracle MICROS customer and reader who reported hearing about a potentially large breach at Oracle’s retail division.

“I do not know to what extent other than they discovered it last week,” said the reader, who agreed to be quoted here in exchange for anonymity. “Out of abundance of caution they informed us and seem to have indicated the incident was isolated to Oracle staff members and not customers like us.  In addition, this notice was to serve to customers the reason for any delays in customer support and service as they were refreshing/re-imaging employees’ computers.”

Two security experts briefed on the breach investigation and who asked to remain anonymous because they did not have permission from their employer to speak on the record said Oracle’s MICROS customer support portal was seen communicating with a server known to be used by the Carbanak Gang. Carbanak is part of a Russian cybercrime syndicate that is suspected of stealing more than $1 billion from banks, retailers and hospitality firms over the past several years.

Many well-known retail, hotel and food & beverage brands use MICROS.

Many well-known retail, hotel and food & beverage brands use MICROS.

A source briefed on the investigation says the breach likely started with a single infected system inside of Oracle’s network that was then used to compromise additional systems. Among those was a customer “ticketing portal” that Oracle uses to help MICROS customers remotely troubleshoot problems with their point-of-sale systems.

Those sources further stated that the intruders placed malicious code on the MICROS support portal, and that the malware allowed the attackers to steal MICROS customer usernames and passwords when customers logged in the support Web site.

Oracle declined to answer direct questions about the breach, saying only that Oracle’s corporate network and Oracle’s other cloud and service offerings were not impacted. The company also sought to downplay the impact of the incident, emphasizing that “payment card data is encrypted both at rest and in transit in the MICROS hosted customer environments.”

In a statement that Oracle is apparently in the process of sending to MICROS customers, Oracle said it was forcing a password reset for all support accounts on the MICROS portal. Oracle added: “We also recommend that you change the password for any account that was used by a MICROS representative to access your on-premises systems.”

ANALYSIS

This breach could be little more than a nasty malware outbreak at Oracle. However, the Carbanak Gang’s apparent involvement makes it unlikely the attackers somehow failed to grasp the enormity of access and power that control over the MICROS support portal would grant them.

Indeed, Oracle’s own statement seems to suggest the company is concerned that compromised credentials for customer accounts at the MICROS support portal could be used to remotely administer — and, more importantly, to upload card-stealing malware to — some customer point-of-sale systems. The term “on-premise” refers to POS devices that are physically connected to cash registers at MICROS customer stores.

Avivah Litan, a fraud analyst at Gartner Inc., says Oracle seems to be saying its systems are encrypted, but that it’s the customer’s on-premise devices where the real danger lies as a result of this breach.

“This [incident] could explain a lot about the source of some of these retail and merchant point-of-sale hacks that nobody has been able to definitively tie to any one point-of-sale services provider,” Litan said. “I’d say there’s a big chance that the hackers in this case found a way to get remote access” to MICROS customers’ on-premises point-of-sale devices.

Point-of-sale based malware has driven most of the credit card breaches over the past two years, including intrusions at Target and Home Depot, as well as breaches at a slew of point-of-sale vendors. The malware usually is installed via hacked remote administration tools. Once the attackers have their malware loaded onto the point-of-sale devices, they can remotely capture data from each card swiped at that cash register.

Thieves can then sell the data to crooks who specialize in encoding the stolen data onto any card with a magnetic stripe, and using the cards to buy gift cards and high-priced goods from big-box stores like Target and Best Buy.

The breach comes at a pivotal time for Oracle, which has been struggling to compete with other software giants like Amazon and Google in cloud-based services. Last month, Oracle announced it would pay $9 billion to acquire NetSuite Inc., one of the first cloud-services companies.

Arstechnica Discloses Nastiest Computer Virus In History

Researchers crack open unusually advanced malware that hid for 5 years

Espionage platform with more than 50 modules was almost certainly state sponsored.

The name “Project Sauron” came from code contained in one of the malware’s configuration files.
Kaspersky Lab

Security experts have discovered a malware platform that’s so advanced in its design and execution that it could probably have been developed only with the active support of a nation-state.

The malware—known alternatively as “ProjectSauron” by researchers from Kaspersky Lab and “Remsec” by their counterparts from Symantec—has been active since at least 2011 and has been discovered on 30 or so targets. Its ability to operate undetected for five years is a testament to its creators, who clearly studied other state-sponsored hacking groups in an attempt to replicate their advances and avoid their mistakes. State-sponsored groups have been responsible for malware like the Stuxnet- or National Security Agency-linked Flame, Duqu, and Regin. Much of ProjectSauron resides solely in computer memory and was written in the form of Binary Large Objects, making it hard to detect using antivirus.

Because of the way the software was written, clues left behind by ProjectSauron in so-called software artifacts are unique to each of its targets. That means that clues collected from one infection don’t help researchers uncover new infections. Unlike many malware operations that reuse servers, domain names, or IP addresses for command and control channels, the people behind ProjectSauron chose a different one for almost every target.

“The attackers clearly understand that we as researchers are always looking for patterns,” Kaspersky researchers wrote in a report published Monday. “Remove the patterns and the operation will be harder to discover. We are aware of more than 30 organizations attacked, but we are sure that this is just a tiny tip of the iceberg.” Symantec researchers, in a report of their own, said they were aware of seven organizations infected.

Jumping air gaps

Part of what makes ProjectSauron so impressive is its ability to collect data from air-gapped computers. To do this, it uses specially prepared USB storage drives that have a virtual file system that isn’t viewable by the Windows operating system. To infected computers, the removable drives appear to be approved devices, but behind the scenes are several hundred megabytes reserved for storing data that is kept on the air-gapped machines. The arrangement works even against computers in which data-loss prevention software blocks the use of unknown USB drives.

Kaspersky researchers still aren’t sure precisely how the USB-enabled exfiltration works. The presence of the invisible storage area doesn’t in itself allow attackers to seize control of air-gapped computers. The researchers suspect the capability is used only in rare cases and requires use of a zero-day exploit that has yet to be discovered. In all, Project Sauron is made up of at least 50 modules that can be mixed and matched to suit the objectives of each individual infection.

“Once installed, the main Project Sauron modules start working as ‘sleeper cells,’ displaying no activity of their own and waiting for ‘wake-up’ commands in the incoming network traffic,” Kaspersky researchers wrote in a separate blog post. “This method of operation ensures Project Sauron’s extended persistence on the servers of targeted organizations.”

Kaspersky researchers said they discovered the malware last September after a customer at an unidentified government organization hired them to investigate anomalous network traffic. They eventually unearthed a “strange” executable program library that was loaded into the memory of one of the customer’s domain controller servers. The library was masquerading as a Windows password filter, which is something administrators typically use to ensure passwords match specific requirements for length and complexity. The module started every time a network or local user logged in or changed a password, and it was able to view passcodes in plaintext.

The main purpose of the malware platform was to obtain passwords, cryptographic keys, configuration files, and IP addresses of the key servers related to any encryption software that was in use. Infected groups include government agencies, scientific research centers, military organizations, telecommunication providers, and financial institutions in Russia, Iran, Rwanda, China, Sweden, Belgium, and possibly in Italian-speaking countries.

Kaspersky researchers estimate that development and operation of the Sauron malware is likely to have required several specialist teams and a budget in the millions of dollars. The researchers went on to speculate that the project was funded by a nation-state, but they stopped short of saying which one.

DOE Issues Further Update to Its Loan Guarantee Programs

DOE Issues Further Update to Its Loan Guarantee Programs To Help Hydrogen Energy Fuel Depots And Portable H2O Cassettes To Receive Funding

 
 

The Loan Program Office (LPO) of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) recently published an important update to the Loan Guarantee Solicitation for Applications for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Projects1 (the Solicitation).

The update, promulgated as the Sixth Supplement to the Solicitation, effectively adds “electric vehicle charging facilities, including associated hardware and software” to the list of “Eligible Projects” (as defined in Section II of the Solicitation) under the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Loan Guarantee Program2.

This update is an important, but not surprising, development. In an article we authored earlier this year, we anticipated public funding to be used with greater frequency in the coming years for clean energy infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging infrastructure3. Indeed, in issuing the update, the Administration seeks to solidify its vision for the acceleration and facilitation of electric vehicle use in order to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the third largest GHG-polluting sector in the United States. Coupled with other federal programs already in place, such as the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program, operated since 2008, the “green” automotive industry is being strongly supported by the federal government.

It should be noted that, pursuant to the Fifth Supplement to the Solicitation, published on June 22, 2016, the submission deadlines for Part 1 and Part 2 applications under the Solicitation were extended: Part 1 and Part 2 must now be submitted no later than November 30, 2016.

In an earlier Legal Alert, released on July 5, 2016, we provided further details regarding the foregoing deadline extension; noted changes to the applicable fees and costs introduced by the Fifth Supplement; and discussed an answer published under the Frequently Asked Questions section of the Solicitations.


1Solicitation Number: DE-SOL-0007154, issued pursuant to Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
2According to the Sixth Supplement, electric vehicle charging facilities may be categorized as “efficient electrical generation, transmission, and distribution technologies” for purposes of Section II.A.1.b) of the Solicitation.
3Robert H. Edwards, Jr., Randall F. Hafer, Mark J. Riedy, Ariel I. Oseasohn and Benjamin P. Deninger, Chapter 21 – United States, The Public-Private Partnership Law Review, Second Addition (Bruno Werneck & Mario Saadi ed., 2016), page 256.

Google’s Investor’s Ordered Federal Agencies To Sabotage Their Competitors!

Google’s Investor’s Ordered Federal Agencies To Sabotage Their Competitors!

FCC, Dept. of Energy, EPA, DOT cooperated with running hit-jobs, black-lists, stone-walling, slow-walking and application rejections against the competitors of Google’s VC’s and investors in almost every case. XP Vehicles and Bright Automotive were cut-off on orders from Google and Google investors. CLICK HERE TO READ DETAILS… Google’s Investor’s Ordered Federal Agencies To Sabotage Their Competitors!

http://www.morenewznow.com/wp-content/uploads/Google’s-Investor’s-Ordered-Federal-Agencies-To-Sabotage-Their-Competitors.pdf

 

Tags:

 

Google employees have enjoyed revolving door during Obama administration

Google employees have enjoyed revolving door during Obama administration

By   /   August 8, 2016  /   News  /   No Comments

 
Part 3 of 3 in the series The Google Administration
Photo illustration from LinkedIn photos

Photo illustration from LinkedIn photos

ALL IN THE FAMILY: These are among the more than 250 people who have transitioned from Google to government or vice versa during the Obama administration. At least two dozen among the group have taken jobs in key posts in government or Google in that span. (Pictured, from top left to bottom right, Mikey Dickerson, Robert Manhini, Nicole Wong, Jannine Versi, Michele Weslander, Sameer Bhalotra, Julie Brill, Will Hudson, Michelle Lee, Matthew Bye, Joshua Wright and Renata Hesse.)

 

More than 250 people have moved from Google and related firms to the federal government or vice versa since President Barack Obama took office.

The Google Transparency Project, the work of Campaign for Accountability, poured over reams of data to find 258 instances of “revolving door activity” between Google or its associated companies and the federal government, national political campaigns and Congress since 2009.

Much of that revolving door activity took place at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, where 22 former White House officials went to work for Google and 31 executives from Google and related firms went to work at the White House or were appointed to federal advisory boards by Obama. Those boards include the President’s Council on Science and Technology and the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

Regulation watchdogs may be just as keen about the moves between Google and the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission. Those government bodies regulate many of the programs that are at the heart of Google’s business, and there have been at least 15 moves between Google and its lobbying firms and those commissions.

Sign-up for our Technology Watchdog email list to receive the latest news and in-depth coverage.

The research also shows that 25 officials in national security, intelligence or the Department of Defense joined Google, and three Google executives went to work for the DOD.

Eighteen former State Department officials became Google employees, and five Google staffers became employed at the State Department.

The complete list can be downloaded via Excel file here.

Friends in high places

Former Google employees occupy several key slots in the federal government. These include:

  • Megan Smith, vice president new business development at Google 2003-12, vice president of Google 2012-14, chief technology officer at the Office of Science and Technology Policy 2014-present.
  • Alexander Macgillivray, deputy general counsel at Google 2003-09, general counsel at Twitter 2009-13, deputy chief technology officer at OSTP 2014-present.
  • Nicole Wong, vice president and deputy general counsel at Google from 2004-11 and deputy chief technology officer at OSTP 2013-14.
  • Jannine Versi, product marketing manager in Middle East and North Africa for Google 2010-2012, White House National Economic Council 2013-14, chief of staff International Trade Administration at U.S. Department of Commerce 2014-present.
  • Michelle Lee, deputy general counsel at Google 2003-12, under secretary of commerce for intellectual property and director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 2012-present.
  • Mikey Dickerson, site reliability manager at Google 2006-13, administrator U.S. Digital Service 2014-present. Dickerson also assisted with election day monitoring and modeling with Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign and helped repair the broken HealthCare.gov website.

At least 18 former Google employees work or have worked for the U.S. Digital Service and its General Services Administration sidekick, 18F. USDS operates under the Executive Office of the President, consulting on big federal information technology projects.

The door revolves

Scott Amey, general counsel for the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan group that exposes abuses of power in government, said it’s hard to know for sure how more than 250 people moving between Google and the federal government since 2009 compares to other corporations, but “it sounds like it’s a very significant number.”

“It’s very hard to get information about the quantity of people who go in and out of government service,” Amey told Watchdog.org.

Google didn’t return an email seeking comment for this story.

Analysts at Google Transparency Project compiled the revolving-door data by using public information that includes lobby disclosure records, news stories, LinkedIn profiles and reports from Open Secrets. Campaign for Accountability notes the analysis is “an evolving representation of the scale of the revolving-door relationship between Google and government” rather than a comprehensive tally.

In other words, the total could be higher.

SCHMIDT: The Google chief executiv

SCHMIDT: The Google chief executiv

SCHMIDT: The Google executive chairman’s company Civis Analytics was a key ally of Obama during his re-election campaign.

The project’s analysis included affiliates of Google, such as YouTube, as well as key law firms and lobbyists.

It also includes Civis Analytics, whose sole investor is Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Google parent company Alphabet Inc.

At least 27 people who worked on Obama’s 2012 presidential re-election campaign went to work for Civis Analytics after the election. Google Transparency Project said “those employees are then deployed by the White House to work on President Obama’s top policy priorities.”

Those policies include federal technology acquisition reform, national security matters and health care reform – Civis Analytics employees worked with Google engineers to fix the broken HealthCare.gov website in 2013, Campaign for Accountability reports.

White House visitor logs showed that Civis Analytics executives met with White House officials at least 51 times since Obama took office.

RELATED: Visitor logs show Google’s unrivaled White House access

The company received more than $3.5 million in payments from Democratic campaigns in the last two presidential election cycles, Campaign for Accountability found.

Going from government to Google

The door has swung open the other way, as well, with prominent federal employees taking high-ranking positions at Google. These include:

  • Caroline Atkinson, head of global public policy for Google beginning this year, previously White House economic affairs adviser.
  • Sameer Bhalotra, cybersecurity at Google in 2014, senior director for cybersecurity at White House, 2010-2012.
  • Will Hudson, senior advisor for international policy at Google 2015-present, director for international cyber policy at National Economic Council, 2014-15. Hudson previously served as a counsel advising government clients on cyber law.
  • Regina Duncan, head of Google’s advanced technology and products division 2012-present, director of Defense Advance Research Projects Agency, 2009-12.
  • Michele Weslander Quaid, chief technology office for public sector at Google 2011-15, chief technology officer at National Reconnaissance Office, 2009-11.

Then there is the curious case of the FTC. Joshua Wright, senior counsel at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (Google’s most trusted antitrust law firm) since January, served as FTC commissioner from 2013-15 after being appointed by Obama.

But Wright had to recuse himself from deciding on issues related to Google while on the FTC because he had co-authored papers urging the commission to not file suit against the company. Those papers were indirectly funded by Google.

Twitter photo

Twitter photo

WRIGHT: Appointed to the FTC by President Obama, he had to recuse himself from matters involving Google because he’d written company-friendly papers to the FTC in the past. Wright now works for a favored Google law firm.

The FTC previously investigated allegations that Google manipulated search results to benefit its own companies, but the FTC ruled in 2013 that wasn’t the case. This, despite FTC staff saying Google’s practices cause “real harm to consumers and to innovation.” 

Meanwhile, the European Commission is expected to slap a record fine on Google for the same allegations the FTC dismissed.

RELATED: Google could face record fine in Europe after skating by in U.S.

“Google loses its friend at the FTC,” Fortune wrote when Wright decided to take a job as professor of law at George Mason University, a position he still holds.

Wright is just one of several former high-ranking FTC officials who have since been employed at Google or its law firms. Others include former commissioner Julie Brill, who went to work for Hogan Lovells as partner and co-director of privacy and cybersecurity in March. That law firm has represented Google on a variety of issues.

Matthew Bye, who advised the FTC on antitrust issues, went to work for Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati before moving to Google. He has been the company’s director of legal competition since November 2015.

In late 2012, months before the FTC settled with Google in its antitrust investigation, FTC Office of General Counsel attorney Robert Mahini took a job as Google’s senior policy counsel.

Some key FCC officials have moved from the commission to Google or its associate law firms, or vice versa. Johanna Shelton, who has visited the White House 128 times since Obama took office, was an FCC attorney from 1998 to 2001.

Renata Hesse, a member at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosata from 2006-11, became senior counsel to the chairman for transactions at the FCC later in 2011. She is now a deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice’s antitrust division.

Austin Schlick has been Google’s director of communications law since 2012. Before that, he was general counsel at the FCC from 2009-12.

The 18 people involved in the revolving door listed in this story are just the tip of the 251-plus name iceberg, though in some cases people among that 251 are low-level employees.

Amey said he’s not as concerned about programmers moving over – and quite a few data engineers who worked on Obama’s re-election campaign have ended up in White House jobs – but top level executives changing jobs can raise “red flags.”

“If they have access to information on competitors and they go to Google … then you have to wonder if Google is getting an unfair advantage over others in their market,” he said.

Campaign for Transparency notes Google hiring former bureaucrats “gives it valuable insights into the inner workings of government and politics,” while having its former employees ensconced in federal offices “gives it a formidable conduit to influence policy making on a variety of issues affecting its interests.”

Third Party Candidate For American 2016 Election Could Win Says Debate Commission: Public Demands Another Candidate

Clinton-Trump debate sites plan for a third podium

 

With third-party candidates hovering near the threshold, the debate commission advises hosts to consider a bigger stage.

 

08/09/16 05:16 AM EDT

Updated 08/09/16 06:15 AM EDT

 

160808_gary_johnson_getty_1160.jpg
Supporters of Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are leading the push for alternatives to the historically unpopular major party nominees. | Getty

 

 

The venues that will host the presidential debates are drawing up plans for a three-person forum that would provide a lectern for a third-party candidate to stand on stage next to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

 

The directive comes from producers working for the Commission on Presidential Debates and it’s meant, they say, to force the university hosts to be prepared and not as a reflection of the state of the race. But it could give supporters of Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein hope as they push an alternative to the historically unpopular major party nominees.

 

 

 

“With [former Gov.] Gary Johnson polling in some places more than double digits, they might have, some of our production people may have said, ‘Just in case, you need to plan out what that might look like,’” Commission on Presidential Debates co-chair and former Bill Clinton White House Press SecretaryMike McCurry told POLITICO. “We won’t know the number of invitations we extend until mid-September.”

 

To participate in one of the four general-election debates (three for president, one for vice president), candidates must be eligible for the presidency and “appear on a sufficient number of state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning a majority vote in the Electoral College,” the commission announced last year. They also must have a level of support nationally of at least 15 percent as “determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results at the time of the determination.”

 

Johnson is hovering around 8.8 percent in national polls, according to RealClearPolitics’ average, whereas Stein, when included in polling, is at around 3.8 percent. Despite being below the 15 percent cutoff, there might be some flexibility in getting someone like Johnson on stage. Frank Fahrenkopf, McCurry’s Republican counterpart and co-chair on the commission, told CNBC last week that the commission may “consider giving an inch” to a third-party candidate if he or she is close enough to the cutoff point.

 

“If someone came in and let’s say he was [polling] at 14.5 percent and the margin of error in five polls was 3 points, we are going to have to sit down and look at it,” Fahrenkopf said. “But right now that person would not be included.”

 

Representatives for the debate sites of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas and Washington University in St. Louis directed inquiries to the Commission on Presidential Debates. Hofstra University did not respond to a request for comment.

 

Late last month, Trump and the RNC also expressed displeasure at the debate commission’s schedule because two debates are scheduled the same night as NFL games.

 

But despite complaints and promises from the Trump campaign manager that a meeting would be scheduled, no meeting appears to have been set yet,McCurry said. Campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks did not respond to questions on Monday, though last week she said she would keep reporters apprised of any scheduled meetings.

 

Beyond the statement last week on how the debate schedule is set, the commission doesn’t plan to get more involved as it tries to avoid sparking a debate on the debates, the commission has repeatedly asserted. And even if there were more discussions to take place, they’d have to be directly between the campaigns, McCurry said.

 

If the two campaigns decide to have on their own a separate set of discussions about terms, the commission then considers their requests, McCurry said,something often called a “memorandum of understanding” that is traditionally drawn up between the two campaigns.

 

But it’s unlikely to change the schedule. Between sports, religious holidays, avoiding Fridays and Saturdays and scheduling the debate on a variety of days so as not to continuously harm one night of network prime-time lineups, the debate commission said it did the best it could with its Sunday, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday debate days.

 

Typically both campaigns accept the commission’s debate schedule as nearly sacrosanct. In 2012, the campaigns did not protest the debate schedule when each of the debates fell on big game days. Instead, the Romney and Obama campaigns negotiated directly with one another and developed the memorandum of understanding which they sent to the commission. The memorandum included such requests as the moderator not asking the candidates for a “show of hands” or similar calls for response and that the dressing rooms would be “comparable in size and in quality and proximity to the debate stage.”

 

McCurry said there’s been no formal meeting planned and only informal contact between the co-chairs and the Trump, Clinton and Johnson campaigns. The Trump campaign is in the process of trying to reach out to the Clinton campaign, McCurry noted, though representatives for the Trump, Clinton and Johnson campaigns did not respond to requests for comment.

 

“Our posture is we design something we think is in the best interest of American citizens. It’s based on a lot of experience over time and we kind of set the table for the candidates and expect them to show up. We don’t take the posture that there’s a lot to negotiate except over simple logistics,” McCurry said.

 

But not everyone is criticizing Trump’s objection to the schedule. Prominent Republican lawyer Ben Ginsberg, who helped in the negotiations during the primary debates among the various campaigns, suggested Trump has a point.

 

“The commission selects debate dates a year in advance so it can lock up venues and corporate sponsorships,” Ginsberg said in an interview recently. “This year, that’s a down side for a candidate wanting to get the maximum number of voters engaged in the debates since two conflict with NFL games. There’s nothing magic about needing a large venue and corporate sponsorships for a presidential debate. If those two dates are a problem for a candidate, they could be replaced by a television studio debate on days that would attract the maximum number of viewers to these events so crucial to Americans choosing their president.”

 

For its part, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta gave an official statement on Monday evening saying they’ve accepted and will be at all the debates.

 

“Secretary Clinton looks forward to participating in all three presidential debates scheduled by the independent debate commission,” Podesta said. “With so much at stake in the fall elections, she believes these debates will provide the American people with an important opportunity to hear from the candidates on issues critical to the country’s future. It is concerning that the Trump campaign is already engaged in shenanigans around these debates. It is not clear if he is trying to avoid debates, or merely toying with the press to create more drama.”

“Either way, our campaign is not interested in playing along with a debate about debates or bargaining around them,” he continued. “The only issue now is whether Donald Trump is going to show up to debate at the date, times, places and formats set by the commission last year through a bipartisan process. We will accept the commission’s invitation and expect Donald Trump to do the same.”

Adrian Covert and John Herrman, the Character Assassins of Gawker, find out that “Pay Back Is A Bitch!”

Adrian Covert and John Herrman, the Character Assassins of Gawker, find out that “Pay Back Is A Bitch!”

HAHA DENTON SUCKS TOADS

 

Gawker Media founder Nick Denton to file for personal bankruptcy (reuters.com)

Now That Nick Denton And Gawker Media are bankrupt, under investigation, getting doxxed and generally reviled by the whole planet, it is time to work on the underlings. Nick Denton’s cabin boys are the twisted kinds of bloggers that live for the joy they gain from damaging others in their petty angst and ennui-ridden lives.

Adrian Covert appears to be one of Elon Musk’s special boys, keenly enabled by the firm hand of John Herrman in their constant need to character assassinate and destroy others using the media control engine that is Gawker, CNN or other propaganda empire.

With over 20 people looking for payback from Covert and Herrman’s malicious and insidious character assassination campaigns, it is a wonder either of those two can go out in public. Investigators believe that Adrian Covert operate on behalf of West Wing PR directors and campaign billionaires. When those folks want an enemy terminated, they call the scummy writers from Gawker. By leaving so many bodies in their wake, Covert and Herrman now need to look over their own shoulders because a number of victims have promised to make them pay “forever” for their

READ MORE…

Tags: Hulk Hogan, Nick Denton, Gawker Media, Adrian Covert, Gizmodo, John Herrman

Google in the White House? Assange Warns of Close Ties Between Hillary Clinton & Internet Giant

Clinton & Internet Giant

caphill
 

Google in the White House? Assange Warns of Close Ties Between Hillary Clinton & Internet Giant

Google in the White House? Assange Warns of Close Ties Between Hillary Clinton & Internet Giant

WATCH FULL SHOW

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/8/8/google_in_the_white_house_assange

 

Topics

Guests

Julian Assange

founder and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.

During the Green Party convention in Houston, Texas, over the weekend, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange spoke via video stream about his book “When Google Met WikiLeaks” and the relationship between Hillary Clinton, the State Department and the internet giant Google.


TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

DAVID COBB: I’m reminded of the great political philosopher Lily Tomlin, who said, “No matter how cynical I get, it’s hard to keep up.” Julian, Greens, like most Americans, are disgusted by the collusion between Wall Street, multinational corporations and our own government. We know, as most Americans do, that these large corporations are no longer merely exercising power, they are literally ruling over us. In your book, When Google Met WikiLeaks, you describe, quote, “a special relationship,” end-quote, between Google, the U.S. State Department and Hillary Clinton. Could you talk about that, please?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, I just want to correct, very quickly, some false reporting. So, very interestingly, when we published the DNC leaks, The New York Times, which has picked its favorite candidate, as has Bloomberg, which is Hillary Clinton, said that I intended to harm Hillary Clinton. This is what we’ve been doing for 10 years. It was a completely fabricated story by Charlie Savage. OK.

But, yes, we are very interested in power and publishing the truth about power, so people can work out however they choose to reform power. And so, Google is a kind of new power on the block, so we are interested in it, and we’re also interested in Hillary Clinton, when she was secretary of state and now, I mean, the presidential candidacy. So, these two powers have merged at a kind of personal level and political level, and even, to a small extent, at the organizational level. So, that book, written three years ago, has been proved to be very prescient.

The chairman of Google, who was the CEO of Google, Eric Schmidt, has started, about a year ago, a company to run Hillary Clinton’s digital campaign. Google has been to the White House, on average over the last four years, once per week—more than any other single company. It spends more money lobbying Washington, D.C., than any other single company. Hillary Clinton’s former staffer, Jared Cohen, was hired by Google in 2009 to head up Google’s internal think tank. There’s a lot of other interconnections between Google and the state. Eric Schmidt is now also, at the same time as being chairman of what is now Google’s parent company, Alphabet, is chairman of the Pentagon innovation board.

So you have a connection between Google, the Clinton campaign, which will be almost certainly the next White House, and the Pentagon. And this triangle is extremely worrying, because, as time goes by, Google is understanding that it does have an ability to influence election campaigns. It’s also bought more than 10 drone companies. It’s integrating its mapping data in order to better be able to fly and navigate drones around the world, is expanding into every country in the world.

And it has a very strange, quasi-religious vision of the future, of this vision of the singularity. It’s really a—I’ve done research that it’s very disturbing what they believe in Silicon Valley, that they believe they can create a massive artificial intelligence, more powerful than any human being or any society’s ability to think. And, of course, we all know what happens when such power is in limited hands.

And so, Google in the White House will be, essentially, an unregulatable company. It’s a question whether it’s already unregulatable, but you can—you can just completely forget about any kind of antitrust legislation being used on Google if there is a Hillary Clinton White House.

DAVID COBB: Julian, I’m reminded that Benito Mussolini, the fascist dictator, said that fascism more appropriately should be called corporatism, because it merges the private power of corporations with the military might of the nation-state. And, of course, he thought that was a good thing. It occurs to me that you were describing our newer, kinder, gentler, smiling face of fascism, where all of the information that we receive is controlled by that same collusion between government and major transnational corporations, and now our ability to even talk to myself, or ourselves. Am I being overdramatic, or do I understand you correctly?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, it could be both. It could be both. No, it is—it is possibly the most serious issue. The potential threat of nuclear war, I think, is perhaps the other one. Yes, there is a merger going on at a rapid pace between the largest American corporations and the traditional aspects of the U.S. state, the military intelligence aspects. I mean, that’s been there for a long time, frankly, with Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, General Electric, etc. But this is a new generation. And Eric Schmidt wrote in his book about Google and the world that what Lockheed Martin and other aerospace companies were to the 20th century, high-tech companies will be to the 21st century. And that’s very much their vision, to integrate with Washington, to prevent antitrust regulation and to be part of that family of traditional D.C.-mediated power.

DAVID COBB: Julian, Greens, like most Americans, have been horrified to learn—and, for many of us, have it objectively collaborated—that multinational corporations and wealthy oligarchs are literally directing U.S. foreign policy. So I have a question for you, because of your unique vantage point: What advice, if any, would you give the next president of the United States about how to shift that policy, given the reality that she might be facing?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, that’s a very interesting question. Does it make any difference who is president or not? A very, very interesting question. It certainly doesn’t make as much difference as people say. What really makes a difference is what the environment is in which the president has to work. And that is the environment of critique, on the one hand, to how free the media is, how much opposition organizations are doing their job in holding government to account. And it’s the economic and corporate environment, and then, to a degree, the international foreign affairs environment. And the president is much more a spokesperson for these forces around them.

Where they do make a big difference is in their initial appointments, so the people that they choose to fill those spots in government that then reactively makes policy. But as you can see with Barack Obama, most of the time is spent reading out teleprompters. There’s just not enough time to do much else than be a spokesperson for these groups. So, what is happening now, with the Green Party and Gary Johnson and the Bernie Sanders campaign and so on, is very, very important, but it must be seen past the moment, past this political moment. That’s a moment to build a movement and build pressure. And having built it, then one can discipline and hold to account and check the abuses of government during the next four years.

AMY GOODMAN: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange speaking at the Green Party convention in Houston, being interviewed by former Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb. Assange’s books include When Google Met WikiLeaks, which is based on Assange’s meeting with Google CEO Eric Schmidt five years ago, when Assange was under house arrest in England, before he was granted political asylum in Ecuador, now living in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, afraid if he steps foot outside, he’ll be arrested and ultimately extradited to the United States, where there, it is believed, a sealed indictment against him for WikiLeaks. We’ll be back with more of the conversation between Julian Assange and David Cobb in a minute.

READ THE DETAILS OF GOOGLE’S TAKEOVER OF THE WHITE HOUSE- CLICK HERE   HOW GOOGLE TOOK OVER THE WHITE HOUSE 2.4

 

Click to access HOW-GOOGLE-TOOK-OVER-THE-WHITE-HOUSE-2.4-1.pdf

Share this:

Political Pollsters Caught With Their Pants Down

From the Gateway Pundit:

Current polls show the race for President is much tighter than it really is.  Ann Coulter warned us years ago in her best seller Slander that Democrats and the liberal media always use polls to manipulate and discourage conservatives from voting.  Thanks to social media there is more and more evidence that the polls are way off and if things stay as they are, Trump will win in a landslide!

It’s evident Hillary has a hard time filling a Union Hall while Trump regularly turns people away from his stadium and arena venues.

Now this – Analysis from social media provides additional support that Trump is likely to win in a landslide.

Every major pollster uses land line telephones and old fashioned metrics technology. Modern, informed, members of the public won’t talk to pollsters and they stealth their communications equipment. Pollsters are only getting results from “old ladies”but social media (IE: The New Ghostbusters debacle) say that Clinton has already lost by miles.

How The Collective Mouth-Off Is About To Change The Presidential Election Process FOREVER!

How The Collective Mouth-Off Is About To Change The Presidential Election Process FOREVER!

 

 

 

– For the first time in the history of America, the internet lets EVERYBODY say what they are thinking

 

– Google and Facebook thought they could control this election but they are getting it flung back in their faces

 

 

 

 

 

Brian Truitt, USA TODAY

 

An unlikely team of supervillains must save the day.

 

(Photo: Clay Enos)

 

The biggest civil war of summer was supposed to be Captain America and Iron Man facing off in a superhero popcorn movie. But in the past few months, battle lines have been drawn all over pop culture, with tempers flaring, cooler heads not prevailing and hate spewing everywhere, mostly on the Internet.

 

There was DC vs. Marvel as fanboys and fangirls hotly debated comic-book franchises. Old-school Ghostbusters fans vs. the new reboot’s female stars. Kanye West and Kim Kardashian vs. Taylor Swift in a he said/she said war involving lyrics and Snapchat videos. Those who were excited to see Suicide Squad vs. the critics who reviled it, with RottenTomatoes.com becoming ground zero for trench warfare.

 

And then there’s the presidential race, where two weeks of conventions featured political parties calling each other out and cable news coverage showcased surrogates of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton sniping at one another 24/7.

 

 

“What I see right now is the whole world seems to be going to hell in a handbasket, and that’s creating a lot of tension and anger,” says Devin Faraci, editor in chief of film site Birth.Movies.Death. “That stuff leaks out into every possible direction. We’re in that weird position where everything sort of seems terrible and so as a result, people become negative and combative.”

 

It’s not as much people hating things as it is feverishly defending what they like, figures Mike Ryan, senior entertainment writer for Uproxx.com. “And if something or someone gets in the way of what they’re defending, watch out.”

 

Captain America (Chris Evans) and Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) kicked off an unlikely summer of warfare with ‘Captain America: Civil War.’ (Photo: Marvel)

 

Pop culture is a lightning rod in society, attracting very strong emotions both positive or negative, according to David Schmid, an English professor at University at Buffalo who has written about the overlap between crime and entertainment in his book Natural Born Celebrities: Serial Killers in American Culture.

 

“From Uncle Tom’s Cabin in 1852 to comic books in the 1950s, pop culture has always been a convenient scapegoat, whether it’s about politics and race or just fear of juvenile delinquency from reading comics,” Schmid says.

 

People have long held strong views, but they didn’t have the venues in which to express it, says Robert Thompson, professor of television and popular culture at Syracuse University.

 

“If you hung out in beauty parlors or barber shops, you probably heard similar kinds of responses, but that’s where they stopped,” Thompson says. “Maybe you might put something on paper and mimeograph it and put it under windshield wipers, or you wrote a letter to editor.”

 

But the instant gratification — and instant hot take — nature of social media changed all that. “I had a great-uncle who complained about everything, but we were the only ones who heard it,” Thompson adds. “Now everyone would hear about it.”

 

The love/hate relationship between theater crowds and movie critics has evolved similarly. Loyalists took it personally when scathing reviews piled on Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice or Suicide Squad before they were able to see the movies themselves.

 

Filmgoers want objectivity in criticism, though their definition of it “always means ‘my opinion,’ ” Faraci says. “They believe they’re coming from the sole rational spot on Earth and anyone who disagrees with them is inherently irrational.”

 

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton’s high-profile race to the White House may have contributed to the current negativity in pop culture. (Photo: Getty Images)

 

He sees two turning points in the last five years where the conversation on social media became much more negative. Facebook commenters started having to use their real names in 2014 but continued saying “the most heinous stuff,” even with the lack of anonymity. And Twitter evolved from being a peer-to-peer messaging system to more of a global broadcasting medium. “Not every statement is for everybody, but the retweet button now allows you to (reach) people well beyond your own crowd or audience.”

 

Adds Schmid: “You start out using social media and down the line you start to feel social media is using you. So you update and you post and you tweet because you feel it’s expected now.”

 

According to Ryan, the rhetoric is so amped up right now, it trickles down into everything — even fans’ favorite comic-book characters on the big screen.

 

“DC vs. Marvel has somehow become an Oakland Raiders/Denver Broncos game, even though these movies don’t really compete head to head at the same time,” Ryan says. “But people cheer for them like they cheer for their favorite team.”

 

 

Even Suicide Squad director David Ayer got caught up in the rivalry: After a fan shouted “(Expletive) Marvel!” at the movie’s world premiere last week, Ayer repeated the sentiment onstage, though he tweeted a mea culpa soon afterward: “Not cool. Respect for my brother filmmakers.”

 

It’s a type of tribalism — where some root for Captain America: Civil War, others for Batman v Superman — that disturbs Faraci, a longtime aficionado of both comic companies.

 

“You have these kids who are really concerned about executives and box office the way I never was,” he says. “It feels like the Cola Wars have come to life and we’re all battling each other on the side of our chosen corporation. Guess what? I can like Superman and Spider-Man equally.”

 

Old ‘Ghostbusters’ fans took umbrage with the new crew: Abby (Melissa McCarthy), Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon), Erin (Kristen Wiig) and Patty (Leslie Jones). (Photo: Hopper Stone)

 

Fans identifying with music, politics, films and TV isn’t intrinsically bad, Schmid says. The Ghostbusters discussion in particular, around the idea that director Paul Feig’s female-centric reboot would “ruin” fanboys’ childhoods, “enabled a larger conversation to take place about the role of women in superhero movies and in movies in general. What starts off as negative or prejudiced point of view can in the fullness of time become more positive.”

 

When the movie opened, Feig acknowledged both sides, tweeting, “It’s been quite a ride, gang. Supporters, you rock. Haters, I’ve heard you all. Now let’s all just have fun. We need it.” Yet the negativity reached a boiling point soon after when star Leslie Jones was temporarily forced off Twitter after a deluge of racist tweets.

 

More recently, breakout star Daisy Ridley from Star Wars: The Force Awakens was chased off Instagram last week by backlash following an anti-gun post.

 

 

Before social media, people didn’t really get the chance to be so close “to the people who make the things that we love,” says Alanna Bennett, a BuzzFeed pop culture writer who took a Twitter break after she was harassed for a post proposing ways fans could support the new Ghostbusters movie.

 

“I think that we’re at a point now where it’s happening more and more … and people of color and especially women of color are disengaging from that when they’re in a very high-profile place.”

 

Trolls are a major part of the social-media space, which has erased age boundaries as it has grown more popular, according to Faraci. A 14-year-old could be arguing with an adult on the Internet, and the latter would never know it by conversing with a blank Twitter egg avatar.

 

Kanye West jumped onstage after Taylor Swift won for best female video at the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards. (Photo: Christopher Polk, Getty Images)

 

Grown-ups aren’t above getting into the fray, either — for example, Trump bashing Clinton on Twitter and vice versa, or the ongoing public feud between Team Kimye and Team Swift. After Kardashian released video of Swift giving tacit approval to ugly lyrics mentioning her in West’s Famous, Swift fought back against being called a liar, adding that she “would very much like to be excluded from this narrative, one that I never asked to be part of, since 2009” — the year West infamously interrupted her at the MTV Video Music Awards.

 

“If celebrities and politicians — who aren’t so very different these days — are constantly taking the negative path, it can feel like the status quo, the way things are done, an acceptable way to act,” says Kate Erbland, film editor at Indiewire.com.

 

“Every famous person ever has had petty beefs,” Faraci adds. “They just didn’t have the easy access to make those beefs public, and we’re still figuring out the etiquette of this stuff and how to properly use it.

 

“I don’t think people have gotten any worse. Our ability to immediately go to our worst place has been made easier.”

 

 

So is it fixable? Does everybody just need to hug it out?

 

“Eventually, people might become so sick of this (that) it becomes not cool, something people don’t respect in the marketplace of ideas and emotion,” Thompson says. “But I don’t see that happening in the near future.”

 

Erbland offers a three-step process to turn our collective frown upside down: “Better movies, better discussion and maybe less time on social media.”

 

But Faraci contends that if people just realized they were actually talking to other people when they engage on social media, they might not be so mean.

 

“We’re not just talking to an avatar or a statement,” he says. “We’re talking to a real human being who got up this morning, had breakfast, maybe something bad happened to them, maybe something good happened to them, but they’re living an actual life outside of their opinion on Suicide Squad.”

 

Contributing: Kelly Lawler and Maria Puente

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

Facebook and Google to track you using your posture only, even if your face is covered!

Faceless Recognition System’ Can Identify You Even When You Hide Your Face

 

Written by

Joshua Kopstein

Contributor

 

With widespread adoption among law enforcement, advertisers, and even churches, face recognition has undoubtedly become one of the biggest threats to privacy out there.

By itself, the ability to instantly identify anyone just by seeing their face already creates massive power imbalances, with serious implications for free speech and political protest. But more recently, researchers have demonstrated that even when faces are blurred or otherwise obscured, algorithms can be trained to identify people by matching previously-observed patterns around their head and body.

In a new paper uploaded to the ArXiv pre-print server, researchers at the Max Planck Institute in Saarbrücken, Germany demonstrate a method of identifying individuals even when most of their photos are un-tagged or obscured. The researchers’ system, which they call the “Faceless Recognition System,” trains a neural network on a set of photos containing both obscured and visible faces, then uses that knowledge to predict the identity of obscured faces by looking for similarities in the area around a person’s head and body.

The accuracy of the system varies depending on how many visible faces are available in the photo set. Even when there are only 1.25 instances of the individual’s fully-visible face, the system can identify an obscured faced with 69.6 percent accuracy; if there are 10 instances of an individual’s visible face, it increases to as high as 91.5 percent.

In other words, even if you made sure to obscure your face in most of your Instagram photos, the system would have a decent chance identifying you as long as there are one or two where your face is fully visible.

It turns out this becomes a lot harder to do using sets of photos from “across events,” or when factors like illumination and the person’s clothing have changed. The researchers found that when identifying faces obscured by black squares across events, the system’s performance drops dramatically from 47.4 percent to 14.7 percent—but even that is three times more accurate than the “naive” method of identifying obscured faces through blind prediction, the researchers note.

In the past, Facebook has shown its face recognition algorithms can predict the identity of users when they obscure their face with 83% accuracy, using cues such as their stance and body type. But the researchers say their system is the first to do so using a trainable system that uses a full range of body cues surrounding blurred and blacked-out faces.

“From a privacy perspective, the results presented here should raise concern,” the researchers write. “It is very probable that undisclosed systems similar to the ones described here already operate online. We believe it is the responsibility of the computer vision community to quantify, and disseminate the privacy implications of the images users share online.”

Steve Westly, Architect Of the Solyndra and Cleantech Taxpayer Scams, has a buddy that beats women to a pulp!

TYPICAL SILICON VALLEY TECH MOGUL CAUGHT ON CAMERA BEATING WOMAN

 

PUBLIC WIKI USERS

 

INVOLVED WITH STEVE WESTLY, ONE OF THE ARCHITECTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY EMBEZZLEMENT SCAM THAT RIPPED OFF TAXPAYERS IN SOLYNDRA AND OTHER SCAMS

 

 

 

Newscom

 

Michael Daly

 

Michael Daly

 

SCUMBAG REPORT:

 

Video of Silicon Valley Mogul Kicking His Girlfriend 117 Times Could Send Him to Jail

 

A video of Silicon Valley princeling Gurbaksh Chahal assaulting his former girlfriend could finally land him in jail.

 

The video is high quality, as might be expected of a surveillance camera in the penthouse bedroom of a high-tech princeling.

 

The footage was so clear that San Francisco police were able to determine that Gurbaksh Chahal punched and kicked his girlfriend 117 times in 30 minutes. He also smothered her with a pillow for 20 seconds.

 

“She stated she was unable to breathe,” San Francisco Police Officer Anh Nguyen testified at the preliminary hearing against Chahal, as reported in the San Francisco Chronicle. “She stated that he said, ‘I’m going to kill you’ four times. She stated she was in fear for her life.”

 

 

And it seemed certain that 31-year-old Chahal was one Silicon Valley startup star for whom IPO would now stand for Initial Prison Offering.

 

Never mind that Chahal had become a figure of legend by selling his first digital ad startup, ClickAgent, for $40 million when he was just 18.

 

Never mind that Chahal sold his second digital ad startup, BlueLithium, for $300 million four years later.

 

Never mind that Chahal had been declared “America’s Most Eligible Bachelor” by the TV show Extra! and deemed one of the planet’s “richest and fittest guys” by Men’s Health magazine.

 

Never mind that Chahal had posed smiling beside President Barack Obama at a fundraiser just 10 months before the attack.

 

Never mind that Chahal now put his megabucks to work, hiring one of San Francisco’s very best defense lawyers, a former prosecutor and retired brigadier general named James Lassart.

 

Never mind that the girlfriend who had started it all with a call to 911 and who had told the police she had been afraid for her life suddenly ceased to cooperate with the authorities.

 

Never mind that Chahal had allegedly paid her as much as $4 million, as charged in a civil suit filed by a former employee.

 

Never mind that he arranged to pay another $1 million to a prominent political powerbroker who suggested he might be able to make the case “go away.”

 

The cops still had the video.

 

Until they didn’t.

 

Before Chahal even had to attempt a fix, a judge ruled that the video was inadmissible because the police had seized it improperly. The judge was not swayed by the prosecutor’s argument that the cops hadn’t had time to secure a warrant because a tech mogul could so easily erase the footage.

 

With no victim and no video, the district attorney’s office agreed to reduce the 47 felony charges to two misdemeanors. Chahal pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would get probation, along with 25 hours of community service and a $500 fine.

 

“A traffic ticket,” Chahal remarked online.

 

He sought to excuse himself and smear the woman by suggesting in a blog that he had only reacted as anyone might upon learning that his girlfriend had supposedly engaged in “unprotected sex for money with other people.”

 

“There is a difference between temper and domestic violence,” he contended.

 

That blog has since been taken down, but he had another called BeLimitless, which includes a “Relationships” section. He described himself as a “diehard entrepreneur. Love innovation & building amazing companies.”

 

That June, Chahal had not hesitated to call the police himself and complain that he was being harassed by an “obsessed female fan.” He said the fan—an accountant in South Carolina—had been sending him unsolicited emails in such a way as to “interfere with his personal and professional life.”

 

In the meantime, Chahal had agreed in his guilty plea to attend a 52-week domestic violence class. The course was not yet halfway done on Sept. 17, 2014, when police received another 911 call from his penthouse. Chahal’s new girlfriend—whom he’d met in Las Vegas while the first case was pending and who should not be confused with the supposedly harassing “female fan”—reported to the dispatcher that he had physically assaulted her in his penthouse.

 

“Same room, same bed, just no security camera that we know of,” says Beverly Upton, executive director of the San Francisco Domestic Violence Consortium.

 

Unfortunately, there was one more similarity between the two cases: this alleged victim also suddenly declined to cooperate with the investigation. She is said in court papers to have hopped a plane back to her native South Korea after Chahal allegedly threatened to turn her in for immigration fraud. The district attorney’s office again found itself without enough material to prosecute a criminal case.

 

But where a criminal case requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the district attorney’s office needed only a preponderance of the evidence to establish that Chahal had violated his probation when he allegedly assaulted a second woman.

 

In a brilliant move, the district attorney’s office asked the judge if the video from the first case could be admitted to establish that the second assault was essentially a repeat offense. The judge ruled that it could.

 

The prosecution also had a recording of the 911 call made by the second girlfriend. That and the video convinced the judge, who ruled on July 22 that Chahal had indeed violated his probation.

 

The sentencing is set for Aug. 12, three years and one week after Chahal assaulted his first girlfriend. The two misdemeanor counts to which he pleaded guilty each carry a one-year maximum, but the district attorney’s office had thought to arrange it so that the sentences would be served consecutively if Chahal violated his probation. Now he may be hit with two years, much less than he would have received if he had been convicted of the felonies, but two years more than he would have received otherwise.

 

Then again, the judge could conceivably allow Chahal once more to avoid incarceration, depending on what the probation report recommends.

 

In the meantime, The Wall Street Journal has found in court papers a remarkable email exchange between Chahal and a mogul on the board of his third digital ad startup, RadiumOne, back at the time of the first arrest.

 

The mogul was Steve Westly, who had scored big with eBay early on and hoped for another big score with RadiumOne’s Initial Public Offering. That hope was dimmed by the prospect of the firm’s founder and CEO facing an Initial Prison Offering.

 

Westly is a former California State Controller who had made a failed run for governor in 2006 and hoped to try again. He was pals with Willie Brown, a former mayor of San Francisco and onetime speaker of the California State Assembly. Westly, the Journal reported, emailed Chahal that Brown “believes he can help you.” Westly told Chahal that Brown was friendly with San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon and “may be able to ‘back him off.’”

 

At Westly’s suggestion, Chahal met with Brown. Chahal reported back to Westly in an email with the subject line “Willie Brown.” Chahal wrote, “Just met him. Wants $1 million if he can make this go away. Just gave him a $250K retainer. If you meet him tomorrow. Apply some pressure on him to make this go away in 2013.” Westly replied, “Wow. That’s pricey, but probably worth it if he can make it happen. I suspect he will pull out all the stops to get this done.”

 

But Gascon would not likely have been swayed even if he had been approached. Any such attempt ceased to be necessary when the judge threw out the video. Chahal was nonetheless forced from his position at RadiumOne, but he soon had a new digital ad startup, Gravity4. His senior employees there included a young Canadian named Yousef Khraibut, who subsequently filed a wrongful termination suit that describes Chahal as a CEO from hell itself.

 

“Chahal, fueled by a toxic cocktail of prescription drugs, party drugs, alcohol, and sycophants, subjected his associates and Gravity4 employees to daily abuse, humiliation, racist taunts, extortionate manipulation, tales of revenge, and threats of violence,” the suit, which was filed in a San Francisco federal court, alleges.

 

The suit continues, “Finally, when Khraibut dared to stand up to Chahal’s abuse, threats, and illegal behavior, Chahal repeatedly threatened Khraibut with violence, fired him, and hustled him out of the country, hounding him with continued threats, stalking, defamation, interference, and manipulation. Khraibut brings this action to vindicate his legal rights, and to stop Chahal from repeating these practices against other unknowing victims in the future.”

 

With regard to first assault, the suit claims, “Chahal told Khraibut that the woman had originally demanded $200,000, then increased her demand to one million after her family’s input, and finally to two million. Khraibut later learned that the amount of the ultimate payment was higher than two million dollars, possibly as much as four million dollars. It was clear in the context of Chahal’s discussions with Khraibut about these issues, that the victim had been paid at least in part to ‘be quiet’ and not cooperate with the criminal investigation.”

 

The suit claims Chahal also spoke to Khraibut about the effort to put in the unneeded fix with Willie Brown. The suit reports, “Chahal described a near-confrontation with Brown in the St. Regis hotel lobby in San Francisco while Chahal was with his bodyguard… Chahal boasted that he had forced Brown to give back much of the original retainer that Chahal had paid him.”

 

The suit further reports that after the judge ruled the video inadmissible, Chahal remained fearful of it “ever getting into the hands of the media or other adverse parties.” He did not explain why he would be so worried if he only hit the woman with a pillow in self-defense, as he had contended.

 

“Chahal’s story evolved to admitting that Chahal had struck his girlfriend with his hands, i.e. ‘just shook her and slapped her,’ but that he did not hurt her,” the suit says.

 

The suit also claims that Chahal remained concerned enough about a negative image that “Gravity4’s hiring efforts were focused in part on hiring women executives and employees to combat Chahal’s negative image in the wake of his domestic violence conviction.”

 

Even so, the suit alleges, “Gravity4’s female hiring efforts were colored by Chahal’s focus on women’s appearances during the hiring process. In one instance, Chahal researched a young, attractive female sales manager applicant by finding online photographs of her wearing a bikini, and then showing them to other male employees, including Khraibut, seeking their opinion on her breasts. When Khraibut protested via Skype chat that it ‘wasn’t right’ to be checking out a prospective hire’s bikini pictures, Chahal responded, ‘Research bro. Everything is online. I do this on every candidate.’”

 

The suit adds, “Chahal frequently referred to women in the workplace in both vulgar and derogatory terms. For example, during the hiring process, Chahal would refer to allowing an attractive woman to proceed in the interview process, as a ‘pussy pass.’”

 

As for his own gender, “Chahal would use the term ‘on PMS’ as a derogatory slur toward men executives, including Khraibut, who were having a difficult day.”

 

The suit says that Chahal called Khraibut a “terrorist” and was heard to use the N word regarding people of color. He also had opinions about Jewish people. “Chahal complained that Jews ran Silicon Valley and had conspired against him in business, and that if his last name had been ‘Zuckerberg,’ his former RadiumOne investors would have supported him,” the suit says.

 

Chahal’s own family was apparently not spared his scorn. The suit contends that he “ridiculed his immediate relatives as ‘ungrateful pieces of shit,’ and that they betrayed him, even after Chahal ‘made them all millionaires,’ because the relatives refused to support Chahal’s decision to publicly trash his former girlfriend and domestic violence victim.”

 

Then came the second assault case. Khraibut claims in the suit that Chahal texted him in the middle of the night, summoning him to the penthouse. Chahal was there with his bodyguard, Moepulou Alais, a bouncer whom he had also met in Las Vegas, the suit claims.

 

“Chahal instructed Khraibut to tell the police that Khraibut had been in the condominium during the alleged incident ” the suit says. “Khraibut was unwilling to state to authorities that he had been in the apartment at a time that he had not been.”

 

The suit adds, “Chahal was enraged that Khraibut refused to buttress Chahal’s alibi against [the woman’s] assault charges.”

 

The suit goes on, “When Khraibut dared to stand up to Chahal’s abuse, threats, and illegal behavior, Chahal repeatedly threatened Khraibut with violence, fired him, and hustled him out of the country, hounding him with continued threats, stalking, defamation, interference, and manipulation.”

 

The suit—filed in San Francisco federal court Sept. 28, 2015 and contested by Chahal, who is presently seeking to have it sent to arbitration over Khraibut’s objections—concludes, “Khraibut brings this action to vindicate his legal rights, and to stop Chahal from repeating these practices against other unknowing victims in the future.”

 

In the meantime, Westly was still talking about running for governor in 2018 despite his efforts on Chahal’s behalf, regarding which Beverly Upton notes, “That’s not helping him, that’s enabling him.”

 

“[Westly] was really helping himself,” Upton says, suggesting the mogul’s priority was the planned RadiumOne IPO.

 

That did not stop the Democratic Party from using Westly’s home for a fundraiser.

 

The invitation read:

 

The Democratic National Committee
Cordially invites you to a Brunch Reception with special guest
BARACK OBAMA
To support the Democratic Hope Fund
Thursday, February 11, 2016
The home of Steve Westly
Atherton, CA

 

The guests did not include Chahal, who was busy trying to avoid a long-delayed Initial Prison Offering. Chahal did not respond to a request for comment. Nor did Westly. Nor did Brown, who has insisted that his dealings with Chahal involved nothing unethical.

 

We will find out at the end of this week whether Chahal will end up behind bars, as it seemed so certain he would when the cops first seized that video.

 

The judge has ruled that the footage will remain sealed because the victim’s face is recognizable, as might be expected with a surveillance camera in the penthouse bedroom of a high-tech princeling.

 

See More In This Extended Report To the FBI (CLICK HERE TO READ THE PDF) The Silicon Valley Mafia 3.7

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;”> 

 

TYPICAL SILICON VALLEY TECH MOGUL CAUGHT ON CAMERA BEATING WOMAN

http://wp.me/p7j6BA-Cuc

TYPICAL SILICON VALLEY TECH MOGUL CAUGHT ON CAMERA BEATING WOMAN

TYPICAL SILICON VALLEY TECH MOGUL CAUGHT ON CAMERA BEATING WOMAN

Newscom

Michael Daly

Michael Daly

SCUMBAG

Video of Silicon Valley Mogul Kicking His Girlfriend 117 Times Could Send Him to Jail

A video of Silicon Valley princeling Gurbaksh Chahal assaulting his former girlfriend could finally land him in jail.

The video is high quality, as might be expected of a surveillance camera in the penthouse bedroom of a high-tech princeling.

The footage was so clear that San Francisco police were able to determine that Gurbaksh Chahal punched and kicked his girlfriend 117 times in 30 minutes. He also smothered her with a pillow for 20 seconds.

“She stated she was unable to breathe,” San Francisco Police Officer Anh Nguyen testified at the preliminary hearing against Chahal, as reported in the San Francisco Chronicle. “She stated that he said, ‘I’m going to kill you’ four times. She stated she was in fear for her life.”

And it seemed certain that 31-year-old Chahal was one Silicon Valley startup star for whom IPO would now stand for Initial Prison Offering.

Never mind that Chahal had become a figure of legend by selling his first digital ad startup, ClickAgent, for $40 million when he was just 18.

Never mind that Chahal sold his second digital ad startup, BlueLithium, for $300 million four years later.

Never mind that Chahal had been declared “America’s Most Eligible Bachelor” by the TV show Extra! and deemed one of the planet’s “richest and fittest guys” by Men’s Health magazine.

Never mind that Chahal had posed smiling beside President Barack Obama at a fundraiser just 10 months before the attack.

Never mind that Chahal now put his megabucks to work, hiring one of San Francisco’s very best defense lawyers, a former prosecutor and retired brigadier general named James Lassart.

Never mind that the girlfriend who had started it all with a call to 911 and who had told the police she had been afraid for her life suddenly ceased to cooperate with the authorities.

Never mind that Chahal had allegedly paid her as much as $4 million, as charged in a civil suit filed by a former employee.

Never mind that he arranged to pay another $1 million to a prominent political powerbroker who suggested he might be able to make the case “go away.”

The cops still had the video.

Until they didn’t.

Before Chahal even had to attempt a fix, a judge ruled that the video was inadmissible because the police had seized it improperly. The judge was not swayed by the prosecutor’s argument that the cops hadn’t had time to secure a warrant because a tech mogul could so easily erase the footage.

With no victim and no video, the district attorney’s office agreed to reduce the 47 felony charges to two misdemeanors. Chahal pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would get probation, along with 25 hours of community service and a $500 fine.

“A traffic ticket,” Chahal remarked online.

He sought to excuse himself and smear the woman by suggesting in a blog that he had only reacted as anyone might upon learning that his girlfriend had supposedly engaged in “unprotected sex for money with other people.”

“There is a difference between temper and domestic violence,” he contended.

That blog has since been taken down, but he had another called BeLimitless, which includes a “Relationships” section. He described himself as a “diehard entrepreneur. Love innovation & building amazing companies.”

That June, Chahal had not hesitated to call the police himself and complain that he was being harassed by an “obsessed female fan.” He said the fan—an accountant in South Carolina—had been sending him unsolicited emails in such a way as to “interfere with his personal and professional life.”

In the meantime, Chahal had agreed in his guilty plea to attend a 52-week domestic violence class. The course was not yet halfway done on Sept. 17, 2014, when police received another 911 call from his penthouse. Chahal’s new girlfriend—whom he’d met in Las Vegas while the first case was pending and who should not be confused with the supposedly harassing “female fan”—reported to the dispatcher that he had physically assaulted her in his penthouse.

“Same room, same bed, just no security camera that we know of,” says Beverly Upton, executive director of the San Francisco Domestic Violence Consortium.

Unfortunately, there was one more similarity between the two cases: this alleged victim also suddenly declined to cooperate with the investigation. She is said in court papers to have hopped a plane back to her native South Korea after Chahal allegedly threatened to turn her in for immigration fraud. The district attorney’s office again found itself without enough material to prosecute a criminal case.

But where a criminal case requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the district attorney’s office needed only a preponderance of the evidence to establish that Chahal had violated his probation when he allegedly assaulted a second woman.

In a brilliant move, the district attorney’s office asked the judge if the video from the first case could be admitted to establish that the second assault was essentially a repeat offense. The judge ruled that it could.

The prosecution also had a recording of the 911 call made by the second girlfriend. That and the video convinced the judge, who ruled on July 22 that Chahal had indeed violated his probation.

The sentencing is set for Aug. 12, three years and one week after Chahal assaulted his first girlfriend. The two misdemeanor counts to which he pleaded guilty each carry a one-year maximum, but the district attorney’s office had thought to arrange it so that the sentences would be served consecutively if Chahal violated his probation. Now he may be hit with two years, much less than he would have received if he had been convicted of the felonies, but two years more than he would have received otherwise.

Then again, the judge could conceivably allow Chahal once more to avoid incarceration, depending on what the probation report recommends.

In the meantime, The Wall Street Journal has found in court papers a remarkable email exchange between Chahal and a mogul on the board of his third digital ad startup, RadiumOne, back at the time of the first arrest.

The mogul was Steve Westly, who had scored big with eBay early on and hoped for another big score with RadiumOne’s Initial Public Offering. That hope was dimmed by the prospect of the firm’s founder and CEO facing an Initial Prison Offering.

Westly is a former California State Controller who had made a failed run for governor in 2006 and hoped to try again. He was pals with Willie Brown, a former mayor of San Francisco and onetime speaker of the California State Assembly. Westly, the Journal reported, emailed Chahal that Brown “believes he can help you.” Westly told Chahal that Brown was friendly with San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon and “may be able to ‘back him off.’”

At Westly’s suggestion, Chahal met with Brown. Chahal reported back to Westly in an email with the subject line “Willie Brown.” Chahal wrote, “Just met him. Wants $1 million if he can make this go away. Just gave him a $250K retainer. If you meet him tomorrow. Apply some pressure on him to make this go away in 2013.” Westly replied, “Wow. That’s pricey, but probably worth it if he can make it happen. I suspect he will pull out all the stops to get this done.”

But Gascon would not likely have been swayed even if he had been approached. Any such attempt ceased to be necessary when the judge threw out the video. Chahal was nonetheless forced from his position at RadiumOne, but he soon had a new digital ad startup, Gravity4. His senior employees there included a young Canadian named Yousef Khraibut, who subsequently filed a wrongful termination suit that describes Chahal as a CEO from hell itself.

“Chahal, fueled by a toxic cocktail of prescription drugs, party drugs, alcohol, and sycophants, subjected his associates and Gravity4 employees to daily abuse, humiliation, racist taunts, extortionate manipulation, tales of revenge, and threats of violence,” the suit, which was filed in a San Francisco federal court, alleges.

The suit continues, “Finally, when Khraibut dared to stand up to Chahal’s abuse, threats, and illegal behavior, Chahal repeatedly threatened Khraibut with violence, fired him, and hustled him out of the country, hounding him with continued threats, stalking, defamation, interference, and manipulation. Khraibut brings this action to vindicate his legal rights, and to stop Chahal from repeating these practices against other unknowing victims in the future.”

With regard to first assault, the suit claims, “Chahal told Khraibut that the woman had originally demanded $200,000, then increased her demand to one million after her family’s input, and finally to two million. Khraibut later learned that the amount of the ultimate payment was higher than two million dollars, possibly as much as four million dollars. It was clear in the context of Chahal’s discussions with Khraibut about these issues, that the victim had been paid at least in part to ‘be quiet’ and not cooperate with the criminal investigation.”

The suit claims Chahal also spoke to Khraibut about the effort to put in the unneeded fix with Willie Brown. The suit reports, “Chahal described a near-confrontation with Brown in the St. Regis hotel lobby in San Francisco while Chahal was with his bodyguard… Chahal boasted that he had forced Brown to give back much of the original retainer that Chahal had paid him.”

The suit further reports that after the judge ruled the video inadmissible, Chahal remained fearful of it “ever getting into the hands of the media or other adverse parties.” He did not explain why he would be so worried if he only hit the woman with a pillow in self-defense, as he had contended.

“Chahal’s story evolved to admitting that Chahal had struck his girlfriend with his hands, i.e. ‘just shook her and slapped her,’ but that he did not hurt her,” the suit says.

The suit also claims that Chahal remained concerned enough about a negative image that “Gravity4’s hiring efforts were focused in part on hiring women executives and employees to combat Chahal’s negative image in the wake of his domestic violence conviction.”

Even so, the suit alleges, “Gravity4’s female hiring efforts were colored by Chahal’s focus on women’s appearances during the hiring process. In one instance, Chahal researched a young, attractive female sales manager applicant by finding online photographs of her wearing a bikini, and then showing them to other male employees, including Khraibut, seeking their opinion on her breasts. When Khraibut protested via Skype chat that it ‘wasn’t right’ to be checking out a prospective hire’s bikini pictures, Chahal responded, ‘Research bro. Everything is online. I do this on every candidate.’”

The suit adds, “Chahal frequently referred to women in the workplace in both vulgar and derogatory terms. For example, during the hiring process, Chahal would refer to allowing an attractive woman to proceed in the interview process, as a ‘pussy pass.’”

As for his own gender, “Chahal would use the term ‘on PMS’ as a derogatory slur toward men executives, including Khraibut, who were having a difficult day.”

The suit says that Chahal called Khraibut a “terrorist” and was heard to use the N word regarding people of color. He also had opinions about Jewish people. “Chahal complained that Jews ran Silicon Valley and had conspired against him in business, and that if his last name had been ‘Zuckerberg,’ his former RadiumOne investors would have supported him,” the suit says.

Chahal’s own family was apparently not spared his scorn. The suit contends that he “ridiculed his immediate relatives as ‘ungrateful pieces of shit,’ and that they betrayed him, even after Chahal ‘made them all millionaires,’ because the relatives refused to support Chahal’s decision to publicly trash his former girlfriend and domestic violence victim.”

Then came the second assault case. Khraibut claims in the suit that Chahal texted him in the middle of the night, summoning him to the penthouse. Chahal was there with his bodyguard, Moepulou Alais, a bouncer whom he had also met in Las Vegas, the suit claims.

“Chahal instructed Khraibut to tell the police that Khraibut had been in the condominium during the alleged incident ” the suit says. “Khraibut was unwilling to state to authorities that he had been in the apartment at a time that he had not been.”

The suit adds, “Chahal was enraged that Khraibut refused to buttress Chahal’s alibi against [the woman’s] assault charges.”

The suit goes on, “When Khraibut dared to stand up to Chahal’s abuse, threats, and illegal behavior, Chahal repeatedly threatened Khraibut with violence, fired him, and hustled him out of the country, hounding him with continued threats, stalking, defamation, interference, and manipulation.”

The suit—filed in San Francisco federal court Sept. 28, 2015 and contested by Chahal, who is presently seeking to have it sent to arbitration over Khraibut’s objections—concludes, “Khraibut brings this action to vindicate his legal rights, and to stop Chahal from repeating these practices against other unknowing victims in the future.”

In the meantime, Westly was still talking about running for governor in 2018 despite his efforts on Chahal’s behalf, regarding which Beverly Upton notes, “That’s not helping him, that’s enabling him.”

“[Westly] was really helping himself,” Upton says, suggesting the mogul’s priority was the planned RadiumOne IPO.

That did not stop the Democratic Party from using Westly’s home for a fundraiser.

The invitation read:

The Democratic National Committee
Cordially invites you to a Brunch Reception with special guest
BARACK OBAMA
To support the Democratic Hope Fund
Thursday, February 11, 2016
The home of Steve Westly
Atherton, CA

The guests did not include Chahal, who was busy trying to avoid a long-delayed Initial Prison Offering. Chahal did not respond to a request for comment. Nor did Westly. Nor did Brown, who has insisted that his dealings with Chahal involved nothing unethical.

We will find out at the end of this week whether Chahal will end up behind bars, as it seemed so certain he would when the cops first seized that video.

The judge has ruled that the footage will remain sealed because the victim’s face is recognizable, as might be expected with a surveillance camera in the penthouse bedroom of a high-tech princeling.

See More In This Extended Report To the FBI (CLICK HERE TO READ THE PDF) The Silicon Valley Mafia 3.7

Light-Phone Patents Can Use Light Recently Discovered To Exist in a Previously Unknown Form to Broadcast Internet and Phone

Light-Phone Patents Can Use Light Recently Discovered To Exist in a Previously Unknown Form to Broadcast Internet and Phone

 


Source Newsroom: Imperial College London

 

 

Nature Communications

 

Newswise — New research suggests that it is possible to create a new form of light by binding light to a single electron, combining the properties of both.

 

According to the scientists behind the study, from Imperial College London, the coupled light and electron would have properties that could lead to circuits that work with packages of light – photons – instead of electrons.

 

It would also allow researchers to study quantum physical phenomena, which govern particles smaller than atoms, on a visible scale.

 

In normal materials, light interacts with a whole host of electrons present on the surface and within the material. But by using theoretical physics to model the behaviour of light and a recently-discovered class of materials known as topological insulators, Imperial researchers have found that it could interact with just one electron on the surface.

 

This would create a coupling that merges some of the properties of the light and the electron. Normally, light travels in a straight line, but when bound to the electron it would instead follow its path, tracing the surface of the material.

 

In the study, published today in Nature Communications, Dr Vincenzo Giannini and colleagues modelled this interaction around a nanoparticle – a small sphere below 0.00000001 metres in diameter – made of a topological insulator.

 

Their models showed that as well as the light taking the property of the electron and circulating the particle, the electron would also take on some of the properties of the light.

 

Normally, as electrons are travelling along materials, such as electrical circuits, they will stop when faced with a defect. However, Dr Giannini’s team discovered that even if there were imperfections in the surface of the nanoparticle, the electron would still be able to travel onwards with the aid of the light.

 

If this could be adapted into photonic circuits, they would be more robust and less vulnerable to disruption and physical imperfections.

 

Dr Giannini said: “The results of this research will have a huge impact on the way we conceive light. Topological insulators were only discovered in the last decade, but are already providing us with new phenomena to study and new ways to explore important concepts in physics.”

 

Dr Giannini added that it should be possible to observe the phenomena he has modelled in experiments using current technology, and the team is working with experimental physicists to make this a reality.

 

He believes that the process that leads to the creation of this new form of light could be scaled up so that the phenomena could observed much more easily. Currently, quantum phenomena can only be seen when looking at very small objects or objects that have been super-cooled, but this could allow scientists to study these kinds of behaviour at room temperature.

 

Read More at: https://lightcasting.wordpress.com

 

 

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”>Tags: Lightphone, lifi, lightcasting, mobile internet, cellular internet, light-casting, laser broadcasting, light broadcasting, laser internet