Show more

Frying oil consumption worsened colon cancer and colitis in mice, study shows

Food scientists have shown that feeding frying oil to mice exaggerated colonic inflammation, enhanced tumor growth and worsened gut leakage, spreading bacteria or toxic bacterial products into the bloodstream.

The case for retreat in the battle against climate change

With sea level rise and extreme weather threatening coastal communities, it's no longer a question of whether they are going to retreat; it's where, when and how. In a new paper, researchers advocate for a managed and planned retreat, not a short-term spur of the moment reaction to a massive storm.

What's killing sea otters? Parasite strain from cats

Many wild southern sea otters in California are infected with the parasite Toxoplasma gondii, yet the infection is fatal for only a fraction of sea otters, which has long puzzled the scientific community. A new study identifies the parasite's specific strains that are killing southern sea otters, tracing them back to a bobcat and feral domestic cats from nearby watersheds.

Dr. Jen Gunter Wants to Protect Your Vagina From Gwyneth Paltrow

Inside a serene natural grocery store in Mill Valley, California, Dr. Jen Gunter is scowling at the women’s health aisle. “What’s wrong with the way the vagina smells?” she scoffs, looking over the topical wipes, creams, and washes promising to resolve undesired aromas. “There are no products here to make balls smell better.” Gunter whips […]

Another study looking at an issue from too narrow of a perspective. Why are people overeating? The answer has many societal parts ranging from production to psychological. Many, but not all, could be solved at a governmental level, and need to be to address other impacts (environment, healthcare, overpopulation).

How Democrats Plan to Win Wisconsin in 2020

The efforts to retake Wisconsin, which Trump won by 23,000 votes, include new investments in field organizing and a targeted focus on communities of color.

The post How Democrats Plan to Win Wisconsin in 2020 appeared first on The Intercept.

Kevin Drum defending capitalism with all the tired old lies.

Ninth Circuit Goes a Step Further to Protect Privacy in Border Device Searches

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a new ruling in U.S. v. Cano [.pdf] that offers greater privacy protection for people crossing the border with their electronic devices, but it doesn’t go as far as we sought in our amicus brief.

Cano had attempted to cross the border near San Diego when cocaine was found in his car. He was arrested at the port of entry and border agents manually and forensically searched his cell phone. He was prosecuted for importing illegal drugs and moved to suppress the evidence found on his phone. The Ninth Circuit held that the searches of his cell phone violated the Fourth Amendment and vacated his conviction.

In U.S. v. Cotterman (2013), the Ninth Circuit had circumscribed the border search exception as it applies to electronic devices. The court held that the Fourth Amendment required border agents to have had reasonable suspicion—a standard between no suspicion and probable cause—before they conducted a forensic search, aided by sophisticated software, of the defendant’s laptop. Unfortunately, the Cotterman court also held that a manual search of a laptop is “routine” and so the border search exception applies: no warrant or any suspicion of wrongdoing is needed.

In Cano, it was disappointing though not surprising that the three-judge panel reaffirmed Cotterman’s en banc rule and held that a manual search of a cell phone requires no suspicion while a forensic search requires reasonable suspicion. We argued in our amicus brief that the Ninth Circuit should revisit this issue and require a probable cause warrant for all border device searches, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Riley v. California (2014). In that watershed case, the Court acknowledged the extraordinary privacy interests people have in their cell phones, irrespective of how the devices are searched, and held that police must obtain a warrant to search the cell phone of an arrestee.

On the bright side, the Cano court further held that warrantless, suspicionless border device searches—both manual and forensic—are only permissible under the Fourth Amendment to determine whether the device contains digital contraband. The court agreed with the arguments we presented in our amicus brief that the border search exception is “narrow,” being justified by the purpose of interdicting contraband and not simply finding evidence of illegal activity. Additionally, the court held with respect to forensic searches, “We clarify Cotterman by holding that ‘reasonable suspicion’ in this context means that officials must reasonably suspect that the cell phone contains digital contraband.”

While we still believe that electronic devices should fall outside the border search exception and thus require a warrant for search, limiting the scope of all device searches under the border search exception to looking for digital contraband is a good pro-privacy rule.

The Cano court emphasized that border agents may not conduct warrantless, suspicionless border device searches “for evidence of past or future border-related crimes.” This is striking because we know from our civil case against the government, Alasaad v. Nielsen, that CBP and ICE agents do regularly conduct device searches (under the border search exception, they argue) to look for mere evidence of border-related crimes and in support of general law enforcement. The Cano rule means that border agents within the Ninth Circuit states can’t conduct broad-ranging fishing expeditions for digital data such as correspondence between the traveler and his associates, or metadata like location information. Such data might be evidence, but is not itself contraband.

It’s important to note, however, that emails and text messages are not totally off limits. The Cano court noted that child pornography may be sent via email or text message, and so border device searches for digital contraband within these kinds of cell phone data are reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

As for Cano himself, the Ninth Circuit held that the recording of phone numbers and text messages during a manual search “had no connection whatsoever to digital contraband.” And while border agents “had reason to suspect that Cano’s cell phone would contain evidence leading to additional drugs,” the forensic search was unconstitutional because “the record does not give rise to any objectively reasonable suspicion that the digital data in the phone contained contraband.”

The Cano court also stated that “the detection-of-contraband justification” for warrantless, suspicionless border device searches “would rarely seem to apply to an electronic search of a cell phone outside the context of child pornography.” We will advocate for courts to narrowly define the “digital contraband” that, under Cano, is the outer limit of the scope of warrantless, suspicionless border device searches. We will also continue to advocate for a warrant requirement.

Bernie Sanders Calls To Seize the Means of Electricity Production

A year after a neglected Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) power line sparked a wildfire that tore through northern California, presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday visited Chico, Calif., where many who fled the fire made a new home. He held a town hall the same day he released a new climate plan, in which he declared that the days of investor-owned utilities—with their profit incentives to underinvest in the electric grid and double down on fossil fuels—have to end.

He’s right: It is time for a massive public takeover of the nation’s electric grid.

The for-profit companies that reign over our energy system now have shown no meaningful sign of being willing to transform our energy system; they are much more interested in shareholder gains and business as usual. Together, for-profit utilities and fossil fuel companies have created powerful political-economic machines across the country to solidify the status quo of extraction and extortion. In contrast, democratic public ownership of our energy system could prioritize community benefit over profit, paving the way for a just and equitable energy system.

“We will end greed in our energy system,” says Sanders’ climate plan. “The renewable energy generated by the Green New Deal will be publicly owned.”

His plan comes as public power ownership campaigns mobilize across the country. California’s movement took off after the state’s largest for-profit utility, PG&E, requested a bailout after the fire forced the utility to declare bankruptcy under the weight of liability claims. Communities across the state are now demanding public ownership, and the company’s hometown of San Francisco has begun looking into municipalization.

In New York, in the midst of a July heat wave, Con Edison sacrificed low-income communities of color in Brooklyn by cutting their power to avoid a larger blackout. Residents responded with outrage, and Mayor Bill de Blasio, another presidential contender, called for kicking out the utility in favor of public ownership.

The birthplace of the monopoly for-profit utility, Chicago, just introduced legislation to take over Commonwealth Edison after years of rate hikes and inaction on climate change. Alderman Carlos Ramirez-Rosa said that "through municipalization, Chicago could accelerate decarbonization, and implement a progressive rate structure that ensures better rates for working-class Chicagoans.”

Over the past months, multiple Democratic presidential candidates have come out in favor of democratizing our energy system. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (who this week dropped out to run again for governor) centered much of his plan for a clean energy economy on community-owned and community-led renewables. And Julian Castro—the former mayor of San Antonio, where one of the more progressive public utilities is located—has voiced support for policies that empower the public to set up democratic utilities not only for electricity but also internet services and water.

But Sanders has voiced the most direct support for 100% public power, and this demand is fundamental to his climate plan. Unlike other proposals to date, Sanders’ plan explicitly commits to using public dollars for everything, refusing to leave the transition to corporate investors who so far have failed the public. By doing so, the Green New Deal proposal also ensures that the benefits of the plan don’t disappear into the pockets of billionaires like Elon Musk but are directed toward a more equitable society. Publicly funded projects, when structured so communities have a say in the types of projects and jobs they create, also have the potential to be more accountable, and can prioritize marginalized communities’ access to high-paying, unionized public jobs and respect the rights of the communities where this new infrastructure is built.

Sanders’ plan envisions harnessing and expanding the four already-operating federal Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), as well as creating a fifth PMA, to build out renewable energy. It would inject $1.52 trillion into renewable energy expansion and $852 billion into energy storage, working particularly with publicly or cooperatively owned utilities. By 2035, this plan would essentially decommodify energy generation through the federal authorities. Unlike the TVA of the past, designed largely for the benefit of white men in search of work in the South, the entire plan is based on the Jemez Principles of environmental justice that focus on bottom-up organizing and including all people in decision-making.

At the municipal, district and state levels, Sanders explicitly commits to supporting the growth of public and co-op utilities. Already, public and cooperatively owned utilities serve 49 million people in the United States, at lower costs and with generally more reliable service. In fact, the entire state of Nebraska runs fully off of public power after the state expelled the for-profit utility in the 1940s because of its extortionist rates. Unlike their for-profit counterparts, these entities are ultimately beholden to the public and any profits are reinvested into the community’s schools, parks and public services. This plan would help this sector expand its reach and invest more in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and much more.

It also provides express assistance to states and municipalities so they could start their own democratically owned utilities—ones driven by the public interest and a climate-resilient future. This could be key for places like New York or Chicago that are starting the process of taking over their utility, seeking guidance and expertise throughout the process. By taking energy utilities into public ownership, we can catalyze renewable energy deployment at the same time we redistribute wealth and power.

Elements of Sanders’ proposal are similar to a proposal for a Community Ownership of Power Administration that was co-created by The Democracy Collaborative (where I work) and grassroots energy groups.

Sanders’ plans for public ownership don’t stop at electricity. He would also allocate funds to massively increase public broadband projects to give people access to a new and necessary public good: the internet. An estimated 19 million people, largely located in rural America, still do not have access to broadband. He offers a vision for integrated and effective local public transportation systems with high-speed rail connections. He stresses the importance of building high-quality, low-carbon-footprint public housing, as well as weatherizing already-standing homes to end energy poverty. The plan reinstates the federal Civilian Conservation Corps jobs program to restore our public lands. It invests dramatically more in public regional development agencies like the Appalachian Regional Commission. It even creates spaces for cooperatively owned grocery stores to facilitate local agriculture not held hostage by monopolies like Monsanto.

Sanders is not alone in his call for more public ownership. Sen. Elizabeth Warren has similarly audacious plans for services like broadband, and both Warren and Sen. Cory Booker have invoked the Civilian Conservation Corps as a model. However, Sanders’ Green New Deal proposal stands alone in its comprehensive commitment to public funding and programs.

The future is public. It is accountable to the principles of environmental justice. It is democratic. It is decommodified. Sanders’ plan is the latest to set the bar for a new economy shepherded in by the green energy transition. We learned long ago that private interests won’t solve for climate and justice at the same time—that change will have to come from united and empowered people. Now, this realization is firmly on the presidential political agenda. 

Democratic National Committee Rejects Call for Official Climate Debate

The Democratic National Committee on Thursday voted not to hold an official debate dedicated to discussing global warming, once again rejecting a longstanding demand from activists who argue that the climate crisis has gotten short shrift during the presidential primary campaign. But the DNC’s resolutions committee also voted to advance a measure that—if approved Saturday—would […]

Browsers Take a Stand Against Kazakhstan’s Invasive Internet Surveillance

Yesterday, Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Apple’s Safari browsers started blocking a security certificate previously used by Kazakh ISPs to compromise their users’ security and perform dragnet surveillance. We encourage other browsers to take similar security measures. Since the fix has been implemented upstream in Chromium, it shouldn’t take long for other Chromium-based browsers, like Brave, Opera, and Microsoft’s Edge, to do the same.

What Happened, and Why Is It a Problem?

Back in July, Kazakhtelecom, Kazakhstan’s state telecommunications operator, began regularly intercepting encrypted web (HTTPS) connections. Usually, this kind of attack on encrypted HTTPS connections is detectable and leads to loud and visible browser warnings or other safeguards that prevent users from continuing. These security measures work because the certificate used is not trusted by user devices or browsers.

However, Kazakh ISPs also sent instructions telling users to compromise their own security by manually trusting the certificate on their devices and browsers, bypassing the security checks that are built into most devices.

The two-step of Kazakh ISPs deploying an untrusted certificate, and users manually trusting that certificate allows the ISPs to read and even alter the online communication of any of their users, including sensitive user data, messages, emails, and passwords sent over the web. Research and monitoring from Censored Planet found around 40 domains that were being regularly intercepted, including Google services, Facebook services, Twitter, and VK (a Russian social media site).

The government of Kazakhstan had expressed their intention to perform dragnet surveillance like this in the past, but, following widespread backlash, it failed to act on those statements. Now, it seems the Kazakh authorities were serious about undermining the privacy of their entire country's communications  even if it meant forcing individual Internet users to manually compromise their devices’ own built-in privacy protections.

What’s Next?

Earlier this month, Kazakhstan’s National Security Committee stated that Kazakhstan had halted the program. The announcement, along with a tweet from the president of Kazakhstan, called the program a successful pilot, claiming it was mounted to detect and counteract external security threats, even though the government’s actions primarily compromised the security of Kazakhstan’s own citizens. The announcement also stated that the program may be deployed again in the future. Censored Planet’s live monitoring indicate that the system was turned off after the first week of August.

This step by Google, Mozilla, and Apple to block the particular certificate that Kazakh ISPs used for traffic interception prevents the government of Kazakhstan from resuming this invasive program, as well as setting a precedent such that browsers may take similar actions against network attacks of this nature in the future. Without strong pushback, it’s likely that Kazakhstan, or other states, might try to repeat their “pilot,” so we also encourage browser vendors, device manufacturers, and operating systems to improve the warnings and tighten the flow around manually trusting new certificates.

Kazakhstan’s actions were a drastic response to the slowly improving security of end-user devices and end-to-end communication online, but they and other countries could take even more invasive steps. Faced with just a handful of secure browsers, the government could next push their citizens to use a browser that does not currently implement this safeguard. We encourage other browsers to take the same steps and stand in solidarity against the government of Kazakhstan’s decision to compromise the Internet security of their entire population. What’s more, designers of user software should anticipate such intrusive state action in future threat models.

Dietary zinc protects against Streptococcus pneumoniae infection, study finds

Researchers have uncovered a crucial link between dietary zinc intake and protection against Streptococcus pneumoniae, the primary bacterial cause of pneumonia.

Bernie Sanders’s Climate Plan Is More Radical Than His Opponents’ — And More Likely to Succeed

The $16.3 trillion plan would not only transition American society away from fossil fuels but renegotiate decades-old nostrums about the government’s role in the economy.

The post Bernie Sanders’s Climate Plan Is More Radical Than His Opponents’ — And More Likely to Succeed appeared first on The Intercept.

Show more
Librem Social

Librem Social is an opt-in public network. Messages are shared under Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license terms. Policy.

Stay safe. Please abide by our code of conduct.

(Source code)

image/svg+xml Librem Chat image/svg+xml