Old Fucking Punk @lwriemen@librem.one

A California Bill Could Transform the Lives of Gig Workers. Silicon Valley Wants Labor’s Help To Stop It.

Gig economy workers who support the legislation view it as a necessary step toward their ability to collectively organize. Uber and Lyft want a workaround.

The post A California Bill Could Transform the Lives of Gig Workers. Silicon Valley Wants Labor’s Help To Stop It. appeared first on The Intercept.

Why Don’t They Just Go Back To Where They Came From?

Trump administration officials take their own advice.

House Votes to Hold Top Trump Officials in Criminal Contempt for Withholding Census Documents

The House of Representatives voted 230 to 198 Wednesday to hold Attorney General William Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in contempt of Congress for refusing to turn over key documents about the Trump administration’s efforts to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. It’s the first time the full House has voted to […]

Spawn of the triffid? Tiny organisms give us glimpse into complex evolutionary tale

Two newly discovered organisms point to the existence of an ancient organism that resembled a tiny version of the lumbering, human-eating science fiction plants known as 'triffids.'

House Judiciary Committee Continues Its Antitrust Inquiry Into the Internet Marketplace

The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Antitrust held its second hearing on whether our antitrust laws and their enforcement are keeping up with the Internet marketplace. Notably, Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Apple were present as witnesses along with a range of experts to follow, giving Congress a lot to assess. EFF supports this inquiry by Congress and shares the concern that the lifecycle of competition has been on the decline, bringing serious risk of a small handful of gatekeepers having disproportionate power over user expression and privacy online.

Congress Asks the Wrong Question: “How Can We Make Big Tech Behave Better?”

A persistent theme from some in Congress is applying pressure to Google, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon to modify their practices to appease some constituency. This misses the point of an antitrust inquiry, which is to figure out if these companies are exerting market power in ways that foreclose competition, harm consumers, and suppress innovation, and then remedy the harm with thoughtful interventions. But not all industries share this objective—some would rather have the dominant Internet companies become regulated monopolies in order to further their own policy goals.

For example, major entertainment companies submitted a letter to the House Judiciary Committee claiming that Google and Facebook are not doing enough to stop copyright infringement, and attempted to shoehorn the copyright issue into an antitrust discussion. Echoing this theme, Congresswoman Mary Gay Scanlon asked the tech companies to explain their copyright enforcement practices. Google’s witness responded by discussing Content ID, their wildly expensive and poorly functioning system of copyright filters for YouTube.

The question struck a discordant note in this hearing on monopoly power. YouTube has the lion’s share of user-uploaded video on the Internet, and while Content ID causes endless difficulties for video creators and their viewers, YouTube’s vast scale makes its filtering system hard to avoid. What’s more, Content ID has cost at least $40 million to build. An aspiring competitor would find it next to impossible to build an equivalent system of filters. Making systems like Content ID the norm (or worse still, a legal requirement) cements Google’s dominance, reinforcing the exact problem the Antitrust Subcommittee has set out to fix.

Changing the subject to copyright may further the entertainment industry’s agenda, but it doesn’t address the monopoly problem. Major content companies consistently seek to narrow distribution channels for their content and then maximize control. It has no place in an antitrust inquiry, as the ultimate objective for Congress should be to open the door to more channels of distribution that can compete with YouTube. In fact, content creators would benefit from competition in distribution channels as alternatives to Google products. This would give content creators choices, and those distributors could compete for new video creations with better terms than what YouTube offers.

Congress’ Effort to Understand the Internet Marketplace Is Vital to the Internet’s Future

Chairman David Cicilline laid out the facts as to why his Subcommittee is engaging in this antitrust inquiry: a small handful of companies wield enormous influence over Internet activity and investors that are important in funding startups noted the “kill-zone” that exists when challenging the dominant tech companies. Rather than try to launch startups that were meant to displace the Internet giants, the market seems to have trended towards building companies that the tech giants will seek to acquire through vertical mergers. Professor Fiona Scott Morton testified that what may be needed is a rethinking of mergers and acquisitions. EFF agrees that this area of antitrust law is sorely in need of a reboot. Other witnesses noted that small businesses now see companies like Amazon as potentially hostile to their ability to use the Internet to grow, Stacey Mitchell of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. This represents a dramatic shift in how Internet industries have worked historically, where the garage startup became the next billion-dollar corporation only to be replaced by the next garage startup, and no company could gatekeep others.

It’s a powerful indication that the Internet markets have changed when the giant corporations under scrutiny could only list each other as competitors, in response to requests from Congressman Hank Johnson. In a follow-up inquiry, Congressman Joe Neguse noted  4 of the 6 largest global social media companies are all owned by Facebook, which highlights how its series of mergers appeared to have gotten ahead of users who switched away from Facebook but were brought back into the fold in the end.

Lastly, an unfortunate outcome from this congressional inquiry was dismissiveness by some Members of Congress about the idea of structural separation. This is effectively saying these serious problems facing the Internet ecosystem should be approached with one hand tied behind our backs. It is quite possible that industry is opposing discussions of structural separation policies, which have a long history in antitrust law, because they might be the most effective solution. If the endgame is to avoid a regulated monopoly approach to Internet commerce, then all options have to be on the table with the purpose of empowering users to be the ultimate decision makers for the Internet’s future. It is critical that Congress get this right.  An extraordinarily valuable benefit of the Internet is how it has lowered the barriers to participation in commerce, politics, and other social activities that historically were often reserved to the powerful few.

Pokémon-like card game can help teach ecology

Playing a Pokémon-like card game about ecology and biodiversity can result in broader knowledge of species and a better understanding of ecosystems than traditional teaching methods, like slideshows, according to new research.

Endangered Bornean orangutans survive in managed forest, decline near oil palm plantations

Recent surveys of the population of endangered Bornean orangutans in Sabah, the Malaysian state in the north-east of Borneo, show mixed results. Populations have remained stable within well-managed forests, where there is little hunting, but declined in landscapes comprising extensive oil palm plantations, according to a new study.

Radiation in parts of Marshall Islands is higher than Chernobyl

Radiation levels in parts of the Marshall Islands in the central Pacific Ocean, where the United States conducted nearly 70 nuclear tests during the Cold War, are still alarmingly high. Researchers tested soil samples on four uninhabited isles and discovered that they contained concentrations of nuclear isotopes that are significantly higher than those found near Chernobyl and Fukushima.

The Warden Tried to Cover Up a Crisis at His Freezing Brooklyn Jail — Then He Got Promoted

The Bureau of Prisons hasn’t released its investigation into what went wrong at the New York jail, but the man in charge just got promoted anyway.

The post The Warden Tried to Cover Up a Crisis at His Freezing Brooklyn Jail — Then He Got Promoted appeared first on The Intercept.

How kissing as a risk factor may explain the high global incidence of gonorrhea

In 2016, there were 87 million people diagnosed with gonorrhea, the most antibiotic resistant of all the STIs. There is a global rise in gonorrhea rates and, until now, no one has understood why.

Study bolsters case that climate change is driving many California wildfires

A new study combs through the many factors that can promote wildfire in California, and concludes that in many, though not all, cases, warming climate is the decisive driver.

The DNC Debate Rules Are Turning Small Donors Into a Racket

You can hear the muffled strains of the first 2020 presidential primary debate play in the background of the office as we put the finishing touches on this issue. Technically it’s the second night of the first debate, as the sprawling field of participants—20 in all—necessitated a two-night affair. 

The decision of who gets to participate falls to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which was battered from all sides (including In These Times) with accusations of bias during the 2016 primary. This time around things would be different, the DNC promised. Among other changes, candidates were able to qualify for the first debates by one of two routes: performance in polls (the traditional measure) or how many donors they have—even (and especially) those who give as little as $1. 

A campaign’s tally of small donors is now viewed as a proxy for broad, grassroots political support—and a hallmark of any good insurgency. It began with Howard Dean in 2004. Barack Obama used the approach to power past Hillary Clinton in 2008. Bernie Sanders nearly did the same in 2016. (Another candidate also mastered this approach last time around: Donald Trump.)

I saw firsthand the power small-donor fundraising can have, working as part of the teams that helped Obama raise record amounts of money in 2008 and again in 2012. But as more candidates adopt this approach, we’ve also seen the rise of an industry custom-built to deliver small donors, for anyone who can afford it. Candidates with a large, established base of support like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden will likely meet any donor threshold the DNC sets. For everyone else, the new rules are an invitation—and maybe even a requirement—to buy your way onto the stage. 

Advertising firms have reportedly been quoting a cost of $40 and up for campaigns to acquire a single $1 donor. In practice, this amounts to a massive transfer of campaign funds directly to online ad platforms—2020 candidates are collectively paying more than $1 million a week to Facebook alone. Not only have fundraising appeals become more numerous, they’ve become increasingly desperate. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) plays beer pong to earn donations. Julián Castro’s mom pleads, “I’m humbly asking for $1 to help my incredible son, Julián, qualify for the Democratic Presidential debates.” As a recent Vice News headline summarized: “2020 Democrats Are Literally Begging for $1 on Facebook.” Even Bernie is offering up copies of his latest book (cover price $27.99) for a buck.

In the end, all 20 candidates in the first debate qualified by polling (with 14 meeting the donor threshold as well). For the third round of debate in September, the threshold will double (to 2% polling and 130,000 donors), and candidates have to meet both criteria. Because each new donor is harder to bring in than the one before it, expect the desperation (and spending) to ramp up exponentially.

There’s a lesson or two in all of this about unintended consequences. There’s also a larger question the Left will need to continue to grapple with moving forward: Do we really want money to be the measure of a good candidate? 

If we want a politics focused on building mass movements, then the price of entry should ultimately be participation and solidarity. What we don’t need is to encourage politicians to become better hucksters, offering a brighter future for the low, low price of just $1.

'Intensive' beekeeping not to blame for common bee diseases

More 'intensive' beekeeping does not raise the risk of diseases that harm or kill the insects, new research suggests.

You Can Bury It for 40,000 Years, but Don’t Mess With Arctic Life

Welcome to Recharge, a weekly newsletter full of stories that will energize your inner hellraiser. See more editions and sign up here. Buried under ice for centuries, plants in the warming Arctic have hit air and are awakening, to the surprise of scientists. The resilience of these species suggests newly known plants may emerge as […]

Maureen Dowd Asked Rahm Emanuel to Weigh In on an Immigration Debate. His Record Is Abysmal.

When it comes to immigration, both the politics and the policy, perhaps no Democrat has been more destructive over the past 25 years than Rahm Emanuel.

The post Maureen Dowd Asked Rahm Emanuel to Weigh In on an Immigration Debate. His Record Is Abysmal. appeared first on The Intercept.

Activists Say Lori Lightfoot Is Not Meeting Their Demands to Protect Immigrants

On July 13, more than 4,000 people rallied in Chicago to protest President Trump’s immigration crackdown—part of a nationwide day of action. But organizers also directed grievances at another politician: Chicago Mayor Lori Lightoot, who is refusing to shut down the Chicago Police Department’s (CPD) infamous gang database, despite evidence that it disproportionately targets Black and Latinx people—and gives Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) another tool to go after Chicagoans.

“The youth demands the gang database be erased,” Keishjuan Owens, a youth leader with Brighton Park Neighborhood Council, told the crowd. “It puts so many people like you and me in harm’s way, targets undocumented folks, limits access to opportunities, jobs and schooling.”

After Trump threatened to unleash sweeping immigration raids starting July 14, Lightfoot announced that the CPD would not cooperate with ICE, and that ICE agents would not have access to the gang database, known as the Citizen and Law Enforcement Analysis and Reporting (CLEAR) database. 

Mony Ruiz-Velasco, the executive director of Proyecto de Acción de los Suburbios del Oeste (PASO), a local immigrants’ rights organization, told In These Times Saturday before the rally that this gesture goes “beyond anything that any of the previous mayors were ever willing to do.” 

Yet, Ruiz-Velasco said it is not enough: “We would like to see those databases eliminated.” 

At Saturday’s march, organizers and speakers repeated this call for the gang database to be shut down. 

“Our message is consistent: We want the gang database closed,” said Darcey Regan, executive director of Indivisible Chicago.

The gang database, which originated in 2002 under the Richard M. Daley administration, includes information on Cook County residents the CPD claims are “criminal offenders” or affiliated with "gangs." Black and brown Chicagoans are disproportionately targeted and added to the database for supposed gang affiliation. The Chicago Tribune reports that “96 percent of the nearly 65,000 people identified as suspected gang members are Black or Latino.” According to ProPublica Illinois, the database has been accessed over a million times in the past decade by many organizations and agencies, including ICE. A report by Joe Ferguson, Chicago’s inspector general, found that between 2009 and 2018, “more than 32,000 queries came from federal immigration authorities.” Ferguson’s report recommended that stronger standards be put in place to make sure the gang database is accurate, and that the CPD evaluate the usefulness of the database itself.

The database has been shown to contain inaccurate or misleading information, such as listing people as 0 years old, or including people who had not been arrested or accused of a crime. The criteria for being added to the database are vague, and people can be added simply because a police officer claims to have "special intelligence on the subject of gangs.” 

These murky criteria have led to the profiling of Black and Latinx people. In 2017, two men brought  separate lawsuits against the CPD, arguing that they had been profiled as gang members and erroneously put in the database. One of them, Wilmer Catalan-Ramirez, was subsequently arrested and detained by ICE. After being detained for 10 months, he was released in January 2018.

The database has been the target of repeated protests. In October 2017, during Rahm Emanuel’s administration, Organized Communities Against Deportations (OCAD) and Black Youth Project 100 protested outside of City Hall with three large art installations that criticized the gang database, as well as Emanuel’s proposed cop academy.

Lightfoot has suggested that the gang database should undergo some changes to improve accountability and transparency, such as creating a system for auditing information. She also has said, “[T]here can be legitimate purposes for collecting that data [in the gang database]. But that’s the rub: legitimate purposes.”

Closing loopholes

Lightfoot is declining to meet another community request to protect immigrants. According to OCAD, on June 29, Lightfoot’s office received an executive order drafted by the Immigration Working Group, which consists of several community organizations (including OCAD). If signed, the executive order would ensure the CPD cannot work with ICE in any capacity, and it would close loopholes in Chicago’s pre-existing Welcoming City ordinance, created in 2012. Rey Wences, an organizer with OCAD, said the ordinance allows police to work with ICE, for instance, if someone is in the gang database or if someone has a felony conviction or charge. They say, “As we know, there’s been an increase in criminalization. And there are people that have felonies but they are made up of non-violent offenses.”

This executive order would “codify the statements the mayor made,” says Wences.

The community’s proposed executive order closes an important loophole by denying not only ICE, but any other agency within the Department of Homeland Security, “direct access to any electronic database or other data-sharing platform” belonging to the CPD.  

Antonio Gutierrez, an organizer with OCAD, told In These Times that the community executive order, if signed by Lightfoot, would ensure that the CPD “would not be participating or collaborating with ICE in any situation.” Guttierrez said that because Lightfoot’s announcement and subsequent package of executive actions do not explicitly address the loopholes in the Welcoming City ordinance, she leaves room for potential CPD and ICE collaboration.

Lightfoot told the Chicago Sun-Times that she would not sign OCAD's executive order. “t would be easy to pander to the crowd,” she said. “But I want to do this in a way that’s actually gonna be meaningful and structural and lasting.”

“The fact that she did not sign the executive order is unfortunate,” said Wences.

On Friday, Curbed Chicago reported that Lightfoot signed a separate package of executive actions that restricts ICE’s access to public facilities, such as parks and libraries, and increases funding towards Chicago’s Legal Protection Fund.

Concerned about what a potential escalation in immigration raids could mean for Chicago, residents are preparing for the worst. Saturday’s march also aimed to connect Chicagoans to various resources for help in case of ICE arrests, such as the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights’ Family Support Hotline. Organizers urged allies to take further, sustainable action by getting involved with local organizations and actions, such as neighborhood bike and foot brigades, which patrolled and defended Chicago neighborhoods against ICE activity on Sunday. With the support of democratic socialist alderwoman Rossana Rodriguez, Chicagoans flocked to Albany Park, a neighborhood with a large population of Central American refugees, where they were trained on how to spot and act against potential ICE activity. As of July 15, the Chicago Tribune reports that there have been no signs of ICE raids in the city. However, the Tribune reports that officials have said that “the sweeps will continue through the coming week."

By cutting ozone pollution now, China could save 330,000 lives by 2050

If China takes strong measures to reduce its ozone pollution now, it could save hundreds of thousands of lives in the long run, according to a new study.

Last month was the hottest June on record and no one is surprised #climatechange #climatecrisis
https://www.engadget.com/2019/07/16/june-2019-hottest-on-record/

Hearing Thursday: EFF, ACLU Will Ask Court to Rule In Favor of Travelers Suing DHS Over Unconstitutional, Warrantless Searches of Cellphones, Laptops

Evidence Shows Fourth, First Amendment Violations

Boston, Massachusetts—On Thursday, July 18, at 3:00 p.m., lawyers for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the ACLU will ask a federal judge to decide that the constitutional rights of 11 travelers were violated by the suspicionless, warrantless searches of their electronic devices at the border by the U.S. government.

The plaintiffs are ten U.S. citizens and a lawful permanent resident who, like many Americans, regularly travel outside the country with their cellphones, laptops, and other electronic devices. Federal officers searched their devices at U.S. ports  of entry without a warrant or any individualized suspicion to believe that the devices contained contraband. Federal officers also confiscated the devices of four plaintiffs after they left the border, absent probable cause of criminal activity. The judge will decide whether a trial is needed or whether the evidence is so clear that the case can be decided now.
Evidence obtained in this lawsuit,Alasaad v. McAleenan,  demonstrates the unconstitutionality of the challenged searches and confiscation of traveler’s devices at the border. It also demonstrates that the plaintiffs’ have standing to bring these claims. At Thursday’s oral argument, EFF Senior Staff Attorney Adam Schwartz will address the standing issues, and Esha Bhandari, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project will address the merits of the claims.
WHAT:
Oral argument on summary judgment motion in Alasaad v. McAleenan
WHO:
Adam Schwartz, EFF senior staff attorney
Esha Bhandari, ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project
WHEN:
Thursday, July 18, 3:00 p.m.
WHERE:
John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse
Courtroom 11, 5th Floor
1 Courthouse Way, Suite 2300
Boston, Massachusetts 02210
For more on this case: https://www.eff.org/cases/alasaad-v-duke

Contact:  Adam Schwartz Senior Staff Attorney adam@eff.org