News of Note

Care About Privacy? You May Be a Terrorist

(También en Español)

News of Note: Justice Dept, FBI Say Interest in Online Privacy an ‘Indicator’ of Terrorism

A new flyer released by the Department of Justice and the FBI, emblazoned with the logos of each agency and being circulated to Internet cafes and other businesses, warns of “potential indicators of terrorist activities.”

In particular, the flyer cautions businesses to be on the lookout for “content of extreme/radical nature” as well as people who visit an Internet cafe even though there is evidence they have Internet access at home. It also urges people to watch for anyone using “anonymizers, portals, or other means to shield IP address,” or who seems “overly concerned about privacy.”

With an endless stream of bills coming forth that would criminalize what we know of today as the internet, here comes the FBI with a warning that use of anonymizers and other shielding tools are signs of terrorism. The internet is under attack and now they’re calling any form of defense terrorism, isn’t this tactic frighteningly obvious?

I hope no one has forgotten about the National Defense Authorization Act that allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens who are suspected of terrorism.

What’s more, the flyer urges people to be suspicious of those who “always pay cash” and to “identify license plates, vehicle description, names used, languages spoken, ethnicity, etc.”

This goes to show how absolutely subjective and malleable the definition of terrorism has become. Do you prefer to pay with cash? Maybe you’d prefer your online activity remain anonymous? I would call that playing it smart. What do you think? Let us know in the comments below.

in News of Note  by 06 Feb 2012 1 comments

Warrant needed for GPS tracking while civilian use rises

(También en Español)

News of Note: Private Snoops Find GPS Trail Legal to Follow

Online, and soon in big-box stores, you can buy a device no bigger than a cigarette pack, attach it to a car without the driv

er’s knowledge and watch the vehicle’s travels — and stops — at home on your laptop.

Tens of thousands of Americans are already doing just that, with little oversight, for purposes as seemingly benign as tracking an elderly parent with dementia or a risky teenage driver, or as legally and ethically charged as spying on a spouse or an employee — or for outright criminal stalking.

The advent of Global Positioning System tracking devices has been a boon to law enforcement, making it easier and safer, for example, for agents to link drug dealers to kingpins.

Last Monday, in a decision seen as a first step toward setting boundaries for law enforcement, the Supreme Court held that under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, placing a GPS tracker on a vehicle is a search. Police departments around the country say they will be more likely to seek judicial approval before using the devices, if they were not already doing so.

Still, sales of GPS trackers to employers and individuals, for a multitude of largely unregulated uses, are growing fast, raising new questions about privacy and a legal system that has not kept pace with technology.

We previously covered how police were attaching GPS tracking devices to cars without a warrant; thankfully they are no longer allowed to do that. It is still hard to consider this a victory, as GPS use by civilians rises, and loss of privacy remains an issue. Nothing is stopping someone (police or not) from placing a device on a car; it’s unlikely that you would know and even more unlikely that the person would ever be caught.

GPS technology is forcing us to rethink privacy. Unless someone invents an easy way to detect these devices, they will likely become commonplace in our society. Technology continues to grant us access to information, including the ability to spy on one another. How do you think our society will adjust to this new norm?

Image source: From previous coverage of MSNBC “Has the government attached GPS to your car?“

in News of Note  by 03 Feb 2012 0 comments

Chocolate’s Child Slaves

News of Note: Chocolate’s Child Slaves

Everyone loves chocolate. But for thousands of people, chocolate is the reason for their enslavement.

The chocolate bar you snack on likely starts at a plant in a West African cocoa plantation, and often the people who harvest it are children. Many are slaves to a system that produces something almost all of us consume and enjoy.

The CNN Freedom Project sent correspondent David McKenzie into the heart of the Ivory Coast – the world’s largest cocoa producer – to investigate what’s happening to children working in the fields.

His work has resulted in a shocking, eye-opening documentary showing that despite all the promises the global chocolate industry made a decade ago, much of the trade remains unchanged. There are still child slaves harvesting cocoa, even though some have never even tasted chocolate and some don’t even know what the word “chocolate” means.

Slavery still exists in our modern world. It is easy for most people in developed countries to live oblivious lives without ever hearing of these atrocities going on across the world. We all know that slavery is not okay; it is the fundamental denial of ones humanity. At the very least, we can be educated consumers that do not fuel these inhumane practices.

in News of Note  by 30 Jan 2012 0 comments

Jurors: Researching online? Go to jail!

(También en Español)

News of Note: Jurors: leave the information age—or go to jail

An English court has sentenced a juror to six months in prison for contempt of court after she performed research on the Internet and forced the abandonment of a criminal trial.

Psychology lecturer Theodora Dallas, 34, was a member of the jury in the trial of Barry Medlock, accused of causing grievous bodily harm. She looked up certain information related to the trial on the Internet, came across information concerning Medlock, and told her fellow jurors what she had found. One of them informed the judge, causing the judge to abandon the trial. Medlock was later retried and found guilty.

In order for a jury to be unbiased they must be ignorant? The entire nature of a jury is rooted in subjectivity. But how is a decision less biased when the jurors only have access to information concerning their specific case? I believe access to information is a human right. Because any juror could do outside research without telling anyone, help expand their own perspective, and easily get away with it, how much longer will this rule enforcing ignorance be  justified or realistic? It isn’t a far stretch to say that our legal system has a few holes; this might be a good place to start making some improvements. Let us know what you think, I’m eager to hear other people’s take on this issue.

in News of Note  by 27 Jan 2012 0 comments

Anonymous takes down Government and Recording Industry sites in largest attack ever

(También en Español)

News of Note: Anonymous takes down government, recording industry websites in retaliation for bust

Anonymous says it is in the process of staging its “largest attack ever” — more than 5,000 loosely associated hackers taking down websites belonging to government and recording industry organizations in response to Thursday’s shutdown of the file-sharing site Megaupload.com.

The Department of Justice unsealed an indictment against Megaupload.com on Thursday, arresting its founder — Kim Dotcom, formerly known as Kim Schmitz — in New Zealand and charging him and at least five other company executives with violating privacy laws.

In response, the hacker collective known as Anonymous announced a collaborative attack against government and recording industry websites, successfully taking down the site of the Department of Justice — which coordinated the case against Megaupload — and the Recording Industry Association of America. As of 4 p.m. Pacific time, Justice.gov and RIAA.org were failing to load, along with other stated targets such as UniversalMusic.com.

Anonymous said on a Twitter account it has used regularly — @YourAnonNews — that the assault is “The Largest Attack Ever by Anonymous — 5,635 People Confirmed Using #LOIC to Bring Down Sites!” In other messages, the group said it was aiming to take down more sites throughout the night.

One day after SOPA and PIPA are stifled by the black out, the US Government takes down one of the most well known sites for piracy, Megaupload (a place for uploading and sharing files, it was only inadvertently used for piracy.) So far, we have yet to see the fallout from these hacks. The Feds haven’t had trouble finding and prosecuting “Anonymous” participants in the past and I’m left wondering who will end up benefiting from these hacks. Some websites go down for a bit on Thursday, life goes on; yet thousands of “Anonymous” activists may have walked into a tremendous trap. Who do you think has more carefully calculated plans, the US government, or the decentralized hivemind of the internet? I don’t want to see more kind-hearted activists given steep jail time, nor do I want the government to make examples of these “hackers” in order to destroy the Anonymous movement with fear. Who do you think will come out on top this time? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Creative Commons image: source

in News of Note  by 24 Jan 2012 0 comments

SOPA: US backers end support for anti-piracy bill

(También en Español)

Wikipedia went black Wednesday to protest SOPA

News of Note: “SOPA: US backers end support for anti-piracy bill“

Websites all over the Internet went black Wednesday in opposition of the SOPA and PIPA bills. This protest is the first of its kind and a powerful example of the power these websites wield.

The US news website Politico estimated that 7,000 sites were involved by early Wednesday morning.

Google did not shut down its main search but is showing solidarity by placing a black box over its logo when US-based users visit its site.

Online marketplace Craigslist asks site visitors to contact their representatives in Congress before moving on to the main site.

Visitors to Wikipedia’s English-language site are being greeted by a dark page with white text that says: “Imagine a world without free knowledge… The US Congress is considering legislation that could fatally damage the free and open internet. For 24 hours, to raise awareness, we are blacking out Wikipedia.”

If users try to access its other pages via search sites, the text briefly flashes up before being replaced by the protest page. However, people have been sharing workarounds to disable the redirect.

WordPress’s homepage displays a video which claims that Sopa “breaks the internet” and asks users to add their name to a petition asking Congress to stop the bill.

You may be wondering how successful the blackout was. Thankfully there is good news to report; this unique internet protest did make a significant impact.

Eight US lawmakers have withdrawn their backing from anti-piracy laws, amid “blackout” protests on thousands of internet sites.

Two of the bill’s co-sponsors, Marco Rubio from Florida and Roy Blunt from Missouri, are among those backing away.

Online encyclopaedia Wikipedia and blog service WordPress are among the highest profile sites to block their content.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has branded the protests as “irresponsible” and a “stunt”.

Is it an abuse of power for these websites to render themselves unreachable? Absolutely not. Access to information, the Internet’s greatest strength, is in jeopardy, and that same strength must be used to protect it. This is only the beginning. As new and more contrived and strangely-worded bills are put on the table, the fight to protect the Internet will only increase in intensity. We must remain diligent, connected, informed, and active less freedom’s greatest tool (information) will be swept away from us.

in News of Note  by 19 Jan 2012 0 comments

U.S. Government Threatens Free Speech

(También en Español)

News of Note: U.S. Government Threatens Free Speech With Calls for Twitter Censorship

EFF [Electronic Frontier Foundation] has witnessed a growing number of calls in recent weeks for Twitter to ban certain accounts of alleged terrorists. In a December 14th article in the New York Times, anonymous U.S. officials claimed they “may have the legal authority to demand that Twitter close” a Twitter account associated with the militant Somali group Al-Shabaab. A week later, the Telegraph reported that Sen. Joe Lieberman contacted Twitter to remove two “propaganda” accounts allegedly run by the Taliban. More recently, an Israeli law firm threatened to sue Twitter if they did not remove accounts run by Hezbollah.

Twitter is right to resist.  If the U.S. were to pressure Twitter to censor tweets by organizations it opposes, even those on the terrorist lists, it would join the ranks of countries like India, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Syria, Uzbekistan, all of which have censored online speech in the name of “national security.”  And it would be even worse if Twitter were to undertake its own censorship regime, which would have to be based upon its own investigations or relying on the investigations of others that certain account holders were, in fact, terrorists.

Twitter is a tool for communication. When you look at revolutions in countries like Egypt, and the role Twitter played in organizing the people, of course governments are going to be afraid. Just as Twitter helps revolutionaries, it also helps victims of natural disasters. Freedom of speech is under greater threat as the Internet enables wider communication and access to information. Because the information age enables greater freedom than ever before, it is going to become harder every day for our government to pull a veil over our eyes. They aren’t going to give up and neither should we.

Creative Commons image: source

in Global Sexual Freedom Watch / News of Note  by 16 Jan 2012 0 comments

My Guantánamo Nightmare

(También en Español)

My Guantánamo Nightmare

On Wednesday, America’s detention camp at Guantánamo Bay will have been open for 10 years. For seven of them, I was held there without explanation or charge. During that time my daughters grew up without me. They were toddlers when I was imprisoned, and were never allowed to visit or speak to me by phone. Most of their letters were returned as “undeliverable,” and the few that I received were so thoroughly and thoughtlessly censored that their messages of love and support were lost.

The Guantanamo Bay detention camp is too far from the thoughts of most Americans. We hold people for 10 years without trials, a modern day concentration camp, complete with medieval torture techniques. How does America get away with this kind of behavior? I suppose Guatanamo is out of sight and out of mind. Let this man’s story sit with you for more than a quick minute as this shames our entire country. We are better than this.

Creative Commons image: source

in Global Sexual Freedom Watch / News of Note  by 12 Jan 2012 0 comments

Wikileaks: US Threatened Spain For Not Implementing Internet Blacklist

News of Note: US Threatened To Blacklist Spain For Not Implementing Site Blocking Law

In a leaked letter sent to Spain’s outgoing President, the US ambassador to the country warned that as punishment for not passing a SOPA-style file-sharing site blocking law, Spain risked being put on a United States trade blacklist . Inclusion would have left Spain open to a range of “retaliatory options” but already the US was working with the incoming government to reach its goals.

Yet again we have Wikileaks to thank for revealing the truth. Citizens of Spain can fall asleep knowing that their loss of freedom was largely caused by the United States Government. Here we are worried about SOPA being passed in our own country and our government is running around policing the world with similar bills. What is happening to this country? The whole world needs to stand up and pay attention to America’s behavior; this sort of thing should not be ignored or tolerated.


in Events / News of Note  by 07 Jan 2012 0 comments

Can cutesy pet names ruin your sex life?

News of Note: Sweetie turns sour – NYTimes.com
Using a cutesy pet name or baby talk with your partner can cause sex life to dwindle 

According to self-help authors Maggie Arana and Julienne Davis, “Calling your partner honey is the first step down the slippery slope toward a bland or nonexistent sexual relationship.”

And it’s not just “honey.” Any endearing nickname — “sweetie,” “darling,” “pookie,” “pumpkin” and Jerry Seinfeld’s gag-reflexive “schmoopie” — they say, will open the “Pandora’s Box of non-sexuality,” which also contains other bad habits of over-familiarity that, over time, can turn lovers into roommates…

“Names have a very deep impact subconsciously, especially when they are repeated day after day, year after year,” Davis, a reformed user of “pookie,” says during a phone interview. Both women currently live in Los Angeles with their “non-honey” partners.

That age-old, enduring “honey,” is an androgynous word that erodes each partner’s individuality and sexuality, she says, inadvertently turning him or her into a cuddly friend. As the book says: “Honey is great at spooning under the covers, but no so great for hot, passionate sex under the covers.”

I’m not so sure that “honey” will literally ruin your sex life, but the subtle effects of pet names on relationships remain quite interesting. Do repeat users of cutesy and non-sexual names seek the familiar, the informal, and the immature?

This is a sensitive subject, one that I imagine could easily put some couples on the defensive. When you examine yourself, have pet names affected your relationship? Let us know what you think!

Creative Commons image: source

in News of Note  by 05 Jan 2012 0 comments