HIGHLY POTENT NEWS THAT MIGHT CHANGE YOUR VIEWS

internet

Beware: Facebook’s “Soft Censorship”

Land Destroyer

SoftCensorshipSeptember 5, 2014 (Tony Cartalucci – LocalOrg) – The Land Destroyer Report maintained a Facebook page under the name Anthony Cartalucci. Since 2009 it was used to express my personal thoughts regarding the news of the day, as well as share relevant links with followers. Today, Facebook, without warning or opportunity to appeal, decided that the Facebook account must be changed over to a “page.” By doing so, all those following my account no longer would receive updates, because of Facebook’s “news feed” filters.

The premise behind news feed filters is that people have too many “friends” and are following too many accounts, so they can’t possibly manage all the content themselves. Therefore, Facebook will do it for them. We already know about the Facebook “experiment” where they intentionally manipulated the news feed of hundreds of thousands of Facebook users without their consent.

A report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) titled, “Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks,” stated in its abstract that:

We show, via a massive (N = 689,003) experiment on Facebook, that emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness. We provide experimental evidence that emotional contagion occurs without direct interaction between people (exposure to a friend expressing an emotion is sufficient), and in the complete absence of nonverbal cues.Not only are the findings troubling – illustrating that Facebook possesses the ability to influence the emotions of its users unwittingly through careful manipulation of their news feeds – but the invasive, unethical methods by which Facebook conducted the experiment are troubling as well.

Clearly manipulating users’ news feeds possesses powerful propaganda and mass-manipulative influence – surely influence those with the resources would be willing to pay for. And that is exactly what Facebook has arranged for with their new “reach” system. Facebook’s own explanation is as follows:

Rather than showing people all possible content, News Feed is designed to show each person on Facebook the content that’s most relevant to them. Of the 1,500+ stories a person might see whenever they log onto Facebook, News Feed displays approximately 300. To choose which stories to show, News Feed ranks each possible story (from more to less important) by looking at thousands of factors relative to each person.

Those involuntarily forced to switch from standard accounts over to “pages” will notice the “boost” feature below each post. This is where you are required to pay Facebook money to ensure people who voluntarily followed you to receive content from you, actually receive it. Obviously, this confers a major advantage to well-funded start-ups, established media outlets, and large, corporate-driven propaganda machines. For the independent or freelance journalist, analyst, or activist, Facebook has gone from an open platform to a cage of soft censorship.

[...CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]


VIDEO — Engineers vs. Thugs: the Power of Bitcoin, Cryptography & Tech

Activist Post
Sept 23, 2014

Vinay Gupta is one of those unique minds. A pragmatist without the negativity, and a visionary unleashed from ideology.

Visit BraveTheWorld.com
Visit HexaYurt.com


Russia to ban Bitcoin by next spring

Red Ice Creations
Sept 19, 2014

From: coinreport.net

RT, an English-language news outlet in Russia, reports that a top official with the Russian government has announced that a law will be passed banning Bitcoin’s exchange into real money by next spring because of Bitcoin’s use by criminals and terrorists.

Deputy Finance Minister Aleksey Moiseev said to journalists in Moscow:

“People can play with their chips, and they can call them money, but they can’t use these surrogate currencies as tender. We will discuss this law in the current session of parliament, and possibly even pass it then, or at the very latest by spring next year. We are currently dealing with comments from the law enforcement agencies, about the specifics of legal measures, and we will take their remarks into account. But the overall concept of the law is set in stone.”
While the draft of the proposed legislation has not been published, officials state they will open criminal proceedings against people who mint digital currency as well as those who use it for transactions. Russia’s financial ministry has also asked regulators to ban access to exchanges and online shops that accept Bitcoin, reports RT.

[...CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]


VIDEO — Cody Wilson: Modern Democracy is Derailed Train, Retrograde Abuses of Liberty

Activist Post
Sept 16, 2014

RT talks to Cody Wilson, the creator of the 3D-printed firearm dubbed “The Liberator”.

When asked why he supports decentralized power after all the “progress” society has made from tribal societies to federal power, Wilson responds:

I’m seeing nothing but, from my perspective, a train in perpetual derailment, retrograde abuses of liberties, in that there is no concept the real human rights. It’s just something we use to go like bomb Iraq, or take over a country or assert our economic dominance. I’m seeing a slide toward barbarism, not toward civilization that you’re there you’re implying. I’m doing everything I can to maintain a distance that separates us and keep our humanity as individuals.


VIDEO — uTorrent [and BitTorrent] Malware Warning

World Crypto Network
Sept 14, 2014

Be careful installing new versions for uTorrent and BitTorrent as they will take over your browser force Yahoo Search as the default search and will reset this after every restart.


Egypt’s Dar al-Ifta issues fatwa against male-female online chatting

nsnbc international
Aug 31, 2014

Aya Samir (TCP) : Egypt’s Dar al-Ifta, a semi-governmental religious body responsible for issuing fatwas, said Saturday that chatting between male and female strangers on the internet is prohibited unless it is extremely necessary.

Answering an FAQ about religious rules on chatting on Dar al-Ifta’s official website, it said it was prohibited as it will “open the doors of evil, sedition and corruption.”

Dar al-Ifta_Egypt_TCPDar al-Ifta added in its fatwa that it is acceptable only in extremely necessary situations, “especially nowadays as these kinds of interactions are a waste of time with no benefit.”

The fatwa added that women should not be sending photos of themselves to strangers they don’t know in order to preserve their dignity, as “criminals have used photos of women strangers in bad, harmful ways.”

Amna Noser, a member of the National Council for Women and a professor of religion and philosophy at Al-Azhar University, told Youm7 Saturday that if the conversation was for something useful, then it is fine, “but saying that chatting in general is ‘haram’ (forbidden) is not really realistic, especially as social media has become a huge part of our life and can’t be denied.”

She explained that the reason for this fatwa, according to her point of view, is that “lately social media has become one of the methods that could be used to make girls sound like easy prey for anyone with twisted behavior online. However, it’s obvious what is considered ‘haram’ in chatting and what is ‘halal’ (religiously acceptable).”

Amr Ali, from the Revolutionary Political Bloc, told Al-Dostor Saturday that the fatwa was “weird” and will not find any positive feedback or acceptance among Egyptians.

“Social media was established in the first place to help people socialize. This fatwa takes the religious bodies back by years,” Ali said

Aya Samir, The Cairo Post


Spiral Of Silence Also Exists On Social Media: Pew Poll

redOrbit
Aug 27, 2014

Image Credit: Thinkstock.com

April Flowers for redOrbit.com – Your Universe Online

In our social circles – especially among family, friends and co-workers – we have a tendency to hold in our views on public policy issues. This is especially true when we think our own opinion isn’t widely shared in those groups, according to pre-internet human behavior studies. Scientists call this phenomenon the “spiral of silence.”

The hope for social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter was that they would provide such a wide variety of discussion forums that people holding minority views would feel free to express their opinions. Such freedom would broaden public discourse and add new perspectives to the discussions.

The Pew Internet Research Project studied the effect of social media on the spiral of science by conducting a survey of 1,801 adults in 2013. The survey was restricted to one public policy issue: Edward Snowden’s 2013 revelations of widespread government surveillance of Americans’ phone and email records. Other Pew Research polls showed the division Americans were feeling over this issue, making it a timely question for the survey. These studies found that Americans were conflicted over both whether the information leaks were justified and whether the NSA policy itself was appropriate or not. One survey, for example, found that 44 percent say that the classified information leak harms the public interest, while 49 percent said it serves the public interest.

The current survey asked questions about people’s opinions about the Snowden leaks, how willing they were to discuss the revelations in various in-person and online situations, and their perceptions of their peers’ views both online and in-person.

The results showed the following key findings:

• More people were willing to discuss the Snowden-NSA story in person than on social media — 86 percent were willing to discuss it in person, while only 42 percent of Facebook or Twitter users were willing to post about the issue.

• For those not willing to discuss the issue in person, social media did not provide an alternative platform. Only 0.3 percent of the 14 percent who were unwilling to discuss the issue face to face would post about it on social media.

• In both forums, people are more willing to share their views if they believe their audience agrees. People who believe their co-workers share their opinion were three times more likely to join a workplace conversation.

• Previous findings on the spiral of silence apply to social media platforms. Facebook users were twice as likely to join a conversation about the Snowden-NSA issue if they believed their followers agreed with them.

• Social media users were less likely to share their views in face to face settings, especially if they thought their social media followers disagreed with them. The average Facebook user is half as likely to share their opinion as other people.

[...CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE]


VIDEO — Is Bitcoin a Conspiracy?

Infowars
Aug 25, 2014

Is Bitcoin a conspiracy to bring in a cashless society? Does it represent the mark of the beast? Julia Tourianski tackles these claims and much more.

http://infowars.com
Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watso…
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

The Declaration of Bitcoin’s Independence http://bravetheworld.com/2014/08/13/d…

Brave The World Youtube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/BraveThe…

Website- http://bravetheworld.com/
FB- https://www.facebook.com/bravetheworld
@BraveTheWorld

Bitcoin Not Bombs
http://www.bitcoinnotbombs.com/the-de…


VIDEO — Kristov Atlas interview, pt. 2 – “Anonymous Bitcoin, Cryptography, and Online Safety” – #204 – Gnostic Media

Gnostic Media
Jul 2, 2014

GM_204

[click here for part 1]

This episode is part 2 about Bitcoin, cryptography and online security and safety and is called Anonymous Bitcoin, Cryptography and Online Safety: It’s being released on Wednesday, July 2, 2014, and was recorded yesterday on Tuesday, July 1, 2014.

Kristov Atlas is a network security and privacy researcher who studies crypto-currencies. He is the author of Anonymous Bitcoin: How to Keep Your Ƀ All to Yourself, a practical guide to maximizing financial privacy with Bitcoin. Kristov is also a correspondent for the World Crypto Network, appearing regularly on the the weekly roundtable show “The Bitcoin Group”, and host of “Dark News”, a show about un-censorship technologies.


References to this episode
:

Anonymous Bitcoin
book:
http://anonymousbitcoinbook.com

Dark News Show:
https://twitter.com/darknewsshow

Tor Project:
https://www.torproject.org

I2P Network:
https://geti2p.net/en/

Tails Linux
https://tails.boum.org

Send Bitcoin donations for this episode to:
12EQTDMzU5mxtEd8ZfyrHrxABZi3jtaCCo

Please make other forms of donations here:
http://www.gnosticmedia.com/donate/

Donations. This episode is brought to you by:

Joseph
Tresor
Barry
David
Joseph
Salman

This episode is video only.

 


Thought Crime: Mozilla CEO Forced to Resign by LGBT Lobby Over ‘Opinion’ on Gay Marriage

[Apr 4, 2014]
21st Century Wire
says…

Our forefathers warned us to beware of mob rule.

Mozilla announced yesterday that its co-founder Brendan Eich (photo, left) is stepping down as CEO following LGBT lobby protests over his support for California’s Proposition 8 ballot measure that outlawed same-sex, or ‘gay’ marriages in that state (the measure was later deemed unconstitutional following a federal court appeal).

Most mainstream media outlets are attributing his resignation to a boycott announcement by popular online dating site, OkCupid.com, who urged its users not to access their dating site through Mozilla’s Firefox browser, but to use Microsoft’s Internet Explorer or Google’s Chrome instead. But there’s a bit more to the story than this…

The internal storm began to brew when two gay software developers decided to launch a boycott of Firefox in protest against Eich’s new CEO appointment.

This appears to have snowballed into a full-blown feud within Mozilla over Eich’s personal views – which appear to have run contrary to those of Mozilla Chairwoman Mitchell Baker, who then fired what looks to be the deadly PR round on March 29, when she first blogged that “Mozilla supports equality for all, explicitly including LGBT equality and marriage equality.”

Prior to resigning, CEO Eich clearly stated his position to the Guardian on Wednesday this week, “There’s a difference here between the company, the foundation, as an employer and an entity, versus the project and community at large, which is not under any constraints to agree on LGBT equality or any other thing that is not central to the mission or the Mozilla manifesto.”

Baker responded on Thursday stating, “We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public.”

The only problem here is that Ms. Baker doesn’t seem to want to include Brendan Eich in her culture of ‘sharing beliefs and opinions’.

Baker then goes on the explain why Mozilla Corp forced Eich out, and how it is ultimately accountable to its ‘communitarians‘. She explains, “This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community.”

She then added, “Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it”. “We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it’s because we haven’t stayed true to ourselves.”

“We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry. We must do better.”
At little over dramatic maybe, but it’s indicative of a US online tech industry seemingly dominated by a liberal herd. The polarity seems subtle at first glance, but the rifts are there: driving a Toyota Prius is considered virtuous, while Tweeting a conservative quip can trigger a firestorm.

Clearly, Eich and Baker’s differences could not be resolved, making for a very toxic working environment. What’s irrefutable here is that Baker chose to undermine her executive colleague in a very public manner, as Baker used her position to push her feud with Eich into the public domain, enabling her to then leverage additional support from the LGBT lobby as a result.

In a corporate setting, this precedent certainly opens the door to abuse. This scenario could be used by any employee of any company who feels they have unaddressed grievances – not just ideological ones, but personal ones – against a senior colleague, and then draw in a third party, like an LGBT lobby, in order to settle a personal score and assist in removing someone from an organisation. This creates a false “consensus”, followed by a tidal wave of online “campaigns” (see image, left) and petitions – where an innocent person can quickly be convicted in a Kangaroos Court of minority public opinion, underpinned by the highly spurious, if not dubious justification of “protecting the “ethos of the company”.

Eich is also one of the creators of the computer language known as Javascript, and has been widely recognised as one of the single most important contributors to the modern free internet.

What exactly Eich’s personal views on Prop 8 have to do with the ‘ethos’ of Mozilla is not clear. Mozilla’s Firefox browser was created by the Mozilla Foundation in 2003, a non-profit organization who supports the open source project run by Mozilla Corp. The mission of the non-profit is “putting individuals in control online.” The CEO’s personal opinions on hot social issues do not come into play at all with the functionality of Firefox, nor should they.

Ruling in Divided America

America has never been more divided along radical political lines as it is today. In many ways, a divided society suits the establishment in its will to rule with no emerging opposition to it. Radical activist groups play a key role in maintaining this vacuum of social solidarity. The age of social media means that, with a snap of the finger, special interest mobs can swarm corporations and individuals. Mobs rule by fear. It’s time to coin a new term: social racketeering.

It’s worth pointing out the obvious problem here – that in 2008, the Proposition 8 Gay Marriage Ban actually passed in 2008 in California with the majority of voters backing the measure, and in a state with a population of 35 million.

So are the millions of Californians – like Brendan Eich, who voted for, or supported the gay marriage ban also “guilty” of this same thought crime, or crime of opinion? Should each voter, and person who wrote out a cheque to campaign for Proposition 8 be identified and perhaps hunted down, and forced to resign from their jobs? If all men and women are created equal, then why not exact the mob’s punishment on everyone classified as guilty by the LGBT lobby? Wouldn’t that be more fair?

The LGBT lobby’s answer to that question would of course be something along the lines of: “We are not targeting everyone who supported Prop 8, only the high profile people (in order to make an example out of them).” This kind of reply is a nicely spun version of, “We hope by publicly toppling Eich, this will serve to intimidate others from opposing the lobby’s will in future.”

This kind of ‘razor blade’ politiking has the following objectives: ruin the man, his career and his future – because he opposed your own social views. In this toxic social environment, ‘activism’ (as some still like to refer to it) has been weaponised.

In a country which purports to champion its citizens’ rights of freedom of speech, expression and more importantly – freedom of opinion, this disturbing trend of minority activist lobbies bullying individuals into submission because of their personal views (clearly the case with Brendan Eich) is simply a mob prosecution of ‘thought crime’, which any radical pragmatist, given the chance, would easily upgrade to ‘hate crime’. Is this Social racketeering, or cultural Marxism? Take your pick. Both are a step backwards, and are highly undesirable conditions in a truly egalitarian and free society.

The Slippery Slope of Tyranny

Uncomfortable to some as it might be, in the United States of America, it is not illegal, nor should it viewed as ‘undesirable’, for an individual to voice one’s opposition – for or against – any state or federal law. The dangers of enabling such a mob tyranny to single out individuals who are not guilty of any real crime are obvious – by crushing support or dissent for any one law, the mob is greasing a slippery slope towards the elimination of not only freedom of speech and beliefs, but dissent for any unconstitutional law. In the long run, this might empower the state over the individual. This might be a hard concept for some to grapple with who only see this issue a small victory nudging forward, but not to anyone with any foresight. Viewed in isolation, gang tackling a person out of his job today may not seem like much, but think about what the next step will look like – a digressive ‘Lord of the Flies’ society where the mobs determine who is innocent and who is guilty – and whether or not any actual crime is committed does not even factor in. Some will argue that we are already there.

Most certainly, gay rights, along with other minority rights of race minorities, disabled minorities, homeless persons, and religious minorities – should be defended. However, there exists a fine line between defending one’s rights and attacking one’s perceived political opponents. The latter is wrong, especially when conducted at the hands of an aggressive, politicized mob.

The fundamental concept which the LGBT ‘collective’ (lobby) do not understand, or are unable to grasp, is basic game theory, where an offensive strategy has consequences. Although it may seem politically vogue today, by exerting radical ‘communitarianism‘ influence through the deployment of fear, intimidation and harassment – any radical minority may in fact be sowing the seeds of their own demise, and society’s too, in the long run. History shows us that such counter-revolutionary movements, especially ultra-conservative ones – are swift and brutal. The only protection against this, is by guarding the inherent rights which we all share, even if that means defending the rights of those whom you may ideologically disagree with.

Targeting individuals and depriving them of their fundamental right to work, expression of a personal opinion, or even disagreement with the lobby, is merely aiding the acceleration of the erosion of universal rights for all citizens, including LGBT ones. Once those rights are gone, they are gone for everyone, and no one will have universal protection under the law, or a ‘Bill of Rights’.

After the LGBT lobby has finished its social cull of its alleged ideological opponents, then a new mob – whether it’s the establishment, or another radical conservative, or religious mob – will set its sights on the LGBT community.

In a free and fair America, LGBT activists should defend Brendan Eich’s right to have an opinion. That would be real tolerance. Anything else is cheap knockoff – phony freedom.

READ MORE LGBT NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire LGBT Files

-


600 million Apple devices contain secret backdoors, researcher claims — video included

Friends of Syria
Jul 26, 2014

000_gyi0060073312.si

A security researcher considered to be among the foremost experts in his field says that more than a half-billion mobile devices running Apple’s latest iOS operating system contain secret backdoors.

Jonathan Zdziarski, also known by his online alias “NerveGas,” told the audience attending his Friday morning presentation at the Hackers on Planet Earth conference in New York City that around 600 million Apple devices, including iPhones and tablets, contain hidden features that allow data to be surreptitiously slurped from those devices.

During Zdziarski’s HOPE presentation, “Identifying Backdoors, Attack Points and Surveillance Mechanisms in iOS Devices,” the researcher revealed that several undocumented forensic services are installed on every new iPhone and iPad, making it easier that ever for a third-party to pull data from those devices in order to compromise a target and take hold of their personal information, including pictures, text messages, voice recordings and more.

Among the hidden functions running on iOS devices, Zdziarski said, are programs called “pcapd,” “file_relay” and “file_relay.” If used properly, he added, those programs can allow anyone with the right means and methodology to pull staggering amounts of data from a targeted phone, even when the rightful owner suspects the device is sufficiently locked.

Zdziarski has previously exploited older versions of the iOS operating system and authored several books on mobile security. Even after raising multiple questions with Apple, however, he said he has yet to figure out why, exactly, the tech giant ships iOS devices with programs that appear to do nothing other than leak digital data.

According to the slides Zdziarski presented during Friday’s talk, there’s little reason to believe the functions are used to run diagnostics or help developers.

Most services are not referenced by any known Apple software,” one slide says in part, and “the raw format of the data makes it impossible to put data back onto the phone, making useless for Genius Bar or carrier tech purposes.”

“The personal nature of the data makes it very unlikely as a debugging mechanism,” he added.

Reuters / David Gray

Reuters / David Gray

According to the researcher, evidence of the mysterious programs raises more questions than it does answers.

“Why is there a packet sniffer running on 600 million personal iOS devices instead of moved to the developer mount?” he asked in one slide. “Why are there undocumented services that bypass user backup encryption that dump mass amounts of personal data from the phone? Why is most of my user data still not encrypted with the PIN or passphrase, enabling the invasion of my personal privacy by YOU?”

“Apple really needs to step up and explain what these services are doing,” Zdziarski told Ars Technia on Monday after his HOPE presentation was hailed over the weekend by the conference’s attendees as a highlight of the three-day event. “I can’t come up with a better word than ‘backdoor’ to describe file relay, but I’m willing to listen to whatever other explanation Apple has. At the end of the day, though, there’s a lot of insecure stuff running on the phone giving up a lot of data that should never be given up. Apple really needs to fix that.”

Indeed, Apple responded on late Tuesday by saying that the tree functions in question are “diagnostic capabilities to help enterprise IT departments, developers and AppleCare troubleshoot issues.”

“Apple has, in a traditional sense, admitted to having back doors on the device specifically for their own use,” Zdziarski responded quickly on his blog. “Perhaps people misunderstand the term ‘back door’ due to the stigma Hollywood has given them, but I have never accused these ‘hidden access methods’ as being intended for anything malicious, and I’ve made repeated statements that I haven’t accused Apple of working with NSA. That doesn’t mean, however that the government can’t take advantage of back doors to access the same information. What does concern me is that Apple appears to be completely misleading about some of these (especially file relay), and not addressing the issues I raised on others.”

“I give Apple credit for acknowledging these services, and at least trying to give an answer to people who want to know why these services are there – prior to this, there was no documentation about file relay whatsoever, or its 44 data services to copy off personal data. They appear to be misleading about its capabilities, however, in downplaying them, and this concerns me,” he added.

On Apple’s part, the company said they have “never worked with any government agency from any country to create a backdoor in any of our products of services.”

Source


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 872 other followers