OpenAI Reportingly Hiring "Army" of Devs to Train AI to Replace Entry-Level Coders

Posted on by

Silicon Valley darling and ChatGPT creator OpenAI has reportedly hired roughly 1,000 contractors with the goal of improving its text-to-code AI, Codex.

Step-by-Step

A new report from Semafor alleges that Silicon Valley darling and ChatGPT creator OpenAI has been making major moves to hire an "army" of outside contractors to better train a model how to code — an operation that could ultimately render entry-level coding jobs extinct.

The company, per Semafor, has brought on roughly 1,000 of these contractors — most of whom live "in regions like Latin America and Eastern Europe," according to sources familiar with the matter — in the past six months. About 60 percent of those hired were reportedly brought to do data labeling work, while the other 40 percent are computer programmers tasked with making software engineering datasets to train OpenAI's models on.

"A well-established company," reads a translated Spanish-language OpenAI job listing posted by an outsourced recruiter, according to Semafor, "which is determined to provide world-class AI technology to make the world a better and more efficient place, is looking for a Python Developer."

During the interview process, prospects are reportedly asked to complete unpaid five-hour-long coding exams that involve identifying basic coding problems and providing solutions, explaining their step-by-step thinking in written English. One of OpenAI's products, Codex, is an AI-powered text-to-code generator designed to translate written word into functioning computer programs.

"They most likely want to feed this model with a very specific kind of training data," an anonymous South American programming applicant told Semafor, "where the human provides a step-by-step layout of their thought process."

Join the Club

Codex has been mostly trained on code taken from GitHub, a practice that has offered the model some success as an assistive program, autocompleting and spell-checking code with some proficiency. GitHub — notably owned by Microsoft, OpenAI's financial overlord — even offers a Codex-powered "Copilot," which is basically like Grammarly for programmers.

The work of these recently-hired contractors, however, would almost certainly take that type of AI to the next level.

Knowing what a line of code might look like is one thing. Having a nuanced understanding of why and how a program needs to be written is entirely another, and by quietly outsourcing human engineers' thought processes, OpenAI seems intent on closing that gap.

And while these machines likely won't be writing any high-level programs anytime terribly soon, it feels fair to say that programmers looking for lower-level coding work should be wary of job prospects in the near future. Sorry, y'all — we hate to see anyone else join that party.

READ MORE: OpenAI has hired an army of contractors to make basic coding obsolete [Semafor]

More on OpenAI contractors: OpenAI Apparently Paid People in the Developing World $2/Hour to Look at the Most Disturbing Content Imaginable

The post OpenAI Reportingly Hiring "Army" of Devs to Train AI to Replace Entry-Level Coders appeared first on Futurism.

Read more:
OpenAI Reportingly Hiring "Army" of Devs to Train AI to Replace Entry-Level Coders

Migrant Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com

Posted on by

Middle School Level

This shows grade level based on the word's complexity.

[ mahy-gruhnt ]SHOW IPA

/ ma grnt /PHONETIC RESPELLING

This shows grade level based on the word's complexity.

adjective

noun

Also called migrant worker. a person who moves from place to place to get work, especially a farm laborer who harvests crops seasonally.

QUIZ

WILL YOU SAIL OR STUMBLE ON THESE GRAMMAR QUESTIONS?

Smoothly step over to these common grammar mistakes that trip many people up. Good luck!

Question 1 of 7

Fill in the blank: I cant figure out _____ gave me this gift.

OTHER WORDS FROM migrantnonmigrant, adjective, noununmigrant, adjective

Dictionary.com UnabridgedBased on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2023

That phrase later became shorthand for nasty statements about refugees and other migrants.

So unless youre in a specific group, like migrant workers or refugees or Palestinians in the occupied territories, youre insured, and youre part of the system.

This comes just before the Lunar New Year festivities, when migrant workers all over China expect to head home to celebrate the holiday with their families.

As we saw with the migrant workers, the year 2020 impacted Indias most vulnerable severely.

It has since grown from an international focus to include assistance for migrants along the southern border of the United States.

Dehydrated and feeling weary, Marino lay down beside another migrant under a tree and fell asleep.

With the help of a Jamaican migrant worker, he returns to his homeland to find his father.

The actor transformed from a sensual Marilyn Monroe to a whimsical Salvador Dali to a starving migrant mother, seamlessly.

While migrant ship tragedies at sea happen all too often, the latest sinking appears to have been no accident.

GNRD has zealously fought to eliminate abuse of Nepalese migrant workers in Qatar, the organization said in a statement.

Common migrant; breeds in the North; a few may winter in the State.

Migrant; rare, if not accidental; only one specimen, and that a female.

Migrant; occasionally winter resident; not known to breed in State.

Rare migrant; range extends only to foothills; no record of its breeding.

Common migrant; occurs from the plains to the great height of 13,000 feet.

noun

a person or animal that moves from one region, place, or country to another

an itinerant agricultural worker who travels from one district to another

adjective

moving from one region, place, or country to another; migratory

C17: from Latin migrre to change one's abode

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2012

Visit link:

Migrant Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com

Definitions | Refugees and Migrants

Posted on by

Refugee

Refugees are persons who are outside their country of origin for reasons of feared persecution, conflict, generalized violence, or other circumstances that have seriously disturbed public order and, as a result, require international protection. The refugee definition can be found in the 1951 Convention and regional refugee instruments, as well as UNHCRs Statute.

--United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

More onkey refugee definitions

While there is no formal legal definition of an international migrant, most experts agree that an international migrant is someone who changes his or her country of usual residence, irrespective of the reason for migration or legal status. Generally, a distinction is made between short-term or temporary migration, covering movements with a duration between three and 12 months, and long-term or permanent migration, referring to a change of country of residence for a duration of one year or more.

- United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

More on key migration terms.

Continued here:

Definitions | Refugees and Migrants

Illegal migrants refuse to leave NYC hotel for Brooklyn migrant relief …

Posted on by

Migrants outside the Watson Hotel

Migrants are seen outside the hotel, many of whom spent last night sleeping on the street rather than be relocated to the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal over the weekend. (Jennifer Mitchell for Fox News Digital)

A group of illegal migrants, who entered into the U.S. through the southern border, are refusing to leave their free NYC hotel rooms for a migrant shelter in Brooklyn, New York, sleeping in the street to protest.

The migrants were initially placed at the Watson Hotel in Midtown Manhattan, but their schedule for relocation to a new migrant relief center, the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, caused uproar late Sunday night.

While some migrants left for the new shelter, many refused to vacate the Hell's Kitchen hotel and rallied outside the building alongside migrant activists. The migrants who were noncompliant in the city's relocation spent the night outside the hotel and were seen holding their ground into Monday morning.

Democrat Mayor Eric Adams responded to the situation, affirming that the new facilities were hospitable accommodations and noting the dire need of state and government support amid the ongoing migrant crisis that is impacting the Big Apple.

NEARLY 300,000 ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS SLIPPED PAST BORDER AGENTS IN LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS: SOURCES

Migrants speak with NYC homeless outreach members as they camp out in front of the Watson Hotel after being evicted on Jan. 30, 2023. (Michael M. Santiago)

"This weekend, we began the process of moving single adult men from the Watson Hotel to Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, as we transition the hotel to meet the large number of asylum-seeking families with children," Adams said in a statement.

"More than 42,000 asylum seekers have arrived in New York City since last spring, and we continue to surpass our moral obligations as we provide asylum seekers with shelter, food, health care, education, and a host of other services," the mayor continued.

GREG ABBOTT BLASTS BIDEN'S NEW BORDER POLICY THAT WILL ALLEGEDLY ATTRACT EVEN MORE ILLEGAL MIGRANTS

Several migrants who went to the new center immediately turned around and went back to the Watson Hotel, claiming there was a lack of heat and bathroom space at the facility.

Despite these claims, the city assured that the Brooklyn Cruise Terminal provided the same services for the migrants seeking asylum, including heat and space.

A view from the surroundings of the Watson Hotel in Manhattan, New York. (Selcuk Acar)

"The facilities at Brooklyn Cruise Terminal will provide the same services as every other humanitarian relief center in the city, and the scheduled relocations to Brooklyn Cruise Terminal this weekend took place as planned. We remain in serious need of support from both our state and federal governments."

The Brooklyn Cruise Terminal Humanitarian Emergency Response and Relief Center was scheduled to open after Adams said NYC had reached "its breaking point." The center, which will close this spring ahead of cruise season, will "provide adult men with a place to stay, access support, and get to their final destination."

A member of the mayor's immigration office speaks with migrants who were camping out in front of the Watson Hotel after being evicted on Jan. 30, 2023, in New York City. (Michael M. Santiago)

Illegal migrants are continuing to flood into New York City on a weekly basis, with Adams reporting an average of 400 people each day during one week in January, with 835 asylum seekers arriving on one single day alone earlier this month.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Adams recently proclaimed the migrant surge at the border a "national crisis" during a visit to El Paso, Texas.

Fox News' Bradford Betz and Greg Norman contributed to this report.

Aubrie Spady is a Freelance Production Assistant for Fox News Digital.

Go here to read the rest:

Illegal migrants refuse to leave NYC hotel for Brooklyn migrant relief ...

At least 853 migrants died crossing the U.S.-Mexico border in past 12 …

Posted on by

Rose Lee said her nephew left his native Peru and journeyed to the U.S.-Mexico border in search of his "American dream." But she said she did not think the quest would cost him his life.

Alan Paredes Salazar, 37, drowned trying to cross the Rio Grande in early September alongside nearly a dozen other migrants whose bodies were found in the river by U.S. Border Patrol agents, his family said. The Medical Examiner's Office in Webb County, Texas confirmed it processed Paredes Salazar's body.

"My nephew's death has left us devastated. It's a very tragic death, to travel so far and die in an unknown place," said Lee, who lives in southern California.

Paredes Salazar's death was not an anomaly. At least 853 migrants died trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border unlawfully in the past 12 months, making fiscal year 2022 the deadliest year for migrants recorded by the U.S. government, according to internal Border Patrol data obtained by CBS News.

The figure, which far exceeded the previous record of 546 migrant deaths recorded by Border Patrol in fiscal year 2021, is likely an undercount due to data collection limits, migration policy analysts said. An April report by a federal watchdog found that Border Patrol did not collect and record "complete data on migrant deaths."

The number also does not encompass all deaths of migrants who died trying to reach or cross the U.S. border, since Border Patrol only counts migrants it identified or processed on U.S. territory. Still, the record deaths reported by Border Patrol offer a grim glimpse into the dangerous, and sometimes deadly, trek millions of migrants have undertaken over the past years in hopes of reaching the U.S.

Many migrants have drowned in the Rio Grande. Others have perished due to the extreme heat in the inhospitable desert terrain along some parts of the U.S. southern border. U.S. officials have also reported deadly falls from border barriers that migrants sometimes climb.

But even when migrants successfully enter the U.S., the trek can still be deadly, as illustrated by the deaths of 53 migrants abandoned inside a tractor-trailer in June, the deadliest human smuggling case in U.S. history.

In a statement to CBS News, Cecilia Barreda, a spokeswoman for Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which oversees Border Patrol, said human smugglers have been endangering migrants' lives to make a profit.

"Smuggling organizations are abandoning migrants in remote and dangerous areas, leading to a rise in the number of rescues but also tragically a rise in the number of deaths," Barreda said. "The terrain along the border is extreme, the summer heat is severe, and the miles of desert migrants must hike after crossing the border in many areas are unforgiving."

In addition to reporting unprecedented numbers of migrant deaths over the past years, Border Patrol has recorded a sharp increase in rescues or life-saving operations in which agents assist migrants in distress. Border Patrol recorded 22,014 migrant rescues in fiscal year 2022, a 72% jump from 2021, CBP statistics show.

The recent spike in migrant deaths, current and former U.S. immigration officials said, can be partly attributed to the soaring number of migrants who have crossed the U.S.-Mexico border unlawfully over the past two years.

Federal authorities along the U.S. southern border stopped migrants nearly 2.4 million times in fiscal year 2022, an all-time high. While the tally included 1.1 million expulsions under a pandemic-era restriction known as Title 42, as well as a significant number of repeat crossings, the migration wave has strained the government's resources and created major humanitarian challenges for the Biden administration.

"It is a high number," said Theresa Cardinal Brown, a former Department of Homeland Security immigration official under former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, referring to the migrant deaths. "But it's also amongst a record year for everything else."

"Is it more dangerous? Yes. But there's also a lot more people trying," added Cardinal Brown, who now serves as the managing director of immigration and cross-border policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Advocates for migrants have also blamed U.S. policies like Title 42 which allows authorities to immediately expel some migrants without allowing them to request asylum for pushing migrants to take more dangerous routes to try to enter the U.S. and avoid apprehension.

For decades, Cardinal Brown said, U.S. border policy has centered on making it more difficult, and in some ways, more dangerous, for migrants to enter the country illegally to deter them from trying. But she said the deaths are also partly fueled by transnational smuggling networks and migrants' willingness to embark on perilous journeys to escape poverty, joblessness and violence in their home countries.

"The answer is that desperate people do desperate things, and desperate things are often dangerous things," Cardinal Brown said. "Is there a role that U.S. policy plays? Well, yes. But there's also the role of migrants in deciding to do this and the smugglers in encouraging it."

While the International Organization for Migration, a United Nations affiliated group, recorded more than 1,200 deaths of migrants in the Western Hemisphere in 2021, it tracked 728 migrant deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border, calling it the "the deadliest land crossing in the world."

Lee said her nephew left Peru to work and provide his wife and 5-year-old son a better future, noting he would constantly ask her for help getting to the U.S. She said he traveled to the U.S. border with her brother.

On Sept. 1, Lee said her brother managed to call her to tell her that a strong current in the Rio Grande had swept away Paredes Salazar and other migrants, causing them to drown. She said it took several days for her to verify with officials in Texas that her nephew had died.

Despite the nearly two months that have elapsed, Lee said she has not been able to claim her nephew's body, which she intends to repatriate to Peru. She called him a loving family member and said she treated him as her own son.

"His dreams were cut short. His dreams of helping his parents, his wife, his child," Lee said.

Camilo Montoya-Galvez is the immigration reporter at CBS News. Based in Washington, he covers immigration policy and politics.

Visit link:

At least 853 migrants died crossing the U.S.-Mexico border in past 12 ...

Illegal immigrants in NYC refuse to leave taxpayer-funded hotel rooms …

Posted on by

Illegal immigrants staying in free New York City hotel rooms are sleeping in the street to protest their resettlement in a Brooklyn migrant shelter.

The immigrants, who entered the United States illegally across the southern border, were first placed in Midtown Manhattan's Watson Hotel, according to a report.

POLICE OFFICER RESIGNS AFTER SUPERIORS SUSPEND HIM FOR TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE BELIEFS

When they discovered Sunday that they were slated to be relocated to a Brooklyn Cruise Terminal migrant relief center, many broke out in protest.

Along with migrant activists, the illegal immigrants spent the night outside the Hell's Kitchen hotel and stayed there well into Monday morning.

New York City Mayor Eric Adams (D) addressed the situation and promised that the migrant facility would have all the amenities required by the illegal immigrants and that they would still receive government support.

"This weekend, we began the process of moving single adult men from the Watson Hotel to Brooklyn Cruise Terminal, as we transition the hotel to meet the large number of asylum-seeking families with children," Adams said.

"More than 42,000 asylum seekers have arrived in New York City since last spring, and we continue to surpass our moral obligations as we provide asylum seekers with shelter, food, health care, education, and a host of other services," he added.

Some immigrants who initially went to the relief center returned to the hotel and argued that the new center lacked heating and bathroom space, according to the report.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

"The facilities at Brooklyn Cruise Terminal will provide the same services as every other humanitarian relief center in the city, and the scheduled relocations to Brooklyn Cruise Terminal this weekend took place as planned," the city said in a statement. "We remain in serious need of support from both our state and federal governments."

More:

Illegal immigrants in NYC refuse to leave taxpayer-funded hotel rooms ...

What Is Censorship? | American Civil Liberties Union

Posted on by

Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are "offensive," happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups. Censorship by the government is unconstitutional.

In contrast, when private individuals or groups organize boycotts against stores that sell magazines of which they disapprove, their actions are protected by the First Amendment, although they can become dangerous in the extreme. Private pressure groups, not the government, promulgated and enforced the infamous Hollywood blacklists during the McCarthy period. But these private censorship campaigns are best countered by groups and individuals speaking out and organizing in defense of the threatened expression.

American society has always been deeply ambivalent about these questions. On the one hand, our history is filled with examples of overt government censorship, from the 1873 Comstock Law to the 1996 Communications Decency Act. On the other hand, the commitment to freedom of imagination and expression is deeply embedded in our national psyche, buttressed by the First Amendment, and supported by a long line of Supreme Court decisions.

The Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment's protection of artistic expression very broadly. It extends not only to books, theatrical works and paintings, but also to posters, television, music videos and comic books -- whatever the human creative impulse produces.

Two fundamental principles come into play whenever a court must decide a case involving freedom of expression. The first is "content neutrality"-- the government cannot limit expression just because any listener, or even the majority of a community, is offended by its content. In the context of art and entertainment, this means tolerating some works that we might find offensive, insulting, outrageous -- or just plain bad.

The second principle is that expression may be restricted only if it will clearly cause direct and imminent harm to an important societal interest. The classic example is falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater and causing a stampede. Even then, the speech may be silenced or punished only if there is no other way to avert the harm.

SEXSEXUAL SPEECHSex in art and entertainment is the most frequent target of censorship crusades. Many examples come to mind. A painting of the classical statue of Venus de Milo was removed from a store because the managers of the shopping mall found its semi-nudity "too shocking." Hundreds of works of literature, from Maya Angelou's I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings to John Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath, have been banned from public schools based on their sexual content.

A museum director was charged with a crime for including sexually explicit photographs by Robert Mapplethorpe in an art exhibit.

American law is, on the whole, the most speech-protective in the world -- but sexual expression is treated as a second-class citizen. No causal link between exposure to sexually explicit material and anti-social or violent behavior has ever been scientifically established, in spite of many efforts to do so. Rather, the Supreme Court has allowed censorship of sexual speech on moral grounds -- a remnant of our nation's Puritan heritage.

This does not mean that all sexual expression can be censored, however. Only a narrow range of "obscene" material can be suppressed; a term like "pornography" has no legal meaning . Nevertheless, even the relatively narrow obscenity exception serves as a vehicle for abuse by government authorities as well as pressure groups who want to impose their personal moral views on other people.

PORNOGRAPHIC! INDECENT! OBSCENE!Justice John Marshall Harlan's line, "one man's vulgarity is another's lyric," sums up the impossibility of developing a definition of obscenity that isn't hopelessly vague and subjective. And Justice Potter Stewart's famous assurance, "I know it when I see it," is of small comfort to artists, writers, movie directors and lyricists who must navigate the murky waters of obscenity law trying to figure out what police, prosecutors, judges and juries will think.

The Supreme Court's current definition of constitutionally unprotected Obscenity, first announced in a 1973 case called Miller v. California, has three requirements. The work must 1) appeal to the average person's prurient (shameful, morbid) interest in sex; 2) depict sexual conduct in a "patently offensive way" as defined by community standards; and 3) taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

The Supreme Court has held that Indecent expression -- in contrast with "obscenity" -- is entitled to some constitutional protection, but that indecency in some media (broadcasting, cable, and telephone) may be regulated. In its 1978 decision in Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica, the Court ruled that the government could require radio and television stations to air "indecent" material only during those hours when children would be unlikely listeners or viewers. Broadcast indecency was defined as: "language that describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory activities or organs." This vague concept continues to baffle both the public and the courts.

PORNOGRAPHY is not a legal term at all. Its dictionary definition is "writing or pictures intended to arouse sexual desire." Pornography comes in as many varieties as the human sexual impulse and is protected by the First Amendment unless it meets the definition for illegal obscenity.

VIOLENCEIS MEDIA VIOLENCE A THREAT TO SOCIETY?Today's calls for censorship are not motivated solely by morality and taste, but also by the widespread belief that exposure to images of violence causes people to act in destructive ways. Pro-censorship forces, including many politicians, often cite a multitude of "scientific studies" that allegedly prove fictional violence leads to real-life violence.

There is, in fact, virtually no evidence that fictional violence causes otherwise stable people to become violent. And if we suppressed material based on the actions of unstable people, no work of fiction or art would be safe from censorship. Serial killer Theodore Bundy collected cheerleading magazines. And the work most often cited by psychopaths as justification for their acts of violence is the Bible.

But what about the rest of us? Does exposure to media violence actually lead to criminal or anti-social conduct by otherwise stable people, including children, who spend an average of 28 hours watching television each week? These are important questions. If there really were a clear cause-and-effect relationship between what normal children see on TV and harmful actions, then limits on such expression might arguably be warranted.

WHAT THE STUDIES SHOWStudies on the relationship between media violence and real violence are the subject of considerable debate. Children have been shown TV programs with violent episodes in a laboratory setting and then tested for "aggressive" behavior. Some of these studies suggest that watching TV violence may temporarily induce "object aggression" in some children (such as popping balloons or hitting dolls or playing sports more aggressively) but not actual criminal violence against another person.

CORRELATIONAL STUDIES that seek to explain why some aggressive people have a history of watching a lot of violent TV suffer from the chicken-and-egg dilemma: does violent TV cause such people to behave aggressively, or do aggressive people simply prefer more violent entertainment? There is no definitive answer. But all scientists agree that statistical correlations between two phenomena do not mean that one causes the other.

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS are no more helpful. Japanese TV and movies are famous for their extreme, graphic violence, but Japan has a very low crime rate -- much lower than many societies in which television watching is relatively rare. What the sudies reveal on the issue of fictional violence and real world aggression is -- not much.

The only clear assertion that can be made is that the relationship between art and human behavior is a very complex one. Violent and sexually explicit art and entertainment have been a staple of human cultures from time immemorial. Many human behavioralists believe that these themes have a useful and constructive societal role, serving as a vicarious outlet for individual aggression.

WHERE DO THE EXPERTS AGREE?Whatever influence fictional violence has on behavior, most expert believe its effects are marginal compared to other factors. Even small children know the difference between fiction and reality, and their attitudes and behavior are shaped more by their life circumstances than by the books they read or the TV they watch. In 1972, the U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior released a 200-page report, "Television and Growing Up: The Impact of Televised Violence," which concluded, "The effect [of television] is small compared with many other possible causes, such as parental attitudes or knowledge of and experience with the real violence of our society." Twenty-one years later, the American Psychological Association published its 1993 report, "Violence & Youth," and concluded, "The greatest predictor of future violent behavior is a previous history of violence." In 1995, the Center for Communication Policy at UCLA, which monitors TV violence, came to a similar conclusion in its yearly report: "It is known that television does not have a simple, direct stimulus-response effect on its audiences."

Blaming the media does not get us very far, and, to the extent that diverts the public's attention from the real causes of violence in society, it may do more harm than good.

WHICH MEDIA VIOLENCE WOULD YOU BAN?A pro-censorship member of Congress once attacked the following shows for being too violent: The Miracle Worker, Civil War Journal, Star Trek 9, The Untouchables, and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. What would be left if all these kinds of programs were purged from the airwaves? Is there good violence and bad violence? If so, who decides? Sports and the news are at least as violent as fiction, from the fights that erupt during every televised hockey game, to the videotaped beating of Rodney King by the LA Police Department, shown over and over gain on prime time TV. If we accept censorship of violence in the media, we will have to censor sports and news programs.

Read the original:

What Is Censorship? | American Civil Liberties Union

Censorship – History of censorship | Britannica

Posted on by

It should be instructive to consider how the problem of censorship has been dealt with in the ancient world, in premodern times, and in the modern world. Care must be taken here not to assume that the modern democratic regime, of a self-governing people, is the only legitimate regime. Rather, it is prudent to assume that most of those who have, in other times and places, thought about and acted upon such matters have been at least as humane and as sensible in their circumstances as modern democrats are apt to be in theirs.

It was taken for granted in the Greek communities of antiquity, as well as in Rome, that citizens would be formed in accordance with the character and needs of the regime. This did not preclude the emergence of strong-minded men and women, as may be seen in the stories of Homer, of Plutarch, of Tacitus, and of the Greek playwrights. But it was evident, for example, that a citizen of Sparta was much more apt to be tough and unreflective (and certainly uncommunicative) than a citizen of Corinth (with its notorious openness to pleasure and luxury).

The scope of a city-states concern was exhibited in the provisions it made for the establishment and promotion of religious worship. That the gods of the city were to be respected by every citizen was usually taken for granted. Presiding over religious observances was generally regarded as a privilege of citizenship: thus, in some cities it was an office in which the elderly in good standing could be expected to serve. A refusal to conform, at least outwardly, to the recognized worship of the community subjected one to hardships. And there could be difficulties, backed up by legal sanctions, for those who spoke improperly about such matters. The force of religious opinions could be seen not only in prosecutions for refusals to acknowledge the gods of the city but perhaps even more in the frequent unwillingness of a city (no matter what its obvious political or military interests) to conduct public business at a time when the religious calendar, auspices, or other such signs forbade civic activities. Indicative of respect for the proprieties was the secrecy with which the religious mysteries, such as those into which many Greek and Roman men were initiated, were evidently practicedso much so that there does not seem to be any record from antiquity of precisely what constituted the various mysteries. Respect for the proprieties may be seen as well in the outrage provoked in Sparta by a poem by Archilochus (7th century bce) in which he celebrated his lifesaving cowardice.

Athens, it can be said, was much more liberal than the typical Greek city. This is not to suggest that the rulers of the other cities did not, among themselves, freely discuss the public business. But in Athens the rulers included much more of the population than in most cities of antiquityand freedom of speech (for political purposes) spilled over there into the private lives of citizens. This may be seen, perhaps best of all, in the famous funeral address given by Pericles in 431 bce. Athenians, he pointed out, did not consider public discussion merely something to be put up with; rather, they believed that the best interests of the city could not be served without a full discussion of the issues before the assembly. There may be seen in the plays of an Aristophanes the kind of uninhibited discussions of politics that the Athenians were evidently accustomed to, discussions that could (in the license accorded to comedy) be couched in licentious terms not permitted in everyday discourse.

The limits of Athenian openness may be seen, of course, in the trial, conviction, and execution of Socrates in 399 bce on charges that he corrupted the youth and that he did not acknowledge the gods that the city did but acknowledged other new divinities of his own. One may see as well, in the Republic of Plato, an account of a system of censorship, particularly of the arts, that is comprehensive. Not only are various opinions (particularly misconceptions about the gods and about the supposed terrors of death) to be discouraged, but various salutary opinions are to be encouraged and protected without having to be demonstrated to be true. Much of what is said in the Republic and elsewhere reflects the belief that the vital opinions of the community could be shaped by law and that men could be penalized for saying things that offended public sensibilities, undermined common morality, or subverted the institutions of the community.

The circumstances justifying the system of comprehensive thought control described in Platos Republic are obviously rarely to be found. Thus, Socrates himself is recorded in the same dialogue (and in Platos Apology) as recognizing that cities with bad regimes do not permit their misconduct to be questioned and corrected. Such regimes should be compared with those in the age of the good Roman emperors, the period from Nerva (c. 3098 ce) to Marcus Aurelius (121180)the golden times, said Tacitus, when everyone could hold and defend whatever opinions he wished.

Much of what can be said about ancient Greece and Rome could be applied, with appropriate adaptations, to ancient Israel. The stories of the difficulties encountered by Jesus, and the offenses he came to be accused of, indicate the kinds of restrictions to which the Jews were subjected with respect to religious observances and with respect to what could and could not be said about divine matters. (The inhibitions so established were later reflected in the manner in which Moses Maimonides [11351204] proceeded in his publications, often relying upon hints rather than upon explicit discussion of sensitive topics.) The prevailing watchfulness, lest someone say or do what he should not, can be said to be anticipated by the commandment You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain (Exodus 20:7). It may be seen as well in the ancient opinion that there is a name for God that must not be uttered.

It should be evident that this way of lifedirecting both opinions and actions and extending down to minute daily routinescould not help but shape a people for centuries, if not for millennia, to come. But it should also be evident that those in the position to know, and with a duty to act, were expected to speak out and were, in effect, licensed to do so, however cautiously they were obliged to proceed on occasion. Thus, the prophet Nathan dared to challenge King David himself for what he had done to secure Bathsheba as his wife (II Samuel 12:124). On an earlier, perhaps even more striking, occasion, the patriarch Abraham dared to question God about the terms on which Sodom and Gomorrah might be saved from destruction (Genesis 18:1633). God made concessions to Abraham, and David crumbled before Nathans authority. But such presumptuousness on the part of mere mortals is possible, and likely to bear fruit, only in communities that have been trained to share and to respect certain moral principles grounded in thoughtfulness.

The thoughtfulness to which the Old Testament aspires is suggested by the following counsel by Moses to the people of Israel (Deuteronomy 4:56):

Behold, I have taught you statutes and ordinances, as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land which you are entering to take possession of it. Keep them and do them; for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.

This approach can be considered to provide the foundation for the assurance that has been so critical to modern arguments against censorship (John 8:32): And you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free. Further biblical authority against censorship may be found in such free speech dramas as that described in Acts 4:1321.

It should be remembered that to say everything one thought or believed was regarded by pre-Christian writers as potentially irresponsible or licentious: social consequences dictated a need for restraint. Christian writers, however, called for just such saying of everything as the indispensable witness of faith: transitory social considerations were not to impede, to the extent that they formerly had, the exercise of such a liberty, indeed of such a duty, so intimately related to the eternal welfare of the soul. Thus, we see an encouragement of the privateof an individuality that turned eventually against organized religion itself and legitimated a radical self-indulgence.

Perhaps no people has ever been so thoroughly trained, on such a large scale and for so long, as the Chinese. Critical to that training was a system of education that culminated in a rigorous selection, by examination, of candidates for administrative posts. Particularly influential was the thought of Confucius (551479 bce), with its considerable emphasis upon deference to authority and to family elders and upon respect for ritual observances and propriety. Cautiousness in speech was encouraged; licentious expressions were discouraged; and long-established teachings were relied upon for shaping character. All in all, it was contrary to Chinese good taste to speak openly of the faults of ones government or of ones rulers. And so it could be counseled by Confucius, He who is not in any particular office has nothing to do with plans for the administration of its duties (Analects [Lunyu], 7:14). It has been suggested that such sentiments have operated to prevent the spread in China of opinions supportive of political liberty.

Still, it could be recognized by Confucius that oppressive government is fiercer than a tiger. He could counsel that if a rulers words are not good, and if people are discouraged from opposing them, the ruin of the country can be expected (Analects, 13:5). Blatant oppressiveness, and an attempt to stamp out the influence of Confucius and of other sages, could be seen in the wholesale destruction of books in China in 231 bce. But the Confucian mode was revived thereafter, to become the dominant influence for almost two millennia. Its pervasiveness may well be judged oppressive by contemporary Western standards, since so much depended, it seems, on mastering the orthodox texts and discipline.

Whether or not the typical Chinese government was indeed oppressive, effective control of information was lodged in the authorities, since access to the evidently vital public archives of earlier administrations was limited to a relative few. In addition, decisive control of what was thought, and how, depended in large part on a determination of what the authoritative texts weresomething that has been critical in the West, as well, in the establishment of useful canons, both sacred and secular. Thus, Richard McKeon has suggested, Censorship may be the enforcement of judgments based on power, passion, corruption, or prejudicepolitical, popular, elite, or sectarian. It may also be based on scholarship and the use of critical methods in the interest of advancing a taste for literature, art, learning, and science.

Read the rest here:

Censorship - History of censorship | Britannica

Censorship – Wikipedia

Posted on by

Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. This may be done on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by governments,[5] private institutions and other controlling bodies.

Governments[5] and private organizations may engage in censorship. Other groups or institutions may propose and petition for censorship.[6] When an individual such as an author or other creator engages in censorship of his or her own works or speech, it is referred to as self-censorship. General censorship occurs in a variety of different media, including speech, books, music, films, and other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of claimed reasons including national security, to control obscenity, pornography, and hate speech, to protect children or other vulnerable groups, to promote or restrict political or religious views, and to prevent slander and libel.

Direct censorship may or may not be legal, depending on the type, location, and content. Many countries provide strong protections against censorship by law, but none of these protections are absolute and frequently a claim of necessity to balance conflicting rights is made, in order to determine what could and could not be censored. There are no laws against self-censorship.

In 399 BC, Greek philosopher, Socrates, while defying attempts by the Athenian state to censor his philosophical teachings, was accused of collateral charges related to the corruption of Athenian youth and sentenced to death by drinking a poison, hemlock.

The details of Socrates's conviction are recorded by Plato as follows. In 399BC, Socrates went on trial[8] and was subsequently found guilty of both corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and of impiety (asebeia,[9] "not believing in the gods of the state"),[10] and as a punishment sentenced to death, caused by the drinking of a mixture containing hemlock.[11][12][13]

Socrates' student, Plato, is said to have advocated censorship in his essay on The Republic, which opposed the existence of democracy. In contrast to Plato, Greek playwright Euripides (480406BC) defended the true liberty of freeborn men, including the right to speak freely. In 1766, Sweden became the first country to abolish censorship by law.[14]

Censorship has been criticized throughout history for being unfair and hindering progress. In a 1997 essay on Internet censorship, social commentator Michael Landier claims that censorship is counterproductive as it prevents the censored topic from being discussed. Landier expands his argument by claiming that those who impose censorship must consider what they censor to be true, as individuals believing themselves to be correct would welcome the opportunity to disprove those with opposing views.[15]

Censorship is often used to impose moral values on society, as in the censorship of material considered obscene. English novelist E. M. Forster was a staunch opponent of censoring material on the grounds that it was obscene or immoral, raising the issue of moral subjectivity and the constant changing of moral values. When the 1928 novel Lady Chatterley's Lover was put on trial in 1960, Forster wrote:[16]

Lady Chatterley's Lover is a literary work of importance...I do not think that it could be held obscene, but am in a difficulty here, for the reason that I have never been able to follow the legal definition of obscenity. The law tells me that obscenity may deprave and corrupt, but as far as I know, it offers no definition of depravity or corruption.

Proponents have sought to justify it using different rationales for various types of information censored:

In wartime, explicit censorship is carried out with the intent of preventing the release of information that might be useful to an enemy. Typically it involves keeping times or locations secret, or delaying the release of information (e.g., an operational objective) until it is of no possible use to enemy forces. The moral issues here are often seen as somewhat different, as the proponents of this form of censorship argues that release of tactical information usually presents a greater risk of casualties among one's own forces and could possibly lead to loss of the overall conflict.

During World War I letters written by British soldiers would have to go through censorship. This consisted of officers going through letters with a black marker and crossing out anything which might compromise operational secrecy before the letter was sent.[22] The World War II catchphrase "Loose lips sink ships" was used as a common justification to exercise official wartime censorship and encourage individual restraint when sharing potentially sensitive information.[23]

An example of "sanitization" policies comes from the USSR under Joseph Stalin, where publicly used photographs were often altered to remove people whom Stalin had condemned to execution. Though past photographs may have been remembered or kept, this deliberate and systematic alteration to all of history in the public mind is seen as one of the central themes of Stalinism and totalitarianism.

Censorship is occasionally carried out to aid authorities or to protect an individual, as with some kidnappings when attention and media coverage of the victim can sometimes be seen as unhelpful.[24]

Censorship by religion is a form of censorship where freedom of expression is controlled or limited using religious authority or on the basis of the teachings of the religion.[25] This form of censorship has a long history and is practiced in many societies and by many religions. Examples include the Galileo affair, Edict of Compigne, the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (list of prohibited books) and the condemnation of Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses by Iranian leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Images of the Islamic figure Muhammad are also regularly censored. In some secular countries, this is sometimes done to prevent hurting religious sentiments.[26]

The content of school textbooks is often an issue of debate, since their target audiences are young people. The term whitewashing is commonly used to refer to revisionism aimed at glossing over difficult or questionable historical events, or a biased presentation thereof. The reporting of military atrocities in history is extremely controversial, as in the case of The Holocaust (or Holocaust denial), Bombing of Dresden, the Nanking Massacre as found with Japanese history textbook controversies, the Armenian genocide, the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, and the Winter Soldier Investigation of the Vietnam War.

In the context of secondary school education, the way facts and history are presented greatly influences the interpretation of contemporary thought, opinion and socialization. One argument for censoring the type of information disseminated is based on the inappropriate quality of such material for the younger public. The use of the "inappropriate" distinction is in itself controversial, as it changed heavily. A Ballantine Books version of the book Fahrenheit 451 which is the version used by most school classes[27] contained approximately 75 separate edits, omissions, and changes from the original Bradbury manuscript.

In February 2006, a National Geographic cover was censored by the Nashravaran Journalistic Institute. The offending cover was about the subject of love and a picture of an embracing couple was hidden beneath a white sticker.[28]

Economic induced censorship is a type of censorship enacted by economic markets to favor, and disregard, types of information. Economic induced censorship, is also caused, by market forces which privatize and establish commodification of certain information that is not accessible by the general public, primarily because of the cost associated with commodified information such as academic journals, industry reports and pay to use repositories.[29]

The concept was illustrated as a censorship pyramid[30] that was conceptualized by primarily Julian Assange, along with Andy Mller-Maguhn, Jacob Appelbaum and Jrmie Zimmermann, in the Cypherpunks (book).

Self-censorship is the act of censoring or classifying one's own discourse. This is done out of fear of, or deference to, the sensibilities or preferences (actual or perceived) of others and without overt pressure from any specific party or institution of authority. Self-censorship is often practiced by film producers, film directors, publishers, news anchors, journalists, musicians, and other kinds of authors including individuals who use social media.[32]

According to a Pew Research Center and the Columbia Journalism Review survey, "About one-quarter of the local and national journalists say they have purposely avoided newsworthy stories, while nearly as many acknowledge they have softened the tone of stories to benefit the interests of their news organizations. Fully four-in-ten (41%) admit they have engaged in either or both of these practices."[33]

Threats to media freedom have shown a significant increase in Europe in recent years, according to a study published in April 2017 by the Council of Europe.This results in a fear of physical or psychological violence, and the ultimate result is self-censorship by journalists.[34]

Copy approval is the right to read and amend an article, usually an interview, before publication. Many publications refuse to give copy approval but it is increasingly becoming common practice when dealing with publicity anxious celebrities.[35] Picture approval is the right given to an individual to choose which photos will be published and which will not. Robert Redford is well known for insisting upon picture approval.[36] Writer approval is when writers are chosen based on whether they will write flattering articles or not. Hollywood publicist Pat Kingsley is known for banning certain writers who wrote undesirably about one of her clients from interviewing any of her other clients.[citation needed]

Flooding the public, often through online social networks, with false or misleading information is sometimes called "reverse censorship". American legal scholar Tim Wu has explained that this type of information control, sometimes by state actors, can "distort or drown out disfavored speech through the creation and dissemination of fake news, the payment of fake commentators, and the deployment of propaganda robots."[37]

Book censorship can be enacted at the national or sub-national level, and can carry legal penalties for their infraction. Books may also be challenged at a local, community level. As a result, books can be removed from schools or libraries, although these bans do not typically extend outside of that area.

Aside from the usual justifications of pornography and obscenity, some films are censored due to changing racial attitudes or political correctness in order to avoid ethnic stereotyping and/or ethnic offense despite its historical or artistic value. One example is the still withdrawn "Censored Eleven" series of animated cartoons, which may have been innocent then, but are "incorrect" now.[citation needed]

Film censorship is carried out by various countries. Film censorship is achieved by censoring the producer or restricting a state citizen. For example, in China the film industry censors LGBT related films. Filmmakers must resort in finding funds within international investors such as the Ford Foundations and or produce through an independent film company.[38]

Music censorship has been implemented by states, religions, educational systems, families, retailers and lobbying groups and in most cases they violate international conventions of human rights.[39]

Censorship of maps is often employed for military purposes. For example, the technique was used in former East Germany, especially for the areas near the border to West Germany in order to make attempts of defection more difficult. Censorship of maps is also applied by Google Maps, where certain areas are grayed out or blacked or areas are purposely left outdated with old imagery.[40]

Art is loved and feared because of its evocative power. Destroying or oppressing art can potentially justify its meaning even more.[41]

British photographer and visual artist Graham Ovenden's photos and paintings were ordered to be destroyed by a London's magistrate court in 2015 for being "indecent"[42] and their copies had been removed from the online Tate gallery.[43]

A 1980 Israeli law forbade banned artwork composed of the four colours of the Palestinian flag,[44] and Palestinians were arrested for displaying such artwork or even for carrying sliced melons with the same pattern.[45][46][47]

Moath al-Alwi is a Guantanamo Bay prisoner who creates model ships as an expression of art. Alwi does so with the few tools he has at his disposal such as dental floss and shampoo bottles, and he is also allowed to use a small pair of scissors with rounded edges.[48] A few of Alwi's pieces are on display at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. There are also other artworks on display at the College that were created by other inmates. The artwork that is being displayed might be the only way for some of the inmates to communicate with the outside. Recently things have changed though. The military has come up with a new policy that won't allow the artwork at Guantanamo Bay Military Prison to leave the prison. The art work created by Alwi and other prisoners is now government property and can be destroyed or disposed of in whatever way the government choose, making it no longer the artist's property.[49]

Around 300 artists in Cuba are fighting for their artistic freedom due to new censorship rules Cuba's government has in place for artists. In December 2018, following the introduction of new rules that would ban music performances and artwork not authorized by the state, performance artist Tania Bruguera was detained upon arriving to Havana and released after four days.[50]

An example of extreme state censorship was the Nazis requirements of using art as propaganda. Art was only allowed to be used as a political instrument to control people and failure to act in accordance with the censors was punishable by law, even fatal. The Degenerate Art Exhibition is a historical instance that's goal was to advertise Nazi values and slander others.[51]

Internet censorship is control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet. It may be carried out by governments or by private organizations either at the behest of government or on their own initiative. Individuals and organizations may engage in self-censorship on their own or due to intimidation and fear.

The issues associated with Internet censorship are similar to those for offline censorship of more traditional media. One difference is that national borders are more permeable online: residents of a country that bans certain information can find it on websites hosted outside the country. Thus censors must work to prevent access to information even though they lack physical or legal control over the websites themselves. This in turn requires the use of technical censorship methods that are unique to the Internet, such as site blocking and content filtering.[57]

Furthermore, the Domain Name System (DNS) a critical component of the Internet is dominated by centralized and few entities. The most widely used DNS root is administered by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).[58][59] As an administrator they have rights to shut down and seize domain names when they deem necessary to do so and at most times the direction is from governments. This has been the case with Wikileaks shutdowns[60] and name seizure events such as the ones executed by the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPR Center) managed by the Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).[61] This makes it easy for internet censorship by authorities as they have control over what should or should not be on the Internet. Some activists and researchers have started opting for alternative DNS roots, though the Internet Architecture Board[62] (IAB) does not support these DNS root providers.

Unless the censor has total control over all Internet-connected computers, such as in North Korea or Cuba, total censorship of information is very difficult or impossible to achieve due to the underlying distributed technology of the Internet. Pseudonymity and data havens (such as Freenet) protect free speech using technologies that guarantee material cannot be removed and prevents the identification of authors. Technologically savvy users can often find ways to access blocked content. Nevertheless, blocking remains an effective means of limiting access to sensitive information for most users when censors, such as those in China, are able to devote significant resources to building and maintaining a comprehensive censorship system.[57]

Views about the feasibility and effectiveness of Internet censorship have evolved in parallel with the development of the Internet and censorship technologies:

A BBC World Service poll of 27,973 adults in 26 countries, including 14,306 Internet users,[66] was conducted between 30 November 2009 and 7 February 2010. The head of the polling organization felt, overall, that the poll showed that:

The poll found that nearly four in five (78%) Internet users felt that the Internet had brought them greater freedom, that most Internet users (53%) felt that "the internet should never be regulated by any level of government anywhere", and almost four in five Internet users and non-users around the world felt that access to the Internet was a fundamental right (50% strongly agreed, 29% somewhat agreed, 9% somewhat disagreed, 6% strongly disagreed, and 6% gave no opinion).[68]

The rising usages of social media in many nations has led to the emergence of citizens organizing protests through social media, sometimes called "Twitter Revolutions". The most notable of these social media led protests were parts Arab Spring uprisings, starting in 2010. In response to the use of social media in these protests, the Tunisian government began a hack of Tunisian citizens' Facebook accounts, and reports arose of accounts being deleted.[69]

Automated systems can be used to censor social media posts, and therefore limit what citizens can say online. This most notably occurs in China, where social media posts are automatically censored depending on content. In 2013, Harvard political science professor Gary King led a study to determine what caused social media posts to be censored and found that posts mentioning the government were not more or less likely to be deleted if they were supportive or critical of the government. Posts mentioning collective action were more likely to be deleted than those that had not mentioned collective action.[70] Currently, social media censorship appears primarily as a way to restrict Internet users' ability to organize protests. For the Chinese government, seeing citizens unhappy with local governance is beneficial as state and national leaders can replace unpopular officials. King and his researchers were able to predict when certain officials would be removed based on the number of unfavorable social media posts.[71]

Research has proved that criticism is tolerable on social media sites, therefore it is not censored unless it has a higher chance of collective action. It isn't important whether the criticism is supportive or unsupportive of the states' leaders, the main priority of censoring certain social media posts is to make sure that no big actions are being made due to something that was said on the internet. Posts that challenge the Party's political leading role in the Chinese government are more likely to be censored due to the challenges it poses to the Chinese Communist Party.[72]

In December 2022 Elon Musk, owner and CEO of Twitter released internal documents from the social media microblogging site to journalists Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger and Bari Weiss. The analysis of these files on Twitter, collectively called, the Twitter Files, explored the content moderation and visibility filtering carried out in collaboration with the Federal Bureau of Investigation on the Hunter Biden laptop controversy.

On the platform TikTok, certain hashtags have been categorized by the platform's code and determines how viewers can or cannot interact with the content or hashtag specifically. Some shadowbanned tags include: #acab, #GayArab, #gej due to their referencing of certain social movements and LGBTQ identity. As TikTok guidelines are becoming more localized around the world, some experts believe that this could result in more censorship than before.[73]

Since the early 1980s, advocates of video games have emphasized their use as an expressive medium, arguing for their protection under the laws governing freedom of speech and also as an educational tool. Detractors argue that video games are harmful and therefore should be subject to legislative oversight and restrictions. Many video games have certain elements removed or edited due to regional rating standards.[74][75]For example, in the Japanese and PAL Versions of No More Heroes, blood splatter and gore is removed from the gameplay. Decapitation scenes are implied, but not shown. Scenes of missing body parts after having been cut off, are replaced with the same scene, but showing the body parts fully intact.[76]

Surveillance and censorship are different. Surveillance can be performed without censorship, but it is harder to engage in censorship without some form of surveillance.[77] Even when surveillance does not lead directly to censorship, the widespread knowledge or belief that a person, their computer, or their use of the Internet is under surveillance can have a "chilling effect" and lead to self-censorship.[78]

The former Soviet Union maintained a particularly extensive program of state-imposed censorship. The main organ for official censorship in the Soviet Union was the Chief Agency for Protection of Military and State Secrets generally known as the Glavlit, its Russian acronym. The Glavlit handled censorship matters arising from domestic writings of just about any kind even beer and vodka labels. Glavlit censorship personnel were present in every large Soviet publishing house or newspaper; the agency employed some 70,000 censors to review information before it was disseminated by publishing houses, editorial offices, and broadcasting studios. No mass medium escaped Glavlit's control. All press agencies and radio and television stations had Glavlit representatives on their editorial staffs.[79]

Sometimes, public knowledge of the existence of a specific document is subtly suppressed, a situation resembling censorship. The authorities taking such action will justify it by declaring the work to be "subversive" or "inconvenient". An example is Michel Foucault's 1978 text Sexual Morality and the Law (later republished as The Danger of Child Sexuality), originally published as La loi de la pudeur [literally, "the law of decency"]. This work defends the decriminalization of statutory rape and the abolition of age of consent laws.[citation needed]

When a publisher comes under pressure to suppress a book, but has already entered into a contract with the author, they will sometimes effectively censor the book by deliberately ordering a small print run and making minimal, if any, attempts to publicize it. This practice became known in the early 2000s as privishing (private publishing).[80]

Censorship by country collects information on censorship, internet censorship, press freedom, freedom of speech, and human rights by country and presents it in a sortable table, together with links to articles with more information. In addition to countries, the table includes information on former countries, disputed countries, political sub-units within countries, and regional organizations.

Very little is formally censored in Canada, aside from "obscenity" (as defined in the landmark criminal case of R v Butler) which is generally limited to pornography and child pornography depicting and/or advocating non-consensual sex, sexual violence, degradation, or dehumanization, in particular that which causes harm (as in R v Labaye). Most films are simply subject to classification by the British Columbia Film Classification Office under the non-profit Crown corporation by the name of Consumer Protection BC, whose classifications are officially used by the provinces of British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Manitoba.[81]

Cuban media used to be operated under the supervision of the Communist Party's Department of Revolutionary Orientation, which "develops and coordinates propaganda strategies".[82] Connection to the Internet is restricted and censored.[83]

The People's Republic of China employs sophisticated censorship mechanisms, referred to as the Golden Shield Project, to monitor the internet. Popular search engines such as Baidu also remove politically sensitive search results.[84][85][86]

Strict censorship existed in the Eastern Bloc.[87] Throughout the bloc, the various ministries of culture held a tight rein on their writers.[88] Cultural products there reflected the propaganda needs of the state.[88] Party-approved censors exercised strict control in the early years.[89] In the Stalinist period, even the weather forecasts were changed if they suggested that the sun might not shine on May Day.[89] Under Nicolae Ceauescu in Romania, weather reports were doctored so that the temperatures were not seen to rise above or fall below the levels which dictated that work must stop.[89]

Possession and use of copying machines was tightly controlled in order to hinder production and distribution of samizdat, illegal self-published books and magazines. Possession of even a single samizdat manuscript such as a book by Andrei Sinyavsky was a serious crime which might involve a visit from the KGB. Another outlet for works which did not find favor with the authorities was publishing abroad.

Amid declining car sales in 2020, France banned a television ad by a Dutch bike company, saying the ad "unfairly discredited the automobile industry".[90]

The Constitution of India guarantees freedom of expression, but places certain restrictions on content, with a view towards maintaining communal and religious harmony, given the history of communal tension in the nation.[91] According to the Information Technology Rules 2011, objectionable content includes anything that "threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states or public order".[92]

Iraq under Baathist Saddam Hussein had much the same techniques of press censorship as did Romania under Nicolae Ceauescu but with greater potential violence.[93]

During the GHQ occupation of Japan after WW2, any criticism of the Allies' pre-war policies, the SCAP, the Far East Military Tribunal, the inquiries against the United States and every direct and indirect references to the role played by the Allied High Command in drafting Japan's new constitution or to censorship of publications, movies, newspapers and magazines was subject to massive censorship, purges, media blackout.[94]

In the four years (September 1945-November 1949) since the CCD was active, 200 million mails, 136 million telegrams were opened, and telephones were tapped 800,000 times. Since no criticism of the occupying forces for crimes such as the dropping of the atomic bomb, rape and robbery by US soldiers was allowed, a strict check was carried out. Those who got caught were put on a blacklist called the watchlist, and the persons and the organizations to which they belonged were investigated in detail, which made it easier to dismiss or arrest the "disturbing molecule".[95]

Under subsection 48(3) and (4) of the Penang Islamic Religious Administration Enactment 2004, non-Muslims in Malaysia are penalized for using the following words, or to write or publish them, in any form, version or translation in any language or for use in any publicity material in any medium:"Allah", "Firman Allah", "Ulama", "Hadith", "Ibadah", "Kaabah", "Qadhi'", "Illahi", "Wahyu", "Mubaligh", "Syariah", "Qiblat", "Haji", "Mufti", "Rasul", "Iman", "Dakwah", "Wali", "Fatwa", "Imam", "Nabi", "Sheikh", "Khutbah", "Tabligh", "Akhirat", "Azan", "Al Quran", "As Sunnah", "Auliya'", "Karamah", "False Moon God", "Syahadah", "Baitullah", "Musolla", "Zakat Fitrah", "Hajjah", "Taqwa" and "Soleh".[96][97][98]

According to Christian Mihr, executive director of Reporters Without Borders, "censorship in Serbia is neither direct nor transparent, but is easy to prove."[99] According to Mihr there are numerous examples of censorship and self-censorship in Serbia [100] According to Mihr, Serbian prime minister Aleksandar Vui has proved "very sensitive to criticism, even on critical questions," as was the case with Natalija Miletic, correspondent for Deutsche Welle Radio, who questioned him in Berlin about the media situation in Serbia and about allegations that some ministers in the Serbian government had plagiarized their diplomas, and who later received threats and offensive articles on the Serbian press.[100]

Multiple news outlets have accused Vui of anti-democratic strongman tendencies.[101][102][103][104][105] In July 2014, journalists associations were concerned about the freedom of the media in Serbia, in which Vui came under criticism.[106][107]

In September 2015 five members of United States Congress (Edie Bernice Johnson, Carlos Curbelo, Scott Perry, Adam Kinzinger, and Zoe Lofgren) have informed Vice President of the United States Joseph Biden that Aleksandar's brother, Andrej Vui, is leading a group responsible for deteriorating media freedom in Serbia.[108]

In the Republic of Singapore, Section 33 of the Films Act originally banned the making, distribution and exhibition of "party political films", at pain of a fine not exceeding $100,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.[109] The Act further defines a "party political film" as any film or video

In 2001, the short documentary called A Vision of Persistence on opposition politician J. B. Jeyaretnam was also banned for being a "party political film". The makers of the documentary, all lecturers at the Ngee Ann Polytechnic, later submitted written apologies and withdrew the documentary from being screened at the 2001 Singapore International Film Festival in April, having been told they could be charged in court.[110] Another short documentary called Singapore Rebel by Martyn See, which documented Singapore Democratic Party leader Dr Chee Soon Juan's acts of civil disobedience, was banned from the 2005 Singapore International Film Festival on the same grounds and See is being investigated for possible violations of the Films Act.[111]

This law, however, is often disregarded when such political films are made supporting the ruling People's Action Party (PAP). Channel NewsAsia's five-part documentary series on Singapore's PAP ministers in 2005, for example, was not considered a party political film.[112]

Exceptions are also made when political films are made concerning political parties of other nations. Films such as Michael Moore's 2004 documentary Fahrenheit 911 are thus allowed to screen regardless of the law.[113]

Since March 2009, the Films Act has been amended to allow party political films as long as they were deemed factual and objective by a consultative committee. Some months later, this committee lifted the ban on Singapore Rebel.[114]

Independent journalism did not exist in the Soviet Union until Mikhail Gorbachev became its leader; all reporting was directed by the Communist Party or related organizations. Pravda, the predominant newspaper in the Soviet Union, had a monopoly. Foreign newspapers were available only if they were published by communist parties sympathetic to the Soviet Union.

Online access to all language versions of Wikipedia was blocked in Turkey on 29 April 2017 by Erdoan's government.[115]

In the United States, censorship occurs through books, film festivals, politics, and public schools.[116] See banned books for more information. Additionally, critics of campaign finance reform in the United States say this reform imposes widespread restrictions on political speech.[117][118]

In 1973, a military coup took power in Uruguay, and the State practiced censorship. For example, writer Eduardo Galeano was imprisoned and later was forced to flee. His book Open Veins of Latin America was banned by the right-wing military government, not only in Uruguay, but also in Chile and Argentina.[119]

Related articles

Freedoms

Visit link:

Censorship - Wikipedia

Censorship on social media? It’s not what you think – CBS News

Posted on by

Watch the newCBS Reportsdocumentary, "Speaking Frankly | Censorship," in the video player above.

Musician Joy Villa's red carpet dresses at the past three years' Grammy Awards were embellished with pro-Trump messages that cemented her as an outspoken darling of the conservative movement. With over 500,000 followers across Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, Villa refers to her social media community as her "Joy Tribe," and a few years ago she enlisted them to help wage a public battle against what she claimed was YouTube's attempt to censor her.

"I had released my 'Make America Great Again" music video on YouTube, and within a few hours it got taken down by YouTube," Villa told CBS Reports. "I took it to the rest of my social media. I told my fans: 'Hey listen, YouTube is censoring me. This is unfair censorship.'"

Villa saw it as part of a pattern of social media companies trying to shut down conservative voices an accusation that many other like-minded users, including President Trump himself, have leveled against Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter in recent years.

But those who study the tech industry's practices say that deciding what content stays up, and what comes down, has nothing to do with "censorship.""There is this problem in the United States that when we talk about free speech, we often misunderstand it," said Henry Fernandez, co-chair of Change the Terms, a coalition of organizations that work to reduce hate online.

"The First Amendment is very specific: It protects all of us as Americans from the government limiting our speech," he explained. "And so when people talk about, 'Well, if I get kicked off of Facebook, that's an attack on my free speech or on my First Amendment right' that's just not true. The companies have the ability to decide what speech they will allow. They're not the government."

A YouTube spokesperson said Villa's video wasn't flagged over something she said, but due to a privacy complaint. Villa disputed that, but once she blurred out the face of someone who didn't want to be seen in the video, YouTube put it back online, and her video remains visible on the platform today.

"At YouTube, we've always had policies that lay out what can and can't be posted. Our policies have no notion of political affiliation or party, and we enforce them consistently regardless of who the uploader is," said YouTube spokesperson Alex Joseph.

While Villa and others on the right have been vocal about their complaints, activists on the opposite side of the political spectrum say their online speech frequently ends up being quashed for reasons that have gotten far less attention.

Carolyn Wysinger, an activist who provided Facebook feedback and guidance about minority users' experience on the platform, told CBS Reports that implicit bias is a problem that permeates content moderation decisions at most social media platforms.

"In the community standards, white men are a protected class, the same as a black trans woman is. The community standards does not take into account the homophobia, and the violence, and how all those things intersect. It takes all of them as individual things that need to be protected," said Wysinger.

The artificial intelligence tools that automate the process of moderating and enforcing community standards on the sites don't recognize the intent or background of those doing the posting.

For instance, Wysinger said, "I have been flagged for using imagery of lynching. ... I have been flagged for violent content when showing images about racism and about transphobia."

According to the platforms' recent transparency reports, from April to June 2020, nearly 95% of comments flagged as hate speech on Facebook were detected by AI; and on YouTube 99.2% of comments removed for violating Community Standards were flagged by AI.

"That means you're putting these community standards in place and you have these bots who are just looking for certain specific things. It's automated. It doesn't have the ability for nuanced decision-making in regards to this," said Wysinger.

Biases can be built into the algorithms by the programmers who designed them, even if it's unintentional.

"Unfortunately tech is made up of a homogenous group, mostly White and Asian males, and so what happens is the opinions, the experiences that go into this decision-making are reflective of a majority group. And so people from different backgrounds Black, Latino, different religions, conservative, liberal don't have the accurate representation that they would if these companies were more diverse," said Mark Luckie, a digital strategist who previously worked at Twitter, Reddit and Facebook.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has said he believes the platform "should enable as much expression as possible," and that social media companies "shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online."

Nonetheless, a recent Pew Research Center survey found that nearly three-quarters of U.S. adults believe social media sites intentionally censor political viewpoints. In the last two years, two congressional hearings have focused on the question of tech censorship.

"We hear that there is an anti-conservative bias on the part of Facebook or other platforms because conservatives keep saying that," said Susan Benesch, executive director of the Dangerous Speech Project, an organization based in Washington D.C. that has advised Facebook, Twitter, Google and other internet companies on how to diminish harmful content online while protecting freedom of speech.

But she adds, "I would be surprised if that were the case in part because on most days the most popular, most visited groups on Facebook and pages on Facebook are very conservative ones."

She said she also finds it interesting that "many conservatives or ultra-conservatives complain that the platforms have a bias against them at the same time as Black Lives Matter activists feel that the platforms are disproportionately taking down their content."

A 2019review of over 400 political pages on Facebook, conducted by the left-leaning media watchdog Media Matters, found conservative pages performed about equally as well as liberal ones.

But reliable data on the subject is scarce, and social media platforms are largely secretive about how they make decisions on content moderation.

Amid ongoing criticism, Facebook commissioned an independent review, headed by former Republican Senator Jon Kyl, to investigate accusations of anti-conservative bias. Kyl's 2019report detailed recommendations to improve transparency, and Facebook agreed to create an oversight board for content removal decisions. Facebook said it "would continue to examine, and where necessary adjust, our own policies and practices in the future."

According to Fernandez, the focus should be on requiring tech companies to publicly reveal their moderation rules and tactics.

Benesch points out, "We have virtually zero oversight regarding take-down, so in truth content moderation is more complicated than just take it down or leave it up," referring to the fact that, to date, there has been little publicly available data provided by tech companies to allow an evaluation of the process.

"Protecting free expression while keeping people safe is a challenge that requires constant refinement and improvement. We work with external experts and affected communities around the world to develop our policies and have a global team dedicated to enforcing them," Facebook said in a statement.

And a statement from Twitter said, "Twitter does not use political ideology to make any decisions whether related to ranking content on our service or how we enforce our rules. In fact, from a simple business perspective and to serve the public conversation, Twitter is incentivized to keep all voices on the service."

Meanwhile users like Wysinger struggle with mixed feelings about social media sites that promise connection but sometimes leave them out in the cold.

"Whether we like it or not, we are all on Facebook and Instagram and Twitter all day long, and when they take us off the banned list, I don't know anyone who doesn't post a status on Facebook right away, after the ban is lifted: 'I'm back y'all!'," said Wysinger.

"It's like an abusive relationship, you can't even leave the abusive relationship because you become so used to and dependent on it."

Read the original:

Censorship on social media? It's not what you think - CBS News

What is Censorship? – National Coalition Against Censorship

Posted on by

What is censorship?

According to Websters Dictionary, to censor means to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable. The word censor originated in ancient Rome, where the government appointed officials to take the census and to supervise public morals. Censorship happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their political or moral values on others by suppressing words, images, or ideas that they find offensive.

A censor, traditionally, is an official whose job it is to examine literature, movies, or other forms of creative expression and to remove or ban anything she considers unsuitable. In this definition, censorship is something the government does. But censorship can also be accomplished very effectively by private groups.

Not all forms of censorship are illegal. When private individuals agitate to eliminate TV programs they dislike, or threaten to boycott the companies that support those programs with advertising dollars, they are certainly trying to censor artistic expression and interfere with the free speech of others. But their actions are perfectly legal; in fact, their protests are protected by the First Amendment right to freedom of speech.

Not even all government censorship is unlawful. For example, we still have laws against obscenity in art and entertainment. These laws allow the government to punish people for producing or disseminating material about sex, if a judge or jury thinks the material is sufficiently offensive and lacks any serious value.

What is the basis for free expression in the United States?The First Amendment (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances) protects against government restrictions on or interference with the content of speech. The First Amendment applies to Government at the national, state, and local level.

Why should I care about censorship?Understanding of First Amendment freedoms is fragile and imperiled by increasingly effective and sophisticated attacks. In numerous communities, people are determined to impose their own narrow views on everyone else, and censor what they do not approve.The First Amendment exists to protect speech and activities that are unpopularif only those ideas which were popular were protected, it wouldnt be needed. Limiting free speech is unAmericanwithout it, all our rights and liberties quickly disintegrate.Censorship is an assault on the rights of all of us. We must continue to fight for the freedom to read, to see, to know, and to think for ourselves.

How can I fight back against censors in my community?Heres what you can do to organize locally.

Where can I get further information on censorship?For more information about censorship, here is a list of NCACs resources, or drop us an e-mail here.

See the rest here:

What is Censorship? - National Coalition Against Censorship

Online Roulette – Play Roulette for Real Money [2023]

Posted on by

If you're looking for online roulette real money sites, there are plenty of these available online. Here are a few examples of these kinds of sites. That way, you can choose between the top three and try them out.

The first place you can play roulette online for real money is on Ignition Casino. There are a number of roulette options here, and you can get up to a fifteen hundred dollars for signing up. They also have live dealers as well.

Some of the most popular casino games available include options like "A Night with Cleo", the "777 Deluxe" as well as a number of others. If you want something more exotic they even have Baccarat.

In the event that you want to do something in addition to roulette, there are some poker options. You can look through the site to find details like their top table games and special poker features. There are anonymous tables, tournaments, and other options available here.

One particularly interesting feature on the site is that they have progressive jackpots. This means that the money goes up and up until someone wins it. And someone needs to win it eventually. That someone could absolutely be you.Examples of jackpots like this on the site include the Shopping Spree game, Bulletproof Babes, Dragons, Fruit Frenzy, Rain Dance, and others.

This is likely the best option for your first stop on your journey to find the site that works for you personally the best. You can make some real money here, so it's worth checking out.

Another excellent option for an online roulette for real money is at Bovada. This is an online roulette game real money is involved in it. It's a good choice for people from the USA.

The reason for this is that theres a number of different options at Bovada. For example, you can try sports options in between all of your casino options. They have a live dealer as well.

The site is easy to use, and it has an appeal to it. There are a number of revolving pictures right on the main site so that you know what events are currently available. This includes different roulette options and special events.

Its worth a shot to try these games out since many of them are highly colorful and could both be fun to play and make you some real money online.

This online casino is full of big online roulette signup bonuses where you can earn online money in real life. There are special codes on the site, so it's worth paying attention to these when you do roulette sign up in order to get as much as you can. It's a real choice to play online roulette for real money.

Its quite a colorful site, with many beautiful drawings of fairies, aliens, and other fanciful depictions. This means that you can enjoy yourself while you win. Games on the site include the Diamond Mine and Diamond Mine Deluxe, Jazz Time, Paydirt!, Rudolph's Revenge, Lion's Lair, Aztec's Treasure, Food Fight, Sevens and Stripes and others.

Each of these options has real online money jackpots. Many of them are as much as hundreds of thousands of dollars. The site has an easy to use interface, and you can sign up with one click. Its easy to both deposit and withdraws on the site, and they have real, live customer support.

There are also a number of safe and secure measures to make sure your money remains with you, just like all of these top three sites.

Overall, youll be in good hands with any of these top three sites. The key is to just dive in and try them out. You'll find that they are some of the best roulette options in the USA where you can play roulette online for real money.

Read the original post:

Online Roulette - Play Roulette for Real Money [2023]

Play 130+ Free Roulette Games in 2023 (No Sign-Up) – casino

Posted on by

There are two distinct types of bet you can make when playing online roulette inside and outside bets.

In roulette, an inside bet is where you put your chips on individual numbers inside the roulette grid. Because youre focusing on individual numbers, rather than any red number for example, the roulette odds are significantly reduced. However, with the higher risk comes a greater reward, so your payout would be more generous.

Putting your chips on a single number is called a straight-up bet, and this is the most common type of inside bet, paying out at 35:1 in European and American Roulette.

Outside bets are made by placing your bet on options outside of the numbered roulette grid. These bets increase your chances of winning on each spin, but pay out less than an inside bet would.

You can choose to bet on a grouping of numbers, such as the first 12, second 12, or third 12, or alternatively pick between 1-18 or 19-36. You can also choose to bet on all black or all red numbers, or decide between all odd and all even numbers.

Experiment with different combinations to suit your preference, and remember youre playing free online roulette, so its all for fun!

Read more:

Play 130+ Free Roulette Games in 2023 (No Sign-Up) - casino

Online Roulette for Real Money – Best 3 Casinos 2023

Posted on by

There are many casinos on the internet that allow users to spin the roulette wheel. If you're interested in playing online roulette for real money it can be very difficult to choose the option that is most suited to your needs, when it comes to online casino. Luckily, lots of people have searched and found where the best places to play American roulette online real money are so you do not have to do the heavy lifting yourself.

Ignition is one of the leading names in internet casinos, amongst all games, not just the game you're currently interested in. If you want to play roulette online for real money, this is going to be one of your very best bets. This is a website that offers many types of betting options to its players, in addition to allowing each user to play for free. You can place inside bets on specific numbers, outside bets on the area outside of the table. The website boasts many wonderful promotions, easy access to the withdrawal of your funds, as well as a dedicated customer support service team that is available at all hours of the day. Designed for US players, Ignition Casino is one of the top names in internet casinos. If you want to spin the roulette wheel, you can't go wrong choosing Ignition.

Cafe Casino is another one of the leading names in casinos, both on the internet and offline. Like many of the top names in casinos, they offer a wide variety of bonus promotions that are sure to increase your enjoyment of playing roulette, dedicated customer support ensuring that your playing experiences go as smoothly as possible, and then. many different variations of roulette to ensure that your online roulette real money game never gets old. Cafe has been in operation since the 1970s and ever since into breaking the online casino market, they have transferred their quality of casinos to the sphere of the world wide web as well. The games that are offered by this casino are some of the most professionally run in the entire sphere of internet gaming.

In comparison to established names such as Harrah's and Caesar, RoyalPanda is a relatively new upstart in the realm of internet gaming. However, despite being newer, RoyalPanda is every bit as worthwhile of a place to play roulette online real money as some of the more established options. Spinning the roulette wheel at RoyalPanda is every bit as rewarding as spinning it in a dedicated real-life setting. American Roulette is one of the hardest games to get right, yet, RoyalPanda are managing to perfect it in a very short amount of time. Like the more established places that let you play roulette online, RoyalPanda offers very competitive promotions, customer service that is dedicated and is always there for players and quick withdrawals, ensuring that the player is always able to access their money in very short order. It is very easy to find an online roulette game here, as there are always people playing.

Although it can be difficult to find the type of game that is the best suited for you, this is truly a casino that you can't go wrong recommending to anyone that is interested in this style of internet gaming. With this information, you should have no problem finding the type of casino that will provide you with the maximal joy and hopefully see to providing you with some of the greatest benefits within other areas as well. Have fun with your real money online roulette game!

Read the original:

Online Roulette for Real Money - Best 3 Casinos 2023

The Best Free Roulette Games Play Roulette Online Free!

Posted on by

If you're new to the game, you might assume theres not much choice when it comes to playing free roulette online. Well, you might be surprised at what you find! All the best casino portals offer different variations of the game includingAmerican,European, and even multiplayer variations, where you can actually play alongside other players in free roulette games.

To get access to gambling sites' free online roulette tables, just find an internet casino that you like and download the software. Just make sure you really can play without using cash at the site youve picked! Every now and then you might be prompted to play forreal moneybut most of the good casinos will never shut you out of free online roulette even if you never choose to play for real stakes. You can learn about how to play and types of roulette here.

Not sure where to begin to find the best free online casino sites? Start with us. We've found the best internet casinos to play at and you can play 100% free roulette online at all of them. The sites weve picked all offer:

A range of free roulette games withno downloads needed

Safe, secure & reliable banking - should you choose to play with real money

Great roulette gameplay, on mobile or desktop

Continue reading here:

The Best Free Roulette Games Play Roulette Online Free!

American Roulette Play Online Roulette for Free – Roulette Simulator

Posted on by

American Roulette as well as French and European are very popular among gamblers worldwide. Nowadays you dont have to travel anywhere searching a brick-and-mortar casino to gamble a roulette. It is much easier to visit an online gambling establishment because any of it has American Roulette!

Check also our American Roulette Simulator. You can play it right here for free, no deposit required.

Free American Roulette Simulator

So now you have it and ready to gamble. But let us say a couple of words about the American Roulette rules beforehand.

Secure

Licenced

Fast Withdrawals

Gamblers know American Roulette as the double-zero roulette. In 1800, some greedy establishments added the thirty-eighth sector to French Roulette00to get even more profit. Currently, the house edge in American Roulette for almost all bets is 5.26%. It is almost twice as much as the house edge in European Roulette. Strange, but many players like it like that and the game variation is popular.

We would not advise you American Roulette for real money, unless you want to say fast goodbye to your bankroll. However, such a high house edge does not discourage some gamblers from playing American Roulette it even increases the excitement level and attracts more and more fans in this game. Anyway, you can play our American Roulette Simulator absolutely free and without any limits, and you do not risk to lose real money.

All the numbers on the American Roulette wheel are distributed in accordance with a certain scheme: 0, 2, 14, 35, 23, 4, 16, 33, 21, 6, 18, 31, 19, 8, 12, 29, 25, 10, 27, 00, 1, 13, 36, 24, 3, 15, 34, 22, 5, 17, 32, 20, 7, 11, 30, 2, 9, 28.

So, American roulette has 38 sectors on the wheel. And in American roulette players have chips of their own colors: every player gets a set of certain color chips to differ from other players. It is convenient.

The American Roulette rules are quite simple and almost the same as in European Roulette. The dealer starts the game and spins the roulette wheel, then rolls a small metal ball on it. Meanwhile, players place their bets and wait until the ball stops at a slot. When the ball slows down, the dealer stops accepting bets and, after the ball stops, announces the winning slot. Winners get the payout, losers lose their bets.

As in any other roulette variation in order to win a player should guess which slot the ball stops. It is the universal roulette rule which applies also to our American Roulette Simulator.

Some casinos have the Surrender rule in American Roulette. According to the Surrender rule, a gambler lose only half of the even money bet if the ball stops on 0 or 00. The rule makes the house edge as 2.63% which is much better than the usual 5.26% for American Roulette.

Originally posted here:

American Roulette Play Online Roulette for Free - Roulette Simulator

Play Free Online Roulette Games (No Download) – Online Gambling

Posted on by

Can I play free roulette without signing up?

Yes, free roulette games are offered at many of our recommended online casinos with no need to sign up. You wont need to give out any personal or bank details if youre playing a free game, so its quick and easy to get started.

Theres no need to make a deposit before you start playing free online roulette as no real money changes hands in this game. However, if youd like to move on to playing real money roulette you will need to deposit funds into your online account, so its still worth checking out the banking options offered by your chosen casino when you start.

Free roulette games offer exactly the same fun, fast-paced gameplay as their real money counterparts. The difference is really in the prizes on offer. Free roulette is played just for the fun of it, whereas in real money roulette theres the additional thrill of potentially huge sums of money up for grabs.

Yes, youll be able to find a free version of almost any variation of roulette youre looking for at our recommended online casinos. Whether you prefer American, European, French or Multi-Ball roulette, weve got the best online casinos for you.

Sadly, no. In order to win real money, you need to bet real money. There are exceptions to the rule, perhaps with free bet bonuses that allow you to keep the winnings, but for the most part, free roulette games wont pay out real money.

Our team of expert reviewers has found the best online casinos offering free roulette. Each site offers something a little different, meaning that theres something for everyone.

More:

Play Free Online Roulette Games (No Download) - Online Gambling

World champion skier Kyle Smaine dies in avalanche at age 31

Posted on by

One year ago, Ilia Malinincame to the U.S. Championships as, largely, a 17-year-old unknown. He finished second to Nathan Chenin 2022 and was left off the three-man Olympic team due to his inexperience, a committee decision that lit a fire in him.

After the biggest year of change in U.S. figure skating in three decades, Malinin came to this weeks nationals in San Jose, California, as the headliner across all disciplines.

Though he fell on his quadruple Axel and doubled two other planned quads in Sundays free skate (the most ambitious program in history), he succeeded the absent Chen as national champion.

Malinin, the worlds second-ranked male singles skater, still landed two clean quads in Fridays short program and three more Sunday. He totaled 287.74 points and prevailed by 10.43 over two-time Olympian Jason Brown, a bridge between the Chen and Malinin eras.

This wasnt the skate that I wanted, said Malinin, who was bidding to become the second man to land six quads in one program after Chen. The Virginia chalked up the flaws at least partially to putting more recent practice time into his short program, which he skated clean on Friday after errors in previous competitions.

FIGURE SKATING NATIONALS: Full Results

Brown, a 28-year-old competing for the first time since placing sixth at the Olympics, became the oldest male singles skater to finish in the top three at nationals since Jeremy Abbottwon the last of his four titles in 2014. As usual, he didnt attempt a quad but had the highest artistic score by 9.41 points.

Browns seven total top-three finishes at nationals tie him with Chen,Michael Weiss,Brian Boitano, David JenkinsandDick Buttonfor the second-most in mens singles since World War II, trailing only Todd Eldredges andHayes Jenkins eight.

Im not saying its super old, but I cant train the way I used to, Brown said after Fridays short program. What Ilia is doing and the way he is pushing the sport is outstanding and incredible to watch. I cannot keep up.

Andrew Torgashev took bronze, winning the free skate with one quad and all clean jumps. Torgashev, who competed at nationals for the first time since placing fifth in 2020 at age 18, will likely round out the three-man world team.

JapansShoma Unowill likely be the favorite at worlds. He won last years world title, when Malinin admittedly cracked under pressure in the free skate after a fourth-place short program and ended up ninth.

That was before Malinin became the first person to land a quad Axel in competition. That was before Malinin became thestory of the figure skating world this fall. That was before Malinin took over the American throne from Chen, who is studying at Yale and not expected to return to competition.

Malinins next step is to grab another label that Chen long held: best in the world. To do that, he must be better than he was on Sunday.

You always learn from your experiences, and theres always still the rest of the season to come, he said. I just have to be prepared and prepare a little bit extra so that doesnt happen again.

OlympicTalk is on Apple News. Favorite us!

Read more:

World champion skier Kyle Smaine dies in avalanche at age 31

Rio de Janeiro 2016 Olympic Games | History, Medals, & Facts

Posted on by

Rio de Janeiro 2016 Olympic Games, athletic festival held in Rio de Janeiro that took place August 521, 2016. The Rio Games were the 28th occurrence of the modern Olympic Games. The event marked the first time that either the Summer or the Winter Olympics was held in South America.

Rio was awarded the Games by the International Olympic Committee in 2009 over bids from Chicago, Madrid, and Tokyo. The buildup to the Rio Games was beset by more problems than any other recent Olympiad. Like many 21st-century Games, particularly the 2014 Sochi Games, the Rio Olympics were plagued by massive cost overruns and construction that ran far behind schedule. Athletes, coaches, and tourists were wary of traveling to the crime-riddled city, where, in addition, an outbreak of the Zika virus led to the withdrawal of a number of prominent athletes, including golfers Rory McIlroy and Jordan Spieth. The waterways of the city were filled with debris and so polluted that the World Health Organization suggested that athletes using the open waters should avoid swallowing it, cover any exposed cuts with waterproof bandages, and shower as soon as they leave the site. Fewer than 50 days before the Games started, the state of Rio de Janeiro declared a state of public calamity, which gave authorities the ability to ration essential public services and made the state eligible for federal emergency funds. Moreover, the Petrobras scandal plunged the Brazilian economy into a recession in the run-up to the Games.

Despite all of these troubles, the Rio Games started on time and there were few significant problems over the course of the two weeks. The Games featured a new-record 205 participating national Olympic committees, with over 11,000 athletes competing in 42 sports. Notable new sports that were added for the Rio Games were golf and rugby sevens. The Rio Olympics also featured the debut of a Refugee Team made up of 10 athletes from various war-torn countries who had no permanent new home at the start of the Games.

Like the previous two iterations, the Rio Olympics were highlighted by the achievements of the greatest Olympian of all time, U.S. swimmer Michael Phelps, and the greatest sprinter in Olympic history, Jamaicas Usain Bolt. After returning from a short-lived retirement, Phelps expanded his Olympic record totals for overall medals (28) and gold medals (23). On the track, Bolt won the 100-metre and 200-metre races for the third consecutive Olympic Games, becoming the first person to accomplish that feat. He also won a gold as a member of Jamaicas 4 100-metre relay team, which temporarily gave him three golds in three straight Olympicsbefore the January 2017 revelation of a failed drug test by one of his 2008 relay teammates led to the earlier relay medal being stripped. Nevertheless, Bolts six total individual sprint Olympic golds still solidified his claim as the fastest man in history.

Phelps was not the only American swimmer to dominate the Rio pool. Katie Ledecky won four gold medals (the 200-, 400-, and 800-metre freestyle and the 4 200-metre relay) and one silver (4 100-metre freestyle relay). Her performance in the 800-metre final was one of the most impressive in Olympic swimming history, as she took almost two seconds off the previous world-record time and finished more than 11 seconds faster than the silver medalist. Fellow U.S. swimmer Simone Manuel won two golds and two silvers, and her win in the 100-metre freestyle made her the first African American woman to win an individual swimming gold. Americans also led the way in the womens gymnastics events, as Simone Biles became the first U.S. womanand just the fifth female everto capture four gymnastics golds at a single Games (all-around, floor exercise, vault, and team). Biless fourth gold in the team event was also significant in that the American team won with the largest margin of victory (8.209 points) in that competition since the open-ended scoring system began 2006.

In other events, the home Brazilian mens football (soccer) team won the first Olympic gold medal in the football-mad countrys history on a dramatic penalty kick in the final by star forward Neymar. The Fiji rugby sevens team won the first gold medal in that countrys history, fittingly in Fijis most popular sport, which led to the declaration of a celebratory public holiday in the country. Two Britons also had historic performances at the Rio Games: distance runner Mo Farah repeated as Olympic champion in the 5,000-metre and 10,000-metre races, becoming the second man (after Lasse Virn) to do so, and cyclist Bradley Wiggins won gold as a member of the mens pursuit team, giving him eight career Olympic medals, the most in his countrys history.

The Rio de Janeiro Olympics final medal rankings are provided in the table.

Continued here:

Rio de Janeiro 2016 Olympic Games | History, Medals, & Facts