Georgia School District Inadvertently Begins Teaching Lessons In First Amendment Protections After Viral Photo – Techdirt

from the not-how-this-works dept

There's this dumb but persistent meme in American culture that somehow the First Amendment simply doesn't exist within the walls of a public school district. This is patently false. What is true is that there have been very famous court cases that have determined that speech rights for students at school may be slightly curtailed and must face tests over "substantial disruption" of the speech in question in order to have it limited. Named after the plaintiff in that cited case, the "Tinker test" essentially demands that schools not simply dislike a student's speech or the discomfort that comes from it, but instead must be able to demonstrate that such speech is disruptive to the school and students broadly. The facts of that case, for instance, dealt with students being suspended for wearing anti-war armbands. Those suspensions were seen as a violation of the students' First Amendment rights, because obviously.

Subsequent cases, such as Morse v. Frederick, have very slightly and narrowly expanded the limitations on speech within schools. In this case, for instance, a student's speech encouraging the use of illegal drugs was found to be a valid target for school punishment. But, narrow or not, some analysis has worried that cases like this could be used to expand the curtailing of student speech:

By contrast, the Eleventh Circuit extended Morse's rationale about illegal drugs to the context of student speech that is "construed as a threat of school violence". Boim, 494 F.3d at 984 (upholding the suspension of a high school student for a story labeled as a "dream" in which she described shooting her math teacher). Moreover, the court concluded that Morse supports the idea that student speech can be regulated where "[in] a school administrator's professional observation ... certain expressions [of student speech] have led to, and therefore could lead to, an unhealthy and potentially unsafe learning environment".

Disallowing student speech that amounts to threats of violence indeed seems to make sense. That being said, speaking of "an unhealthy and potentially unsafe learning environment":

You'd be forgiven if you thought that picture was taken from the Paulding County high school six months ago, with so few masks. But it wasn't. Instead, it was taken on August 4th, the first day back to school for Paulding County. Whatever your thoughts on whether and how schools should be opening, you really need to go read that entire article from BuzzFeed. The overwhelming impression left is that Paulding County appears to have reopened its schools in as callous and cavalier manner possible while still staying just inside government guidelines. Masks? Sure, if you want, but they're optional. Distancing? Of course, but we can't really enforce it in any meaningful way. And overall safety?

North Paulding teachers said they too felt they had no choice but to show up to work, even after a staff member texted colleagues saying she had tested positive for the virus. The staffer had attended planning sessions while exhibiting symptoms, one teacher said.

She did not attend school after testing positive. But teachers have heard nothing from the school, they said, which wont confirm that staff members have tested positive, citing privacy concerns.

The Paulding County School Superintendent, Brian Otott, began reaching out to parents to reassure them that what they saw in the viral photo going around Twitter was fine, just fine. It lacked context, you see. Context, one presumes, is another word for safety. Or, if we are to believe Otott, the context is essentially: yes, this is totally happening, but the state said we can operate this way.

Otott claimed in his letter that the pictures were taken out of context to criticize the schools reopening, saying that the school of more than 2,000 students will look like the images that circulated for brief periods during the day. The conditions were permissible under the Georgia Department of Educations health recommendations, he said.

This from the same state that has the 6th highest number of total COVID-19 cases, the 11th most total cases per capita, the 4th most total new cases in the last week, and the 6th most new cases per capita in the last week. So, you know, not the state doing the best job in the country by a long shot at containing outbreaks of this virus.

Which perhaps makes sense, actually, since Otott seems chiefly interested in containing not the virus in his school halls, but rather any criticism of his district. Remember that viral photo that kicked off this discussion? Well...

At least two students say they have been suspended at North Paulding High School in Georgia for posting photos of crowded hallways that went viral on Twitter.

The photos show students packed into hallways between classes, not appearing to practice social distancing and with few masks visible, amid the coronavirus panic. They went viral after being shared by the account @Freeyourmindkid.

Those suspensions being handed out are five day suspensions and are being levied at violations of school rules around using cell phone cameras without permission. A couple of things to say about that.

First, the removal of a student from a School-sanctioned petri dish of a novel coronavirus feels odd as a punishment. Were it not for the intentions of the Superintendent, it would be damn near heroic as an attempt to save these kids from getting sick.

Second, refer back to my two paragraph throat-clearing above. This isn't constitutional. Nothing about the students sharing their concerns amounts to a disruption of school, or anything else that would qualify this protected speech for scholastic punishment. Taking a fearful 15 year old student and punishing him or her for their fear is beyond reproach. And, about those school rules for cell phones:

On Wednesday, an intercom announcement at the school from principal Gabe Carmona said any student found criticizing the school on social media could face discipline.

Again, plainly unconstitutional. One wonders why anyone should have faith in a school administration that isn't even educated enough on the rights of its own students to keep from ignorantly broadcasting its idiocy over school intercoms. Why are these people even allowed to teach children in the best of times, never mind during a pandemic as these kids get herded like cattle to the slaughter through school halls?

While I guess we'll all get to see what happens in this idiotic school district now, and maybe even learn some lessons from what occurs, I'm generally not of the opinion that we should treat our own children like they were the subjects of some kind of bizarre modern-day Tuskegee test.

Filed Under: 1st amendment, free speech, georgia, paulding county, photos, school reopenings, students, suspensionsCompanies: north paulding hs

Read the original:

Georgia School District Inadvertently Begins Teaching Lessons In First Amendment Protections After Viral Photo - Techdirt

Supreme Court placed its thumb on Idaho’s side of the scale – Lewiston Morning Tribune

Appellate court decisions result in winners and losers in any specific case, but the issues involved often are worked through murky gray areas. Consider for example the July 30 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Little v. Reclaim Idaho.

The background is fairly well known in Idaho. The group Reclaim Idaho has been trying to promote an Invest in Idaho tax and schools initiative for the November election ballot. When the pandemic hit and Gov. Brad Littles stay at home order was issued, its petition-gathering which in the normal process has to be done face to face was blocked, which meant a part of Idahos election process also was blocked.

That point, essentially an argument over voting civil rights, went to federal court. Idaho U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill ordered that the state either simply place the proposed initiative on the ballot or allow the group to collect the signatures electronically. The state appealed, and the case with startling speed went to the U.S. Supreme Court. On a 4-2 decision, the court sided with the state, ordering a stay of the Winmill decision.

The Supreme Court, as often happens, didnt go to the center of the issue the voters-rights matter and it did not specifically reverse the Winmill decision, though it may have felt that way. But whats there is worth considering.

First, the majority decision (written by Chief Justice John Roberts) pointed out that, oddly enough, different federal courts have established different guidelines for what states can and cant do in initiative procedures (one reason the high court might have granted certiorari permission to bring this case to it). It said: The States depend on clear and administrable guidelines from the courts. Yet the Circuits diverge in fundamental respects when presented with challenges to the sort of state laws at issue here. According to the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, the First Amendment requires scrutiny of the interests of the State whenever a neutral, procedural regulation inhibits a persons ability to place an initiative on the ballot. ... Other Circuits, by contrast, have held that regulations that may make the initiative process more challenging do not implicate the First Amendment so long as the State does not restrict political discussion or petition circulation.

The Supreme Court didnt really land on this turf in its Idaho decision, but the majority did focus on the right of the state more than the right of the initiative proponent: The District Court did not accord sufficient weight to the States discretionary judgments about how to prioritize limited state resources across the election system as a whole.

Thats not an unreasonable point, but it leaves a massive gap in how to review something like this. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor zeroed in on balancing harms to stay applicant against harms to respondent in other words, balancing the interests of the state and the initiative backers, rather than simply disregarding the interests of the backers. She acknowledged that allowing the electronic signature would be a burden on the state and counties and it would be but she argued it should be considered in context.

Putting a still finer point on it: The stay granted today puts a halt to their signature-collection efforts, meaning that even if respondents ultimately prevail on appeal, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to collect enough qualifying signatures by any reasonable deadline for the November ballot. In other words, the delay occasioned by this Courts stay likely dooms to mootness respondents First Amendment claims before any appellate court has had the chance to consider their merits (and, indeed, before this Court has had the chance to consider any potential petition for certiorari).

So in balancing the rights of a state government against those of its voters, the Supreme Courts majority seems to be putting its thumb on the states side of the scale. That may be worth giving some careful thought when you look, as historically we long have, to the nations highest court as a protector of the rights of the American people.

See original here:

Supreme Court placed its thumb on Idaho's side of the scale - Lewiston Morning Tribune

RCFP: Trump campaign’s nondisclosure agreements are unenforceable – Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

Amicus brief filed by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 16 media organizations

Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Date Filed: Aug. 6, 2020

Background: In June, Jessica Denson, a former staffer for Donald J. Trumps 2016 presidential campaign, filed a class-action lawsuit against the campaign to nullify the nondisclosure agreement each staffer was required to sign.

Densons attorneys argue that the nondisclosure agreement is overly broad and indefinite, running contrary to established New York public policy. They also claim it violates the First Amendment by requiring a waiver of the right to engage in political speech.

In a motion for summary judgment, Densons attorneys asked the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to declare the Trump campaigns form nondisclosure agreement void and unenforceable.

Our Position: The district court should grant summary judgment to the current and former Trump campaign staffers who have signed the challenged nondisclosure agreement and hold that the nondisclosure agreement is void and unenforceable.

Quote: When political campaigns require campaign staff to sign NDAs, they chill staff members speech and prevent the public from learning vital information about candidates for political office.

Related: Earlier this year, the Reporters Committee filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Mary Trumps efforts to publish a book about her uncle, President Donald Trump. The brief argued that a confidentiality agreement Mary Trump had signed 19 years earlier is unenforceable because it runs contrary to established public policy and the First Amendment.

In 2019, a federal appeals court ruled that Baltimores practice of forcing victims in police misconduct cases to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to settle is unconstitutional. The Reporters Committee and 19 media organizations had filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, arguing that the routine practice of using nondisclosure agreements silences the victims in these cases, restricting the news medias ability to report on police misconduct allegations.

Original post:

RCFP: Trump campaign's nondisclosure agreements are unenforceable - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

For Big Tech, Breaking Up May Not Be Hard To Do – Chief Executive Group

Heres a fun fact: This exact week of August 1962, Neil Sedekas Breaking Up is Hard to Do landed in the #1 spot ofBillboards Hot 100. Thanks to last weeks Congressional antitrust hearings, this bit of trivia is suddenly ironic. Could the once unthinkablebreaking up the largest, most powerful technology corporations in the worldactually not be so hard to do?

Given the current political climate, and what I saw last week, Id say yes.

This scenario, of course, is the ultimate nightmare for the CEOs who run Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google. For Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sunder Pichai, comfortably beaming into the remote inquiry (using Cisco WebEx, their competitors system), it has long loomed as a potential Black Swan event, but seldom has it seemed a real possibility. Perhaps thats why, despite their own brilliance, stellar business track records, platoons of attorneys, 1.4 million documents, 400 hours of organizing meetings, and 20 press briefings, none of them seemed truly prepared for what they faced last week.

Unlike the stumbling, bumbling Q&As of the past that did little but assure the American people that their representatives in Washington had zero grasp of technology, this time lawmakersfrom both partiescame prepared. They alleged a gamut of abuses of power by Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Googlesquashing competitors, undermining innovation, price discrimination, required tie-ins of across bundled businesses, covert consumer data harvesting, privacy violations and foreign power election interference, irresponsible but remunerative biased gateways to content such as hate speechthe list goes on and on.

Most worrisome for Big Tech, some of the complaints focused on the consequences to consumers of allegedly monopolistic behavior such as predatory pricing or buying out major competitors to reduce consumer choice and later drive up price, potentially classic violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 or potential restraint of trade issues covered by the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, (such as Amazons supposed access barriers to AT&Ts HBO Max content, and Apples prohibitively-priced $46 billion App Store business).

Denying all such allegations, the Tech Titans survived the battle, but they may be losing the long war. None of them did much to build credibility in the publics eyes, and all of them are certain to face more scrutiny in the years ahead. Regardless of who takes control of the White House and Congress next year, theyll face the most populist political environment in decades. Gaudy earnings and evasive testimony? Hardly assets if the nation enters a second Great Recession and the national mood turns even darker.

It was a similar atmosphere in the late 19th Century, when the Republican Teddy Roosevelt Administration pioneered antitrust prosecution, culminating in the 1911 breakup of John D. Rockefellers Standard Oil. The charges? The misused power they obtained frompurchasing its competitors andusing its size to drive benefits not available to smaller companies such as discount rates from railroads.

The 1984 breakup of the originalAT&T into 8 regional operating companies as well as separate manufacturing and research businesses seemed unthinkable at the time (it was designed as a legal monopoly in 1885). But it happened,with checkered success, sparking thecreation of new businesses such as Cisco and Apple, which would not have been possible under the original structure.

Even past clearance is not shield.For example, P&G was ordered to divest Clorox in 1960years after FTC clearance in 1957.Similarly, while regulators cleared the Comcast/NBC merger in 2011, creatinga$30 billion media behemoth that controls both how television shows and movies are made and how they are delivered. Yet, six years later, the anti-trust division of the Trump Administrations Department of Justicessued to break up the $85 merger of AT&T and TimeWarner,a plan with identical market implications, despite an antitrust chief whose career publications held the opposite positions before his political appointment.

Rather than the more current concern over horizontal integration of former competitors, this breakup move was built upon the1938 and 1948 government action against Paramount Pictures, Twentieth Century-Fox, Lowes, RKO, Warner Bros., Columbia Pictures, Universal and United Artists which separated production and distribution of films. After two costly years of appeals, theAT&T/TimeWarner deal was ultimately cleared by courts.

Its exactly this kind of activist atmosphere the Tech Titans should fear, an atmosphere where anything can happen. A world in which, for instance, the Trump Administration unilaterally threatens to shut down the hugely popular TikTok app over alleged national security risks, pushing them into the arms of Microsoftand no one really blinks an eye. Strange days indeed.

Watching the leaders of Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple testify last week, I was reminded of what one CEO told me forty two years ago while I was researching aHarvard Business Reviewarticle examining why employees at companies conspired to fix prices, despite the well-known risks and painful penalties.

We point out that anticompetitive practices hurt the companys ethical standards, public image, internal morale, and earnings, he said. Yet we wind up in trouble continually You begin to wonder about the intelligence of these people. Either they dont listen or theyre just plain stupid.

Link:

For Big Tech, Breaking Up May Not Be Hard To Do - Chief Executive Group

Move Over Big Tech; This Week Is All About Blue Chips – Yahoo Finance

Following last week's waterfall of quarterly tech reports, the earnings season continues this week with blue chips leading the way, one being Walt Disney Co(NYSE: DIS) reporting later today. But we also see the earnings of pioneers such as Roku Inc(NASDAQ: ROKU), Nikola (NASDAQ: NKLA) and newly public companies such as Virgin Galactic (NYSE: SPCE), Uber Technologies Inc.(NYSE: UBER) and Beyond Meat (NASDAQ: BYND).

Nikola Corporation, the maker of battery-electric and hydrogen powered vehicles will report its first quarter since its June listing. Despite not having sold a single vehicle yet, its company's market capitalization already exceeded $10.8 billion last Friday.

The Clorox Company (NYSE: CLX) reported Monday and posted the highest sales growth the company has seen in its modern history. With a 24% increase in organic sales last quarter and a 10% increase in organic sales in its latest fiscal year, it followed its peer personal care companies including Kimberly-Clark Corporation (NYSE: KMB), Colgate-Palmolive (NYSE: CL) and The Procter & Gamble Company (NYSE: PG) that already reported strong results as home goods and personal health-care products are still enjoying a high level of demand.

Troubled travel companies crushed by the pandemic are also set to report, including Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings (NYSE: NCLH) and Wynn Resorts Limited (NASDAQ: WYNN). Just like airlines, these companies struggled to readjust their operations and slash costs as quickly as possible to be able to survive the severe reduction in demand. Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc (NYSE: HLT) and TripAdvisor Inc (NASDAQ: TRIP) are also set for a dismal performance as quarantine and travel restrictions are likely to have significantly impacted their top lines.

Pharmaceutical companies rank highly on our list these days and a few important players are also set to report this week. Regeneron Pharmaceutical (NASDAQ: REGN) just revealed it signed a $450 million contract with the U.S. government for its anti-coronavirus cocktail.Mylan Inc (NASDAQ: MYL) is a stock with a strong history of beating estimates and as it recently rolled out the branding for its giant generics combo that is being developed with Pfizer Inc (NYSE: PFE), it seems well-positioned to continue that trend. Although their merger is not official yet, it was approved by its shareholders on June 30th. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (NYSE: BMY), a biopharmaceutical giant, is expected to report a year-over-year increase in earnings on higher revenues for its quarter that ended in June.

On Thursday, we also have some very interesting players to look forward to such as Datadog Inc (NASDAQ: DDOG). For the quarter, the company expects to report a break-even at the very least, with revenues in the range between $134 million and $136 million. Management warned that coronavirus-led disruptions are expected to have hurt net retention rate and new customer additions as well as caused delays in completing deals. But Datadog's potential remains intact in any scenario. Moreover, its growing international presence is likely to have benefited its performance during the quarter.

We are far from being out of the woods, but each week we are getting closer to leaving the pandemic and the resulting economic crisis behind us. This week will also provide us with significant insights on how to live in a COVID-19 reality that has turned our world upside down.

This article is not a press release and is contributed by a verified independent journalist for IAMNewswire. It should not be construed as investment advice at any time please read the full disclosure. IAM Newswire does not hold any position in the mentioned companies. Press Releases If you are looking for full Press release distribution contact: press@iamnewswire.com Contributors IAM Newswire accepts pitches. If you're interested in becoming an IAM journalist contact: contributors@iamnewswire.com

The post Last Week Was About Big Tech, This Week Is About Bluechips appeared first on IAM Newswire.

Photo by Carlos Muza on Unsplash

See more from Benzinga

2020 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Follow this link:

Move Over Big Tech; This Week Is All About Blue Chips - Yahoo Finance

Investors got it right piling into Big Tech, but might need new catalysts to power stocks in August – CNBC

Combo of Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos, Sundar Pichai

Getty Images (L) | Reuters (C) | Getty Images (R)

Financial markets enter August registering an array of extremes and at something of a "Now what?" moment.

The Nasdaq and gold at or just about at record highs, Treasury yields scraping all-time lows and the U.S. Dollar index sliding to a two-year trough, just as the bulk of earnings season is through, a tougher seasonal period arrives, and some excesses start to surface in investor behavior.

Some can't resist calling this an "Everything Rally" floated by a flagrantly easy Fed and cheapening of the dollar, but the action is more nuanced than that on careful review. Here are few things we learned last month that shape the set-up for the rest of the summer and beyond:

The issue now is just how much more can be asked of this stock cohort at this stage. Apple gained 10% Friday after its results but Amazon failed to rise even 4% and sits below its July high. A faint hint that most of the stupendous business performance is largely in these stocks by now? The Nasdaq 100, too, has surrendered a couple percentage points of outperformance versus the firm but range-bound S&P 500 over the past few weeks.

This group owes investors nothing after its run, the stocks are near 20-year valuation highs and last week there were signs of capitulation buying by holdouts after the Big Four CEOs survived tough Congressional hearings and the glittering earnings hit the tape.

The underpinnings of the Big Tech strength remain - and likely will unless bond yields surge or an economic acceleration seems underway but it's unclear if their two-week cooldown was enough to refresh this group for another sustained advance.

In this way, the market continues to act as if big-money investors are not overcommitted to equities, meaning there is no quick-triggered selling that would turn routine pullbacks into self-reinforcing slides.

For sure, the breadth of the market has not always been impressive, and of course the economy has backslid in recent weeks with the lapse of enhanced unemployment payments, Covid-case surges and resulting consumer caution.

But Friday was a good example of how traders must remain aware of "upside risks." Reports that Democrats and the White House would keep talking about a new fiscal deal this weekend were joined by others saying Microsoft might buy TikTok from its Chinese owner and private-equity firms are looking to acquire Kansas City Southern.

Individually not big market drivers but if we're in a phase where railroad leveraged buyouts, 11-figure tech deals and another round of fiscal juice are in play at once, it's tough to lean too heavily to the bearish side.

All of which sets the market up for some tests.

August begins what is easily been the toughest two-month stretch of the calendar for stocks, with higher volatility and weaker returns, on average. Election years have a particular tendency to get erratic in August, as this historical composite chart from Nautilus Research shows:

Of course, seasonal factors speak to broad tendencies over many years, but don't dictate an individual year's action. A separate study by LPL Financial of years when all four months from April through July were up for S&P 500, as this year has been, show above-average returns for the rest of those years (with the glaring exception of 2018, when a September market peak led to a 20% decline).

There is some froth building around the edges of the market for sure: The zero-commission retail speculators stampeding into moribund imaging company Kodak last week on news of a government loan; Special Purpose Acquisition Vehicles new shell companies set up to buy something are proliferating fast. Mostly this is the routine boundary-testing seen in bull markets, but it can get out of hand if the market keeps rewarding hubris too easily.

Another test could come from overstretched inter-market relationships. The persistent, steep slide in the US dollar mostly against the euro has been associated with firmer risk appetites and the run in gold. The dollar is getting oversold and sentiment is quite negative, possibly setting up a bounce that could ding stock prices.

It makes sense to enter August alert to all these interactions and the implicit bets embedded in share prices. But they don't yet amount to a convincing case to bet boldly against a market that has spent four months turning the doubts of bears into dollars for the bulls.

Read more:

Investors got it right piling into Big Tech, but might need new catalysts to power stocks in August - CNBC

Opinion | Behind the masks of contrition worn recently by Big Tech chiefs – Livemint

Last week, $5 trillion strode into the US Congress. That they did so virtually, through technology that some of them helped create, was perhaps an ironic coincidence. Googles Sundar Pichai, Amazons Jeff Bezos, Apples Tim Cook and Facebooks Mark Zuckerberg represented Big Tech, and their companies were worth a total of about $5 trillion, the size of Japans economy. While members of Congress were masked, the Tech Titans seemed to wear masks of contrition.

Just a few years back, these men (and they are almost always men) could do no wrong. They were the new idols, creators of new technologies and untold wealth. Their companies and campuses were the new wonders of the world, and it was the tools they were building that would enrich our lives and save our planet; even take us to other planets.

A few years later, while a large part of the adulation remains, their sheen is rapidly wearing off. Google is accused of monopolizing all of search globally, stifling competition as well as small merchants, and suffocating publishers. Amazon is seen as an apex predator, monopolizing e-commerce and driving small retailers into the ground. Apple makes most of the devices Americans use, and is a single, monopolistic gateway to the apps that power them. Facebook is perhaps the most reviledfor allegedly fuelling hate speech, ruining newspapers, swallowing startups that threaten it, and even swinging the US elections and the UK Brexit vote.

There are many reasons for this tech-lash. Monopoly power is one of them. The US antitrust laws were created more than a century ago to break the oil and steel monopolies Esso and US Steel. The basic idea of those laws was to keep producers from using their monopoly power to jack up consumer prices. This is where US regulators ran into a conceptual difficulty with tech giants. Their products were either free, or (in the case of Amazon) extremely cheap, and therefore presumably serving consumers well. The other reason for the backlash has been the use, or misuse, of datathe fact that many of these companies are making money off the free information we voluntarily give them. This data is sliced, diced, massaged and sold to advertisers for gobs of money, with the consumer getting nothing. This is the primarily business model of Google and Facebook, and its dangers were highlighted starkly by the Cambridge Analytica scandal; this firm had used the Facebook data of millions of Americans to influence the 2016 presidential polls. Then, there is also the onslaught of fake news, the amplification of hate speech, and the concentration of unimaginable wealth in the hands of a few. While the companies are still hugely admired, a citizen backlash has only just begun. And, predictably, politicians and regulators have started taking note.

The EU was first off the block with its General Data Protection Regulations, which prioritized consumer privacy. In the US, in response to a clamour to break Big Tech up, members of its antitrust subcommittee realized that while these firms might not raise user prices, their practices could lower the quality of products (on privacy, for example). Facebook and Twitter have been forced to hire thousands of people to weed out the hate spewed on their networks. Amazon is under scrutiny across the world, including India, for being anti-competitive to small traders. Facebook suicide", or getting off the network, has become common among people who do not want to be chased across the virtual world by marketers and spammers.

These companies started as forces for good, created by idealistic founders who wanted to change the world for the better. Google promised never to be evil", Zuckerberg wanted to connect people across the world, Jeff Bezos wanted to deliver stuff at low prices. Along the way, they grew big, and needed ever more money to fuel their ambitions. All of them went public, investors clamoured for stratospheric growth every quarter to maintain their insane valuations, and idealism gave way to capitalism. Creating cool technology took second place to ratcheting up the financial rewards for investors, employees and themselves, it seems.

I do believe, however, that these companies are smart enough to learn from this impasse and transform themselves. They do not have far to look. Just two decades ago, one of them was accused of monopoly, fought the battle, changed itself, and emerged ever stronger. It is still highly valued today, far better respected, and was not a part of the $5 trillion that beamed into the US Congress last week. That company is called Microsoft.

Jaspreet Bindra is the author of The Tech Whisperer, and co-founder of Unqbe

Subscribe to newsletters

* Enter a valid email

* Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Original post:

Opinion | Behind the masks of contrition worn recently by Big Tech chiefs - Livemint

Soon, your brain will be connected to a computer. Can we stop hackers breaking in? – ZDNet

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) offer a direct link between the grey matter of our human brains and silicon and circuitry of computers. New technologies always bring with them new security threats, but with the human brain a single store of the most sensitive and private information it's possible to imagine, the security stakes couldn't be higher.

If we're soon to be plugging computers directly into our brains, how can we protect that connection from those who want to attack them?

The first wave of brain-computer interfaces are beginning to make their way onto the market, offering users a way of keeping tabs on theirstress levels, control apps, and monitor their emotions. BCI tech is also progressing outside the consumer area, with medical researchers using them to help those with spinal injuries to move paralysed limbs andrestore a lost sense of touch.

SEE: Managing AI and ML in the enterprise 2020: Tech leaders increase project development and implementation (TechRepublic Premium)

Ultimately, BCIs could offer a way of communicating thoughts a form of human-machine telepathy.

So why would someone want to hack a BCI?

Being able to read the thoughts or memories of a political leader, or a business executive, could be a huge coup for intelligence agencies trying to understand rival states, or for criminals looking to steal commercial secrets or for blackmail. There's a military angle too; the US is already looking at BCIs as a way of controlling fleets of drones or cyber defences far more effectively than is now possible being able to hack into those systems would create a huge advantage on the battlefield.

The consequences of an attack or data breach from a BCI could be an order of magnitude worse than other systems: leaked email logs are one thing, leaked thought logs are another. Similarly, the risks of ransomware become far greater if it's targeted at BCIs rather than corporate systems; making it impossible to use a PC or a server is one thing; locking up the connection between someone's brain and the wider world could be far worse.

BCIs could ultimately become an authentication mechanism in their own right: our patterns of brain activity are so unique they could ultimately be used as a way of permitting access to sensitive systems, which could make it worthwhile to try to copy them. "Attempts to trick such a biometric will likely be very difficult, because brainwaves are not visible (like other biometrics like a fingerprint, iris, etc.) and cannot be replicated by another person... without direct access to the person and their brain to record the person," researchers at Israel's Ben-Gurion University of the Negevwrote in a recent paper.

It's early days, but there are already some signs that security will be a key consideration. For example, researchers have already shown that BCIs could be used to get people todisclose information from their PIN numberstotheir religious convictions.

Some of the potential threats to BCIs will be carry-overs from other tech systems. Malware could cause problems with acquiring data from the brain, as well as sending signals from the device back to the cortex, either by altering or exfiltrating the data.

Man-in-the-middle attacks could also be recast for BCIs: attackers could either intercept the data being gathered from the headset and replace it with their own, or intercept the data being used to stimulate the user's brain and replace it with an alternative. Hackers could use methods like these to get BCI users to inadvertently give up sensitive information, or gather enough data to mimic the neural activity needed to log into work or personal accounts.

Other threats to BCI security will be unique to brain-computer interfaces. Researchershave identifiedmalicious external stimuli as one of the most potentially damaging attacks that could be used on BCIs: feeding in specially crafted stimuli to affect either the users or the BCI itself to try to get out certain information, showing users images to gather their reactions to them, for example. Other similar attacks could be carried out to hijack users' BCI systems, by feeding in fake versions of the neural inputs causing them to take unintended actions potentially turning BCIs into bots, for example.

Other attacks hinge on the introduction or removal of data from BCIs: introducing noise to diminish the signal-to-noise ratio, for example, and making the signal being received from the brain difficult or impossible to read. Similarly, attackers interfering with the noise cancellation of BCI systems which separates the useful brain signals from the general background fuzz could cause a denial of service: annoying if it's an entertainment system that's cracked, life-altering if it's a BCI that allows someone to walk or control a wheelchair, for example.

SEE: Scientists are using brain-computer connections to restore a lost sense of touch

Currently, while we know something about the effect of normal BCI use on the brain, we don't know how an attack on a BCI could, deliberately or inadvertently, damage the grey matter. A hijacked BCI causing disruption to the way a user's brain works sounds like a sci-fi plot, but it could certainly be possible.

"What type of damage will [an attack] do to the brain, will it erase your skills or disrupt your skills? What are the consequences would they come in the form of just new information put into the brain, or would it even go down to the level of damaging neurons that then leads to a rewiring process within the brain that then disrupts your thinking?" says Dr Sasitharan Balasubramaniam, director of research at the Waterford Institute of Technology's Telecommunication Software and Systems Group (TSSG). "It's not only at the information level, it could also be the physical damage as well," he says.

Brains of BCI users will change and adapt as they learn to use the system, in the same way as they would to fresh experiences or acquiring new skills in the course of normal life. However, BCIs' ability to cause neuroplasticity could bring with it a new level of risk. "BCIs have the potential to change the brain of the user (e.g. to facilitate motor or cognitive improvements to people with disabilities). To preserve the physical and mental integrity of the user, BCI systems need to ensure that no unauthorized person can modify their functioning," Javier Mnguez, cofounder and CSO of neurotechnology companyBitbrain, tells ZDNet.

So how can you protect such systems, particularly given the information they hold and the potentially disastrous effects? While BCIs themselves may still be relatively novel, the technologies needed to secure them likely won't be: anonymisers, security standards and protocols, antivirus, and encryption are all being suggested as means of staving off BCI attacks.

And, like any other technologies, brain-computer interfaces will need a multi-layered security approach to keep them safe, locking down each individual element of the BCI. "I don't think that the countermeasures would be individual solutions. Going forward, we need to integrate so many different things, from how signals are wirelessly sent to the interface that might be just outside the head, all the way to integrating that with the machine learning for determining whether it's the right or wrong pattern [a BCI is using], and then using that to actually deter the attacks," TSSG's Balasubramaniam says.

The level of risk in using BCIs also varies according to which type of system someone's using: a headset-based, no-invasive system will get a low-quality signal and will be easy for a user to switch off and block external communication; an invasive system, meanwhile, gathers high-quality signals direct from the brain's surface and requires surgery to disengage it fully.

"The more accurate and powerful a BCI is, the higher the risk could be," says Mnguez. A more comprehensive measurement of the brain will potentially contain more sensitive information and, therefore, requires more strict safety standards, as do devices that modify brain function. "This is especially relevant, because the target users of these systems are generally a vulnerable population, including patients with certain neurological disorders," he says.

SEE: Mind-controlled drones and robots: How thought-reading tech will change the face of warfare

What's more, many of the standards and principles of good tech security and data hygiene used in other systems can be brought across for use in BCIs: educating users, gathering only the minimum amount of data necessary for the system to work, locking down when, how and who can access the system, and so on. However, while the technology side of the equation may have good security precedents elsewhere, the unknown unknowns of the human brain could prove BCIs' greatest security challenge.

"In terms of the security of computational systems in general, this is a branch of science that is advanced enough and we probably have good enough understanding to know how to do the right thing from a technical perspective," says Tamara Bonaci, affiliate faculty member at the National Science Foundation's Center for Neurotechnology.

"What's probably a little more interesting and likely much harder is the question of, do we know enough about the brain and about the human body and electrophysiological signals. Something that may not mean very much today might be recognised as something that is revealing sensitive information about the person tomorrow," she warns.

However, the complexity of the human brain also brings good news for BCI security. Unlike other typically compromised systems like smartphones and tablets, BCIs aren't one size fits all: they require a lot of training to make them compatible with their individual user.

"That signal on the surface looks pretty much like white noise. It's very hard to discern any useful information there. You kind of have to zoom in on specific parts of the signal and know exactly what you're looking for," Bonaci says.

The rest is here:

Soon, your brain will be connected to a computer. Can we stop hackers breaking in? - ZDNet

Inside the final resting place of Tutankhamun’s treasures – Action News Now

For almost a century, King Tutankhamun has been the poster boy for Ancient Egypt. His death mask was sublimely, breathtakingly crafted over 3,300 years ago from 24 pounds of beaten gold, with eyeliner of lapis lazuli and eyes of quartz and obsidian.

It's probably the most recognizable artifact we have from antiquity.

Once entombed in Egypt's Valley of the Kings, the mask has toured the world, entrancing audiences with its aura of opulence and millenia-old regal mystery.

"You know, if you ask a child from the age of eight and you tell him Egypt, and he will tell you King Tut," Zahi Hawass, an Egyptian archaeologist and former antiquities minister, tells CNN. "I made a Skype last week to a school in the States. All the children ask about one thing, Tutankhamun."

While ancient Egyptians crafted great monuments to their dead, wonders of granite and limestone including the Pyramids at Giza, modern Egyptians have been building a new home for Tutankhamun and his ancestors just over a mile away.

Something monumental of their own in glass and concrete.

Construction has taken eight years so far, the opening delayed multiple times, but the Grand Egyptian Museum isn't called "Grand" for nothing.

At almost half a million square meters, it's the size of a major airport terminal, with a price tag to match. Most of the huge cost has been met with loans from Japan.

The Egyptians badly want tourists back in the large numbers that the country hasn't seen since before the country was gripped by political upheaval in the wake of the 2011 Arab Spring.

This museum amounts to a calculated gamble -- a $1 billion dollar bet on Tutankhamun. His treasures will be the star attraction when all finally arrive here next year.

This should be their last resting place.

A selection of Tutankhamun's treasures have been on the road -- off and on -- since the 1960s. Among them, the Boy King as "Guardian Statue," a proud figure, face and body painted black to symbolize the fertile silt of the Nile.

Another gold-covered statue shows Tutankhamun carrying a harpoon and wearing one of his many crowns. On the back of a golden throne, the young pharaoh appears in a tender marital portrait, king and queen bathed in the rays of the sun. And on a golden fan, he's seen hunting in his chariot.

Tutankhamun's portrait was always idealized, as it was on his famous death mask.

The reality may well have been rather different.

Images of his unimposing mummy, first revealed in 1925, show that Tutankhamun was probably a child of incest, standing about 1.65 meters (5 ft 5 in). Scientists think that he may well have had a clubfoot and buck teeth.

He was dead at 18 or 19 and Egyptologists still speculate about what killed him.

"When you go really deeply into the collections of the king, into the history of the king, you discover that he was a really important king," says Tayeb Abbas, head of archaeology at the Grand Egyptian Museum.

"What is also important about the king is that his life and death are still a mystery. And that's why people all over the world are still fascinated by King Tutankhamun."

The creation of the new museum has taken almost as long as Tutankhamun's lifespan. A winning design was chosen in 2003, with a facade or wall of semi-translucent stone, one kilometer long, that can be backlit at night.

The original architects were a small Dublin-based practise, Heneghan Peng, led by an American-Chinese architect, Shih-Fu Peng.

The Egyptian Revolution in 2011 delayed things and construction only began in earnest the following year.

CNN first caught up with the project six years later, in 2018, as the pyramid's entrance took skeletal shape.

"It's a new landmark that is being added to the complete view of the city of greater Cairo... for the first time the pyramids and the fantastic treasures of Tutankhamun will be eye to eye," Tarek Tawfik, the former director general of the Grand Egyptian Museum Project, said at the time.

A visit to the museum in May 2020 revealed everything looking pretty much landscaped and ready.

But behind the scenes, it's still a construction site -- and Covid-19 hasn't helped.

Going in, everyone had to have their temperature checked, including CNN's team.

Like extras from a remake of "Ghostbusters," gangs of workers wearing tanks of disinfectant on their backs were out spraying.

"We are working hard, despite Covid-19," says Major General Atef Moftah, the army engineer who is the museum's general supervisor. "We are taking precautions, sterilizing everything and everyone."

On the ground, it's easy to get a sense of how gargantuan this project really is.

The statue of Ramses the Great -- the largest of all the museum artifacts -- arrived in 2018 so they could build the atrium around the 13th century BCE pharaoh.

More than 20 meters high, crafted from 83 tons of red granite, he's simply magnificent -- even with his nose royally chipped and his stubby toes lightly coated in dust.

The new museum is a far more dignified place to hang out than the polluted spot outside Cairo's main railway station where Ramses used to stand.

His companions -- on a grand staircase behind him -- are mostly still under wraps.

There'll be 87 statues of pharaohs and Egyptian gods on the steps. As visitors ascend, they'll get a sweeping history of Ancient Egypt. Some 5,000 years of it.

Or at least they will when the museum finally opens.

"The project is scheduled to be finished by the end of this year," says Moftah. "Then at the beginning of next year, we will work on the antiquities side of the project for four to six months. Hopefully by then, Covid-19 will be over and have left the world in peace."

What was clear from CNN's brief visit, as work to tidy up the vast spaces goes on, is that tourists may need to set aside two days to get around it.

Wandering through the museum, visitors may spot a familiar recurring motif.

Pyramids are everywhere. Upright and sometimes inverted, huge triangular designs built into the museum's monumental structures and mosaic surfaces. And then there are the real pyramids -- visible through gigantic windows. This is a museum with a view.

That Great Pyramid less than a mile away took roughly, it's thought, 20 years to build, when Pharoah Khnum Khufu wanted to create a burial place for himself back in the 26th century BCE using more than two million granite blocks -- each weighing over two and a half tons.

From architectural competition to planned opening in 2021, the Grand Egyptian Museum has also taken almost 20 years.

The museum is manifestly a matter of huge prestige for Egypt. In tandem with the building, an extraordinary program is underway to conserve every single one of Tutankhamun's treasures.

The intention is to exhibit all of them together -- for the very first time.

The Conservation Center for the Grand Egyptian Museum is the largest of its kind in the Middle East. It's a seemingly endless corridor leading to no fewer than 10 different laboratories, all devoted to the art of conservation.

The labs themselves are enveloped in an almost monastic silence. The experts working within them need intense concentration, a good eye and a steady hand.

There are more than 5,000 artifacts to conserve from Tutankhamun alone. "His magnificent panoply of death," as Howard Carter, the man credited with finding his tomb, once said.

Many items are being freshly conserved so that they can be shown for the very first time when the new museum opens.

Funding for some of this work comes from Tutankhamun's golden legacy -- income from exhibiting his treasures overseas.

"When I sent that Tutankhamun exhibit in 2005 to the States, Australia, Japan and London, I brought to Egypt $120 million to build the conservation labs. I never thought to see young Egyptians -- geniuses with golden hands -- returning every piece back," says Hawass, the former minister of antiquities. "That was the first thing that captured my heart."

Here in the labs can be found the lion goddess, Menhit, with nose and tears of blue glass, eyes of painted crystal. There's the deity Ammut, part hippo, part crocodile, part lion -- with teeth and red tongue of ivory.

The cow goddess, Mehet-Weret, is here too, represented in a pair of bovine figures, solar discs wedged between their horns.

There are also ritual couches that were apparently intended to speed Tutankhamun on his journey to the afterlife. After conservation, they remain in astonishingly good condition.

It's a privilege to witness all this material before it goes under glass in the new museum.

And not everything was golden.

Tutankhamun was buried with some 90 pairs of his sandals. Some of rush and papyrus, others of leather and calf-skin.

Before conservation, one pair had partially rotted away, but even these were still somehow salvageable.

"We create a new technique by using some special adhesive," says Mohamed Yousri, one of the conservators. "It's condition was very bad, and I think it comes alive again."

One pair -- almost brand new, it seemed -- is decorated with captured warriors, one Nubian, the other Asiatic. In these sandals, Tutankhamun could symbolically crush his enemies under foot every day.

"What we are doing here is re-discovering the collections of the king," says Tayeb Abbas, the museum's head of archaeology. "So we are doing the job which is really as important as it was done by Carter."

Howard Carter, an Englishman, was 48 years old when he made the discovery of his life in the Valley of the Kings, a pharaonic burial complex on the western banks of the Nile near the city of Luxor.

He would spend a decade -- from 1922 to 1932 -- recording the treasures and methodically clearing the tomb.

Without his doggedness, Tutankhamun might never have been found. And without Tutankhamun, we probably wouldn't have a Grand Egyptian Museum.

"This king was unique," says Hawass. "I think Howard Carter was so lucky to discover his tomb. And this is my opinion. This is the most important discovery, still, in archaeology."

Carter's archive is kept at the Griffith Institute, an Egyptology center at the UK's Oxford University.

A meticulous, demanding man, Egyptology will forever owe him an immense debt. Carter's clearance of the tomb was, for the time, exemplary.

Artifacts like the black and gold Guardian Statue were sprayed with protective paraffin wax. But now, almost a century later, the wax is being taken off.

In the labs, a ceremonial chariot was having every little bit of wax winkled and teased out during CNN's visit. Its old sheen was restored.

Tutankhamun's outer coffin, meanwhile, has been fumigated for insects. Just conserving this one artifact has taken some eight months.

This is the first time the coffin has ever left the tomb in the Valley of Kings. And it won't be going back there, a fact that not everyone's happy about.

"To be honest, most of the people on the west bank were angry because of this," says Abbas. "But when we took it out of the tomb, the people saw the bad condition of how the coffin was, people started to encourage us to get it back to how it looked like before."

The local residents did win one campaign. They're going to keep Tutankhamun's mummy, even though, like the outer coffin, the authorities had coveted it for the new museum.

"The people of Luxor think that their grandfather should stay there," says Hawass, the former minister of antiquities. "And I really do respect this. When we decided to move it a few months ago, all the people of Luxor disagreed with that. And this really actually made me happy. The mummy will stay there."

Fifteen years ago, Hawass did manage to extract the mummy for a CT scan -- but only for a day, barely enough time to incur the "mummy's curse" -- the supposed deadly consequence of moving King Tut's remains, a legend that is said to have claimed the life of Carter's financial backer Lord Carnarvon.

"When I went to scan the mummy and I took the mummy out of the coffin, I looked at his face," Hawass says. "That is the most beautiful moment in my life. The discovery -- November 4, 1922, 5,398 objects were found, excavated by Carter for 10 years. The curse. Lord Carnarvon died. All of that made the magic of King Tut!"

Everything, it seems, always comes back irresistibly to Tutankhamun. A century ago, only a few Egyptologists even knew his name. Now everyone does.

While the new Grand Museum will help preserve his status and many more of Egypt's ancient artifacts, it's reassuring to note that a piece of the country's more recent history will not be overlooked.

Head into central Cairo and the salmon pink sandstone edifice of one of its most distinct landmarks is unmissable.

The Egyptian Museum of Antiquities -- so beloved by Egyptologists -- opened in 1902.

Inside is hall after hall of statuary and an ever-expanding collection. It's here you can meet some of the Boy King's relatives.

There's Akhenaten, the so-called "heretic" pharaoh -- Tutankhamun's father. And an unfinished bust of his stepmother, the serene Nefertiti. His grandparents are here too -- Yuya and Tjuyu were once a power couple.

"You know, Cairo Museum, you cannot close it even if you have the Grand Egyptian Museum," says Hawass. "If you enter this museum, you smell the history. You smell the past and that's why we are keeping it as it is."

Of course, tourists always swiftly take the stairs to the first floor of the Cairo Museum. That's where -- for the time being -- you can still find the death mask and the rest of Tutankhamun's treasures

The display here has always seemed a bit dull. Beautiful but old-fashioned glass cases and drab lighting.

But then gold is still pretty stunning in any light.

There's the solid 22-carat gold likeness of Tutankhamun that formed his innermost coffin. It measures just over six feet long, and weighs a hefty 108 kilograms (240 pounds) -- about the same weight as Anthony Joshua, the heavyweight boxing champion.

More endearing perhaps, is a painted wooden sculpture of Tutankhamun, probably executed when he was in his early teens. This may have been a mannequin for his clothes.

Back in the labs, they have, in fact, been carrying out the first ever scientific study of Tutankhamun's textiles, including a scarf or shawl several meters long that has somehow endured over the 3,300 years since his death.

The research is part of a joint Egyptian-Japanese project.

"Among the many objects from the Tutankhamun's tomb, textiles are the most deteriorated materials," says ancient textiles expert Mia Ishii, an associate professor at Saga University in Japan. "Therefore it was a request from the Egyptian government to work especially on the textiles from the beginning."

More than 100 textile examples were recovered from the tomb and were evidently used in life. Among them is a tunic of some kind. Clearly visible is the design of a lotus flower -- for ancient Egyptians, the symbol of eternal life.

Japanese experts have also been advising on the big move -- from the Cairo museum to the new Conservation Center's labs 10 miles away.

Back in 2018, CNN watched a ritual couch being bandaged up like a patient with sunburn. Traditional Japanese washi or tissue paper was applied to fragile areas of gold leaf.

A hunting chariot needed a bespoke crate and a lot of manhandling -- almost enough men for a football team.

Tutankhamun's chariots, they've discovered, were all made from a hardwood -- elm -- a tree not native to Egypt. The wood probably came from somewhere in the Eastern Mediterranean more than 500 miles away.

Some artifacts are still revealing their secrets. A set of rods covered with gold leaf were a bit of a puzzle, but it's now believed they were part of a sunshade for a ceremonial chariot -- the oldest sunshade ever found.

One discovery, a dagger found with Tutankhamun's mummy, was made with iron from a meteorite. Anything that fell from the heavens seems to have had special meaning for ancient Egyptians.

Another treasure is a fabulous pendant, covered with scarab beetles -- the ancient Egyptian symbol for immortality.

Back in the 1920s, the pendant was photographed around the neck of a boy who was employed to supply Carter's archaeological dig workers with water. This, so the story goes, is the child who found the tomb.

Clearing a space for his large water jar, he chanced on the first step -- the first of a flight of sixteen down to the tomb.

View post:

Inside the final resting place of Tutankhamun's treasures - Action News Now

Wait: The power ballad is more than 1,000 years old? – A Journal of Musical Things

[I associate power ballads with the preening rock bands of the 70s and 80s. Apparently, though, those acts were late to the party. This is from MelMagazine.com. AC]

When the great chronicle of human civilization comes to be written, the 1980s will go down as the decade when we had everything in our grasp but let it all go. So many self-inflicted threats were allowed to escalate unchecked during that time, and were now all being forced to live with their consequences: Nuclear proliferation, global carbon emissions, free-market capitalism, and most monstrous of all, adult-oriented power ballads. Its virtually impossible to explain exactly how the first three Promethean nightmares came about. But with the last one, as a runaway outgrowth of deeply misguided pop-culture trends, we can at least attempt to trace its origins in the hope that it will never happen again.

First off, for a culture that daily had to deal with the risk of Cold War annihilation, the popularity of a musical style desperately reaching for immortality makes a lot of sense. Traditionally, the power balladeers sing of an emotional Valhalla where flames are eternal, feelings are boundless and everything everybloody thing that pops into their heads has to be forever. Power ballads are pop-cultures response to the abyss, which is probably why theyre often so abysmal.

[]

How did such an affected, risible, ultimately silly formula ever get to be so popular? And which needy, over-earnest songwriters should we hold directly responsible?

Keep reading.

See the article here:

Wait: The power ballad is more than 1,000 years old? - A Journal of Musical Things

Five of Kirin’s Proprietary Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma Products Registered as Foods with Function Claims – BioSpace

Aug. 7, 2020 07:30 UTC

TOKYO--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Kirin Holdings Company, Limited (TOKYO:2503) announced today that five of its products*1 that utilize Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma were registered as Foods with Function Claims with Japans Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA). This is the first time that an immune system-related product has been registered in Japan. When registration is accepted by the CAA, labeling of function claims (usually health benefits) on products becomes possible. This registration provides the value of reliability and reassurance for consumers when choosing products.*1: Three soft drinks and two supplements, to be announced at a later date.

This press release features multimedia. View the full release here: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200807005123/en/

Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma (Photo: Business Wire)

The Kirin Group Vision 2027 sets out the broad goal of creating value across the world of food & beverages to pharmaceuticals and becoming a global leader in CSV*2. To augment the Groups existing Food & Beverages domain and Pharmaceuticals domain, the Group has launched a new Health Science domain to help people stay fit and healthy by leveraging advanced fermentation and biotechnology the Group has amassed over the years. One example of this is leveraging the Groups 35 years of research that led to the development of Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma, jointly developed across Group companies. Moving forward, Kirin Group will accelerate domestic sales as well as expand overseas sales of products that utilize Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma, leading to further contribution to the health and well-being of the global community.*2: Creating Shared Value. Combined added value for consumers as well as for society at large.

Kirins proprietary Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma

The Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma is a type strain of Lactococcus lactis, which is a natural lactic acid bacterium mainly used for the fermentation of cheese and yogurt. The Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma is a product of joint research by Kirin Holdings, Koiwai Dairy Products, and Kyowa Hakko Bio, and a number of relevant papers have been published and many presentations have been given at medical societies in cooperation with medical schools and research institutions.

Summary of the Functional Food Labeling Registration to the CAA

This product contains Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma. It has been shown to support maintenance of the immune system in healthy individuals by stimulating pDC (plasmacytoid dendritic cells).

[Functional Ingredient]Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma (100billion/day)

Container and Packaging Label Information

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200807005123/en/

See original here:

Five of Kirin's Proprietary Lactococcus lactis strain Plasma Products Registered as Foods with Function Claims - BioSpace

Researchers slowly discover censorship doesnt work – Reclaim The Net

Nobody said wholesale censorship on internet platforms used by billions of people would be easy, and this is something that is now becoming apparent, almost six months into giant social media networks attempts to tightly control information, and the narrative around the coronavirus pandemic.

But censorship of this magnitude is not seen as a problem in itself; a major headache emerging now for Twitter, Facebook, and others, is that it doesnt actually work. Instead, banning content that has already gained wide exposure means its reach could grow almost exponentially, as the ban itself becomes a news story.

Reports are now recognizing this, treating it as a novel phenomenon (though its unclear why censorship is nothing new, and its well documented that in the pre-internet era authoritarian regimes banned print books and they would quickly become a hot commodity.)

Be that as it may, researchers and analysts quoted are not merely acknowledging the difficulty in effectively suppressing misinformation, such as a recent banned video showing the Americas Frontline Doctors group promoting the use of the drug hydroxychloroquine.

Double your web browsing speed with today's sponsor. Get Brave.

They are also looking at what went wrong and why centralized social media platforms arent doing a better job of blocking information they dont want their users to see.

It appears to be nothing more than the nature of these networks itself, and how they propel any message to visibility: content is posted at a small scale, gains momentum, travels from one platform to another, such as from Facebook to Twitter, where users with a large number of followers further accelerate its dissemination.

And if a ban comes at this stage, the media pick that up while social media websites are left playing the role of facilitators of the flow of information and online communication (which is what they should be doing anyway, instead of struggling to editorialize the internet).

Theyre trying to do the right thing, but addressing something that is already viral is a really hard problem, says Annie Klomhaus of social media research company Yonder, referring to (mis) information suppression and how that tends to fail.

Twitter, Facebook, and others are advised to act more quickly and not allow several hours to pass before they take content down and also, improve their technical and human content moderation methods.

Read the original:

Researchers slowly discover censorship doesnt work - Reclaim The Net

Brother Nut, the Artist, Taking Vow of Silence to Protest Chinas Censorship – VOA Asia

WASHINGTON - If I cant tell the truth, I will keep my mouth shut for a month, thats 720 hours.

Meet Beijing-based Chinese performance artist Brother Nut. Born in Shenzhen in 1981, hes internationally known only by his pseudonym.

From 4 p.m. June 1, until 4 p.m. July 1, he barely opened his mouth. Thats part of his project Shut Up for 30 Days, which is designed to spotlight Chinas shrinking space for freedom of speech, particularly regarding the coronavirus pandemic.

He sealed his lips in different ways, using metal clamps, gloves and a surgical face mask inscribed with shut up. He also wore packing tape marked with the characters Error 404, in reference to Chinas Great Internet Firewall.

During a telephone interview with VOA from Beijing, he said there were a few times when he slipped up and uttered a comment. On those rare occasions, he said he slapped himself 16 times and ate only white rice for all three meals after that.

Self-punishment, you know, he said, just like if the authority asks you to shut up and you fail to do so, you will be punished.

He named himself Brother Nut 10 years ago when he began his performance arts.

Nut, in English, it means someone whos weird and hard to deal with, the 39-year-old told VOA. I think it represents my attitude perfectly.

Living up to that name, he has done quite a few crazy and weird things over the past 10 years.

In 2015, he launched Project Dust, in which he created a brick made entirely from dust he vacuumed out of the heavily polluted Beijing city air over 100 days. The project highlighted Beijings air pollution problems at a time when China sought to recast itself as an environmentally aware nation.

In 2018, he made headlines with project Nongfu Spring Market, in which he filled 9,000 water bottles with cloudy and contaminated water from a village in Shaanxi, in northwestern China, and exhibited them in Beijings art district, 798 Art Zone, to showcase the countrys water problems.

In 2019, he collected 400 dolls from the children of migrant workers in Shenzhen in southeastern China, and he used an excavator to throw all the dolls into the air, advocating for the kids who lost the opportunity to get an education because of land seizures back home.

Brother Nut says that in a country like China, art is a symbol of resistance.

In the past two months, he has launched several projects regarding freedom of speech.

In addition to Shut Up for 30 Days, he has set up the truth award to salute journalists who dare to speak out during the countrys battle with COVID-19.

Brother Nut raised just short of $3,000 from 73 netizens, and he gave the award and money to Gong Jingqi, a journalist from Chinas People Magazine. She wrote a bombshell feature story on whistleblower doctor Ai Fen, the director of the emergency department at Wuhan Central Hospital, one of the hospitals most directly affected by COVID-19. The original piece was quickly deleted from Chinas tightly controlled social media, yet its copy was widely circulated online.

His project Error 404 invited netizens to list sensitive words banned on Chinas internet. More than 100 netizens participated, listing roughly 1,000 words as the most sensitive words in 2020. These included National Security Law, Soviet Union has died and raise your hand if you disagree.

Brother Nut said people are so used to Error 404 they feel indifferent when they see the words. These banned phrases are the epitaph of our time, he told VOA.

From air pollution, water pollution and migrant workers, to freedom of speech, he said hes inching closer to the dangerous red line.

But this red line can move, you know. Maybe instead of me moving closer to the red line, it is the red line drawing closer to everybody, he shrugged.

He was taken away by Chinas secret police for tea drinking, which is an unofficial way of interrogating and intimidating anyone who dares to voice different opinions. The first thing they told me were artists are garbage. I was pretty shocked, he said.

Last year, he was detained for 10 days for a project he undertook on financial fraud.

After his release from prison, Brother Nut continued his performance art. Im on this land, so Im focusing on the things happening here, he said.

Chinas shrinking creative space has made it hard for artists, but Brother Nut said he wants to do something to create change.

We have to believe theres a future for us.

See the original post here:

Brother Nut, the Artist, Taking Vow of Silence to Protest Chinas Censorship - VOA Asia

Setlist: Wiley, Twitter and the online censorship debate – Complete Music Update

Artist News Business News Live Business Setlist By Andy Malt and Chris Cooke | Published on Monday 3 August 2020

CMUs Andy Malt and Chris Cooke review key events in music and the music business from the last week, including Wileys antisemitic social media posts and what responsibilities the social media platforms have when their users offend, plus the call from various big name musicians for politicians to stop using their music (or any music) without permission.

SECTION TIMES01: Wiley antisemitic social media posts (00:07:39)02: Musicians letter to politicians (00:25:11)

SUBSCRIBE TO SETLISTListen to Setlist and sign up to receive new episodes for free automatically each week through any of these services

Acast | Apple Podcasts|audioBoom | CastBox | Deezer | Google Play | iHeart | Mixcloud | RSS | Spotify | Stitcher | TuneIn

STORIES DISCUSSED THIS WEEK Wiley condemned over antisemitic social media outburst Wiley insists hes not racist despite his antisemitic Twitter tirade Musicians call on politicians to stop using their music without permission

ALSO MENTIONED Socially-distanced gig pilot didnt provide a commercially viable model Return of indoor shows delayed (BBC News) Setlist 6 Jul 2020: Rolling Stones threaten to sue Donald Trump if he plays their music at another campaign rally

MORE FROM CMU Buy the new Dissecting The Digital Dollar on Amazon Sign up to receive the CMU Daily news bulletin

Read the original post:

Setlist: Wiley, Twitter and the online censorship debate - Complete Music Update

The line between legislating in opposition to disinformation and censorship could be very skinny – Pledge Times

We have to create, among all of us, politicians, technologists, journalists, etc., an ethical code to know how to act with technology, for example in terms of data exploitation. Three young women well aware of the challenges of the technological revolution explained their ideas, fears and solutions in the debate that was broadcast live from the newsroom of El PAS. The guests were Nagua Alba, psychologist and deputy for Guipzcoa (Podemos), who is the youngest deputy in the Chamber; Clara Jimnez, journalist, founder of Maldita.es and one of the experts appointed by the European Commission in its plan to deal with disinformation and fake news; and Nerea Luis Mingueza, researcher in robotics and artificial intelligence at the Carlos III University, who was the one who pronounced the sentence with which the paragraph begins. The reason for the meeting was to find out what has been the impact of this transformation among the youngest, a more vulnerable group but also more flexible and with greater capacity to adapt. Also invited was Roco Vidal, scientific disseminator on YouTube, creator of the successful channel La Gata by Schrdinger, who was unable to arrive in time due to a problem with transportation.

Politics lags behind society when it comes to the use of technology, said Alba, reality is always on top of politicians. The deputy believes that this revolution is catching the leaders with the wrong foot, but warned about the risks that legislative measures could pose against disinformation, for example. The line between legislating against disinformation and censorship is very thin, said Jimnez, aware that many governments may try to take advantage of this controversy to curtail freedom of expression and of the press. Alba proposed that it would be more useful to train educating the critical spirit of the citizenry to discern what it is that they are reading. In this sense, Luis insisted that much more should be done in technological training from a young age, giving them access to information.

The guests talked about the risks of social networks, in the propagation of hoaxes immediately and massively. What worries the technology community the most is the speed with which the false sources are shared, because the denials will not spread as much, explained the robotics and artificial intelligence specialist. In the same way, Jimnez recalled that there are already 36% of Spaniards already reported by WhatsApp: Which means that we consume more information, but also more disinformation. And he warned: More and more misinformation comes to us about migrations and it is something that is happening throughout Europe: hoaxes, videos against migrants, which arise in Spain and which in two days are in Italy or Germany. However, they all insisted that the networks have a positive side, as Jimnez and Alba recalled, by empowering women around the mobilizations for Womens Day or #MeToo.

Politics lags behind society when it comes to the use of technology. Reality is always on top of politicians, lamented Alba

Faced with the labor and unemployment problems that will arise with robotization and artificial intelligence, Nerea Luis stated that there will be a tendency to replace jobs dedicated to repetitive tasks with robots, but what is in a more creative field is going to be harder to replace. The political response to this challenge was provided by Nagua Alba: It will be good if we have to work less, to dedicate ourselves to leisure or care. But the political question is whether we abandon people who will not be able to work, said the deputy, defending the possibility of introducing basic income.

This debate is the first event of a special, called The age of puzzlement, with reports and interviews where expert anthropologists, philosophers, psychologists, economists and technologists will debate, from different perspectives, what awaits humanity in the face of the technological changes that are underway, and also those that will come in the medium term and that we do not even expect .

This special will culminate on November 27 in Madrid a debate in which three of the worlds leading experts will participate in the consequences of the evolution of technology and artificial intelligence. Continuing the debate generated by the book The age of puzzlement, from Openmind, the speakers will discuss issues such as the future of democracy and work, analyzing the role of disruptive technologies in politics and the economy. The three speakers are Nuria Oliver, Director of Research in Data Sciences at Vodafone, Luciano Floridi, Director of the Digital Ethics Lab and professor of Philosophy and Information Ethics at the University of Oxford, and Jannis Kallinikos, professor of Information Systems in the Management Department of the London School of Economics.

Read more:

The line between legislating in opposition to disinformation and censorship could be very skinny - Pledge Times

In a future of mind uploading, will you still be you, and …

Achieving immortality has long been humanitys holy grail. Ever since we first became aware of the fragility of our own existence, weve been looking for ways to cheat death and prolong our lives indefinitely. Although advancements in medicine have enabled us to significantly increase our lifespan, true immortality has remained out of reach. Achieving physical immortality may very well prove to be beyond our capabilities, but what about digital immortality?

A US startup called Nectome recently unveiled plans to help humanity achieve digital immortality by preserving the brain using a revolutionary new embalming technique and subsequently uploading it to the cloud. The process is called vitrifixation, or Aldehyde-Stabilised Cryopreservation. It involves replacing the blood flow in the brain with embalming chemicals that preserve its neuronal structure in microscopic detail, basically by turning it into frozen glass. You can think of what we do as a fancy form of embalming that preserves not just the outer details but the inner details, explains Robert McIntyre, a co-founder of Nectome.

There are a couple of caveats, though. The biggest one is that you cant actually survive the procedure. Furthermore, in order for it to work, it needs to be performed on a living brain. If the brain has been dead even for a short amount of time, it will become irreparably damaged and the procedure wont be successful. That means that it would essentially be a form of suicide, which would make it legal only in those US states that allow euthanasia, such as California. Another major downside is that Nectome still isnt even close to developing a method for reviving or uploading the preserved brain to the cloud.

However, this uncertainty didnt stop people from investing in the idea, with 25 people already having joined the waiting list by paying a $10,000, fully-refundable deposit. One of those people is Sam Altman, the chief executive of the successful startup accelerator Y Combinator, which recently welcomed Nectome into its fold. The company managed to raise more than $1 million in funding so far and was awarded two prizes by the Brain Preservation Foundation, as well as a large government grant to collaborate with MIT. However, the widespread public criticism that followed the waiting list announcement resulted in MIT cutting all ties with Nectome.

Nectome isnt the only company working on uploading our minds to a computer. In 2011, the Russian businessman and billionaire Dmitry Itskov founded the 2045 Initiative, an organisation that aims to help humanity achieve immortality by 2045. Within the next 30 years, I am going to make sure that we can all live forever, claims Itskov. The ultimate goal of my plan is to transfer someones personality into a completely new body.

The 2045 Initiative has laid out its plan in three stages. The first stage involves building a humanoid robot called the Avatar, and a cutting-edge brain-computer interface system. The second stage consists of building a life support system for the human brain, and linking it with the Avatar. The third and final stage involves creating an artificial brain that would hold the original individual consciousness.

So, can it actually be done? Is it really possible to upload a mind to a computer? The short answer is: yes, theoretically. All of the evidence seems to say in theory its possible its extremely difficult, but its possible, says neuroscientist Randal Koene, the scientific director of the 2045 Initiative. The human brain is an incredibly complex organ, consisting of about 86 billion neurons that constantly exchange information with one another. All of the connections between the neurons in a brain are called the connectome, and many scientists believe that this connectome actually holds the information that makes us who we are. And mapping it could potentially allow us to recreate a persons mind.

Our current assumption is that all brain activity is computable. If thats true and the brain does work like a computer, and if we could find a way to map that activity, scan the brain at the necessary level of detail, interpret the scan in a way that would allow us to reconstruct the brains neural network and create a faithful simulation, and if we had enough computing power to run such a simulation, then we should be able to recreate the human mind in a computer. Thats a lot of ifs, but until we know different, it remains in the realm of possibility. However, its a very remote possibility at this point. We are pitifully far away from mapping a human connectome, says Dr Ken Hayworth, a neuroscientist at the Janelia Research Campus in Virginia. To put it in perspective, to image a whole fly brain it is going to take us approximately one to two years. The idea of mapping a whole human brain with the existing technology that we have today is simply impossible.

The main problem is that there are so many things about the human brain we dont know yet. We dont know how the mind is created. We dont know what consciousness is or how to measure it, so even if we were able to create a simulation of the human brain, we wouldnt be able to determine whether that simulation really is conscious. We dont even know exactly which brain structures and biomolecules need to be preserved to recreate a persons memory or personality, or if its even possible.

Many scientists are certain it cant be done. You cannot code intuition; you cannot code aesthetic beauty; you cannot code love or hate, argues Dr Miguel Nicolelis, a neuroscientist at Duke University. There is no way you will ever see a human brain reduced to a digital medium. Its simply impossible to reduce that complexity to the kind of algorithmic process that you will have to have to do that.

The whole idea is also rife with ethical issues, and some experts are suggesting that Can we do it? isnt even the right question to ask. Instead, what we should be asking is Should we do it?. Lets say that weve successfully uploaded a human mind onto a computer. Does that mean that personal identity has also transferred along with memories and that this person is still the same? Or is it a new person with a different identity that just happens to share the same memories? What rights would this digital person have? And if you could create one copy of yourself, why wouldnt you be able to create multiple copies? In that case, which one of those copies would be the real you? And since you wouldnt have a physical body anymore and would essentially be reduced to a stream of data, who would that data belong to? Who would own you? How could you prevent major corporations from misusing your data?

Mind uploading is a fascinating concept, but were not sure yet whether its even possible. Our existing technology and our understanding of the human brain arent advanced enough to answer that question at this time. Even if uploading the human mind onto a computer eventually turns out to be impossible, the idea is still worth pursuing further, because the technology Nectome and others are working on could have many other useful applications. For example, it could facilitate brain banking for future research into health and disease states, help us discover new brain disorder drugs, or enhance our basic neuroscience circuit mapping.

Here is the original post:

In a future of mind uploading, will you still be you, and ...

The immortalist: Uploading the mind to a computer – BBC News

While many tech moguls dream of changing the way we live with new smart devices or social media apps, one Russian internet millionaire is trying to change nothing less than our destiny, by making it possible to upload a human brain to a computer, reports Tristan Quinn.

"Within the next 30 years," promises Dmitry Itskov, "I am going to make sure that we can all live forever."

It sounds preposterous, but there is no doubting the seriousness of this softly spoken 35-year-old, who says he left the business world to devote himself to something more useful to humanity. "I'm 100% confident it will happen. Otherwise I wouldn't have started it," he says.

It is a breathtaking ambition, but could it actually be done? Itskov doesn't have too much time to find out.

"If there is no immortality technology, I'll be dead in the next 35 years," he laments. Death is inevitable - currently at least - because as we get older the cells that make up our bodies lose their ability to repair themselves, making us vulnerable to cardiovascular disease and other age-related conditions that kill about two-thirds of us.

So Itskov is putting a slice of his fortune in to a bold plan he has devised to bypass ageing. He wants to use cutting-edge science to unlock the secrets of the human brain and then upload an individual's mind to a computer, freeing them from the biological constraints of the body.

"The ultimate goal of my plan is to transfer someone's personality into a completely new body," he says.

Itskov's interest in making the impossible possible began as a child in the Soviet Union in the 1980s. "My biggest dream was to be a cosmonaut, to fly in to outer space," he says. One science fiction novel made a lasting impression: "The hero took some immortality pill and he ended up flying the orbit of Earth. I remember myself questioning what I was going to do if I'm immortal."

But does his plan to allow us all to upload our minds to computers amount to anything more than sci-fi? The scientific director of Itskov's 2045 Initiative, Dr Randal Koene - a neuroscientist who worked as a research professor at Boston University's Center for Memory and Brain - laughs off any suggestion Itskov might have lost touch with reality.

"All of the evidence seems to say in theory it's possible - it's extremely difficult, but it's possible," he says. "So then you could say someone like that is visionary, but not mad because that implies you're thinking of something that's just impossible, and that's not the case."

The theoretical possibility Randal refers to is rooted in questions about how our brains work that neuroscience has yet to answer. Our brains are made up of about 86 billion neurons, connected cells that send information to each other by firing electrical charges that propagate through this organ in our skulls like waves.

But exactly how the brain generates our mind is a mystery like no other in science, according to the neurobiologist Prof Rafael Yuste of Columbia University. "The challenge is precisely how to go from a physical substrate of cells that are connected inside this organ, to our mental world, our thoughts, our memories, our feelings," he says.

Find out more

Horizon: The Immortalist, produced and directed by Tristan Quinn, will be shown on BBC 2 at 20:00 on Wednesday 16 March 2016 - viewers in the UK can catch up later on the BBC iPlayer

To try to unlock its workings, many neuroscientists approach the brain as if it were a computer. In this analogy the brain turns inputs, sensory data, into outputs, our behaviour, through computations. This is where the theoretical argument for mind uploading starts. If this process could be mapped, the brain could perhaps be copied in a computer, along with the individual mind it gives rise to.

That's the view of Dr Ken Hayworth, a neuroscientist who maps slivers of mouse brain at the Janelia Research Campus in Virginia by day, and by night grapples with the problem of how to upload his mind. Ken believes mapping the connectome - the complex connections of all the neurons in a brain - holds the key, because he believes it encodes all the information that makes us who we are, though this is not proven. "In the same sense that my computer is really just the ones and zeros on my hard drive, and I don't care what happens as long as those ones and zeros make it to the next computer it should be the same thing with me," he says, "I don't care if my connectome is implemented in this physical body or a computer simulation controlling a robotic body."

But Ken is a realist. "We are pitifully far away from mapping a human connectome," he acknowledges. "To put it in perspective, to image a whole fly brain it is going to take us approximately one to two years. The idea of mapping a whole human brain with the existing technology that we have today is simply impossible." And there's another theoretical challenge. Even if we could create the wiring diagram of a human brain, mind uploading would also most likely require reading the constant activity of all its neurons too.

Here Itskov might get some unexpected help, according to Yuste - who helped bring about the world's biggest neuroscience research project, the Brain Initiative. As part of this $6bn American programme aimed at solving the mysteries of brain disorders like Alzheimer's, he is hoping to map the continual interaction of neurons - the patterns of firing - in the brain over time, "We want to measure every spike from all the neurons at once simultaneously. Many people said it's just impossible."

It is an approach that does not rely on mapping the connectome first. In research yet to be published, Yuste has for the first time imaged over time the hypnotic electrical flashes that make up the activity of nearly all the neurons - up to several thousand - in one of the simplest nervous systems in evolution, a tiny invertebrate called a hydra. "It was very exciting," he says. But "today we just cannot tell you what these patterns mean. So it's a bit like listening in on a conversation in a foreign language that you don't understand."

Within 15 years Yuste hopes to map - and interpret - the activity of all the neurons in a mouse cortex. But the ultimate aim is to read the activity of the human brain.

"If the brain were a digital computer, if you wanted to upload the mind you need to be able to decipher it or download it first. So I think the Brain Initiative is a step that is necessary for this uploading to happen."

But Itskov is far from home and dry. At Duke University, one leading neuroscientist argues that the brain's dynamic complexity - from which the human condition emerges - cannot be replicated. "You cannot code intuition; you cannot code aesthetic beauty; you cannot code love or hate," says Dr Miguel Nicolelis, who is developing a mind-controlled exoskeleton aimed at helping the paralysed walk. "There is no way you will ever see a human brain reduced to a digital medium. It's simply impossible to reduce that complexity to the kind of algorithmic process that you will have to have to do that."

Yuste is also very far from certain the brain works like a computer and could ever be copied in a machine. But because neuroscience cannot yet explain how exactly the brain gives rise to us and prove that mind uploading is impossible, he believes society should start considering what the consequences might be if Itskov succeeded in his ambition.

"The pathway that leads with the new neural technologies to our understanding of the brain is the same pathway that could lead, theoretically, to the possibility of mind uploading," says Yuste. "Scientists that are involved in these methods have the responsibility to think ahead."

Mind uploading would usher in a world fraught with risks.

"If you could replicate the mind and upload it into a different material, you can in principle clone minds," says Yuste. "These are complicated issues because they deal with the core of defining what is a person."

Itskov is more sanguine: "I will answer you to the question of ethics by the opinion which was given to me by his holiness the Dalai Llama when I visited him in 2013. His point was that you can do everything if your motivation is to help people."

But this assurance is not enough for Yuste, who sits on the Brain Initiative's ethics panel: "I would put mind uploading in the list of the topics that should be very carefully discussed and thought through."

Itskov is already planning his endless life. "For the next few centuries I envision having multiple bodies, one somewhere in space, another hologram-like, my consciousness just moving from one to another."

It is estimated that 107 billion people have died before us. As our understanding of the brain advances in the decades ahead it will become clear whether Itskov is really the momentous visionary he claims to be, or merely the latest dreamer of impossible dreams.

Tristan Quinn produced and directed Horizon: The Immortalist, which will be shown on BBC 2 Wednesday at 20:00 on 16 March 2016 - viewers in the UK can catch up later on the BBC iPlayer

Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

Read this article:

The immortalist: Uploading the mind to a computer - BBC News

The Singularity Is Near: Mind Uploading by 2045? | Live …

NEW YORK By 2045, humans will achieve digital immortality by uploading their minds to computers or at least that's what some futurists believe. This notion formed the basis for the Global Future 2045 International Congress, a futuristic conference held here June 15-16.

The conference, which is the brainchild of Russian multimillionaire Dmitry Itskov, fell somewhere between hardcore science and science fiction. It featured a diverse cast of speakers, from scientific luminaries like Ray Kurzweil, Peter Diamandis and Marvin Minsky, to Swamis and other spiritual leaders.

In the year 2045

Kurzweil an inventor, futurist and now director of engineering at Google predicts that by 2045, technology will have surpassed human brainpower to create a kind of superintelligence an event known as the singularity. Other scientists have said that robots will overtake humans by 2100. [Super-Intelligent Machines: 7 Robotic Futures]

According to Moore's law, computing power doubles approximately every two years. Several technologies are undergoing similar exponential advances, from genetic sequencing to 3D printing, Kurzweil told conference attendees. He illustrated the point with a series of graphs showing the inexorable upward climb of various technologies.

By 2045, "based on conservative estimates of the amount of computation you need to functionally simulate a human brain, we'll be able to expand the scope of our intelligence a billion-fold," Kurzweil said.

Itskov and other so-called "transhumanists" interpret this impending singularity as digital immortality. Specifically, they believe that in a few decades, humans will be able to upload their minds to a computer, transcending the need for a biological body. The idea sounds like sci-fi, and it is at least for now. The reality, however, is that neural engineering is making significant strides toward modeling the brain and developing technologies to restore or replace some of its biological functions.

Brain prostheses

Substantial achievements have been made in the field of brain-computer interfaces, or BCIs (also called brain-machine interfaces). The cochlear implant in which the brain's cochlear nerve is electronically stimulated to restore a sense of sound to someone who is hard of hearing was the first true BCI. Many groups are now developing BCIs to restore motor skills, following damage to the nervous system from a stroke or spinal cord injury.

Jos Carmena and Michel Maharbiz, electrical engineers at the University of California, Berkeley, are working to develop state-of-the-art motor BCIs. These devices consist of pill-size electrode arrays that record neural signals from the brain's motor areas, which are then decoded by a computer and used to control a computer cursor or prosthetic limb (such as a robotic arm). Carmena and Maharbiz spoke of the challenge of making a BCI that works stably over time and does not require being tethered to wires.

Theodore Berger, a neural engineer at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, is taking BCIs to a new level by developing a memory prosthesis. Berger aims to replace part of the brain's hippocampus, the region that converts short-term memories into long-term ones, with a BCI. The device records the electrical activity that encodes a simple short-term memory (such as pushing a button) and converts it to a digital signal. That signal is passed into a computer where it is mathematically transformed and then fed back into the brain, where it gets sealed in as a long-term memory. He has successfully tested the device in rats and monkeys, and is now working with human patients. [Bionic Humans: Top 10 Technologies]

Mind uploading

The conference took a surreal turn when Martine Rothblatt a lawyer, author and entrepreneur, and CEO of biotech company United Therapeutics Corp. took the stage. Even the title of Rothblatt's talk was provocative: "The Purpose of Biotechnology is the End of Death."

Rothblatt introduced the concept of "mindclones" digital versions of humans that can live forever. She described how the mind clones are created from a "mindfile," a sort of online repository of our personalities, which she argued humans already have (in the form of Facebook, for example). This mindfile would be run on "mindware," a kind of software for consciousness. "The first company that develops mindware will have [as much success as] a thousand Googles," Rothblatt said.

But would such a mindclone be alive? Rothblatt thinks so. She cited one definition of life as a self-replicating code that maintains itself against disorder. Some critics have shunned what Rothblatt called "spooky Cartesian dualism," arguing that the mind must be embedded in biology. On the contrary, software and hardware are as good as wet ware, or biological materials, she argued.

Rothblatt went on to discuss the implications of creating mindclones. Continuity of the self is one issue, because your persona would no longer inhabit just a biological body. Then, there are mind-clone civil rights, which would be the "cause clbre" for the 21st century, Rothblatt said. Even mindclone procreation and reanimation after death were mentioned.

The quantum world

In parallel with the talk of brain technologies and mind-uploading, much was said about the nature of consciousness in the universe. Physicist Roger Penrose of the University of Oxford and others disagree with the interpretation of the brain as a mere computer. Penrose argued that consciousness is a quantum mechanical phenomenon arising from the fabric of the universe. Those of the "Penrose school" think uploading the brain would have to involve quantum computers a development unlikely to happen by 2045.

But Itskov thinks otherwise. The 32-year-old president of the Global Future 2045 Congress is dead set on living forever.

Editor's Note: This article was updated on June 19, 2013, to correct the dates of the Global Future 2045 International Congress (it was held June 15-16, not June 14-15, as previously stated.)

Follow Tanya Lewis on Twitterand Google+.Follow us @livescience, Facebook& Google+. Original article onLive Science .

Read the original here:

The Singularity Is Near: Mind Uploading by 2045? | Live ...

Heads Up Poker Podcast: 234 – Steve and Carlos: WITWICWRN – Pokerfuse

Full Episode Description For those wondering, Steve's easy acronym - WITWICWRN - stands for 'Where in The World Is Carlos Welch RIght Now'. While it does not roll of the tongue, it is a question that always comes up when we have Carlos on. The two discuss about fishing, cryptocurrency, and at 30:50 they dive into a strategy hand discussion. Remember that you can always submit a hand for our resident poker analysts to dissect by emailing [emailprotected]! Alex Fitzgerald gives away for FREE his 3 Hour Training Packon 3 betting. He has also put out a class Master Small Stakes Cash Games in One Class, and his tournament version, Master Tournament Poker in One Class. Use the code hupoker to get your discount, good until 2/21/2020. Elliot Roe! Start with thefreeTilt-Buster MP3, or look at his collection ofMental Game MP3s. If you need to be putting in more volume, thenThe Simple Volume Systemis for you. Total Mindset Makeover? Join thePoker Mind Coach Courses. If you are atournament poker player, you may already know aboutTournament Poker Edge. Check out somefree training videoshere. Check out all things poker atHeadsUpPoker.info. Sign up for a coaching session with Steve, watch instructional videos, and check out all previous podcasts. You can contact Steve viaTwitter,Facebook, or email at[emailprotected]

Read more:

Heads Up Poker Podcast: 234 - Steve and Carlos: WITWICWRN - Pokerfuse

SentinelOne Research Identifies IoT Vulnerabilities Enabling Remote Takeover and Network Intrusion – Yahoo Finance

Barak Sternberg to Present Research Findings at DefCon after Working with Smart Device Provider HDL Automation on Vulnerability Patches

SentinelOne, the autonomous cybersecurity platform company, today announced that Barak Sternberg, SentinelLabs security researcher, has identified four unique vulnerabilities in HDL Automation smart devices. The vulnerabilities exposed thousands of HDL devices to remote control by adversaries, leading to possible network intrusion, secret exfiltration, and even ransomware attacks. SentinelOne alerted HDL to the issues via the responsible disclosure process, and the vulnerabilities have been patched. Sternberg will present the findings at DefCon on Saturday, August 8 at 9AM PST, and the complete research will be available on the SentinelLabs blog.

IoT devices are ubiquitous in the home and the workplace, connecting lights, air conditioning, and even heat-sensors to home or corporate networks. IoT devices are also potential security weak points that attackers target to exploit internal network configurations, change arbitrary controllers, and cause software or hardware damage. With enterprises adding more and more connected devices to their networks, vulnerabilities like those outlined in SentinelLabs research are concerning as every connection to the enterprise network is a potential vulnerability.

"IoT can pose a significant threat to enterprise security because, while anything you connect to your network is a potential point of ingress, not everyone considers that IoT devices contain unintended vendor-created backdoors" said Sternberg. "Many organizations dont design smart thermostats or refrigerators with security in mind. However, even mundane devices such as this can be open to attackers, making it critical to understand exactly how many devices you have connected to your network and to harden every endpoint."

SentinelLabs identified two vulnerabilities that enabled account takeover; a flaw in the "forgot your password" function and a takeover of the debug email account. Two additional vulnerabilities relating to endpoint APIs were also identified. Due to these flaws, SentinelLabs researchers were able to compromise remote servers used as proxies for configuring smart devices and worked with HDL Automation on patch solutions. If attackers were simply interested in causing chaos, they could do physical damage by raising the temperature in a server room, disabling security cameras, or disabling sensors designed to detect leaks or voltage surges. The four new-found IoT vulnerabilities highlight the sensitivity and cost of IoT cyberattacks in impacting our digital way of life.

Further details on SentinelOnes research will be released on the SentinelLabs blog at the time of the DefCon presentation. Sternberg will present his findings at DefCon IoT Village, on Saturday, August 8th at 9 AM PST.

To learn more about how SentinelOne secures IoT devices and protects corporate networks from IoT-related intrusions, visit http://www.sentinelone.com. The SentinelOne Singularity Platform includes broad IoT capabilities through SentinelOne Ranger, which identifies every connected device on the network and prevents them from being exploited.

About SentinelOne

SentinelOne is the only cybersecurity solution encompassing AI-powered prevention, detection, response and hunting across endpoints, containers, cloud workloads, and IoT devices in a single autonomous platform. With SentinelOne, organizations gain full transparency into everything happening across the network at machine speed to defeat every attack, at every stage of the threat lifecycle. To learn more visit http://www.sentinelone.com or follow us at @SentinelOne, on LinkedIn or Facebook.

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200806005536/en/

Contacts

Will Clarkfama PR for SentinelOneP: 401-714-4192E: S1@famapr.com.

The rest is here:

SentinelOne Research Identifies IoT Vulnerabilities Enabling Remote Takeover and Network Intrusion - Yahoo Finance