Apple removes China censorship-dodging apps from store, software makers say – MarketWatch

Posted on by

BEIJINGApple Inc. is removing software from its app store in China that allowed users to circumvent the countrys vast system of internet filters, according to makers of the apps.

Several popular apps giving users access to virtual private networks, or VPNs, that tunnel through Chinas sophisticated system of internet filters disappeared from the mainland China version of Apples App Store on Saturday.

One service, ExpressVPN, said in a blog post that Apple AAPL, -0.70% had notified it that its iOS app was removed from the Chinese App Store. ExpressVPN published a copy of the notice, which said the app included content that was illegal in China.

Read: The stock markets near-term fortunes may ride on Apples earnings

And see: This 1 number sums up why that Foxconn deal is over-the-top bad for Wisconsin

Another company, Star VPN, said on its Twitter account that it had also received the notice. Searches in the China App store for a number of popular VPN apps turned up no results Saturday evening.

Were disappointed in this development, as it represents the most drastic measure the Chinese government has taken to block the use of VPNs to date, and we are troubled to see Apple aiding Chinas censorship efforts, the ExpressVPN blog post said.

An expanded version of this report appears on WSJ.com

Popular on WSJ.com:

Bad news if you make $150,000 to $300,000: Higher taxes for many

Japan slaps 50% tariff on some U.S. beef

Go here to read the rest:

Apple removes China censorship-dodging apps from store, software makers say - MarketWatch

OPINION | Carolla: ‘Safe spaces’ harm free speech, stunt students … – The Hill (blog)

Posted on by

As someone who makes his living by challenging ideas through humor, social commentary and, if warranted, ridicule, I care deeply about free speech. And there is a growing movement across our college campuses to shut down free speech of teachers, students and invited guests. This should scare the hell out of all us all.

Ive been doing talk radio for more than three decades and I host a daily podcast. This means I constantly have guests on who disagree with me on many subjects. Challenging their ideas and points of views while they do the same to me is an important part of the public discourse. One thing Ive learned about Americans from talking with them for more than 30 years is that we like to argue and debate, even among friends and were damn good at it.

But seriously, America has been that safe space where truth can be spoken to power. Where We the People can challenge a king and a corrupt idea like a monarchy. This right has been reaffirmed through our history. Its been fought for, and people have died for it. We must understand that we have the right to free expression, not the right to not be offended. This fundamental difference is being lost on todays college campuses.

We should not be teaching students to retreat from debate, but to charge intellectually into it. This is one of the most valuable and profound gifts given to us in the founding of America.

When we enter into robust debate, the best ideas will most often rise. Its when ideas and points of view are censored that our country loses, because we may miss new ideas or other ones may not have been properly examined.

I used to love to play colleges as a comedian. College campuses were a fantastic place to perform, but today the negatively-charged environment where everyone is offended has made it toxic. Its so bad that some of the top comedians, including Jerry Seinfeld, Bill Maher and Chris Rock not exactly a right-wing cabal have noted that performing on a college campus is no longer a real option due to the labyrinth of speech codes and hurt feelings.

As comedians, we find subjects, which often includes stereotypes. Then, we make social commentary or a joke about it. String enough of those together and you have a routine. And heres a window into my business: Offending people is the foundation of what comedians do. Finding a moment, person, group or idea and holding it up for ridicule has been a part of comedy since the very first joke ever told.

Someone will almost always be offended; its risky, but if youre a good comedian the joke will reveal a truth we can all recognize. Without this, were all just sitting in a dark theater buying two overpriced drinks. Comedians are the modern-day court jesters holding the mirror of truth back up to society.

I also know that what happens at college does not stay at college. Given this generations impulse to post every moment of life online, nothing they do will stay in college. In fact, it will haunt them from job interview to job interview. There seems to be a growing movement to shut down differing points of view that are not politically correct or fit neatly into todays speech codes, which are nothing short of thought-regulation.

The centrifuge of this movement is ironically the college campus the place that has traditionally been the center of the free exchange of ideas. Instead, colleges now have places known as safe spaces where students who feel threatened by concepts, ideas, differing views, other ethnicities or different economic or geographical backgrounds may retreat.

We currently have more than 20 million people attending colleges or degree-granting programs. This is up from 17.8 million in 2006.Thats a lot of trigger warnings and play-doh and puppy crap to pick up from safe spaces if we continue down the coddling road. But I digress.

Ive also seen how speakers have faced being shut down, intimidated from speaking and even physically assaulted on campus. I recently faced being shut down when nationally-syndicated radio host Dennis Prager and I planned to hold an event at Cal State Northridge in California. The producers of the event confirmed the rental of the facilities, and then, suddenly, two weeks prior to the event, were told the school did not want to have controversial speakers such as Dennis and myself on campus.

Me, I can understand the offense, but Dennis, hes just really tall and really smart. This was later deemed a scheduling conflict not a content conflict. Eventually, after lawyers jumped in, the scheduling conflict was resolved, and the event was held. It also produced a No. 1 iTunes comedy album. But it showed me up close what is happening on campus. To be candid, it shocked me, because our colleges should be an important place that embraces free speech, intellectual diversity and challenging ideas.

What is provided in these safe spaces, and why is it a problem? Instead of fostering the development of young adults, colleges are providingcoloring books, play-doh, puppies and stuffed animals.Its basically your four-year-old daughters bedroom where one can shut out the challenges, facts and outside world. Providing this bubble-wrapped type of education does not prepare the next generation for the challenges of life. It prepares them for failure.

Can you imagine a student like this getting a job in customer service for an IT company where millions of dollars are on the line, and rather than being able to address or fix a problem, they will need play-do and puppies to get through the day?

We also hear a cry for diversity on college campuses, which is total boloney. Diversity by definition doesnt just mean differing races, genders or ethnicities coexisting. True diversity is intellectual diversity, where differing points of view and ideas can be discussed, even the ones we vehemently disagree with. True diversity requires points of view we disagree with, otherwise it wont be diverse, only self re-affirming.

But this definition of diversity does not seem to fit within the current college campus. The definition being pushed is not one of true diversity, but reaffirming already approved thoughts. Its basically like were dressing ideological uniformity in a cheap supermarket costume but calling it diversity. We all know the real kid behind the mask, but students and teachers are forced to go along with the charade.

This point couldnt be made any clearer than by Sol Stern, one of the co-founders of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement in the 1960s. Stern, looking back 50 years later on what he saw as the failure of the original Free Speech Movementobserved, Because the claim that the FSM was fighting for free speech for all (i.e., the First Amendment) was always a charade. Within weeks of FSMs founding, it became clear to the leadership that the struggle was really about clearing barriers to using the campus as a base for radical political activity. Our movement ignored Orwells warning that political language is designed to make lies sound truthful.

Orwell was right, and 50 years later, the climate on college campuses is growing worse. The stated goal of diversity has been one of inclusion, but the recent growth of identity politics has reversed this to ultimately promote exclusion, nearly indiscernible from Jim Crow laws of the 1940s.

While our national motto is E Pluribus Unum, or out of many, one, identity politics creates a divisive power play on the pattern of basing ones identity on characterizations like race, gender, class, sexual orientation, religion and on down the line in as many divided categories of oppression as one can imagine.

Ultimately this movement against challenging ideas is a disservice to students, as theyre not being prepared for the world outside their safe spaces. Instead, their diplomas some of which cost in the mid-six figures will have actually set them back. I think the only thing worse than being uneducated is being mis-educated.

Adam Carolla is a comedian, television host, actor, podcaster, author and director. He hosts "The Adam Carolla Show," which set the Guinness World record in 2011 for "most downloaded podcast." He and Dennis Prager are currently filming a documentary, "No Safe Spaces," which explores political correctness on college campuses.

Th views expressed by contributors are their own and not the views of The Hill.

Read more:

OPINION | Carolla: 'Safe spaces' harm free speech, stunt students ... - The Hill (blog)

US bill on Israel boycotts sets up free speech battle – The Jerusalem Post

Posted on by

The White House. (photo credit:REUTERS)

WASHINGTON Earlier this month, one of Americas largest civil-liberties organizations announced opposition to a congressional bill that would target international efforts to boycott, divest and sanction Israel, setting up an uncomfortable fight between US-based Israel lobbies and free-speech advocates.

The American Civil Liberties Union a union at the forefront of several battles against the Trump administration over the rights of immigrants, refugees and minority groups facing systemic discrimination said the bill would make worse a 1970s-era law that had already stymied the ability of individuals and companies to exercise their constitutional right to boycott.

But the Israel Anti-Boycott Act was jointly introduced in March by a Senate Democrat and House Republican, with cosponsors from both sides of the aisle a rare moment of bipartisanship in 2017 as several other legislative items on Israel have wrought division.

In recent years, efforts to legislate against the BDS movement have largely taken place at the state and local level. That tactic has proven successful on paper: The nations largest states, including California, Texas, Florida and New York, have all passed harsh measures that effectively prevent their states from aiding businesses that partake in boycotts of Israel.

But this new bill takes a different approach, reacting to new global efforts beyond the reach of any one state. It was drafted in reaction to a decision from the UN Human Rights Council last spring to compile a blacklist of companies operating in the Palestinian territories, defined by them as anywhere beyond the pre-1967 war Green Line.

The anti-boycott act would amend the Export Administration Act of 1979 originally written to protect US companies from Arab League sanctions on Israel to protect Israel and Israeli businesses from international boycotts of virtually any kind. Specifically, the bill would criminally penalize any US person seeking to collect information on another partys relationship with Israel in pursuance of a boycott.

The ACLU has been joined in recent days by several other civil liberties advocates warning that the law would encroach on free speech: Ones right to join a boycott called for by an organization such as the United Nations. They claim that the law, as it is currently written, is blatantly unconstitutional in this regard.

But the language of the bill offers a clever counterargument: That enforcement of the US-Israel Strategic Partnership Act of 2014, which compels the US to deepen strategic, security and economic ties as much as possible, in a definitional manner requires Washington to rebut the BDS effort. And it simply expands on the sturdy parameters of 1979 export regulations that prohibit the boycott of friendly countries.

Supporters of the bill contend that the ACLUs argument against the legislation is, in fact, one against the Export Administration Act a basis for international sanctions levied against governments worldwide in the name of national security. The ACLU, on the other hand, argues that its problem with the bill is that is targets specific companies choosing whether to enter into business with other specific companies, such as one operating a factory in West Bank settlements.

Authors of the bill note that their legislation takes no position on Israels settlement activity.

The ACLU has long supported laws prohibiting discrimination, but this bill cannot fairly be characterized as an anti-discrimination measure, as some would argue, the organization said in a July 17 letter to lawmakers. For example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 already prevents businesses from discriminating against customers based on race, color, religion and national origin.

This bill, on the other hand, aims to punish people who support international boycotts that are meant to protest Israeli government policies, while leaving those who agree with Israeli government policies free from the threat of sanctions for engaging in the exact same behavior, the group continues. Whatever their merits, such boycotts rightly enjoy First Amendment protection.

Share on facebook

Go here to read the rest:

US bill on Israel boycotts sets up free speech battle - The Jerusalem Post

Court: Politicians blocking followers violates free speech – WND.com – WND.com

Posted on by

(New York Magazine) While there is no set precedent for the issue, more and more courts are encountering a new type of lawsuit related to social-media blocking. The Knight Foundation, for instance, is suing the U.S. government on behalf of Twitter users blocked by President Donald Trump, whose Twitter account has become alarmingly vital when it comes to understanding his presidency.

This week, a federal court in Virginia tackled the issue when it ruled on behalf of a plaintiff blocked by a local county politician. According to The Wall Street Journal, Brian Davison sued the chairwoman of the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors, who temporarily banned him from her Facebook page after he posted criticism of local officials last year. Judge James Cacheris found that she had violated Davisons First Amendment rights by blocking him from leaving comment, because, in his judgment, the chairwoman, Phyllis Randall, was using her Facebook page in a public capacity. Though it was a personal account, she used it to solicit comments from constituents.

See the original post here:

Court: Politicians blocking followers violates free speech - WND.com - WND.com

Merkel, Germany, the Media and Free Speech – National Review

Posted on by

From the Financial Timesearlier this week:

German media were too uncritical in their coverage of the 2015 refugee crisis, giving Angela Merkels open-door policy a free pass and failing to represent the legitimate concerns of ordinary people alarmed by the influx, a new study has found.The report, commissioned by the Otto Brenner Stiftung in Frankfurt, said the coverage was so one-sided that it ended up deepening the ideological rift in Germany between liberals on the one hand and nationalists and conservatives on the other.

Up until late autumn 2015 hardly any editorials dealt with the concerns, fears and also resistance of a growing part of the population, the report said. When they did, they adopted a didactic or in the case of east Germany [where anti-immigrant sentiment is strongest], a contemptuous tone.

The study, led by Michael Haller, a former senior editor at weekly newspaper Die Zeit, is the most comprehensive analysis of how the German media dealt with the migrant crisis

Newspapers were filled with articles about the new Willkommenskultur or welcome culture, epitomised by the crowds who gathered in Munich station in September 2015 to greet refugees arriving from Hungary and hand out sweets and toys.

The report said Willkommenskultur became a kind of magic word used by certain sections of the media to turn ordinary people into good Samaritans and encourage them to carry out acts of kindness towards newcomers.

And yet even this was not enough for Merkel, an authoritarian curiously now widely praised as a defender of liberal (in the accurate sense of that word) values.

Heres CNBC from September, 2015:

German Chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard confronting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg over incendiary posts on the social network, Bloomberg reported on Sunday, amid complaints from her government about anti-immigrant posts in the midst of Europes refugee crisis. On the sidelines of a United Nations luncheon on Saturday, Merkel was caught on a hot mic pressing Zuckerberg about social media posts about the wave of Syrian refugees entering Germany, the publication reported.The Facebook CEO was overheard responding that we need to do some work on curtailing anti-immigrant posts about the refugee crisis. Are you working on this? Merkel asked in English, to which Zuckerberg replied in the affirmative before the transmission was disrupted.

Could it have been that some people at least were turning to Facebook to express their views because there was nowhere else where they could get a hearing?

In the course of a post that September on the topic of the German governments attitude to (yes, sometimes ugly) dissent, I noted this from a Breitbart report:

An organisation run by a former Stasi agent has been recruited by the German government to patrol Facebook in a bid to stamp out xenophobic comments. Those caught posting material that the government disagrees with are likely to face criminal prosecution.Germany is set to welcome one million new immigrants this year, a move that has not been without controversy. Determined to see his fellow Germans embrace their new multicultural homeland, Justice Minister Heiko Maas has decided to crack down on those citizens who criticise the influx, especially those who take to their own private Facebook accounts to do so.Maas has recruited the help of an organisation Network Against Nazis (Netz Gegen Nazis, or NAN) to aid him in his crackdown. NAN was founded by, and according to its website works in partnership with, the Amaedu Antonio Foundation, run by Anetta Kahane, who between 1974 and 1982 worked for the Stasi under the code name Victoria [According to Wikipedia she was an "Inoffizieller Mitarbeiter", an "unofficial collaborator" with the Stasi, no agent, but still...].

Fast forward to the end of last month.

Newsweek:

Social media companies in Germany that dont do enough to prevent the spread of hate speech and fake news could face fines, the countrys parliament ruled Friday.

What could go wrong?

Newsweek:

Networks that do not remove content that is obviously illegal within 24 hours, or one week in less clear-cut cases, face fines beginning at 5 million ($5.7 million) and rising to 50 million ($57 million) depending on the severity of the offense concerned.Facebook immediately slammed the decision in a statement. The company said it shared the aspiration to fight hate speech in a statement to the BBC, but: We believe the best solutions will be found when government, civil society and industry work together and that this law as it stands now will not improve efforts to tackle this important societal problem.

The new law has even gone too far for the UN

But the U.N. has criticized the bill. Many of the violations covered by the bill are highly dependent on context, context which platforms are in no position to assess, the U.N. Special Rapporteur to the High Commissioner for Human Rights David Kaye wrote of the law in the run up to its passage.

At the beginning of 2016 (as I noted in a post here), Angela Merkel was awarded the Roosevelt Foundations Four Freedoms Award for, amongst other achievements, her moral leadership of Germany and Europe during the refugee crisis.

Handelsblatt:

The Roosevelt Foundation in Middelburg, the Netherlands, and the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute in New York present the annual Four Freedoms Award which is named after the four freedoms President Franklin D. Roosevelt named in a speech in 1941 and which all people should enjoy. They are freedom of speech, freedom of worship, freedom from want, and freedom from fear.

Top of the list: Freedom of speech.

Read more here:

Merkel, Germany, the Media and Free Speech - National Review

Hassan should support freedom of speech – Seacoastonline.com

Posted on by

July 28 To the Editor:

Sen. Maggie Hassan spoke at the 35th annual Martin Luther King Day Celebration in Manchester last Jan. 16. I heard her and was impressed by her firm commitment to civil rights and inclusion in our state and country.

So I am shocked that she has co-sponsored the Israel Anti Boycott Act (Senate Bill 720). This bill imposes fines and criminal penalties, up to 20 years in prison, on those supporting the movement to boycott Israeli goods and divest in Israeli investments. The purpose of the boycott is to pressure the Israeli government to change its settlement policy, which many believe is illegal and also immoral.

I oppose hate speech in any form: anti-Semitic as well as anti-Muslim speech. I condemn acts of hate directed at others. However, American citizens have a First Amendment right to speak and act in favor of boycott and divestment. Whether or not I agree with the point of view of the boycott is beside the point. I must support any American who chooses to exercise this right peacefully.

So, I believe, should Senator Hassan.

Sincerely,

David Blair

Harrisville

See the original post here:

Hassan should support freedom of speech - Seacoastonline.com

Soy milk is at the epicenter of a global free-speech debate – Quartz

Posted on by

Its not just an unassuming carton in the supermarket dairy aisle. At least, not anymore.

Soy milk has been available since 1947 and is currently in high demand, bringing in about $300 million per year. Despite its popularityor perhaps because of itthe beverage has also found itself at the center of a global debate over freedom of speech.

Traditional dairy companies are arguing that the soy industry has inappropriately coopted terminologies such as milk to sell products, and that in doing so, its confusing consumers. The debate is reaching a fever pitch as cow-milk peddlersespecially in the USfind themselves in the sales doldrums while simultaneously having to fight off consumer interest in vegan, plant-based food companies looking to take more of their market share.

As a result of sour dairy-company profits, the soyfood industryworth about $5 billionis increasingly finding itself in courtrooms around the world. At its core, these cases boil down to the issue of free speech, and whether a beverage made by a commercial enterprisesuch as a soy milk companycan legally describe itself as milk.

Whether a soy company can market its liquid product as milk depends on where you are in the world. Thats because its one thing to consider individual peoples freedom of speech, but when it comes to businesses, governments take different positions globally. Those differences have created a legal minefield for soy milk.

In the US, the right to free speech includes protections for commercial speech, which is speech done on behalf of a company for the intent of making a profit. In places such as Canada and the European Union, it is generally upheld as the freedom of expression, which includes the right to hold opinions and impart ideas without interference by the government. When it comes to how that applies to corporations, the European Commission, the EUs ruling body, commits to promoting best practices by companies.

In Europe, this sort of language leaves a lot of wiggle room in the grey area of commercial speech. I think the American acceptance of commercial speech as a form of speech differentiates us from other countries, says Roy Gutterman, the director of Syracuse Universitys Tully Center for Free Speech. Other countries have way more room to regulate. We leave less room for the government to decide when it comes to speech issues.

The different legal attitudes toward freedom of speech mean that in the US, courts generally side with plant-based food companies, and in Europe, courts are ruling against them.

In June, the European Court of Justice heard a case in which a company called TofuTown was challenged by a German consumer-protection group. The court ultimately ruled that plant-based foods in the EU cannot be sold as milk, butter, and cheese because their chief ingredient isnt derived from an animal. Consumers could be confused, the court said. This ruling stands even if those products are clearly marketed as animal-free, such as TofuTowns products soyatoo tofu butter and veggie cheese.

In the same month, a US court heard a similar case against WhiteWave Foods, which produces Silk and So Delicious soy, almond, coconut, and cashew products, such as non-dairy milk, creamer, yoghurt, and ice-cream alternatives. The federal district court in California dismissed the issue outright, saying there was no consumer confusion. The court added that the challengers essentially allege that a reasonable consumer would view the terms soy milk and almond milk, disregard the first words in the names, and assume that the beverages came from cows. One month before, another federal court in California ruled in favor of almond-milk maker Blue Diamond Growers, concluding that the challenger failed to plausibly allege that a reasonable consumer is likely to be deceived.

Still, the laws in Europe arent totally cut-and-dry. In 2010, the European Commission (pdf) oddly included coconut milk, ice cream, cocoa butter, and peanut butter on a list of products that are protected. This patchwork of different rules across the globe makes it especially difficult for companies looking to expand business, as discrepancies across borders can cause prickly problems for food companies looking to get their products in more supermarkets.

For an American soy-milk maker that wants to expand into Europe, this would present a serious policy challenge, says Jessica Almy, director of policy at the Good Food Institute (GFI), a Washington-based group that supports and lobbies on behalf of vegan and vegetarian food companies. Where theres no consumer confusion, they cant be restricting what goes on the label. For that reason, GFI is looking for ways to try and reshape regulations in Europe to clear a path for products such as soy milk.

The results of these legal skirmishes will stock the fridge for a food-production future that might be less reliant on animal-based agriculture. For example, new food-technology companies perfecting lab-made meats and acellular milk will be watching these battles closely to see how they will be able to market their products. In the global marketplace, these kinds of companies are still currently tiny players with big ambitions. But if they cant jump the freedom-of-speech hurdle, there will be serious roadblocks to cracking into big markets around the world.

This sounds like its a cutting edge issue thats going to be gaining some publicity and notoriety as it develops, Gutterman says.

Read this next: How the vegan movement broke out of its echo chamber and finally started disrupting things

See the rest here:

Soy milk is at the epicenter of a global free-speech debate - Quartz

Mariners declare atheism, refuse to save the Queens Court – Lookout Landing

Posted on by

Today the Seattle Mariners were better at baseball than the New York Mets. They may not be a better baseball team than the New York Mets, but today they were, and continued their march towards .500. Hooray!

Yovani Gallardo went 5.2 innings and... [checks notes]...outdueled Jacob DeGrom? That cant be right. But no: Gallardo was effective with his pitches, getting lots of weak contact and commanding his pitches effectively. He finished his day just shy of six innings, allowing five hits and just one run while walking two and striking two batters out. Tony Zych came in to relieve him in the fifth and was wild to start, but settled down to close out the inning. Zep, Vincent, and Diaz closed things down. Things got a little hairy in the ninth with Diaz allowing a run, because Conforto gonna Conforto, but Diaz came back to strike out Asdrubal Cabrera to secure the win.

Meanwhile, DeGrom struggled. He was at 70 pitches already after the third and had lapses of control, such as when he HIT OUR PRECIOUS MITCH HANIGER IN THE FACE. Haniger had to leave the game and is now on the DL, and whoever has the Mitch Haniger voodoo doll, its like, enough already, okay? Anyway, so DeGrom rearranged Hanigers face in the second, when Nelson Cruz had singled and Kyle Seager had doubled, so the bases were loaded, and then Jarrod "I love to hit in the clutch" Dyson hit a single to give the Mariners a 2-0 edge. The Mariners would smallball their way into another run in the third, and for today, that would be enough.

Today the Mets fans mobbed up at Safeco amd made the "Queens Court." They had K cards and t-shirts and everything and I got pretty mad about it, although everyoneincluding the friends I was at the game withtold me I shouldnt be so mad. On the one hand I guess my reaction was outsize; I tend to listen to my friends and there was sun and beer, etc. But on the other hand, it sucked a little to see an opposing fan base invade Safeco and ape one of our most cherished traditions in our own house. I might have been wrong about my anger, but i was selfishly, gleefully glad about winning this game. And Im super-excited to see the Maple Grove in action tomorrow. GOMS.

Read the original post:

Mariners declare atheism, refuse to save the Queens Court - Lookout Landing

Pence begins 3-nation European tour in NATO member Estonia – CBS News

Posted on by

US Vice President Mike Pence and his wife Karen Pence disembark their plane after arriving at the airport in Tallinn, Estonia, on July 30, 2017. /

Raigo Pajula / AFP/Getty Images

U.S. Vice President Mike Pence arrived Sunday in Estonia for meetings with the presidents of three Baltic nations in northeastern Europe, the first stop of a four-day European tour.

The vice president and his wife, Karen Pence, arrived in the Estonian capital, Tallinn, to kick off the European tour that also includes stops in Georgia and Montenegro.

Pence is scheduled to meet with the leaders of the Baltics - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - on Monday. He is expected to pledge Washington's commitment to NATO's mutual defense, an important issue for the former Soviet republics that border Russia.

Play Video

President Trump said Friday that the U.S backed NATO Article 5 and thanked the Romanian leader for fighting alongside American troops in Afghanis...

In a press pool interview, Pence said he was sent to Europe by President Donald Trump "with a very simple message."

"That is that 'America First' doesn't mean 'America Alone,'" Pence told Fox News. "Our message to the Baltic states my message when we visit Georgia and Montenegro will be the same: to our allies here in Eastern Europe, we are with you."

Later Sunday, he held talks with Estonian Prime Minister Juri Ratas.

Issues included Estonia's current holding of the European Union presidency, trade, cybersecurity and the continuing tensions in the Baltic Sea region, where Russia and NATO have increased their military presence in recent years.

"NATO's collective position of deterrence and defense has strengthened in the Baltic region and the U.S.A. is indispensable to ensuring the security of our immediate neighborhood, as well as all of Europe," Ratas said in a statement.

Ratas told Estonian broadcaster ERR he also brought up the possible deployment of Patriot surface-to-air missiles in his country. Lithuania also has said it would be eager to have the missiles in its territory.

The U.S. military displayed Patriot missiles in Lithuania earlier this month after having used them in an exercise there. Poor anti-aircraft defense is seen by experts as the weakest link for NATO in the Baltics.

2017 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Read this article:

Pence begins 3-nation European tour in NATO member Estonia - CBS News

Reptile Cult Leader Says Her Follower Was Killed by NATO – Daily Beast

Posted on by

Two followers of a cult-like group have died of apparent suicide in the past five years, but their former leader Sherry Shriner says they were murdered by the U.S. government.

On July 15, Steve Mineo allegedly asked his girlfriend to shoot him in the head. Mineo, 32, had been having issues with Shriners cult that believes in reptilian aliens, his girlfriend told police when they arrived. Five years earlier, another follower of Shriner, 22-year-old Kelly Pingilley, died after swallowing 30 sleeping pills.

In both cases, Shriner says shadowy forces were responsible. For instance, NATO killed Pingilley because she believed in the god Yahuah.

Shriner preaches online from Ohio that the world is being taken over by reptile aliens; that a superpowered substance called orgone can destroy demons, clones, and zombies; that Jesus is actually Satan and that only followers of the god Yahuah will go to heaven. But for all their talk of end-times salvation, its their members who keep dying young.

Sherry Shriner basically runs a death cult based on fear, Pingilleys brother Nate told The Daily Beast. Theres always something major thats going to happen every month. She tells her followers that the world is ending, basically Planet X is coming and Planet X is gonna crash into Earth, or minotaurs are gonna jump from the surface of Planet X. These are all literal things Kelly told me were gonna happen.

These apocalyptic visions seemed out of character for Pingilley, a Lutheran former cheerleader in suburban Detroit. She was a sweet soul who, when she observed an old man struggling to cut his steak in a restaurant, got up and cut it for him, Nate said.

Shriner also has stories about Pingilley. They met when Pingilley was 19 or 20, Shriner says, when Pingilley was struggling with the choice of going to college or spending what time we have left on this for earth, for Yah and doing things He needed done as we headed into the Last Days.

Pingilley, always a helper, started working as a transcriber for Shriners radio show Aliens in the News.

Pingilley also joined Shriner and her followers on missions to New York and Kentucky, where the group believed they were battling the New World Order. At Fort Knox, Pingilley claimed she helped liberate a group of beautiful turtle people from a government prison, Shriner claimed. In New York City, Pingilley joined her on a hunt for a government base that extended all the way over to the Bronx and had tunnels extended out to everywhere, even midtown and Times Square, NY.

Shriner said the god Yahuah made her followers invisible for the mission, and that New York City would now be on the bottom of the Atlantic if not for their efforts.

On her blog, Pingilley described her new beliefs as a reawakening.

A little over a year ago, she wrote in her first post in January 2011, I woke up againspirituallythe way I had been when I was a kid.

Get The Beast In Your Inbox!

Start and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast.

A speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don't).

Subscribe

Thank You!

You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason.

But her excitement appeared to sour over the next two years. Her writings became increasingly untethered from reality, and she wrote of visions and voicesperhaps the symptoms of undiagnosed schizophrenia, her brother suggested.

One week before her death in December 2012, Pingilley said the apocalypse was near. Yahuah had shown her a strange symbol, which foretold invasion by an alien race that would eat and enslave humans, she wrote.

On the night of Dec. 28, she left a note on her pillow and drove off to a snowy wildlife park with a bottle of sleeping pills to kill herself.

Shriner fills peoples heads with delusions of grandeur tells them theyre really angels with magic powers in human form, Nate said. Part of why my sister killed herself was to reach that next level of spirituality. She was convinced in her suicide note that she was off to fulfill some great destiny.

When hunters found her body in the park the following morning, she was wearing a necklace with a pendant of orgone, the supposedly supernatural substance central to Shriners teachings. A photograph of Pingilley before her death shows her wearing an orgone pendant that Shriner currently sells on her website for $44, plus shipping.

Kelly didnt hitch a ride on a spaceship. She didnt die peacefully, Debra McCorkle, a family friend told the Detroit News after Pingilleys death. It was a cold and silent death alone in the woods. She was looking for God and Shriner steered her into some weird crap.

Shriner disagrees, saying a NATO death squad murdered the troubled young woman.

Kelly just pissed people off because she was supposed to kill me 3 months earlier on a trip to NYC with me and she refused to kill me, Shriner told The Daily Beast, adding that the alleged murder orders came from the White House I was #2 on Obamas death list for 8 years she was coming to my house before we headed to NYC she was supposed to kill me when she got here so the trip would never happen.

On one of her followers blogs, Shriner spun Pingilleys death into a conspiracy theory of its own.

She didnt give up without a fight and they left all the fake evidence NATO is involved. Shriner wrote in the days after Pingilleys death.

Shriner turned the tragedy into a rallying cry for her surviving followers.

Obama is on the march folks, if youre not with him and the Alien New Age youre against them, she warned in the dark eulogy. They have their lists, and theyre going to work on them Kellys death is a wake up call that they are after Yahs people.

Shriner posted the eulogy on Truth Seeker Blog, a website run by her follower Steve Mineo. And four and a half years after Pingilleys death, Mineo finally did heed a wakeup call: He denounced Shriner and set out to debunk her teachings.

Mineo had been a Shriner disciple since 2004, he said in one of his YouTube videos. But he and the self-proclaimed prophetess had a falling-out in May, after Shriner accused Mineos girlfriend of being a reptilian for eating raw steak. After weeks of infighting, Mineo and his girlfriend broke from Shriners circles and Mineo began making long videos about his former leader.

From May 29 to July 11, Mineo uploaded five videos attempting to expose Shriner. Then on July 15, he was murdered. His girlfriend, who had also been involved in the alleged cult, called 911 immediately after shooting him in the forehead in their apartment in Tobyhanna, Pennsylvania. She told police that Mineo was undergoing a lot of stress through problems with [a] cult, and that he asked her to kill him, according to a police report.

The report suggested that Mineo had been killed with the gun placed directly on the forehead, and that he did not appear to have struggled.

Mineo did not appear to know Pingilley directly, but he knew she died.

He talked about Pingilleys death during an interview with another Shriner cast-out named Richard Brown.

Im not trying to get vengeance, Im just trying to get the truth out, man, Mineo tells Brown in a YouTube video uploaded weeks before Mineos death. Because I can see the damage she causes people. I heard a woman named Kelly killed herself.

Brown tells Mineo to be patient. All things happen in the Lords time, Brown says. You cant intervene in what hes got planned for [Shriner]. Because if somebody else gets hurt the way Kelly got hurt, [Shriners] gonna pay for it big time.

Both men said Shriner and her followers had victimized them when they took a step away from the alleged cult. Brown said Shriner accused him of being a clone, or of having gone to hell.

If I was a clone, or if I was in Hell, why is it that I made a video about orgone all around me? Brown said of the supernatural substance, which supposedly destroys clones. Ive got tons of orgone all around me. She lied and said I told her to get rid of her orgone. I never said that. I actually went to her house and rebuilt her orgone stonehedge.

Mineo said Shriner accused his girlfriend of being a reptilian or a witch, and that her followers turned against him.

She runs her circle with an iron fist, Laurie Alexander, one of Mineos friends told The Daily Beast. Because if you do not believe in what shes teaching, shes like, thats fine. But youre at risk of not going to heaven if you dont believe what Im saying.

After Mineos death, Alexander spoke out against Shriner on Facebook, calling her Lizard Laurie and implicating her in Pingilleys suicide.

Now Im the reptilian, Alexander said. Shes going to have to get a new mode of attack, because this ones getting old very quickly.

Shriner says the allegations against herthat shes a cult leader, that her followers are dying of suicideare government conspiracies.

They tried to use [Pingilleys] murder to claim it was a suicide and then blame it on me..to smear me, she told The Daily Beast, adding they made Mineos girlfriend a pawn. Both gov psyops to try and smear me. Ive been at this a long time, they can shove their psyops up their arses.

Shriner appears to be weathering the second death exactly as the first. Shortly after Mineos death, Shriner uploaded a video calling his girlfriend a vampire who morphed her huge teeth out before killing him. A Shriner follower made a video playing Mineos most recent YouTube upload backwards. The garbled backwards speech sounded like gonna serve the devil, the follower claimed.

And Shriner still appears to be making money from her ministry. In addition to selling orgone for as much as $288 on her website, Shriner also solicits donations. A GoFundMe page says Shriner has pulled in more than $126,000 over the past three years. The donations have not slowed since Mineos death. If anything, theyve become more frequent.

Kelly Pingilleys brother said he doesnt know why, after two deaths and countless failed prophesies, people are still following Shriner.

Youd think every time one of her predictions doesnt come true, shed lose followers, but that doesnt seem to be the case, Nate said. If I had to say something of encouragement to people, it would be to tell them, look around you: The world isnt ending.

Continue reading here:

Reptile Cult Leader Says Her Follower Was Killed by NATO - Daily Beast

Online site backing defense of accused NSA leaker founded to promote fearless journalism – The Augusta Chronicle

Posted on by

The founders of the online news publication that will help in the defense of a Fort Gordon contractor accused of leaking a classified document were among the first to report on the National Security Agency surveillance of citizens in other countries and at home in 2013, using thousands of documents leaked by a former NSA contractor, Edward Snowden.

While the document published by The Intercept which the government says came from NSA contract employee Reality Leigh Winner of Augusta is still considered classified by prosecutors, it allegedly concerns the NSA analysis of Russias efforts to infiltrate a voting software company and infect computers used by state election officials. The Intercept published a story based on the analysis, and Winner was arrested June 3.

According to The Intercepts site, journalists Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Jeremy Scahill founded the online publication dedicated to fearless, adversarial journalism. EBays founder Pierre Omidyar provided the funding in 2013 for First Look Media in 2013, a non-profit, which launched The Intercept.

The Intercept has an average of 5 million visitors a month, said Vivian Siu, director of communications for First Look.

The online publication has a lot of readers in and outside of the U. S., said Rick Edmonds, media business analysis with the Poynter Institute, a nonprofit school for journalism. The Intercept began as a site for leaked documents but has expanded into other areas, Edmonds said. Non-profit, online publications are definitely a growing part of journalism and investigative reporting, he said.

The non-profit, online publication ProPublica has been publishing significant investigative work, Edmonds noted. There is also the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists that won a Pulitzer Prize for the Panama Papers investigation into the finances of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, which led to his resignation Friday. The new form of journalism has a significant presence, Edmonds said.

I believe that great journalism boils down to a few key principles, Scahill wrote in an article asking for readers support for investigative journalism. Hold those in power accountable, regardless of their political or corporate affiliations; give voice to the voiceless; provide people with information they can use to make informed decisions; be transparent with your readers about how you know what you know; (and) make sure your facts are straight.

Scahill won a George Polk Award for his reporting in war zones and for his 2008 report about Blackwater, the private armed security force. Greenwald is a journalist and attorney who wrote four New York Times best-sellers on politics and law. He also wrote No Place to Hide about the U.S. surveillance and his experience in reporting on the Snowden documents. In 2013 he was awarded a George Polk award and several others for his reporting on the Snowden documents.

Poitras was also awarded a George Polk award and shared the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for public service with The New York Times. Poitras left The Intercept for Field of Vision, which is also part of First Look Media. She was awarded an Academy Award for best documentary in 2015.

The Intercept has won a number of national journalism awards. It focuses on national security, politics, civil liberties, the environment, international affairs, technology, criminal justice, the media and more, according to its website. And it seeks whistleblowers, providing an email site and online drop box.

In Winners case, the Press Freedom Defense Fund of the First Look Media is giving $50,000 in matching funds to Stand with Reality, a fundraising campaign. First Looks attorney Baruch Weiss, a former U.S. attorney with experience in NSA investigations, will support Winners local defense team.

Winner is in custody without bond. She has pleaded not guilty to one count of willful retention and transmission of national defense information.

Reach Sandy Hodson at sandy.hodson@augustachronicle.com or (706) 823-3226

Read the original here:

Online site backing defense of accused NSA leaker founded to promote fearless journalism - The Augusta Chronicle

Posted in NSA

We Can’t Live in Fear of Our Own Intelligence Community | The … – The American Conservative

Posted on by

Privacy march, Washington D.C, 2013. Credit: James Bovard

U.S. intelligence agencies are telling us not to worry about the FISA Amendments Act, a 2008 law that allows the NSA to tap into the communications of non-U.S. persons who are outside the U.S., even though this lawsidestepsthe Fourth Amendment as it allows the NSA to record the emails and phone calls of U.S. citizens who happen to be communicating with people overseas.

How many American citizens is the government listening in on? We dont know, as the intelligence agencies told Congress they cant say just how many American citizens theyve eavesdropped on (without warrants).

Despite this, they say Congress should just renew the controversial section 702 of the Act before it expires in December; in fact, they want it to be made permanent law.

Congress would probably do this too if it wasnt for the fact that theyve recently learned their privacy is also at stake. Recent unmaskings show that even a congressmans conversations with a foreign official might go public with their names un-redacted. Then, even if the member of Congress didnt do anything wrong, what they said and whom they spoke with could quickly be taken out of context by the media outlets that root for the opposing team.

We cannot live in fear of our own intelligence community, said Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY). They have such power to suck up every bit of every transmission, every communication we ever made. We cant just have them willy-nilly releasing that to the public.

In this case Paul is not a lone gadfly. Politicians from Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), arent so keen about what this law can do to them. Theyve learned that this is a new age when elected officials, not just privacy advocates, fear not just leaked facts, but innuendo and out-of-context spin from off-camera conversations or email exchanges.

Some Republicans even used a debate at a recent congressional hearing to suggest Obama administration officials had purposely unmasked elected officials and then leaked the info to harm Trump administration officials. Specifically, former National Security Advisor Susan Rice and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power have been accused of unmasking Trump administration officials and expanding who could see the documents in an effort to get them to leak.

All of this is very new and confusing to our politicians. But, as fiction can gaze just beyond the headlines to show us where we are going and how we might keep our freedom in this changing world, my novel Kill Big Brother takes this plot to its dramatic end. What I found while researching and writing the book is there are ways to keep our intelligence agencies strong enough to protect us while keeping our freedom.

This begins with enforcing a change in mindset. Too often our intelligence agencies, as law enforcement will, have their eyes so fixed on the problemsterrorism, ransomware wielded by criminal syndicatesthey lose sight of the freedom they are supposed to be protecting.

So what should Congress do with Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act?

First, they shouldnt make it permanent law, as Congress needs to revisit this issue periodically as events and technology change.

Next, Congress should require the intelligence agencies to report by specified dates how many U.S. citizens have been listened to or have had their emails viewed as a result of this provision in the lawand not just general numbers, but real data. The law sunsets in December, so Congress should use this deadline to pressure the intelligence community to get these answers now.

Congress should then update the law by setting up a legal apparatus that will help to quickly, in this modern world, give the NSA and more the ability to get approval or to, in some cases, get approval within a certain time period after the fact for listening in on communications that might include U.S. citizens. Yes, this means stripping away the NSAs ability to listen away with no checks or balances from Congress or the courts. The Fourth Amendment protections need to be respected. If technology makes it possible for the NSA to listen in on conversations,then the NSA, with all of its vast resources, can propose ways for technology to help create a fast approval and oversight process.

Civil libertarians shouldnt forget that U.S. intelligence agencies have an almost impossible task. They have to find terrorists and others who are plotting to do us harm in an age when encryption and other technologies allow even unsophisticated criminals to hide their communications. But then, history is also a teacher heresimply empowering secretive government organizations can lead to some undesirable places.

Also, encryption and other technologies have become an important part of modern commerce. There is no turning back the clock. What it comes down to is that good police work is called for, not broad new powers for a Big Brother state.

Few Americans now know that under Section 702 the FISA Amendments Act the government now collects millions of communications annually from American citizens, according to research done by The Washington Post. Part of the way the NSA does this is by temporarily copying internet traffic going in and out of the U.S. As a result, they are copying and potentially searching emails between journalists and their sources, communications protected by attorney-client privilege, and lawful conversations elected officials are having with foreigners.

Just imagine if a new Edward Snowden leaked this data, information that currently can be used in domestic criminal and civil proceedings, without a warrant. Our right to communicate privately, via Fourth Amendment protections, is paramount to our freedom; also, the First Amendment right to free speech is dampened by this lack of privacy. The U.S. intelligence agencies should be reminded that telling us to give up what they are supposed to be protecting also kills our liberty.

Frank Miniter is the author ofKill Big Brother, a novel that shows how we can keep our freedom in this digital age.

See the original post:

We Can't Live in Fear of Our Own Intelligence Community | The ... - The American Conservative

Police Threaten Second Amendment, Raid Wrong Home, Shoot … – National Review

Posted on by

Its happened again. Police officers in Southaven, Miss., were trying to serve an arrest warrant for aggravated assault on a man named Samuel Pearman, but instead they showed up at a trailer owned by an auto mechanic named Ismael Lopez. It was nighttime, and according to his wife, Lopez went to the door to investigate a noise. She stayed in bed.

What happened next was tragic. According to the police, Lopez opened his door and a pit bull charged out. One officer opened fire on the dog, the other officer fired on the man allegedly holding a gun in the doorway, pointing it at the men approaching his home. As the Washington Post reported on July 26, it was only after the smoke cleared that the officers made their heart-dropping discovery: They were at the wrong home.

Lopez died that night. Just like Andrew Scott died in his entrance hall, gun in hand, when the police pounded on the wrong door late one night, Scott opened it, saw shadowy figures outside, and started to retreat back into his house. Police opened fire, and he died in seconds.

Angel Mendez was more fortunate. He only lost his leg when the police barged into his home without a warrant and without announcing themselves. They saw his BB gun and opened fire, inflicting grievous wounds.

If past precedent holds, its likely that the officers who killed Ismael Lopez will be treated exactly like the officers in the Scott and Mendez cases. They wont be prosecuted for crimes, and theyll probably even be immune from civil suit, with the court following precedents holding that the officers didnt violate Lopezs clearly established constitutional rights when they approached the wrong house. After all, officers have their own rights of self-defense. What, exactly, are they supposed to do when a gun is pointed at their face?

In other words, the law typically allows officers to shoot innocent homeowners who are lawfully exercising their Second Amendment rights and then provides these same innocent victims with no compensation for the deaths and injuries that result. This is unacceptable, its unjust, and it undermines the Second Amendment.

Think where this leaves homeowners who hear strange sounds or who confront pounding on the door. Should they risk their safety by leaving their gun in the safe while they check to make sure its not the police? Should they risk their lives by bringing the gun to the door, knowing that the police may not announce themselves and may simply be trying to barge into the wrong home? Doesnt the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure include a right to be free of armed, mistaken, warrantless, home intrusions?

Its time for the law to accommodate the Second Amendment. Its time for legal doctrine to reflect that when the state intrudes in the wrong home or lawlessly or recklessly even into the right home that it absolutely bears the costs of its own mistakes. Its time for law enforcement practice to reflect the reality that tens of millions of law-abiding men and women exercise their fundamental, constitutional rights to protect themselves and their families.

What does this mean, in practice? First, extraordinarily dangerous and kinetic no-knock raids should be used only in the most extreme circumstances. Writers such as Radley Balko have written extensively about the prevalence of the practice (even in routine drug busts), the dangers inherent in dynamic entry, and the sad and terrible circumstances where the police find themselves in a gunfight with terrified homeowners.

Second, prosecutors should closely scrutinize every single instance of mistaken-identity raids. Good-faith mistakes are always possible, but given the stakes involved when police raid homes or pound on doors late at night with their guns drawn, they should exercise a high degree of care and caution in choosing the right house. Its hard to imagine a worse or more tragic injustice than being gunned down in your own home by mistaken agents of the state.

Third, if and when police do kill or injure innocent homeowners, they should be stripped of qualified immunity even when the homeowner is armed. There are circumstances where it would improper to file criminal charges against an officer who makes a good-faith mistake and finds himself making an immediate life-or-death situation, but when the mistake is his, then he should face strict liability for all the harm he causes.

As the law now stands, police are not only rarely prosecuted when they violate the Fourth and Second Amendment rights of innocent homeowners by gunning them down in their own home, its often difficult even to impose civil liability. Innocent men and women are left with no recourse, and officers remain immune from judicial accountability for their own, tragic mistakes.

Last year a Minnesota police officer shot a lawfully armed Philando Castile during a traffic stop despite the fact that Castile was precisely following the officers commands. The officers acquittal unquestionably undermined the Second Amendment, but such shootings are mercifully rare. More common are the panicked, confused moments late at night or early in the morning when a homeowner hears shouts at his door, or someone breaks it down, and all he knows is that armed men are in his house. In those moments, a persons rights of self-defense are at their unquestioned apex. Its the states responsibility to protect those rights, not snuff out a life and escape all legal consequence.

READ MORE: Another Federal Court of Appeals Attacks the Second Amendment The Need for Smarter Second Amendment Jurisprudence The Real Reason Officers Are Rarely Convicted of Shooting Suspects

David French is a senior writer for National Review, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, and an attorney.

Continued here:

Police Threaten Second Amendment, Raid Wrong Home, Shoot ... - National Review

The First Amendment: Free press, open meetings laws survive RI State House standoff – The Providence Journal

Posted on by

Columnist Edward Fitzpatrick looks at two new state laws.

On June 30, an epic impasse between Rhode Island House and Senate leaders left the states $9.2-billion budget in limbo along with scores of other pieces of legislation. But amid the State Houses marble maze of power politics and clashing priorities, two bills managed to emerge at the last minute that will bolster press freedom and create a more open government.

Before the legislative session came to an abrupt halt, the House and the Senate had unanimously approved one of those bills the Student Journalists Freedom of Expression Act, which protects student journalists and their advisers from censorship and retaliation.

To become law, the House and Senate versions of that bill needed to cross over for votes in the other chamber. But just as those votes were about to take place on June 30, the Senate moved to amend the budget and House Speaker Nicholas A. Mattiello, D-Cranston, sent the House home in protest.

We thought that was it, said Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, based in Washington, D.C. I was staying up, watching and refreshing the [General Assembly] website until 10:30 p.m. before I gave up hope.

But just before midnight, Steven Brown, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island, contacted LoMonte, saying the Senate had passed the House version of the student press freedom bill. That was a little more thrilling of a roller coaster ride than I would have liked, LoMonte said. But I am happy where it landed.

The Senate bill, introduced by Sen. Gayle L. Goldin, D-Providence, landed in limbo. But the House bill, introduced by Rep. Jeremiah T. OGrady, D-Lincoln, landed on Gov. Gina Raimondos desk, and she signed it into law on July 18.

So why does the new law matter? Let two student journalists explain.

Peder S. Schaefer, editor of the Providence Country Day student newspaper, The Roundtable, noted that earlier this year student journalists in Kansas dug into the background of their newly hired principal, revealing questionable credentials and leading to her abrupt resignation.

This bill would enable stories like that to happen, Schaefer said. Especially in high school, schools have the power to shut things like that down very quickly. This bill puts protections in place that allow students to go after stories like that or to write about school policies, such as school start times.

Mary Lind, co-editor of the Lincoln High School student newspaper, The Lions Roar, said she called state legislators and the governors office, urging them to adopt the law to prevent the horror stories of censorship in other parts of the country.

It will show students in Rhode Island that although theyre under 18, their voices still matter and that they are still reliable sources, she said. They are not fake news.

Back in March 2016, I wrote about how a student at The Met High School, Yanine Castedo, launched the local push for a student press freedom bill, working with the Providence Student Union. Zack Mezera, executive director of the Providence Student Union, said student journalists now wont have to worry about censorship if, for example, they write about the condition of school buildings.

More broadly, he said, It protects journalism in an age when journalism is under attack, and it sends a message about protecting youth as people with valid, legitimate experiences.

Rhode Island became the 13th state to pass a student press freedom law, joining Nevada and Vermont in enacting such a law this year. And LoMonte noted the House and Senate floor votes were unanimous, saying, Its always gratifying that support crosses party lines and ideological lines. Freedom of the press should not be a partisan or political issue.

LoMonte also pointed out that the new Rhode Island law protects high school and college journalists in both public and private schools.

You could argue that its the most comprehensive law of its kind in the country, he said. Its certainly one we will show to other states as a model.

Such laws are necessary, LoMonte explained, because the U.S. Supreme Courts 1988 ruling in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier upheld the right of a public high school to censor student newspaper stories about teen pregnancy and the effects of divorce on children. Since then, states have been passing anti-Hazelwood laws.

And now LoMonte hopes Rhode Island schools will adopt rules reflecting the new law so that disputes over student journalism can be handled internally rather than in state court.

The student press freedom law wasnt the only bill to narrowly escape Smith Hill purgatory on June 30. Senate Majority Leader Michael J. McCaffrey and Rep. Evan P. Shanley, both D-Warwick, had introduced legislation to make two significant changes to the state Open Meetings Law. While McCaffreys bill ended up in limbo, the Senate passed the House version, and Raimondo signed that bill into law on July 18.

The new law requires all public bodies to keep minutes of open meetings (not just on the state level but also the city and town level), and it excludes weekends and holidays from the calculation of the 48-hour public notice requirement.

These reforms to the Open Meetings Act were significant and will affect every citizen of Rhode Island positively, said John M. Marion, executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island. Right now, municipalities dont have to put minutes online, but theyre going to have to. Thats great because there are a lot more municipal bodies than state bodies, and they affect citizens on a daily basis setting property taxes, hiring school superintendents, managing municipal pensions.

The ACLU had reviewed public-meeting notices a couple of years ago. And we were quite shocked to see how often public bodies posted notices of a Monday meeting late on a Friday afternoon, Brown said. These werent just small agencies no one has heard of; these were city councils and school committees.

Its not only that people dont learn about the meetings in advance, but they have very little time to prepare if they want to speak out on an issue.

Marion said the idea for the new law originated with some conservative constituents in McCaffreys district. Open government is an issue that unites the left and the right, he said.

Indeed, thats a key lesson for students of journalism and politics: A free press and open government serve both sides of the partisan divide, helping to inform citizens and hold whoever is in power accountable.

Edward Fitzpatrick is director of media and public relations for Roger Williams University, a New England First Amendment Coalition and Common Cause Rhode Island board member, and a former Providence Journal columnist. His First Amendment column appears monthly in The Journal. This piece first appeared on the universitys First Amendment blog at firstamendment.rwu.edu.

See the original post:

The First Amendment: Free press, open meetings laws survive RI State House standoff - The Providence Journal

Unite the Right rally sparks First Amendment questions | Virginia … – Roanoke Times

Posted on by

CHARLOTTESVILLE The limits of constitutionally protected speech and freedom of assembly are being put to the test in Charlottesville.

In less than two weeks, members of the National Socialist Movement, the pro-secessionist League of the South and hundreds of their allies in the Nationalist Front and alt-right movement will gather in Emancipation Park for the Unite the Right rally.

Arranged by self-described pro-white activist Jason Kessler, the rally is expected to also draw hundreds of confrontational counter-protesters who will be able to gather at McGuffey and Justice parks, per event permits recently secured by University of Virginia professor Walt Heinecke.

While the stage for Aug. 12 is nearly set, with massive demonstrations and protesters expected, questions regarding the enforcement of law and order remain.

City officials said they have been working with Kessler to relocate the rally elsewhere, because of the number of people the event is expected to draw to the downtown area. Kessler, however, does not want to change venues, according to authorities.

The director of the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression says the city is allowed to move the event in order to maintain public safety and prevent disruption to traffic and business downtown.

They should be able to relocate it to a more suitable location, said the centers director, Clay Hansen. As long as its for legitimate reasons and they dont try to minimize or hide the rally in some far-off corner.

An attorney supporting Kessler says the city is prohibited from doing so.

It would be ridiculously unconstitutional for the city to try to move the event elsewhere on that basis, said Kyle Bristow, an attorney and director of the Michigan-based Foundation for the Marketplace of Ideas, a self-described nonpartisan civil liberties nonprofit.

The groups board of directors includes Mike Enoch, a white nationalist commentator and podcaster. Enoch will be one of the featured speakers at the Unite the Right rally.

In an email last week, Bristow said his recently founded legal network is quickly becoming the legal muscle behind the alt-right movement.

The alt-right is a far-right movement that combines elements of racism, white nationalism and populism while rejecting mainstream conservatism and multiculturalism.

Earlier this year, according to Bristow, his organization helped coordinate the legal case that led to an Alabama court requiring the University of Auburn to let white nationalist Richard Spencer speak on campus. Auburn settled the case earlier this year with a $29,000 payout to cover the legal fees of the student who filed the suit, according to the universitys student-run newspaper, The Auburn Plainsman.

In recent weeks, business owners, activists and others have commented on the possibility of violence at the rally, sometimes comparing it to the melees between self-styled anti-fascist protesters and alt-right ideologues at protests in Berkley, California, earlier this year.

In a letter to city officials last week, Bristow said law enforcement officials could potentially deprive the right-wing activists of their constitutional rights if authorities do not prevent leftist thugs from attacking the rally.

If the Charlottesville Police Department stands down on Aug. 12, it would not be farfetched to postulate that the alt-right rally participants will stand up for their rights by effectuating citizens arrests or by engaging in acts of self-defense, Bristow said. It would be imprudent, reckless, unconstitutional and actionable for the Charlottesville Police Department to not maintain order.

Bristow alleged in his letter that Kessler recently was told that law enforcement officials would not have to intervene should left-wing protesters attack the rally attendees. A police spokesman refuted that claim Friday, saying that the department officials met with Kessler and a representative of his security staff earlier this month and discussed several security concerns.

At no time was Mr. Kessler informed officers would not take action against those that attempted or committed violence towards another, said Lt. Steve Upman.

Kessler did not reply to calls and messages last week.

Some suspect that the possible violence could be the result of intentional right-wing agitation, as local activists with Solidarity Cville have recently exposed posts on social media and far-right blogs in which supporters of Unite the Right rally seemed to revel in the possibility of violence and call on others to prepare for a fight.

Denounced by both parties

Republicans and Democrats alike have cast the hardcore conservatives and populists associated with the alt-right movement as racist for its provocative leaders explicit anti-Semitism and unabashed calls for a white-ethno state.

While their beliefs and activism have turned off many, the rallys primary goal of protesting the citys effort to remove a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee has caused some Southern heritage supporters and political moderates to become sympathetic to Kesslers cause.

But the slow revelation that the events extreme far-right elements will be met by liberals, leftists and anti-racists has scared others away.

According to Albemarle County spokeswoman Lee Catlin, the organizers of the Patriot Movements planned 1Team1Fight event in Darden Towe Park, which was being relocated from Greenville, South Carolina, have called it off.

Catlin said the organizers reportedly canceled their event because of unknown variables with the opposition.

Earlier in the week, an organizer for the event, who goes by the name Chevy Love on Facebook, said the event was not affiliated with the Unite the Right rally, saying that she did not want to associate with any of the hate groups expected to attend, listing both left- and right-wing activist groups.

Earlier in the week, before the organizers canceled the event in Darden Towe Park, the National Socialist Movement announced that members will be in attendance at the Unite the Right rally to defend Free Speech and our Heritage at the Lee Monument.

In an interview, Butch Urban, the movements chief of staff, said the organization had been planning to attend the event after it was arranged by Kessler earlier this summer.

The event also will draw leaders and followers of other groups in the Nationalist Front, an alliance of groups such as the Traditionalist Worker Party and The League of the South all of which are united in working toward the creation of an ethno-state for white people.

Although National Socialism is typically cited as the definition of Nazi ideology, Urban said his organization is not a neo-Nazi group.

Thats what everybody takes it to be. Thats not what it is, Urban said. National Socialism is about your country and your people come first. You dont support wars around the world and giving billions of dollars to other countries.

As for the calls for a white-ethno state, Urban said multiculturalism has only been pushed down everyones throat in the last 30 to 40 years. Thats not what everyone wants, he said.

Take a look at Chicago, theres a prime example of multiculturalism, he added, citing the citys reputation of having high murder and unemployment rates.

First Amendment

U.S. courts have grappled with the First Amendment questions involving Nazi demonstrations and displays. Many of those cases have determined that Nazi and white supremacist rhetoric is constitutionally protected.

And while many object to those ideals, authorities cannot justify restricting speech despite the threat of violence and public disorder a principle known as the Hecklers veto. Both Bristow and local attorney Lloyd Snook recently mentioned the doctrine in comments about the upcoming rally.

In First Amendment theory, it is fundamental that a government cannot regulate speech based on its content, including on the fact that some people may be hostile to it, Snook wrote on his law firms website.

About two weeks after a North Carolina chapter of the Ku Klux Klan held a rally in Justice Park to protest the planned removal of the Lee statue, Snook wrote that there has been a disturbing complaint about law enforcement being hand in hand with the Klan and white nationalists.

In fact, the city police department is required to preserve order to allow the demonstration to go forward, Snook said. This is not a matter of choice, but of constitutional law.

Snook cited the 1992 Supreme Court decision that invalidated an ordinance in Forsyth County, Georgia, that required fees for any parade, assembly or demonstration on public property. According to Snook, Forsyth County passed the ordinance after a violent civil rights demonstration in 1987 cost the county over $670,000.

Two years later, when the Nationalist Movement had to pay fees to hold a protest against the federal Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, the group sued the county.

In a 5-4 opinion, the Supreme Court decided that the countys ordinance violated the First Amendment.

In recent weeks, some opposed to the Unite the Right rally have called on the city to ensure Kessler pays the fees and obtains liability insurance of no less than $1 million that the city requires for special events.

In an email last week, city spokeswoman Miriam Dickler clarified that the city makes distinctions between demonstrations and special events, and that the two are not interchangeable under the citys regulations.

The differences are attributable to United States Supreme Court decisions involving the First Amendment, Dickler said.

According to the citys Standard Operating Procedure for special events, a demonstration is defined as a non-commercial expression protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution (such as picketing, political marches, speechmaking, vigils, walks, etc.) conducted on public property, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers.

Regardless, she said, Kessler has voluntarily provided a certificate of insurance.

1977 Skokie decision

Looking at another Supreme Court case, Hansen, of the local Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, said the courts 1977 decision in the National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie case feels closest to what were dealing with here in the city.

The case centered on a planned National Socialist demonstration in Skokie, Illinois, which at the time had a large population of Jewish residents who survived detention in Nazi concentration camps or were related to Holocaust survivors.

Fearing violence would be directed at the demonstrators who were planning to dress in Nazi-era uniforms with swastika armbands, a local court prohibited the event, an action that the U.S. Supreme Court later found to be unconstitutional in a 5-4 opinion.

In particular, the litigation in that didnt have to do with the march and the gathering itself it was more about symbols, Hansen said. The Supreme Court had to decide whether Nazi imagery could constitute fighting words, a legal distinction that prohibits some forms of speech that are likely to incite violence.

The court found that those symbols do not pass that threshold, which has in recent years largely fallen out of favor as doctrinal tool, Hansen said. Instead, the doctrine in recent years has morphed into a new rationale thats based on allowing authorities to stop speech that could lead to imminent lawless action, he said. Its useful if something goes wrong.

While the city could theoretically stop the Unite the Right rally as its happening, according to Hansen, its not a decision to take lightly.

Its a high hurdle to legally justify stopping a demonstration, Hansen said.

The city has an obligation to handle any crowds that are on site as a result of a lawful and protected speech activity, he said. In a public park, and given the proper permit police are obliged to make sure that the event goes unimpeded.

Free-assembly zones

Concerned that people protesting the Unite the Right could be arrested for participating in an unlawful assembly, Heinecke earlier this month applied to hold demonstrations at McGuffey Park and Justice Park.

At the Klan rally earlier this month, 22 people were arrested on various charges. About half of the arrests occurred after the rally had ended and authorities declared that the hundred or so people still on the street were illegally gathered. Authorities used tear gas to disperse the crowd.

The best way to avoid that is to have some free-assembly zones at the parks, Heinecke said. He said the permits will allow the protesters to gather from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. Aug. 12. The Unite the Right rally is scheduled for noon to 5 p.m.

Heinecke said there will be programming at the two parks. He declined to say which activist groups and organizations hes collaborating with to contend with Kesslers rally.

He said Charlottesville in particular has unfinished business in regard to racial justice.

I think the city will be the epicenter of a conversation about racial justice in a new era were going toward with changing racial demographics, he said.

Asked about the alt-right activists concern that the nations changing demographics are tantamount to a displacement of white people, Heinecke said it saddens him that they are so fearful.

I think theyre operating out of fear rather than seeing an opportunity to create a diverse and equal society, he said. Thats a sad thing when theres an opportunity to think about what the United States of America really means.

Go here to see the original:

Unite the Right rally sparks First Amendment questions | Virginia ... - Roanoke Times

What is cryptocurrency? – Telegraph.co.uk

Posted on by

Units of cryptocurrency are created through a process called mining, which involves using computer power to solve complicated maths problems that generate coins. Users can also buy the currencies from brokers, then store and spend themusing cryptographic wallets.

Cryptocurrencies and applications of blockchain technology are still nascent in financial terms and more uses should be expected. Transactions including bonds,stocks and other financial assetscould eventually be traded using the technology.

Cryptocurrencies are known for being secure and providing a level of anonymity. Transactions in them cannot be faked or reversed and there tend to be low fees, making it more reliable than conventional currency. Their decentralised nature means they are available to everyone, where banks can be exclusive in who they will let open accounts.

As a new form of cash, the cryptocurrency markets have been known to take off meaning a small investment can become a large sum over night.

But the same works the other way. People look to invest in cryptocurrencies should be aware of the volatility of the market and the risks they take when buying.

Because of the level of anonymity they offer, cryptocurrencies are often associated with illegal actvity, particularly on the dark web. Users should be careful about the connotations when choosing to buy the currencies.

Continued here:

What is cryptocurrency? - Telegraph.co.uk

Elad Gil and Silicon Valley’s bright future in cryptocurrency, genetics … – TechCrunch

Posted on by

A disappointed Pokmon GO Fest attendee has proposed class-action lawsuit againstNiantic

Elad Gil is running around the Color Genomics office when I come to meet him for a little sit-down. The place is full for a Friday afternoon. Theres a worker taking calls on the couch in the front and plenty of others pacing about in the background.

The office is tucked away in an unassuming industrial area of Burlingame, California, in a building that reminds me of some 60s-style government structure. Color is easy to spot. First suite on the first floor and the only one with, well, bright color.

Gil offers me a water and we sit down in a little conference room. Jokingly, he says maybe he can do something funny for the featured image for my article like pretend to hold up the color wheel logo. Katie would never let me do that, he says, referring to his chief marketing officer and ex-Twitter employee Katie Jacobs Stanton. Hes nerdy funny. I like that.

Gil came to Silicon Valley with impressive academic credentials, including a degree in mathematics, another in molecular biology and a PhD in biology from MIT. It was 2001, and he had hoped to make a dent in the universe. But the timing was off. The country was already headed toward an economic downturn, then 9-11 happened.

He was at a telecom company that quickly grew to 150 people and shortly after shrank to a tenth of the size in five rounds of layoffs. Gil was cut in the third round.

That was a turning point for him.

All these people helped, he said. Like big brand-name VCs were referring me to companies just to help. They were like, Everythings collapsing. Youre some random person who showed up with a PhD in biology. You have no job prospects.

He went on to hold prominent positions at Google and Twitter and now as a co-founder in Color Genomics. Hes also an investor in several well-known startups including Airbnb, Square, Stripe and Pinterest and is in a position, which hes known to readily use, to give back to Silicon Valley in much the same way.

But, a dark cloud has been hanging over the Valley lately. News of several incidents of sexual harassment and sex discrimination of female founders have toppled VCs once seen as demigods and caused some to lose hope in the dream.

SB: Ive heard people say Silicon Valley is over. Theyve kind of almost lost faith in their heroes, and then theres all these other little pop-up satellite Silicon Valley-esque cities starting to come up. Do you think Silicon Valley is over?

EG: Oh God, no. I think its best days are ahead of itDo you know the last time they said that Silicon Valley was over?

SB: When?

EG: Theres two times.One was in the early 90s where they were like Its over. Theres nothing left to be done.

SB: At the height of the semiconductors.

EG: Yeah, because all the semiconductor stuff was really sort of like 70s and 80s. And then in early 90s 91, 92, 93 theres the internet. And I was talking to somebody who was really prominent in the internet wave, and he was like I moved out here in like 93 and everybody thought it was over.

Literally, that was the thing. They were like The best times are behind us. All the stuff that could be done has been done. Its over. And then a small group of people were like Lets do stuff on the internet. Others were like Thats insanity. Like the internets a stupid toy thing that connects five universities. Who cares? Then of course, Netscape happened, and then theres a wave of innovations, and then in the bubble that I moved into with my perfect bad timing, the collapse I moved into. In that period, everybodys like Oh, theres nothing interesting on the internet, and we have to go back to hard tech. And Kleiner Perkins got into clean tech, and all these people were talking about nano tech, and it was like Silicon Valley is over, and theres nothing to do. We need to find new industries. Thats literally what happened.

Then all the social waves happened, and the mobile waves happened Just like theres a business cycle, theres a venture cycle, and innovation cycle. You end up with these gaps, and I think were just going through a period where theres less obvious things.

Interjection: We started talking about cryptocurrencies, ice cream, health tech and whats next in Silicon Valley. Ive cut a bunch of this short for brevity.

EG:I basically think the last six months have been cryptocurrencys Netscape moment, and I think were still trying to figure out whats Google, and whats PayPal, and Yahoo, and what to keep in with this first wave.

SB: [Cryptocurrency] scares people, especially when its very new.

EG:Totally. You remember the first internet. People were like Oh, nobodys going to buy anything on that. Theyre not going to put a credit into a website. Thats madness.Now weve got Instacart, Amazon..

Can I say something, and then argue that I never said it when you have a tape? Can I do that purposefully?

SB: Okay. What do you want to argue?

EG: I never said I like chocolate ice cream. I like chocolate chip, or something like that.

SB: And Ill be like No, on the record. This is where he said it.

Okay, so kind of wrapping this up. Where do you see Color fitting in in all of this?

EG: Yeah. I think Color was sort of part of a very early first wave of the visual data areaSo really our focus is on how do you unlock information thats sort of locked up for people, make it something they can actually use to help manage their own health.

SB: People might say it makes it a lot harder if you have to go through your physician first to get this information. I think thats kind of the allure of these at-home health tests a lot of the time.

EG: I think it depends on how much friction you can take out of the physician process, but also the flip of it is, if physicians are telling people that they should consider it, thats actually a really powerful way, as well, for people to participate. So I think there are sort of two sides of the same coin.

As an Ashkanazi Jew, I remember going to my doctor and like Hey, should I be taking these genetic tests for cystic fibrosis and Tay-sachs and all this other stuff as a carrier? And he was like, Oh yeah. Youre Jewish. Sure. You should do it.

SB: Sure. Gotta be proactive.

EG: But I had to bring it up, right? Its something thats often recommended for Ashkenazi Jews to do. So, were basically trying to create an online version of that, where youre still working with the physician but theres different ways for you to work with him.

SB:Where do you think people can innovate further in the health tech space right now? What would you like to see?

EG: Yeah. Um, thats a great question. I think ultimately, theres so much data available ambiently through peoples bodiesThis company Cardiogram that I mentioned. Im a small investor there, from a disclosure perspective. Thats a good example of where youre just ambiently recording and then telling people that they may have had a heart attack. I think that those are some themes that are really intriguing.

I think the top part in health care is that the people who are often benefiting the most from things, arent necessarily the people making the buying decisions. There are some things at a low enough price-point, so that really changes the adoption rates of different tested products. Thats one obstacle, in terms of larger scale adoptions.

SB: Okay. I think well end it on that.

Go here to see the original:

Elad Gil and Silicon Valley's bright future in cryptocurrency, genetics ... - TechCrunch

Is Kazakhstan the next cryptocurrency hotspot? – Crypto Insider (press release) (blog)

Posted on by

Back in 2014, Kairat Kelimbetov, then-head of Kazakhstans National Bank suggested that Bitcoin could be a form of financial pyramid scheme. The common belief among Kazakhstani officials was that cryptocurrencies could undermine the countrys already struggling tenge.

The tenge absolutely was struggling, though.

Nearly 80 percent of the Kazakhstan National Banks reserves, deposited from customers, are not kept in tenge, the countrys national currency. Though the number is lower for businesses, the fact that most of the banks reserves are in dollars, euro, and other currencies is not encouraging for the countrys national currency. Even still, with the tenge having fallen over 70% between 2008 and 2014 due to rampant corruption and low oil prices, media rumors of a BTC ban were circulating the Central Asian nation throughout 2014.

Things began to change, however, and as cryptocurrencies increased in popularity and other countries began to relax their positions, the Kazakhstan government followed suit. The Kazakhstani even saw their first BTC ATM in late 2015. Seeing the need for change, the government began the race to regulate cryptos in 2016, allowing the National Bank leverage to monitor the situation, according to Daniyar Akishev.

In June 2017, Kazakhstan announced plans to begin selling blockchain based bonds. The idea was to provide investors with a low-cost, commission-free, and speedy medium for purchasing bonds. While not necessarily a new idea, it was a landmark event for Kazakhstan in the blockchain race.

Showing an even greater commitment to the governments efforts to adapt to the technology taking root across the world, President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev announced that It is high time to look into the possibility of launching the international payment unit. It will help the world get rid of monetary wars, black-marketeering and decrease volatility at markets, at the 10th Astana International Forum (AIF). According to Nazarbayev, All countries should be represented there equally. This is a difficult question but it should be solved. This signaled a distinct shift in ideology from officials 2014 decry of the subject.

From that surprising announcement, a fresh movement was seemingly born. In mid-July, working with Deloitte, Kesarev Consulting, Waves Platform, and legislation firm Juscutum, the Astana International Financial Center (AIFC) announced that the coalition would be working together to develop supportive cryptocurrency regulation in Kazakhstan. We consider this project as a perfect opportunity to create a new jurisdiction, which would be most favorable for crypto projects in the world, said Head of Juscutum, Artem Afyan.

Kazakhstani officials clearly recognize the need to adapt to the rapidly changing techno-economic environment, and theres no lack of enthusiasm from the trading population either. Kazakhstans move to become the worlds second government to regulate cryptocurrencies puts it on track to become a hub for crypto-startups, blockchain businesses, and ICOs. The financial implications of this move could prove to be more than beneficial to the nations struggling economy.

But Kazakhstan is not the only country in Eurasia to catch the Bitcoin bug. Belarus has recently approved the use of blockchain technology for its securities market, while Poland last year promoted an idea to move to a cashless economy favorable to blockchain-based security systems. Even Ukraine has lofty goals involving cryptocurrency.

The blockchain race is on, and those who act fast and efficiently could emerge as leaders in the crypto-revolution.

Images from Wikimedia commons and Forexnewsnow.com

View post:

Is Kazakhstan the next cryptocurrency hotspot? - Crypto Insider (press release) (blog)

Cryptocurrency 101 – TechJuice (press release) (blog)

Posted on by

Cryptocurrency is the talk of the town now, its everywhere, from thousands of digital coin ATMs installed over the world to the hospital in Pakistan offering to accept the digital currency. Among all the debate about its legality and profitability, an unfamiliar mind finds itself confused over the word cryptocurrency. Now we are going to discuss all the whats and the hows of cryptocurrency.

Cryptocurrency is a digital currency which is created and accessed electronically and can be used to buy things electronically. Just like dollar, rupees or yen, various conventional currencies circulating today, there are more than 900 cryptocurrencies available. Most famous of them is Bitcoin, the first cryptocurrency invented in 2009. Ethereum, Litecoin, Factom and dozen others are also used in a fair amount.

Cryptocurrency serves the same purpose as conventional currency except for the one main difference: it is decentralized i.e. there is no central bank regulating it. There is no intermediary present between two dealing parties. In the case of conventional currencies, banks have all the record and they charge fees for their services. However, in the case of cryptocurrency, there are no banks present to cut fees. It is the anonymity ensured by the absence of intermediary which has made it famous; just like in emails and phone calls, where our message travels from A to B without relying on a third-party, thus ensuring our privacy.

But the question arises who regulates the transactions? What if someone just duplicates their cryptocurrency or uses it for more than one transaction? To solve this problem, an online public ledger, Blockchain, keeps and updates all the record of transactions. It is the technology at the heart of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. It uses cryptography to make transactions secure and makes them publicly available while ensuring the users anonymity, thus also helping to reduce fraud. Since it is publicly available, the whole community can verify the authenticity of a transaction.

State Bank of Pakistan hasnt announced any regulations for the cryptocurrency, which means that digital currency neither holds the status of money nor it is illegal to use. However, earlier this year, FBR launched action against those involved in money laundering and tax evasion through digital currency, and SECP warned the public to beware of scams in cryptocurrency. Apart from this, there arent any comments by the Government of Pakistan.

The majority of countries have no legislation regarding any digital currency. Japan has given it the status of legal tender. However, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, and few other countries have declared it illegal, citing their concern over its possible use in money laundering.

The reason for the absence of any clear legislation is that the cryptocurrency is still in developing phase and a very small fraction of public uses it. Unless major investors enter this market, we cannot expect a word about its legality from the government.

Because of the absence of any third party, it offers a number of benefits.

No one knows how much digital currency you have and what transaction you have made unless you make your online wallet public. Compared to conventional currency, where banks carry all the information regarding your balance and transactions, it is up to you how much information you want to share with others.

Whenever you make a transaction, data is updated on Blockchain, an online ledger, but your identity is kept private. If someone wants to verify a transaction they would look it up in Blockchain, but they wont know your name. However, this privacy must not be confused with complete anonymity; you are still required to prove your identity while signing up.

Of what use a currency is if you cannot buy things with it. Many websites accept cryptocurrency as payment. For instance, Overstock.com accepts Bitcoins as payment and the good thing is they also ship to Pakistan. You can also top up your prepaid mobile phone using Bitrefill. Freelancers also prefer to use cryptocurrency, as it reduces their transaction fees and increases their earning by 2% to 5%.

Yes, there are many risks and disadvantages of using cryptocurrency.

There are a limited number of coins at the moment and demand varies from day to day. The rate of digital currency adoption may hamper or increase depending on the press coverage and other factors. But point needing emphasis is that overall trend is upwards. Earlier this year Bitcoin surpassed the value of one ounce of gold. Around the same time, it also dropped by 30%. Its a high-risk medium and you better not keep your savings in it.

You wont find any ATM for cryptocurrency in Pakistan. There arent any local retailers offering to accept any digital currency. So, you cant simply go out in the market and use cryptocurrency; it still has a lot of growing to do. The price that vendor cuts for processing your transaction keep changing, servers often dont work and it takes a whole day to do just one transaction. Cryptocurrency is new to this world and is still under development, but still, it is improving with every passing day.

World of cryptocurrency is an uncharted territory. It is so new that there isnt any legislation regarding its taxation. The government hasnt classified it either as a commodity or a currency. There are no statements regarding taxation of cryptocurrency. There is still a lot of confusion about its taxability. So, in order to avoid trouble, it is advisable to establish a record keeping system and keep a track of when is cryptocurrency acquired and when it is disposed of.

In the next story, I will tell you about the most popular cryptocurrency Bitcoin. I will also give you a detailed explanation on what you can do to buy Bitcoin or other coins in Pakistan.

Feel free to drop your questions below for further discussion.

TechJuice for Browser: Get breaking news notifications on your browser. Subscribe

More:

Cryptocurrency 101 - TechJuice (press release) (blog)

Bitcoin teller machines in Boulder let customers jump into the cryptocurrency market – The Denver Post

Posted on by

Walk into the Amante coffee shop at 2850 Baseline Road in Boulder on any given morning and youll see what looks like an automated teller machine sitting along one wall.

Throughout the day, a handful of people use it. One is a techie, another is a well-dressed, middle-aged couple. But this is not your grandmothers ATM. Its a Bitcoin teller machine, a portal into the brave new world of cryptocurrency.

Some call this new kind of money the grandest experiment of our time. Others fear its rising power and the rest of us have no idea what the heck it is.

Boulders Eric Weissmann was fascinated early on with the potential of digital currency. And when the opportunity arose to own and operate Bitcoin teller machines, or BTMs, he jumped in and founded Modern Tender. Weissmann thought the architecture of the code, the blockchain, had the potential to transform currency markets.

I was interested in Bitcoin and thought the blockchain technology was revolutionary, so I wanted a foothold in the space. We reached out to Amante because we wanted a location that was upscale, easily accessible, and attractive to early adopters and the tech demographic, Weissmann said.

BTMs are still rare. There are 13 statewide, including two in Boulder Weissmanns at Amante Coffee and a second machine in the Spark Boulder tech accelerator at 1310 College Ave.

The two BTMs in Boulder were installed in February of 2015. The Spark machine is owned by Aurora-based XBTeller. Officials there could not be reached for comment.

Operating outside the traditional banking system with no regulatory oversight, BTMs have experienced a surge in use as more people turn to cryptocurrencies as a haven from political instability and distrust of government-backed currencies.

To read more of this story go to dailycamera.com

Read the original post:

Bitcoin teller machines in Boulder let customers jump into the cryptocurrency market - The Denver Post