Monthly Archives: February 2017

NATO should adapt to various challenges like Russia & ISIS – RT.com – RT

Posted: February 19, 2017 at 10:57 am

Russia indeed poses a challenge to NATO, but of a different kind than ISIS terrorism, the alliances former chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen told RT. He believes NATO should adapt to the various threats but ultimately deal with them from a position of force.

The military alliance does not compare Russia with Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorism since it does not measure whether one threat is worse that another, but deems them both as challenges, NATO's former Secretary General told RT on the sidelines of the annual Munich Security Conference in Germany.

Read more

I dont think we should rank treats. I consider Russia a challenge, I consider the Islamic State a challenge, and they should be addressed in different ways. Thats actually the essence of this, that NATO should adapt to be able both to address territorial challenges as well as challenges from overseas like terrorism.

The so-called territorial challenges which NATO faces according to Rasmussen are apparently tensions along Russias borders, namely the Ukraine unrest and concerns over Moscows potential aggression across other Eastern European states. Rasmussen believes the tensions are Moscows own strategy; to set its own borders ablaze to keep NATO out, and not a result of the bloc's expansion into post-Soviet countries.

It is Putins strategy to keep conflicts in the near neighborhood similarly or frozen, because he knows if that he can keep these conflicts similarly or frozen then he will keep his neighbors dependent on the Kremlin and economically weak, and he will prevent them from seeking Euro-Atlantic integration with NATO and the European Union, Rasmussen said.

To prevent Russia from pursuing this alleged strategy, NATO should do its best to implement the Minsk agreement, which is rather confusing since Russia itself has constantly been calling the warring sides of the Ukrainian civil war to stick with this deal for the past two years.

This is also the reason why we should focus on the implementation of the Minsk deal. And the ultimate goal should be to restore full Ukrainian control with the eastern borders, Rasmussen said.

Read more

While NATO is refusing cooperation with Russia, it is ready for dialogue, and Rasmussen fully supports the US approach to talks with Moscow from a position of strength and even refers to a very successful Cold War experience.

Dialogue is always good. But I think any dialogue should take place from a position of strength, and thats exactly what Vice President Pence also stressed today. He said 'Peace through strength.' And the same did president Reagan in the past, and very successfully. He said we will need a stronger US to make sure that the Russians understand that were sincere.

But according to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, political dialogue and diplomacy do not make any sense without the resumption of military cooperation.

NATOs expansion has led to an unprecedented level of tension over the last 30 years in Europe, Lavrov said in Munich, rejecting the idea of such dialogue.

What kind of relationship do we want with the US? One [based on] pragmatism, mutual respect, and an understanding of special responsibility for global stability, the Russian FM stated.

READ MORE:Lavrov: NATO expansion led to tension in Europe unprecedented in last 30 years

The stealthy approach of dialogue from a position of strength seems to even apply to Washingtons own allies, whom the US has pressured to contribute their fair share of 2 percent of GDP on maintaining NATO.

But Rasmussen says this call should not be treated as a threat. We should consider this statement from the US not as threat but as a welcome opportunity how can we, Europeans invest more, not only economically but also politically into transatlantic bond.

Link:
NATO should adapt to various challenges like Russia & ISIS - RT.com - RT

Posted in NATO | Comments Off on NATO should adapt to various challenges like Russia & ISIS – RT.com – RT

Richmond County Daily Journal | StingRay is why the 4th … – Richmond County Daily Journal

Posted: at 10:56 am

Imagine you are in the middle of your typical day-to-day activities. Maybe you are driving, spending time with family, or working. If you are like most people, your phone is at your side on a daily basis. Little do you know that, at any time, police and law enforcement could be looking at information stored on your phone. You havent done anything wrong. You havent been asked for permission. You arent suspected of any crime.

The StingRay

Police have the power to collect your location along with the numbers of your incoming and outgoing calls and intercept the content of call and text communication. They can do all of this without you ever knowing about it.

How? They use a shoebox-sized device called a StingRay. This device (also called an IMSI catcher) mimics cell phone towers, prompting all the phones in the area to connect to it even if the phones arent in use.

The police use StingRays to track down and implicate perpetrators of mainly domestic crimes. The devices can be mounted in vehicles, drones, helicopters, and airplanes, allowing police to gain highly specific information on the location of any particular phone, down to a particular apartment complex or hotel room.

Quietly, StingRay use is growing throughout local and federal law enforcement with little to no oversight. The ACLU has discovered that at least 68 agencies in 23 different states own StingRays, but says that this dramatically underrepresents the actual use of StingRays by law enforcement agencies nationwide.

The Violation

Information from potentially thousands of phones is being collected every time a StingRay is used. Signals are sent into the homes, bags, and pockets of innocent individuals. The Electronic Frontier Foundation likens this to the Pre-Revolutionary War practice of soldiers going door-to-door, searching without suspicion.

Richard Tynan, a technologist with Privacy International notes that, there really isnt any place for innocent people to hide from a device such as this.

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution states that, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The StingRay clearly violates these standards. The drafters of the Constitution recognized that restricting the government from violating privacy is essential for a free society. Thats why the Fourth Amendment exists. The StingRay is creating a dangerous precedent that tells the government that its okay for them to violate our rights. Because of this, freedom is quietly slipping out the window.

Little Regulation

Law Enforcement is using StingRays without a warrant in most cases. For example, the San Bernardino Police Department used their StingRay 300 times without a warrant in a little over a year.

A handful of states have passed laws requiring police and federal agents to get a warrant before using a StingRay. They must show probable cause for one of the thousands of phones that they are actually searching. This is far from enough.

Additionally, there are many concerns that agents are withholding information from federal judges to monitor subjects without approval bypassing the probable cause standard laid out in the Constitution. They even go as far as to let criminals go to avoid disclosing information about these devices to the courts.

If the public doesnt become aware of this issue, the police will continue to use StingRays to infringe on our rights in secret and with impunity.

Olivia Donaldson is a recent high school graduate that is currently opting out of college and participating in an entrepreneurial program called Praxis. Originally published at fee.org.

http://yourdailyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/web1_oliviadonaldsonjpg.jpg

.

Read more:
Richmond County Daily Journal | StingRay is why the 4th ... - Richmond County Daily Journal

Posted in Fourth Amendment | Comments Off on Richmond County Daily Journal | StingRay is why the 4th … – Richmond County Daily Journal

Rubio and his Resurrection of The Second Amendment Enforcement Act – Bearing Arms

Posted: at 10:56 am

Senator Marco Rubios resurrectedSecond Amendment Enforcement Actwill ensure that law-abiding citizens in Washington, D.C. can exercise their Second Amendment right to carry a firearm, should it pass.

Emotionally charged anti-gunners are doing their best to keep the current stringent D.C. gun laws in place. Unfortunately, they dont understand that federal laws, already in place, are more than sufficient to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.

It is essential for all to remember that criminals, by the very definition of the word, are law breakers. Boundaries are disregarded, and they act upon their own volition; without concern of consequence. Law-abiding citizens are consistently punished by having their rights infringed upon with layers and layers of laws that are in place to detour the criminal. The oxymoron here is that law-abiding citizens will obey the laws, and criminals wont.

How will enacting layers of laws over and above federal laws change the demeanor of someone who disregards the law, because they act with moral turpitude? Simply put, it wont.

Anti-gunners with their flair for the dramatic and with no foundationin fact spread misinformation. For those of us who know and understand the laws, it is nothing less than frustrating. For those of you who dont, become familiar with federal, state, and your local guns laws. Put them in context of criminal behavior.

Allowing D.C.s excessive gun laws to stand as is only benefits criminals. They already know that they likely wontface life threatening resistance when committing a crime.

The Second Amendment Enforcement Act will put guns in the hands of the good guys. So, when the criminals hear their targetsmay be armed in order to protect themselves, it could be the game-changer that helps to deter crime in D.C.

Author's Bio: Pamela Jablonski

Read more here:
Rubio and his Resurrection of The Second Amendment Enforcement Act - Bearing Arms

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on Rubio and his Resurrection of The Second Amendment Enforcement Act – Bearing Arms

Colorado Senate debates Second Amendment bill – The Journal

Posted: at 10:56 am

Enlargephoto

Associated Press Some of the handguns with 15-round magazines that were banned in 2013 in Colorado.

DENVER The Republican-controlled state Senate on Thursday hosted another debate about expanding Second Amendment rights.

Previous debates focused on magazine capacity and training of school employees to carry firearms.

Thursdays discussion concerned Senate Bill 6, which would amend the concealed carry law to include a provision allowing active-duty and honorably discharged military personnel younger than 21 to apply for permits. The bill was adopted and scheduled for a final reading before moving to the House.

Half her unit was deployed in Afghanistan. They can go to Iraq or can go to Afghanistan and defend themselves, but they cannot come back here to the state of Colorado, because they are under the age of 21, to get a conceal carry permit, Cooke said.

When deployed, these military personnel are allowed to carry guns, but they are closely supervised by superior officers, Kagan said. There are very strict rules about when, where and how they carry those firearms and when, where and how they use them.

These 18- to 20-year-olds are incredible young people who have been through a great deal of stress, a great deal of hardship, a great deal of loss, she said. They have seen things we will never see, and what really gets under my skin is that we seem to lump them in with everyone else. They are not everyone else.

The bill represents the sixth piece of legislation focusing on gun laws this session.

Four of these bills have originated in the Republican-held Senate, were passed by committees to the full floor and are expected to go to the House, which the Democrats control.

The other two originated in the House, but both died in the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, the so called kill committee.

This committee is the likely landing spot for Second Amendment bills passed by the Senate.

Go here to read the rest:
Colorado Senate debates Second Amendment bill - The Journal

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on Colorado Senate debates Second Amendment bill – The Journal

Watch that government doesn’t overreach constitutional authority – Belleville News-Democrat

Posted: at 10:56 am

Watch that government doesn't overreach constitutional authority
Belleville News-Democrat
With Kevin Gagen's latest letter, after denigrating the members of the National Rifle Association, he asks, What is it about the term 'well-regulated' they don't get? What did well-regulated mean at the time the Second Amendment was written, Gagen?

Link:
Watch that government doesn't overreach constitutional authority - Belleville News-Democrat

Posted in Second Amendment | Comments Off on Watch that government doesn’t overreach constitutional authority – Belleville News-Democrat

Court Says Google Has A First Amendment Right To Delist Competitor’s ‘Spammy’ Content – Above the Law

Posted: at 10:55 am

Last summer, a Florida federal court reachedsome unusual conclusionsin a lawsuit filed by SEO company e-ventures, which felt Google had overstepped its bounds in delisting a lot of its links. Google defended itself, citing both Section 230 and the First Amendment. The court disagreed with both arguments.

As to Section 230, the court found that Googles delisting efforts werent in good faith. The reason cited was e-ventures claim that the delisting was in bad faith. So much for this seldom-used aspect of Section 230: the Good Samaritan clause which states no third-party company can be found liable for actions it takes to remove content it finds questionable. And so much for viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Apparently, Googles long history of spam-fighting efforts is nothing compared to an SEO wranglers pained assertions.

The court also said Google had no First Amendment right to handle its search rankings however it saw fit, which is more than a little problematic. While it admitted Googles search rankings were protected speech, its statements about how it handled search engines werent. And, for some reason, the court felt that Googles ads undermined its First Amendment protections because its desire to turn a profit somehow nullified its editorial judgment.

It was a strange decision and one that suggested this court might be considering getting into the business of telling service providers how to run their businesses. It also suggested this court believed the more successful the business was, the fewer rights and protections it had. These dubious conclusions prevented Google from having the case dismissed.

Fortunately, this wasnt the final decision. As Eric Goldman points out, last years denial only delayed the inevitable. After a few more rounds of arguments and legal paperwork, Google has prevailed. But theres not much to celebrate in this decision as the court has (again) decided toroute around Googles Section 230 Good Samaritan defense.

Regarding 230(c)(2), the court says spam can qualify as harassing or objectionable content (cite toe360insightwith a but-see to theSong Ficase). Still, the court says e-ventures brought forward enough circumstantial evidence about Googles motivations to send the case to a trial. By making it so Google cant even win on summary judgment, rulings like this just reinforce how Section 230(c)(2) is a useless safe harbor.

Had it ended there, Google would be still be facing e-ventures claims. But it didnt. The court takes another look at Googles First Amendment claims and finds that the search engine provider does actually have the right to remove spammy links. Beyond that, it finds Google even has the First Amendment right to remove competitors content. From theorder[PDF]:

[T]he First Amendment protects as speech the results produced by an Internet search engine. Zhang v. Baidu.com, Inc., 10 F. Supp. 3d 433, 435 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). A search engine is akin to a publisher, whose judgments about what to publish and what not to publish are absolutely protected by the First Amendment. See Miami Herald Publg Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241, 258 (1974) (The choice of material to go into a newspaper . . .whether fair or unfairconstitute[s] the exercise of editorial control and judgment that the First Amendment protects.) The presumption that editorial judgments, no matter the motive, are protected expression is too high a bar for e-ventures to overcome.

And the court walks back its earlier conclusion the one that seemed to find profit-motivated editorial judgment to be unworthy of First Amendment protections.

Googles actions in formulating rankings for its search engine and in determining whether certain websites are contrary to Googles guidelines and thereby subject to removal are the same as decisions by a newspaper editor regarding which content to publish, which article belongs on the front page, and which article is unworthy of publication. The First Amendment protects these decisions, whether they are fair or unfair, or motivated by profit or altruism.

The case is now dismissed with prejudice which bars e-ventures from complaining about Googles delisting efforts in federal court. e-ventures has gone this far already in hopes of seeing its terms-violating content reinstated, so it will likely attempt to appeal this decision. But it really shouldnt. Its unlikely another set of judges will help it clear the First Amendment hurdle. Not only that, but this area of law should be well-settled by now, as Goldman points out:

Of course Google can de-index sites it thinks are spam. Its hard to believe were still litigating that issue in 2017; these issues were explored in suits likeSearchKingandKinderStartfrom over a decade ago.

The plaintiff was given a long leash by the court, which should have tossed last year. Even with the extra time and the court doings its Section 230 circumvention work for it, e-ventures still couldnt prevail.

Court Says Google Has A First Amendment Right To Delist Competitors Spammy Content

Dangerous: Judge Says It Was Objectively Unreasonable For Cox To Claim DMCA Safe Harbors Trump Tops Obama, Hands Over Full Torture Report To Court Previous Administration Refused To Apple Wants To Stop You Fixing Your iPhone And iPad: Source Says It Will Testify Against Right To Repair Legislation

See the article here:
Court Says Google Has A First Amendment Right To Delist Competitor's 'Spammy' Content - Above the Law

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Court Says Google Has A First Amendment Right To Delist Competitor’s ‘Spammy’ Content – Above the Law

New ‘Fingerprinting’ Tech Can Track You Anywhere Online … – NewsFactor Network

Posted: at 10:54 am

Banks, retailers and advertisers can track your online activity using Web "fingerprinting" techniques, but these methods usually only work across a single browser. Now, however, new technology can follow you anywhere online -- even if you switch browsers.

The new tech makes it possible to establish a unique online fingerprint based not on browser features but on features of a user's operating system and computer hardware, according to a new study by researchers at Lehigh University and Washington University. The cross-browser fingerprinting technique identifies users with an accuracy of 99.24 percent, compared to AmIUnique's "state-of-the-art" accuracy of 90.84 percent across a single browser, according to the researchers.

While acknowledging the fingerprinting method could be used for undesirable purposes that violate online privacy, the researchers said the technique could also help service providers authenticate users for improved security.

Tracking Tech Evolving Fast

In their paper, researchers Yinzhi Cao and Song Li of Lehigh University and Erik Wijmans of Washington University in St. Louis described their cross-browser fingerprinting technique as the first to use "many novel OS and hardware features, especially computer graphics ones" to establish identities and track individual online users. They provided both a working demo and open source code online.

"Web tracking is a debatable technique used to remember and recognize past website visitors," the researchers noted. "On the one hand, web tracking can authenticate users -- and particularly a combination of different web tracking techniques can be used for multifactor authentication to strengthen security. On the other hand, web tracking can also be used to deliver personalized service -- if the service is undesirable, e.g., some unwanted, targeted ads, such tracking is a violation of privacy."

Whether people like it or not, Web tracking technology is widely used and evolving quickly, the researchers added, noting that "more than 90 [percent] of Alexa Top 500 Web sites adopt web tracking."

Possible Defenses: Tor, Virtualization

Cao, Li and Wijmans said their tracking technique outperforms the only other cross-browser fingerprinting technique, which uses IP (Internet Protocol) addresses to track user activity. That technique doesn't work when IP addresses are dynamically allocated -- as when users browse via mobile networks -- or changed by switching from home networks to office networks, they said.

By contrast, the new cross-browser tracking technique might even work with some installations of the Tor browser, which normally prevents browser fingerprinting, according to the researchers. They said their technique could probably be blocked by using the Tor browser with its default settings intact or by using machine virtualization, although the latter technique has the disadvantage of being "heavyweight."

For many online users, Web tracking is a daily issue. The most common sign of being tracked online is when users see ads on different Web sites for products or services they searched for earlier on different sites.

Privacy-focused organizations have developed a number of tools to help users minimize the impact of such tracking. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, for example, offers a tracking tester called Panopticlick that lets users analyze and tweak their browsers and add-ons to maximize privacy protections.

Cao, Li and Wijmans plan to present their research at the Network and Distributed System Security Symposium scheduled for Feb. 26 through March 1 in San Diego.

Image Credit: iStock.

Read the original:
New 'Fingerprinting' Tech Can Track You Anywhere Online ... - NewsFactor Network

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on New ‘Fingerprinting’ Tech Can Track You Anywhere Online … – NewsFactor Network

How to Stay (Mostly) Anonymous Online – Newsweek – Newsweek

Posted: at 10:54 am

It may only be a slight exaggeration that companies know more about you than you do about yourself.

Fire up your cell phone or laptop if you have any doubts. Companies can predict what you want to buy and show you ads for them. They know your birthday. They can even tell when your teenage daughter is pregnant.

(I'm not making that last one up. Target famously made that discovery a few years ago.)

Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week

In a series of recent surveysconducted by the Previous Pew Research Center, Americans consumers say they're afraid they've lost control of their personal information and that companies aren't doing enough to protect the customer data they collect. A majority of Americans (64 percent) have personally experienced a major data breach, the poll found.

"People are interested in disappearing online," says Caleb Chen, who specializes in digital currency issues for London Trust Media, a provider of private internet products. "It's a sign of the times."

Lowering your profile is possible with a few simple steps and the right technology. But absolute anonymity online may be difficultperhaps even impossibleto achieve.

"The ability to eliminate your online footprint completely is a myth," says David Cox, the CEO of LiquidVPN, a service that helps protect your location identity online. "However, there are many ways we can minimize our online footprint."

One simple way to sweep up that trail of electronic breadcrumbs you leave is to instruct your browser to not be promiscuous with your personal information. For example, you can tell Chrome to disallow a site to track your physical location under Preferences and then by clicking Settings, followed by Advanced and Content Settings.

A lock icon, signifying an encrypted Internet connection, is seen on an Internet Explorer browser in a photo illustration in Paris April 15, 2014. Reuters

You can switch to a more privacy-conscious web search engine, like DuckDuckGo.com, that doesn't collect or share personal information, or use "incognito" mode on your browser, which doesn't share any personal data with the site you're visiting.

"Also, stay logged out of online services such as Gmail and Facebook," says Michael Gregg, president of Houston-based Superior Solutions Inc., an IT consulting firm. "That makes it harder for third parties to track your activity."

The strategy is sound. If you don't want everyone knowing who you are, you first have to stop telling everyone who you are. You can start by checking the privacy settings on your favorite social network, which may or may not be easy to find.

For example, on Facebook, you have to click on the arrow next to the question mark on the top left of your screen. Go to "Privacy" to review and change your account settings. On Twitter, you have to click on "Profile and settings" and then "Security and privacy."

No, they don't like to make it easyand for obvious reasons. That's how social networks make their money. You are the product.

It shouldn't take long to significantly diminish your digital footprint. But there's still some work to be done before it's eliminated.

A VPN, or virtual private network, is an application that encrypts your internet traffic and routes it through an intermediary server. As a result, the devices address is masked and third parties can't track you.

"Most VPN providers utilize shared IP addresses on their servers," explains Paul Bischoff, a privacy advocate for Comparitech.com, a services comparison site. "Multiple usersdozens, hundreds, and even thousandsare assigned a single IP address. This makes it nearly impossible to trace the activity of a single person in the pool."

As an added bonus, a VPN allows you to effectively change your location with the click of a button. So if you're in New York but you want your browser to think you're in London, you can easily do that.

If you're serious about eliminating your digital trail, you might also consider switching to the Tor Browser. Tor is a network of volunteer-operated servers that helps improve your privacy and security on the Internet. It works by creating a series of virtual tunnels rather than making a direct connection, which allows you to connect to places online without making a direct connection.

"Think of Tor surfing as taking a flight with stopovers instead of a nonstop," explains S. Adam Rizzieri, the director of digital marketing for SevenTablets.com, a developer of mobile apps. "The traveler is your internet activity, which is comprised of packets of information. In a direct flight, the traveleryour packet of informationgoes from Point A to B and the originating flight is clear. In Tor browsing, you have layovers. You still get to Point B, but your point of origin is cloaked by layovers at Points C and D."

And as you might expect, it does make the browsing experience a little slower. But no one will know who you are.

You can also scramble your message securely before sending it, which protects your identity and the information.

"If attackers can't decipher or read any of the emails, their efforts are largely stymied and the owner of the email address maintains strong privacy and anonymity when it comes to their information being protected," says Bill Bullock, the CEO of SecureMyEmail, which offers an encrypted email product.

There are hundreds of encryption products, far too many to mention in a single story. But they're fairly easy to use and often cost little or nothing. For example, a service likeVirtu, which is a simple extension to your Chrome browser, offers military-grade encryption, allows you to control forwarding, permits you to take a message back and even expire an email.

But many of today's encryption solutions are cumbersome to use, forcing the recipient to download software before they can read your message.

Maybe it's worth pausing for a moment to ask how we got to this place. How did all of our personal information get carelessly strewn across the internet? While there are many reasons for why companies seem to know so much about us, and why we know comparatively little about them, one explanation seems inescapable: consumers collectively assigned almost no value to their privacy for too long.

And here we are.

In a world without secrets, these steps can ensure that you'll keep a few more of yours. Checking your privacy settings, switching browsers, using a VPN and adding encryption can certainly help.

"But there's only one surefire way to be invisible online," says Ed Brancheau, the chief executive of the digital marketing agency Goozleology. "Don't go online."

Consumer advocateChristopher Elliott's latest book isHow To Be The Worlds Smartest Traveler(National Geographic). You can get real-time answers to any consumer question on his new forum,elliott.org/forum, or by emailing him at chris@elliott.org.

See more here:
How to Stay (Mostly) Anonymous Online - Newsweek - Newsweek

Posted in Tor Browser | Comments Off on How to Stay (Mostly) Anonymous Online – Newsweek – Newsweek

Vietnamese Bitcoin P2P Platform Remitano Targets Global Expansion – CryptoCoinsNews

Posted: at 10:53 am

Remitano, a Vietnam-based P2P platform for trading bitcoin, has expanded its services across the English-speaking world.

The company is targeting bitcoin exchangers, investors and users of remittance services, beginning with Asian countries, including Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia and China.

Leading sources of traffic on Remitano besides Vietnam are Nigeria and Malaysia.

Our new platform will help bring bitcoin to everyone, by means of preventing fraud and scamming among the bitcoin community, said CEO and co-founder Dung Huynh. Bitcoin fraud is a problem that is deterring people from partaking in this exciting market, hampering its overall potential. At Remitano, we want to fix that.

Fake exchanges, fraudulent bitcoin wallets which allow malware into a computer, phishing and Ponzi schemes are all things that would-be bitcoin traders need to look out for on a daily basis, according to Remitano.

Remitano features a simple user interface and responsive customer support. Customers in need of support can jump on a live chat and get questions answered quickly.

When a user opens a trade, Remitano holds the amount of bitcoins they wish to buy in escrow. The buyer can send payment to the seller without having to worry about not receiving bitcoin.

The bitcoin remains locked until the seller confirms the payment.

Also read: Bitcoin survey: 1 in 4 bitcoin users defrauded by exchanges

The Remitano support team will resolve disputes based on evidence provided by both sides.

The 0.5% fee charged by the platform is lower than the other major platforms in the market.

Remitano is owned by Babylon Solutions Limited, which is incorporated in Seychelles.

The team is comprised mostly by banking professionals with experience in financial products, electronic currencies and payment services.

The app is available on the App Store and Google Pay.

Image from Shutterstock.

Follow this link:
Vietnamese Bitcoin P2P Platform Remitano Targets Global Expansion - CryptoCoinsNews

Posted in Bitcoin | Comments Off on Vietnamese Bitcoin P2P Platform Remitano Targets Global Expansion – CryptoCoinsNews

How Strong Is the Bull Case for Bitcoin? — The Motley Fool – Motley Fool

Posted: at 10:53 am

Chris Hill and Simon Erickson

In this episode of Market Foolery, Chris Hill and Simon Erickson review Discovery Communications (NASDAQ:DISCA)after its solid quarter; talk about where bitcoin is headed -- possibly into an ETF; and reflect on the rumors that Burger King's parent has been testing the waters for an acquisition of spicy fried chicken specialist Popeyes(NASDAQ:PLKI).

A full transcript follows the video.

This podcast was recorded on Feb. 14, 2017.

Chris Hill: We've gotearnings to get to. We're going to follow up on yesterday's storythat we did onRestaurant Brands(NYSE:QSR),because the news continues there, and we'regoing to share some Market Foolery newsat the end of this episode. We've got a little bit of an announcement. But let's start with fourth-quarter profits fromDiscovery Communications, whichcame in a little higher than expected. When you'relooking at media companies,I think it's safe to say that the thesis for Discovery Communications,as much as anything, is this is a global play. If youlive in the United States and you have cable, you'refamiliar with at least some of their networks --Animal Planet, TLC, theDiscovery Channel, that sort of thing. But when you look at the global footprint of whereDiscovery Communications operates,I think that's part of the thesis, isn't it?

Simon Erickson: Absolutely,it is. I think that's probably whatinvestors are looking at for this company right now. Like you said,there's some definitely established channels here in the United States. We actually saw aslight decline in U.S.subscribers. So the real story here is that international growth. The one thatreally sticks out for me, Chris, it's actually in Europe of all places. Discovery Communications hasEurosport,which is kind of broadcasting live events. They have done Wimbledon. They've done Formula 1. They've donea variety of other events. Typically not soccer, because that's expensive, but otherlive sports in Europe. And they've got theexclusive rights for the Winter Olympics of 2018, tobroadcast nearly 740 million peopleacross in Europe. Great, right?

Hill: Yeah.

Erickson: Butthe other thing that's really interesting to me is,there's various ways that you can reach people. They're going to,of course, do the free network TV. They'regoing to do some other paid TV events like that. But the thing that's interesting to me is the over-the-top offering, thedigital streaming that they're going to be doingin the next few years. They're usingBAMtechtechnology to create this. We know BAMtech becauseDisney is also working with them for live sports here in the U.S.Discovery is using them in Europe. They have the guy fromDirecTV. They built out theNFL Sunday Ticket,incredibly successful here in this country.

Hill: I was going to say...that's a nice thing to have on your resume.

Erickson: Yeah,the right guy on the right project. I think that more and more,you and I talk quite a bit aboutwhere the media industry is heading. It's not just that linear free TV anymore, butstuff you could watch at any timeover computer andhave it streamed directly to youfor a certain price.

Hill: I want to go back to the first point you hit, which is decliningsubscriber ship in the U.S. Nice reminder that, for all of the headlines that Disney hasgotten over the last 18 months aboutthe following subscribership of ESPN,this is a nice reminder thatit's not just ESPN. Whenpeople are cutting the cord, it's also affecting companies likeDiscovery Communications.

Erickson: Absolutely. The subscriber numberis only one piece of this puzzle. As thatcontinues to evolve over time,you can't just look at that and that's the only thing that you're following as aninvestor, there's a lot of other things going on, too. Andlet's not forget currency, too. A lot of this is revenue that's generated overseas. When youtranslate that back to a strong dollar in U.S. dollar,it doesn't look, sometimes, as strong as it really is out there.

Hill: Where is this stockin terms of its valuation? This is a good quarter,but I think the declining cable subscriber numbermight be a little bit of why we'reseeing the stock fall 2.5% today. That'snot a big drop, and this is a stock that was trading near a 52-week high. But it's really been in the 20s for a year now,and I'm just wondering if it's pricey,if that has anything to do with the drop today,or if it's really all just about the cable subscribers?

Erickson: Well,I mean, a $13 billion valuation for a media company -- that's asmaller media company than the juggernauts -- but obviously larger than a smaller regional one would be oranything like that. So, Istill think it has room to run, Chris. I think a lot of that over-the-top anddigital streaming stuff really isn't priced into the stock at this point, but we stillneed to continue to see them gain traction on that,especially with that Eurosport in Europe.

Hill: All right. Here'ssomething we haven't talked about in...I don't even remember the last time wetalked about bitcoin,but we're going to talk about bitcoin.

I feel like, if he's listening over in Germany,Matt Koppenheffer is smiling, if not outright laughing at me, because I've been bearish on bitcoin from the start, and over the past year, the price of bitcoin has quadrupled. It broke the $1,000 mark last week, and it's dipped back down. But you're someone, likeMatt Koppenheffer, who's beenpretty bullish on bitcoin. First, before we diginto the news with bitcoin, tell me why. Why the bull case for bitcoin? Because, to me, it just seems likeMonopoly money, it seems like a made-up currency, andas I have admitted before,the fact that the Winklevoss twins wereinvolved in this doesn'thelp the bull case, in my opinion.

Erickson: Right. This iskind of an ethereal discussion here, Chris. There's a lot ofspeculation in bitcoin right now. Wedon't have any stocks tied to this --

Hill: Not yet. We'll get to that.

Erickson: Yes,exactly. But it is a very interesting story. Just, generally,my personal thesis,disclaimer, I own one bitcoin, have had quite a year with that.[laughs]

Hill: Congratulations, that's worked out well for you.

Erickson: But,I think there's just a lot of transactionalfriction in the way that we buy and sell things today. Think about it, we'rebuild off of a financing infrastructure. You have a bank account thatyou have a credit card that ties into, youpay your statement at the end of the month, andevery step along the way, somebody is taking a small piece of this. Butit's the way that we built it out over the last several decades. And if you build adigital infrastructurecorrectly, as bitcoin did andBlockchain is trying to do, you don't needa lot of those steps. It's basically digital cash. I always think about it as, you'rehanding a digital dollar to somebody, and that's it. There'sno statements. There's no financing. There's no APR at the end of the year, anything like that. But to do that, there's a lot ofregulators who don't like thatbecause you can do bad things with that. Youcan't track the person giving you the cash at the end of the day and various other things. That's hadbitcoin held back on what its true potential, possibly, could be. Butat the end of the day, you'restarting to see more and more transactions using bitcoin allacross the globe, not just in the United States, but in China andJapan and a bunch of different places. Because bitcoin isgoing to tap out at 21 million bitcoins, once they're mined, you have a fixed supply and increasing demand, and that's pushing the value of each one bitcoin up over the years.

Hill: We've seen this run up over the past 12 months,and you look at the fact that the SEC is considering threeseparate potential bitcoin ETFs. Considering approval of any one of the three. Let's say one of them gets approved -- what kind of run-up are we going to see then? Becauseif we're seeing this run-up now...this actually gets me,I don't want to say bullish on bitcoin,but it gets me slightly less bearish as an investor, because ETFs are a way that a lot of people investif they're looking to get exposure to something without really having the concentrated upside and, therefore, downside of a single stock.I'm not looking to buy a bitcoin, but I'mslightly more interestedin a bitcoin ETF. What happens if they actually approve one of these things?

Erickson: Sure. On thecontinuum of uncertainty, it goes down a notch. If the SEC is going to say, "This is alright, to create bitcoin ETFs," andthey have until March 11th, I believe, to approve of this, but the people who said, "No way, this is too early, I haveso many questions about this even being possible,"those people will start saying, "You know,this still sounds speculative to me, but I think it's interesting now that the SEC is behind it." Basically, anything new, almost all of innovation has got a zillionquestions when it first gets introduced that, over time, as it grows and getsmore and more approvals or people behind it, the questions tend to either linger or go away. And I thinkthat's what you're seeing with bitcoin. That's what the SEC decisionis going to have an impact on this.

Hill: Yesterday,we talked about the latest earnings from Restaurant Brands,which is the parent company of Burger King andTim Hortons. After we taped the episode, Restaurant Brands wasback in the news reportedly talking toPopeyes Louisiana Kitchenabout apotential acquisition, andas a result of those reports,shares of Popeyes are up 14% at one point yesterday. They have sincecome back down to earth, so they are basically flat day to day. This isinteresting to me, though. We were talking about this earlier this morning --it seems like, in the restaurant business, anyway, that if you're good atmanaging one type of restaurant,keeping in the category of quick-serve restaurants, if you're good at that, thenthat's a skill that translates to others.

So, without knowing what they were looking to buyPopeyes for, just on the surface of it,assuming they got the right price, I saw that news and I thought, "You know what? That could work out well for Restaurant Brands." Ultimately, theywalked away because they didn't want to pay the price, becausePopeyes is a stock that has done wellrecently, and as a result of that,the company is more expensive. I guess, the larger question for me is, when you think aboutacquisitions, when you just see, "Company X is thinking about acquiring Company Y," what goes through your mind? Do you have any gut feeling in terms of "That makes sense" or "I need to see the terms first?" What'sthe first thing that you think of?

Erickson: Sure. First of all, to step back,there's definitely different types of acquisitions going on. Themost speculative, if you will, ofacquisitions is technology acquisitions,especially softwareacquisitions, because things change so quickly. There'sa lot of unknowns ofwhat's going to happen five years from now. It'svery difficult to tell. And maybeHPis the poster child of making bad acquisitions, very large, $10 billion acquisitions that they write downsignificantly in a couple of years.

Hill:[laughs] Ifthey're not the poster child, they're onMount Rushmore.

Erickson: [laughs] So manyuncertainties for that. But then you have more predictablebusinesses like we're talking aboutin the restaurant industry. Restaurantsare not software companies, they'remuch more predictableas far as the traffic andhow the business looks. At that point, the acquisition ismuch more predictable for the acquirer, and if they'relarger and can scale the business, and be moreefficient than they were previously, thenyou can drop a lot more moneyto the bottom line to your shareholders and your investors. AndI think that's what Restaurant Brands,who was actually majority-owned by3G Capitalin Brazil, is after in this. They want thepredictable, steady cash flows of a restaurant, but they want to be a little bit more creative, I think, on how they're raising financing and taking what I would call non-strategic costs out of this business to drop more down to the bottom line.

Hill: I don't think this is over, in terms of theirpursuit of Popeyes. I think,at the right price, and today is clearly not the right price because,again, this is a stock that has done very well over the last few years, I think ifthere was some sort of short-term hit the stock took,I could see Restaurant Brands going back to them. In the meantime, they clearly seem like they are looking for,Warren Buffett talks about the elephant gun,I don't know if they have an elephant gun,because they don't have that amount of cash on hand thatBerkshire Hathawaydoes. But they clearly seem like they are looking toexpand their portfolio.

Erickson: I'm glad you mentioned Warren Buffett,because Berkshire Hathaway is kind of partners with 3G Capital. Theygo after and make big deals like these together,which is kind of interesting because I think 3G isclearly a leader in the food spaceand the restaurant space, and that'sdirecting a lot of Warren Buffett's,the greatest investor we have in theUnited States, capital. And they'relooking to build an empire here,and they got creative in doingdeals in the past. If you look at theacquisition of Tim Hortons,people were calling that a taxinversion deal, you're avoiding a lot of U.S.-based taxes byacquiring and moving the company to Canada. The Popeyes one isgoing to be interesting because that's based here in the U.S. That'snot something you have to worry about, the inversions. But,there's a reason that they're looking at it for doing this. Theyhave a price and their mind. Yousee them walking away now as Popeyesstock price has increased significantlyover the last four or five months or so. But,it'll be interesting to see what they're going after on this one. It'snot as obvious to me, but they see something they like.

Hill:Well,I think it's probably just the category. Yes, it's a quick-serverestaurant, but it's not burgers,it's not coffee and donuts. Quick-serve chicken makes upsomewhere in the neighborhood of 10-15% of quick-serverestaurants. And,as we were talking about with our man behind the glass, Dan Boyd, beforehand, yes, you can haveKFC. IfJason Moser were here,I'm sure he would be talking aboutBojangles. Give me Popeyes every day. Their biscuits. And the honey, oh!

Erickson: Theirbiscuits are great. So good.

Hill: AsChris Rock said, it's too good. It's too good! That was hiscomment to Jerry Seinfeld onSeinfeld's web series, that Popeyes is so good that you actually need one of those memory sticks from theMen in Black movies to erase your memory,because otherwise you would just go back every single day.

Erickson: Right. Now,do they do significantly more business today because it'sValentine's Day?

Hill: [laughs]I don't know. I don't knowif they're doing any sort of big promotion. Look,you could do a lot worsefor that special someone in your life thantake them to Popeyes. Dan,you're a Popeyes fan, aren't you?

Dan Boyd: I am, yes.

Hill:Any chance you're going to be thinkingValentine's Day or anything like that?

Boyd: Ifmy girlfriend was amenable to the idea, which,I'm sure she's not,I would love to go to Popeyes forValentine's Day.

Hill: Let'sflip this around. If she came to you and said, "Hey,here's what I'm thinking for Valentine's Day.I'm taking you to Popeyes," you'reeven more in love?

Boyd: We'd make a short stopon the way to Popeyes to a jewelry storeso I could buy her an engagement ring.

Hill: [laughs] All right. Before we wrap up,as I mentioned,a little something, apropos thatSimon is in the studio for this, becauseI'm happy to say that next month, we are going back toSouth by Southwest. If you're in theGreater Austin Texas area or you're going toSouth by Southwest, drop us an email, marketfoolery@fool.com, or hit us up on Twitter, because Simon, Dylan Lewis, who you may know from the Industry Focus podcast, Dan Boyd and I will be going. We'regoing to be recording from thebrand new podcast center that they have atSouth by Southwest. Excited to check that out. Simon, I know thatyou have only begun to look at --I mean, we're going to be doing a whole week's worth of Market Foolery there,but there are also breakout sessions,there are keynote speakers that you're going to be checking out. Do you have an early sense of what's going to be on your agenda?

Erickson: Absolutely, Chris. This isone of my favorite events in the entire year. It has such a window towhat the future is going to bring in, especially in the tech world.Kimbal Musk will be speaking about trust.I saw that on the agenda. I saw Ray Kurzweil, going to betalking about collaboration. And two topics that I'm very personally interested in isconnected health and the future of wearable technology. Those are both going to be tracks atSouth by Southwest in Austin.I'm super stoked about the event.

Hill: AndI should say,just as we did last year, we'regoing to try and put together a little meet and greet. Stay tuned formore details on that,but we did that last year, we went to Guero's.

Erickson: Guero's Taco Bar.

Hill: Abunch of listeners came out,a bunch of Motley Fool members. It was a great time, and we're looking to do that again. In terms of dates, we're lookingbroadly at March 11th through the 15th. Again,if you're going to South by Southwest,if you're in the Austin area,we would love to see you. More details to come. Dan Boyd, are there food truckson your agenda that you're looking to hit?

Boyd: Absolutely, Keith's Barbecue is the main one. Theyoperate out of an old school bus, and I think I ate there every single day last year in Austin, because it was amazing.

Hill: All right! Simon Erickson,thanks for being here!

Erickson: Thanks, Chris!

Hill: Asalways, people on the program may have interestsin the stocks that they talk about,and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against,so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. That'sgoing to do it for this edition of Market Foolery. The show was mixed byDan Boyd. I'm Chris Hill. Thanks for listening. We'llsee you tomorrow!

Chris Hill has no position in any stocks mentioned. Simon Erickson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway (B shares). The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Berkshire Hathaway (B shares) and Twitter. The Motley Fool recommends Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Originally posted here:
How Strong Is the Bull Case for Bitcoin? -- The Motley Fool - Motley Fool

Posted in Bitcoin | Comments Off on How Strong Is the Bull Case for Bitcoin? — The Motley Fool – Motley Fool