Daily Archives: March 27, 2017

Forbes

5 People Who Are Pushing Technology That You Will Want To Work With Now Forbes Here are some incredibly smart people that are pushing boundaries and/or doing some incredibly inventive things in emerging technology and other areas. Whether it's healthcare, news or immersive technologies - these are the people you'll be hearing a ...

Here is the original post:

5 People Who Are Pushing Technology That You Will Want To Work With Now - Forbes

TechCrunch

Technology is killing jobs, and only technology can save them TechCrunch In the recent presidential election, automation and robotics got a slight reprieve from the accusations that it has been the key driver in job losses in the United States. During the campaign, the conversation shifted, thanks largely to then-candidate ... and more »

Go here to see the original:

Technology is killing jobs, and only technology can save them - TechCrunch

As Washington fiddles, China is investing billions in U.S. startups with cutting-edge products that could have military applications at the same time it is dialing back investments in less critical American industries such as entertainment.

A New York Times story this week says that among the startups are companies working on artificial intelligence for military robots, rocket engines, ship sensors and printers that could produce high-tech components such as computer screens for military jets. Many of the firms making such investments are owned by companies controlled by the Chinese government or connected to its leaders.

A blog post last December on the website of CB Insights, which tracks startup investments, says that China poured $9.9 billion into new Silicon Valley firms in 2015 and made an additional $3.5 billion in tech investments in the first nine months of last year. The number and size of those tech investments in startups developing military applications were not broken out.

Related: Pentagon Scientists Worry the US Is Losing the Artificial Intelligence Arms Race

The Times story says a Defense Department white paper being circulated among Trump administration officials makes the case that "Beijing is encouraging Chinese companies with close government ties to invest in American start-ups specializing in critical technologies like artificial intelligence and robots to advance China's military capacity as well as its economy." A call to the Defense Department for comment was referred to a public affairs officer who was not immediately available.

Last year, China spent $225 billion investing in or buying out overseas companies, although there is evidence that the leadership in Beijing is exerting pressure to both rein in outflows of capital and ensure that when investments are made, they are in strategic industries.

Trump's Next Challenge: Russia Returns to Afghanistan

For example, one casualty of more controlled investment may have been the $1 billion deal by Dalian Wanda Group to buy Dick Clark Productions, which produces a popular New Year's Eve countdown show and the Golden Globe Awards ceremony, among other entertainment properties.

Eldridge Industries, which owns Dick Clark Productions, moved to terminate the deal earlier this month after contending that Wanda, which has been aggressively pursuing investments in Hollywood, was unwilling to meet its obligations. Earlier this week, the New York Post reported that a $1 billion financing deal between Viacom's Paramount Pictures and two Chinese companies, Shanghai Film Group and Hua Hua Media, is in jeopardy.

What is driving the Chinese interest in U.S. startups focused on AI and robotics with military applications seems to be a recognition that the parameters of war and defense are rapidly evolving.

A report prepared last October for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Committee, which monitors the national security implications of trade and deals with China, said that "Chinese military leaders and strategists believe that the nature of warfare is fundamentally changing due to unmanned platforms" and pointed to a growing military drone industry and efforts to acquire artificial intelligence capabilities either by investment or possibly "cyber espionage."

Related: Game of Drones: The Air Force Ramps Up Video Game Warfare

The study conducted by the intelligence research and analysis firm Defense Group Inc. said: "Chinese strategists consider the U.S. military to be increasingly dependent upon unmanned systems, making countermeasures against these weapons a necessity."

Besides attempting to acquire military technology illegally or through means that are not clearly regulated, DGI said "state-owned conglomerates, companies, and venture capital firms are actively acquiring and investing in AI and foreign robotics technologies companies, particularly in Europe."

The report recommended that Washington "monitor and when necessary investigate China's growing foreign investments in robotics and AI companies and consider the security implications of transactions and acquisitions involving emerging technologies such as AI and nanorobotics."

Investigating Chinese investments, however, may not address the root problem. Some startups told the Times that they turned to Chinese investors because they were more willing to take risks and because the American military has been reluctant to take a chance on unproven technology even when the capital required is relatively insignificant.

Excerpt from:

China finds a new source of cutting-edge military technology: US startups - CNBC

Human vision is all that holds back technology.

Technology is in its infancy, said Nick Reddy, chief digital officer and senior vice president of information services at Baylor Scott & White Health.

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

If you have previously registered on tdtnews.com, and have a current online subscription you may login with your email and password. Online subscribers get access to all of the Temple Daily Telegram's online content, plus a digital replica of the print edition. Some third party content, including circulars may not be available online.

If you have questions regarding access, please contact circulation at tdtcir@tdtnews.comor 254-778-4444 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Need an account? Create one now.

kAm%96 >@C6 x D66[ E96 >@C6 x 36=:6G6 x

kAmu:G6 J62CD 7C@> ?@H[ 96 D2:5[ E66?D 2C6 8@:?8 E@ H@?56C 9@H H6 FD65 D@>6E9:?8 2D 4=F?

kAm%96 :?E6?E:@? @7 #655J 2?5 E96 A6@A=6 96 H@C2<6 962=E9 42C6 >@C6 4@?G6?:6?E[ <66A A6@A=6 962=E9J 2?5 >2<6 962=E9 42C6 >@C6 277@C523=6]k^Am

kAm#:89E ?@H 2== @7 @FC 677@CED C6G@=G6 2C@F?5 E96 BF6DE:@?D 😀 :E 36EE6C 7@C @FC A2E:6?ED[ H:== :E <66A E96> >@C6 962=E9J 2?5 H:== :E 564C62D6 E96 4@DE @7 962=E9 42C6[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

kAmx7 2 DA64:7:4 56G:46 @C A2CE:4F=2C D@7EH2C6 H:== 96=A q2J=@C $U2>Aj( C62=:K6 H92E :E 4@?D:56CD 2 ?665[ :E H:== 92G6 E96:C 2EE6?E:@?]k^Am

kAm(6 5@?E 92G6 2 =:DE @7 :E6>D E92E H6C6 =@@<:?8 7@C[ 96 D2:5] xED >@C6 23@FE H92E H6 H2?E E@ 244@>A=:D9]k^Am

kAm%92E 4@F=5 >62? 4@?D:56C:?8 6G6CJE9:?8 7C@> 2CE:7:4:2= :?E6==:86?46[ 2 5:8:E2= E@@= @C 2 >65:42= 56G:46[ E96 49@:46D CF? E96 82>FE]k^Am

kAm%96 H2J H6 E9:?< 23@FE :E :D H92E 5@ H6 H2?E :E E@ 244@>A=:D9[ H92E :E =@@62?D H6 92G6 E@ 3FJ )*+[ H6 H:==[ @C H6 92G6 E@ A2CE?6C H:E9 pqr[ H6 H:==]k^Am

kAmx? yF?6[ q2J=@C $4@EE U2>Aj (9:E6 96=5 :ED 7:CDE 5:8:E2= DF>>:E 5FC:?8 H9:49 `a 4@>A2?:6D[ D6=64E65 7C@> 23@FE `__ 2AA=:42?ED[ A:E4965 4@?46AED 5:C64E=J E@ 23@FE f_ q2J=@C $4@EE U2>Aj (9:E6 DJDE6> 6I64FE:G6D]k^Am

kAm%9@D6 4@>A2?:6D H6C6 7@4FD65 @? 2 76H 2C62D @7 :?E6C6DE[ DF49 2D 86?6E:4D[ EC2?D7@C>2E:@?2= D@=FE:@?D[ 2CE:7:4:2= :?E6==:86?46 2?5 H62C23=6 E649?@=@8J]k^Am

kAmq2J=@C $4@EE U2>Aj (9:E6 ?@H 92D A:=@E DEF5:6D H:E9 23@FE D:I @7 E96 A2CE:4:A2E:?8 4@>A2?:6D]k^Am

kAmpE 2?J 8:G6? E:>6 #655J 2?5 9:D 4@==628F6D 4@F=5 36 =@@<:?8 2E D6G6C2= :E6>D]k^Am

kAm(6== 5@ 2 >2C<6E DFCG6J 2?5 H6== =@@< 2E d_ E@ `__ E@@=D :? 2 >@?E9 D@>6E:>6D[ 96 D2:5] *@F >:89E =@@< 2E 2? :E6> 7@C b_ D64@?5D[ D@>6E:>6D 7@C EH@ 9@FCD @C c_ 9@FCD[ 56A6?5:?8 😕 9@H :?EC:8F:?8 :E :D]k^Am

kAm%96C6D 2? 6G2=F2E:@? AC@46DD[ 56E6C>:?:?8 :7 :ED 2? :?E6C6DE:?8 :562 3FE ?@E H@C<23=6[ 5@6D :E 92G6 C:G2= G2=F6[ :D :E D@>6E9:?8 E96 962=E9 42C6 DJDE6> 2=C625J 92D 2?5 5@6D :E 92G6 E96 A@E6?E:2= 7@C 5:DCFAE:@?]k^Am

kAm%96 :E6>D E92E E96 E62> 4@?D:56CD 42? 4@>6 7C@> E96 >2C<6E A=246[ 3FE E96 >2;@C:EJ @7 E96 E:>6 E96 C6BF6DED 4@>6 7C@> H:E9:? q2J=@C $4@EE U2>Aj (9:E6[ :ED A9JD:4:2?D[ 25>:?:DEC2E@CD 2?5 @E96CD]k^Am

kAmx7 2 A9JD:4:2? H2?ED D@>6E9:?8 E92E 96=AD E96> 4@??64E H:E9 2 A2E:6?E 27E6C 2 E92E H:== 2==@H E96 :?5:G:5F2= E@ 5@ C6923 7C@> 9@>6[ #655J H:== 8@ 7:?5 E96 a_ :E6>D 😕 E96 >2C<6E A=246 E92E >2E49 E96 DA64:7:42E:@?]k^Am

kAm(6 =@@< 2E 9@H :E H:== 7:E :?E@ @FC @G6C2== DEC2E68J[ D9@F=5 H6 36 5@:?8 E9:D[ H96C6 :D :E :? E96 AC:@C:E:6D 2?5 :D :E ECF=J 2 >65:42= 36?67:E[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

kAm#655J 92D 2 E62> @7 `d A6@A=6 H9@ H@C< H:E9 9:>[ 3FE H96? 96 ?665D 2 DA64:2=:DED 25G:46 96 =6G6C286D E96 6IA6CED 96 92D 2G2:=23=6]k^Am

kAmx7 H6C6 =@@<:?8 2E 2 962CE G2=G6 H6== =6G6C286 @FC 36DE 42C5:@=@8:DED 2?5 92G6 E96> 6G2=F2E6 E96 G2=G6 H:E9 FD[ #655J D2:5] x7 x> =@@<:?8 2E D@>6E9:?8 E92ED 6IEC6>6=J 4=:?:42= @C:6?E65 x== 3C:?8 😕 @FC 36DE 4=:?:4:2?] (6 92G6 2 3:8 36?49 DEC6?8E9 @7 6IA6CED]k^Am

kAmx7 :ED 7@C 4@?DF>6CD[ #655J H:== 86E E96 >2C<6E:?8 E62> E@ AFE E@86E96C 2 DFCG6J]k^Am

kAm(6 =6G6C286 E96 42A23:=:E:6D E92E H6 92G6 😕 @FC @C82?:K2E:@? E@ 6G2=F2E6[ C6G:6H 2?5 2?2=JK6[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

kAmp== @7 E96 E649?@=@8J 2?5 :??@G2E:@?D E92E 2C6 D66? 😕 4=:?:4D 2?5 H:== 36 FD65 😕 E96 ?6H DFC8:42= 46?E6C F?56C 4@?DECF4E:@? 😕 %6>A=6 H6?E E9C@F89 #655JD @77:46]k^Am

kAm%96 A6@A=6 😕 pFDE:? D2J H6 H2?E E@ 5@ D@>6E9:?8 :??@G2E:G6[ H6 8@ E96C6 2?5 E2=< 23@FE H92E E92E >62?D 2?5 H92E H6 42? 5@[ 96 D2:5] (6== 8@ 324< H:E9 :562D 2?5 A:4< 2 76H @7 E96>]k^Am

kAm%96 :?E6?E:@? 😀 E@ A:@?66C E649?@=@8J 2E E96 5@H?E@H? pFDE:? 4=:?:4]k^Am

kAmxED 2 G6CJ 5:D4:A=:?65 AC@46DD 7@C FD[ #655J D2:5] x7 H6 5@ D@>6E9:?8 H6 =:<6 E@ 28C66 @? H92E 8@@5 :D 8@:?8 E@ =@@< =:<6] x7 :E :D 8@@5 H6 D42=6 :E 24C@DD q2J=@C $4@EE U2>Aj (9:E6]k^Am

kAm~? 56>2?5 D6CG:46D[ E96 4@?DF>6C 4@?G6?:6?46 :E6>D 2C6 G6CJ A@AF=2C 2?5 2C6 36:?8 :?EC@5F465 E9C@F89@FE E96 DJDE6>]k^Am

kAmq642FD6 @7 q2J=@C $4@EE U2>Aj (9:E6 w62=E9 😀 D@ =2C86 :ED 62D:6C E@ 3C:?8 ?6H :562D E@ E96 E23=6 E92E D>2==6C AC24E:46D 42?E]k^Am

kAm(6 42? 5@ E9:?8D H:E9 >@C6 D@A9:DE:42E:@?[ >@C6 C:8@C[ >@C6 5:D4:A=:?6[ 96 D2:5]k^Am

kAm%96C6 2C6 @E96C A6@A=6 =:<6 #655J H9@ 2C6 7@4FD65 @? 5C:G:?8 :??@G2E:@? :? =2C86 962=E9 42C6 DJDE6>D]k^Am

The rest is here:

Technology key to health care at Baylor Scott & White - Temple Daily Telegram

So what are the sell side analysts saying now? Barron's excellent columnist, Tiernan Ray, would do well to get Bernstein's Mark Newman in a room with Credit Suisse's John Pitzer and listen to them chat about Micron Technology (NASDAQ:MU). These are the two sell side analysts I respect the most, and they have widely divergent views on Micron after the company's blowout quarterly earnings, and ultra super duper maximum deluxe robust (technical term) third quarter guidance, delivered on the March 23 earnings call. The tables below demonstrate how divergent Wall Street's view of Micron has become.

Here are the first five firms I've reviewed, on EPS estimates and price targets:

These are all from reports generated after the March 23 earnings call. Blank cells mean no data was presented.

And here's our quintet on revenue estimates, in billions of dollars:

Huh! Well at least they all agree on the third quarter of 2017. Wait! that's smack in the middle of the guided range of $5.2 to $5.6 billion!

Here's some representative language from the reports. First John Pitzer and team at Credit Suisse:

We continue to see fundamentals for MU improving from here - specifically (1) we expect the pricing environment to remain healthy through 2H17 and drive margin improvement for MU; (2) structurally, Memory is a different industry now - higher concentration than ever (HHI 3,300 now versus only 1,900 in 2007), more diversified demand, and slowing supply - we argue margins are more resilient now than in the past, and expect a re-rating as investors realize normalized earnings of >$2 per year; and (3) we continue to argue that strategic value continues to be underappreciated, particularly given China's interest is Memory. Our TP of $40 represents ~8x of our NTM EPS of $5.34 (w/ SBC).

And here is Bernstein's Mark Newman:

The New Memory Paradigm is back, but how much upside is left? We expect this strong pricing to continue in DRAM through the end of CY17 as supply growth in DRAM remains relatively muted this year. We worry more about NAND oversupply later this CY17 due to Samsung's aggressive supply additions and potential oversupply and price weakness later this year.

Taxes. There seems to be some confusion here on SA, and even on the sell side, about Micron's low tax rate and how long it will continue. For a while. Remember Micron's shareholder unfriendly poison pill to protect their Net Operating Loss Carryforwards?

Here are the NOLs from page 85 of the most recent 10k:

And just for fun, here is the same table from the previous year's 10k so you can see that NOLs are growing, not shrinking:

But beyond all these NOLs, Micron operates in a variety of jurisdictions where they don't get levied the full US statutory rate. As a sanity check I looked at Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) over time, and they have a much larger US footprint as a percentage of their total than does Micron:

Source: Bernstein reports 11/4/14, 3/30/15, 3/21/16, and 2/10/17

Those average to 22.8%, far below the maximum US statutory corporate rate.

Finally, and please don't make me dredge up the explanations and examples from business school, GAAP taxes as shown above are not the same as cash taxes. There are plenty of things to worry about with Micron, but current taxes are not one of them.

Free Cash Flow. Also in the confused category is Free Cash Flow. This has been a legitimate worry with Micron over the past year or so. But now, as this table from John Pitzer at Credit Suisse shows, Micron has become something of a Free Cash Flow generation machine:

Note the second to last line of the table: $4.9 Billion in FCF in 2017 and $5.3 Billion in 2018.

Don't believe Credit Suisse (or want it in a type size you can see)? How about the gang at Citicorp:

Also note what this does for cash balances in Citi's estimation, with a static LTDebt amount of $11.3 billion over the same period:

So at least these two analysts don't feel cash flow is an issue.

I am interested and a bit nervous as to what Micron may do with regard to bidding on Toshiba's (OTCPK:TOSBF) memory assets, and bids are due this week. Bloomberg feels bids may be in the neighborhood of $13 billion. My hope is that Micron joins a consortium bid which I imagine might include Silverlake, their portfolio companies Dell & EMC, Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL), and Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT). While I hope Micron won't do a solo bid, they will surely have to ante up in any consortium. And while I don't want dilution, this could be a worthy and ultimately anti-dilutive extremely accretive rollup of more of the memory industry. In a correctly structured and priced consortium bid, I would support Micron making an equity offering of 10% of its shares.

Conclusions. Reviewing what the sell side is saying, or more particularly reviewing how what they are saying has changed, is a key step in beginning to formulate my own earnings estimate. Clearly Mark Newman of Bernstein feels we are late in the cycle and the downturn is around the corner. John Pitzer of Credit Suisse seems to think this cycle has a ways to go. I suspect my own estimate, which I've begun working on, will come out somewhere between the two but trending towards the high side based on the many pages of updates I've read.

I'm a bit surprised that Micron's stock price didn't react more favorably to this incredible earnings call. On the other hand, the aftermarket on Thursday saw 12 million shares traded, the pre-market on Friday saw another 6 million, and Friday's regular session saw 107 million. We are getting some new shareholders for this trip into the wild blue yonder. Buckle up for the trip! Good luck to all.

Disclosure: I am/we are long MU, INTC.

I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Follow this link:

Micron Technology: Analyst Upgrades - Seeking Alpha

SINGAPORE - Law firms here will receive yet another boost to get "smart" by adopting technology, with two new initiatives launched by the Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) on Monday (March 27).

The SmartLaw Assist scheme will provide law firms with 70 per cent subsidy in initial costs for an online knowledge database, which will help cut the time needed for legal research by up to 20 per cent, said LawSoc president Gregory Vijayendran.

This was announced by Mr Vijayendran on Monday during the two-day Legal Technology Roadshow at the NTUC Business Centre.

The databases under the scheme, which will support an eligible firm's first-year subscription costs, are from the Singapore Academy of Law, Lexis Nexis or Thomson Reuters.

About $300,000 from the LawSoc's Education Fund has been set aside for this scheme.

Separately, to recognise law firms whichhave adopted technology to improve productivity and encourage more law firms to come on board, Mr Vijayendran also launched the society's SmartLaw recognition scheme.

Law firms who have adopted a practice management or accounting software, an online knowledge management database and have an online presence will be able to use the SmartLaw logo on its website and marketing collaterals.

At the event on Monday, the first 10 firms were recognised with a certificate.

This move comes amid a greater push for legal technology in recent months, including a $2.8 million Tech Start for Law programme by the Ministry of Law, LawSoc and Spring Singapore.

Launched in February, it provides funding support for law firms to adopt baseline technologies in practice management, online research and marketing.

"A smart nation needs smart lawyers... I hope that such technology will enable our small- and medium-sized Singapore law practices to be even more efficient and profitable by allowing our lawyers to move up the value chain," said Mr Vijayendran.

The roadshow is the LawSoc's largest event of its kind thus far, featuring 15 vendors, including products and services which are not under the two schemes, but are offering discounts to law firms.

Justice Lee Sieu Kin, who heads the One Judiciary (IT) Steering Committee, said in his opening speech on Monday that the roadshow is an "encouraging start" to realising the Legal Technology Vision, a five-year blueprint charting the legal sector's use of technology.

He said: "This is the first of many steps for the legal sector in the transformation of the legal sector to stay ahead of impending disruption that technology will bring."

Go here to see the original:

2 new technology schemes launched to help law firms get 'smart' - The Straits Times

By Hadeel Al-Alosi, Western Sydney University

Posted March 27, 2017 19:10:27

Domestic violence is a serious issue in Australia and globally.

It is an inherently gendered crime. Research consistently shows the overwhelming majority of offenders are male and the victims are female.

Australian governments have recently taken a strong stand against domestic violence, focusing mainly on preventing physical forms of abuse.

For example, in 2015, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) announced it would implement a $30 million campaign designed to reduce domestic violence against women and their children.

Another example is the New South Wales Government's Domestic Violence Strategy 2013-2017, which aims to improve the criminal justice system's response to domestic violence.

But what is missing from these strategies is a focus on technology-facilitated domestic violence.

This is a form of domestic violence that provides abusers a pervasive way to control, coerce, stalk and harass their victims.

It involves a range of behaviours. These include sending abusive text messages or emails, making continuous threatening phone calls, spying on and monitoring victims through the use of tracking systems, abusing victims on social media sites, and sharing intimate photos of the victim without their consent ("revenge porn").

A well-publicised example of technology-facilitated domestic violence is the 2010 incident involving Lara Bingle, whose nude images were shared without her consent by her former partner, Brendan Fevola.

The first Australian study conducted to specifically investigate the use of technology in the context of domestic violence is the 2013 SmartSafe Project.

The study involved surveying 152 domestic violence caseworkers and 46 victims in Victoria.

Almost all of the caseworkers who participated in the survey (98 per cent) said their clients had experienced technology-facilitated abuse by a former partner.

Five of the most commonly used technology and online platforms by abusers are:

Other Australian studies further highlight that technology-facilitated domestic violence is prevalent and has significant "real world" implications.

For example, in its review of domestic violence homicides occurring between 2000 to 2012, the NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team observed that technology was commonly being used by abusers to stalk, monitor, and control their intimate partners while the relationship was on foot.

This challenges:

" ... misconceptions that stalking behaviours usually only manifest after the relationship has ended."

On an international level, the United Nations, in its 2015 "wake up" report, estimated that 73 per cent of females worldwide have endured online abuse.

The report also urged countries to recognise that online abuse can be just as damaging as physical violence, and has negative consequences:

" ... for all societies in general and irreparable damage for girls and women in particular."

Given the ubiquity of digital communication devices, it is unsurprising that some people are misusing technology to abuse and harass their current or former intimate partners.

Unfortunately, technology-facilitated abuse has been given little, if any, attention in government initiatives aimed at tackling domestic violence.

For example, the Domestic Violence Strategy does not mention technology-facilitated domestic violence.

There are federal and state laws that may deal with some forms of digital abuse for example, stalking offences or using a carriage service to menace and harass someone.

But there needs to be a coordinated national response, rather than a patchwork of legislation throughout Australia.

This is especially true given the borderless nature of the internet.

This allows abusers to traverse geographical barriers to reach their victims through the use of technology.

It is also evident that there needs to be non-legal initiatives that focus on perpetrator accountability and challenge victim-blaming attitudes.

In the SmartSafe Project, it was reported that:

" ... often police put the responsibility back onto the woman and say she should stop visiting Facebook or using devices."

In 2016 federal parliamentary debates, it was also suggested that domestic violence victims take extra precautionary steps by:

"Shut[ting] off GPS and wi-fi, stay away from social media Twitter, Facebook, Instagram; whatever and remember that the perpetrator will be monitoring the sites of your family and friends to see you wherever you are, because you might pop up; they might take photos of you. So please make sure that children do the same."

Victims (and their children) should not be told to abandon their digital communications.

The focus should instead be on holding abusers to account.

Telling victims to forsake their online presence effectively drives women offline, marking the internet as yet another male-dominated space.

The aim should be to prevent perpetrators from further abusing victims through the use of technology, and ultimately changing misogynist and victim-blaming attitudes.

The National Sexual Assault, Family & Domestic Violence Counselling Line 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.

Hadeel Al-Alosi is a lecturer at Western Sydney University's School of Law. She has a strong interest in the work of community legal centres and addressing access to justice issues for vulnerable groups.

Originally published in The Conversation

Topics: assault, crime, community-and-society, domestic-violence, australia, nsw

Read the original here:

Technology-facilitated abuse: The new breed of domestic violence - ABC Online