The Prometheus League
Breaking News and Updates
- Abolition Of Work
- Ai
- Alt-right
- Alternative Medicine
- Antifa
- Artificial General Intelligence
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artificial Super Intelligence
- Ascension
- Astronomy
- Atheism
- Atheist
- Atlas Shrugged
- Automation
- Ayn Rand
- Bahamas
- Bankruptcy
- Basic Income Guarantee
- Big Tech
- Bitcoin
- Black Lives Matter
- Blackjack
- Boca Chica Texas
- Brexit
- Caribbean
- Casino
- Casino Affiliate
- Cbd Oil
- Censorship
- Cf
- Chess Engines
- Childfree
- Cloning
- Cloud Computing
- Conscious Evolution
- Corona Virus
- Cosmic Heaven
- Covid-19
- Cryonics
- Cryptocurrency
- Cyberpunk
- Darwinism
- Democrat
- Designer Babies
- DNA
- Donald Trump
- Eczema
- Elon Musk
- Entheogens
- Ethical Egoism
- Eugenic Concepts
- Eugenics
- Euthanasia
- Evolution
- Extropian
- Extropianism
- Extropy
- Fake News
- Federalism
- Federalist
- Fifth Amendment
- Fifth Amendment
- Financial Independence
- First Amendment
- Fiscal Freedom
- Food Supplements
- Fourth Amendment
- Fourth Amendment
- Free Speech
- Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
- Futurism
- Futurist
- Gambling
- Gene Medicine
- Genetic Engineering
- Genome
- Germ Warfare
- Golden Rule
- Government Oppression
- Hedonism
- High Seas
- History
- Hubble Telescope
- Human Genetic Engineering
- Human Genetics
- Human Immortality
- Human Longevity
- Illuminati
- Immortality
- Immortality Medicine
- Intentional Communities
- Jacinda Ardern
- Jitsi
- Jordan Peterson
- Las Vegas
- Liberal
- Libertarian
- Libertarianism
- Liberty
- Life Extension
- Macau
- Marie Byrd Land
- Mars
- Mars Colonization
- Mars Colony
- Memetics
- Micronations
- Mind Uploading
- Minerva Reefs
- Modern Satanism
- Moon Colonization
- Nanotech
- National Vanguard
- NATO
- Neo-eugenics
- Neurohacking
- Neurotechnology
- New Utopia
- New Zealand
- Nihilism
- Nootropics
- NSA
- Oceania
- Offshore
- Olympics
- Online Casino
- Online Gambling
- Pantheism
- Personal Empowerment
- Poker
- Political Correctness
- Politically Incorrect
- Polygamy
- Populism
- Post Human
- Post Humanism
- Posthuman
- Posthumanism
- Private Islands
- Progress
- Proud Boys
- Psoriasis
- Psychedelics
- Putin
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Physics
- Rationalism
- Republican
- Resource Based Economy
- Robotics
- Rockall
- Ron Paul
- Roulette
- Russia
- Sealand
- Seasteading
- Second Amendment
- Second Amendment
- Seychelles
- Singularitarianism
- Singularity
- Socio-economic Collapse
- Space Exploration
- Space Station
- Space Travel
- Spacex
- Sports Betting
- Sportsbook
- Superintelligence
- Survivalism
- Talmud
- Technology
- Teilhard De Charden
- Terraforming Mars
- The Singularity
- Tms
- Tor Browser
- Trance
- Transhuman
- Transhuman News
- Transhumanism
- Transhumanist
- Transtopian
- Transtopianism
- Ukraine
- Uncategorized
- Vaping
- Victimless Crimes
- Virtual Reality
- Wage Slavery
- War On Drugs
- Waveland
- Ww3
- Yahoo
- Zeitgeist Movement
-
Prometheism
-
Forbidden Fruit
-
The Evolutionary Perspective
Monthly Archives: June 2017
Second Amendment Violations Targeted by Criminal Code Experts – Heritage.org
Posted: June 29, 2017 at 10:52 am
In District of Columbia v. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that Washington, D.C.s ban on handgun possession unconstitutionally infringed on Second Amendment rights. Yet a District law prohibiting with few exceptions ammunition in residents homes lingers on the books.
What good is the right to keep and bear arms for self-defense if you cannot have ammunition? How can residents look to the law to understand what conduct is and is not illegal? Should they follow the statutes? The court? Get confused and forgo their rights?
In Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote that if a statute is in opposition to the Constitution, the Constitution must govern.
Following that principle, the criminal code reform commission established by the City Council has reviewed the districts criminal laws and identified two statutes Unlawful Possession of Ammunition (D.C. Code 7-2506.01) and Alteration of Identifying Marks of Weapons (D.C. Code 22-4512) as being unconstitutional.
The commissions findings rest on two cases in D.C. courts: Herrington v. United States and Reid v. United States.
In Herrington, the trial court had ruled that all the government needs to prove to obtain [an unlawful possession of ammunition] conviction are that the defendant possessed ammunition, and that he did so knowingly and intentionally. The D.C. Court of Appeals disagreed, writing, a flat ban on the possession of handgun ammunition in the home is not just incompatible with the Second Amendment, but clearly so.
Yet it ruled that the government may convict a defendant of unlawful possession of ammunition if it also proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he had not lawfully registered a firearm of the same gauge or caliber as the ammunition he possesses.
The commissions report identifies the statute as unconstitutional but advises lawmakers to cure that by amending the law to incorporate the courts ruling.
The second offense makes it a crime to alter or obliterate a firearms serial number. The commissions report observes that the law also permits a jury to infer that a person who possesses a weapon with obliterated markings is the same person who did, in fact, obliterate those markings.
In Reid, the D.C. Court of Appeals recognized that individuals might unknowingly acquire weapons with previously obliterated markings, and that, therefore, the presumption of guilt in the statute is fundamentally unfair and violates due process.
Thirty-four years later, commissioners are just now advising lawmakers to bring the law up to date with the U.S. Constitution.
The commissioners give three reasons why lawmakers should no longer delay updating D.C. firearms laws:
1) to ensure respect for the peoples constitutional rights;
2) to clarify to the general public what precisely constitutes an offense; and
3) to guide practitioners in the future.
For the same reasons, other states should review their criminal codes to ensure that Second Amendment rights, and other constitutional provisions, are protected.
As the Supreme Court stated in McBoyle v. United States in 1931, and had recognized long before that, fair warning should be given to the world in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed. To make the warning fair, so far as possible the line should be clear.
In Heller, the Court wrote that the Second Amendment bears no secret or technical meanings that would not have been known to ordinary citizens in the founding generation. In McDonald v. Chicago, the Court held that the Second Amendment right, recognized in Heller, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense applies to the states.
The D.C. Criminal Code Reform Commission represents a step in the right direction. It has provided a straightforward methodology for reviewing criminal laws in the interest of protecting constitutional rights. It is an approach that all cities and states should consider taking.
See the original post here:
Second Amendment Violations Targeted by Criminal Code Experts - Heritage.org
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Second Amendment Violations Targeted by Criminal Code Experts – Heritage.org
Justice Thomas Chides Colleagues for Ignoring Second Amendment Case – Townhall
Posted: at 10:52 am
On Monday, the Supreme Court decided against hearing a case involving the right to carry a firearm outside of one's home. California resident Edward Peruta had challenged a state lawlimiting gun-carrying permits to those showing "good cause." Simply mentioning self-defense is not enough - San Diego policy requires residents to list specific threats they believe they're facing.
Although the right to carry has been a hot topic across the country, Peruta v. California did not interest at least four of the justices, so it will not be added to their docket at this time.
That really peeved off Justices Clarence Thomas, who dissented from the bench.
The Second Amendments core purpose further supports the conclusion that the right to bear arms extends to public carry, Thomas wrote. Even if other Members of the Court do not agree that the Second Amendment likely protects a right to public carry, the time has come for the Court to answer this important question definitively.
Thomas went on to say that he and his colleagues are too removed from everyday American life to understand why this case is so important.
"For those of us who work in marbled halls, guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantees of the Second Amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous. But the Framers made a clear choice: They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense. I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right, particularly when their very lives may depend on it," Thomas added.
Newest Justice Neil Gorsuch joined on to Thomas's opinion.
Without the chance to be heard at the Supreme Court, the lower court rulings stands. In a vote of 7-4, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the San Diego restrictions were permissible.
New Requirements for Visa Holders as Partial Travel Ban Goes Into Effect
Read the rest here:
Justice Thomas Chides Colleagues for Ignoring Second Amendment Case - Townhall
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Justice Thomas Chides Colleagues for Ignoring Second Amendment Case – Townhall
Editorial: Target the US Constitution – Amarillo.com
Posted: at 10:52 am
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. The Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. The Tenth Amendment, U.S. Constitution
The aforementioned amendments are clear, at least to those without an agenda.
We offer these amendments to show the lack of logic regarding the decision this week by the U.S. Supreme Court not to consider a challenge to a law in California which restricts the constitutional rights of Americans to carry a gun. California has what it called a good cause law, which means California residents must convince the state they have a valid reason to carry a concealed weapon.
Here is the problem, which is clearly evident when reading the Second Amendment and the Tenth Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional right. In other words, it is not a right that is left up to individual states to recognize as they see fit.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. The right of Americans to keep and bear arms is specifically a delegated power, which means states do not have the authority to gut the Second Amendment.
Californias law makes little sense anyway, regardless of the U.S. Constitution.
As of February, there were at least 11 states which had passed legislation allowing the carry of concealed weapons without a permit. If the fears of those who want to destroy the Second Amendment are accurate, these 11 states should be a battleground. For the record, the state of Texas has had a concealed carry law for more than 20 years, and has had an open carry law since 2016. The Lone Star State has not returned to the stereotypical days of the wild west, when residents settled disputes with a shootout at high noon on Main Street.
Evidently, Californians cannot be trusted with firearms as much as residents of other states. (Sarcasm noted.)
What states such as California are doing is taking it upon themselves to determine how their residents exercise their constitutional rights contained in the Second Amendment. And a hodgepodge of gun laws based on the whims of the states ignores the Second Amendment.
The rest is here:
Editorial: Target the US Constitution - Amarillo.com
Posted in Second Amendment
Comments Off on Editorial: Target the US Constitution – Amarillo.com
First Amendment Center Releases 2017 State of the First Amendment Survey Results – PR Newswire (press release)
Posted: at 10:52 am
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2017 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today, the First Amendment Center of the Newseum Institute released the results of its State of the First Amendment survey, which examines Americans' views on freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition, and samples their opinions on contemporary First Amendment issues. The survey, conducted this year in partnership with Fors Marsh Group, an applied research company, has been published annually since 1997, reflecting Americans' changing attitudes toward their core freedoms.
The results of the 2017 survey show that, despite coming out of one of the most politically contentious years in U.S. history, most Americans remain generally supportive of the First Amendment. When asked if the First Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees, 69 percent of survey respondents disagreed.
However, there are ideological divisions in attitudes toward the First Amendment, with liberals and conservatives disagreeing on the amount of protection the First Amendment should provide in certain scenarios. Conservatives were more likely than liberals to believe that those who leak information should be prosecuted and that the government should be able to hold Muslims to a higher level of scrutiny. However, liberals were more likely than conservatives to think that colleges should be able to ban speakers with controversial views.
This year, 43 percent of Americans agreed that news media outlets try to report the news without bias a significant improvement from only 23 percent in 2016. However, a majority of Americans (53 percent) expressed a preference for news information that aligns with their own views, demonstrating that many Americans may not view "biased" news in a negative light. The 2017 survey also attempted to assessthe impact of the "fake news" phenomenon. Approximately 70 percent of Americans did not think that fake news reports should be protected by the First Amendment, and about one-third (34 percent) reported a decrease in trust in news obtained from social media.
Regarding freedom of religion, 59 percent of Americans believe that religious freedom should apply to all religious groups, even those widely considered as "extreme" or fringe. The age group least likely to agree with this is Americans between the ages of 18 and 29: Just 49 percent of them supported protection for all religious faiths, compared to over 60 percent for every other age group.
On free speech, 43 percent of Americans felt that colleges should have the right to ban controversial campus speakers.Those who strongly agreed or disagreed with this tended to be current students and/or activists (people who had participated in political actions over the past year, such as signing a petition or attending a protest) on both sides of the political spectrum.Other Americans even those in the 18 to 29-year-old millennial demographic were more lukewarm on this issue.
"We were glad to find that most Americans still support the First Amendment, although it's troubling that almost one in four think that we have too much freedom," said Lata Nott, executive director of the First Amendment Center. "It's also troubling that even people who support the First Amendment in the abstract often dislike it when it's applied in real life."
The 2017 survey was conducted and supported by Fors Marsh Group, and contributing support provided by the Gannett Foundation.
Click here to view the complete survey.
ABOUT THE NEWSEUM INSTITUTE'S FIRST AMENDMENT CENTERThe Newseum Institute's First Amendment Center is a forum for the study and exploration of issues related to free expression, religious freedom, and press freedom, and an authoritative source of information, news, and analysis of these issues. The Center provides education, information and entertainment to educators, students, policy makers, legal experts, and the general public. The Center is nonpartisan and does not lobby, litigate or provide legal advice. The Newseum Institute promotes the study, exploration and education of the challenges confronting freedom through its First Amendment Center and the Religious Freedom Center. The Newseum is a 501(c)(3) public charity funded by generous individuals, corporations and foundations, including the Freedom Forum. For more information, visit newseuminstitute.org or follow us on Twitter.
To view the original version on PR Newswire, visit:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/first-amendment-center-releases-2017-state-of-the-first-amendment-survey-results-300481542.html
SOURCE Newseum Institutes First Amendment Center
http://www.newseuminstitute.org
See more here:
First Amendment Center Releases 2017 State of the First Amendment Survey Results - PR Newswire (press release)
Posted in First Amendment
Comments Off on First Amendment Center Releases 2017 State of the First Amendment Survey Results – PR Newswire (press release)
Lawsuit: Seattle democracy vouchers violate First Amendment – MyNorthwest.com
Posted: at 10:52 am
A City of Seattle Democracy Voucher belonging to the wife of Mark Elste, a plaintiff in a new lawsuit challenging Seattle's first-in-the-nation voucher system for publicly financing political campaigns. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)
A new lawsuit is challenging Seattles first-in-the-nation voucher system.
Under the program, Seattle voters in 2015 decided to tax themselves $3 million a year in exchange for a $100 in vouchers that they can sign over to candidates.
The cost of the system is estimated to be about $11 and 50-cents per homeowner each year. A federal lawsuit filed on Wednesday by the Pacific Legal Foundation says it forces people to pay taxes to support candidates they dont necessarily agree with.
Part of human dignity is controlling what we believe, said Ethan Blevins, Attorney for Pacific Legal Foundation. So when we are forced to support values that grade against our own sense of right or wrong that strikes at the core of who we are. Thats what the First Amendment seeks to protect.
They call it a violation of the First Amendment, which guarantees not just right to speak freely but not speak. They feel that forcing homeowners to pay for these political donations is forcing them to speak politically with their money.
Supporters say its a novel way to counter the effect of big money in politics and gives lesser-known candidates a chance to be heard.
More here:
Lawsuit: Seattle democracy vouchers violate First Amendment - MyNorthwest.com
Posted in First Amendment
Comments Off on Lawsuit: Seattle democracy vouchers violate First Amendment – MyNorthwest.com
Supreme Court stands up for First Amendment – Pleasanton Weekly (blog)
Posted: at 10:52 am
Local Blogs
By Tim Hunt
E-mail Tim Hunt
View all posts from Tim Hunt
I was saddened to read of the passing of Dick Baker, the long-time president and CEO of Ponderosa Homes. He died May 25 at the age of 73. I have known Dick for many years, particularly through his leadership of the homebuilders charity arm, HomeAid of Northern California. Many years ago, Dick was chairman of the group and initially rejected an application from Shepherds Gate for help with its Livermore campus that just had one residence hall and the offices built. I was serving on the board of Shepherds Gate at the time. I joined our Steve McRee, the Shepherds Gate CEO, when we met with Dick asked for reconsideration. He changed his mind about partnering with our organization. That partnership resulted in three key facilities on the Livermore campus: the second residence hall, the five cottages and last year, the long-awaited Life Center. HomeAid did have a policy of only helping a non-profit once, but modified it for Shepherds Gate and ended up building more than half of the campus. Dicks leadership led to the first commitment and those three buildings and the thousands of women and children who have been served there are a legacy to his vision in partnering with a faith-based organization that never has taken government money.
Comments
View post:
Supreme Court stands up for First Amendment - Pleasanton Weekly (blog)
Posted in First Amendment
Comments Off on Supreme Court stands up for First Amendment – Pleasanton Weekly (blog)
Some Catholics say First Amendment rights under attack | WRSP – FOX Illinois
Posted: at 10:52 am
by Jaclyn Driscoll, Fox Illinois
A rally for religious liberty was held Wednesday because some Catholics say their first amendment rights have not and are not being protected. (WRSP)
A rally for religious liberty was held Wednesday because some Catholics say their first amendment rights have not and are not being protected.
"There's so many threats to religious freedom, from the redefinition of marriage and transgender issues, that we're dealing with a lot of issues at the same time," said Hillary Byrnes of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
"I think our state is doing a horrendous job of protecting religious freedom," Hillsboro resident Mary Jo Cerny said. "I am appalled on the national level at what they've done."
Cerny, a former business owner and devout Catholic, says the government shouldn't be able to force businesses and other organizations to abandon religious beliefs.
"When they say that anybody with same-sex marriage that I have to provide for them," Cerny said. "I hope we have 8 million stores close when they tell them they got to do it."
Same-sex marriage was a reoccurring topic at the event. Bishop Thomas Paprocki says although it's an opinion no longer supported by the Supreme Court, the church's belief on marriage is one he will stand by.
"I'm not free to change my views," Bishop Paprocki said. "These are teachings that have been handed out for the last 2000 years and it is my job as the bishop to teach what the Catholic Church teaches."
Though some argue this belief doesn't support inclusion, Cerny says Catholics should be more concerned with remaining firm in their faith.
"Stand up for it," said Cerny. "Don't say, Oh well, I've got to include you. Christ said you have to accept everybody. You can. You can pray for them. He also said do not associate with those you know the devil's controlled."
See the original post here:
Some Catholics say First Amendment rights under attack | WRSP - FOX Illinois
Posted in First Amendment
Comments Off on Some Catholics say First Amendment rights under attack | WRSP – FOX Illinois
Brazilian site teaches journalists how to protect sources and personal data from digital attacks – Knight Center for Journalism in the Americas (blog)
Posted: at 10:50 am
Metadata? Encryption? Backdoor? Tor Browser? VPN? PGP? When it comes to digital security for journalists, the amount of technical terms and acronyms can be scary. But tools to ensure online privacy can be crucial to protecting sources, which is why the site Privacidade para Jornalistas (Privacy for Journalists) has been launched in Brazil.
On the site, a threat analysis helps you understand the best ways to combat surveillance, hacking, and the collection and retention of data from various adversaries, from governments to casual gossipers, to corporations and criminals. The initiative is based on Australias Privacy for Journalists, a project from the non-profit organization CryptoAustralia.
Since Brazilian journalist Raphael Hernandes launched his platform on March 6, 2017, he has been sought by colleagues in the newsroom who need tips on how to protect themselves in their investigations. Hernandes is data journalist at Folha de S. Paulo, where he offered a small workshop on the subject. According to him, the issue of privacy has aroused interest among colleagues.
"You can see that whoever accesses [the site] is interested. They spend a lot of time on pages and sees multiple pages per visit (average of 6), which shows interest in content. There are a lot of things we do not look at everyday, at how exposed we are," Hernandes told the Knight Center.
The site that served as inspiration for Hernandes came from the personal initiative of information security specialist Gabor Szathmari, president of CryptoAustralia. He worked with the Walkley Foundation at CryptoParty Sydney, an event to teach digital safety rules to journalists.
I thought if I had to develop the training materials for the workshop, why I should not publish them for the benefit of the whole journalist community in Australia and beyond? I have looked around, and although I found heaps of valuable materials online, I did not find any privacy and security tutorials that were addressing the specifics in Australia, Szathmari told the Knight Center.
Raphael Hernandes explained to the Knight Center that it is important to understand what protection to use in each case.
The secrecy of our sources is one of the most important things we have. If its a person we talk to every day, theres no need to hide him or her, but maybe the source is sending something sensitive and its important to encrypt. We should not live in paranoia, but think about our sources and what they need. Its treating a cold with cold medicine, not with a cannonball, he said.
According to Hernandes, the discussion is especially relevant in Brazil. In the countrys Civil Framework for the Internet, providers are supposed to collect and retain navigation data for one year. A court order is required to access these metadata, but a bill in the Chamber of Deputies wants to remove this requirement.
For Hernandes, this scenario leaves a situation where journalists and individuals should leave as few traces as possible which he assures is not a difficult task.
In fact, there are things that are more advanced, such as setting up GlobaLeaks (a secure file and message exchange tool). But were here to help. And apart from that, most are tools we can use at home anytime. It may seem difficult at first, but more so because it has words that we do not use every day, such as back door (software that allows remote access to the computer), he said.
According to Szathmari, the most basic security measures include replacing messaging programs like Messenger and Skype for encrypted platforms, like Signal and Wire. In more sensitive cases, other measures are necessary. Finally, leave your smartphone home if you are meeting with the source, as it is a spying machine. I suggest avoiding a computer altogether and dusting off that good old reporters notebook for very sensitive notes, he said.
Concerns about digital security are not unique to Brazil or Australia. Several journalism organizations around the world, such as the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), have sections dedicated to the topic. Other organizations dedicated to digital security, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, offer specific tips and guides for journalists and their sources.
Here are some basic protection tools, according to Raphael Hernandes:
Encryption of HD and flash drives - Encryption places a password on hard drives and USB devices, which protect sources and personal files in case the equipment is lost or stolen.
Two-Step Authentication - Used for online banking access, it can be configured in your email and social networks. Login is done with something you know (your password) and something you have (a code sent to your smartphone, for example). This avoids problems even if you have compromised passwords.
Signal - Application available for encrypted message smartphones. If the cell phone is intercepted, no one can understand what was written there.
Sync.com - Free cloud storage system. It uses the zero-knowledge protocol, meaning it stores information but does not know what is being stored. As a rule, the websites we use commonly scan the files and pass reports to the authorities. Sync is encrypted and more secure, very simple to use.
PGP - Pretty Good Privacy acronym. It's a way to encrypt emails. Like a kind of chest, but with two keys: one to lock and the other to unlock. You give the key that locks the chest so people can send you files and messages. But only you have the keys to unlock the content.
Follow this link:
Brazilian site teaches journalists how to protect sources and personal data from digital attacks - Knight Center for Journalism in the Americas (blog)
Posted in Tor Browser
Comments Off on Brazilian site teaches journalists how to protect sources and personal data from digital attacks – Knight Center for Journalism in the Americas (blog)
Purism aims to push privacy-centric laptops, tablets and phones to market – Computerworld
Posted: at 10:50 am
A San Francisco-based start-up is creating a line of Linux-based laptops and mobile devices designed with hardware and software to safeguard user privacy.
Purism this week announced general availability of its 13-in. and 15-in. Librem laptops, whichit says can protect users against the types of cyberattacks that led to the recent Intel AMT exploits and WannaCry ransomware attacks.
The laptop and other hardware in development has been "meticulously designed chip by chip to work with free and open source software."
"It's really a completely overlooked area," said Purism CEO Todd Weaver. "We also wanted to start with laptops because that was something we knew we'd be able to do easily and then later get into phones, routers, servers, and desktops as we expand."
The company has already designed a 11.6-in. Linux-based 2-in-1 that can currently be pre-ordered. Weaver expects the 2-in-1 to be available in about six months. The 2-in-1 with a basic 256GB SSD and 8GB of memory retails for $1,398.
Purism's 2-in-1 is based on the same Linux OS as its laptops and has physical toggle switches that can turn off its cameras, microphone and wireless connectivity.
Around the same time, the company wants to ramp up development of an open-source smartphone that will also sport native security features such as an encrypted messaging platform. The company still needs $5 million in capital to develop the privacy-based smartphone, Weaver said.
Now that the Purism has built up an inventory of laptops, however, it will begin targeting businesses as customers for its laptops; wait times for one should only be a few weeks.
"The nice thing about the B2B sales is our core audience -- the software developers, hardware geeks and hardcore security individuals," Weaver said. "CTOs and CIOs are, of course, in that core audience and they recommend technology to buy. So, we'll start picking up small businesses...and be able to expand that to much larger enterprises because we have a depth of credibility they're interested in."
By "depth of credibility," Weaver means his company's philosophy that it will always release its system source code, enabling it to be audited and known vulnerabilities eliminated in order to avoid even theoretical cyberthreats.
For example, in May, Intel announced that PCs sold after 2010 with its server chipsets could be remotely hacked due to a critical vulnerability in its Active Management Technology (AMT) firmware, a component of Intel's 7th Generation Intel Core vPro processors. Intel released a patch for the vulnerability.
The vulnerability was first discovered in March by a researcher at Embedi, a security product provider. Along with allowing a potential hacker to gain control of a PC's mouse and keyboard, the vulnerability also enabled a hacker to bypass a computer's password authentication processes.
"Prior to the Intel publishing the AMT (Active Management Technology) exploit, it was all just a theoretical threat," Weaver said. "We took it upon ourselves to say that is a theoretical threat, so we're going to remove it. The way we remove it is, of course, we don't use an Intel networking card, we don't use a management engine that has that networking stack in it, and we don't use a CPU that has vPro, which means AMT isn't able to be used."
Because Purism's laptops don't natively run Windows or macOS or applications, they're not suseptible to common ransomware attacks, such as the WannaCry attack in May, Weaver said.
Purism's 15-in and 13-in Librem laptops.
The laptops are built on sixth-generation Intel i5 mobile processors and so-called PureOS, a platform based on Debian GNU/Linux that runs the open-source Coreboot BIOS firmware.
The computers come preinstalled their version of the LibreOffice suite of business applications, software created by The Document Foundation, a non-profit organization based in Germany. The suite includes email, spreadsheets, graphics, drawing, presentation, media player and Purity's own browser called PureBrowser.
PureBrowser is based on the Firefox web browser but includes security add-ons such as the Privacy Badger, a plug-in created by the non-profit Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) that blocks spyware and browser trackers.
The laptops also come with a preinstalled Tor Browser, an anonymizing browser that uses encryption and anonymous routing to protect users' rights, and the EFF's HTTPS Everywhere, a browser extension that encrypts communications with many major websites.
Despite the company's plans, analysts say it could have a tough climb.
Mikako Kitagawa, a principal research analyst at Gartner, said a vendor as small as Purism will have a difficult time breaking into even the midsized corporate market, as that laptop market is already dominated by Lenovo, Dell and HP.
"The reality is that large companies do not really get their hardware from unknown vendors," she said.
Additionally, when Purism announced the Librem laptop line in 2015, it caused something of a stir in the open-source software community from developers who argued the company wasn't fully delivering on its promise of a completely open-source computer because it used an Intel processor and a proprietary BIOS.
"The criticism comes down to the strictness of Free Software Foundation enthusiasts, which is completely understandable," Weaver said. "The concern from that audience...is that they wanted us to be further along than we are."
Now that Purism is using Coreboot, there is only 200KB worth of proprietary binary code remaining on the computer, Weaver said.
He compared the laptops and their software to a layer cake in which the first seven layers are open source, and only the last layer remains to be freed through reverse engineering.
"Yes, we know we have this binary, but it's at the lowest level. We're investing [revenue] back into the supply chain and reverse engineering the management engine, which is the last remaining binary we have," Weaver said.
A base model of the Librem 13 laptop, with 8GB of RAM and a 250GB SATA 3-attached SSD retails for $1,898; the Librem 15, also with 8GB of memory and a 250GB SATA SSD, retails for $1,999.
Purism launched a crowdfunding campaign in 2014 to raise money to develop the two laptops and a 2-in-1 tablet. The crowdfunding campaign for the 13-in laptop raised about $462,000 of a $250,000 goal; the 15-in laptop raised nearly $600,000 of its $250,000 goal.
All together, Purism said it's raised more than $2.5 million (including seed funding) and has seen 35% to 38% average monthly growth in orders over the last year for its Librem 13-in and 15-in laptops, respectively. Previously, the laptops were only made-to-order, meaning it took up to three months to get one.
Along with free, open-source software, the laptops come with two physical toggle switches, one to turn off the microphone and camera and another to shut off wireless/Bluetooth connectivity. The laptops also sport something called a "Purism Key," a one-touch method to search the computer for documents and applications.
The laptops have a distinctively MacBook-like look to them. They include a multi-touch track pad that can scroll, click, zoom, and scale the view in the same way a MacBook's trackpad works.
Weaver said that's no coincidence, as purchasing any sturdy, all-aluminum laptop case from third-party vendors who mimic Apple designs leaves little room for customization. And, in fact, a lot of Purism's core customers are Apple enthusiasts and will be familiar with the build quality.
Go here to read the rest:
Purism aims to push privacy-centric laptops, tablets and phones to market - Computerworld
Posted in Tor Browser
Comments Off on Purism aims to push privacy-centric laptops, tablets and phones to market – Computerworld
Beware Cryptocurrency "Gold Rush Mentality": Aberdeen Asset Mgmt – Investopedia
Posted: at 10:50 am
On one hand, it's hard for many investors not to be excited about the meteoric rise of cryptocurrencies in the past few months. Bitcoin has roughly tripled in value since the beginning of the year, Ethereum is up by about 40 times, and Ripple, one of the newest arrivals on the scene, gained a shocking 3800%. What's more, the total market cap for the cryptocurrency industry has been steadily increasing as well, and more and more businesses are finding ways to incorporate digital currencies into their models and payment systems. However, with all of this excitement about the new industry, there are also many analysts approaching with caution. Aberdeen Asset Management is one of the latest firms to do so, suggesting that there is a virtual currency bubble which will, at some point, eventually burst.
In an interview with Bloomberg, the head of global venture capital at Aberdeen Asset Management had some words of caution for investors considering the cryptocurrency field. Peter Denious said that "prices right now aren't being driven by network usage, they're being driven by speculation that tokens are going to appreciate. It's a gold-rush mentality." Denious and others point to the rapid increase in the number of initial coin offerings, or ICOs, as well as the quick gains in the price of tokens upon listing as two signs that a bubble is in effect. ICOs are tremendously successful, with many companies operating in the blockchain space making millions of dollars in minutes, even if they have no proven or distinctive idea backing their token.
It may be important to note, however, that digital currencies are not the only assets which have seen gains to record levels in recent months. The returns on the leading cryptocurrencies so far in 2017 have been unparalleled in other areas, but other asset classes have also made impressive gains. Nasdaq and S&P 500 indices are at record levels, despite the widespread uncertainty surrounding global markets. At the same time, housing prices seem to have mostly recovered from an earlier burst.
Coin Telegraph suggests that the increase in asset prices may be due to large degrees of liquidity across global markets, thanks to quantitative easing by many central banks around the world. Considering this possible reason for the gains, it may not be just a cryptocurrency bubble that eventually bursts. If there is, in fact, a burgeoning bubble in either the real estate or equity worlds, those could have serious and long-lasting effects on the worldwide economy. As cryptocurrencies are untested, it's more difficult to say what the impact of a bubble burst would be in that area.
See more here:
Beware Cryptocurrency "Gold Rush Mentality": Aberdeen Asset Mgmt - Investopedia
Posted in Cryptocurrency
Comments Off on Beware Cryptocurrency "Gold Rush Mentality": Aberdeen Asset Mgmt – Investopedia







