Huge price impact. XMR down 30% Withdrawal supported till May 20th Some swap sites temporarily can’t do XMR, such as ExCh Some nodes are having issues connecting. If ever there was a time to test your faith, this is it. Stay strong. Stay calm. Stay rational. Given that privacy is a fundamental human need, XMR will always have value. Flash back to Bitcoin when Silk Road shut down. Would you have sold then? The teams doing atomic swaps have made good progress. Re-read our previous post on Twisting Monero’s flaws. We said then “Monero has the most vibrant peer-to-peer markets. If Monero is banned, recent technology developments with two-way atomic swaps will allow it to continue globally regardless. The Particl team has developed bi-directional atomic swaps, Elizabeth Binks has developed ETH-XMR atomic swaps, and DarkFi has a unique and completely private method as well.” As you get anxious watching the numbers drop, you might be tempted to make a quick decision. According to Psychology Today, “When we are anxious, we naturally seek comfort and control over the situation. Some social psychologists believe that the state of our feelings provides a useful source of information for making decisions.” But ironically the reason you bought XMR to begin with is because the government made you nervous. The very anxiety you experience today, is the cure XMR seeks to provide, with uncertainty over a politically and economically unstable situation. The threat of a CBDC. The unstable budget that can only be repaired through printing of money. The loss of human rights and privacy violations. The anxiety you experience today of wanting to get out, will be what the US dollar holders will feel in the future. USD is the real shitcoin. It’s Monero’s stable and resilient code that can give you comfort in a world of dramatic emotion. Today we experience the effects of regulators turning their cross-hairs on the tools of freedom. But do you believe they will stop here? Do you believe this is their last bad act? Remember that Monero has value in the face of true tyranny. So if you believe we’re going in that direction, this might be the greatest buy the dip of all time
reclaimthenet.org
An influential member of Meta’s Oversight Board, a group nicknamed the “Supreme Court of Facebook,” Pamela San Martín, has argued that the level of censorship enacted by Meta during the 2020 presidential election was inadequate and that it should be stepped up for 2024. This viewpoint was [criticized](https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/free-speech/catherine-salgado/2024/02/01/what-meta-board-member-claims-2020-interference-not) by individuals in favor of freedom of expression, who cited a poll conducted by the Media Research Center suggesting that the influence of Big Tech censorship significantly affected the outcome of the election. In a [conversation with WIRED](https://www.wired.com/story/meta-disinformation-elections/), San Martín argued vociferously in favor of more stringent censorship measures ahead of future elections, including the 2024 one. San Martín’s ideas for 2024 include “adding labels to posts that are related to elections, directing people to reliable information, prohibiting paid advertisement when it calls into question the legitimacy of elections, and implementing WhatsApp forward limits.” “No election is exactly the same as the previous one,” San Martín said to the outlet. “So even though we’re addressing the problems that arose in prior elections as a starting point, it is not enough.” Her proposal centers on pre-emptive actions, which some observers see as a threat to freedom of speech online. Anti-censorship critics drew attention to San Martín’s suggestion of coordination with election officials, interpreting it as a direct call for collusion between tech giants and government authorities in matters of censorship. They argued that each election is a unique event and that relying on strategies from previous campaigns was insufficient – a sentiment San Martín herself echoed. San Martín referenced the 2020 and 2022 US and Brazilian elections, criticizing Meta for failing to adequately prevent its platforms from being manipulated for campaigning and disinformation.
reclaimthenet.org
Political commentator Megyn Kelly has [reacted](https://yewtu.be/watch?v=VWhBbWGUdzI) to the fact that she was singled out and monitored by the large pharmaceutical corporation, Moderna, after sharing her adverse reactions to the COVID vaccine publicly. Last year, Kelly voiced regret over her decision to get the COVID shot which, in her case, reportedly resulted in autoimmune complications. As a healthy 52-year-old woman, Kelly, in her podcast, expressed doubt over the necessity of getting vaccinated, as she contracted COVID “many times” after. She further shared that her annual medical check-up had revealed a positive result for an autoimmune condition for the first time ever. “And she said ‘yes.’ Yes. I wasn’t the only one she’d seen that with,” Kelly noted, referring to the New York’s finest rheumatologist’s reaction to her querying whether her vaccination and subsequent COVID contraction within three weeks could be linked. Subsequently, a year later, a [separate investigation conducted by Lee Fang](https://reclaimthenet.org/new-documents-provide-more-insights-on-modernas-online-speech-monitoring-efforts) revealed that Moderna had marked Kelly under its controversial “misinformation” reporting system. Moderna utilized artificial intelligence to scrutinize millions of online conversations worldwide, influencing the narrative around vaccines. Internal documents revealed that the company paid special attention to prominent vaccine dissenters. The lobbying group for Pfizer and Moderna, Public Goods Project (PGP) has played a role in identifying supposed vaccine misinformation and aided in the removal of such content from Twitter and other social networks. PGP consistently provided Twitter with Excel spreadsheets listing accounts to promote and others to ban. This was all due to the concern that public statements from those like Kelly may fuel “vaccine hesitancy.” An alert about Kelly’s comments, which the company believe could repel those still undecided about getting vaccinated, was issued by Moderna. They voiced fears that her remarks could exacerbate the growing apprehensions about the potential correlation between autoimmune diseases and COVID-19 vaccines. Interestingly, the information conveyed by Moderna’s alert seemed to validate Kelly’s claims instead of refuting them. Revisiting the issue on her Tuesday show, Kelly recounted how Moderna was concerned she would intensify fears relating to autoimmune disorders and COVID-19 immunization. According to Kelly, Moderna was also deeply perturbed with her statements during one of her shows, in which she admitted that her general doctor had confirmed she had contracted an autoimmune illness after she got her third COVID shot. She noticed they had linked internally a National Institutes of Health report which highlighted a correlation between the COVID vaccines and autoimmune problems. “They’re admitting internally that it’s a problem, but they’re upset that I am talking about it and Alex Berenson, and Russell Brand, and Michael Shellenberger, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya are talking about it because they don’t want it discussed,” Kelly pointed out. “And the mainstream media outlets were only too happy to comply.” In her final remarks, she lamented about the disregard of media outlets for covering all viewpoints. “They just didn’t like it,” Megyn concluded, clearly indicating the censorship she experienced, which in turn, not only underlines the significance of independent media but also reveals the blind support corporate media has per pharma’s ‘experimental shots,’ despite the rising evidence of their dangers and inefficiencies.”
reclaimthenet.org
Most of those who use Microsoft products – Windows, and the Edge browser included – must by now be well conditioned to accept that the software they run and the data they believe they own isn’t really something they control. And perhaps this is why a “feature” as astonishing as Edge automatically importing tabs open in Google Chrome – even when Microsoft browser’s import tool is disabled – has been known for months, without getting fixed (assuming it was a bug). But it looks like a “bug” in the company’s thinking, one of many – not exactly a software one. It’s definitely a feature, after all. Both Edge and Chrome are based on the same Chromium engine, which should make the “operation” easier; and Microsoft and Google are birds of a feather when it comes to invasive and controversial practices and behavior toward end-users. And when they feel they have to be, they’re not particularly nice to each other, either. Some reports suggest that this “tab-stealing” feature is in fact “just” Microsoft’s way of trying to steal users from Chrome and get them to, willy-nilly, switch to Edge. A Verge [reporter](https://www.theverge.com/24054329/microsoft-edge-automatic-chrome-import-data-feature) and a Windows and Chrome (and occasionally Edge) user described the ordeal, the gist of which is that the tabs left open in their default Chrome browser got imported to Edge after a Windows update and a reboot. No surprise that the user was not prompted to consent to any of this. Here’s the Windows/Edge experience summed up in one sentence: “I didn’t even realize I was using Edge at first, and I was confused why all my (imported from Chrome) tabs were suddenly logged out.” And sure enough, the option at edge://settings/profiles/importBrowsingData was set to disable automatic access to “recent browsing data” i.e., the Borg-like assimilation of open Chrome tabs by Edge. But resistance is certainly not futile: use open-source operating systems and browsers, and root (deepest-level permissions access/decision-making) is all yours. Meanwhile, those (re)installing Windows these days will, at that stage, learn something about why the browser kerfuffle is happening. Reads an installation prompt: “With your confirmation, Microsoft Edge will regularly bring in data from other browsers available on your Windows device. This data includes your favorites, browsing history, cookies, autofill data, extensions, settings, and other browsing data.” With your confirmation – or, as users are reporting, without it. It’s Microsoft after all, and the tech dinosaur felt no urgency in responding to relevant media queries.
reclaimthenet.org
Concerns are growing over the role of Big Tech companies in moderating “misinformation,” particularly due to the fear that these corporations already wield significant power and influence which could potentially sway political outcomes, including elections. Many worry that the concentrated power in these tech giants allows them to arbitrarily define what constitutes misinformation, leading to a situation where they could suppress certain viewpoints or information. This raises questions about the impartiality and fairness of such moderation, especially in the context of political discourse and the democratic process. The debate is fueled by the concern that these companies, due to their size and reach, could have a disproportionate impact on public opinion and electoral processes. In an AI-focused [interview](https://yewtu.be/watch?v=740yVfgd1oY) with Microsoft CEO, Satya Nadella, it was revealed that Microsoft intends to combat alleged “disinformation” throughout the 2024 elections. During his conversation with NBC’s Lester Holt on NBC Nightly News’ January 30 edition, Nadella was questioned about how AI might either assist or endanger the future election. However, Nadella’s response seemed to imply a willingness to use technology for censoring content in pursuit of fighting what he identified as disinformation. Nadella stated, “This is not the first election where we dealt with disinformation or propaganda campaigns by adversaries and election interference. “We’re doing all the work across the tech industry around watermarking, detecting deep fakes and content IDs. There is going to be enough and more technology quite frankly in order to be able to identify the issues around disinformation and misinformation.”
reclaimthenet.org
A potentially precedent-setting bill has been proposed in the Florida Senate that could redefine defamation language surrounding terms such as “transphobic,” “homophobic,” “racist,” or “sexist.” The bill, labeled SB 1780, suggests these terms could be deemed defamatory, eliminating the need to satisfy the standard of “actual malice,” which has been a significant threshold in defamation lawsuits since the 1964 Supreme Court case, [New York Times v. Sullivan](https://reclaimthenet.org/supreme-court-upholds-actual-malice-requirement-of-defamation-cases). Designated as the “Defamation, False Light, and Unauthorized Publication of Name or Likeness” bill, SB 1780 would ease the path to launch defamation lawsuits and make it easier to suppress speech. We obtained a copy of the bill for you [here](https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/FL-SB-1780.pdf) (PDF). It distinctly makes the claim that any insinuation of the plaintiff being discriminatory against any person or group due to their race, sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity inherently constitutes defamation. The bill, introduced by Senator Jason Brodeur, goes a step further, stating that a person facing liability for allegedly defaming someone through accusations of homophobia or transphobia would not be allowed to reference the plaintiff’s religious or scientific beliefs in their defense, potentially leading to a mandatory penalty of no less than $35,000 upon conviction. This bill is part of a twinned legislation with a sister bill – HB 757 – being simultaneously introduced in the Florida House. In terms of how the bill affects the free press, the bill also aims to undermine the dependability of anonymous sources for journalists by categorizing their testimony as “presumptively false,” thereby making those in the profession more susceptible to accusations of defamation. The proposed law sets out specific conditions under which a well-known individual can claim actual malice, clarifying that judges can infer that statements are malicious under several specific contexts such as an unnamed and anonymous source, inherently improbable allegations, reasons to doubt the truth of the report, and deliberate failure to validate or corroborate the claim, among others.
reclaimthenet.org
The [Global Disinformation Index](https://reclaimthenet.org/biden-official-questioned-on-disinformation-blacklist) (GDI), a US government-funded pro-censorship organization, has come under fire for lacking transparency, ironically the same issue it labels non-mainstream websites for. Despite hypocritically casting aspersions on sites that reject the mainstream narrative on many issues, the GDI, as per [a report by the Washington Examiner](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/technology/2820047/state-department-disinformation-tracker-gdi-redacts-tax-forms/), exhibits a conspicuous absence of this very transparency in its operations. Billing itself as nonpartisan and objective while routinely favoring leftist narratives, the GDI has received over $100k from the State Department’s Global Engagement Center. Part of the score it assigns to online platforms stems from the possibility of controversial interests emerging from shadowy ownership structures—a principle it doesn’t appear to abide by itself. According to Mike Davis, founder and president of the Internet Accountability Project, the GDI is in breach of the law by keeping its disclosures hidden. The Washington Examiner also mentioned that the GDI is currently under congressional investigation. Adding to the mystery is the GDI’s refusal to disclose its “dynamic exclusion list,” a tool reportedly used by businesses like Microsoft and Oracle to hamstring ad placements on right-leaning outlets, thereby achieving a sort of financial strangulation of these sites. Despite providing heavily concealed tax information for its two US subsidiaries, Disinformation Index Inc. and the AN Foundation, upon request from the Examiner, details from the GDI’s tax filings on ProPublica reveal a closer relationship between the organization, the US Government, and left-wing donors. The report discloses that the State Department-funded National Endowment for Democracy and the billionaire George Soros together donated a grand total of $465,750 to the GDI in 2022. In 2023, Texas along with media outlets The Daily Wire and The Federalist [started legal proceedings against the State Department’s Global Engagement Center](https://reclaimthenet.org/texas-daily-wire-federalist-sue-state-dept-censorship), alleging governmental attempts to silence the American press through funding the GDI. The action taken was based on GDI’s activities which reportedly included blacklisting conservative media.
reclaimthenet.org
The expression is, “you can’t make that up” – to signal the level of the absurdity of a situation. Meanwhile, groups calling themselves “fact checkers” and those bankrolling them keep making things up. And becoming used to it aside, their work still feels as if – “you can’t make that up.” When names like the Omidyar Network, George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, and Meta start cropping up in the same sentence, you start believing anything could come out of an “alliance” of the sort. Here we have yet another supposedly “fact-checking” effort that turned into a smear campaign against people engaged in lawful protest regarding economic, social, and political issues. In this instance, in Germany. There the economy, and with it the government, has been in serious trouble ever since Germany, for political reasons, cut itself off from affordable gas. Those with the most to lose, such as farmers, have been hit the hardest. One of the recent consequences, though you may not hear much about it in legacy media, have been mass and ongoing farmer protests. At the same time, efforts are under way to ban one of the country’s most popular parties, AfD. Both have been labeled as right-wing conspiracy theorists, Covid “misinformationists,” and even Russia supporters. And this labeling work is being done by something called “Correctiv” – a group that says it is a news and fact-checking site. Correctiv gets its money from Omidyar, Soros, Meta, but also the current German government. In a report on Public, US-based author Gregor Baszak goes into the weeds of the situation, that shows a beleaguered government resorting to decidedly undemocratic moves and pondering shockingly undemocratic ideas, such as banning political opposition. Baszak talks about a Correctiv article that goes after the farmers as some sort of right wing menace, supposedly spreading not only Russian propaganda and Covid disinformation – just because of expressing anger over their business becoming unsustainable with the government’s fuel and vehicle subsidy cuts. “The (Correctiv) article does not specify what ‘Covid disinformation’ the farmers spread,” Baszak writes. “Nor does it offer any evidence of ties between the farmers and the Russian government, only that ‘some X accounts’ that support the farmers wrote posts that ‘coincided with the methods of a pro-Russian propaganda network.'” However, at least for the time being, what left-leaning German politician Sahra Wagenknecht has described as “the stupidest government in Europe” is succeeding in keeping its opponents divided by throwing damning, even false, accusations their way. Read the full report [here](https://public.substack.com/p/soros-facebook-and-omidyar-money).
reclaimthenet.org
A New York judge has [denied](https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/Gross-v-Madison-Square-Garden-jan-9-2024.pdf) (PDF) Madison Square Garden Entertainment’s motion to dismiss a [biometric privacy lawsuit](https://reclaimthenet.org/madison-square-garden-is-sued-facial-recognition). The litigation revolves around a contentious policy, enacted by MSGE, which deployed facial recognition technology to prohibit certain attorneys from gaining entry into the entertainment giant’s renowned venues. The lawsuit, had previously survived MSGE’s initial attempt to dismiss it. The entertainment firm once again finds itself rebuffed in the District Court for the Southern District of New York, despite raising multiple arguments pleading for a dismissal. In the core of the dispute lies MSGE’s use of facial scanning systems. Initially installed to deter individuals deemed dangerous, the company made adjustments to the dataset on June 22. Following these changes, the system [started pinpointing specified lawyers](https://reclaimthenet.org/new-york-investigates-msg-facial-recognition-entry), citing claims that these attorneys – typically tied to firms currently in litigation against MSGE—might be present on MSGE premises for lawsuit-related duties. The suit will move forward, as ruled by the presiding judge, focusing on whether MSGE’s tactics violate the city’s Biometric Identifier Information Protection Law. Even though the judge acknowledged MSGE’s rationale for wanting to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims of civil rights violations and unjust enrichment, the alleged breach of the city’s biometrics statute remains a query. The judge found credence in the plaintiffs’ assertion that MSGE could “profit” from executing face scans on the specified attorneys, which might contravene the city’s biometric policy. This argument contends that any profits accrued by company executives from these scans – attributed to dissuading litigation and hence curbing MSGE’s significant legal costs – indeed poses a potential breach of the law.
reclaimthenet.org
Russia is advancing towards a China-like extensive surveillance system. The Perm region is the first to mandate that private video camera owners must integrate their devices into a regional surveillance network, a practice poised to be replicated nationwide. The initiative, driven by [a decree from Perm’s Governor Dmitry Makhonin](https://archive.ph/1ajue), took effect on January 25. This move aligns with President Vladimir Putin’s martial law declaration in Ukraine’s occupied territories in October 2022, granting regional governors augmented powers to ensure the “security” of their areas. Russia’s citizen monitoring has intensified since its Ukraine invasion. Authorities are increasingly scrutinizing social media and employing surveillance cameras to track both activists citizens. Moscow recently trialed facial recognition traffic lights. Alexander Bykov, head of Moscow’s State Traffic Safety Inspectorate, has even suggested that providing biometric data should be obligatory. Facial recognition is a critical element in Russia’s surveillance strategy. It has been used for detaining opposition activists and identifying individuals who ignored military draft summons, with arrests reported in subways and train stations. Sergey Suchkov, CEO of NtechLab, reports that facial recognition is operational in 62 regions, contributing to the Ministry of Digital Development’s “Data Economy” project, aiming to compile a comprehensive profile of citizens’ activities. Currently, private cameras are inaccessible to regional authorities, and only half of the 1.2 million street cameras are state-owned, as reported by the Digital Development department in November 2023. A major goal is to centralize street surveillance, with private cameras playing a significant role.
therecord.media
 Popular social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, X and YouTube, were inaccessible for parts of the weekend in Pakistan, which is gearing up for a general election next month. Pakistan’s telecommunication authority [blamed](https://twitter.com/PTAofficialpk/status/1748752018557305309) the nationwide internet disruptions, which lasted for several hours on Saturday evening, on a “technical failure” and said that the internet was restored as soon as the issue was fixed. Local media, however, [reported](https://www.express.pk/story/2593755/1/) that the issue was more political and supposedly intended to disrupt a virtual rally held by the party of the jailed former Prime Minister Imran Khan ahead of the general elections in February. The internet disruptions in Pakistan started before the live stream of the event, so many users were unable to participate. This is not the first time that Pakistan has experienced internet disruptions ahead of online campaign events organized by Khan's party, also known as PTI — similar outages [occurred](https://www.livemint.com/news/world/pakistan-slow-internet-service-virtual-jalsa-organised-by-imran-khan-party-pti-what-social-media-users-say-11702828013847.html) at the beginning of January and in December. PTI [acknowledged](https://twitter.com/PTIofficial/status/1748729357932036597) the latest outage, calling it “desperate tactics” deployed by the sitting government. The party [recommended](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/pakistan-experiences-nationwide-internet-outage-social-media-blackout-ptis-manifesto-launch-disrupted/articleshow/106629330.cms) that Pakistani users use a virtual private network (VPN) to access blocked social media platforms, and managed to host a part of the online event on YouTube with over 7,000 participants. “No amount of oppression can quash the passion and will of the people!” the party said in a post on X (formerly Twitter). Alp Toker, the director of the internet monitoring firm NetBlocks, told Agence France Presse that the outage was "remarkably systematic" and "consistent with previous restrictions imposed during PTI events." One of Pakistan’s internet providers, Nayatel, told customers in an audio message that it was acting on the instructions of Pakistani authorities, as reported by Bloomberg. A Pakistani court sentenced Khan in August to three years in jail in a corruption case, accusing him of allegedly selling state gifts. He is the country's seventh former prime minister to be arrested before completing a five-year tenure. Khan has denied any wrongdoing, blaming the country's military elites for forcing him out of office. Khan’s name was banned from the media, while thousands of PTI workers have been arrested in recent months. Khan has been prevented from conducting in-person campaigning — making online appearances essential. Russia, Iran, Belarus, and Cuba have taken social networks offline or shut off communication infrastructure in response to recent protests or opposition. The digital rights organization Access Now called the internet shutdowns in Pakistan “problematic,” especially when they occur just before the polls. “Authorities in Pakistan must uphold the people’s mandate,” the organization said.#
atlasofsurveillance.org
Documenting Police Tech in Our Communities with Open Source Research. Explore 12,090 data-points in the U.S. collected by hundreds of researchers.
sls.eff.org
Welcome to the Field Guide to Police Surveillance. EFF’s Street-Level Surveillance project shines a light on the surveillance technologies that law enforcement agencies routinely deploy in our communities. These resources are designed for advocacy organizations, journalists, defense attorneys, policymakers, and members of the public who often are not getting the straight story from police representatives or the vendors marketing this equipment. Whether it’s phone-based location tracking, ubiquitous video recording, biometric data collection, or police access to people’s smart devices, law enforcement agencies follow closely behind their counterparts in the military and intelligence services in acquiring privacy-invasive technologies and getting access to consumer data. Just as analog surveillance historically has been used as a tool for oppression, we must understand the threat posed by emerging technologies to successfully defend civil liberties and civil rights in the digital age. The threats to privacy of these surveillance technologies are enormous, as law enforcement agencies at all levels of government use surveillance technologies to compile vast databases filled with our personal information or gain access to devices that can lay bare the intricacies of our daily lives. Use of these surveillance technologies can infringe on our constitutional rights, including to speak and associate freely under the First Amendment or be free from unlawful search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Law enforcement also tends to deploy surveillance technologies disproportionately against marginalized communities. These technologies are prone to abuse by rogue officers, and can be subject to error or vulnerability, causing damaging repercussions for those who interact with the criminal justice system. The resources contained in this hub bring together years of research, litigation, and advocacy by EFF staff and our allies, and will continue to grow as we obtain more information.
therecord.media
Amazon announced Wednesday that they will make it harder for police departments to ask for footage generated from customers’ Ring video doorbells and surveillance cameras. The practice had long been under fire from civil liberties groups and [some politicians](https://www.markey.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-markeys-probe-into-amazon-ring-reveals-new-privacy-problems). Eric Kuhn, who helms the company’s Neighbors Platform, said Ring’s controversial “Request for Assistance” (RFA) function allowing law enforcement to ask for and obtain user footage will no longer appear in the Neighbors App. Kuhn said the company will remove the RFA button, deep-sixing a program that had let police obtain footage from users on a voluntary basis. Moving forward, law enforcement and fire departments will be forced to obtain a warrant to ask for the footage or produce evidence of an emergency unfolding in real time, [according to Bloomberg News](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-01-24/amazon-s-ring-to-stop-letting-police-request-video-from-users), which first reported the development.. Kuhn wrote a [blog post](https://blog.ring.com/about-ring/ring-announces-new-neighbors-app-features-sunsets-request-for-assistance-post/) saying that Amazon is “sunsetting the Request for Assistance (RFA) tool” and explaining the company’s decision. “Public safety agencies like fire and police departments can still use the Neighbors app to share helpful safety tips, updates, and community events,” Kuhn wrote. “They will no longer be able to use the RFA tool to request and receive video in the app.” The blog post noted that public safety agency posts remain public and that users will still be able to view their messages on the Neighbors app feed and on a given agency's profile. Kuhn’s post did not indicate why Ring is removing the RFA tool other than to say it is responding to customer feedback. A spokesperson for Ring told Bloomberg that the company had opted to instead invest more heavily in new Neighbors app experiences which are more in line with Amazon’s strategy for the product. The spokesperson told Bloomberg the Neighbors app will focus more on connecting communities, referring to new programs also announced Wednesday that will let consumers post clips and better inform fellow users about community happenings on a block-by-block basis. “In addition to making it easier to share different kinds of videos, photos, and stories, we’re also introducing a new feature that makes it easier for Ring customers to enjoy the most popular Ring videos from across the country,” the blog post said. It said the new tool, “Best of Ring,” will debut in the coming weeks and will be an “in-app tile featuring a curated selection of our favorite Ring videos.” Google also has recently curtailed law enforcement access to its product features, saying last month that it would no longer allow police to use its Google Maps location history feature to investigate crimes. Ring, which debuted in 2013 and was acquired by Amazon in 2018, has long been controversial on privacy grounds. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a leader in drawing attention to Ring’s practice, celebrated Wednesday’s announced change, but said it remains “deeply skeptical” about how law enforcement and Ring will decide which footage should be disclosed without a warrant due to alleged emergencies. “This is a step in the right direction, but has come after years of cozy relationships with police and irresponsible handling of data (for which they reached a settlement with the FTC),” EFF said in a [blog post](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/01/ring-announces-it-will-no-longer-facilitate-police-requests-footage-users). “Ring has been forced to make some important concessions—but we still believe the company must do more.”
www.theregister.com
Indian infosec firm CloudSEK last week claimed it found records describing 750 million Indian mobile network subscribers on the dark web, with two crime gangs offering the trove of data for just $3,000. CloudSEK named CYBO CREW affiliates CyboDevil and UNIT8200 as the vendors of a 1.8TB trove, which contains mobile subscribers' names, phone numbers, addresses, and Aadhaar details. CloudSEK stated its investigation of the trove saw threat actors claim to have "obtained the data through undisclosed asset work within law enforcement channels" rather than as a result of a leak from Indian telcos. CloudSEK said its initial analysis found that the leak affects all major telecom providers. "The leak of Personally Identifiable Information (PII) poses a huge risk to both individuals and organizations, potentially leading to financial losses, identity theft, reputational damage, and increased susceptibility to cyber attacks," stated CloudSEK.
Privacy
NSA Confirms Purchasing Data on American Citizens' Internet Behavior, Circumventing the Need for Warrants
c0mmando
8 months ago
•
100%
Realize that they are just buying data that ANYONE can buy. This is the real danger.
reclaimthenet.org
An urgent appeal has been relayed to ministers across the European Union by a consortium of tech companies, exacting a grave warning against backing a proposed regulation focusing on child sexual abuse as a pretense to jeopardize the security integrity of internet services relying on end-to-end encryption and end privacy for all citizens. A total of 18 organizations – predominantly comprising providers of encrypted email and messaging services – have voiced concerns about the potential experimental regulation by the European Commission (EC), singling out the “detrimental” effects on children’s privacy and security and the possible dire repercussions for cyber security. Made public on January 22, 2024, this shared [open letter](https://tuta.com/blog/open-letter-encryption-eu) argues that the EC’s draft provision known as “Chat Control,” mandating the comprehensive scanning of encrypted communications, may create cyber vulnerabilities that expose citizens and businesses to increased risk. Further inflating the issue, the letter also addresses a stalemate amongst member states, the EC, and the European Parliament, who haven’t yet reconciled differing views on the proportionality and feasibility of the EC’s mass-scanning strategy in addressing child safety concerns. Among the signatories are Proton, an encrypted email service from Switzerland; Tuta Mail and NextCloud, specializing in email and cloud storage respectively; as well as Element, a provider of encrypted communications and collaboration services. Together, they implore EU leaders to consider a more balanced version of the mandate, as suggested by the European Parliament, which experts argue to be more potent and efficient than mass scanning of encrypted services. The proposed version of the regulation by the EC pushes tech companies to inject “backdoors” or leverage “client-side scanning”, to scrutinize the content of all encrypted communications for evidence of child sexual abuse. However, these companies are forceful in their conviction that despite its purpose to combat cybercrime, the mechanism could be swiftly utilized by offenders, “compromising security for everyone.” The application of client-side scanning – juxtaposing “hash values” of encrypted messages with a “hash value” database of unlawful content residing on personal devices – has met stiff critique from the security community. In defiance of the EU’s strong standpoint towards data protection, which paved the way for ethical, privacy-centric tech companies to flourish in the European market, these tech firms believe the EC’s proposal could contradict other EU regulations like the Cyber Resilience Act (CSA) and the Cybersecurity Act, which encourage the application of end-to-end encryption to counter cyber risks. The tech firms propose alternatives to mandatory scanning they believe are more effective and prioritize data protection and security. They argue an approach aligned with the European Parliament’s proposals provides a robust framework for child protection. Moreover, they discuss the danger of such scanning technology being potentially misused by oppressive regimes to squash political dissidents. They conclude that while they are not solely resistant to solutions, they stress the importance of devising strategies closely aligned to the European Parliament’s proposals. In a statment to Reclaim The Net Matthias Pfau, founder of Tuta, adds that such legislation “to scan every chat message and every email would create a backdoor – one that could and will be abused by criminals.”
reclaimthenet.org
An ambitious and over-reaching “anti-porn” bill is currently making its way through Oklahoma’s state legislative system, the severity of which threatens to criminalize the act of sexting or sharing intimate photos. The proposed bill, known as Oklahoma Senate Bill 1976, targets not just explicit porn but even erotic expression, and in the process, takes an extreme stance against the First Amendment. We obtained a copy of the bill for you [here](https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/SB1976-INT.pdf). (PDF) The bill bans: “any visual depiction or individual image stored or contained in any format on any medium including, but not limited to, film, motion picture, videotape, photograph, negative, undeveloped film, slide, photographic product, reproduction of a photographic product, play, or performance.” The initiated legislation, described by Reason as being so “extreme that it could even make sexting outside of a marriage a crime,” is part of a more significant push, intent on broadening the definition of what constitutes porn, even at the expense of hard-won civil liberties. Sen. Dusty Deevers (R–District 32) sponsors this proposal. Typically, adult pornography enjoys protection under First Amendment rights, barring a few exceptions, including content featuring individuals who are underage or obscene. This new stringent legislation, however, aims to navigate around the standard protections and introduce a novel classification of banned material under the dubious label of “unlawful pornography.” Sen. Deevers’ proposed legislation is incredibly comprehensive, including both visual depictions and individual images across multiple mediums in its definition of illicit porn. It seeks to forbid not only explicit sexual acts but also anything designed to excite sexual interest, such as nudity or the suggestion of sexual activity. The bill extends beyond conventional pornography, encompassing a wide array of adult content and establishing a high bar for what is considered having serious literary, artistic, educational, political, or scientific value, thereby putting sexting, and even some social media posts and private messages in its scope.
reclaimthenet.org
The NSA’s long history of often legally sketchy mass surveillance continues, despite some of the agency’s activities getting exposed more than a decade ago by whistleblower Edward Snowden. Now, the National Security Agency has had to reveal, in response to a senator’s questions, that it is, as one report put it, “sidestepping” obtaining warrants first before it buys people’s information, put on sale by data brokers. This came to light in an exchange of letters between Senator Ron Wyden and several top security officials. And this time – because of NSA’s own interest being at stake – he has been able to reveal the information he obtained. Wyden’s January 25 letter to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines contained a fairly straight-forward request: US intelligence agencies should only buy American’s data “that has been obtained in a lawful manner.” We obtained a copy of the letter for you here. With the implication that something entirely different is happening, the senator went on to explain what: if these agencies went to communications companies themselves for the data, that would require a court order. Instead, Wyden continued, they go the roundabout way to get information (like location data) taken from people’s phones – collected via apps, and finally ending up with commercial brokers, who sell it to the likes of the NSA. And, this particular agency is also buying “Americans’ domestic internet metadata.” In other words, a comprehensive, yet legally questionable mass surveillance scheme. Wyden “reinforced” his letter to Haines by attaching NSA Director General Paul Nakasone’s December response to one of his earlier queries – a back-and-forth that has been going on for almost three years, he says, and concerned other agencies as well and their practice of data acquisition. But now that he said he would block the Senate confirmation of Nakasone’s successor – the information he received finally “got cleared” for release and pretty quickly. Nakasone confirmed the practice, and then went on to justify it by saying it only pertains to “records” of online traffic, rather than “emails and documents.” He said what the NSA purchases is “netflow data” that comes from devices where “one or both” ends of the connection is in the US. And why? It is “critical,” wrote Nakasone, in “protecting US defense contractors from cyber threats.”
reclaimthenet.org
As part of a move that, at least on the surface, is aimed at protecting the privacy and well-being of young adolescents, Florida is taking legislative steps towards restricting social media access for children under sixteen. The bill, advanced in the state legislature on Wednesday, mandates rigorous age verification and calls for existing accounts of underage users to be deleted while purging any stored personal information. We obtained a copy of the bill for you [here](https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/florida-social-media-id-bill.pdf). (PDF) A bipartisan majority in the Florida house has ratified the bill with a vote of 106-13. It now awaits receipt by the Republican-majority senate. The legislation calls for age verification through an independent, third-party unrelated to the social media platform, ensuring that children under 16 can’t open new accounts. Drawn up to address platforms with potential “addictive, harmful, or deceptive design features,” this legislation is aimed at deterring persistent or compulsive usage influenced by digital design. In support of the legislation, Republican state lawmaker and bill co-sponsor Fiona McFarland equated social media usage designed to trigger dopamine releases to a “digital fentanyl.” Florida’s move comes against the backdrop of growing concern over the impact of social media on kids’ mental health and well-being. Last year, US Surgeon General [Vivek Murthy](https://reclaimthenet.org/us-surgeon-general-vivek-murthy-suggests-joe-rogan-should-be-censored) issued a warning on the potential harms of social media for children and adolescents, calling for more research into the area. The implementation of online age verification systems, increasingly requiring to the rollout of digital IDs, has sparked a significant debate about the balance between internet safety and free speech. These systems are designed to verify the age of users, ostensibly to protect younger audiences from inappropriate content or to ensure compliance with legal age restrictions. However, they often necessitate the use of digital IDs, which can include personal information like name, age, and sometimes even location. This shift towards digital IDs for age verification purposes raises concerns about the erosion of online anonymity and the ability to speak under a pseudonym.
reclaimthenet.org
Many iPhone applications have been found to be exploiting iOS’s push notifications to secretly harvest user data, a practice that potentially aids in building tracking profiles. This revelation was made by mobile researcher Mysk, who also added that these apps could bypass Apple’s stringent restrictions on background app activities, thereby posing a privacy threat to its users. While Apple’s App Store review guidelines explicitly prevent such data collection practices, apps have been found to engage in this activity rather surreptitiously. According to [Mysk](https://twitter.com/mysk_co/status/1750502700112916504), many well-known apps with large user bases clandestinely send user details back to their servers upon receiving or acknowledging push notifications, raising concerns about privacy. Apple’s iOS operating system is designed to minimize security risks and resource consumption by preventing apps from running in the background. Essentially, an app’s execution is suspended and eventually terminated when not in use. However, a system introduced in iOS 10 enabled apps to launch silently in the background to process incoming notifications before they were displayed on the device. Once this action gets completed, the app is again terminated. Mysk’s research unearthed extensive abuse of this feature, with apps using this as an opportunity to send data back to their servers. The transmitted information may vary depending on the app, but it typically included data like system uptime, language settings, available storage, battery status, device model, and screen brightness. This collected data can potentially be leveraged to create tracking profiles. In December, it was uncovered that several governments were [seeking access to push notification records from Apple’s and Google’s servers for espionage on users.](https://reclaimthenet.org/apple-reveals-governments-use-app-notifications-to-surveil-users)
reclaimthenet.org
During the Covid-19 pandemic, data protection and privacy concerns took center stage as governments and organizations worldwide implemented various overreaching measures to control the spread of the virus. One of the most significant and controversial of these measures was the introduction of vaccine passports and health passes. These digital certificates indicated an individual’s vaccination status and, in many cases, were required for access to public spaces, travel, and certain services. This move marked a drastic shift in the way personal health information was used and shared, raising serious concerns about data privacy and surveillance. But aside from that, constant mandatory testing opened up new ways that people’s data could be collected and shared. CoronaLab, one of the largest Dutch COVID-19 test providers, seemingly exposed a password-less database to the internet. A total of 1.3 million sets of coronavirus testing records were potentially compromised, but thus far, no party has claimed responsibility for the oversight. This database contained an alarming variety of vital personal information including patient names, passport numbers, email addresses, and other data. According to [The Register](https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/24/dutch_covid_testing_firm_ignored_warnings/), the disappointing discovery of the data leak was made by Jeremiah Fowler, a credible source known for detecting breaches. Fowler found 118,441 test certificates, 660,173 testing samples, 506,663 appointment logs, and several internal files on the open internet, which, if sourced by a nefarious actor, could lead to significant privacy infringement. “Criminal[s] could potentially reference test dates, locations, or other insider information that only the patient and the laboratory would know,” Fowler commented. Believed to be linked to CoronaLab, a subsidiary of the Amsterdam-based Microbe & Lab, the exposed database paints a troubling picture of negligence. CoronaLab is listed by the US Embassy in the Netherlands as a recommended commercial COVID-19 test provider.
reclaimthenet.org
Harvey Eugene Murphy Jr, a 61-year-old man, is launching a legal battle against Macy’s and EssilorLuxottica, Sunglass Hut’s parent company, alleging a misidentification by facial recognition technology led to his unlawful arrest. Murphy’s lawsuit asserts that owing to a flawed criminal identification by a low-quality camera image, he spent days unjustly incarcerated where he underwent horrific physical and sexual violence. In January 2022, a robbery at a Houston-based Sunglass Hut led to the theft of merchandise worth thousands. However, Murphy’s legal counsel insists that Murphy was living in California, not Texas, during that time frame. Murphy’s lawsuit details how an EssilorLuxottica staff member in cooperation with Macy’s used facial recognition software to single out him as the thief. Following the allegation, a team member from EssilorLuxottica claimed to have identified one of two burglars involved in the heist using this technology, directing the Houston police department to halt its ongoing investigation. In addition to this accusation, the employee shared that Murphy was potentially associated with two more theft cases, based on the same software. On returning to Texas, Murphy was soon arrested upon his identity notification to a DMV clerk, as a warrant had been issued for his arrest concerning an aggravated theft case. According to a [Guardian report](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/jan/22/sunglass-hut-facial-recognition-wrongful-arrest-lawsuit), after experiencing wrongful imprisonment in the local county jail and later being transferred to the Harris County jail, his charges were dropped as his alibi was certified by his defense attorney and prosecutor. Nevertheless, the alleged horrifying physical and sexual assault he underwent hours before his release in jail left him severely traumatized. “That was sort of terrifying,” Murphy expressed. He stayed anticipating help in the same cell as his alleged attackers until his release, constantly overwhelmed with intense anxiety. The entire litigation process was unbeknownst to Murphy until Daniel Dutko, his attorney, informed him about the facial recognition technology used in the investigation. Dutko discovered that footage collected by the Sunglass Hut employee was shared with Macy’s and it was their staff that identified Murphy. Dutko insists that facial recognition software is the sole explanation for Murphy’s false identification. The use of facial recognition technology by corporations, in cooperation with law enforcement, as seen in Murphy’s case, also raises significant privacy concerns. The idea that an individual can be tracked, identified, and potentially criminalized based on surveillance footage underscores a worrying trend towards a surveillance state. This situation is troubling not only for the individuals who might be misidentified but also for society at large, as it raises questions about the erosion of personal privacy and autonomy. Murphy’s ordeal highlights the lack of transparency and accountability in the use of these technologies. He was unaware of the facial recognition technology’s role in his case until informed by his attorney.
reclaimthenet.org
In February 2022, amid the cross-country truck convoy civil liberties protests in Ottawa against COVID-19 precautions and vaccine mandates, Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister, made an overreaching decision. He invoked the Emergencies Act as a response to this challenge to his overarching policies in a widespread attempt to silence and crush his critics. Under the Emergencies Act, Trudeau, and his Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, froze the bank accounts of protesters and their supporters in one of the biggest attacks on free speech and civil liberties that Canada has seen in recent times. However, a Federal Court has now ruled that the Trudeau-led Liberal government overreached its powers. Their act was declared unreasonable, unjustified, and violating the Charter in a verdict published on a recent Tuesday. We obtained a copy of the verdict for you [here](https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/2024.01.23-306-22-T-316-22-T-347-22-T-382-22.pdf). (PDF) Presiding over the case, Federal Court Justice Richard Mosley found that whereas these Freedom Convoy protests generated harm, they did not elevate to a threat against national security as per the legal definition. Proclaiming the Emergencies Act in such a scenario, according to Mosley, lacked the attributes of sound decision-making, including justification, transparency, and intelligibility. Tracing the legal and factual constraints that must inform such a resolve illuminated this lack for Mosley. “I have concluded that the decision to issue the Proclamation [of the Emergencies Act’ does not bear the hallmarks of reasonableness – justification, transparency and intelligibility – and was not justified,” Mosley wrote. Civil liberty groups, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) and the Canadian Constitutional Foundation (CCF), had challenged this historic precedent. They contended that the Liberal government stretched its power too far while dealing with the Freedom Convoy blockades in Ontario and Alberta in February 2022. The court’s verdict aligned with their argument. Expressing a rare degree of self-reflection, Mosley confessed to initially leaning towards the counter-argument. He perceived the convoy’s actions as crossing the line of legitimate protest, constituting the erosion of public order. Were he present at the government’s decision-making table, he might have supported invoking the act. Over months of mulling over the evidence and different angles of the argument, Mosley swung towards the viewpoint presented by CCLA and CCF. Nonetheless, the government remains convinced that invoking the Emergencies Act was necessary and has promised to appeal the verdict. Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland commented on Mosley’s decision by asserting their belief that public safety and national security, which include economic security, were under threat. “The public safety of Canadians was under threat, our national security, which includes our national economic security, was under threat,” Freeland alleged. “I was convinced at the time. It was the right thing to do. It was the necessary thing to do.”
Privacy
Surveillance Overreach: Federal Investigators Asked Banks To Search Transactions Related to “MAGA,” “TRUMP”
c0mmando
8 months ago
•
66%
right? we should give every transaction to the state to stop bad guys.
reclaimthenet.org
As part of the growing support for censorship within the EU, the EU Parliament has cast their votes for a resolution, regarding making so-called “hate speech” a crime throughout the Union. The decision, which critics have likened to Orwell’s “Big Brother,” is set to redefine the landscape of freedom of speech within the European Union. The move has garnered substantial attention due to its potential impact on individual liberties. Critics argue that this could lead to overreach and the suppression of free speech. Yet, the EU Parliament remains firm in its stance, asserting that this radical change is a crucial step in combating hate and is plowing ahead. Before the resolution, Maite Pagazaurtundúa (Spain), rapporteur for the report and Member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, said: “The current EU legal framework only covers hate speech and hate crimes on some bases, but there is currently no common, comprehensive legal definition at Union level. With the new social dynamics, the normalization of hate evolves very quickly and we must protect ourselves as a society and protect people who are attacked, persecuted, and harassed. Radical networks and extreme polarization are a favorable environment for increasing these behaviors that violate fundamental rights. With this report we ask the Council to give the green light to legislate against hate crime and hate speeches in European terms, always in accordance with the principle of proportionality and guaranteeing freedom of expression for citizens.” From The [European Conservative](https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/youre-big-brother-eu-parliament-votes-to-make-hate-speech-an-eu-crime/): >“The document lays down two primary goals: including hate speech among the EU crimes specified in Article 83(1) TFEU which lists “particularly serious crime[s] with cross-border dimensions”—such as terrorism, human trafficking, drug and arms trafficking, money laundering, and organized crime—and are subject to EU-wide minimum rules regarding definitions and penalties. According to the official explanation, hate speech deserves the same label because it’s so serious that not only affects an individual or a community “but also society as a whole, by undermining the foundations of the EU,” while social media instantly gives it a “cross-border dimension” as well. > “The second goal underscored in the resolution is to extend the definition of hate speech and hate crimes to cover several additional victim categories. Currently, EU laws define them as hatred only toward a specific race, skin color, religion, nationality, or ethnicity, which leftist lawmakers argued is not nearly enough in today’s world. >“Therefore, the document calls for extending the definition to ‘sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, age, disability and any other fundamental characteristic.’ Absent an objective definition, it’s easy to imagine the last one functioning as a blank check to cover whatever anyone might be offended by.”
reclaimthenet.org
The Dutch Queen Maxima utilized her platform during the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos to advocate for the far-reaching benefits of digital ID for various sectors. Queen Maxima highlighted that a digital ID could become a critical instrument, capable of determining vaccination statuses, facilitating school registrations, and simplifying the process of claiming government subsidies. There has been a growing push by various global elites, including governments, tech companies, and international organizations, towards the adoption of digital identity systems. This shift is often presented as a means to increase efficiency and security. But, few talk about the major implications for surveillance and the erosion of civil liberties. The Dutch monarch emphasized the relevance of digital ID for expanding financial systems, during a panel called “Comparing Notes on Financial Inclusion.” She expressed her earlier concern about the rarity of a universal ID system, particularly in regions like Latin America and Africa. “In order to open up an account, you need to have an ID. I have to say that when I started this job, there were actually very little countries in Africa or Latin America that had one ubiquitous type of ID, and certainly that was digital and certainly that was biometric. “We’ve really worked with all our partners to actually help grow this, and the interesting part of it is that yes, it is very necessary for financial services, but not only.” Africa is being used as the testing ground for several digital ID projects. Of course, Queen Maxima also said that digital ID systems would be useful to act as a vaccine passport. “It is also good for school enrollment; it is also good for health – who actually got a vaccination or not; it’s very good actually to get your subsidies from the government,” she said. With her role as the United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Advocate for Inclusive Finance for Development, Queen Maxima has been a key figure in driving the digital ID paradigm shift. This trend also applies to vaccine passports, a form of digital ID that the WEF says are an essential part of our future. They envision that this digital identity could be linked to diverse aspects such as financial services, healthcare records, mobility, travel, and digital governance.
reclaimthenet.org
In a year marked by dwindling public trust in key institutions and heralded by the theme “Rebuilding Trust” at the World Economic Forum’s annual Davos assembly, Emma Tucker, the Wall Street Journal’s Editor in Chief, has called for a reevaluation of how traditional media operates. Recalling a point when the mainstream press was the chief adjudicator of information and facts, she highlighted its demise that came with the rise of alternative media platforms. Tucker, during a Davos panel supposedly dedicated to the preservation of truth, offered a lament for the era when the press held exclusive dominance over news and facts. “If you go back not that long ago, We owned the news. We were the gatekeepers, and we very much owned the facts as well,” Tucker said. “If it said it in the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times, then that was a fact. Nowadays, people can go to all sorts of different sources for the news, and they’re much more questioning about what we’re saying.” Not only do her comments reveal a lot about how mainstream media figures see their role in society, her comment painted a clear picture of the power shift that has marked the recent history of the media landscape. “So it’s no longer good enough for us to say this is what happened, or this is the news. We almost have to explain our working. So readers expect to understand how we source stories, they want to know how we go about getting stories,” she continued. “We have to sort of lift the bonnet as it were in a way that newspapers aren’t used to doing, and explain to people what we’re doing. We need to be much more transparent about how we go about collecting the news,” Tucker added.
reclaimthenet.org
Moscow’s parliament is set to contemplate the introduction of a regulation that may grant the authority to seize assets, such as financial resources, valuable goods, and real estate from individuals accused of disseminating “knowingly false narratives” concerning the Russian military operations, according to a prominent legislator’s statement on Saturday. Vyacheslav Volodin, the presiding officer of the State Duma, the lower house of the Russian parliament, [posted a note on Telegram](https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-consider-law-property-confiscation-fakes-about-army-2024-01-20/) explaining that the proposal would target individuals advocating for “extremist behaviors” or suggesting sanctions against Russia. Reports that undermine the reputation of the Russian military, currently classified as a criminal act under newly implemented stringent regulations post Russia’s deployment of forces in Ukraine in February 2022, will also face the same consequences. “Everyone who tries to destroy Russia, betrays it, must suffer the deserved punishment and compensate for the damage inflicted on the country, at the cost of their property,” Volodin said. He added that under the law, those found guilty of “discrediting” the army also face being stripped of any honorary titles. The legislative proposal was scheduled for review in the State Duma on Monday, according to Volodin’s statement. Narratives slandering the reputation of the Russian military, including those classified as promoting terrorism and spreading fictitious reports about Russian forces, are currently checked under an [existing legal framework](https://reclaimthenet.org/russia-passes-law-banning-criticism-of-voluntary-military-groups).
reclaimthenet.org
Pre-bunking information, pre-crime, etc. etc. – it all could easily spell out post-democracy, observers critical of the trends keep saying. None of their arguments, however, seem to be reaching or affecting top EU bureaucrats, Věra Jourová – vice president of the European Commission for none other than “values and transparency” – being one of them. Vera’s in Davos this week – where else – and has been telling a World Economic Forum (WEF) panel about things like deploying law enforcement to deal with “conspiracy theories,” pre-bunking information considered as disinformation, censorship of that, but also of hate speech” – and then, to top it off, about her alleged love of “freedom of speech.” The moderator cited WEF’s own “global risk report” for this year which allegedly found that “disinformation is actually the top risk which people cited for the next couple of years” – to ask Jourova about the EU strategy in this respect. She quickly launched into branding “this information” – i.e., disinformation as a “security threat” and listed a number of things the EU is doing to mitigate it: strengthen “strong professional media,” and, “work with (online) platforms.” That, Jourová quickly explained, means mainly “fact-checking.” And, she added, “We have all the big tech under the commitment of the Code of Practice against this information.” And then she arrived at “pre-bunking.” According to Jourova, it means forcing the raising of awareness, and at the same time, “lowering of the absorption capacity in the society to believe the lies.” Very interesting wording, especially going from the usual, “lowering absorption” to, lowering the capacity for it. “Pre-bunking” is usually defined as a preemptive measure (Vera used the word, predictive), so as to discredit an account or information, and “refute” information even before it gets disseminated. A fairly convoluted censorship game here, and the EU bureaucrat had more good news for the WEF attendees: the bloc, she assured them, is taking care (by means of censorship) of “hate speech and disinformation.” Then, as if to also reassure everyone hypocrisy is alive and well in the EU, she talked about supporting freedom of speech. Jourová, who is Czech, referred to “living half her life in an authoritarian regime” (a reference to the Cold War). Judging by the policies she is promoting, she is sadly determined to spend the rest of it the same way.
reclaimthenet.org
The Epoch Times has found that religious leaders and advocates for religious freedom are expressing significant concern. This comes after information surfaced that, as part of their investigation into January 6, 2021, federal officials encouraged banks and other financial entities to [surveil customer accounts using search terms including “religious texts,” “MAGA,” and “Trump.](https://reclaimthenet.org/feds-asked-banks-to-search-transactions-related-to-maga)” The criticism mounted among those fighting for religious liberty, as these searches were conducted absent judicially authorized warrants. Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council, a non-profit organization centered around traditional values, found such actions by the Biden administration appalling. “This is beyond alarming,” Perkins told The Epoch Times. “If we did a word search in history of the type of activities the Biden administration is engaged in, it would return words like ‘KGB,’ ’totalitarian,‘ ’repressive,’ ‘anti-democratic,’ and ‘grave threat to freedom.’” Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, another non-profit organization championing religious liberty, warned against the inherent danger of such governmental overreach in a society renowned for its freedom of speech. He laid bare the realities of such oppressive actions, typically associated with autocratic governments looking to suppress dissenting voices. According to [the report](https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/religious-liberty-experts-outraged-that-feds-asked-banks-to-search-customer-purchases-5568600), Leaders of other organizations expressed similar sentiments. The First Liberty Institute’s Kelly Shackelford termed federal encroachment on freedom of speech through financial institutions monitoring the purchase of religious texts as ‘outrageous,’ adding that such actions posed a significant threat to all freedoms. His sentiments were echoed by Jeremy Tedesco of the Alliance Defending Freedom, who labeled the government’s collaboration with financial institutions to flag their customers for activities pertaining to the exercise of constitutional rights as “terrifying.” According to a statement by Representative Jim Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, such surveillance was orchestrated by the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in collaboration with the FBI. His letters to Noah Bishoff, the former director of FinCEN now performing the role of anti-money laundering officer for Plaid Inc, and Peter Sullivan, senior private sector partner for the FBI, asked them to testify about the searches. “According to this analysis, FinCEN warned financial institutions of ‘extremism’ indicators that include ‘transportation charges, such as bus tickets, rental cars, or plane tickets, for travel areas with no apparent purpose,’ or ‘the purchase of books (including religious texts) and subscriptions to other media containing extremist views,’” Jordan wrote. “In other words, FinCEN used large financial institutions to comb through the private transactions of their customers for suspicious charges on the basis of protected political and religious expression.”
reclaimthenet.org
Donald Trump, former president of the United States and a clear contender for returning to this role, has made it clear that the creation of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) within the US will not occur under his watch should he be elected back into office. He considers such a move a potential infringement on citizens’ liberties, equating them to the government gaining total control of finances. In a recent campaign speech held in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, Trump made his anti-CBDC stance abundantly clear. He vowed to disallow the development of a CBDC, fostering a narrative that any such state-backed digital currency would only enable the federal government to exert complete dominance over citizens’ monetary assets. This, to him, appears as a direct threat to freedom. Once known for his opposition toward Bitcoin and others in the cryptocurrency ecosystem in the past, something he has now reversed his position on, Trump extended the same disapproval to CBDCs. He vowed to nip any attempt at such a development in the bud if he earns the title of US President once again. “As your President, I will never allow the creation of a central bank digital currency. Such a currency will give a federal government, our federal government absolute control over your money,” President Trump said. “They could take your money, you won’t even know it’s gone.” Trump’s sentiments strike a chord with the perspective of the current Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, a fellow presidential hopeful who also pledged to quash any developments toward a CBDC if he succeeds in the race. Similarly, Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Ron DeSantis, other contender for the top seat, echoed these sentiments back in July 2023. CBDCs could potentially lead to a dystopian future, marked by a significant erosion of financial privacy and an unprecedented concentration of power. The ability of governments to track all financial transactions in real-time raises concerns about total surveillance and the potential for financial censorship. This level of oversight could allow authorities to block transactions, freeze accounts, or alter balances, undermining the concept of personal asset security. Additionally, the shift to a CBDC-dominated system could eliminate the anonymity provided by cash transactions, leading to a society where anonymous spending is impossible. The implementation of social credit systems, where financial capabilities are tied to government-approved behavior, could further erode individual freedoms. Meanwhile, other nations continue to not only explore but embrace the idea of sovereign digital currencies, indicating a divergent approach to the United States. The Bank of Russia even anticipates the wide adoption of its own CBDC, known as the digital ruble, by 2025. The commencement of their pilot is set for August 2023.
reclaimthenet.org
Controversies originating from those who gained the most from the pandemic – most visibly, Big Pharma – refuses to go away. One of the leading (and among the earliest) producers of Covid vaccines was US-based Moderna. We know for sure that the vaccine worked for Moderna – turning it from the verge of collapse into a $100 billion company, [Defender reports](https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/moderna-surveillance-independent-media-covid-vaccine-narrative/). But in large part due to the unusual speed with which vaccines were put through trials and then to market, many people – from regular citizens to public figures to medical professionals and scientists – felt skepticism about their efficacy and safety. Expressing that openly, though, tended to get those people canceled or at least monitored and/or censored, and now new documents reveal Moderna’s role. Among them were journalists Alex Berenson, Stanford Health Policy professor Jay Bhattacharya, and actor Russell Brand. In one instance, they “flagged a Russell Brand video in which he raised concerns about former British health official Jonathan Van-Tam, who was instrumental in COVID-19 policymaking and then took a high-level job at Moderna,” writes Defender. Despite the billions in revenues raked in by Big Pharma, this obviously wasn’t enough, especially once the Covid panic started to subside and vaccine sales stalled. And so Moderna sought out online media surveillance partners, and found one in the Public Goods Projects non-profit (otherwise receiving funds from Big Pharma), which was then useful in getting Covid vaccine skeptics silenced or censored on Twitter – Moderna and its partner, of course, called this combating “medical information.” The documents, uncovered by [RealClearInvestigations and journalist Lee Fang](https://www.leefang.com/p/moderna-surveillance-operation-targeted), show that independent media and their commentators, especially well-known and influential ones, were of specific interest in a bid to protect Moderna – but health agencies. The goal was to suppress doubt or criticism about any side effects linked to the vaccine, and Twitter was not the only place Moderna was “monitoring:” unsurprisingly, given its critical bent, a site like Zerohedge, but also the New York Times, should a “negative” observation fly under the radar, which is/was indeed a very rare event for that “paper of record.” Plus, no less than about 150 million websites in between, according to the documents, “the Moderna Files.” They paint a picture of mass surveillance carried out by a private company. “The documents seem to show that Moderna is running a corporate public relations effort designed to boost sagging vaccine sales under the veneer of public health,” Fang is quoted as saying.
reclaimthenet.org
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is in Davos these days for the annual World Economic Summit (WEF), and [his address](https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Fl8VaC9uR8U&t=800s) at one of the panels has been in keeping with the meeting’s agenda(s) – but also, clearly, those recently forcefully pushed by the world organization. Among the schemes Guterres spoke about are the UN’s Global Digital Compact and the Sustainable Development Goals. The first consists of several proposals, [including digital ID](https://reclaimthenet.org/united-nations-development-program-urges-governments-to-push-digital-id) that is linked to people’s bank accounts, while the second, overarching one, that enjoys the support of some of the world’s most powerful countries, also involves digital ID, and UN’s “vision” of disinformation moderation (also known as censorship). Guterres said that Global Digital Compact would be a major contributor to what he called “the digital connectivity gap.” Referring to the overall project as multi-stakeholder, the UN chief noted that “AI” would play a role in building the public and private sector’s capability of a “networked governance model.” More data sharing seems to be at the heart of all this, while in order to keep control over the way “AI” is used in the future, Guterres and his team want to see governments and (private) tech companies work together. All these initiatives will feature at the “Summit for the Future” this coming September. One idea voiced by Guterres is to make globalist organizations – such as G20, international financial institutions, and the UN itself, even closer. A recent UN Policy Brief discusses the complex “pyramid” of initiatives, where until now something called “Our Common Agenda” (of which Global Digital Compact is one mechanism) was designed to accelerate Sustainable Development Goals. Now, there is also the move to bring G20 and others into this play – likened in some reports as an economy-oriented counterpart to UN’s Security Council. And the fear here becomes the effect it may have on the international banking system – and in the process, of people’s financial liberties. As for the Global Digital Compact, it looks like yet another dystopian iteration of an idea that is cropping up all over the world in different forms. With digital ID as an unavoidable component, it would create a centralized – therefore easily controlled – network of citizens.
reclaimthenet.org
Czech Foreign Minister Jan Lipavský is in Davos, for the World Economic Forum (WEF). There, he offered his two-euro-cents about “misinformation” and democracy – albeit referring to the former as “false content.” Davos is just the right place for the minister to try to press home the “mantra” of “global solutions.” In this case – “a global solution (…) and to have a global discussion about the way [sic] how we communicate.” “How we communicate?” There may be a bit of a language barrier here, but is Mr. Lipavský actually talking up the merits of speech control, by any other name? Doesn’t seem unlikely, because some of the other phrases that came out of his mouth included “government accountability” and quite directly, a mention of “control” of technology that is made possible through government intervention, that is, “regulation.” (It’s not inconceivable that somewhere in the WEF corridors, China’s representatives were nodding approvingly…) Meanwhile, let’s see how it should work, according to the government in Prague and its rep. They certainly have a lot on their plate right now, but apparently, elections in various countries around the world seem to be top of agenda, and who better to talk about that, than a foreign minister. But even if they tend to talk about “4 million people across the globe” going to the polls, and how to gently, or not so gently, nudge them to pick “the proper” candidates – it always comes back to the one election that really matters, especially to outfits like the WEF – the US presidential vote. But gatherings like this will go out of their way not to always focus on that election, and will talk in circles, warning that “what is happening in one country today might happen in another country tomorrow” thanks to (or because of) globally available internet platforms. And so, perhaps test “regulation” in one – to then implement it in another. What taxpayers (around the world) should perhaps be even more worried about than the by now customary attacks on speech is just how little original idea or even turn of phrase those they push it have to offer, sounding instead like they’re all reading from the same playbook. Case in point, Lipavský: “We need a really global solution and to have a global discussion about the way how we communicate as people, which content and how are we presented”; (…) And definitely we will see more and more false content being used as something which will disturb the election process, which will disturb the way how the society makes decisions.” “So…the kind of regulation or possession or control of those technologies needs to be developed, (so) that the governments will be sure that it is not going against the interests of the governments,” the minister also said.
reclaimthenet.org
CEO of Center for Democracy and Technology Alexandra Reeve Givens is one of those who have tuned up at this year’s World Economic Forum (WEF), apparently well equipped and eager to promote state censorship, and throw a couple of red herrings in there, presumably for the sake of “credibility.” Givens, whose group has made it to Spotify’s “safety advisory council” and was keen to see the Biden administration set up an online “disinformation” task, has spoken at one of WEF panels to lament an injunction that aims to stop the current White House from further pressuring Big Tech on speech issues. Apparently, not only should they continue to work under this pressure, but should also be, figuratively, tarred and feathered, and dragged to, say, Davos – to “talk about the (censorship) work (they’re doing)” – i.e., be “held accountable.” Another complaint heard from Givens is that there is now more scrutiny in the US, specifically from Congress, about what these social media companies and their “misinformation researcher partners” have been doing. While the free-speech world may cautiously welcome such trends, Givens does not – to her mind it just means there is less censorship (“moderation”) on social platforms, whereas the same “thinker” is convinced these companies have a “duty to help surface the trusted sources of information.” It’s pretty clear what we’re hearing here, but Givens decided to confuse things a little – at least on the surface – by expressing her concern that “governments are cracking down on free speech.” Here’s the full section: *“So in the United States, for example, right now we have congressional investigations and lawsuits against people that study misinformation about elections on social media platforms. There is currently an injunction in place stopping the Biden administration from communicating with social media platforms about interference threats on the topics of elections that’s actually going before the United States Supreme Court this year. So we’re in this bizarre environment where right as the threats are ticking up, the investments in actually doing the day-to-day work of online trust and safety for our information environment is being scaled back and is under attack.”* But not to worry – these would be some other governments, since Givens’ entire stance of “misinformation and moderation” in terms of how the Biden administration is doing it is positive – if anything, she would like to see more of the same and get the courts and a pesky Congress out of that particular way. Givens’ overall performance at WEF was more of what we have been hearing from “misinformation” fearmongers, trying to justify the practice that ends up in censorship, as some sort of (perverted) key democracy issue. She mentions the role played by “authoritative information” coming from no doubt politically and ideologically vetted journalists – and “journalist.” And, peppers in a bit of “AI-generated misinformation” alarmism in there.
reclaimthenet.org
A revelation by the House Judiciary Committee has raised concerns about federal investigators’ intrusion into individuals’ private financial transactions. According to the committee, federal investigators instructed banks to filter customer transactions using politically related terms such as “MAGA” and “TRUMP.” This move, part of an investigation into the events of January 6, 2021, was [exposed by the House Judiciary Committee](https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/federal-government-flagged-transactions-using-terms-maga-and-trump-financial). The potential alarm does not end here, as even purchases of “religious texts” are seen as indicative of extremism in the eyes of the investigators. The committee’s report further revealed that the investigators suggested banks filter transactions using keywords such as names of popular merchandise stores including Dick’s Sporting Goods and Bass Pro Shops, among others. The meticulous oversight undertaken by the House Judiciary Committee and its subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is focused on federal law enforcement’s acquisition of information about US citizens without legal procedures as well as its engagement with the private sector. Documents acquired by the committee, according to Chair Jim Jordan, point to actions from the Treasury Department’s Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). Following the events of January 6th, the department provided search terms to banks to identify transactions on behalf of federal law enforcement. These materials suggested generic keywords to search Zelle payment messages amidst other instructions. According to Jordan, FinCEN essentially relied on large financial institutions to scrutinize their customers’ private transactions for suspicious activities that might stem from protected political and religious expression. The committee has called Niah Bishoff, the former director of FinCEN, to appear for a formal interview on this issue. As Jordan highlights, pervasive financial surveillance of American citizens’ private transactions, coordinated with federal law enforcement, raises serious concerns about FinCEN’s attitude towards fundamental civil liberties. We obtained a copy of the letter the committee sent Bishoff for you [here](https://docs.reclaimthenet.org/jordan-bishoff-letter-rtn.pdf). Jordan also requested an interview with Peter Sullivan, the senior private sector partner for outreach in the Strategic Partner Engagement Section )at the FBI. The concern arose after receiving testimony indicating that Bank of America [voluntarily provided the FBI](https://reclaimthenet.org/bank-of-americas-handing-over-of-data-fbi-invesigated) with a list of individuals who made transactions in the Washington, D.C. area using a bank card within a specific period in 2021.
cross-posted from: https://monero.town/post/1871686 > **💸 Why Monezon?** > > - Anonymous Transactions: Say goodbye to tedious KYC procedures! Spend your Monero on real-life goods without compromising your privacy. > > **🚚 Flexible Delivery Options:** > > - Ship Anywhere: Monezon allows you to have Amazon goods delivered to any Amazon Locker, personal address, or relay point of your choice. Enjoy the convenience of personalized delivery options. > > **🔧 How it Works:** > > - Place Your Order: Submit your Amazon order through Monezon using monero and receive a unique passphrase. > > - Executor Network: Your order is broadcasted to available executors (total order cost only, no personal details). > > - Order Execution: An executor accepts your order and places it on Amazon. > > - Secure Communication: Utilize end-to-end encrypted chat with your executor using the provided passphrase. > > - Keep Track: Get a tracking code to ensure that your order has been sent. > > - Confirmation & Payment: Once both parties confirm the delivery, the executor receives payment in monero, completing the seamless transaction. > > Monezon has got a new update, and we're looking to improve your experience from your feedbacks! > > Check out our updated Frequently Asked Questions (F.A.Q) section for some quick insights. Feel free to ask us anything, and we'll be more than happy to assist you. > > [Monezon](https://monezon.com) > > [Twitter](https://twitter.com/atMonezon) > > **We are currently welcoming executors! Slide in our dms if interested in earning monero!** > > *Note: Monezon is an independent platform and is not affiliated with Amazon.*
cross-posted from: https://monero.town/post/1871686 > **💸 Why Monezon?** > > - Anonymous Transactions: Say goodbye to tedious KYC procedures! Spend your Monero on real-life goods without compromising your privacy. > > **🚚 Flexible Delivery Options:** > > - Ship Anywhere: Monezon allows you to have Amazon goods delivered to any Amazon Locker, personal address, or relay point of your choice. Enjoy the convenience of personalized delivery options. > > **🔧 How it Works:** > > - Place Your Order: Submit your Amazon order through Monezon using monero and receive a unique passphrase. > > - Executor Network: Your order is broadcasted to available executors (total order cost only, no personal details). > > - Order Execution: An executor accepts your order and places it on Amazon. > > - Secure Communication: Utilize end-to-end encrypted chat with your executor using the provided passphrase. > > - Keep Track: Get a tracking code to ensure that your order has been sent. > > - Confirmation & Payment: Once both parties confirm the delivery, the executor receives payment in monero, completing the seamless transaction. > > Monezon has got a new update, and we're looking to improve your experience from your feedbacks! > > Check out our updated Frequently Asked Questions (F.A.Q) section for some quick insights. Feel free to ask us anything, and we'll be more than happy to assist you. > > [Monezon](https://monezon.com) > > [Twitter](https://twitter.com/atMonezon) > > **We are currently welcoming executors! Slide in our dms if interested in earning monero!** > > *Note: Monezon is an independent platform and is not affiliated with Amazon.*
yewtu.be
therecord.media
A 22-year-old Frenchman [was sentenced](https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/member-notorious-international-hacking-crew-sentenced-prison) on Tuesday to three years in U.S. federal prison for his participation in the ShinyHunters hacking group. Sebastien Raoult, also known as “Sezyo Kaizen,” was extradited to the U.S. in January 2023 after his arrest in Morocco the year before. He pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and aggravated identity theft and is also required to pay $5 million in restitution. According to an indictment from prosecutors in the Western District of Washington, Raoult and two co-conspirators hacked more than 60 companies around the world and posted stolen data on dark web forums like RaidForums, EmpireMarket and Exploit. In some cases, they threatened to leak data if a ransom was not paid. In 2020 and 2021, ShinyHunters [perpetrated](https://intel471.com/blog/shinyhunters-data-breach-mitre-attack) a series of hacks on well-known entities, including breaches of the clothing retailer Bonobos, the photo app Pixlr and Microsoft’s GitHub account. It also [claimed](https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/atandt-denies-data-breach-after-hacker-auctions-70-million-user-database/#google_vignette) to have information from 70 million AT&T accounts, although the company denied it had been breached. According to the DOJ, Raoult and accomplices created spoof websites pretending to be the login pages of legitimate businesses, and sent phishing emails to company employees. When the victims entered their credentials, the hackers were able to gain access to their accounts. They stole “hundreds of millions of customer records” and inflicted an estimated $6 million in losses. “This is an extraordinarily serious offense. We’re talking about him robbing people of millions of dollars,” said U.S. District Judge Robert S. Lasnik at the sentencing hearing, according to a Department of Justice release. Raoult’s father [told](https://www.databreaches.net/sebastien-raoult-sentenced-in-federal-court-could-be-out-in-less-than-11-months/) DataBreaches.net that the sentence includes served time in Morocco and Seattle, meaning that he only has another 11 months to serve in prison. According to the DOJ, Raoult told the court: “I understand my mistakes and I want to put that part behind me. No more hacking. I don’t want to disappoint my family again.”
News
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
Following the latest batch of court documents, these names have been added:
- Richard Branson
- Sergey Brin
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
click on the link in the post
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
One allegation already made public concerns David Copperfield, an associate of both Casablancas and Trump, who judged Look of the Year in 1988 and 1991, and once dated another Elite supermodel, Claudia Schiffer. Two years ago, as the #MeToo movement reverberated through the entertainment industry, he was the subject of allegations by Brittney Lewis, a 17-year-old contestant in the 1988 Look of the Year, held in Japan. According to her account, published on the entertainment news website The Wrap, Copperfield invited her to a show in California after she had returned home to Utah. Lewis alleged that she saw Copperfield pour something into her glass and then blanked out, but says she retained hazy recollections of him sexually assaulting her in his hotel room.
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
In reference to the court documents, John Casablancas was mentioned only in questioning without any direct allegations, however, I believe he came up in questioning because of his relationship with David Cooperfield, the magician, and pedophile it seems.
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
Rich people can afford to pay lawyers and evade courts; now the rich and powerful have the support from the captured system.. which is why Epstein was tipped off to his search warrant.
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
Some of the names are mentioned only in questioning, others are directly implicated as abusers. The relevant details are in the forum post.
World News
New Epstein Documents: Highlights and Name Drops
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
66%
I haven't seen that one, but I might have to now.
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
They really do think that they're a superior race of humans with full dominion over the lower species.
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
93%
when I was looking some of these people up, I was surprised how many billionaires came up...
In the 37th annual Forbes list of the world's billionaires, the list included 2,640 billionaires with a total net wealth of $12.2 trillion, down 28 members and $500 billion from 2022.
however, when considering that there are only ~2,600 billionaires in the world, I could see how these ultra rich only associate with each other.
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
Upon further investigation, I mistook original cloudflare headers that were passed through with x-archive-orig-* as an indication that archive.org was behind cloudflare. my mistake. I have edited the original post.
Hacker News
Please, Expose Your RSS
c0mmando
9 months ago
•
100%
ReadYou on Fdroid
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
100%
WTF first time seeing reclaimthenet on cloudflare
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
100%
it applies to both
Privacy
Trump Prosecutor Jack Smith’s Overreaching Warrant Seeks Data on People Who Liked, Retweeted Trump Tweets
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
7%
name checks out
Privacy
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
100%
hi wravoc, good to see you again and i must say your git page is looking sweeet
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
🚨 It's time to fire up those seedboxes! Preserve human knowledge FOREVER by seeding Anna’s Archive torrents 🚨
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
88%
my man!!
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
🚨 It's time to fire up those seedboxes! Preserve human knowledge FOREVER by seeding Anna’s Archive torrents 🚨
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
75%
that works!
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
🚨 It's time to fire up those seedboxes! Preserve human knowledge FOREVER by seeding Anna’s Archive torrents 🚨
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
12%
If you can do better let's see it. This post is for altruists and archivists... clearly you're neither.
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
🚨 It's time to fire up those seedboxes! Preserve human knowledge FOREVER by seeding Anna’s Archive torrents 🚨
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
76%
of course it will.. but downloading 150 TB is overkill if you want one book
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
🚨 It's time to fire up those seedboxes! Preserve human knowledge FOREVER by seeding Anna’s Archive torrents 🚨
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
93%
donate!
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
100%
yup never used matrix.org... https://hackliberty.org/register https://chat.hackliberty.org
Privacy
Thomas Massie Tried, But Failed, To Stop "Kill Switch" Mandate That Could Disable Vehicles
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
100%
what are you talking about?
c0mmando
10 months ago
•
100%
you're right, bad headline, I edited the title to "Signal Privacy Concerns"
c0mmando
11 months ago
•
100%
session, matrix, simplex, briar, xmpp
Privacy
Dirt has been gathered on extremist Ohio school board candidates - would this be legal if it had been in the EU (under the GDPR)?
c0mmando
11 months ago
•
100%
the trick is using archive as a man in the middle: https://web.archive.org/web/20231012145424/https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1bNftkYLPiW84VhBHqjkp32REyerA_xfn534zkbTKeSg/htmlview
c0mmando
11 months ago
•
100%
thanks Solo, good suggestions and I might just remove the Matrix channels all together
Philosophy
How the Religion Called Atheism is Destroying Human Freedom
c0mmando
11 months ago
•
3%
go ahead and plug your ears, this material ain't for you.
Conspiracy
The Most Entertaining Conspiracy Theory
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
25%
shitting up my conspiracy community with psyops.. i expected better
Fediverse
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
75%
the bots and down-vote brigades are outta control
Privacy
Why do airlines share my itinerary with my bank? GDPR violation? Any travelers switching to cash?
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
66%
it hides transactions from the bank, acting as a proxy. I connected via debit card. i trust privacy more than i trust big banks.. and they make money off service fees
Privacy
Why do airlines share my itinerary with my bank? GDPR violation? Any travelers switching to cash?
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
60%
Conspiracy
Jimmy Savile was part of satanic ring
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
25%
rather than employing a modicum of thought and critical thinking
yet you did none of those things before commenting. fuck off shill
Conspiracy
Jimmy Savile was part of satanic ring
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
25%
Ok wristy clapperson. She opened up to her therapist and what the therapist broker her confidentiality or as you can’t libel the dead they can just print what they want. Do you wear a crash helmet indoors?
and now defending pedophiles
Conspiracy
Jimmy Savile was part of satanic ring
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
27%
imagine being such a hypocrite that you attempt to advocate for victims while simultaneously denying their testimony and abuse..
Conspiracy
Jimmy Savile was part of satanic ring
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
25%
and what does denying victim testimony get you?
c0mmando
12 months ago
•
50%
post away
Android
c0mmando
1 year ago
•
50%
It's really the only choice for a secure and FOSS mobile device. GOS addresses most of the SIGINT associated with phone tracking.
- disabling wifi autoconnect to prevent bssid pings
- auto reboot feature
- auto disable bluetooth feature (prevent bluetooth mac leaks)
- airplane mode is never auto disabled after system upgrades .. which is a requirement to prevent cell tower triangulation
- usb-c data transfer disabled if the phone is locked
- secure hardware to prevent physical attacks and evil maid
- and many many more..