Tag: corporations

Study Shows Pesticide Companies Hid Developmental Neurotoxicity Data From EU Regulators

A recently published study reveals that pesticide companies have failed to disclose data related to brain toxicity. What does this mean for toxicity data in other fields of research?

Recently, the U.S. Geological Survey acknowledged that at least 45% of the nation’s tap water is estimated to have one or more types of the chemicals known as per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances, or PFAS, also known as forever chemicals. This is, unfortunately, just the latest in a string of similar admissions relating to water quality which have come to light in recent years.

As more Americans grapple with the reality that we are swimming in a soup of toxins and radiation, Europeans are becoming aware of the lack of transparency involving studies of pesticides, and potentially other toxins.

A study published in early June found that some studies of pesticides relating to developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) were submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but not to regulatory bodies within the European Union. It took between 14 and 21 years for EU regulators to become aware of these studies. Once they were aware of the data, they enacted new safety regulations in some cases and continue to evaluate necessary steps in others.

A DNT test typically exposes pregnant female rats to a pesticide to assess their offspring for neuropathological and behavioral changes. The tests have been useful for identifying chemicals which will cause DNT in humans.

The study was first reported on by The Guardian in collaboration with European outlets Bayerischer Rundfunk/ARD, Der Spiegel in Germany, SRF in Switzerland, and Le Monde in France. It has received little attention in the American media.

Keep reading

The Biggest Winners in America’s Climate Law: Foreign Companies

The 2022 climate law unleashed a torrent of government subsidies to help the U.S. build clean-energy industries. The biggest beneficiaries so far are foreign companies.

The Inflation Reduction Act has spurred nearly $110 billion in U.S. clean-energy projects since it passed almost a year ago, a Wall Street Journal analysis shows. Companies based overseas, largely from South Korea, Japan and China, are involved in projects accounting for more than 60% of that spending. Fifteen of the 20 largest such investments, nearly all in battery factories, involve foreign businesses, the Journal’s analysis shows. 

These overseas manufacturers will be able to claim billions of dollars in tax credits, making them among the biggest winners from the climate law. The credits are often tied to production volume, rewarding the largest investors. 

Japan’s Panasonic, one of the few companies to publicly estimate the impact of the law, could earn more than $2 billion in tax credits a year based on the capacity of battery plants it is operating or building in Nevada and Kansas. The company, which supplies batteries to electric-vehicle maker Tesla, is considering a third factory in the U.S. that would lift that total. 

The climate law is designed to build up domestic supply chains for green-energy industries, but the reality is that the technology for building batteries and renewable-energy equipment resides overseas. The incentives are leading these companies to invest in the U.S., often alongside domestic businesses. 

“It’s a testament to the fact that we still live in a globalized economy,” said Aniket Shah, head of environmental, social and corporate governance—or ESG—strategy at investment bank Jefferies. “You can’t just out of nowhere put up borders and say, ‘It has to be made in America by American companies.’ ”

Keep reading

A Reddit User Admitted To Pirating a Movie 12 Years Ago. Movie Studios Want To Unmask Him.

In what appears to be an escalating incursion into a user’s digital privacy, a collective of film companies continue to implore the court to compel Reddit to surrender its users’ personal details. This move is part of an ongoing piracy liability case against Internet Service Providers. Reddit, however, steadfastly resists, staunchly defending its users’ rights to anonymous speech.

While governments and law enforcement agencies have increasingly sought user details from Reddit — with over 1,000 requests, 277 search warrants, and 582 subpoenas last year, Torrent Freak reported — Reddit has staunchly resisted, drawing a firm line in the sand to protect its users’ privacy.

The battle over privacy rights came to a head earlier this year when film companies, involved in litigation against ISP RCN, attempted to extract personal details of Reddit users via a DMCA subpoena. Reddit objected, criticizing the subpoena as a sweeping and excessive invasion of user privacy, rather than a reasonable search for evidence. Reddit made a stand, yielding the details of only one user and rejecting the rest, underscoring its commitment to the right to anonymous speech.

The court sided with Reddit, ruling that the right to anonymity outweighed the copyright holders’ interests. US District Court Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler further reinforced this stance, suggesting the film companies could obtain necessary information through alternative channels, such as directly from the ISP in question.

Undeterred by the earlier legal setback, the film companies are now making a similar push against ISP Grande, targeting a fresh group of Reddit users. Reddit, maintaining its position as a defender of user privacy, declined to release the requested information, triggering another motion to compel in court.

The film companies assert that they have exhausted all other options for evidence and insist on the need to reveal Reddit users’ identities. However, their earlier attempt to contact Grande’s repeatedly pirating subscribers failed to yield useful results, forcing them to resort to targeting Reddit users once again.

In response to this potential breach of privacy, Reddit has reiterated its commitment to preserving its users’ rights to anonymous speech. Reddit contends that the film companies have not presented a convincing case to justify the infringement of privacy, arguing that its users are not an “irreplaceable source” of evidence.

Reddit has further pointed out that the film companies already procured the identifying details of 118 of Grande’s most frequent pirating IP addresses. This action, according to Reddit, debunks the claim that violating user privacy is the only path to necessary evidence.

Reddit also questioned the film companies’ approach, noting they have yet to subpoena the Grande subscribers they contacted, an alternative step that could have been taken before pursuing Reddit users.

The film companies have singled out a Reddit user, “xBROKEx,” citing a 12-year-old comment admitting to pirating the movie The Expendables.

Keep reading

No Warrant, No Problem

In 1928, the late Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis characterized the values underlying the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as embracing the uniquely American right, and the right most valued by civilized persons, which he called the right to be let alone. Today we call it the right to privacy. He also warned that the greatest dangers to privacy lurk in the slow and insidious encroachments upon it by zealots in the government.

Last week, the Biden administration’s director of National Intelligence caused me to recall Justice Brandeis’ warnings when she revealed that the 16 federal spying agencies that she nominally supervises have begun to do indirectly what the Constitution prohibits them from doing directly.

Since they cannot obtain search warrants from a judge to surveil targets without first demonstrating under oath probable cause of crime by the persons whose surveillance they seek, these zealots in the government are purchasing private data about every American adult from the corporations and entities to which we all have unwittingly surrendered it.

This constitutes computer hacking – and it is as criminal as if federal agents had directly broken into the computers of those about whom and from whom they desire personal data.

Can the government do indirectly what the Constitution prohibits it from doing directly? In a word: NO.

Here is the backstory.

Keep reading

A Delaware city is set to give corporations the right to vote in elections

The state of Delaware is famously business-friendly. With more than 1.8 million entities registered in the First State, companies outnumber its human residents by nearly two-to-one. 

One city is now moving to raise businesses’ influence in the state even further, with a proposal to grant them the right to vote.

Seaford, a town of about 8,000 on the Nanticoke River, amended its charter in April to allow businesses — including LLCs, corporations, trusts or partnerships — the right to vote in local elections. The law would go into effect once both houses of Delaware’s state legislature approve it.

The proposal has rekindled a debate over how much power corporations should have in local government, with fierce opposition from civic interest groups who say businesses already wield too much influence over politics.

“It was very shocking to see this attempt to have artificial entities have voting rights,” said Claire Snyder-Hall, executive director of Common Cause Delaware, a watchdog group. 

“We’re seeing voter suppression all over the county, and this is the flipside,” she added. “It’s not saying the residents of Seaford can’t vote, but it’s diluting their votes by allowing nonresidents to vote.”  

Keep reading

BLACKROCK RECRUITER SAYS $10K ‘CAN BUY A SENATOR,’ CALLS UKRAINE WAR ‘GOOD FOR BUSINESS’

A recruiter for BlackRock said that the asset management firm is able to “buy a senator” for $10,000 and that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is “good for business,” according to a video recorded by an undercover journalist. 

“You could buy your candidates. First, there is the senators. These guys are f***ing cheap. Got 10 grand? You can buy a senator. I’ll give you 500k right now. It doesn’t matter who wins, they’re in my pocket,” BlackRock Recruiter Serge Varlay said in a video published Tuesday by the O’Keefe Media Group, which was founded by guerilla journalist James O’Keefe.

BlackRock, the world’s largest asset management firm, can “run the world,” he also said in the video.

BlackRock is also financially benefitting from the war in Ukraine, according to Varlay.

“Ukraine is good for business, you know that right? Russia blows up Ukraine’s grain silos and the price of wheat is going to go mad up. The Ukrainian economy is tied very largely to the wheat market. The price of bread, literally everything goes up and down. This is fantastic if you’re trading,” Varlay also said. “Volatility creates opportunity to make profit. War is real f***ing good for business. It’s exciting when s*** goes wrong, right?”

Keep reading

AP Called Out For Claim That Target Staff Were Subject To “Violent Confrontations” Over Trans/Pride Products

The Associated Press has been forced into quietly editing an article that repeated a statement from Target claiming that the company’s staff have been threatened, with the newswire adding a baseless claim that there have been “violent confrontations” over huge collections of ‘Pride’ and transgender themed apparel in stores, including some with Satanist imagery.

It’s been the story of the week. Here’s the backdrop…

Target Becomes The Latest Target Of Anti-Woke Boycott As It Sells ‘Satanist Pride’ LGBTQ+ Products For Kids

Cotton Blasts “Target’s Partnership With Satanist To Push Trans Agenda On Children”

Target To Remove Satan ‘Pride’ Products; Democrat Accuses CEO Of “Selling Out LGBTQ+ Community”

As we highlighted yesterday, Target was clear in pointing out that it isn’t removing the stuff because it’s Satanist and pushing sexualisation and gender ideology on kids, but rather because they have “experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and well-being.”

The AP took it further, however, claiming that Target has seen “intense backlash from some customers including violent confrontations with its workers.”

The report was altered without notification after it was challenged by Katrina Trinko, the editor-in-chief of the Daily Signal. While the confrontations claim remains, the word “violent” has been removed.

It now reads “Target said that customers knocked down Pride displays at some stores, angrily approached workers and posted threatening videos on social media from inside the stores.”

Pointing out the deception, Trinko writes “Again, what are the specifics? What is a threatening video?” further demanding to know “What constitutes angrily approaching a worker? How many customers at how many stores knocked down Pride displays?”

It appears that one video surfaced of one person taking a part of a pride display and throwing it on the ground, which prompted gay Democratic California State Senator Scott Wiener to label it “terrorism”.

Keep reading

What are open-source seeds? Why are open-source seeds important?

Perhaps you have heard the term open-source. Maybe you heard about it within the context of software and technology as the open-source movement originated within the software development community as a means to encourage innovation and knowledge sharing. As such, the open-source concept is best-known within the technological paradigm. However, the essence of open-source can be applicable across practically all fields and sectors. 

At the most basic level, open-source means that a technology or process is made freely available for modification and redistribution. It is common practice for one or more individuals or groups to work together to develop and refine the technology. Such distribution and organizational structures are in contrast to presently common economic models where a single entity works to create a product or process and retains exclusive ownership of the output (although the right to use the product or process can be sold). 

The characteristic of allowing participants to edit and change open-source products is also contrary to conventional production practices. In a sense, this suggests that open-source products belong not to one single entity or person but to the wider community that has contributed to the realization of that product. This organizational structure contrasts common economic standards where property rights are clearly defined (which helps to clarify the principal-agent dilemma). 

Keep reading