Canada To Censor “Hurtful” Comments About Politicians, Implement Internet Kill-Switch

…but, constituents to remain fair game for abuse from party apparatchiks.

A colleague forwarded me the text of an article from Blackrocks Reporter, which covers Canadian politics from Ottawa, our capitol.

It’s a report on Federal Heritage Minister Steven Guibeault’s ongoing vendetta against non-conforming political speech on the internet, in which he’s calling for censorship of “hurtful” comments against politicians and implementation of an internet killswitch to facilitate it.

Blackrocks is behind a paywall, permit me to quote it here:

Federal internet censors should target hurtful words against politicians, says Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault. The Minister added pending regulations may include an internet kill switch to block websites deemed hurtful, but called it a “nuclear” option.

“We have seen too many examples of public officials retreating from public service due to the hateful online content targeted towards themselves or even their families,” said Guilbeault.  “I have seen firsthand alongside other Canadians the damaging effects harmful content has on our families, our values and our institutions. As a dad and a stepdad to six kids, I know more can and should be done to create a safer online environment.”

Guilbeault made his remarks in a podcast sponsored by Canada 2020, an Ottawa think tank affiliated with the Liberal Party. Legislation to censor internet content will be introduced shortly, he said.

“I am confident we can get this adopted,” said Guilbeault. “Once the legislation is adopted, clearly creating a new body, a new regulator like that in Canada, would take some time.”’

The same story is covered here by the Post Millienial (the rest of Canada’s “approved media”, as in the ones who received hundreds of millions in tax breaks and subsidies from the Federal Government in the run up to the last election, are not giving it a lot of airtime for some reason).

Keep reading

What Is The Internet Of Bodies? And How Is It Changing Our World?

What is the Internet of Bodies (IoB)?

When the Internet of Things (IoT) connects with your body, the result is the Internet of Bodies (IoB). The Internet of Bodies (IoB) is an extension of the IoT and basically connects the human body to a network through devices that are ingested, implanted, or connected to the body in some way. Once connected, data can be exchanged, and the body and device can be remotely monitored and controlled.

There are three generations of Internet of Bodies that include:

·        Body external: These are wearable devices such as Apple Watches or Fitbits that can monitor our health.

·        Body internal: These include pacemakers, cochlear implants, and digital pills that go inside our bodies to monitor or control various aspects of our health.

·        Body embedded: The third generation of the Internet of Bodies is embedded technology where technology and the human body are melded together and have a real-time connection to a remote machine.  

Progress in wireless connectivity, materials, and tech innovation is allowing implantable medical devices (IMD) to scale and be viable in many applications.

Keep reading

Unreleased Federal Report Concludes ‘No Evidence’ that Free Speech Online ‘Causes Hate Crimes’

Freedom of speech on the internet did not lead to a rise in “hate crimes,” according to a report sent from the U.S. Department of Commerce to Congress in January — a report that has yet to appear on any government website.

Breitbart News has obtained a copy of the report, which is published in full below. But sources close to the government say they are baffled as to why it wasn’t released publicly after being sent to Congress.

The report was prepared by the Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is responsible for advising the President on all matters related to telecommunication and the internet.

It was drafted to revise the findings of a previous report from NTIA in 1993 titled The Role of Telecommunications in Hate Crimes. Although it was prepared under the Trump administration, the request to revise the report came from the 116th Congress, which was controlled by a 35-seat Democrat majority in the House and only a slim Republican majority in the Senate.

The 1993 report is still publicly available on the web. But the latest revision to its findings is not.

Keep reading

Judge “Disturbed” To Learn Google Tracks “Incognito” Users, Demands Answers

A US District Judge in San Jose, California says she was “disturbed” over Google’s data collection practices, after learning that the company still collects and uses data from users in its Chrome browser’s so-called ‘incognito’ mode – and has demanded an explanation “about what exactly Google does,” according to Bloomberg.

In a class-action lawsuit that describes the company’s private browsing claims as a “ruse” – and “seeks $5,000 in damages for each of the millions of people whose privacy has been compromised since June of 2016,” US District Judge Lucy Koh said she finds it “unusual” that the company would make the “extra effort” to gather user data if it doesn’t actually use the information for targeted advertising or to build user profiles.

Keep reading

This extension lets you know when a website is secretly phoning home to Big Tech

Want to see Big Tech’s monopoly over the internet? There is a browser extension that blocks any website that sends requests to IP addresses owned by the four Big Tech companies, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Facebook. If you use the extension just for a few hours, you will realize the modern internet is almost impossible to use without these companies.

To prove Big Tech’s monopoly, the Economic Security Project developed a browser extension called the Big Tech Detective.

Available on Chromium browsers and Mozilla’s Firefox, the extension tracks requests sent by websites and what companies the requests are sent to. You can configure the extension to block websites that send requests to the four Big Tech companies. A red pop-up will appear with information on the requests so you can get an idea of what is being requested.

Keep reading

UPDATE: Hasbro Keeps ‘Mr.’ Potato Head, The ‘Modern Makeover’ Of ‘Gender-Neutral’ Name Will Not Happen

Hasbro revealed Thursday that it was renaming Mr. Potato head toy a ‘gender-neutral’ name and the Mr./Mrs. ‘pronouns’ will be dropped from the toy’s characters. This change was set to appear in the fall and Hasbro thought after 70 years it needed a ‘modern makeover’

Now Hasbro has decided to announce again that the ‘Mr. Potato Head’ will not be going anywhere as well as Mr. and Mrs. will remain as their own characters. It is more obvious now when the first announcement happened, the company wanted to test the waters as to how the internet would react.

Keep reading

Congress Escalates Pressure on Tech Giants to Censor More, Threatening the First Amendment

For the third time in less than five months, the U.S. Congress has summoned the CEOs of social media companies to appear before them, with the explicit intent to pressure and coerce them to censor more content from their platforms. On March 25, the House Energy and Commerce Committee will interrogate Twitter’s Jack Dorsey, Facebooks’s Mark Zuckerberg and Google’s Sundar Pichai at a hearing which the Committee announced will focus “on misinformation and disinformation plaguing online platforms.”

The Committee’s Chair, Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), and the two Chairs of the Subcommittees holding the hearings, Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), said in a joint statement that the impetus was “falsehoods about the COVID-19 vaccine” and “debunked claims of election fraud.” They argued that “these online platforms have allowed misinformation to spread, intensifying national crises with real-life, grim consequences for public health and safety,” adding: “This hearing will continue the Committee’s work of holding online platforms accountable for the growing rise of misinformation and disinformation.”

House Democrats have made no secret of their ultimate goal with this hearing: to exert control over the content on these online platforms. “Industry self-regulation has failed,” they said, and therefore “we must begin the work of changing incentives driving social media companies to allow and even promote misinformation and disinformation.” In other words, they intend to use state power to influence and coerce these companies to change which content they do and do not allow to be published.

Keep reading