• Tweet2Doom sur Twitter : « ROOT node for Doom Shareware 1.9 Read the instructions in the images below. » / Twitter

    Bot Twitter permettant de jouer à Doom sur Twitter. Pour y jouer, il suffit d’indiquer la séquence de touches pressées, le bot génère une partie de Doom en conséquence, générant une vidéo de la partie en guise de réponse.

    #jeu_vidéo #jeux_vidéo #twitter #jeu_vidéo_doom #bot

  • In article assez incroyable sur un secteur économique dont je ne soupçonnais pas l’existence, celui des #sneakerbots, ces programmes informatiques qui vont automatiquement essayer d’acheter des baskets. En effet, certaines sociétés fabriquent des baskets en édition limitée. Le principe est de lancer le sneakerbot sur le site Web de vente en ligne, de rafler toutes les baskets puis de les revendre plus cher. Malgré les efforts des vendeurs pour ralentir ces programmes, les acheteurs humains ne peuvent pas lutter. Cela rapporte tellement qu’il existe un marché du sneakerbot, avec différents modèles, gérés par différents groupes. « seulement 100 personnes par mois obtiennent un accès à CyberAIO, un bot populaire tout en un – il est apprécié pour sa capacité à gérer différents types de détaillants en ligne, contrairement à des logiciels spécialisés uniquement pour Nike ou encore pour les sites supportés par Shopify, comme Kith, Bape et Alife. »


  • L’extractivisme en récits

    À propos de : Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, Friction : délires et faux-semblants de la globalité, La Découverte,. Pourquoi le #capitalisme est-il si chaotique ? demande Anna Tsing depuis les montagnes de Bornéo saccagées par l’exploitation. Aborder les connexions globales et les idéaux universalistes comme de puissantes mises en récit permet de comprendre et de résister.

    #International #nature #écologie

  • Elizabeth Blackwell ou la botanique comme instrument de libération | Le blog de Gallica

    Elizabeth Blackwell voit le jour en 1707 dans une famille de marchands d’Aberdeen et elle reçoit une bonne éducation. Elle épouse en secret son cousin Alexander Blackwell (1709-1747) et ils partent s’installer à Londres. Son mari ouvre une imprimerie sur le Strand, mais ses dettes le conduisent droit à la prison de Highgate où il doit purger une peine de deux ans d’emprisonnement. Elizabeth Blackwell, qui a reçu des leçons de dessin et de peinture, ne se laisse pas abattre : elle décide de tout faire pour réunir la somme qui permettra de libérer son mari.

    #illustration #botanique #femme

  • Immigration Enforcement and the Afterlife of the Slave Ship

    Coast Guard techniques for blocking Haitian asylum seekers have their roots in the slave trade. Understanding these connections can help us disentangle immigration policy from white nationalism.

    Around midnight in May 2004, somewhere in the Windward Passage, one of the Haitian asylum seekers trapped on the flight deck of the U.S. Coast Guard’s USCGC Gallatin had had enough.

    He arose and pointed to the moon, whispering in hushed tones. The rest of the Haitians, asleep or pretending to be asleep, initially took little notice. That changed when he began to scream. The cadence of his words became erratic, furious—insurgent. After ripping his shirt into tatters, he gestured wildly at the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) watchstanders on duty.

    I was one of them.

    His eyes fixed upon mine. And he slowly advanced toward my position.

    I stood fast, enraptured by his lone defiance, his desperate rage. Who could blame him? Confinement on this sunbaked, congested, malodorous flight deck would drive anyone crazy—there were nearly 300 people packed together in a living space approximately 65 feet long and 35 feet wide. We had snatched him and his compatriots from their overloaded sailing vessel back in April. They had endured week after week without news about the status of their asylum claims, about what lay in store for them.

    Then I got scared. I considered the distinct possibility that, to this guy, I was no longer me, but a nameless uniform, an avatar of U.S. sovereignty: a body to annihilate, a barrier to freedom. I had rehearsed in my mind how such a contingency might play out. We were armed only with nonlethal weapons—batons and pepper spray. The Haitians outnumbered us 40 to 1. Was I ready? I had never been in a real fight before. Now a few of the Haitian men were standing alert. Were they simply curious? Was this their plan all along? What if the women and children joined them?

    Lucky for me, one of the meanest devils on the watch intervened on my behalf. He charged toward us, stepping upon any Haitians who failed to clear a path. After a brief hand-to-hand struggle, he subdued the would-be rebel, hauled him down to the fantail, and slammed his head against the deck. Blood ran from his face. Some of the Haitians congregated on the edge of the flight deck to spectate. We fastened the guy’s wrists with zip ties and ordered the witnesses to disperse. The tension in his body gradually dissipated.

    After fifteen minutes, the devil leaned down to him. “Are you done? Done making trouble?” His silence signified compliance.

    Soon after, the Haitians were transferred to the custody of the Haitian Coast Guard. When we arrived in the harbor of Port-au-Prince, thick plumes of black smoke rose from the landscape. We were witnessing the aftermath of the CIA-orchestrated February coup against President Jean-Bertrand Aristide and the subsequent invasion of the country by U.S. Marines under the auspices of international “peacekeeping.” Haiti was at war.

    None of that mattered. Every request for asylum lodged from our boat had been rejected. Every person returned to Haiti. No exceptions.

    The Gallatin left the harbor. I said goodbye to Port-au-Prince. My first patrol was over.

    Out at sea, I smoked for hours on the fantail, lingering upon my memories of the past months. I tried to imagine how the Haitians would remember their doomed voyage, their detention aboard the Gallatin, their encounters with us—with me. A disquieting intuition repeated in my head: the USCG cutter, the Haitians’ sailing vessel, and European slave ships represented a triad of homologous instances in which people of African descent have suffered involuntary concentration in small spaces upon the Atlantic. I dreaded that I was in closer proximity to the enslavers of the past, and to the cops and jailors of the present, than I ever would be to those Haitians.

    So, that night, with the butt of my last cigarette, I committed to cast my memories of the Haitians overboard. In the depths of some unmarked swath of the Windward Passage, I prayed, no one, including me, would ever find them again.

    In basic training, every recruit is disciplined to imagine how the USCG is like every other branch of the military, save one principle: we exist to save lives, and it is harder to save lives than to take them. I was never a very good sailor, but I took this principle seriously. At least in the USCG, I thought, I could evade the worst cruelties of the new War on Terror.

    Perhaps I should have done more research on the USCG’s undeclared long war against Haitian asylum seekers, in order to appreciate precisely what the oath to “defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic” would demand of me. This war had long preceded my term of enlistment. It arguably began in 1804, when the United States refused to acknowledge the newly liberated Haiti as a sovereign nation and did everything it could to insulate its slaving society from the shock waves of Haiti’s radical interpretation of universal freedom. But in our present day, it began in earnest with President Ronald Reagan’s Executive Order 12324 of 1981, also called the Haitian Migrant Interdiction Operation (HMIO), which exclusively tasked the USCG to “interdict” Haitian asylum seekers attempting to enter the United States by sea routes on unauthorized sailing vessels. Such people were already beginning to be derogatorily referred to as “boat people,” a term then borrowed (less derogatorily) into Haitian Kreyòl as botpippel.

    The enforcement of the HMIO and its subsequent incarnations lies almost entirely within the jurisdiction of federal police power acting under the authority of the executive branch’s immigration and border enforcement powers. It does not take place between nations at enmity with one another, but between vastly unequal yet allied powers. Its strategic end is to create a kind of naval blockade, a fluid maritime border around Haiti, which remains under ever-present threat of invasion by a coalition of U.S. and foreign military forces.

    Adding to its asymmetry, the “enemies” to be vanquished on the battlefield are also unconventional: they are not agents of a state, but rather noncombatant individuals who are, in one sense or another, simply acting to save their own lives. During their incarceration aboard USCG cutters, they automatically bear the legal status of “economic migrant,” a person whom authorities deem to be fleeing poverty alone and therefore by definition ineligible for asylum. The meaning of this category is defined solely by reference to its dialectical negation, the “political refugee,” a person whom authorities may (or may not) deem to have a legible asylum claim because they are fleeing state persecution on the basis of race, creed, political affiliation, or sexual orientation. These abstractions are historical artifacts of a half-baked, all-encompassing theory of preemptive deterrence: unless USCG patrols are used to place Haiti under a naval blockade, and unless botpippel are invariably denied asylum, the United States will become flooded with criminals and people who have no means of supporting themselves. By 2003 John Ashcroft and the Bush administration upped the ante, decrying botpippel to be vectors of terrorism. On January 11, 2018, President Donald Trump, during efforts to justify ending nearly all immigration and asylum, described Haiti (which he grouped with African nations) as a “shithole country” where, as he asserted several months prior, “all have AIDS.”

    Haiti is now facing another such crisis. Its president, Jovenel Moïse, having already suspended nearly all elected government save himself, refused to step down at the end of his term on February 7, 2021, despite widespread protests that have shuttered the country. Moïse’s administration is currently being propped up by criminal syndicates, but they are slipping his grasp, and kidnapping for money is now so prevalent that people are terrified to leave their homes. So far, the Biden administration’s response has not been encouraging: though it has instructed ICE to temporarily halt deportations to Haiti, naval blockades remain in force, and the U.S. State Department has expressed the opinion that Moïse should remain in office for at least another year, enforcing the sense that Haiti is once again a U.S. client state.

    With regard to the Coast Guard’s longstanding orders to block Haitians seeking asylum, the modality of killing is not straightforward, but it is intentional. It consists of snatching the Haitian enemy from their vessel, forcing them to subsist in a state of bare life, and finally abandoning them in their home country at gunpoint. Of course, many may survive the ordeal and may even attempt another journey. But especially during acute phases of armed conflict and catastrophe, it is just as likely that—whether at the behest of starvation, disease, or violence—a return to Haiti is a death sentence.

    This banal form of murder is analogous to what Ruth Wilson Gilmore offers as her definition of racism in Golden Gulag (2007): “the state sanctioned or extralegal production and exploitation of group-differentiated vulnerability to premature death.” Based on the extant documentary record, I estimate that the USCG has interdicted at least 120,000 botpippel since the HMIO of 1981 took effect. Those who fell prey to an untimely demise following deportation died because the United States, though repeatedly responsible for undermining Haitian democracy and economic stability, nonetheless refuses to acknowledge that these actions have made Haiti, for many, mortally unsafe. The true death toll will never be known. Countless botpippel have simply disappeared at sea, plunged into a gigantic watery necropolis.

    Since 2004 U.S. officials have brought their forms of border policing strategies and tactics against Haitians to bear on land-based immigration and refugee policies against non-white asylum seekers. One of the most significant technical innovations of enforcement against Haitians was the realization that by detaining them exclusively within a maritime environment, the United States could summarily classify all of them as economic migrants—whose claims for asylum de facto have no standing—and prevent them from lodging claims as political refugees, which are the only claims with any hope of success. They were thus proactively disabled from advancing a request for asylum in a U.S. federal court, with all claims instead evaluated by an INS-designated official aboard the USCG vessel. The New York Times recently reported that, since late 2009, similar techniques have been adopted by Customs and Border Control agents patrolling sea routes along the California coast, which has resulted in a notable escalation of CBP naval patrols and aerial surveillance of the region. And in fact, the USCG has cooperatively supported these efforts by sharing its infrastructure—ports, cutters, and aircraft—and its personnel with CBP. All of this has been with the aim of making sure that asylum seekers never make it to the United States, whether by land or by sea.

    The Trump administration made the most significant use of this set of innovations to date, insisting that asylum claims must be made from camps on the Mexican side of the U.S. border—and therefore automatically invalid by virtue of being limited to the status of economic migrant. Thus, hundreds of thousands of non-white asylum seekers fleeing material precariousness, yes, but also the threat of violence in the Global South are, and will continue to be, caught in carceral webs composed of ICE/CBP goon squads, ruthless INS officials, and perilous tent cities, not to mention the prison guards employed at one of the numerous semi-secret migrant detention centers operating upon U.S. soil for those few who make it across.

    From the perspective of Haitian immigrants and botpippel, this is nothing new. Thousands of their compatriots have already served time at infamous extrajudicial sites such as the Krome detention center in Miami (1980–present), Guantanamo Bay (1991–93), and, most often, the flight decks of USCG cutters. They know that the USCG has long scoured the Windward Passage for Haitians in particular, just as ICE/CBP goon squads now patrol U.S. deserts, highways, and city streets for the undocumented. And they know that Trump’s fantasy of building a “Great Wall” on the U.S.–Mexico border is not so farfetched, because the USCG continues to enforce a maritime one around Haiti.

    The Biden administration has inherited this war and its prisoners, with thousands remaining stuck in legal limbo while hoping—in most cases, without hope—that their asylum claims will advance. Opening alternative paths to citizenship and declaring an indefinite moratorium on deportations would serve as foundations for more sweeping reforms in the future. But the core challenge in this political moment is to envision nothing less than the total decriminalization and demilitarization of immigration law enforcement.

    Botpippel are not the first undocumented people of African descent to have been policed by U.S. naval forces. The legal architecture through which the USCG legitimates the indefinite detention and expulsion of Haitian asylum seekers reaches back to U.S. efforts to suppress the African slave trade, outlawed by Congress in 1807, though domestic slaveholding would continue, and indeed its trade would be not only safeguarded but bolstered by this act.

    This marked a decisive turning point in the history of maritime policing vis-à-vis immigration. Per the Slave Trade Acts of 1794 and 1800, the United States already claimed jurisdiction over U.S. citizens and U.S. vessels engaged in the slave trade within U.S. territorial borders (contemporaneously understood as extending three nautical miles into the ocean). By 1808, however, the United States sought to extend its jurisdiction over the sea itself. Slaver vessels operating around “any river, port, bay, or harbor . . . within the jurisdictional limits of the United States” as well as “on the high seas” were deemed illegal and subject to seizure without compensation. The actual physical distance from U.S. soil that these terms referred to was left purposefully vague. To board a given vessel, a Revenue Cutter captain only had to suspect, rather than conclusively determine, that that vessel eventually intended to offload “international” (i.e., non-native) enslaved people into the United States. The 1819 iteration of the law further stipulated that U.S. jurisdiction included “Africa, or elsewhere.” Hence, in theory, after 1819, the scope of U.S. maritime police operations was simply every maritime space on the globe.

    Revenue Cutter Service captains turned the lack of any description in the 1808 law or its successive iterations about what should be done with temporarily masterless slaves into an advantage. They did what they would have done to any fugitive Black person at the time: indefinitely detain them until higher authorities determined their status, and thereby foreclose the possibility of local Black people conspiring to shuttle them to freedom. During confinement, captured Africans were compelled to perform labor as if they were slaves. For instance, those captured from the Spanish-flagged Antelope (1820) spent seven years toiling at a military fort in Savannah, Georgia, as well as on the local U.S. marshal’s plantation. As wards of the state, they were human only insofar as U.S. officials had a duty to force them to remain alive. Of those “rescued” from the Antelope, 120 ultimately died in captivity and 2 went missing. Following litigation, 39 survivors were sold to U.S. slaveowners to compensate Spanish and Portuguese claimants who had stakes in the Antelope and her enslaved cargo. Per the designs of the American Colonization Society, the remaining 120 Africans were freed upon condition that they be immediately deported to New Georgia, Liberia.

    This anti-Black martial abolitionism was therefore a project framed around the unification of two countervailing tendencies. While white planters consistently pushed to extend racial slavery into the southern and western frontiers, white northern financiers and abolitionists were in favor of creating the most propitious conditions for the expansion of free white settlements throughout America’s urban and rural milieus. Black people were deemed unfit for freedom not only because of their supposed inborn asocial traits, but because their presence imperiled the possibility for white freedom. To actualize Thomas Jefferson’s “Empire of Liberty,” the United States required immigration policies that foreshortened Black peoples’ capacities for social reproduction and thereby re-whitened America.

    This political aim was later extended in legislation passed on February 19, 1862, which authorized President Abraham Lincoln—who intended to solve the contradictions that led to the Civil War by sending every Black person in America back to Africa—to use U.S. naval forces to capture, detain, and deport undocumented people of East Asian/Chinese descent (“coolies”) while at sea. Henceforth, “the free and voluntary emigration of any Chinese subject” to the U.S. was proscribed unless a ship captain possessed documents certified by a consular agent residing at the foreign port of departure. At the time, the principal means for Chinese emigrants to obtain authorization would have been at behest of some corporation seeking expendable, non-white laborers contractually bound to work to death in mines and on railroads on the western frontiers—Native American lands stolen through imperialist warfare. White settlers presupposed that these Asians’ residency was provisional and temporary—and then Congress codified that principle into law in 1870, decreeing that every person of East Asian/Chinese descent, anywhere in the world, was ineligible for U.S. citizenship.

    Twelve years later, An Act to Regulate Immigration (1882) played upon the notion that non-white immigration caused public disorder. Through the use of color-blind legal language, Section 2 of this law specified that the United States must only accept immigrants who were conclusively not “convict[s], lunatic[s], idiot[s], or any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge.” The burden of proof lay on non-white immigrants to prove how their racial backgrounds were not already prima facie evidence for these conditions. Section 4 also stipulated that “all foreign convicts except those convicted of political offenses, upon arrival, shall be sent back to the nations to which they belong and from whence they came.” By which means a non-white person could demonstrate the “political” character of a given conviction were cleverly left undefined.

    It was not a giant leap of imagination for the United States to apply these precedents to the maritime policing of Haitian asylum seekers in the 1980s. Nor should we be surprised that the logic of anti-Black martial abolitionism shapes present-day U.S. immigration policy.

    Political philosopher Peter Hallward estimates that paramilitary death squads executed at least a thousand supporters of Lavalas, President Aristide’s party, in the weeks following Aristide’s exile from Haiti on February 29, 2004. The first kanntè (Haitian sailing vessel) the Gallatin sighted one morning in early April had likely departed shortly thereafter.

    The first people from our ship that the Haitians met were members of the boarding team, armed with pistols, M-16s, shotguns, and zip ties. Their goal was to compel the hundred or so aboard the kanntè to surrender their vessel and allow us to deposit them on the flight deck of our ship. Negotiations can take hours. It is not uncommon for some to jump overboard, rather than allow boarding to occur uninhibited. If immediate acquiescence is not obtained, we will maneuver ourselves such that any further movement would cause the small boat to “ram” the Gallatin—an attack on a U.S. military vessel.

    On the Gallatin, we waited for uptake, outfitted with facemasks and rubber gloves. One at a time, we aided the Haitian adults to make the final step from the small boat to the deck of the cutter. We frisked them for weapons and then marched them to the fantail to undergo initial processing. Most of them appeared exhausted and confused—but compliant. Some may have already been in fear for their lives. One night aboard the USCGC Dallas, which hovered in Port-au-Prince Bay as a deportation coordination outpost and as a temporary detention site for Haitians awaiting immediate transfer to Haitian Coast Guard authorities, my friend and his shipmates asked their Kreyòl interpreter how he managed to obtain compliance from the botpippel. “I tell them you will hurt or kill them if they do not obey,” he joked, “so, of course, they listen.”

    Boarding all the Haitians took from midday until midnight. One of the last ones I helped aboard, a man dressed in a suit two sizes too large, looked into my eyes and smiled. He gently wept, clasped my hand tightly, and embraced me. I quickly pushed him off and pointed to the processing station at the fantail, leading him by the wrist to join the others. He stopped crying.

    Three things happened at the processing station. First, Haitians deposited the last of their belongings with the interpreter, ostensibly for safekeeping. Who knows if anyone got their things back. Second, a Kreyòl translator and one of the officers gave them a cursory interview about their asylum claims, all the while surrounded by armed sentries, as well as other Haitians who might pass that intelligence onto narcotics smugglers, paramilitary gangs, or state officials back in Haiti. Lastly, they received a rapid, half-assed medical examination—conducted in English. So long as they nodded, or remained silent, they passed each test and were shuffled up to the flight deck.

    We retired for the night after the boarding team set fire to the kanntè as a hazard to navigation. The Haitians probably didn’t know that this was the reason we unceremoniously torched their last hope for escape before their very eyes.

    About a week later, we found another kanntè packed with around seventy Haitians and repeated the process. Another USCG cutter transferred a hundred more over to the Gallatin. Our flight deck was reaching full capacity.

    We arrived at one kanntè too late. It had capsized. Pieces of the shattered mast and little bits of clothing and rubbish were floating around the hull. No survivors. How long had it been? Sharks were spotted circling at a short depth below the vessel.

    The Gallatin’s commanders emphasized that our mission was, at its core, humanitarian in nature. We were duty-bound to provide freshwater, food, and critical medical care. During their time aboard, Haitians would be treated as detainees and were not to be treated, or referred to, as prisoners. The use of force was circumscribed within clear rules of engagement. The Haitians were not in any way to be harmed or killed unless they directly threatened the ship or its sailors. Unnecessary violence against them could precipitate an internal review, solicit undue international criticism, and imperil the deportationist efficiency of INS officials. We were told that our batons and pepper spray were precautionary, primarily symbolic.

    It sounded like all I had to do was stand there and not screw anything up.

    Over the course of several watches, I concluded that, in fact, our job was also to relocate several crucial features of the abysmal living conditions that obtained on the kanntè onto the Gallatin’s flight deck. Though the flight deck was 80 feet by 43 feet, we blocked the edges to facilitate the crew’s movement and to create a buffer between us and the Haitians. Taking this into account, their living space was closer to 65 feet by 35 feet. For a prison population of 300 Haitians, each individual would have had only 7 feet 7 inches square to lie down and stand up. On the diagram of the eighteenth-century British slaver Brooks, the enslaved were each allocated approximately 6 feet 10 inches square, scarcely less than on the Gallatin. (Historian Marcus Rediker thinks that the Brooks diagram probably overstates the amount of space the enslaved were given.)

    Although some cutters will drape tarps over the flight deck to shield the Haitians from the unmediated effects of the sun, the Gallatin provided no such shelter. We permitted them to shower, once, in saltwater, without soap. The stench on the flight deck took on a sweet, fetid tinge.

    The only place they could go to achieve a modicum of solitude and to escape the stench was the makeshift metal toilet on the fantail. (On slave ships, solitude was found by secreting away to a hidden compartment or small boat to die alone; the “necessary tubs” that held human excrement were contained in the slave holds below deck.) They were permitted to use the toilet one at a time in the case of adults, and two at a time in the case of children and the elderly. For what was supposed to be no longer than five minutes, they had an opportunity to stretch, relax, and breathe fresh sea air. Nevertheless, these moments of respite took place under observation by the watchstander stationed at the toilet, not to mention the numerous Haitian onlookers at the rear of the flight deck.

    Despite our commanders’ reticence on the matter, the ever-present fear of revolt hovered underneath the surface of our standing orders. We were to ensure order and discipline through counterinsurgency protocols and techniques of incarceration that one might find in any U.S. prison. The military imperative aboard the Gallatin was to produce a sense of radical uncertainty and temporal disorientation in the Haitians, such that they maintain hope for an asylum claim that had already been rejected.

    In this context, there were four overlapping components to the security watch.

    The first component of the ship’s securitization was constant surveillance. We were not supposed to take our eyes off the Haitians for one moment. During the watch, we would regularly survey the flight deck for any signs of general unrest, conspiracy, or organized protest. Any minor infraction could later contribute to the eruption of a larger riot, and thus needed to be quickly identified and neutralized. We also had to observe their behavior for indications that one of them intended to jump overboard or harm another Haitian. All that said, we found a used condom one day. Surveillance is never total.

    The second was the limitation we placed on communication. We shrouded all USCG practices in a fog of secrecy. Conversing with the Haitians through anything other than hand signals and basic verbal commands was forbidden; physical contact was kept at bare minimum. Nonofficial speech among the watch was proscribed. Watchstanders were stripped of their identity, save their uniform, from which our nametags were removed. It was critical that botpippel forever be unable to identify us.

    Secrecy preemptively disabled the Haitians from collectively piecing together fragments of information about where our vessel had been, where it was now, and where it was going. Officially, the concern was that they might exploit the situation to gather intelligence about our patrol routes and pass this information to human or narcotics smugglers. We militated against their mapping out how the ship operated, its layout and complement, where living spaces and the armory were located, and so on. These were standard tactics aboard slaver vessels. As freed slave and abolitionist Olaudah Equiano observed, “When the ship we were in had got in all her cargo . . . we were all put under deck, so that we could not see how they managed the vessel.”

    On the Gallatin, the command also strove to maintain strict control over the narrative. They blocked sailors’ access to the open Internet and censored letters from home that contained news of global or domestic politics (and even just bad personal news). Knowledge of whether a particular asylum claim had failed or succeeded was hidden from all. A watchstander harboring political solidarity with—as opposed to mere empathy and pity for—the Haitians might compromise operational capacities, good judgment, and core loyalty to the USCG.

    Our third securitization strategy was to produce false knowledge of the future. The Haitians were led to believe that they were merely waiting aboard the ship because their asylum claims were still being vigorously debated by diplomatic entities in Washington. Their continued compliance was predicated on this differential of knowledge. They could not realize that they were moving in circles, being returned slowly to Haiti. If they lost all hope, we presumed they would eventually resist their intolerable conditions through violent means.

    Hence, our fourth securitization measure: USCG personnel were permitted to inflict several limited forms of physical and symbolic violence against the Haitians, not only in response to perceived noncompliance, but also as a means of averting the need to inflict even greater violence in the future.

    If it were not classified as a matter of national security, we might have a better grasp of how many times such instances occur aboard USCG vessels. I open this essay with a story of how we subdued and punished one person for resisting the rules. But it is known that punishment is sometimes inflicted on entire groups. A telling example took place on January 30, 1989, when the USCG captured the Dieu Devant with 147 Haitians aboard. One of them, Fitzroy Joseph, later reported in congressional hearings that, after they expressed a fear of being killed if returned to Haiti, USCG personnel “began wrestling with the Haitians and hitting their hands with their flashlights.” This was followed by threats to release pepper spray. Marie Julie Pierre, Joseph’s wife, corroborated his testimony, adding:

    [We were] asked at once if we feared returning to Haiti and everyone said yes we did. We said ‘down with Avril, up with Bush.’ We were threatened with tear gas but they didn’t use it. Many people were crying because they were so afraid. [Ti Jak] was hit by the officers because he didn’t want to go back. They handcuffed him. The Coast Guard grabbed others by the neck and forced them to go to the biggest boat. My older brother was also hit and treated like a chicken as they pulled him by the neck.

    Counterintuitively, our nonlethal weapons functioned as more efficient instruments of counterinsurgency than lethal weapons. Brandishing firearms might exacerbate an already tense situation in which the Haitians outnumbered the entire ship’s complement. It could also provide an opportunity for the Haitians to seize and turn our own guns against us (or one another). In contrast, losing a baton and a can of pepper spray represented a relatively minor threat to the ship’s overall security. In the event of an actual riot, the command could always mobilize armed reinforcements. From the perspective of the command, then, the first responders on watch were, to some extent, expendable. Nevertheless, sentries bearing firearms were on deck when we approached Haiti and prepared for final deportation. That is, the precise moment the Haitians realized their fate.

    Like the enslaved Africans captured by the Revenue Cutter Service, botpippel were human to us only insofar as we had to compel them, through the threat or actuality of violence, to remain alive. The Haitians ate our tasteless food and drank our freshwater—otherwise they would starve, or we might beat them for going on a hunger strike. They tended to remain silent and immobile day and night—otherwise they would invite acts of exemplary punishment upon themselves. The practices of confinement on the Gallatin represent a variant of what historian Stephanie Smallwood describes as a kind of “scientific empiricism” that developed aboard slave ships, which “prob[ed] the limits to which it is possible to discipline the body without extinguishing the life within.” Just as contemporary slavers used force to conserve human commodities for sale, so does the USCG use force to produce nominally healthy economic migrants to exchange with Haitian authorities.

    The rational utilization of limited forms of exemplary violence was an integral aspect of this carceral science. Rediker shows how slaver captains understood violence along a continuum that ranged from acceptably severe to unacceptably cruel. Whereas severity was the grounds of proper discipline as such, an act was cruel only if it led “to catastrophic results [and] sparked reactions such as mutiny by sailors or insurrection by slaves.” In turn, minor acts of kindness, such as dispensing better food or allowing slightly more free time to move above deck, were conditioned by these security imperatives. Furthermore, they exerted no appreciable change to the eventuality that the person would be sold to a slaveowner, for kindness was a self-aggrandizing ritual performance of authority that intended to lay bare the crucial imbalance of power relations at hand. This was, Rediker maintains, “as close as the owners ever came to admitting that terror was essential to running a slave ship.”

    The USCG’s undeclared long war against Haitian asylum seekers is but one front of a much longer war against people of African descent in the Americas. The entangled histories of the African slave trade and anti-Black martial abolitionism reveal how this war intimately shaped the foundations and racist intentions that underlay modern U.S. immigration and refugee policy writ large. And the Gallatin, her sailors, and the Haitians who were trapped on the flight deck, are, in some small way, now a part of this history, too.

    The Biden administration has the power to decisively end this war—indeed, every war against non-white asylum seekers. Until then, botpippel will continue to suffer the slave ships that survive into the present.


    #esclavage #héritage #migrations #contrôles_migratoires #Haïti #gardes-côtes #nationalisme_blanc #USA #Etats-Unis #migrations #frontières #asile #réfugiés #USCG #Haitian_Migrant_Interdiction_Operation (#HMIO) #botpippel #boat_people

    #modèle_australien #pacific_solution

    ping @karine4 @isskein @reka

    • Ce décret de #Reagan mentionné dans l’article rappelle farouchement la loi d’#excision_territoriale australienne :

      But in our present day, it began in earnest with President Ronald Reagan’s Executive Order 12324 of 1981, also called the Haitian Migrant Interdiction Operation (HMIO), which exclusively tasked the USCG to “interdict” Haitian asylum seekers attempting to enter the United States by sea routes on unauthorized sailing vessels. Such people were already beginning to be derogatorily referred to as “boat people,” a term then borrowed (less derogatorily) into Haitian Kreyòl as botpippel.

      Excision territoriale australienne :



      Citation tirée du livre de McAdam et Chong : « Refugees : why seeking asylum is legal and Australia’s policies are not » (p.3)

      “Successive governments (aided by much of the media) have exploited public anxieties about border security to create a rhetorical - and, ultimately, legislative - divide between the rights of so-called ’genuine’ refugees, resettled in Australia from camps and settlements abroad, and those arriving spontaneously in Australia by boat.”

  • The coloniality of planting: legacies of racism and slavery in the practice of botany - Architectural Review - The coloniality of planting legacies of racism and slavery in the practice of botany - Architectural Review.pdf

    The coloniality of planting: legacies of racismand slavery in the practice of botany

    Merci Raka #colonisation #racisme #esclavage #botanique

  • Covid-19 : des milliers de Zimbabwéens affluent en Afrique du Sud pour fuir le confinement

    Venu du Zimbabwe, le chauffeur de poids lourds Wallace Muzondiwa attend depuis quatre jours dans son camion pour entrer en Afrique du Sud, où des milliers de personnes ont afflué à la frontière pour fuir les nouvelles restrictions liées au Covid-19 dans son pays. L’afflux de personnes voulant quitter le Zimbabwe a pris de court les responsables de l’immigration au poste-frontière de Beitbridge, le deuxième plus important d’Afrique du Sud, où des foules en colère sont bloquées dans des embouteillages.« La situation est très très très chaotique », résume Wallace Muzondiwa, qui s’apprête à reprendre la route après que les autorités ont finalement accepté son test négatif au coronavirus et des papiers supplémentaires requis en rapport avec la pandémie. « La queue avance très lentement et le soleil tape très fort », se plaint-il.
    Harare a ordonné, samedi 2 janvier, un nouveau confinement sur l’ensemble du territoire en raison d’une recrudescence des cas de contamination au Covid-19. Au Zimbabwe, le nombre de cas a plus que doublé depuis novembre, atteignant 18 000. Le pays, en proie depuis le début des années 2000 à une très grave crise économique qui a provoqué l’effondrement de son système de santé, avait déjà décrété un premier confinement en mars 2020, mais ces mesures avaient été progressivement assouplies à partir de mai.
    Au poste-frontière, des voyageurs à l’air perdu se pressent avec leurs bagages, s’engouffrent dans des taxis garés le long de stands vendant des ailes de poulet grillé à emporter. Le coronavirus a compliqué le passage, déjà laborieux, de la frontière, où des poids lourds peuvent parfois attendre des jours pour régler les formalités douanières. « Ce sont les papiers qui provoquent des retards aux frontières », juge Sinki Tshangise, un chauffeur sud-africain de 44 ans qui franchit les frontières du Botswana, du Malawi, de la Zambie et du Zimbabwe depuis presque dix ans.
    Les certificats de test négatif au coronavirus ont souvent expiré avant l’arrivée au poste-frontière, contraignant les chauffeurs à se faire de nouveau tester sur la route, ajoute M. Tshangise : « Je ne pense pas pouvoir me permettre de payer de nouveaux tests à chaque fois que je dois passer une frontière. » Au poste-frontière de Beitbridge, les chauffeurs de poids lourds ont été rejoints par des foules de voyageurs faisant la queue pour des tests PCR fournis par le gouvernement sud-africain. Selon les membres du personnel soignant, qui pratiquent les tests sous une tente, l’afflux de personnes provenant du Zimbabwe depuis le début du deuxième confinement est difficile à gérer.Certains Zimbabwéens ont en outre attrapé le virus en prenant la route pour l’Afrique du Sud, selon l’infirmier Country Musekwa. De longues files d’attente se sont formées sur le seul pont qui surplombe le fleuve Limpopo, frontière naturelle entre les deux pays. « Des gens qui disent qu’ils ont été testés négatifs au Zimbabwe sont testés positifs ici parce qu’ils ont été sur le pont pendant plus de quatre jours », dit-il.


  • The Age of Instagram Face | The New Yorker

    This past summer, I booked a plane ticket to Los Angeles with the hope of investigating what seems likely to be one of the oddest legacies of our rapidly expiring decade: the gradual emergence, among professionally beautiful women, of a single, cyborgian face. It’s a young face, of course, with poreless skin and plump, high cheekbones. It has catlike eyes and long, cartoonish lashes; it has a small, neat nose and full, lush lips. It looks at you coyly but blankly, as if its owner has taken half a Klonopin and is considering asking you for a private-jet ride to Coachella. The face is distinctly white but ambiguously ethnic—it suggests a National Geographic composite illustrating what Americans will look like in 2050, if every American of the future were to be a direct descendant of Kim Kardashian West, Bella Hadid, Emily Ratajkowski, and Kendall Jenner (who looks exactly like Emily Ratajkowski). “It’s like a sexy . . . baby . . . tiger,” Cara Craig, a high-end New York colorist, observed to me recently. The celebrity makeup artist Colby Smith told me, “It’s Instagram Face, duh. It’s like an unrealistic sculpture. Volume on volume. A face that looks like it’s made out of clay.”

    Instagram, which launched as the decade was just beginning, in October, 2010, has its own aesthetic language: the ideal image is always the one that instantly pops on a phone screen. The aesthetic is also marked by a familiar human aspiration, previously best documented in wedding photography, toward a generic sameness. Accounts such as Insta Repeat illustrate the platform’s monotony by posting grids of indistinguishable photos posted by different users—a person in a yellow raincoat standing at the base of a waterfall, or a hand holding up a bright fall leaf. Some things just perform well.

    The human body is an unusual sort of Instagram subject: it can be adjusted, with the right kind of effort, to perform better and better over time. Art directors at magazines have long edited photos of celebrities to better match unrealistic beauty standards; now you can do that to pictures of yourself with just a few taps on your phone.

    Snapchat, which launched in 2011 and was originally known as a purveyor of disappearing messages, has maintained its user base in large part by providing photo filters, some of which allow you to become intimately familiar with what your face would look like if it were ten-per-cent more conventionally attractive—if it were thinner, or had smoother skin, larger eyes, fuller lips. Instagram has added an array of flattering selfie filters to its Stories feature. FaceTune, which was released in 2013 and promises to help you “wow your friends with every selfie,” enables even more precision. A number of Instagram accounts are dedicated to identifying the tweaks that celebrities make to their features with photo-editing apps. Celeb Face, which has more than a million followers, posts photos from the accounts of celebrities, adding arrows to spotlight signs of careless FaceTuning. Follow Celeb Face for a month, and this constant perfecting process begins to seem both mundane and pathological. You get the feeling that these women, or their assistants, alter photos out of a simple defensive reflex, as if FaceTuning your jawline were the Instagram equivalent of checking your eyeliner in the bathroom of the bar.

    “I think ninety-five per cent of the most-followed people on Instagram use FaceTune, easily,” Smith told me. “And I would say that ninety-five per cent of these people have also had some sort of cosmetic procedure. You can see things getting trendy—like, everyone’s getting brow lifts via Botox now. Kylie Jenner didn’t used to have that sort of space around her eyelids, but now she does.”

    Twenty years ago, plastic surgery was a fairly dramatic intervention: expensive, invasive, permanent, and, often, risky. But, in 2002, the Food and Drug Administration approved Botox for use in preventing wrinkles; a few years later, it approved hyaluronic-acid fillers, such as Juvéderm and Restylane, which at first filled in fine lines and wrinkles and now can be used to restructure jawlines, noses, and cheeks. These procedures last for six months to a year and aren’t nearly as expensive as surgery. (The average price per syringe of filler is six hundred and eighty-three dollars.) You can go get Botox and then head right back to the office.

    Ideals of female beauty that can only be met through painful processes of physical manipulation have always been with us, from tiny feet in imperial China to wasp waists in nineteenth-century Europe. But contemporary systems of continual visual self-broadcasting—reality TV, social media—have created new disciplines of continual visual self-improvement. Social media has supercharged the propensity to regard one’s personal identity as a potential source of profit—and, especially for young women, to regard one’s body this way, too. In October, Instagram announced that it would be removing “all effects associated with plastic surgery” from its filter arsenal, but this appears to mean all effects explicitly associated with plastic surgery, such as the ones called “Plastica” and “Fix Me.” Filters that give you Instagram Face will remain. For those born with assets—natural assets, capital assets, or both—it can seem sensible, even automatic, to think of your body the way that a McKinsey consultant would think about a corporation: identify underperforming sectors and remake them, discard whatever doesn’t increase profits and reorient the business toward whatever does.

    Another client is Kim Kardashian West, whom Colby Smith described to me as “patient zero” for Instagram Face. (“Ultimately, the goal is always to look like Kim,” he said.) Kardashian West, who has inspired countless cosmetically altered doppelgängers, insists that she hasn’t had major plastic surgery; according to her, it’s all just Botox, fillers, and makeup. But she also hasn’t tried to hide how her appearance has changed. In 2015, she published a coffee-table book of selfies, called “Selfish,” which begins when she is beautiful the way a human is beautiful and ends when she’s beautiful in the manner of a computer animation.

    On the way to Diamond’s office, I had passed a café that looked familiar: pale marble-topped tables, blond-wood floors, a row of Prussian-green snake plants, pendant lamps, geometrically patterned tiles. The writer Kyle Chayka has coined the term “AirSpace” for this style of blandly appealing interior design, marked by an “anesthetized aesthetic” and influenced by the “connective emotional grid of social media platforms”—these virtual spaces where hundreds of millions of people learn to “see and feel and want the same things.” WeWork, the collapsing co-working giant—which, like Instagram, was founded in 2010—once convinced investors of a forty-seven-billion-dollar vision in which people would follow their idiosyncratic dreams while enmeshed in a global network of near-indistinguishable office spaces featuring reclaimed wood, neon signs, and ficus trees.

    #Instagram #Chirurgie_esthétique #Botox #Kim_Kardashian #Oppression_physique

  • ❓ SCOOP : Ils ont FABRIQUÉ l’opinion publique de toute pièce • Le Petit Point d’ ? - 27 novembre 2020

    Ca fait un peu complotisme anti complotistes ou complot dans le complot et je sais pas encore ce que donne les suites de cette histoire révélée il y a une semaine.
    Si le mec dit vrai, des bots et automatismes de référencements ont été utilisé au bénéfice de Raoult
    – directement par le service de com de Raoult
    – par les #Qanon qui se servent de Raoult pour s’implanté en France. Il pourrait y avoir aussi les anthroposophes antivax et autres idéologues new age

  • Vie en ligne : « Il n’est pas normal que tout site Web avec une nouvelle idée se trouve à la merci de Google Search »

    Le professeur de communication Charles Cuvelliez et le cryptographe Jean-Jacques Quisquater expliquent, dans une tribune au « Monde », comment Google est parvenu à protéger de toute concurrence son moteur de recherche.

    Tribune. Dans son combat contre les GAFA (Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon), le ministère américain de la justice a décidé de cibler Google Search, le moteur de recherche de la firme de Mountain View. Le rapport de la commission antitrust du Congrès américain lui en donne les clés, à savoir pourquoi aucun concurrent à Google ne verra jamais le jour sans un coup de pouce réglementaire ?

    La commission distingue deux types de moteurs de recherche : horizontaux et verticaux.

    Les premiers ont une vocation généraliste.

    Les seconds sont spécialisés : ils ne cherchent que dans une catégorie donnée de contenu, comme des images (Dreamstime), le transport aérien et les voyages (Expedia). Les moteurs de recherche monétisent leur service par le placement de publicité. Ils ne facturent pas l’utilisateur. Google est leader sur les moteurs horizontaux, avec 81 % de parts de marché sur les ordinateurs et 91 % sur les mobiles. Bing, le moteur de Microsoft, n’a que 6 % de parts de marché, Yahoo 3 % et Duckduckgo 1 % aux Etats-Unis.

    Le fonctionnement d’un moteur de recherche comprend trois activités distinctes.

    Il y a d’abord le crawl : parcourir Internet avec un robot pour collecter une copie de toutes les pages Web qu’il peut trouver. Puis ce matériel est indexé et organisé en une carte géante consultable en temps réel. Enfin vient l’indexation qui consiste à organiser l’information dans un format adéquat et dans des bases de données pour la dernière étape : la réponse aux requêtes des utilisateurs, de manière pertinente. Ces dernières ne sont que la pointe visible de l’iceberg.
    Article réservé à nos abonnés Lire aussi Concurrence : « Ni Apple ni Google n’avaient besoin de ces comportements prédateurs »

    L’indexation a un coût plus élevé et exige une infrastructure importante. C’est tout Internet ou quasiment qui s’y retrouve. Google a été le premier à l’indexer en entier. Son algorithme, PageRank, le lui impose : plus il cherche, plus les résultats sont adaptés. PageRank part du principe que les liens dans une page Web vers un autre site Web sont le meilleur critère pour détecter le contenu le plus pertinent.

    Retour de la pertinence

    Qui mieux que celui qui a conçu le site A et y a placé des liens vers le site B peut identifier que le site B a le contenu en adéquation par rapport à ce qu’il annonce sur son propre site ? C’est bien plus efficace que de répertorier indépendamment le site A et le site B et de les indexer. Google Search a donc intérêt à naviguer toujours plus dans tout Internet en suivant les renvois de site en site.

    Jusqu’ici, rien de grave : c’est l’avantage du premier arrivé sur le marché avec une innovation. Mais les grands sites Web ne se laissent plus indexer par n’importe qui. Se faire palper par trop de robots, c’est du trafic inutile, sauf si c’est celui de Google que tout le monde consulte. Bonne chance alors à un nouveau venu avec son moteur de recherche et ses robots, qui seront bloqués !

    C’est à un point tel que Yahoo et Duckduckgo sont obligés d’acheter un accès à l’index de Google. Seuls Bing, le moteur de recherche de Microsoft, a aussi l’index de tout Internet (mais sa taille est trois à cinq fois moins grande).

    Un second avantage concurrentiel irrattrapable par la concurrence, c’est la manière dont les usagers réagissent à la présentation des résultats de Google Search, sur quels liens ils ont cliqué. C’est un précieux retour de la pertinence des résultats présentés par Google. Il l’utilise ensuite dans son algorithme. C’est encore plus vrai pour les requêtes les plus rares. Savoir que ce lien-là est pertinent pour cette recherche si particulière et y laisser s’engouffrer PageRank pour collecter de là encore plus de contenu spécialisé, voilà un autre secret de la performance de Google.
    Google paie Apple

    Un troisième avantage concurrentiel est le placement par défaut du moteur de recherche de Google, tant dans Android que chez Apple !

    Pour le premier, c’est une condition pour placer les autres outils de Google si prisés (Gmail, Youtube).

    Quant à Apple, Google lui paie 12 milliards de dollars (environ 10,15 milliards d’euros) pour qu’il soit le moteur de recherche par défaut, une preuve s’il en est de l’avantage stratégique d’être pré-installé. Apple a accéléré le développement de son propre moteur de recherche pour n’être pas emporté dans la tourmente des poursuites du ministère américain de la justice.

    Google Chrome, le navigateur, propose bien évidemment Google Search par défaut. Ce dernier incite en plus l’utilisateur à installer Google Chrome. Il a 51 % de parts de marché. Safari, le navigateur d’Apple, aussi avec Google Search par défaut, occupe 31 % de parts de marché. Il ne reste plus grand-chose.

    Le quatrième défi qui se poserait aux audacieux concurrents de Google Search concerne les petits plus que ce dernier offre désormais à la présentation des résultats. Ce sont les cartes qui sont proposées quand on tape une adresse, la présentation de la fréquentation du magasin qu’on cherchait, les images, un cadre explicatif sur la droite de l’écran à propos d’une ville, de l’organisme qu’on recherche, les réponses rapides à des questions pratiques sans devoir cliquer sur rien (une perte de trafic pour le site dont le contenu a été emprunté à cet effet) : un nouvel entrant aurait du pain sur la planche pour répéter tout cela.


    Comme l’a montré la commission antitrust du Congrès américain, le salut ne viendra pas des moteurs de recherche verticaux. Ils ont besoin d’un accès à des données et à des ressources spécialisées, comme les données de vols pour les sites de réservation de voyages ou de billets d’avion. Les moteurs de recherche basés sur des recommandations ont, eux, besoin des interactions des usagers. En revanche, ils ne doivent pas indexer le Web. Mais ces moteurs doivent attirer des utilisateurs qui les trouvent par… Google Search.

    Ces moteurs de recherche verticaux ont avoué à la commission dépendre de Google pour 80 % à 95 % de leur trafic. Yelp, spécialisé dans la recherche locale, avait vu son contenu aspiré par Google pour son nouveau service vertical « Google Local ». Yelp a demandé à Google de retirer son contenu, mais Google lui a répondu que le seul moyen était de délister Yelp.

    Des documents ont prouvé que Google ajustait son algorithme de recherche de façon à privilégier ses propres services verticaux qu’il a commencé à développer dès 2005. Il avait identifié que la relation à long terme que ces sites pouvaient créer avec les utilisateurs allait le priver de trafic sur le long terme, même si sur le court terme, c’était l’inverse.

    L’algorithme de Google impose même une pénalité aux sites dits « de mauvaise qualité », comme, par hasard, le site de Kelkoo. Comme le disait un témoin, il n’est pas normal que tout nouveau site Web avec une nouvelle idée qui aurait réussi aux premiers temps d’Internet se trouve à la merci de Google Search qui peut le délister sous un quelconque prétexte et le copier sans même chercher à atteindre la même qualité. La moitié des clicks dans Google Search atterrirait sur des sites de… Google.

    Charles Cuvelliez (Professeur à l’Ecole polytechnique de l’université libre de Bruxelles) et Jean-Jacques Quisquater (Professeur à l’Ecole polytechnique de Louvain, université de Louvain et au Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

    #Apple #Google #Microsoft #Altaba/Yahoo ! #DoJ #DuckDuckGo #Bing #Expedia #Gmail #GoogleSearch #Kelkoo #Yelp #YouTube #Android #Chrome #PageRank #Safari #domination #algorithme (...)

    ##Altaba/Yahoo_ ! ##bot

  • Social Media Conversations in Support of Herd Immunity are Driven by Bots – Federation Of American Scientists

    Approximately half of the profiles pushing the case for herd immunity are artificial accounts. These bot or bot-like accounts are generally characterized as engaging in abnormally high levels of retweets and low content diversity.
    The high level of bot-like behavior attributed to support for the Great Barrington Declaration on social media indicates the conversation is manipulated

  • Face à la haine en ligne, « l’État a confié la gestion de la liberté d’expression aux plateformes capitalistes »

    Le gouvernement ressort les dispositions de la loi Avia censés renforcer la lutte contre les contenus haineux sur internet. Ces mesures ont pourtant été censurées par le Conseil constitutionnel en juin, car elles portent atteinte à la liberté d’expression. Explications avec Arthur Messaud, juriste à La Quadrature du Net. Depuis l’attentat de Conflans, le gouvernement cherche à relancer la loi « Avia » (du nom de la députée LREM auteure du projet de loi, Lætitia Avia), contre les contenus haineux et (...)

    #bot #algorithme #manipulation #technologisme #modération #LoiAvia #LaQuadratureduNet #ConseilConstitutionnel-FR #Facebook #Twitter (...)


    • C’est Pharos qui avait demandé la censure d’Indymedia, donc pour la censure politique, a priori, ça marche. Mais pour les signalements des messages haineux, ils ne servent pas à grand-chose. Actuellement, sur la modération des contenus en France, l’État a tout délégué aux plateformes étatsuniennes. Des juges sont parfois saisis, mais #Pharos, ce n’est pas la justice. Le droit est construit pour que Twitter, Facebook et les autres modèrent pour le compte de l’État. Ces plateformes privées font donc à la fois office de #police et de juge...

      #gafam #loi_Avia

  • Cyber Command has sought to disrupt the world’s largest botnet, hoping to reduce its potential impact on the election

    In recent weeks, the U.S. military has mounted an operation to temporarily disrupt what is described as the world’s largest botnet — one used also to drop ransomware, which officials say is one of the top threats to the 2020 election. U.S. Cyber Command’s campaign against the Trickbot botnet, an army of at least 1 million hijacked computers run by Russian-speaking criminals, is not expected to permanently dismantle the network, said four U.S. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity (...)

    #Intel #Microsoft #DoD #ransomware #spyware #bot #criminalité #hacking #élections


  • Haine en ligne : ils veulent lutter autrement que les GAFAM

    Les géants du net ont multiplié les initiatives pour lutter contre haine et désinformation cet été. Comptes bloqués, vidéos censurées, labels signalant les « médias affiliés à un État ». Mais pour les promoteurs de l’internet libre, le problème est bien plus profond. Tour d’horizon de leurs solutions. YouTube, Twitter, Facebook... Les grandes plateformes n’hésitent plus à intervenir désormais lorsqu’un contenu ne respecte pas les règles du réseau. L’ex humoriste Dieudonné en a fait les frais cet été, banni de (...)

    #Google #Facebook #Instagram #Twitter #YouTube #bot #algorithme #manipulation #censure #modération #GAFAM (...)


  • YouTube a doublé la suppression de vidéos durant la pandémie

    La plate-forme américaine d’hébergement de vidéos en ligne s’est appuyée sur ses systèmes automatisés pour modérer le site et a préféré supprimer trop de vidéos que pas assez. Jamais YouTube n’avait supprimé autant de vidéos en un trimestre : 11,4 millions de vidéos ont été modérées par la plate-forme entre avril et juin 2020, a révélé l’entreprise américaine détenue par Google. A titre de comparaison, 6,1 millions de vidéos avaient été supprimées lors des trois premiers mois de l’année 2020. Pour justifier ces (...)

    #Google #YouTube #algorithme #bot #censure #modération

  • Episode 1 : What is a Dirt Box ?

    Albert, Liz, and Ali outline the horrifying ways in which law enforcement has been spying on protesters and political dissidents throughout history and, most recently, the George Floyd protests in New York City. Plus, RoboCop holds up, but in more ways than you think.

    #bot #activisme #vidéo-surveillance #écoutes #surveillance

  • Les deux visages de la censure, par Félix Tréguer

    En France, le Conseil constitutionnel a invalidé le 7 juin 2020 l’essentiel de la loi Avia, un texte qui organisait la censure extrajudiciaire d’Internet sous l’égide du gouvernement et des grandes plates-formes numériques. Cette décision n’est cependant pas de nature à remettre en cause la relation multiséculaire entre l’État et le capitalisme informationnel. En ce 12 novembre 2018 se tient, dans la grande salle de conférences de l’Organisation des Nations unies pour l’éducation, la science et la (...)

    #Europol #Google #Microsoft #Amazon #bot #censure #législation #CloudAct #CloudComputing #LoiAvia (...)


  • Une mafia assiège World of Warcraft Classic avec des bots pour vous faire dépenser de l’argent

    Blizzard, l’éditeur de WoW, a banni 74 000 comptes de bots. mais peine à endiguer le phénomène, qui bouscule le fonctionnement même du jeu et lui fait perdre des clients. Le jeu World of Warcraft Classic a un gros problème de bots. Des personnages automatisés accaparent les ressources du monde virtuel et contrôlent l’économie du jeu. Comparés à une mafia par les joueurs, ils s’accordent pour fixer des prix au-dessus de la normale à l’hôtel des ventes, la plateforme de vente et d’achat d’objets virtuels (...)

    #Blizzard #bot #jeu #criminalité #manipulation


  • Victory ! French High Court Rules That Most of Hate Speech Bill Would Undermine Free Expression

    Paris, France—In a victory for the free speech rights of French citizens, France’s highest court today struck down core provisions of a bill meant to curb hate speech, holding they would unconstitutionally sweep up legal speech. The decision comes as some governments across the globe, in seeking to stop hateful, violent, and extremist speech online, are considering overbroad measures that would silence legitimate speech. The French Supreme Court said the bill’s requirements—that online posts, (...)

    #bot #censure #LoiAvia #SocialNetwork #EFF

  • Director of science at Kew: it’s time to decolonise botanical collections

    In my own field of research, you can see an imperialist view prevail. Scientists continue to report how new species are “discovered” every year, species that are often already known and used by people in the region – and have been for thousands of years.

    Scientists have appropriated indigenous knowledge and downplayed its depth and complexity. The first inhabitants of Brazil and the first users of plants in Australia often remained unnamed, unrecognised, and uncompensated. They are quite literally invisible in history. This needs to change.

    #botanique #décolonisation

  • The (non)sense of online advertising : when the numbers don’t add up

    The digital advertising industry, worth hundreds of billions of dollars annually, is often plagued by widespread fraud, dubious metrics, and adblockers. Turns out that in a world of maths and numbers, measuring anything accurately is almost impossible. On 29 January 2017, the American online advertising world congregated at the upmarket Diplomat Beach Resort in Hollywood Beach, Florida. The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) had invited 1,000 industry leaders to discuss the future of (...)

    #Adobe #GlaxoSmithKline #Google #InteractiveAdvertisingBureau-IAB #Microsoft #Motorola #Procter&Gamble #Verizon #Amazon #Facebook #YouTube #AdBlock #bot #consommation #consentement #fraude #bénéfices #publicité (...)

    ##Procter&Gamble ##publicité ##AT&T