country:new zealand

  • Attacks by White Extremists Are Growing. So Are Their Connections. - The New York Times

    In a manifesto posted online before his attack, the gunman who killed 50 last month in a rampage at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, said he drew inspiration from white extremist terrorism attacks in Norway, the United States, Italy, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

    His references to those attacks placed him in an informal global network of white extremists whose violent attacks are occurring with greater frequency in the West.

    An analysis by The New York Times of recent terrorism attacks found that at least a third of white extremist killers since 2011 were inspired by others who perpetrated similar attacks, professed a reverence for them or showed an interest in their tactics.

    The connections between the killers span continents and highlight how the internet and social media have facilitated the spread of white extremist ideology and violence.

    In one instance, a school shooter in New Mexico corresponded with a gunman who attacked a mall in Munich. Altogether, they killed 11 people.

    #extrême_droite #agression #terrorisme #cartographie #visualisation

  • Facebook va censurer les vidéos en direct suite à l’attaque de Christchurch.

    Facebook finally responds to New Zealand on Christchurch attack | Technology | The Guardian

    Zuckerberg still has not commented publicly on the attack, nor on Facebook’s role in amplifying the reach of the act of terror.

    The potential restrictions on livestreaming would be based on “factors such as prior Community Standards violations”, Sandberg wrote. A spokeswoman for Facebook declined to comment on whether the Christchurch shooter would have been barred from live-streaming if such a policy had been in place, citing a request from New Zealand police “not to go into specifics” while the investigation continues.

    Facebook is also “investing in research to build better technology to quickly identify edited versions of violent videos and images and prevent people from re-sharing these versions”, Sandberg wrote.

  • Des féministes musulmanes apprécient peu de voir la PM de Nouvelle Zélande voilée.

    New Zealand women face praise and protests for donning the ...,Jpeg/jpeg_q/70/resize_w/1100

    “When we see non-Muslim women wear the hijab in solidarity of Muslim women it is very ironic and contradictory because our experience with the hijab is not empowering or uplifting in the political sense,” said Maryam Lee, a Muslim women’s rights advocate and author in Malaysia who chooses to not wear a hijab.

    “I wish she (Ardern) hadn’t (wore it) but I understand where she is coming from because she is not a Muslim and not from a Muslim majority country.”

    Women across New Zealand donned headscarves last Friday as part of a Head Scarf for Harmony campaign started by a doctor who heard about a woman too scared to go out as she felt her headscarf would make her a target for terrorism. “Why is hijab a ’show of solidarity’ symbol for New Zealand terror attack victims,” wrote Twitter user @RamaNewDelhi. “A key part of my feminism is to question shackles that religion imposes selectively on women.”

  • An Outsider’s View on the Cryptocurrency and #blockchain Landscapes in New Zealand

    Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) is a new development in computer science. It enables transparency and trust through immutability and visibility as recorded data can be retrieved online. Furthermore, it can eliminate the need for a third party and can potentially alter the current relationships held between people, businesses and governments. In New Zealand, the opportunities are abundant. Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain technology are generally well-received in the sovereign island country.In this article, we will explore the general outlook of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology in New Zealand.Support from New Zealand Government and AuthoritiesA report from Callaghan Innovation, NZ’s innovation agency, shows immense support from the New Zealand government. They recognize the (...)

    #blockchain-new-zealand #blockchain-technology #new-zealand

  • Newspapers help to radicalise far right, says UK anti-terror chief

    Britain’s counter-terrorism chief has said far-right terrorists are being radicalised by mainstream newspaper coverage, while also criticising the hypocrisy of outlets such as Mail Online, which uploaded the “manifesto” of the gunman in the Christchurch terror attack.

    Neil Basu, one of Britain’s top police officers, said it was ironic that while newspapers have repeatedly criticised the likes of Facebook and Google for hosting extremist content, sites including the Sun and the Mirror rushed to upload clips of footage filmed by the gunman as he attacked two mosques in New Zealand.

    “The same media companies who have lambasted social media platforms for not acting fast enough to remove extremist content are simultaneously publishing uncensored Daesh [Islamic State] propaganda on their websites, or make the rambling ‘manifestos’ of crazed killers available for download,” Basu said in an open letter to the media on how to report terrorism.

    • He cited the 2017 terror attack in Finsbury Park in London as an example of where a man was “driven to an act of terror by far-right messaging he found mostly on mainstream media”.

  • Neo-Nazis Bet Big on Bitcoin (And Lost) – Foreign Policy

    Several hundred white supremacists carrying tiki torches march through the University of Virginia campus in Charlottesville on Aug. 11, 2017.
    Evelyn Hockstein/For The Washington Post via Getty Images

    How the far-right’s failed cryptocurrency gamble became a bad joke for the Christchurch killer.

    The neo-Nazi terrorist who takes credit for murdering 50 people in Christchurch, New Zealand, on March 15 released a manifesto. One of the claims inside it is that he did very well investing in cryptocurrency—specifically, a collapsed Ponzi scheme called Bitconnect.

    Like much of the shooter’s manifesto, the claim about cryptocurrency is almost certainly nonsense—thrown in to get the media to chase their tails as they try to make sense of a deliberately confusing stew of alt-right memes and neo-Nazi in-jokes.

    The reason it works as an in-joke is exactly because cryptocurrencies have become a favorite resource for the far-right—if rarely a successful one. White nationalists were known to be getting into cryptocurrencies during the 2017 bitcoin bubble, because PayPal kept cutting them off. The further joke is that Bitconnect is best known not for having helped its investors succeed but for taking them for millions, if not billions, of dollars. And Bitconnect started in 2016—but the shooter claimed to have made the money before he went traveling in 2010 or so.
    Bitcoin ideology is not a neo-Nazi ideology. However, bitcoin’s right-libertarian anarcho-capitalism is very much in range of far-right extremism, particularly in the degree to which both propagate “international banker” and Rothschild-style conspiracy theories, and there are social spaces where the two cross directly, such as the /biz/ cryptocurrency forum on 4chan.

    David Golumbia is the author of the 2016 book The Politics of Bitcoin: Software as Right-Wing Extremism. He documents the history of the ideas that went into bitcoin—such as long-running anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about “international,” i.e., Jewish, bankers—and how these extremist ideas are propagated by the subculture, even as present-day enthusiasts would utterly repudiate the ideas’ origins.

    I think only a small number of cryptocurrency users are out-and-out fascists or Nazis,” Golumbia told Foreign Policy. “But I also suspect that the proportion of fascists in that world is higher than it is in the general population. That’s due to the widespread presence of conspiratorial ideas in cryptocurrency communities. Many in cryptocurrency actively promote ignorance about what should be clear and uncontroversial facts about the world.

  • Global inequality: Do we really live in a one-hump world?

    There is a powerful infographic that has been circulating on social media for a couple of years now. It illustrates a dramatic transformation from a “two hump world” in 1975 to a “one hump world” today. It was created by Hans Rosling and Gapminder, and has been reproduced and circulated by Max Roser and Our World in Data. Take a look:

    It is an astonishing image. In his post on inequality, Roser uses this graph to conclude: “The poorer countries have caught up, and world income inequality has declined.” Hans Rosling went further, saying that thinking about the world in terms of North and South is no longer a useful lens, as the South has caught up to the North. Bill Gates has used the graph to claim that “the world is no longer separated between the West and the Rest.” Steven Pinker leveraged it for the same purpose in his book Enlightenment Now. And Duncan Green recently wrote that income inequality is no longer about a divide between nations or regions of the world, but rather between social groups within the global population as a whole.

    Indeed, the graph gives the impression that all of the world’s people are basically in the same income bubble: whether you’re in Europe, Asia or the Americas, we’re all in the same hump, with a smooth, normal distribution. Clearly globalization has abolished that old colonial divide between North and South, and has worked nicely in favour of the majority of the world’s population. Right?

    Well, not quite. In fact, this impression is exactly the opposite of what is actually happening in the world.

    There are a few things about this graph that we need to keep in mind:

    First of all, the x axis is laid out on a logarithmic scale. This has the effect of cramming the incomes of the rich into the same visual space as the incomes of the poor. If laid out on a linear scale, we would see that in reality the bulk of the world’s population is pressed way over to the left, while a long tail of rich people whips out to the right, with people in the global North capturing virtually all of the income above $30 per day. It’s a very different picture indeed.

    Second, the income figures are adjusted for PPP. Comparing the incomes of rich people and poor people in PPP terms is problematic because PPP is known to overstate the purchasing power of the poor vis-a-vis the rich (basically because the poor consume a range of goods that are under-represented in PPP calculations, as economists like Ha-Joon Chang and Sanjay Reddy have pointed out). This approach may work for measuring something like poverty, or access to consumption, but it doesn’t make sense to use it for assessing the distribution of income generated by the global economy each year. For this, we need to use constant dollars.

    Third, the countries in the graph are grouped by world region: Europe, Asia and the Pacific, North and South America, Africa. The problem with this grouping is that it tells us nothing about “North and South”. Global North countries like Australia, New Zealand and Japan are included in Asia and Pacific, while the Americas include the US and Canada right alongside Haiti and Belize. If we want to know whether the North-South divide still exists, we need a grouping that will actually serve that end.

    So what happens if we look at the data differently? Divide the world’s countries between global South and global North, use constant dollars instead of PPP, and set it out on a linear axis rather than a logarithmic one. Here’s what it looks like. The circle sizes represent population, and the x axis is average income (graphics developed by Huzaifa Zoomkawala; click through for more detail):

    Suddenly the story changes completely. We see that while per capita income has indeed increased in the global South, the global North has captured the vast majority of new income generated by global growth since 1960. As a result, the income gap between the average person in the North and the average person in the South has nearly quadrupled in size, going from $9,000 in 1960 to $35,000 today.

    In other words, there has been no “catch up”, no “convergence”. On the contrary, what’s happening is divergence, big time.

    This is not to say that Rosling and Roser’s hump graphs are wrong. They tell us important things about how world demographics have changed. But they certainly cannot be used to conclude that poor countries have “caught up”, or that the North-South divide no longer exists, or that income inequality between nations doesn’t matter anymore. Indeed, quite the opposite is true.

    Why is this happening? Because, as I explain in The Divide, the global economy has been organized to facilitate the North’s access to cheap labour, raw materials, and captive markets in the South - today just as during the colonial period. Sure, some important things have obviously changed. But the countries of the North still control a vastly disproportionate share of voting power in the World Bank and the IMF, the institutions that control the rules of the global economy. They control a disproportionate share of bargaining power in the World Trade Organization. They wield leverage over the economic policy of poorer countries through debt. They control the majority of the world’s secrecy jurisdictions, which enable multinational companies to extract untaxed profits out of the South. They retain the ability to topple foreign governments whose economic policies they don’t like, and occupy countries they consider to be strategic in terms of resources and geography.

    These geopolitical power imbalances sustain and reproduce a global class divide that has worsened since the end of colonialism. This injustice is conveniently elided by the one-hump graph, which offers a misleadingly rosy narrative about what has happened over the past half century.

    #inégalités #monde #statistiques #visualisation #chiffres #évolution
    ping @reka

  • Facebook says it has removed 1.5 million copies of the New Zealand terror attack video - MIT Technology Review

    The sheer scale of efforts by Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter to take down clips of the video shows how hard it is to stop people from spreading horrific content.

    The news: Facebook has said that in the first 24 hours after the attack it removed 1.5 million versions of the video filmed by the gunman who killed over 50 people in two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand. Of those, 1.2 million were blocked while they were uploading, so they never made it onto the site. YouTube and Twitter are yet to release figures.

    The gunman live-streamed the shooting over 17 minutes on Facebook, and it was quickly re-posted by people both on that platform and others. There are almost certainly still versions of the video available online, despite the efforts to remove them.

    What next: There are growing calls for social-media companies to change their policies after the outrage—but it’s not always clear exactly what that means in practice. Bloomberg reports that New Zealand’s prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, is seeking talks with Facebook over live-streaming but hasn’t set out any specific demands.

    Supply and demand: The problem, according to Facebook’s former chief security officer, Alex Stamos, is not just virality. It’s that the biggest tech companies have much less control over whether people in free societies trade data than you might think. It also reflects a systemic issue, which is that social platforms often don’t even see themselves as arbiters of content in the first place. And perhaps a more profound question: do we really want them to be?

    #Facebook #NZ_massacre #Vidéo #Alt_right #Fascisme

    • Pour ceux qui n’ont pas de compte.

      Many of you have probably read several articles, tweets and posts about the horrific event that killed 50 people and injured many, by a white supremacist fuelled by racial hate in my little, isolated country, New Zealand. This event shocked my country to the core. However, I read some misguided opinions of some of the people in NZ and abroad and I wanted to address sensibly some of the unsavoury comments that I read online as a response to this tragedy rather than screaming abuses at them... which we all know the internet is a popular place for. Maybe you know a friend, a co-worker or a neighbour who has these misguided views. Here is a point of view from a racial minority immigrant who has successfully “integrated” into NZ.

      Comment 1: “They (i.e. Muslim immigrants) don’t integrate; therefore, they fuel this kind of right-wing extremism.”

      Other than this statement blaming the victims rather than the perpetrator, let’s still explore the issue of integration. What does that mean exactly to integrate? Oxford Dictionary coins the term: “1. The action or process of successfully joining or mixing with a different group of people:
      2. the action or process of combining two or more things in an effective way.”

      If you are mixing or combining two or more things, say coffee and milk, the resulting product we are left with is not just coffee alone or just milk. It is a combination of both. Therefore, integrating isn’t a linear one-way process, but rather a two-way process that arrives at a mutually beneficial state. However, this term has been popularly used to describe how the new wave of immigrants is not cooperating, especially those that are racial minorities by subjecting them to a linear power dynamic: i.e. “my way or the highway.” “Follow my opinions, my way of life, you are in my house, so you follow my rules.” This is not integration, but a power abuse by the majority towards the minority.
      But you may say, “but these immigrants won’t even meet us half way!” Well, ask yourself, have you also made efforts to meet them halfway before you make that assumption?

      Let’s take learning a new language as an example. A lot of people who complain about immigrants not integrating is that they won’t learn the host country’s language. I grew up bilingual of radically different languages. Korean and English. I was 8 when my parents immigrated to NZ. As a child, it took me relatively a short time to be competent in the english language and I did not have a thick accent that can often make you sound like an idiot and deflate your confidence. Therefore, I was rather proud of the fact that I knew two very different languages while my fellow New Zealanders only relied on one.

      However, now I live in Denmark and learning a whole new language again… but as an adult. This proved to be much more difficult than how I remembered as a child. I have been relying on English for so long that it became a hurdle. Those who never had to learn a completely new language perhaps would find it hard to empathise or relate. But believe me when I tell you, mastering a language is a two-way process. And this means, I also need the help of those who are fluent in Danish. If I want to improve my speaking skills, I need to practice A LOT. Not just in the language classes and by myself, but wherever I go. In the cafés, banks, at the supermarket, with my neighbours and colleagues. That means, I need a Dane to be patient, supportive and willing to sit through possibly boring and agonising hours listening to me make broken sentences that are incomprehensible, my thick accent that makes it difficult to understand, whilst kindly correcting me, having to wait patiently while I speak at a snail speed (whilst continually making mistakes) and listen to me talk about the most boring things as I’m limited to say things like: “the cat is sitting next to the chair under the table. The house is red, and my car is blue.” It requires just as much effort, if not more to help as a Dane, to help me master this language. Trust me, there is a limit to language schools if I don’t get your participation. If I don’t feel comfortable practising or proactively seek it, I will never master this language to the degree that would render me a “native speaker.” It requires proactive effort from my end, and from their end. It is not a one-way process.

      Also, if integrating is a mixing of two or more things, have you ever thought about learning THEIR language to enhance communication? How about learning Arabic for once rather than just insisting that they learn English without ever contributing to their english learning journey by patiently listening and helping their broken English? (By the way, learning a new language is good for your brain! More reason to learn Arabic don’t you think?)

      And you know what? Now that I think of it, I learned English quickly because my primary school teacher asked the best pupils in my class to take time aside from their education and helped me learn English. My fellow students taught me. I remember clearly, my classmates would take turns and take me to the library and they drew me a beautiful alphabet book and read books aloud to me. Maybe I learned English quickly not because I was young, but because I had amazing New Zealanders who really helped me “integrate.”

      Maybe that is why, despite having grown up with racial abuses for being Asian, I don’t generalise New Zealanders to be all intolerant or racist just like people shouldn’t assume that Muslim immigrants refuse to integrate. I’m sure there are many Muslims that are dicks, but so can New Zealanders. It would be unfair to render every white man with the same brush because of this white supremacist. Maybe white supremacists exist because they feel marginalised by society just like the way we marginalise minorities. Perhaps rather than be sour at those who seem to be different to us such as the Muslim immigrants and blame them to be the cause of right-wing extremism, perhaps you should build the bridge of successful integration to prevent misunderstanding and division.
      Start by making it easier for the Muslim community to “integrate” to the existing NZ culture (which by the way, culture is not stagnant, fixed thing, it is constantly changing and redefining itself with time). And of course, vice versa from the Muslim community. We do this kind of “integrating” on a daily basis with our friends, colleagues and family. Meeting them half way and incorporate some of their ways to our lives.
      After all, that is what we all want no? A peaceful country where everyone feels safe and respected.

      Sorry for the long-winded post, but I hope it gave you a different perspective on the issue of integration.

  • The New Zealand shooting put the media’s Islamophobia problem on display yet again

    Take, for example, language that is used to describe Muslims.

    In the immediate aftermath of the Christchurch massacre, there were descriptions of the mosque and its worshipers as “peaceful” — by the media as well as by well-intentioned, horrified onlookers around the world.

    The use of the term “peaceful” seems, at face value, benign, but it is a term that insinuates that Muslims and mosques, by near default, are violent unless we categorize and prove them to be otherwise. Muslims, themselves, have adopted the language of “Islam means peace” as a means of protection against violence and accusations of dual loyalty. The choice that is given to Muslims is one that defaults violence: We are either violent or we are against violence.

    The 11 worshipers killed at the Tree of Life synagogue in October 2018 were not called “peaceful worshipers.” The Sutherland Springs Church, which saw 26 of its congregants killed in 2017, wasn’t called a “peaceful church.”
    But the acceptability and normalization of Islamophobia goes beyond that: It’s when a black, visibly Muslim woman in Congress has her own party partake in an Islamophobic campaign against her, a campaign that hinged on the assumption that Muslims, by default, are anti-Semitic.

    It’s when those who have spent a large part or the entirety of their careers fear-mongering about Muslims are rewarded by prestigious institutions with Ivy League fellowships or columns in the New York Times.

    It’s when a former U.S. President gets up in front of tens of thousands of fellow party members and demands a loyalty test from Muslim Americans whose vote he is trying to collect for his candidate wife.

    It’s when an editor of one of the most respected journalistic institutions in this country casually tweets about “halting and repatriating Middle Eastern mass migration to Europe to keep it safe.” And then does something similar four years later in a piece about how maybe the fascists have a point about “enforcing the borders.”

    There is “good” Islamophobia — it’s not all Fox News, Ben Shapiro and right-wing chatrooms.

    There is Islamophobia we accept, as though it is simply a known truth, because we accept the foundational premise of Muslims having a propensity toward violence, toward not being loyal to “our values” — that there is something, a now New York Times columnist once called, “the tantrum of Islam.”

  • Ce que l’on sait de l’attaque terroriste contre deux mosquées en Nouvelle-Zélande

    Au moins 49 personnes ont été tuées et une vingtaine blessées à Christchurch, dans un acte terroriste pour lequel un homme, présenté comme un « extrémiste de droite » qui a filmé son attaque, a été arrêté.

    Au moins quarante-neuf personnes ont été tuées et vingt autres, dont des femmes et des enfants, blessées, vendredi 15 mars, lors d’une attaque terroriste contre deux mosquées de la ville néo-zélandaise de Christchurch, selon un bilan officiel. « Il est clair qu’on ne peut décrire cela que comme une attaque terroriste, a déclaré la première ministre, Jacinda Ardern. Pour ce que nous en savons, [l’attaque] semble avoir été bien planifiée. »
    L’attaque, méthodique, contre les deux mosquées a eu lieu à l’heure de la prière du vendredi. Au moment de la fusillade, la mosquée Al-Noor, sur Deans Avenue, dans le centre de la ville, était remplie de fidèles. Quarante et une personnes y ont été tuées, tandis que sept autres ont succombé dans une deuxième attaque perpétrée à la mosquée de Linwood, à cinq kilomètres de là, dans la banlieue de Christchurch. Un blessé est ensuite mort à l’hôpital.

    • C’était un garçon si poli, si bien élevé,…

      Christchurch mosque shootings: Gunman livestreamed 17 minutes of shooting terror - NZ Herald

      A horrific shooting at a Christchurch mosque was livestreamed for 17 minutes by the gunman.

      Australian police have identified the shooter as Brenton Tarrant - a white, 28-year-old Australian-born man. Twitter has shut down a user account in that name.

      The gunman published an online link to a lengthy “manifesto”, which the Herald has chosen not to report.

      Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison confirmed an individual taken into custody was an Australian-born citizen. He called him “an extremist, right-wing, violent terrorist”.

      Sky News reported that the man’s home town of Grafton was in shock, trying to come to terms with how a “polite, well-mannered young man” came to find himself on a path that led to Christchurch.

      He was a student at the local high school and went on to work at a gym, where his former boss said he regularly volunteered his time to train kids for free.

    • FP-Morning Brief: 49 killed and 48 injured in New Zealand mosque shootings

      Four people were arrested in connection to the attacks. One of the alleged attackers—Brenton Tarrant, a 28-year-old Australian national—live streamed the shooting, creating a harrowing, 17-minute video and issued a manifesto explaining his actions that draws heavily on the ideas of white nationalists and fascists, including the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik and the Nazi-era British Union of Fascists leader Oswald Mosley.

      Authorities found and disarmed two explosive devices attached to suspects’ cars.

  • The year women became eligible to vote in each country

    La tâche rouge ...

    Suffrage happened in 1920 in the United States, three years behind Russia and Canada but 91 years ahead of Saudi Arabia, as noted by this map depicting the year women became eligible to vote in each country. Countries began joining the fray en masse by the mid-twentieth century, but the leader of the pack comes from far down under — women in New Zealand obtained voting rights in 1893. This map was uploaded to Reddit and shows the year women became eligible to vote in each country.

    A quick glance at the map tells only part of the story, however. Pay close attention to the asterisks, as the year noted for some countries signifies only limited suffrage, often only for white women or in conjunction with specific requirements such as homeownership or marriage. Belgium’s 1919 suffrage granted widows and the mothers of servicemen killed in World War I, or widows and mothers of servicemen “shot and killed by the enemy” the vote but didn’t extend the same rights to all women until 1948. Australia granted women excluding Aboriginals the right to vote in 1902. For a more complete list of exclusions, view the notes at the far bottom of the infographic.

    #droits_civiques #droit_des_femmes #droit_de_vote #démocratie #govrnance #cartographi #visuaisation #cartoexperiment #arabie_saoudite

  • Lime scooters have a software bug that causes them to hurl their riders to the ground / Boing Boing
    Was für ein Mist. Das soll nun auch berliner Bürgersteige füllen.

    Lime scooters have been recalled in Switzerland and cleared off the streets of New Zealand following a string of injuries, including multiple broken bones, caused by a software bug that brings the scooters to an abrupt halt, throwing their riders off (the scooters are still available in the USA despite an account of a similar incident in Texas).

    The company says it has found the bug: “[I]n very rare cases—usually riding downhill at top speed while hitting a pothole or other obstacle—excessive brake force on the front wheel can occur, resulting in a scooter stopping unexpectedly.”

    There’s an important underlying issue here that illustrates one of the ways in which devices whose rental terms are enforced by software do not fail safe: Lime scooters are designed so that they can be remotely immobilized, over the internet, if your credit runs out or if the scooter is doing something else the company disfavors.

    This design constraint means that the users of the scooter can’t (in some circumstances) override the brakes. Malicious code, or code with errors in it, poses a constant risk for the scooter rider, because if it triggers this braking function, then by design the system will treat attempts by the rider override the immobilization command as an attack.

    In an ideal world, we’d design the control systems for devices that can harm their users to fail safe, with overrides for owners that let them judge when safety features are inappropriately triggered. But when the “safety” that these features ensures is the safety of a rental company, not the user of the device, then the “fail safe” mode is one that elevates the protection of the owner’s capital investment over the user’s physical wellbeing.

    This is bad enough in scooters, but in cars it’s potentially lethal. It’s also the most rapidly proliferating model of embedded systems design, as “software as a service” metastasizes into “hardware as a service,” sometimes merging with other abusive modes of computing to create a kind of Inkjet Dystopia.

    (No word on whether Lime will follow industry leader Bird by sending out bogus legal threats to people who write in detail about its flaws)

    The company claims that fewer than 0.0045% of all rides worldwide have been affected, adding that “any injury is one too many.” An initial fix reduced the number of incidents, it said, and a final update underway on all scooters will soon be complete.

    A software glitch is throwing riders off of Lime scooters [Corinne Purtill/Quartz]

    #disruption #Verkehr

  • Top 5 Safest Countries in Asia Pacific for Women | ValueChampion Singapore

    Top 5 Safest Countries in Asia Pacific for Women
    Feeling safe as you carry out your day-to-day activities is something that many people tend to take for granted. Unfortunately, half of the world’s population may end up a victim of a crime while doing something as innocuous as taking the train home or having a meeting with their boss just because of their gender. To see where in Asia Pacific women may feel the safest, we analysed 14 countries in Asia Pacific based on safety, healthcare and opportunities for women.
    Anastassia Evlanova - March 5, 2019
    Where in Asia Pacific Do Women Have the Best Quality of Life?

    With the rise of the #MeToo movement and female-led protests around the globe against sexual assault, the reality about the day-to-day quality of life for females is surfacing. Unfortunately, even countries deemed to be relatively risk-free for women have their fair share of gender-specific injustices, whether it’s low-quality healthcare, fear of reporting crimes, or lack of education, employment opportunities and independence. However, amidst the grim reality, there are definitely cities where women flourish and are able to live free of fear. Below, we examine the safety and quality of life in some of the major countries in Asia and Asia Pacific to see where women can live with the greatest peace of mind.
    Study Highlights:

    Singapore & New Zealand topped the list for the safest city for women, with impressive healthcare, safety and opportunity indicators.
    Indonesia, Philippines & India ranked bottom despite government efforts to improve quality of life for women, indicating that government regulation does not always improve quality of life if they are in contrast to religious or cultural values.
    As in the case with Japan, we found that just because a country ranks high for overall safety, it does not mean women in everyday life face the same level of safety as men.

    • Une vision très large de ce qu’est la #sécurité pour les #femmes : santé, droit à l’avortement, opportunités économiques, protection des violences, etc. Un truc intéressant sur #Singapour : le #viol_conjugal y est encore autorisé (c’est en train de changer) mais l’opinion publique considère que c’est un viol. Chez nous, c’est plutôt le contraire : il est interdit mais pas compris comme tel. Et j’ai découvert qu’en #Nouvelle_Zélande il fallait porter les rejetons de son violeur, c’est sympa.

  • La liste des incidents du USCG Polar Star continue à s’allonger. Les capacités polaires des garde-côtes états-uniens sont à la merci d’un incident…

    FIRE IN ANTARCTIC OCEAN Aboard USCG’s Last Heavy Icebreaker – gCaptain

    The Coast Guard Cutter Polar Star, with 75,000 horsepower and its 13,500-ton weight, is guided by its crew to break through Antarctic ice en route to the National Science Foundation’s McMurdo Station, Jan. 15, 2017. The ship, which was designed more than 40 years ago, remains the world’s most powerful non-nuclear icebreaker.
    U.S. Coast Guard photo by Chief Petty Officer David Mosley

    The 150-member crew of the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Polar Sta_r fought a fire at approximately 9 p.m. PST Feb. 10 that broke out in the ship’s incinerator room about 650 miles north of McMurdo Sound, Antarctica.

    After initial response efforts using four fire extinguishers failed, fire crews spent almost two hours extinguishing the fire. Fire damage was contained inside the incinerator housing, while firefighting water used to cool exhaust pipe in the surrounding area damaged several electrical systems and insulation in the room.

    Repairs are already being planned for the Polar Star’s upcoming maintenance period. The incinerator will need to be full functional before next year’s mission.
    “_It’s always a serious matter whenever a shipboard fire breaks out at sea, and it’s even more concerning when that ship is in one of the most remote places on Earth,
    ” said Vice Adm. Linda Fagan, commander of the U.S. Coast Guard’s Pacific Area.
    The Feb. 10 fire was not the first engineering casualty faced by the Polar Star crew this deployment. While en route to Antarctica, one of the ship’s electrical systems began to smoke, causing damage to wiring in an electrical switchboard, and one of the ship’s two evaporators used to make drinkable water failed. The electrical switchboard was repaired by the crew, and the ship’s evaporator was repaired after parts were received during a port call in Wellington, New Zealand.

    The ship also experienced a leak from the shaft that drives the ship’s propeller, which halted icebreaking operations to send scuba divers into the water to repair the seal around the shaft. A hyperbaric chamber on loan from the U.S. Navy aboard the ship allows Coast Guard divers to make external emergency repairs and inspections of the ship’s hull at sea.

    The Polar Star also experienced ship-wide power outages while breaking ice. Crew members spent nine hours shutting down the ship’s power plant and rebooting the electrical system in order to remedy the outages.

    The U.S. Coast Guard maintains two icebreakers – the Coast Guard Cutter Healy, which is a medium icebreaker, and the Polar Star, the United States’ only heavy icebreaker. If a catastrophic event, such as getting stuck in the ice, were to happen to the Healy in the Arctic or to the Polar Star near Antarctica, the U.S. Coast Guard is left without a self-rescue capability.

    By contrast, Russia currently operates more than 40 icebreakers – several of which are nuclear powered.

    nouvel épisode après il y a 6 semaines.

  • China Military Threat: Seeking New Islands to Conquer - James Stavridis - Bloomberg

    The constant refrain was simple: The West is becoming a less reliable partner. These allies are dismayed by a U.S. administration that has repeatedly criticized its closest partners and accused them of freeloading on defense. They are also worried about weakness and distraction of a Europe facing Brexit. This is compounded as they watch China increase pressure on Taiwan to accept a “one nation, two systems” deal a la Hong Kong and militarize the #South_China_Sea by constructing artificial islands.
    There is also a less-noticed but extremely worrisome aspect to China’s increasing boldness: It seems to be building its naval capability to dominate farther into the Pacific — as far as what Western analysts call the “second island chain.

    When thinking in a geo-strategic sense about China, the island-chain formulation is helpful. Since the 1950s, U.S. planners have delineated a first island chain, running from the Japanese islands through the Philippines, and down to the tip of Southeast Asia. Dominating inside that line has been the goal of China’s recent buildup in naval and missile capabilities. But U.S. officials warn that Chinese strategists are becoming more ambitious, set on gaining influence running to the second island chain — running from Japan through the Micronesian islands to the tip of Indonesia. As with its initial forays into the South China Sea, Beijing is using “scientific” missions and hydrographic surveying ships as the tip of the spear.

    Japan and Singapore are essentially anchors at the north and south ends the island chains. They have been integrating their defense capabilities with the U.S. through training, exercises and arms purchases. They are exploring better relations with India as the Pacific and Indian Oceans are increasingly viewed as a single strategic entity. This is a crucial element in the U.S. strategy for the region. But there are changes coming.

    First, there are expectations that China will eye the third island chain, encompassing Hawaii and the Alaskan coast before dropping south down to New Zealand. This has long been regarded as the final line of strategic demarcation between the U.S. and China. Second, some analysts are beginning to talk about a fourth and even fifth island chain, both in the Indian Ocean, an increasingly crucial zone of competition between the U.S. and China.

    Two obvious Indian Ocean chains exist. The first would run from southern Pakistan (where China has created a deep-water port at Gwador) down past Diego Garcia, the lonely atoll controlled by the U.K. from which the U.S. runs enormous logistical movements into Central Asia. As a junior officer on a Navy cruiser in the 1980s, I visited Diego Garcia when it was essentially a fuel stop with a quaint palm-thatched bar. The base has expanded enormously, becoming critical to supporting U.S. and British combat efforts in the Horn of Africa and Middle East.

    The fifth and final island chain could be considered to run from the Horn of Africa – where the U.S. and China now maintain significant military bases – down to the coast of South Africa. Little wonder the U.S. military has renamed its former Pacific Command as the Indo-Pacific Command.


  • The US threatens to stop sharing intelligence with allies if they use Huawei - MIT Technology Review

    Qui a dit la « guerre commerciale » est une continuation de la guerre sous d’autres formes ?

    The US will stop sharing intelligence with countries that use Huawei hardware in their core communication systems, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said.

    The threat: “If a country adopts this [Huawei equipment] and puts it in some of their critical information systems, we won’t be able to share information with them, we won’t be able to work alongside them,” Pompeo said during an interview with Fox Business on Thursday. “In some cases there’s risk – we won’t even be able to co-locate American resources, an American embassy, an American military outpost,” he added.

    Defiance: Britain, New Zealand, and Germany have all signaled this week that they may be willing to continue using Huawei gear as they prepare their infrastructure for the arrival of 5G. Pompeo’s remarks are a major escalation in tensions between the US and its allies over the role of Huawei.

    American concerns: It’s got a lot to do with the role of 5G and whether China could use security backdoors to exert undue control over a nation’s digital infrastructure via Huawei’s equipment. Confusingly, on the same day as Pompeo’s comments, President Donald Trump tweeted he wanted the US to win in 5G development “through competition, not by blocking out currently more advanced technologies.”

    Denials: In an interview with the BBC this week, Huawei’s founder Ren Zhengfei said it has never installed backdoors into its technology, and never would do so, even if required to by Chinese law.

    La backdoor de la NSA est certainement plus appropriée pour la défense de nos libertés, n’est-ce pas ?

    #Huawei #5G

  • Huawei tells New Zealand : banning us is like banning the All Blacks

    Chinese tech company uses full-page ads to push for inclusion in 5G rollout despite concerns it is a security risk China’s Huawei has taken out full-page ads in major New Zealand newspapers in which they equate the idea of ban on the company to a rugby tournament without the All Blacks. The advertisement reads : “5G without Huawei is like rugby without New Zealand”, referring to the upcoming nationwide rollout of the mobile technology. National telco Spark has been temporarily banned from (...)

    #Huawei #domination #lobbying

  • The Real Wall Isn’t at the Border. It’s everywhere, and we’re fighting against the wrong one.

    President Trump wants $5.7 billion to build a wall at the southern border of the United States. Nancy Pelosi thinks a wall is “immoral.” The fight over these slats or barriers or bricks shut down the government for more than a month and may do so again if Mr. Trump isn’t satisfied with the way negotiations unfold over the next three weeks.

    But let’s be clear: This is a disagreement about symbolism, not policy. Liberals object less to aggressive border security than to the wall’s xenophobic imagery, while the administration openly revels in its political incorrectness. And when this particular episode is over, we’ll still have been fighting about the wrong thing. It’s true that immigrants will keep trying to cross into the United States and that global migration will almost certainly increase in the coming years as climate change makes parts of the planet uninhabitable. But technology and globalization are complicating the idea of what a border is and where it stands.

    Not long from now, it won’t make sense to think of the border as a line, a wall or even any kind of imposing vertical structure. Tearing down, or refusing to fund, border walls won’t get anyone very far in the broader pursuit of global justice. The borders of the future won’t be as easy to spot, build or demolish as the wall that Mr. Trump is proposing. That’s because they aren’t just going up around countries — they’re going up around us. And they’re taking away our freedom.

    In “The Jungle,” a play about a refugee camp in Calais, France, a Kurdish smuggler named Ali explains that his profession is not responsible for the large numbers of migrants making the dangerous journeys to Europe by sea. “Once, I was the only way a man could ever dream of arriving on your shore,” the smuggler says. But today, migrants can plan out the journeys using their phones. “It is not about this border. It’s the border in here,” Ali says, pointing to his head — “and that is gone, now.”

    President Trump is obsessed with his border wall because technology has freed us from the walls in our heads.

    For people with means and passports, it’s easy to plot exotic itineraries in a flash and book flights with just a glance at a screen. Social feeds are an endless stream of old faces in new places: a carefree colleague feeding elephants in Thailand; a smug college classmate on a “babymoon” in Tahiti; that awful ex hanging off a cliff in Switzerland; a friend’s parents enjoying retirement in New Zealand.

    Likewise, a young person in Sana, Yemen, or Guatemala City might see a sister in Toronto, a neighbor in Phoenix, an aunt in London or a teacher in Berlin, and think that he, too, could start anew. Foreign places are real. Another country is possible.

    If you zoom out enough in Google Earth, you’ll see the lines between nations begin to disappear. Eventually, you’ll be left staring at a unified blue planet. You might even experience a hint of what astronauts have called the “overview effect”: the sense that we are all on “Spaceship Earth,” together. “From space I saw Earth — indescribably beautiful with the scars of national boundaries gone,” recalled Muhammed Faris, a Syrian astronaut, after his 1987 mission to space. In 2012, Mr. Faris fled war-torn Syria for Turkey.

    One’s freedom of movement used to be largely determined by one’s citizenship, national origin and finances. That’s still the case — but increasingly, people are being categorized not just by the color of their passports or their ability to pay for tickets but also by where they’ve been and what they’ve said in the past.
    Editors’ Picks
    Mitch McConnell Got Everything He Wanted. But at What Cost?
    ‘A Pumping Conspiracy’: Why Workers Smuggled Breast Pumps Into Prison
    The 20 Best TV Dramas Since ‘The Sopranos’

    This is what is happening on that front already:

    A 2017 executive order barred people from seven countries, including five with Muslim majorities, from entering the country. An older rule put in place during the Obama administration compelled anyone who’d even just visited seven blacklisted nations to obtain additional clearance before traveling to the United States. Even as the Trump administration’s policy has met with legal challenges, it means that the barrier to entering the United States, for many, begins with their data and passport stamps, and is thousands of miles away from this country.

    The Trump administration would also like to make it harder for immigrants who’ve received public assistance to obtain citizenship or permanent residence by redefining what it means to be a “public charge.” If the administration succeeds, it will have moved the border into immigrants’ living rooms, schools and hospital beds.

    The walls of the future go beyond one administration’s policies, though. They are growing up all around us, being built by global technology companies that allow for constant surveillance, data harvesting and the alarming collection of biometric information. In 2017, the United States announced it would be storing the social media profiles of immigrants in their permanent file, ostensibly to prevent Twitter-happy terrorists from slipping in. For years, Customs and Border Protection agents have asked travelers about their social media, too.

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation has said these practices can “chill and deter the free speech and association of immigrants to the United States, as well as the U.S. persons who communicate with them.” In other words, it’s no longer enough to have been born in the right place, at the right time, to the right parents. The trail of bread crumbs you leave could limit your movements.

    It’s possible to get a glimpse of where a digital border might lead from China. Look at its continuing experiment with social-credit scoring, where a slip of the tongue or an unpaid debt could one day jeopardize someone’s ability to board a train or apply for a job. When your keystrokes and text messages become embedded in your legal identity, you create a wall around yourself without meaning to.

    The Berkeley political theorist Wendy Brown diagnoses the tendency to throw up walls as a classic symptom of a nation-state’s looming impotence in the face of globalization — the flashy sports car of what she calls a “waning sovereignty.” In a recent interview for The Nation, Professor Brown told me that walls fulfill a desire for greater sovereign control in times when the concept of “bounded territory itself is in crisis.” They are signifiers of a “loss of a national ‘we’ and national control — all the things we’ve seen erupt in a huge way.”

    Walls are a response to deep existential anxiety, and even if the walls come down, or fail to be built in brick and stone, the world will guarantee us little in the way of freedom, fairness or equality. It makes more sense to think of modern borders as overlapping and concentric circles that change size, shape and texture depending on who — or what — is trying to pass through.
    Get our weekly newsletter and never miss an Op-Doc

    Watch Oscar-nominated short documentaries from around the world made for you.

    It’s far too easy to imagine a situation where our freedom of movement still depends entirely on what has happened to us in the past and what kind of information we’re willing to give up in return. Consider the expedited screening process of the Global Entry Program for traveling to the United States. It’s a shortcut — reserved for people who can get it — that doesn’t do away with borders. It just makes them easier to cross, and therefore less visible.

    That serves the modern nation-state very well. Because in the end, what are borders supposed to protect us from? The answer used to be other states, empires or sovereigns. But today, relatively few land borders exist to physically fend off a neighboring power, and countries even cooperate to police the borders they share. Modern borders exist to control something else: the movement of people. They control us.

    Those are the walls we should be fighting over.
    #mobile_borders #frontières_mobiles #ligne #ligne_frontalière #frontières #ubiquité

  • Japan to resume commercial whaling after pulling out of #IWC | Reuters

    Japan will resume commercial whaling from July in its waters and exclusive economic zone while ending its controversial hunts in the Antarctic, it said on Wednesday, as it announced its withdrawal from the International Whaling Commission (IWC).

    Australia and New Zealand welcomed the decision to abandon the Antarctic whale hunt, but expressed disappointment that Japan would engage in any killing of the ocean mammals.

    The decision, some experts said, allows Japan to save the money it spends to support Antarctic whaling while taking a tough pro-whaling stance - a matter of national pride for some conservatives.

    But doubts exist about whether Japanese commercial whaling can be economically viable, especially as fewer people than ever are eating whale meat, they said.

    From July 2019, after the withdrawal comes into effect on June 30, Japan will conduct commercial whaling within Japan’s territorial sea and its exclusive economic zone, and will cease the take of whales in the Antarctic Ocean/the Southern Hemisphere,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said in a statement announcing the decision.


  • Facebook isn’t a tech company — let’s stop calling it that - CNN

    Sometimes it takes an old guy to call out a youngster. Hatch knew that it was time for us to stop referring to Facebook as a tech company. As his spokesman reportedly noted later, Hatch was just using “a common tactic used in Congressional hearings to make a point.”
    Facebook runs ads based on the information it has collected about you. And it has used the imprimatur of “technology” to shift our attention so it — as well as Google — can operate under a different set of rules than all the other media companies that run ads. By clinging to its definition of being a technology company, Facebook and other social media companies enjoy protections under the Communications Decency Act that immunize them from being held liable for hate and other objectionable speech, libel and falsehoods in news stories and advertising that media companies do not.

    To be sure, Facebook utilizes technology, but that doesn’t make it a tech company any more than Exxon Mobil (because it uses instruments to find oil) or Burlington Northern (because it’s based on the invention of the steam engine)."

    David Dodson

    For media companies that run ads, especially ones that use public networks, we tell them that they can’t lie or mislead, that it’s not okay to advertise cigarettes to children or push prescription drugs without including the risks. We have laws governing deceptive advertisements and Truth in Advertising laws. Companies that run ads can’t say a car gets 40 miles per gallon unless it’s true. They can’t say a movie won an Academy Award unless it did. If you say the wool comes from New Zealand, it must.
    Technology companies invent cars that drive themselves, satellites that can identify a license plate from miles away, phones that can guide us through traffic jams, and machines that see inside our bodies. That’s what tech companies do.

    To be sure, Facebook utilizes technology, but that doesn’t make it a tech company any more than Exxon Mobil (because it uses instruments to find oil) or Burlington Northern (because it’s based on the invention of the steam engine).
    Zuckerberg’s genius was harnessing an already existing network and previously developed computer code to allow people to share words and pictures with one another. In return, he runs ads.

    When nearly half of Americans get their news from Facebook, its newsfeed should be subjected to the same standards of fairness, decency and accuracy as newspapers, television and other media outlets.

    For decades, CBS sold beer during weekend football games and toys during Saturday morning cartoons. Long before the internet, folks figured out that by targeting the right audience, they could charge a higher price for running ads. Facebook just does it better.

    #Facebook #Médias_sociaux