position:professor

  • Show #376: iO! iO! iO!
    http://www.radiopanik.org/emissions/l-etranger/show-376-io-io-io-

    Reflections on Show #375: #oi! Oi! Oi!; with special guest Matthew Worley (who we cited in the intro for Show #375) selecting some tunes, and talking to our good selves (singular).

    On: “Matthew Worley grew up on the periphery of the punk culture, and found himself fascinated by it. Today he is a Professor of #history at the University of Reading, researching youth subcultures.” - Find Out More.

    His published works include ’Waiting for the Revolution: The British Far Left from 1956’ (with Evan Smith), ’No Future: Punk, Politics and British Youth Culture, 1976–1984’, ’Tomorrow Belongs to Us (The British Far Right Since 1967)’ (with Nigel Copsey), ’The Aesthetic of Our Anger’ (with Mike Dines).

    Late Addition to the program: DJ Meeuw on a #reggae tip. (...)

    #skinhead #subculture #ranting_poetry #oi,reggae,skinhead,subculture,ranting_poetry,history
    http://www.radiopanik.org/media/sounds/l-etranger/show-376-io-io-io-_06168__1.mp3


  • How Zero Wins: Product Analysis of the Fasting Tracker
    https://hackernoon.com/how-zero-wins-product-analysis-of-the-fasting-tracker-d9d915b36977?sourc

    How Zero Wins: A Product Analysis of the Fasting TrackerZero (iOS)’s simple yet effective user flow.Don’t eat anything for the next 18 hours.If you’re shocked at the absurdity of this suggestion and wouldn’t even wish it as a punishment for your worst enemy, then you probably haven’t heard of intermittent fasting.First, Some ContextIntermittent fasting (I.F. for short), is not a diet, but a pattern of eating where you cycle between periods of fasting (most commonly 16 to 18 hours a day) and non-fasting. The protocol doesn’t dictate which foods to eat, but rather when you should eat them. While it has been around informally forever, I.F. came into the mainstream in 2016, after Professor Yoshinori Ohsumi was awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his research on the role of autophagy (i.e. how (...)

    #product-management #design #health #behavioral-science #technology


  • CS News: danah boyd Has Been Named Among Forbes Top 50 Women In Tech
    http://cs.brown.edu/news/2019/01/31/danah-boyd-has-been-named-among-forbes-top-50-women-tech

    The Forbes 2018 Inaugural Top 50 Women In Technology identifies three generations of forward-thinking technologists leading more than a dozen tech sectors across the globe. Honoring the top tech “Moguls, Founders, Engineers, Innovators and Warriors” in the world, this list recognizes those who are truly at the cutting edge of advancement within the STEM fields. This year, Forbes has included Brown CS alum danah boyd, highlighting her work on the intersection of technology and society.

    danah is currently working as a Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research, is the founder and president of the Data & Society Research Institute, and serves as a Visiting Professor at New York University. She also serves on the boards of Crisis Text Line and Social Science Research Council, and is a Trustee of the National Museum of the American Indian. Currently, danah’s research focuses on how data-driven technologies can amplify inequities, mistrust, and hate; she is also widely recognized as an authority in the field of social media research. In her book It’s Complicated: the social lives of networked teens, danah explores and uncovers some of the major myths regarding teens’ use of social media. She has made an enormous impact through her work on this subject, and this recognition follows a long list of accomplishments including the Award for Public Sociology from the American Sociological Association, the naming by Fortune as the “smartest academic in the technology field” and the naming as a “Top 100 Global Thinker” by Foreign Policy.


  • 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.


    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/26/opinion/sunday/border-wall-immigration-trump.html#click=https://t.co/BWNDIXplPK
    #mobile_borders #frontières_mobiles #ligne #ligne_frontalière #frontières #ubiquité


  • Hacking #education For The Future with Eric P.M. Vermeulen
    https://hackernoon.com/hacking-education-for-the-future-with-eric-p-m-vermeulen-d1323d92d8ba?so

    Hacking Education For The Future with Erik P.M. VermeulenEpisode 19 of the Hacker Noon #podcast: An interview with Erik P.M. Vermeulen, Professor, Executive, and innovator.Listen to the interview on iTunes, or Google Podcast, or watch on YouTube.Today’s show would not be possible without Digital Ocean. Learn more at do.co/hackernoon.In this episode Trent Lapinski and Erik P.M. Vermeulen discuss decentralization, #automation, and the future of work for Millennials.“I really believe in communities.”“When I talk about creativity, and what I want my students to be, I want them to understand communities. I want them to be visible.’”“Thinking about how to become visible in a community based World, and how you can actually contribute and build something with the community is something they cannot do (...)

    #technology #hackernoon-podcast


  • Une déclaration d’Angela Davis - [UJFP]
    http://www.ujfp.org/spip.php?article6872

    Une déclaration d’Angela Davis
    mercredi 9 janvier 2019 par Angela Davis

    Nous publions ci-dessous, la traduction française de la déclaration d’Angela Y. Davis, à la suite de la décision du BCRI (Birmingham Civil Rights Institute) de revenir sur sa décision et de ne pas lui accorder le prix Fred Shuttlesworth, vraisemblablement en raison de son soutien pour la justice en Palestine.

    L’UJFP, comme bien d’autres associations juives dans le monde est révoltée par l’instrumentalisation systématique aujourd’hui de l’antisémitisme comme arme majeure pour bâillonner toute parole sur la situation du peuple palestinien.

    Angela Davis militante antiraciste reçoit tout notre soutien et notre solidarité. (...)

    • Birmingham Civil Rights Institute Reinstates Award for Angela Davis
      January 27, 2019 8:44 PM
      http://imemc.org/article/birmingham-civil-rights-institute-invites-angela-davis-to-receive-award

      Academic and civil rights activist, Angela Davis was nominated for the Fred Shuttlesworth Award in early January, by the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute (BCRI), but soon after, the award was rescinded due to Professor Davis’ outspoken support of Palestinian equal rights.

      The decision was reversed on January 25th, when the board issued a statement stating it has “voted to reaffirm Dr. Davis as the recipient (of the Fred Shuttlesworth Award),”, inviting Dr. Davis to come to Birmingham to receive the award. It is not yet known whether Dr. Davis will accept the invitation. (...)


  • Judge Richard Goldstone suffered for turning his back on Gaza – but not as much as the Palestinians he betrayed | The Independent

    by Robert Fisk

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/israel-gaza-war-judge-richard-goldstone-palestinian-conflict-a8709211
    https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2010/02/02/00/310761.bin

    When a hero lets you down, the betrayal lasts forever. I’m not alone, I know, when I say that Richard Goldstone was a hero of mine – a most formidable, brilliant and brave judge who finally spoke truth to power in the Middle East. And then recanted like a frightened political prisoner, with protestations of love for the nation whose war crimes he so courageously exposed.

    Now, after years of virtual silence, the man who confronted Israel and Hamas with their unforgivable violence after the 2008-09 Gaza war has found a defender in a little known but eloquent academic. Judge Goldstone, a Jewish South African, was denounced by Israelis and their supporters as “evil” and a “quisling” after he listed the evidence of Israel’s brutality against the Palestinians of Gaza (around 1,300 dead, most of them civilians), and of Hamas’ numerically fewer crimes (13 Israeli dead, three of them civilians, plus a number of Palestinian “informer” executions).
    Professor Daniel Terris, a Brandeis University scholar admired for his work on law and ethics, calls his new book The Trials of Richard Goldstone. Good title, but no cigar. ​

    Terris is eminently fair. Perhaps he is too fair. He treats far too gently the column that Goldstone wrote for the Washington Post, in which the judge effectively undermined the research and conclusions of his own report that he and three others wrote about the Gaza war. The book recalls how Richard Falk, a Princeton law professor and former UN rapporteur on human rights in Gaza and the West Bank, described Goldstone’s retraction as “a personal tragedy for such a distinguished international civil servant”. I think Falk was right.


  • Traffic Sign Classification
    https://hackernoon.com/traffic-sign-classification-6e7113d9c4d5?source=rss----3a8144eabfe3---4

    Having just finished the semester at NYU, I thought I’d share the results of one of the more interesting homework assignments that I had. As the title suggests, this will be another post about the traffic sign classification competition found at http://benchmark.ini.rub.de/.For some background, I am currently studying for my master’s degree at NYU. Like many of the other students there, I jumped at the chance to take the computer vision class taught by the renowned professor Rob Fergus.Cool, but what makes this assignment more interesting than any other assignment from any other professor? This homework assignment was given in the form of a #kaggle competition. The higher your rank on the private leaderboard the higher your grade.For those that don’t know what the private leaderboard is on (...)

    #image-classification #convolutional-network #machine-learning #computer-vision


  • Proportion of migrants who return to country of birth significantly higher than first thought, study suggests

    Mexico-to-US route sees largest flow in past five years, but also biggest rate of return as study suggests 45 per cent of immigrants eventually return home.

    The new method, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that the higher level of migration can be explained by increases in return migration – back to a person’s country of birth – which was much higher than previously thought.

    Approximately 45 per cent of migrants returned to their home country in the studied period from 1990 to 2015. This appears to be particularly relevant for those displaced by conflict.

    “We estimate a rate of return migration that is significantly higher than other methods, but it is also supported by history,” Professor Raftery said.

    “For example, during the Rwandan genocide in 1994, more than a million migrants left the country, but most returned within three years after the conflict ended.”

    Mass migration is still mainly being driven by major world conflicts and events, the study suggests. The civil war in Syria accounted for two of the top three emigration drivers between 2010 and 2015 in the study with flows from Syria to Turkey and from Syria to Lebanon accounting for 1.5 million people and 1.2 million people respectively.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/migration-refugee-syria-conflict-europe-mexico-conflict-study-a869845
    #statistiques #chiffres #retour_au_pays #solde_migratoire #migrations #émigration #immigration

    Sur la situation entre #Mexique et #Etats-Unis:

    It suggests that emigration from Mexico to the United States was the biggest flow between 2010 and 2015, accounting for 2.1 million people. However the US to Mexico also had the highest rate of return migration, accounting for 1.3 million people – four times the rate of return from the United Arab Emirates to India.

    #USA

    ping @simplicissimus @reka

    • L’article scientifique cité dans l’article de l’Independent :

      Estimation of emigration, return migration, and transit migration between all pairs of countries

      Despite the importance of international migration, estimates of between-country migration flows are still imprecise. Reliable record keeping of migration events is typically available only in the developed world, and the best existing methods to produce global migration flow estimates are burdened by strong assumptions. We produce estimates of migration flows between all pairs of countries at 5-year intervals, revealing patterns obscured by previous estimation methods. In particular, our estimates reveal large bidirectional movements in all global regions, with roughly one-quarter of migration events consisting of returns to an individual’s country of birth.

      https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/12/18/1722334116


  • A Database of Fugitive Slave Ads Reveals Thousands of Untold Resistance Stories
    https://hyperallergic.com/435183/freedom-on-the-move

    Readers of the May 24, 1796 Pennsylvania Gazette found an advertisement offering ten dollars to any person who would apprehend Oney Judge, an enslaved woman who had fled from President George Washington’s Virginia plantation, Mount Vernon. The notice described her in detail as a “light mulatto girl, much freckled, with very black eyes and bushy black hair,” as well as her skills at mending clothes, and that she “may attempt to escape by water … it is probable she will attempt to pass as a free woman, and has, it is said, wherewithal to pay her passage.” She did indeed board a ship called the Nancy and made it to New Hampshire, where she later married a free black sailor, although she was herself never freed by the Washingtons and remained a fugitive.

    The advertisement is one of thousands that were printed in newspapers during colonial and pre-Civil War slavery in the United States. The Freedom on the Move (FOTM) public database project, now being developed at Cornell University, is the first major digital database to organize together North American fugitive slave ads from regional, state, and other collections. FOTM recently received its second of its two National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) digital humanities grants.

    Runaway Slaves in Britain :: Home
    https://www.runaways.gla.ac.uk


  • DevOps101 : How To Provide #infrastructure To Your #startup In 6 Easy Steps
    https://hackernoon.com/devops101-how-to-provide-infrastructure-to-your-startup-in-6-easy-steps-

    DevOps101: How To Provide Infrastructure To Your Startup In 7 Easy StepsI’m currently a teacher assistant 👨‍💻@ Técnico Lisboa, and I’m working closely with Dr. Professor Rui Cruz 👨‍🏫at the It Infrastructure Management and Administration 🖥, a masters level course @ Técnico Lisboa.Why?My experience as a professor opened my mind on how to use certain tools to achieve goals that me, as a student, want to reach. As a student, I’m responsible for a student’s group, GCE. Our project had some problems: it was very difficult and time-consuming to move from the conceptualization of an idea to its actually delivery.A good, automated infrastructure was the answer to our problem. It allowed saving lots of time and effort, which translated into a better product delivered faster. This technique is meant for the (...)

    #terraform #devops #heroku


  • The Tech Industry Is Broken and It’s Our Fault.
    https://hackernoon.com/the-tech-industry-is-broken-and-its-our-fault-43f29293a6be?source=rss---

    I was walking to Chipotle with my girlfriend yesterday when she mentioned that one of the questions on her final exam wanted her to model a map in a video game. As I’ve been playing Red Dead Redemption 2 for the last month this didn’t sound like a difficult question to grasp, however as a non-gamer Jessica said it took her more time trying to understand the concept than actually answering the question. The professor used Risk and Settlers Of Catan as examples, both of which are games she has never played. Ultimately Jessica answered the question using Sims as an example since you are able to move around the neighborhoods in a way similar to a map.Ever since Jessica declared her major in Computer Science I’ve been more focused on the different privileges that currently exist in the (...)

    #technology #inclusion #software-engineering #startup-lessons #diversity


  • [Essay] Machine Politics by Fred Turner | Harper’s Magazine
    https://harpers.org/archive/2019/01/machine-politics-facebook-political-polarization

    The rise of the internet and a new age of authoritarianism

    par Fred Turner

    “The Goliath of totalitarianism will be brought down by the David of the microchip,” Ronald Reagan said in 1989. He was speaking to a thousand British notables in London’s historic Guildhall, several months before the fall of the Berlin Wall. Reagan proclaimed that the world was on the precipice of “a new era in human history,” one that would bring “peace and freedom for all.” Communism was crumbling, just as fascism had before it. Liberal democracies would soon encircle the globe, thanks to the innovations of Silicon Valley. “I believe,” he said, “that more than armies, more than diplomacy, more than the best intentions of democratic nations, the communications revolution will be the greatest force for the advancement of human freedom the world has ever seen.”

    At the time, most everyone thought Reagan was right. The twentieth century had been dominated by media that delivered the same material to millions of people at the same time—radio and newspapers, movies and television. These were the kinds of one-to-many, top-down mass media that Orwell’s Big Brother had used to stay in power. Now, however, Americans were catching sight of the internet. They believed that it would do what earlier media could not: it would allow people to speak for themselves, directly to one another, around the world. “True personalization is now upon us,” wrote MIT professor Nicholas Negroponte in his 1995 bestseller Being Digital. Corporations, industries, and even whole nations would soon be transformed as centralized authorities were demolished. Hierarchies would dissolve and peer-to-peer collaborations would take their place. “Like a force of nature,” wrote Negroponte, “the digital age cannot be denied or stopped.”

    One of the deepest ironies of our current situation is that the modes of communication that enable today’s authoritarians were first dreamed up to defeat them. The same technologies that were meant to level the political playing field have brought troll farms and Russian bots to corrupt our elections. The same platforms of self-expression that we thought would let us empathize with one another and build a more harmonious society have been co-opted by figures such as Milo Yiannopoulos and, for that matter, Donald Trump, to turn white supremacy into a topic of dinner-­table conversation. And the same networked methods of organizing that so many thought would bring down malevolent states have not only failed to do so—think of the Arab Spring—but have instead empowered autocrats to more closely monitor protest and dissent.

    If we’re going to resist the rise of despotism, we need to understand how this happened and why we didn’t see it coming. We especially need to grapple with the fact that today’s right wing has taken advantage of a decades-long liberal effort to decentralize our media. That effort began at the start of the Second World War, came down to us through the counterculture of the 1960s, and flourishes today in the high-tech hothouse of Silicon Valley. It is animated by a deep faith that when engineering replaces politics, the alienation of mass society and the threat of totalitarianism will melt away. As Trump fumes on Twitter, and Facebook posts are linked to genocide in Myanmar, we are beginning to see just how misplaced that faith has been. Even as they grant us the power to communicate with others around the globe, our social-­media networks have spawned a new form of authoritarianism.

    #Fred_Turner #Autoritarisme #Médias_sociaux #Mobilisation #Extrême_droite


  • DevOps101 — First Steps on #terraform: Terraform + OpenStack + #ansible
    https://hackernoon.com/terraform-openstack-ansible-d680ea466e22?source=rss----3a8144eabfe3---4

    DevOps101 — First Steps on Terraform: Terraform + OpenStack + AnsibleI’m currently a teacher assistant 👨‍💻@ Técnico Lisboa, and I’m working closely with Dr. Professor Rui Cruz 👨‍🏫at the It Infrastructure Management and Administration 🖥, a masters level course @ Técnico Lisboa.This #tutorial aims to provide you with an introduction to Terraform. Terraform will be leveraging the deployment an infrastructure on OpenStack. Ansible will provision the deployed machines. We will use Vagrant to manage the machine with Terraform and Ansible installed.In DevOps101 — Infrastructure as Code With Vagrant (LAMP Stack), I’ve introduced the Agile #devops movement. It aims to automate work and allow you to launch faster.If you are planning to start a business or side-project, something that you have to take into account is (...)

    #open-source




  • Americans Are Increasingly Critical of Israel – Foreign Policy
    https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/11/americans-are-increasingly-critical-of-israel

    The firing of Professor Marc Lamont Hill as a CNN contributor after his speech at a United Nations event commemorating the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People has generated considerable debate about free speech that goes beyond the case itself—what is legitimate criticism of Israel, and what constitutes anti-Semitism. A recent University of Maryland public-opinion poll indicates that many aspects of Hill’s views are widely shared among the American public—and that these views are not reflective of anti-Semitic attitudes, or even of hostility toward Israel as such. On these issues, there is a gap between the mainstream media and U.S. politicians on the one hand, and the American public on the other.

    While many issues were raised about Hill, the part of his speech that received the most criticism was his call for a “free Palestine from the river to the sea,” which was seen by some as calling for the end of Israel. Hill himself clarified almost immediately that “my reference to ‘river to the sea’ was not a call to destroy anything or anyone. It was a call for justice, both in Israel and in the West Bank/Gaza.” In an op-ed he penned later, he acknowledged that the language he chose may have contributed to the misperception that he was advocating violence against Jewish people—and apologized for that.

    Trending Articles

    It’s Macron’s Destiny to Be Hated
    The French president can make all the concessions he wants, but he can’t make the public like him.
     
    Powered By
    But, perceptions aside, are Professor Hill’s views exceptional?

    The first issue to consider is advocacy for a one-state solution, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, with equal citizenship for all, which would in effect threaten Israel’s status as a Jewish-majority state, as Arabs might soon outnumber Jews on that territory. In fact, this solution has considerable support among the American public, as revealed in a University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll, fielded by Nielson Scarborough, which was conducted in September and October among a nationally representative sample of 2,352 Americans, with a 2 percent margin of error. When asked what outcome they want U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to seek in mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Americans are split between one state with equal citizenship and two states coexisting side by side: 35 percent say they want a one-state solution outright, while 36 percent advocate a two-state solution, 11 percent support maintaining the occupation, and 8 percent back annexation without equal citizenship. Among those between 18 and 34 years old, support for one state climbs to 42 percent.

    Furthermore, most of those who advocate a two-state solution tend to choose one state with equal citizenship if the two-state solution were no longer possible; the last time the survey asked this question, in November 2017, 55 percent of two-state solution backers said they would switch to one state in such circumstances. Bolstering this result is Americans’ views on the Jewishness and democracy of Israel: If the two-state solution were no longer possible, 64 percent of Americans would choose the democracy of Israel, even if it meant that Israel would cease to be a politically Jewish state, over the Jewishness of Israel, if the latter meant that Palestinians would not be fully equal.

    When one considers that many Israelis and Palestinians, as well as many Middle East experts, already believe that a two-state solution is no longer possible, especially given the large expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, it’s not hard to see why more people would be drawn to a one-state solution—or see the advocacy for two states as legitimizing the unjust status quo through the promise of something unattainable.

    Second, while most Americans have probably never heard of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement that Hill backs, our poll shows that a large number of Americans support imposing sanctions or more serious measures if Israeli settlements in the West Bank continue to expand: 40 percent of Americans support such measures, including a majority of Democrats (56 percent). This comes as senators, including Democrats, are proposing, despite continued ACLU opposition, to delegitimize and criminalize voluntary boycotts of Israel or settlements through the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, while not differentiating between Israeli settlements in the West Bank from those in Israel proper.

    Third, there is a growing sense that the Israeli government has “too much influence” on U.S. politics and policies: 38 percent of all Americans (including 55 percent of Democrats, and 44 percent of those under 35 years old), say the Israeli government has too much influence on the U.S. government, compared with 9 percent who say it has “too little influence” and 48 percent who say it has “about the right level of influence.” While the number of Jewish participants in the sample (115) is too small to generalize with confidence, it is notable that their views fall along the same lines of the national trend: 37 percent say Israel has too much influence, 54 percent say it has the right level, and 7 percent say it has too little influence.

    These results indicate neither a rise in anti-Semitism nor even a rise in hostility toward Israel as such. As analysis of previous polls has shown, many who espouse these opinions base them on a principled worldview that emphasizes human rights and international law.

    Keep in mind that, in a polarized America with deep political antagonism, it’s hardly surprising that Americans would have sharply divided views on Israelis and Palestinians. What many read as a rising anti-Israeli sentiment among Democrats is mischaracterized; it reflects anger toward Israeli policies—and increasingly, with the values projected by the current Israeli government.

    On the question of whether Americans want the Trump administration to lean toward Israel, toward the Palestinians, or toward neither side, there is a vast difference between Republicans and Democrats in the new poll: While a majority of Republicans want Washington to lean toward Israel outright (57 percent), a substantial majority of Democrats (82 percent) want it to lean toward neither side, with 8 percent wanting it to lean toward the Palestinians and 7 percent toward Israel. Still, it’s inaccurate to label the Democrats’ even-handedness as “anti-Israel.”


  • Amazon, AI and Medical Records: Do the Benefits Outweigh the Risks? - Knowledge Wharton
    http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/amazon-medical-records

    Last month, Amazon unveiled a service based on AI and machine-learning technology that could comb through patient medical records and extract valuable insights. It was seen as a game changer that could alleviate the administrative burden of doctors, introduce new treatments, empower patients and potentially lower health care costs. But it also carries risks to patient data privacy that calls for appropriate regulation, according to Wharton and other experts.

    Branded Comprehend Medical, the Amazon Web Services offering aims “to understand and analyze the information that is often trapped in free-form, unstructured medical text, such as hospital admission notes or patient medical histories.” Essentially, it is a natural language processing service that pores through medical text for insights into disease conditions, medications and treatment outcomes from patient notes and other electronic health records.

    The new service is Amazon’s latest foray into the health care sector. In June, the company paid $1 billion to buy online pharmacy PillPack, a Boston-based startup that specializes in packing monthly supplies of medicines to chronically ill patients. In January, Amazon teamed up with Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase to form a health care alliance that aims to lower costs and improve the quality of medical care for their employees.

    “Health care, like everything else, is becoming more of an information-based industry, and data is the gold standard — and Amazon knows as well as anyone how to handle and analyze data,” said Robert Field, Wharton lecturer in health care management who is also professor of health management and policy at Drexel University. “It’s a $3.5 trillion industry and 18% of our economy, so who wouldn’t want a piece of that?”

    AI offers “enormous” promise when it comes to bringing in new and improved treatments for patient conditions, such as in the area of radiology, added Hempstead. Machine learning also potentially enables the continual improvement of treatment models, such as identifying people who could participate in clinical trials. Moreover, Amazon’s service could “empower a consumer to be more in charge of their own health and maybe be more active consumer of medical services that might be beneficial to their health,” she said.

    On the flip side, it also could enable insurers to refuse to enroll patients that they might see as too risky, Hempstead said. Insurers are already accessing medical data and using technology in pricing their products for specific markets, and the Amazon service might make it easier for them to have access to such data, she noted.

    #Santé_publique #Données_médicales #Amazon #Intelligence_artificielle


  • Can We Really Inherit #Trauma? - The New York Times
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/health/mind-epigenetics-genes.html

    “These are, in fact, extraordinary claims, and they are being advanced on less than ordinary evidence,” said Kevin Mitchell, an associate professor of genetics and neurology at Trinity College, Dublin. “This is a malady in modern science: the more extraordinary and sensational and apparently revolutionary the claim, the lower the bar for the evidence on which it is based, when the opposite should be true.”

    Investigators in the field say the critique is premature: the science is still young and feeling its way forward. Studies in mice, in particular, have been offered as evidence of such trauma-transmission, and as a model for studying the mechanisms. “The effects we’ve found have been small but remarkably consistent, and significant,” said Moshe Szyf, a professor of pharmacology at McGill University. “This is the way science works. It’s imperfect at first and gets stronger the more research you do.”

    The debate centers on genetics and biology. Direct effects are one thing: when a pregnant woman drinks heavily, it can cause fetal alcohol syndrome. This happens because stress on a pregnant mother’s body is shared to some extent with the fetus, in this case interfering directly with the normal developmental program in utero.

    But no one can explain exactly how, say, changes in brain cells caused by abuse could be communicated to fully formed sperm or egg cells before conception. And that’s just the first challenge. After conception, when sperm meets egg, a natural process of cleansing, or “rebooting,” occurs, stripping away most chemical marks on the genes. Finally, as the fertilized egg grows and develops, a symphony of genetic reshuffling occurs, as cells specialize into brain cells, skin cells, and the rest. How does a signature of trauma survive all of that?

    #épigénétique



  • Smart Contracts, Part 2: The Legality
    https://hackernoon.com/smart-contracts-part-2-the-legality-761cc4be100d?source=rss----3a8144eab

    The legality of smart contracts is often ambiguous — regulations need to be clarified, and a smart dispute-resolution system must be created. The past few years have seen a global spike in the excitement over smart contracts and the #blockchain technology that supports them. But not everyone has gotten carried away, Wharton Legal Studies Professor Kevin Werbach is one such person.In a recent podcast, Werbach said, “Even though we think machines can render contracts effectively, there are lots of situations where they cannot.” This is a good rejoinder to those who proclaim that smart contracts have ‘solved’ contract law or that we can build a future without traditional government or legal systems.“Even though we think machines can render contracts effectively, there are lots of situations where (...)

    #cryptography #smart-contracts #smart-contract-legality #ethereum


  • The Smookes Speak at University of Colorado’s Disruptive #entrepreneurship Class
    https://hackernoon.com/the-smookes-speak-at-university-of-colorados-disruptive-entrepreneurship

    Hacker Noon Podcast: Live from BoulderPhoto Credit, StartEngine.com/HackerNoonUniversity of Boulder Live Edition: Linh & David Smooke Speak at Disruptive Entrepreneurship ClassHacker Noon CEO David Smooke & COO Linh Dao Smooke recently spoke at University of Colorado Boulder’s Disruptive Entrepreneurship class taught by Professor & Hacker Noon contributing writer Nathan Schneider.https://medium.com/media/7d62b7ed9608faba582ba082bfeb7538/hrefSome notable quotes:“On the internet right now, there is a massive battle going on between centralization and decentralization.” — David“It’s what drives us everyday: we know that people want to read more, write more and that people rally behind us when we are threatened by an external source.” — Linh“Know that the obstacles are only a day, and (...)

    #university-of-colorado #smookes-speak #live-tech-podcast #hackernoon-podcast


  • Des universitaires et des artistes israéliens mettent en garde contre une mise en équation de l’antisionisme et de l’antisémitisme
    22 novembre | Ofer Aderet pour Haaretz |Traduction J.Ch. pour l’AURDIP
    https://www.aurdip.org/des-universitaires-et-des-artistes.html

    Une lettre ouverte de 34 éminents Israéliens, dont des chercheurs en histoire juive et des lauréats du Prix Israël, a été publiée mardi dans les média autrichiens appelant à faire une différence entre critique légitime d’Israël, « aussi dure puisse-t-elle être », et antisémitisme.

    Cette lettre a été émise avant un rassemblement international à Vienne sur antisémitisme et antisionisme en Europe.

    L’ événement de cette semaine, « L’Europe par delà l’antisémitisme et l’antisionisme », se tient sous les auspices du Chancelier autrichien Sebastian Kurz. Son homologue israélien, Benjamin Netanyahu, devait y prendre part, mais est resté en Israël pour s’occuper de la crise dans sa coalition gouvernementale.

    « Nous adoptons et soutenons totalement le combat intransigeant [de l’Union Européenne] contre l’antisémitisme. La montée de l’antisémitisme nous inquiète. Comme nous l’a enseigné l’histoire, elle a souvent été l’annonce de désastres ultérieurs pour toute l’humanité », déclare la lettre.

    « Cependant, l’UE défend les droits de l’Homme et doit les protéger avec autant de force qu’elle combat l’antisémitisme. Il ne faudrait pas instrumentaliser ce combat contre l’antisémitisme pour réprimer la critique légitime de l’occupation par Israël et ses graves violations des droits fondamentaux des Palestiniens. » (...)

    #antisionisme #antisémitisme

    • La liste des signataires:
      Moshe Zimmerman, an emeritus professor at Hebrew University and a former director of the university’s Koebner Center for German History; Moshe Zukermann, emeritus professor of history and philosophy of science at Tel Aviv University; Zeev Sternhell, a Hebrew University emeritus professor in political science and a current Haaretz columnist; Israel Prize laureate, sculptor Dani Karavan; Israel Prize laureate, photographer Alex Levac; Israel Prize laureate, artist Michal Naaman; Gadi Algazi, a history professor at Tel Aviv University; Eva Illouz, a professor of Sociology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and former President of Bezalel Academy of Art and Design; Gideon Freudenthal, a professor in the Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas at Tel Aviv University; Rachel Elior, an Israeli professor of Jewish philosophy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Anat Matar, philosophy professor at Tel Aviv University; Yael Barda, a professor of Sociology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem; Miki Kratsman, a former chairman of the photography department at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design; Jose Brunner, an emeritus professor at Tel Aviv University and a former director of the Minerva Institute for German History; Alon Confino, a professor of Holocaust Studies at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst; Israel Prize laureate, graphic designer David Tartakover; Arie M. Dubnov, Chair of Israel Studies at George Washington University; David Enoch, history, philosophy and Judaic Studies professor at Israel’s Open University; Amos Goldberg, Jewish History and Contemporary Jewry professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Israel Prize laureate and vice-president of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities David Harel; Hannan Hever, comparative literature and Judaic Studies professor at Yale University; Hannah Kasher, professor emerita in Jewish Thought at Bar-Ilan University; Michael Keren, emeritus professor of economics at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Israel Prize laureate, Yehoshua Kolodny, professor emeritus in the Institute of Earth Sciences at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Nitzan Lebovic, professor of Holocaust studies at Lehigh University; Idith Zertal, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Dmitry Shumsky, professor of Jewish History at Hebrew University; Israel Prize laureate David Shulman, professor emeritus of Asian studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Ishay Rosen-Zvi, Jewish philosophy professor at Tel Aviv University; Dalia Ofer, professor emerita in Jewry and Holocaust Studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Paul Mendes-Flohr, professor emeritus for Jewish thoughts at the Hebrew University; Jacob Metzer, former president of Israel’s Open University; and Israel Prize laureate Yehuda Judd Ne’eman, professor emeritus at Tel Aviv University arts faculty

      #Palestine


  • Israeli academics and artists warn against equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism
    Their open letter ahead of a conference in Vienna advises against giving Israel immunity for ‘grave and widespread violations of human rights and international law’

    Ofer Aderet
    Nov 20, 2018

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israeli-professors-warn-against-equating-anti-zionism-with-anti-se

    An open letter from 35 prominent Israelis, including Jewish-history scholars and Israel Prize laureates, was published Tuesday in the Austrian media calling for a distinction between legitimate criticism of Israel, “harsh as it may be,” and anti-Semitism.
    To really understand Israel and the Middle East - subscribe to Haaretz
    The letter was released before an international gathering in Vienna on anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in Europe.
    The event this week, “Europe beyond anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism: Securing Jewish life in Europe,” is being held under the auspices of Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz. His Israeli counterpart, Benjamin Netanyahu, had been due to take part but stayed in Israel to deal with the crisis in his coalition government. 
    “We fully embrace and support the [European Union’s] uncompromising fight against anti-Semitism. The rise of anti-Semitism worries us. As we know from history, it has often signaled future disasters to all mankind,” the letter states. 
    Keep updated: Sign up to our newsletter
    Email* Sign up

    “However, the EU also stands for human rights and has to protect them as forcefully as it fights anti-Semitism. This fight against anti-Semitism should not be instrumentalized to suppress legitimate criticism of Israel’s occupation and severe violations of Palestinian human rights.” 

    The signatories accuse Netanyahu of suggesting an equivalence between anti-Israel criticism and anti-Semitism. The official declaration by the conference also notes that anti-Semitism is often expressed through disproportionate criticism of Israel, but the letter warns that such an approach could “afford Israel immunity against criticism for grave and widespread violations of human rights and international law.”
    The signatories object to the declaration’s alleged “identifying” of anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. “Zionism, like all other modern Jewish movements in the 20th century, was harshly opposed by many Jews, as well as by non-Jews who were not anti-Semitic,” they write. “Many victims of the Holocaust opposed Zionism. On the other hand, many anti-Semites supported Zionism. It is nonsensical and inappropriate to identify anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.”
    Among the signatories are Moshe Zimmerman, an emeritus professor at Hebrew University and a former director of the university’s Koebner Center for German History; Zeev Sternhell, a Hebrew University emeritus professor in political science and a current Haaretz columnist; sculptor Dani Karavan; Miki Kratsman, a former chairman of the photography department at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design; Jose Brunner, an emeritus professor at Tel Aviv University and a former director of the Minerva Institute for German History; Alon Confino, a professor of Holocaust Studies at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst; and graphic designer David Tartakover.

    Ofer Aderet
    Haaretz Correspondent

    Send me email alerts

    • La liste des signataires:
      Moshe Zimmerman, an emeritus professor at Hebrew University and a former director of the university’s Koebner Center for German History; Moshe Zukermann, emeritus professor of history and philosophy of science at Tel Aviv University; Zeev Sternhell, a Hebrew University emeritus professor in political science and a current Haaretz columnist; Israel Prize laureate, sculptor Dani Karavan; Israel Prize laureate, photographer Alex Levac; Israel Prize laureate, artist Michal Naaman; Gadi Algazi, a history professor at Tel Aviv University; Eva Illouz, a professor of Sociology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and former President of Bezalel Academy of Art and Design; Gideon Freudenthal, a professor in the Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas at Tel Aviv University; Rachel Elior, an Israeli professor of Jewish philosophy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Anat Matar, philosophy professor at Tel Aviv University; Yael Barda, a professor of Sociology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem; Miki Kratsman, a former chairman of the photography department at the Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design; Jose Brunner, an emeritus professor at Tel Aviv University and a former director of the Minerva Institute for German History; Alon Confino, a professor of Holocaust Studies at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst; Israel Prize laureate, graphic designer David Tartakover; Arie M. Dubnov, Chair of Israel Studies at George Washington University; David Enoch, history, philosophy and Judaic Studies professor at Israel’s Open University; Amos Goldberg, Jewish History and Contemporary Jewry professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Israel Prize laureate and vice-president of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities David Harel; Hannan Hever, comparative literature and Judaic Studies professor at Yale University; Hannah Kasher, professor emerita in Jewish Thought at Bar-Ilan University; Michael Keren, emeritus professor of economics at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Israel Prize laureate, Yehoshua Kolodny, professor emeritus in the Institute of Earth Sciences at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Nitzan Lebovic, professor of Holocaust studies at Lehigh University; Idith Zertal, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Dmitry Shumsky, professor of Jewish History at Hebrew University; Israel Prize laureate David Shulman, professor emeritus of Asian studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Ishay Rosen-Zvi, Jewish philosophy professor at Tel Aviv University; Dalia Ofer, professor emerita in Jewry and Holocaust Studies at Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Paul Mendes-Flohr, professor emeritus for Jewish thoughts at the Hebrew University; Jacob Metzer, former president of Israel’s Open University; and Israel Prize laureate Yehuda Judd Ne’eman, professor emeritus at Tel Aviv University arts faculty


  • About Disclosures and Information Asymmetry in Security Tokens
    https://hackernoon.com/about-disclosures-and-information-asymmetry-in-security-tokens-fc83c3505

    When we think about the foundational building blocks that need to be built in the next phase of security tokens, disclosures makes the top of the list. Information disclosures, or the lack thereof, is arguably the biggest roadblock in the evolution of crypto-securities and one that can make the difference between an efficient or an inefficient market. Professor Stephen McKeon often refers to the term “Disclosures Marketplace” as this component of security tokens that should enable transparency of public material information relevant to crypto-securities. While conceptually trivial, implementing effective token disclosures in a decentralized ecosystem is far from trivial. Today, I would like to explore some ideas in this area.The relevance of disclosures in security tokens goes beyond (...)

    #security-token-disclosure #information-asymmetry #security-token #blockchain #sto