Monthly Archives: August 2018

Abuse and Disinformation

Posted on by
Reply

Facebook is claiming to be adding a new tool for fighting these on its platform.

The Ad Archive API will allow researchers, journalists, publishers, and watchdog groups to efficiently analyze and search for ads to determine if anything untoward is happening.

Who, though, are going to be authorized access to the databases—which researchers, journalists, publishers, and watchdog groups, and what selection criteria will be used?  We’ve already seen how Facebook, under the guise of identifying what it’s pleased to call fake news, has selected “fact checkers” almost exclusively from the Left (a few tokens from the right have been invited)—Associated Press, Snopes.com, ABC News, and Politifact—as a mechanism for making the identification and then deleting the allegedly fake material.

We’ve also seen how, using this new capacity, Facebook censors and deletes Conservative posts and suspends Conservative accounts, and on being caught claiming “mistake” and undoing the deeds.  And continuing to make those “mistakes” apace.

Given Facebook‘s history of this, on what basis would we think this latest move has value?

Security and Hacking

Posted on by
Reply

The USAF and software company Merlin Cryption have developed a “cybersecurity technology”—and encryption technique—that has yet to be hacked, having been tried by the likes of Louisiana-based Cyber Innovation Center and the University of Louisiana in extensive testing.

The problem I have, based on published reporting and my status as a non-expert in the security field, is this from Brandon Brown, Merlin Cyrption’s CEO.

It uses a random data generator that never repeats a pattern. This puts it in a good position to overcome AI and Quantum computing….

Once you have a computer doing “random,” you’ve generated a pattern. Randomness requires access to infinitely large numbers with infinitely numbers of digits in them. Computers are bit-limited in how big a number they can represent—if nothing else, by the number of bits their storage media can hold and the number of bits their memory media can hold, much less the number of bits their CPU chips can process.  There is only so many unique draws from the population that a computer can do, even if that number approaches ginormosity.

Experts are optimistic.

One industry cybersecurity expert called the new technology “what the government has been looking for…a single solution to protect digital assets….”

No, this is just the convenience—and enormous risk—of putting all the eggs in one basket.  That’s not cool.

Understand: this is a valuable advance in security; it’s just not hack-proof.  Advances in computing power and in the horsiness of CPUs and storage will allow the hackers to catch up—and get back in the lead.  This is why even Merlin Cyrption won’t make any claim of hack-proof.

Flipping Witnesses

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump decries it.  So have I in writing about the Manafort case and the credibility of Mueller’s prosecutors’ witnesses.

What’s interesting to me and saddening, and what’s dangerous to our system of justice—which includes justice for the accused as well as the victim—is prosecutors’ response to Trump’s decrial.

Peter Zeidenberg, a former federal prosecutor, said that Mr Trump’s comments amount to “an absolutely outrageous statement and to any prosecutor would just be shocking to hear.”

“It’s hard to overstate how fundamental” to prosecutions cooperating witnesses are, Mr Zeidenberg said.

And Stephen Gillers, a New York University School of Law professor:

Trump’s idea would effectively demolish one of the basic and valuable tools of criminal law enforcement in the US.

It’s dangerous for our prosecutors to so blatantly and avidly rely on their ability to do the testifying by using the mouths of “witnesses” they’ve either browbeaten into testifying in a certain way or who’ve sold their testimony to the prosecutors like Thursday night hookers.

If the prosecutors can’t make their case without such witnesses, they don’t have a case to make.

Voting and Respect

Posted on by
Reply

I received a text message from a representative of Beto O’Rourke, Texas’ Progressive-Democratic Party US Senate candidate:

Hi Edward, this is [the rep] volunteering w/ Beto O’Rourke’s campaign for US Senate. We’re texting Texas voters today about the upcoming November election. Will you be voting for Beto O’Rourke or Ted Cruz for Senate?

I texted her back:

I’ll be voting for the one who respects our flag, our national anthem, and generations of veterans who have fought, been maimed, and killed to defend the rights of others, in the words of John Kerry, to be stupid.

You might find my blog interesting: APlebesSite.com.

“Nothing More American”

Posted on by
1

Texas Senate Progressive-Democratic Party candidate Beto O’Rourke has said, in response to a question about NFL players kneeling during our national anthem

I can think of nothing more American than to peacefully stand up, or take a knee for your rights anytime, anywhere, any place.

It’s the American thing to do to kneel and disparage our national anthem, to deprecate our flag, to insult generations of veterans who have fought, been maimed, and been killed for the right of folks like this…candidate…and those NFL personages to insult of the symbol and defenders of that right.

Right.

Remember the Progressive-Democrat’s version of respect and of patriotism this fall.