[…] This is the real way that the internet is changing society. Where 20 years ago, those people would have struggled to find each other, now they are only a keyboard and screen away. That’s not to deny the benefits of more internet access and the education it brings. But the deeper changes will play out long after this week’s events have been forgotten.
His name is José Zamora, and he had a routine.
During his months-long job search, he says he logged onto his computer every morning and combed the internet for listings, applying to everything he felt qualified for. In the Buzzfeed video above, he estimates that he sent out between 50 to 100 resumes a day — which is, in a word, impressive.
But Zamora said he wasn’t getting any responses, so on a hunch, he decided to drop the “s” in his name. José Zamora became Joe Zamora, and a week later, he says his inbox was full.
I saw this news in the Being Latino Facebook page. Some would say that this is mere coincidence, that we already live in a post-racial society and that he would have gotten the next job. But every now and then a news story rehashes this experience in a different context. Even papers have been written about this phenomenon. And it keeps reminding us that a non-discriminatory society is a long time from being true, and closing our eyes to this reality won’t make it true sooner.
Most of you are probably surprised to find a post about Richard Dawkins under the wingnuts category, but what he’s done here is hardly pro-reason. It is more in line with what someone like a Pamela Geller would do, not someone who is supposed to be rationalists. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with criticizing Islam, or any other religion for that matter, this is not critiquing the religion from a skeptical or rationalist perspective. Dawkins has promoted a man ( and I’m guessing he’s a man ) who promotes bigotry and conspiracy theories. He has basically come out and endorsed the bigoted anti Muslim “counter jihad.”
Richard Dawkins promotes following @jihadistjoe on twitter. The following screen grabs are from the same day Dawkins endorsed, but just before he tweeted his endorsement.
Should what Rebecca Schoenkopf found surprise anyone?
Jerad and Amanda Miller, the super-patriots who gunned down a couple of cops and a lady who was going to Wal-Mart in Vegas yesterday, may have bragged constantly to all their neighbors about their guns and about how they’d been hanging at Bundy Ranch with fellow super-patriot Cliven Bundy, but Jim Hoft, the Stupidest Man on the Internet, knows what really drove them: They were Socialists, Dude. Say what you want about their tenets, at least it’s an ethos.
Where would Jim Hoft get the idea that the Millers were Socialists?
These “satire” news sites like the National Journal and the Daily Currant are a poison to rational and truthful discourse on the internet. About once a week it seems like, I see some stupid story (usually in my Facebook feed) that - in the words of Charles Johnson in a LGF comment - “prey[s] on people’s ignorance and confirmation bias.”
The New Republic tackles these pernicious sites head on.
While it takes a particularly keen immunity to irony to fall for an Onion article these days, The Daily Currant is a fake-news site of a different stripe: one entirely devoid of jokes. Whether this humorlessness is intentional or not—the site’s founder contends his critics don’t have a sense of subtlety—the site’s business model as an ad-driven clickbait-generator relies on it. When Currant stories go viral, it’s not because their satire contains essential truths, but rather because their satire is taken as truth—and usually that “truth” is engineered to outrage a particular frequency of the political spectrum. As Slate’s Josh Voorhees wrote after Drudge fell for the Bloomberg story, “It’s a classic Currant con, one that relies on its mark wanting to believe a particular story is true.”
And these sites make a lot of money. I don’t suggest checking any of these Onion-wannabe sites, as your browser will be flooded with advertisements and cookies. They’re making money on people’s fears and confirmation biases. It’s sickening. It’s also protected speech and a money maker for unscrupulous folks.
Writing for Medium, Quinn Norton argues that every computer, tablet, cellphone, Linux-embedded device, has as many security holes as a block of Swiss cheese. All it would take is someone clever enough to find a hole and exploit it.
It’s already happened, but for relatively innocent purposes.
Recently an anonymous hacker wrote a script that took over embedded Linux devices. These owned computers scanned the whole rest of the internet and created a survey that told us more than we’d ever known about the shape of the internet. The little hacked boxes reported their data back (a full 10 TBs) and quietly deactivated the hack. It was a sweet and useful example of someone who hacked the planet to shit. If that malware had actually been malicious, we would have been so fucked.
This is because all computers are reliably this bad: the ones in
hospitals and governments and banks, the ones in your phone, the ones that control light switches and smart meters and air traffic control systems. Industrial computers that maintain infrastructure and manufacturing are even worse. I don’t know all the details, but those who do are the most alcoholic and nihilistic people in computer security. Another friend of mine accidentally shut down a factory with a malformed ping at the beginning of a pen test. For those of you who don’t know, a ping is just about the smallest request you can send to another computer on the network. It took them a day to turn everything back on.
Even the so-called secure protocols, like the Off The Record messaging app that Edward Snowden recommended to Glenn Greenwald, sits on top of libraries that are not bulletproof, she says. There is only the illusion of security and anonymity.
The Intelligence Community can take advantage of porous electronic security. Spooks are so used to being under surveillance themselves that they don’t seem to understand why expansive surveillance is not such a good thing. Instead, Norton argues, the IC needs to understand why people would want privacy.
But, she says, most of us seem quite willing to hand other people the electronic keys to our private lives, by passively accepting the poorly secured operating systems and apps we use every day.
As our desires conflict with the IC, we become less and less worthy of rights and considerations in the eyes of the IC. When the NSA hoards exploits and interferes with cryptographic protection for our infrastructure, it means using exploits against people who aren’t part of the NSA just doesn’t count as much. Securing us comes after securing themselves.
In theory, the reason we’re so nice to soldiers, that we have customs around honoring and thanking them, is that they’re supposed to be sacrificing themselves for the good of the people. In the case of the NSA, this has been reversed. Our wellbeing is sacrificed to make their job of monitoring the world easier. When this is part of the culture of power, it is well on its way to being capable of any abuse.
The general public needs to draw a line in the sand, and say “Go no further.”
Remember that new creationist movie Charles Johnson recently talked about here? Based on what EssenceOfThought says in his most recent video, it sounds like they don’t take lightly to people critical of their new movie.
Such “good” “Christians” bearing false witness against people who simply disagree with them. They must have a lot of faith in their ability to argue their point if they have to silence people critical of them like this.
If what EssenceOFThought is saying is true, this just goes to show how vacuous creationist arguments really are.
The Founder of Wikipedia just power owned some believers in medical pseudoscience quackery. A ton of them in fact. They demanded, much like creationists, that their ideas be treated “fairly” rather than totally discredit Jimmy Wales, and Wikipedia. Of course given the fact that their claims are baseless, there’s no way they could have done that. Instead “holistic healing” supporters, demanded that Wikipedia lower its standards and allow them to cite unreliable sources and treat them as fact. Again this is very similar to what creationists do, demanding equal time.
Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales Responds to change.org Petition Asking That “Holistic Approaches to Healing” Be Taken Seriously
You mean people don’t have to do whatever a change.org petition tells them to do?
People in the “holistic healing” community don’t like how they’re being written about on Wikipedia, so they started a change.org petition asking that Wikipedia put policies in place for their nonsense to be taken just as seriously as actual science. Jimmy Wales responded and forever won our respect.
Recently, I became the first person in the history of Ars Technica to have a gold—rather than black—user name.
How did I get this blinged-out honor? I bought it for the low, low price of 500 Arscoins—the latest digital cryptocurrency to hit the Internet. Arscoin is one of around 100 or so “altcoins,” or alternative bitcoins, derived from the same source code as the original cryptocurrency.
The existing Bitcoin community has an inherent distrust of many altcoins. Bitcoin forums are replete with discussions of “pump and dump” scams, where the originators of a new altcoin might “pre-mine” coins, release their currency to the general public, and market their hot new cryptocurrency hard in order to drive the price up. Then the creators simply sell off their coins at a profit and walk away. It’s one of the oldest financial tricks in the book.
But other altcoin creators are true believers in anarcho-capitalism, or they simply find Bitcoin and its derivatives new and interesting. And not all altcoins are quite as ridiculous as they may seem; even Dogecoin, which was jokingly based on an image meme, has an on-paper market capitalization of more than $60 million.