#China Information Protection Law

[thelawandmore]

Recent Developments in Data Privacy and Their Implications for Business 

Recent Developments in Data Privacy and Their Implications for Business

Data privacy is a hot topic in today’s digital world. Here are nine recent developments that changed the data privacy landscape and what they mean for businesses and consumers.  1. The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into force in May 2018, creating a unified data protection framework across the EU and giving individuals more control over their personal data. The EU General…

[evilminji]

Actually? You know what would be darkly hilarious?

If, when the GIW can't get ghosts declared both malicious AND non-sapient/sentient? They push for "dumb animals" instead.

Which is accepted. Ghosts are animals. Checks out, says scientists everywhere.

HOW "dumb"?

What? Says the GIW, mid-victory high fives. They did not expect a follow up question. They SHOULD have, as this is the SCIENTIFIC community and that is literally their job, but here we are.

How. "Dumb"? The scientists repeate slower. What methodology did you use? What is your sample size? Are their different sub-species? Is this dimension like ours? Is Ghost the equivalent to Mammal? It says here their are humanoid ones.

What IQ are we talking about here and HOW DID YOU TEST??

A goldfish, parrot, and dolphin are all animals. WILDLY different levels of intelligence. You can't treat them the same. Technically speaking, WE are animals.

The GIW does not like where this conversation is going. Tries to shut it down.

.......well NOW the scientists are both offended AND invested. How DARE you try to push faulty science and hide the Truth from them! They're gonna do their OWN studies! *picks up the phone and dials that one embarrassing spiritualist friend they had in college* Hey! You still think you can summon ghosts? I'll pay you to try it for Science!

And like? As a Ghost? It's degrading as hell. But ALSO these fuckos just Whoopsie'd you into having both protections under the law, since animal abuse IS illegal, AND just put the ENTIRE planets scientific community on their asses.... by accident.

So you take a deeeeeeep breath you don't even need. Remember you're doing this for the little ghost babies and fluffy ghost animals. And show up at a research facility like "yes, hello, I am Ghost. Here for you to poke and prod at. Please ask me to name the object on the flash card or whatever IQ tests do these days."

Should you HAVE to prove your own fucking sentience? No. But? You do it. You're even polite about it. Ask for a copy of the study they plan to publish so you can BEAT some mother fuckers with it. The scientists nod in understanding and use the BIG font for your copy so it'll hurt more.

They've been there.

And just? Shitty people getting what they wanted only to have it blow up in their faces?? I see all these angst "but what if they were declared ANIMALS" prompts and I just?? Are we talking PARROT or goldfish!? One has the average intelligence of about a human 4yr old and the other is a FISH! People get RIGHTFULLY furious when you treat INTELLIGENT animals badly.

And would, in fact, adapt pretty easy to discovering one of said animal has become HUMAN lvl intelligent. It's easy to grasp the idea of human intelligence lvl dolphin or monkeys. Maybe there was some mutated strain, maybe in uetro tampering. Who knows. But if I tried to sell you a human intelligent housefly? Gold fish? Lizard?

You wouldn't believe me. There is some kind of trick at play.

So if GHOSTS are seen as animals? Everyone nods and then later? Someone comes in TV and very excitedly informs you "we found INTELLIGENT LIFE amongst the ghosts!" You'd believe it. Probably be really excited by your conversation starter for the day. Get a taco and move on with your life.

But? Having to willing sit for a barrage of testing? Is going to suuuuuuck so bad. Poor Danny. SATs all over again. For HOURS. At multiple facilities, just to be CERTAIN it's not a one off. All because he not certain he can insure good behavior from other ghosts and This Is IMPORTANT. He ALSO can't be certain it's even SAFE.

Might be a trap.

But if he has to do it again and again and again? Mexico to Bavaria to China to the Maldives? If this is what it takes for the scientific community to bitchslap the GIW into ORBIT before the UN? Hand him that pencil.

He has no where more important to be.

@hdgnj @nerdpoe @mutable-manifestation @ailithnight @the-witchhunter

[mostlysignssomeportents]

China hacked Verizon, AT&T and Lumen using the FBI’s backdoor

On OCTOBER 23 at 7PM, I'll be in DECATUR, presenting my novel THE BEZZLE at EAGLE EYE BOOKS.

State-affiliated Chinese hackers penetrated AT&T, Verizon, Lumen and others; they entered their networks and spent months intercepting US traffic – from individuals, firms, government officials, etc – and they did it all without having to exploit any code vulnerabilities. Instead, they used the back door that the FBI requires every carrier to furnish:

https://www.wsj.com/tech/cybersecurity/u-s-wiretap-systems-targeted-in-china-linked-hack-327fc63b?st=C5ywbp&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

In 1994, Bill Clinton signed CALEA into law. The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act requires every US telecommunications network to be designed around facilitating access to law-enforcement wiretaps. Prior to CALEA, telecoms operators were often at pains to design their networks to resist infiltration and interception. Even if a telco didn't go that far, they were at the very least indifferent to the needs of law enforcement, and attuned instead to building efficient, robust networks.

Predictably, CALEA met stiff opposition from powerful telecoms companies as it worked its way through Congress, but the Clinton administration bought them off with hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies to acquire wiretap-facilitation technologies. Immediately, a new industry sprang into being; companies that promised to help the carriers hack themselves, punching back doors into their networks. The pioneers of this dirty business were overwhelmingly founded by ex-Israeli signals intelligence personnel, though they often poached senior American military and intelligence officials to serve as the face of their operations and liase with their former colleagues in law enforcement and intelligence.

Telcos weren't the only opponents of CALEA, of course. Security experts – those who weren't hoping to cash in on government pork, anyways – warned that there was no way to make a back door that was only useful to the "good guys" but would keep the "bad guys" out.

These experts were – then as now – dismissed as neurotic worriers who simultaneously failed to understand the need to facilitate mass surveillance in order to keep the nation safe, and who lacked appropriate faith in American ingenuity. If we can put a man on the moon, surely we can build a security system that selectively fails when a cop needs it to, but stands up to every crook, bully, corporate snoop and foreign government. In other words: "We have faith in you! NERD HARDER!"

NERD HARDER! has been the answer ever since CALEA – and related Clinton-era initiatives, like the failed Clipper Chip program, which would have put a spy chip in every computer, and, eventually, every phone and gadget:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip

America may have invented NERD HARDER! but plenty of other countries have taken up the cause. The all-time champion is former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who, when informed that the laws of mathematics dictate that it is impossible to make an encryption scheme that only protects good secrets and not bad ones, replied, "The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia":

https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-laws-of-australia-will-trump-the-laws-of-mathematics-turnbull/

CALEA forced a redesign of the foundational, physical layer of the internet. Thankfully, encryption at the protocol layer – in the programs we use – partially counters this deliberately introduced brittleness in the security of all our communications. CALEA can be used to intercept your communications, but mostly what an attacker gets is "metadata" ("so-and-so sent a message of X bytes to such and such") because the data is scrambled and they can't unscramble it, because cryptography actually works, unlike back doors. Of course, that's why governments in the EU, the US, the UK and all over the world are still trying to ban working encryption, insisting that the back doors they'll install will only let the good guys in:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/05/theyre-still-trying-to-ban-cryptography/

Any back door can be exploited by your adversaries. The Chinese sponsored hacking group know as Salt Typhoon intercepted the communications of hundreds of millions of American residents, businesses, and institutions. From that position, they could do NSA-style metadata-analysis, malware injection, and interception of unencrypted traffic. And they didn't have to hack anything, because the US government insists that all networking gear ship pre-hacked so that cops can get into it.

This isn't even the first time that CALEA back doors have been exploited by a hostile foreign power as a matter of geopolitical skullduggery. In 2004-2005, Greece's telecommunications were under mass surveillance by US spy agencies who wiretapped Greek officials, all the way up to the Prime Minister, in order to mess with the Greek Olympic bid:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_wiretapping_case_2004%E2%80%9305

This is a wild story in so many ways. For one thing, CALEA isn't law in Greece! You can totally sell working, secure networking gear in Greece, and in many other countries around the world where they have not passed a stupid CALEA-style law. However the US telecoms market is so fucking huge that all the manufacturers build CALEA back doors into their gear, no matter where it's destined for. So the US has effectively exported this deliberate insecurity to the whole planet – and used it to screw around with Olympic bids, the most penny-ante bullshit imaginable.

Now Chinese-sponsored hackers with cool names like "Salt Typhoon" are traipsing around inside US telecoms infrastructure, using the back doors the FBI insisted would be safe.

Tor Books as just published two new, free LITTLE BROTHER stories: VIGILANT, about creepy surveillance in distance education; and SPILL, about oil pipelines and indigenous landback.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/10/07/foreseeable-outcomes/#calea

Image: Kris Duda, modified https://www.flickr.com/photos/ahorcado/5433669707/

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

[accio-victuuri]

xiao zhan - shanghai jiuze law firm update on cases

Shanghai Jiuze Law Firm has accepted the entrustment of Xiao Zhan Studio and Xiao Zhan to carry out evidence preservation and litigation protection work and investigate the case where users of relevant online platforms continued to publish information that insulted and slandered Xiao Zhan and other suspected infringements, and allegedly infringed on Xiao Zhan's legal rights and interests.

At present, sina weibo uses “椰饽饽”(UID:5190008370)、“二千的颂伊”(UID: 6459308408); douban users“豆友5516575205”(豆瓣ID:252175254)、“小比爱比饭” (豆瓣ID:213393093) are suspected of fabricating false information, publicly making insulting and defamatory remarks against Xiao Zhan, and infringing on Xiao Zhan's reputation rights. This firm has completed the evidence fixation and will file a lawsuit with the court as soon as possible, requesting the court to order the relevant network platforms to disclose the real name identity information of the involved network users in accordance with the law, and hold them accountable through litigation.

Our firm has now accepted Xiao Zhan’s entrustment to pay close attention to online public opinion, notify relevant online platforms to actively perform their supervisory obligations as network service providers, and promptly take measures such as blocking and disconnecting infringement content that infringes upon Xiao Zhan’s legitimate rights and interests. To avoid further expansion of the damage caused by infringement. We will also continue to collect evidence and hold accountable those who fail to stop the infringement or those with serious infringement, and will never tolerate it, so as to stop the relevant infringement and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Xiao Zhan.

Our firm is entrusted to remind and advise Internet users: please immediately stop publishing and disseminating remarks that are suspected of infringing on Xiao Zhan’s reputation rights.

Cyberspace is not a place outside the law, and we cannot act arbitrarily without cost or burden. We should actively respond to the relevant clarification special actions launched by the Cyberspace Administration of China to jointly create a civilized and healthy network environment.

[mollyjimbly]

🚨🚨🚨DANGEROUS INTERNET CENSORSHIP/SURVEILLANCE BILLS WILL NUKE THE INTERNET AS WE KNOW IT🚨🚨🚨

WE WILL BE SPIED ON DUE TO NO ENCRYPTION

LGBTQ CONTENT WILL BE WIPED FROM THE INTERNET

SEX WORKERS WILL BE CRIMINALIZED

The EARN IT Act of 2023 threatens to undermine online encryption by punishing companies that provide encryption services. And by repeating the same mistakes as a previous bill called SESTA/FOSTA, it would lead to widespread Internet censorship and crackdowns on marginalized communities. When EARN IT was previously introduced in 2020 and 2022, it was shelved in the face of overwhelming public outcry and opposition from human rights groups. Now, lawmakers are introducing EARN IT for a third time, hoping to pass it and break the internet while we’re distracted.

KOSA claims to make kids safer, but it’s really a dangerous censorship bill that would give the government unprecedented control over the internet. This would put youth in danger by preventing them from accessing potentially life-saving resources. Lawmakers concerned about online safety should reject KOSA and instead work to protect all internet users from abusive tech companies by passing a Federal data privacy law.

Lawmakers claim the RESTRICT Act addresses privacy and security concerns around TikTok. But this is about so much more than just TikTok. RESTRICT gives Biden (and all future presidents!) extraordinary new powers to ban Americans from using entire apps simply by claiming they pose a “threat to national security,” outside of any democratic process. Politicians are pushing this bill to show they’re “tough on China”—but instead of protecting us, this law would lead to an internet censored by the president.

Regressive states across the country are taking away teenagers’ online rights. It started in Utah with two laws that create a mandated social media “bedtime” and give parents complete control over their kids’ accounts, messages, and passwords. Utah lawmakers claim their curfew-and-control bills help children, but these bills actually make children less safe by increasing state and parental surveillance and restricting access to community. To make matters worse, legislation like this is spreading. Arkansas has passed a copycat bill. Louisiana and Texas are trying to follow Utah’s lead, and it’s been introduced federally in Congress.

STOP CSAM wouldn’t actually stop CSAM. Instead, it would make CSAM cases harder to prosecute—like SESTA/FOSTA before it—while reducing privacy protections in ways that would harm vulnerable people. Like EARN IT, STOP CSAM undermines end-to-end encryption, a technology that’s vital for LGBTQ+ youth, survivors of interpersonal violence and stalking, abortion seekers and providers, and activists. Weakening E2EE as a means to funnel more information to law enforcement also sets an alarming precedent for government surveillance. All of us, including children, need to be able to communicate in the digital age without our conversations being spied on.

ALSO WE CAN TACKLE ALL OF THEM TOGETHER, LINKS BELOW

DISCORD THAT YOU CAN JOIN

[mariacallous]

TikTok went all out to defend itself in a court hearing last Monday, to block a law that could force TikTok to be sold or banned in the United States. That included using one surprising strategy: to bring other Chinese apps down with it.

Earlier this year, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), which aims to prevent national security threats from apps like TikTok, took less than two months to pass both the House and the Senate, before it was swiftly signed by President Joe Biden in April. It caught almost everyone by surprise, including TikTok. The law requires TikTok to find a US buyer to take over its operation soon, or face being banned in the US. TikTok promptly sued the government over it.

At the Court of Appeals in Washington, DC, on September 16, Andrew Pincus, a partner at law firm Mayer Brown acting for TikTok, argued that the law unfairly targets the social media app for the speech on the platform and that it violates the First Amendment. Specifically, Pincus said the law exempts other Chinese apps that could have been doing worse on the concern of data security protection.

“There are very significant ecommerce sites based in China and other places that collect much more data than TikTok does. Very sensitive data,” Pincus said. At another point in the hearing, he narrowed down the targets to “two Chinese, two e-commerce sites that would certainly meet all of the other criteria in the law.”

Pincus did not name-drop the two sites in his statements, but a TikTok court filing from August 15 cited the privacy policies of Shein and Temu—two ecommerce companies linked to China—to make the same argument Pincus made. The filing also cited research from April 2023 on the data risks of these two companies, collated by the US–China Economic and Security Review Commission.

Shein and Temu came from China’s fiercely competitive ecommerce industry and were able to take over the world by storm by shipping low-cost apparels and goods globally. Each boasts tens of millions of customers around the world, and they are often compared to TikTok as the rare examples of Chinese tech companies that have truly succeeded in the US.

TikTok, however, claims there’s an exemption clause in the PAFACA Act that essentially protects Chinese companies like Shein and Temu but not TikTok. When defining what companies are covered, the Act has only one exclusion: companies and products “whose primary purpose is to allow users to post product reviews, business reviews, or travel information and reviews.”

To be fair, the clause that TikTok highlighted was a bewildering inclusion from the beginning. Even some lawmakers claimed they weren’t sure why it was necessary to put in place such an exception.

But TikTok is seizing this opportunity to argue that, because the clause would likely protect Shein, Temu, and similar ecommerce sites that also have significant presence in the US and collect a wealth of privacy data, the Act is narrowly tailored to punish TikTok. It went as far as to claim that the clause shows Congress favors topics like products, business, and travel instead of politics, religion, and entertainment, making it a First Amendment infringement. The DOJ has denied this characterization in written court briefs.

It is a valid legal strategy, Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota Law School, explains to WIRED, as the First Amendment can consider a law unconstitutional “if the law hinges on solving a particular problem, does so in an extremely limited way, and leaves the law unsolved.”

But the judge didn’t seem to buy the argument. “It’s a rather blinkered view that the statute just singles out one company,” said Judge Douglas Ginsburg during the hearing. “It describes a category of companies, all of which are owned by or controlled by adversary powers, and subjects one company to an immediate necessity because it’s engaged in two years of negotiation with that company, held innumerable hearings, meeting after meeting after meeting, [and] an attempt to reach an agreement on a national security arrangement which failed.”

The DOJ also replied to TikTok’s problem with the exclusion clause, saying in a court brief that if the clause were to be found problematic, the right solution would be to simply take out that clause about excluding businesses, instead of invalidating the whole law.

In recent years, data security concerns have become one of the main friction points in tech policies in the US and China. While the Chinese government passed a law that regulates cross-border data transfers, the US government has taken a more piecemeal approach, investigating risks posed by products like TikTok and Chinese-made smart cars.

Some experts and lawmakers advocate for a more comprehensive legal framework to solve this issue. “This bill not only fails to solve the problem, but also jeopardizes the free speech and livelihoods of 170 million Americans who use the app. Instead, Congress should pass a bill to prevent apps, whether it's TikTok or any other social media platform, from collecting or transferring data and make foreign interference in social media algorithms illegal,” said Representative Ro Khanna in an emailed statement. Khanna voted no on the PAFACA bill.

For now, Chinese ecommerce sites like Shein and Temu have faced much less scrutiny around data security than TikTok. But TikTok’s legal strategy of highlighting the alleged data security risks of other Chinese companies will no doubt put more pressure on them. If TikTok fails its legal challenge and is banned from operating in the US unless it is sold, it’s not hard to imagine that lawmakers might turn their attention to other prominent Chinese tech companies.

“There might be some kind of legal strategy behind this, but in terms of how the public will now perceive TikTok, it has voluntarily opted to be associated with Temu and Shein and has undone a lot of the narrative work it has been trying to do,” says Ivy Yang, the founder of Wavelet Strategy, a strategic PR consultancy who has worked in Alibaba’s PR department.

By comparing TikTok’s data security concerns to Shein’s and Temu’s, the company essentially has labeled itself among a number of Chinese companies considered security risks.

So far, Shein and Temu have not made any statement about the PAFACA bill and its potential implications on their businesses. A Shein spokesperson responded in an emailed statement: “SHEIN has robust data security policies and practices in line with industry standards, and we are committed to only collecting and using the minimum amount of data needed to fulfill orders. SHEIN stores US customer data within Microsoft’s US-based Azure cloud-based solution and within AWS’s US-based cloud-based solution.” Temu and TikTok did not reply to requests for comment.

These ecommerce companies have plenty of problems to deal with at the moment too. A September White House decision to scrap a tariff exemption policy could significantly increase shipping costs for them and harm their profitability. Meanwhile, the two ecommerce companies have been embroiled in a tit-for-tat legal battle in the US since July 2023, accusing each other of monopolistic practices and deceptive marketing.

“What they are doing is basically airing all the dirty laundry,” Yang says about the Shein–Temu court fights. “It’s very much, ‘We are competitors and we have to beat the other party no matter how far we go, even though as a whole it’s a terrible look on Chinese companies.’” The same problem is playing out as TikTok seemingly decided to take down its fellow Chinese companies to save itself in the court.

But TikTok’s gambit may not pay off in the end. Even if it successfully argues that the Congress shouldn’t just target one app for its data security risks, it still needs to refute the government’s other justification for the law—that TikTok could be subject to content and algorithm manipulation by the Chinese government in the future. “The law has used two justifications. [If] one is invalid and the other is valid, the law is still valid,” says Rozenshtein.

There has been no proof—at least not in the nonredacted materials—that the Chinese government is currently interfering with TikTok’s content in the US. But during last week’s hearing, none of the judges seemed interested in discussing this point with TikTok or the government.

“[TikTok] made the best argument they could. Just the argument went very poorly for them,” Rozenshtein says. “I don’t think it’s conceivable that TikTok will win, at least on this level.”

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this press release from the Center for Biological Diversity:

The UNESCO World Heritage Committee renewed its call today for urgent action to protect the critically endangered vaquita porpoise in Mexico. With merely six to eight individuals estimated remaining, the vaquita faces imminent extinction from entanglement in illegal fishing gear.

The committee agreed to retain the Islands and Protected Areas of the Gulf of California World Heritage site — the only home to vaquita — on its List of World Heritage in Danger. In its review, the committee determined that Mexico’s recent enforcement actions to quell illegal fishing in the area were “not fully effective” in protecting the vaquita. The committee also approved a suite of corrective measures for Mexico to implement to safeguard the species.

“I appreciate the committee’s continued pressure, but it’s disheartening that Mexico still hasn’t kept its promises to protect the quickly vanishing vaquita,” said Alejandro Olivera, senior scientist and Mexico representative at the Center for Biological Diversity, who is attending the committee meeting in Delhi. “Despite a 2020 ban, lethal gillnets still plague these little porpoises’ habitat. Mexico needs to step up immediately, expand the vaquita’s protected area, and enforce the law by stopping illegal fishing.”

Under the World Heritage Convention, a site may be listed as “in danger” if development projects or major public works threaten the natural values the site was designated to protect. According to UNESCO, the aim of the list is to “inform the international community” of the situation and “encourage corrective action.”

The vaquita population has declined drastically, falling from nearly 600 in 1997 to fewer than 10 in 2024 because of entanglement in gillnets used for illegal fishing. These nets target shrimp and a variety of fish, including totoaba, an endangered species whose swim bladder is coveted in China. Despite some reduction in illegal fishing within a no-fishing zone known as the zero tolerance area, the practice remains widespread outside this zone, posing a continuous threat to the vaquita’s survival.

The committee decided that for the “in danger” designation to be lifted, Mexico must enact the following corrective measures:

implement sustainable fishing practices that avoid harming marine life

demonstrate a five-year increase in the vaquita population with healthy individuals and calves

effectively protect the area from illegal fishing

eliminate gillnets from the Vaquita Refuge and Biosphere Reserve

collaborate internationally to combat illegal totoaba poaching and trafficking

[noticiassincensura]

Russia to ban Discord: nearly 40 million people, including gamers and developers, will be cut off.

A new blow for every gamer or developer in Russia, another method to control information and the channels from which it comes and goes. The world is becoming less global, and freedom of speech is being censored under the guise of supposed security that has the planet on edge. In the U.S. and Europe, as well as China, Korea, or Japan, social media is being censored, as many documents have shown, to combat so-called “fake news,” misinformation, and sensitive information. After Telegram, now Discord is next, with Russia set to shut it down in days.

Globalism is over, and now it’s time for the protectionism typical of a pre-war scenario, if we’re not already in several wars and that isn’t enough. The control of information and media is vital, and platforms like Telegram, X, or Discord, following the internal regulations that Meta and Google are facing, have become the targets of governments. Putin is crystal clear about this — no doubt about it.

Russia to ban and shut down Discord in a few days for violating the law Russia-to-ban-Discord-after-violating-these-5-laws In the West, at least they come up with an excuse to justify what they do, even though the result is the same. They want to give the appearance of justification. In Russia, it’s a different story, and the Kommersant newspaper openly shows this by stating that Discord will be completely blocked in record time.

Every IT professional, whether a technician, developer, engineer, or consultant, as well as millions of gamers, will be cut off from the platform that connected them and allowed them to exchange information — one of the few remaining safe havens in Putin’s country for doing so. According to local reports, Putin has taken measures based on five new decisions against Discord, claiming that it violated the law.

Specifically, they argue that it was the Law on Information Technology and Information Protection that was breached in these five points, prompting the Kremlin to take one action for each violation.

No explanations, just the desire and order to block Putin-is-watching The worst part is that there are no explanations about what was violated, how it was violated, or by whom. Russia is going to shut down and block Discord from all angles, including VPNs. In fact, the platform will not have any license to operate in the country, so something must have been happening in its chats for Putin to make a decision similar to what he did with Telegram at the time.

The newspaper points to a total shutdown and block within just a few days. Vasily Ovchinnikov, director of the Organization for the Development of the Video Game Industry in Russia, told the newspaper that “the problem is that for Russian developers, communication with the community, including internationally, and technical support are done through Discord.”

As if this blow to the platform wasn’t enough, today a Moscow court fined them nearly $40,000 for failing to restrict access to prohibited information. Therefore, without knowing the specific causes — assuming they even make them public — it seems that either the platform refused to censor content and hand over the keys to privacy, as Telegram once refused, or it simply couldn’t censor what Putin and his government demanded.

Russia seeks sovereignty in all aspects, just like China Russia-and-China-Putin-and-Xi-Jinping In fact, the Kremlin is now seeking digital sovereignty, as it has also attempted in other areas, like the chip industry we discussed last year. Needless to say, these attempts have not borne much fruit, but they’ve even gone as far as censoring Wikipedia, it seems, copying only the content they deem appropriate.

The folks at PCGamer have thrown some criticism at all of this, which we fully support, as it’s as true as it is humorous: “In Russia, Wikipedia edits you.” This is a clear sign that freedom in all its forms is disappearing, and everyone is striving for a controlled environment like China’s. Useful idiots who don’t even consider rebelling against the establishment because they think it’s all done in their best interests and for their safety.

By the time we wake up, it will be too late — assuming we don’t end up in a war first. Russia banning and blocking Discord is just another sign of where we’re headed, and Europe and the U.S. aren’t exactly better in this regard, with their own coercions and threats.

[dresden-syndrome]

Political offender classification: Class 2

“Class 2 offense is a societally harmful act which undermines the authority of the East European Socialist Union government and its social and political order.”

“Class 2 offenders are potentially dangerous elements committing stated crimes with a possible deliberate anti-socialist intent.”

Rules: 

Can be applied to minors aged 16 and older

Used for most class 1 offenses during martial law 

Used for class 1 repeat offenders 

May be used for class 3 offenses when the state/region is in a great need of agricultural labor

Mostly used in peacetime

Offenses: 

Non-reporting on class 4 crimes

Contribution to class 3 crimes

Illegal country border crossing to an ally state*

Verbal anti-government propaganda in peacetime 

Personal acts of economical sabotage 

Unapproved foreign (Western) media possession

Showing support to enemy states or regimes 

Unregistered media broadcasting device possession**

Unregistered foreign property possession 

Leaking or disclosure of confidential information 

Penalties: 

Limitations on certain jobs, ranks and positions

Demotion from Party member to Party candidate

Termination from the Party (in more severe cases)

Forced resettlement to remote areas with corrective labor for up to a few years 

Deportation to labor communes for up to 10 years 

Protection status: 

All remaining constitutional rights legally and actually protected (may experience discrimination)

Further restrictions: 

Not allowed to get certain jobs or ranks 

Not allowed to be registered within EESU capital, region capitals and biggest cities (usually from 3 to 20 years after release)

Political literacy courses after resettlement or release from the commune

Life prospects: 

Back to freedom after detention or release from the commune

Back to life in a remote town/settlement after serving penalty 

Job, movement and travel prospects reduced

More often become political crime suspects later in life; may be arrested as class 3-4 while in labor commune or resettlement 

Rehabilitation possibility: 

Rehabilitated with a political criminal record after finishing courses

May be fully rehabilitated with charges dropped and rights restored for labor or political achievements

Party membership can be restored (usually a difficult process) 

Class promotion/demotion possibility: 

Promotion to class 1 for labor achievements and political loyalty 

Demotion to class 3 if aggravating circumstances are found during investigation/detention 

Demotion to class 3 if escaped from the labor commune

Prisoner use methods: 

Cheap unskilled labor within their commune or resettlement place 

Cheap labor in the offender’s skill field within their commune or resettlement place 

May be used as voluntary unofficial informers 

May be used in SSR*** for important projects 

Legal documentation: 

ID card stamped with a political criminal record mark

*Ally states (by 1960): USSR, Yugoslavia, China, North Korea. Yugoslavia is the most common EESU escape route aside from West Germany.

**TVs and radios, including DIY radio stations. Must be analyzed and approved by the government before purchase.

***Strategic Scientific Reserve (Science Division).

Picture: Ştefana Rusu and Ana-Maria Antonescu on the field work in a small labor commune. PUR Romania, 1965.

Art tag: @painful-pooch @prismpanic @generic-whumperz @suspicious-whumping-egg @onlywhump @whumpedydump @whumpthefifth @monarchthefirst @sunshiline-writes @project-xiii

Lore dump tag: @sweet-lost-husbands @whumpingandsmilinglikeanidiot

[witch-of-the-creek]

Fascinating flora, special edition.

White Sage

I am still doing a regular post about sage in general, but as a conservationist and student of ethnobotany, I wanted to address the conservation status and history of salvia apiana in particular.

White sage is endemic to Southern California and parts of Northern Baja, and is a valuable medicinal and cultural resource to indigenous populations who were forcibly relocated to these areas. Today, the majority of white sage is cultivated by indigenous Americans on protected land.

Smudging refers to a variety ceremonies that involve the burning of sacred herbs. The British, Spanish, and French colonizers started to relocate indigenous people, to wash away their culture, take their children, and erase their languages. Smudging is an English word that was used to generalize and belittle a widely held set of spiritual practices, and has now been reclaimed by many indigenous communities.

The use of this plant by non native people, and the misappropriation of the word ‘smudging’ came much later, around the time the first legal protections were established to protect the remaining people and culture. “In the 1960s, the hippie movement co-opted the use of white sage and evolved into the New Age Movement.” (Ramirez, Rose & Small, Deborah)

The popularity of white sage has only gotten higher, and with a boom in demand, illegal harvesting of the plant has become all to common a practice. “With very few commercial growers of white sage (Salvia apiana), the vast majority of products are wild-harvested.” (Ramirez & Small)

“What I learned when I was in California and visited the Etiwanda Preserve was that it is the epicenter of the current commercial harvest.” (Leopold, Susan).

“What is important to stress is that this underground sage mafia is not ethical or sustainable wildcrafting as it is portrayed in hipster IG accounts and stores! The scale of white sage commercial trade on the Internet and demand in China is alarming” (Leopold).

“I was invited by the owner of a white sage company to meet at the Etiwanda Preserve in March of 2019; he wanted to show his sustainable harvesting methods. I quickly pulled out my phone to show him that it was against the law to do so, and that recent arrests had been made. He carried on as if that was not the case” (Leopold).

The current elemental status of white sage is G4, which means ‘apparently secure.’ This rating has not been reviewed since June nineteenth, 2002. The lack of updated information on the plants range and occurrences have kept it off multiple endangered species lists.

The article referencing a book by Ramirez and Small, published in spring of 2020, evaluate that 50% of white sage has been eradicated due to urbanization.

I am not native, I can’t speak for any native people. All of what I have stated here is a summary or quotation of the words of indigenous activists, ethnobotanists, and conservationists. My hope here is to give a factual overview of the situation and provide direction to people more knowledgeable than myself.

Sources below

-News from Native California, Spring 2020 By Rose Ramirez and Deborah Small

[zvaigzdelasas]

17 Jul 23

China Law Translate - Interim Measures for the Management of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services

Quotes from direct English translation of law below

These measures apply to the use of generative AI technologies to provide services to the public in the [mainland] PRC for the generation of text, images, audio, video, or other content (hereinafter generative AI services). Where the state has other provisions on the use of generative AI services to engage in activities such as news and publication, film and television production, and artistic creation, those provisions are to be followed. These Measures do not apply where industry associations, enterprises, education and research institutions, public cultural bodies, and related professional bodies, etc., research, develop, and use generative AI technology, but have not provided generative AI services to the (mainland) public.[...]

During processes such as algorithm design, the selection of training data, model generation and optimization, and the provision of services, effective measures are to be employed to prevent the creation of discrimination such as by race, ethnicity, faith, nationality, region, sex, age, profession, or health;[...]

Respect intellectual property rights and commercial ethics, and protect commercial secrets, advantages in algorithms, data, platforms, and so forth must not be used for monopolies or to carry out unfair competition;[...]

Promote the establishment of generative AI infrastructure and public training data resource platforms. Promote collaboration and sharing of algorithm resources, increasing efficiency in the use of computing resources. Promote the orderly opening of public data by type and grade, expanding high-quality public training data resources. Encourage the adoption of safe and reliable chips, software, tools, computational power, and data resources.[...]

Where intellectual property rights are involved, the intellectual property rights that are lawfully enjoyed by others must not be infringed;[...]

Where personal information is involved, the consent of the personal information subject shall be obtained or it shall comply with other situations provided by laws and administrative regulations;[...]

When manual tagging is conducted in the course of researching and developing generative AI technology, the providers shall formulate clear, specific, and feasible tagging rules that meet the requirements of these Measures;[...]

Providers shall bear responsibility as the producers of online information content in accordance with law and are to fulfill the online information security obligations. Where personal information is involved, they are to bear responsibility as personal information handlers and fulfill obligations to protect personal information. Providers shall sign service agreements with users who register for their generative AI services (hereinafter “users”), clarifying the rights and obligations of both parties.[...]

Providers shall clarify and disclose the user groups, occasions, and uses of their services, guide users’ scientific understanding and lawful use of generative AI technology, and employ effective measures to prevent minor users from overreliance or addiction to generative AI services.[...]

Providers shall lawfully and promptly accept and address requests from individuals such as to access, reproduce, modify, supplement, or delete their personal information.[...]

Providers shall label generated content such as images and video in accordance with the Provisions on the Administration of Deep Synthesis Internet Information Services.[...]

Those providing generative AI services with public opinion properties or the capacity for social mobilization shall carry out security assessments in accordance with relevant state provisions[...]

These measures take effect on August 15, 2023.

[staticart]

I need to know the lore behind Jackie and China’s beef 👀

They're both informants for skug and they both use their looks to their advantage

China thinks Jackie's just a common whore and a cougar and Jackie thinks China is cheating with her enchanted looks

Also both women love skug, both women are jealous people, so naturally, they don't want to share, the only reason they haven't tried to kill eachother is because skug protects Jackie from the law (she tends to break a few) and China is too paranoid and has too many safeguards to risk attacking her over something as silly as petty beef lmao

[rainbowsky]

Hi rainbowsky☺️ thanks for all the fun posts. I love them a lot! I am a fruit from 2021. Toxic mtjj has recently attecked fruit with this claim. 'The court ruled that bjyx is a disgrace to Mr. Wang Yibo.'

I am trying to find information on this, but I can't seem to find it. Do you know anything about it?

Hi remember! Thanks, I'm glad you're enjoying my blog! ☺️

If I've said this once, I've said this a thousand times, block and ignore toxic people (and report where appropriate). Don't give them the time of day. They are trying to hurt you. Ignore, ignore, ignore.

As for this particular claim, this emptyjiejie is misrepresenting what happened in order to upset turtles.

They're talking about the Lyfen case, where a BXG sued Lyfen for failing to give them a prize they had legitimately won. Lyfen's homophobic defense was that they were trying to protect DD's reputation by disassociating the contest/event from BXG.

Lyfen won the case. Of course they did! Anyone who thought the ruling would go against Lyfen is out of touch with reality.

This is a lone BXG against a large corporation with high powered lawyers. The BXG never stood a chance, regardless of what basis Lyfen argued its case upon.

Lyfen was the defendant in the case, and a brand arguing it was trying to protect its reputation and the reputation of its spokesperson is already at an advantage. I'm not an expert in Chinese law, but in most courtrooms around the world all Lyfen would have had to do to win the case was prove that, in their mind, they were acting in good faith. They wouldn't have had to prove anything beyond that. They wouldn't even have had to prove anything negative about turtles, just that as a brand, they were acting based on what they felt was best for their company and their spokesperson. If they weren't acting illegally in doing so, they win.

LGBTQ rights aren't protected under the law in China. In a country like China where there are no legal protections in place against LGBTQ discrimination (and where, in fact, the current government - which is very homophobic - is increasingly cracking down on LGBTQ people), courts are going to side with a defendant who is arguing against being associated with 'deviant queer culture'. According to the law in China, queerness isn't a protected class. Quite the contrary.

The courts didn't rule that BXG are a 'disgrace', they ruled that Lyfen was within their rights to not want to associate with them. Even if the courts had made that determination that BXG were a bunch of disgraceful, immoral monsters, anyone wanting to cite a LGBTQ repressive institution on matters pertaining to the morality of homosexuality/queer culture... uhhhh*... 🤔

I have said this before, but anyone who smugly cheers on this kind of thing is a fucking asshole, and a homophobe.

*This reminds me of shrimps gleefully quoting a bottom-feeding paparazzo as 'proof' that BJYX isn't real. Solos don't actually GAF about right and wrong when it comes to attacking BXG. They'll throw all morality out the window if they think it can help further their anti agenda.

Block and ignore, block and ignore, block and ignore.

And please, if you read any of my posts, make it this one.

I talked a bit more about brand antis here.

[greenhappyseed]

Hi, okay, I have to weigh in on this vote to ban TikTok happening in the U.S., because I’m seeing misinformation on Twitter. Here’s the deal: TikTok is owned by a Chinese company, and TikTok sends your personal data to China. Why is that a problem? Well, private companies in China aren’t exactly “private” in the way Americans think of them. It’s very easy for the Chinese government to influence Chinese companies…including ordering the company to change its algorithms (…and yes, access any personal data). If, say, China wanted to spread misinformation, sow chaos in the U.S., and disrupt the 2024 U.S. presidential election the way Russia did via Facebook in 2016, the Chinese government has the personal data AND control of the platform to do it. The PLATFORM is actually more important than the personal data. China doesn’t need to exploit Facebook when they’ve got TikTok. The only way to reduce the risk to zero is to ban TikTok in the U.S. https://www.wsj.com/tech/tiktok-pledged-to-protect-u-s-data-1-5-billion-later-its-still-struggling-cbccf203 (WSJ has its paywall BS, but the same point is made elsewhere across the internet). This idea has been kicking about in the U.S. for several years, and I can find articles going back to 2021-22 expressing the same concern. But of course, it’s coming to a head now that it’s actually 2024 and we’ve got another fucking election involving Trump.

Do not be deceived: The TikTok ban has little to do with personal data and absolutely NOTHING to do with Palestine. It is NOT a move to “hide the truth” about Palestine from you, as the ban idea predates October 2023. You can still use Twitter, Discord, Instagram, YouTube, BlueSky, etc. (or just look up your preferred news sources online). Also, any law designed for the purpose of stopping information on a particular topic would violate the First Amendment and the law would be overturned by a court.

Is this ban hypocritical of the U.S.? Yes, a bit. This is similar to what the EU says about personal data transfers from the EU to the U.S. To oversimplify, the EU alleges that EU citizen personal data isn’t safe in the U.S. not just because of corporate greed, but also because the U.S. government can subpoena that data under normal U.S. legal processes. It’s fair to criticize the U.S. for this. Then again, I don’t think there have ever been allegations that the U.S. government has tried to disrupt a European government or election the way Russia did in the U.S. in 2016. Also, to be snarky, the governmental bodies in the EU haven’t figured out how to use Microsoft Office without violating their own privacy laws. Like they can’t successfully apply their own laws to themselves. Last week this case was, I think, the third or fourth case the EU has brought against itself for GDPR violations. https://www.edps.europa.eu/system/files/2024-03/EDPS-2024-05-European-Commission_s-use-of-M365-infringes-data-protection-rules-for-EU-institutions-and-bodies_EN.pdf As a result, the EU comparison sounds similar at first, but doesn’t really materialize into a strong parallel to the national security concerns that U.S. legislators have about TikTok.

Look, the ban is clearly a protectionist move, and yeah we can debate it for all kinds of reasons, but don’t fall into the trap of thinking the ban is meant to stop TikTok from having “the truth” that the government or “mainstream media” is “hiding” from you. That’s some paranoid Fox News bullshit logic, and being young and leftist doesn’t make you immune to it. PLEASE read about what happened with Russia and Facebook in 2016 so you’re not repeating the same mistakes.

[accio-victuuri]

xiao zhan - shanghai juze law firm statement

Shanghai Jiuze Law Firm (hereinafter referred to as "the Firm") has accepted the commission of Xiao Zhan Studio and Mr. Xiao Zhan to carry out evidence preservation and litigation rights protection work for suspected infringement of Mr. Xiao Zhan's reputation and other legitimate rights and interests by users of relevant online platforms who continue to post insulting and defamatory information about him.

At present, the real name information of online users suspected of infringement, such as Sina Weibo users "超急玛丽" (UID: 3121714161) and "thelastholle" (UID: 3938716772), has been determined in accordance with the law. For online users whose subject information has been determined in accordance with the law, our firm will file a lawsuit with the court based on authorization, requesting the court to order the relevant infringing parties to bear legal responsibilities for infringement, such as apology, compensation for mental damages, and all rights protection costs; In response to Sina Weibo users such as "露著晚瓜田" (UID: 7484772739), "安折说夫人的玫瑰花凋谢了" (UID: 7808747484), "明月别枝了" (UID: 3265906365), "西风染流年" (UID: 2715477801), etc., who fabricated false information and publicly made insulting and defamatory remarks against Mr. Xiao Zhan, suspected of seriously infringing on Mr. Xiao Zhan's reputation rights, our firm has completed the evidence requisition and will file a lawsuit with the court as soon as possible, requesting the court to order the relevant network platforms to disclose the real name identity information of the involved network users in accordance with the law and pursue legal responsibility through litigation.

We have now accepted Mr. Xiao Zhan's commission to closely monitor online public opinion, notify relevant online platforms to actively fulfill their regulatory obligations as network service providers, and take timely measures such as blocking and disconnecting infringing content that infringes on Mr. Xiao Zhan's legitimate rights and interests, in order to avoid further expansion of the damage caused by infringement. We will also continue to collect evidence and hold accountable those who are negligent in stopping infringement and those who have committed serious infringement, without any tolerance, in order to stop related infringement and safeguard Mr. Xiao Zhan's legitimate rights and interests.

We hereby remind and urge online users to immediately stop publishing and disseminating statements that are suspected of infringing on Mr. Xiao Zhan's reputation rights. The cyberspace is not a lawless place, we cannot act recklessly without any consequences. We should actively respond to the clear (qinglang) online environment campaign launched by the Cyberspace Administration of China, and jointly create a civilized and healthy online environment.

上海九泽律师事务所

Shanghai Jiuze Law Firm

[curlsabroad]

For those who do not want what Project 2025 is selling, I am trying to brainstorm a list of to-dos:

Stockpile hormonal therapies and birth control.

Decide if you want to risk having kids.

Make a will.

Make sure you have legal documentation that shows you have a right to make medical decisions for your same sex partners, adopted kids, etc.

Try to create a physical mailing list of queer folk you know, as in addresses. Make sure you write it down in an address book and make sure it is circumspect.

Remove online information that could be used against you if laws become more restrictive, such as anything about planning an abortion.

If you have art that is "objectionable," have a plan for storage that protects a physical copy of it.

Visit the national parks.

Go to the coastline and view it, remember it.

Look into food safety practices.

Consider doing some homesteading projects like quail or chickens, vegetable and herb garden, safe canning.

Try to find a co-op or small farm that you can buy into and buy local.

Buy a mask that can filter out small particulates. Look for ones that can stand up to serious air pollution.

If you are considering a divorce, consider faster. You may only have a few months to be able to get a no-fault divorce.

Make sure you have access to your own private accounts with money. Maybe have a stash of cash somewhere.

If you are in an abusive relationship, please consider using the resources that currently exist to help you.

Get into filtered water.

Swim in the lakes and go fishing.

Go your public institutions.

Try to make any major purchases of goods sourced from China before January to avoid tariffs.

Get on your local committees.

Visit your library.

Save analog media like CDs and such.

Apply for all the grants and resources you can, right now.

If you are on the Affordable Act insurance, look into any jobs or assistance that could get you reasonable private healthcare.

Cut back on unnecessary purchases and budget wisely.

Look into homeschooling resources that are not overly religious.

Consider buying banned books and storing them in a private location.

Plant as many native trees and plants as you can, wherever you can.

Invest some money in the stock market.

Research your local laws.

Research how to protest safely and don't leave said research on your phone.

Don't take your phone to a protest. Buy a burner or get an old Nokia.

Learn how to fix things in your home.

Join a union or start a union.

Look into jobs that would enable you to move abroad.

Finish any degrees as soon as possible.

Research international colleges.

Prepare yourself for how to deal with hate-crimes and aggression.

Take self defense classes.

Get gun safety training.

Take first aid courses.

Have a stockpile of medicine, food, and water in case of hazardous weather.

Weather-proof your home.

Plan for high temperatures. PLAN FOR DROUGHTS. Plan for wildfires. Plan for smog.

Learn techniques used in dry climates to maximize water retention in soil.