#International Telecommunication Union

[documenting-apartheid]

JUNE 21, 2024 - "Israel opposed a proposal at a recent United Nations forum aimed at rebuilding the Gaza Strip’s war-ravaged telecommunications infrastructure on the grounds that Palestinian connectivity is a readymade weapon for Hamas."

"The resolution, which was drafted by Saudi Arabia for last week’s U.N. International Telecommunication Union summit in Geneva, is aimed at returning internet access to Gaza’s millions of disconnected denizens."

“Based on this rationale, Gaza will never have internet,”

"Marwa Fatafta, a policy adviser with the digital rights group Access Now, told The Intercept, adding that Israel’s position is not only incoherent but inherently disproportionate."

“You can’t punish the entire civilian population just because you have fears of one Palestinian faction.”

"Israel’s monthslong bombardment of the enclave has severed fiber cables, razed cellular towers, and generally wrecked the physical infrastructure required to communicate with loved ones and the outside world."

"A disconnected Gaza Strip also threatens to add to the war’s already staggering death toll. Though Israel touts its efforts to warn civilians of impending airstrikes, such warnings are relayed using the very cellular and internet connections the country’s air force routinely levels. It is a cycle of data degradation that began at the war’s start: The more Israel bombs, the harder it is for Gazans to know they are about to be bombed."

The United States, which has previously harshly condemned Russia for national internet disruptions in Ukraine, told the Council that it could not support the resolution as it was drafted because it "disagreed with some of the characterizations", specifically the language blaming the destruction of Gaza and the forced use of obsolete technology on Israel.

"Whether or not the U.S. ultimately voted for the resolution — the State Department did not respond when asked — it appears to have been successful in weakening the version that was ultimately approved by the ITU. The version that did pass was stripped of any explicit mention of Israel’s role in destroying and otherwise thwarting Gazan internet access, and refers obliquely only to “​the obstacles practiced in preventing the use of new communication technologies.”

[theleadersglobe]

China Advances 6G Standards with International Recognition

China has taken a major leap in the global race for next-generation telecommunications by establishing three crucial 6G technological standards under the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). These new standards represent a significant step toward shaping the international framework for 6G, putting China at the forefront of the future of telecommunications. 

Endorsed on July 26 during a plenary meeting of the ITU’s Telecommunication Standardisation Sector study group, these standards are designed to align with the International Mobile Telecommunications 2030 framework. The focus is on improving immersive communication, ultra-reliable low-latency connections, and the seamless integration of artificial intelligence. These advancements will pave the way for new services requiring high bandwidth, reliability, and minimal latency, making them a cornerstone of the future global telecommunications landscape.

Read More: https://theleadersglobe.com/science-technology/china-advances-6g-standards-with-international-recognition/

[xialite]

ITU’s birthday is today! I kinda like the graphic on this one ngl

I might draw birthday art for the org later <33

[hicginewsagency]

ITU Publishes updated Global Treaty to Optimize Radio Spectrum Management and advance Technological Innovation

Doreen Bogdan-Martin, ITU Boss Geneva, 28 August 2024 ​​The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) released today an updated version of the Radio Regulations, the international treaty governing the global use of radio-frequency spectrum and satellite orbits.  Entering into force on 1 January 2025, the 2024 e​dition of the ITU Radio Regulations is the result of a four-year process that…

[thesimblrofficedirectory]

Welcome to The Simblr Office Directory

This blog is an archive of the submissions for the office-centric OC prompt posted by the light of Simblr, @kashisun.

Here you can browse all the amazing creations submitted by your fellow simblrs. Feel free to scroll to your delight or click one of the links under the cut to see who's on roster under (or over) a particular bureau or delegation.

Want to be added to the directory or confirm that you've been queued? Just include a link to your post in an ask off anon and it will be queued within 48 hours. Until we get through the backlog and can queue at a more leisurely pace, all ask submissions will receive a confirmation. You can always mention us, but we won't be able to provided confirmation for that method.

Leaving the company? If you'd like your post removed, just include a link to the post in an ask off anon and it will be removed. Sideblogs may require additional verification. Please allow, at most, 48 hours for the request to be honored. Removal requests will not be confirmed, only acted upon.

Every company's hierarchy is a little different. Designations for this directory are based on some of the companies I've worked for, but especially on the multi-media marketing company I work for now.

Bureaus and Their Delegations

Delegations with an * currently have low or no headcount (posted and queued). Excludes leadership.

Bureau of Client Engagement

Leadership

Billing*

Escalations*

Product Support*

Quality Assurance*

Sales*

Bureau of Compliance (Bureau-specific Internal Affairs and Auditing)

Leadership

Client Engagement*

Facilities*

Finance*

Human Resources*

Information and Technology*

Legal (General)

Legal (Leadership)

Marketing*

Bureau of Facilities

Leadership

Catering*

Environmental (Janitorial, HVAC, and Plumbing)*

Mechanical (Electrical, Elevators, Equipment Maintenance)*

Premise* (Grounds Maintenance and Real Estate)

Purchasing* (From pushpins to pallet jacks)

Security

Warehousing* (Shipping, Receiving, Mail room, and Inventory)

Bureau of Finance

Leadership

Accounting

Asset Management*

Investments*

Travel and Accommodations*

Vendor Relations*

Bureau of Human Resources

Leadership

Career Development (Internships and Internal Role Transitions)

Dependent Care*

Employee Activities Committee (Members are volunteers)

Employee Benefits*

Floating Delegates (Administration) (For profiles that list a nondescript secretary/admin/receptionist/assistant role)

Floating Delegates (General) (For profiles that do not list a position)

Floating Delegates (Leadership) (For profiles that list a nondescript managerial role)

Health Services*

Payroll*

Recruiting*

Training*

Union Relations*

Bureau of Information & Technology

Leadership

Data Security*

Infrastructure*

Public Relations

Research and Development*

Systems and Devices*

Telecommunications*

Bureau of Marketing

Leadership

Copy

Design

Planning and Implementation*

Board of Directors

Chief Officers

CEO - Chief Executive Officer/President

COO - Chief Operations Officer/Vice President

CCO - Chief Compliance Officer/Vice President

CFO - Chief Finance Officer/Vice President

CITO - Chief Information and Technology Officer/Vice President

CMO - Chief Marketing Officer/Vice President

Executive Administration* (Admins that report to chief officers)

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Adrian Carrasquillo at The Bulwark:

EMPLOYEES AT THE SPANISH-LANGUAGE cable mainstay Univision were left distraught earlier this month after the network’s brass decided to run Department of Homeland Security ads warning immigrants that the government will find and deport them. The ads, which are part of a new $200 million campaign Homeland Security unveiled in February, have rankled immigrant-rights groups, who view them as a blunt attempt at fearmongering on the taxpayer dime. Univision itself has covered the ads critically on air. “‘If you don’t leave, we’ll find you and deport you,’—that’s how radical the ad from the DHS Secretary Kristi Noem is,” anchor Andrea Linares said in a February 18 segment. Yet Univision has joined English-language networks in choosing to run the ads on its airwaves. That decision has left journalists inside the network frustrated. It has also increased internal tensions over how Univision has chosen to cover Trump, according to current and former employees. One Univision newsroom leader, who was so upset about the ad airing that they had to be calmed down by a former colleague, argued that the network has changed under the ownership of Televisa, the Mexican telecommunications and broadcasting company. The leader, who spoke on condition of anonymity, recalled that Televisa executives—along with Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner—had a hand in organizing the November 2023 interview of Trump by veteran journalist Enrique Acevedo, who was widely criticized for the gentleness and deference he seemed to offer his divisive subject. “We previously didn’t care what Televisa said, but the Trump interview with Acevedo was coordinated by Televisa, there were Televisa corporate people at that interview,” the Univision source said. “I’ve only known journalism in the States, I haven’t done journalism in Mexico—they take care of whoever is in political power in Mexico—so I just feel that is trickling down in the States.” (After their $4.8 billion merger went through in 2022, the company became TelevisaUnivision, though the network Hispanics have known for decades remains known as Univision.) Acevedo himself works for Televisa, not Univision, which made his selection to conduct the interview more conspicuous to Univision employees. Later in the campaign, as the network moved to soothe ruffled feathers, Acevedo also interviewed President Biden. Local Univision staffers were notified ahead of Trump’s joint speech to Congress on March 4 that the network would be airing the DHS ads that night. Later, some learned the ads had begun airing the day before. Media buyers in touch with Univision told The Bulwark that the DHS ad orders were for English copy with Spanish subtitles and that they are only slated to run through March, at this point. The ads have aired in major TV media markets including Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, Miami, Phoenix, Austin, Houston, and Dallas, as well as on radio and digital streaming platforms.

[...] Joaquin Blaya, who helped found the Univision network, served as its president, and hired its most famous anchor, Jorge Ramos, likened the DHS ad campaign to the sort of propaganda official government newspapers would have run in the Soviet Union and other authoritarian states. “I told my wife, this is Pravda, ‘dear leader’ type of stuff,” Blaya told The Bulwark. “I know these are different times, I know they are trying to be more accommodating. But suffice to say, under our leadership, the ad would not have run,” he said. “This is not about being a network to promote breaking laws and regulations—that’s not the point. It’s a network to let Hispanics know their rights within the legal structure of the United States. It’s about knowing your rights and standing up for them.” Univision was not the only Spanish-language network to air the DHS ad. Telemundo did as well. But the reaction at that network was somewhat more muted. That may be because, internally, Telemundo’s coverage of the Trump administration has been perceived in the Spanish-language community as tough but fair, and the network has also traditionally been viewed as an advocate for the Latino community. On February 23, Noticias Telemundo aired a one-hour news special featuring legal, law-enforcement, and immigration experts discussing the changes in federal immigration policy and answering audience questions.

[...] The controversy over the decision to run the DHS ads comes at a difficult time for Spanish-language media companies, which, like their English-language counterparts, have suffered from mass layoffs and a contracting industry—all while facing a retribution-minded Trump administration. There is concern within the networks that Trump could soon go after them more aggressively. The Telemundo news division source worried that the president’s executive order designating English as the country’s official language could lead to Spanish-language networks being targeted for fines, restrictions, or worse if they continue to broadcast in the preferred language of their audience, particularly as Trump uses the FEC as sword and shield against media companies. When the White House held the traditional off-the-record meeting with journalists before Trump’s joint speech to Congress last week, members from both Spanish-language networks were excluded, sparking additional concerns. The exclusion was a break from past years, when those sessions were opened to anchors and White House correspondents from Telemundo and Univision. “He’s degraded the Spanish language,” the Telemundo news division source said. “What does it mean to not be part of an official language in this country? How far can they go? Who are we to say we won’t wake up one day to a pronouncement from the administration that these Spanish-language stations are catering to DEI? Where does he draw the line?”

Univision should be ashamed of themselves for airing this MAGA propaganda ad from DHS, especially with the channel making more Trump-like overtures.. Telemundo also aired the ad, but there is lot less outcry over there.

[spacetimewithstuartgary]

NASA and Italian Space Agency test future lunar navigation technology

As the Artemis campaign leads humanity to the moon and eventually Mars, NASA is refining its state-of-the-art navigation and positioning technologies to guide a new era of lunar exploration.

A technology demonstration helping pave the way for these developments is the Lunar GNSS Receiver Experiment (LuGRE) payload, a joint effort between NASA and the Italian Space Agency to demonstrate the viability of using existing GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) signals for positioning, navigation, and timing on the moon.

During its voyage on an upcoming delivery to the moon as part of NASA's CLPS (Commercial Lunar Payload Services) initiative, LuGRE would demonstrate acquiring and tracking signals from both the U.S. GPS and European Union Galileo GNSS constellations during transit to the moon, during lunar orbit, and finally for up to two weeks on the lunar surface itself.

The LuGRE payload is one of the first demonstrations of GNSS signal reception and navigation on and around the lunar surface, an important milestone for how lunar missions will access navigation and positioning technology.

If successful, LuGRE would demonstrate that spacecraft can use signals from existing GNSS satellites at lunar distances, reducing their reliance on ground-based stations on the Earth for lunar navigation.

Today, GNSS constellations support essential services like navigation, banking, power grid synchronization, cellular networks, and telecommunications. Near-Earth space missions use these signals in flight to determine critical operational information like location, velocity, and time.

NASA and the Italian Space Agency want to expand the boundaries of GNSS use cases. In 2019, the Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) mission broke the world record for farthest GPS signal acquisition 116,300 miles from the Earth's surface—nearly half of the 238,900 miles between Earth and the moon. Now, LuGRE could double that distance.

"GPS makes our lives safer and more viable here on Earth," said Kevin Coggins, NASA deputy associate administrator and SCaN (Space Communications and Navigation) Program manager at NASA Headquarters in Washington. "As we seek to extend humanity beyond our home planet, LuGRE should confirm that this extraordinary technology can do the same for us on the moon."

Reliable space communication and navigation systems play a vital role in all NASA missions, providing crucial connections from space to Earth for crewed and uncrewed missions alike. Using a blend of government and commercial assets, NASA's Near Space and Deep Space Networks support science, technology demonstrations, and human spaceflight missions across the solar system.

"This mission is more than a technological milestone," said Joel Parker, policy lead for positioning, navigation, and timing at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

"We want to enable more and better missions to the moon for the benefit of everyone, and we want to do it together with our international partners."

The data-gathering LuGRE payload combines NASA-led systems engineering and mission management with receiver software and hardware developed by the Italian Space Agency and their industry partner Qascom—the first Italian-built hardware to operate on the lunar surface.

Any data LuGRE collects is intended to open the door for use of GNSS to all lunar missions, not just those by NASA or the Italian Space Agency. Approximately six months after LuGRE completes its operations, the agencies will release its mission data to broaden public and commercial access to lunar GNSS research.

"A project like LuGRE isn't about NASA alone," said NASA Goddard navigation and mission design engineer Lauren Konitzer. "It's something we're doing for the benefit of humanity. We're working to prove that lunar GNSS can work, and we're sharing our discoveries with the world."

The LuGRE payload is one of 10 science experiments launching to the lunar surface on this delivery through NASA's CLPS initiative.

Through CLPS, NASA works with American companies to provide delivery and quantity contracts for commercial deliveries to further lunar exploration and the development of a sustainable lunar economy. As of 2024, the agency has 14 private partners on contract for current and future CLPS missions.

Demonstrations like LuGRE could lay the groundwork for GNSS-based navigation systems on the lunar surface. Bridging these existing systems with emerging lunar-specific navigation solutions has the potential to define how all spacecraft navigate lunar terrain in the Artemis era.

The payload is a collaborative effort between NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center and the Italian Space Agency.

[beardedmrbean]

BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) — A top Romanian court on Friday annulled the first round of the country’s presidential election, days after allegations that Russia ran a coordinated online campaign to promote the far-right outside r who won the first round.

The Constitutional Court’s unprecedented decision — which is final — came after President Klaus Iohannis declassified intelligence on Wednesday that alleged Russia ran a sprawling campaign comprising thousands of social media accounts to promote Calin Georgescu across platforms such as TikTok and Telegram.

The intelligence files were from the Romanian Intelligence Service, the Foreign Intelligence Service, the Special Telecommunication Service and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

Despite being an outsider who declared zero campaign spending, Georgescu emerged as the frontrunner on Nov. 24. He was due to face reformist Elena Lasconi of the Save Romania Union party in a runoff on Sunday.

A new date will now be set to rerun the vote from scratch. Some 951 voting stations had already opened abroad on Friday for the runoff for Romania’s large diaspora but had to be halted.

Lasconi strongly condemned the court’s decision, saying it was “illegal, immoral, and crushes the very essence of democracy.”

“We should have moved forward with the vote. We should have respected the will of the Romanian people. Whether we like it or not, from a legal and legitimate standpoint, 9 million Romanian citizens, both in the country and the diaspora, expressed their preference for a particular candidate through their votes. We cannot ignore their will!” she said.

“I know I would have won. And I will win because the Romanian people know I will fight for them, that I will unite them for a better Romania,” she added. “I will defend our democracy. I will not give up.”

She said the issue of Russian interference should have been tackled after the election was completed. Some 9.4 million people — about 52.5% of eligible voters — had cast ballots in the first round.

Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu said in a statement the annulment was “the only correct solution” following the intelligence drop which revealed the “Romanian people’s vote was flagrantly distorted as a result of Russian interference.”

“The presidential elections must be held again,” he said in a post on Facebook. “At the same time, investigations by the authorities must uncover who is responsible for the massive attempt to influence the outcome of the presidential election.”

The same court last week ordered a recount of the first-round votes, which added to the myriad controversies that have engulfed a chaotic election cycle. Following a recount, the court then validated the first-round results on Monday.

Many observers have expressed concerns that annulling the vote could trigger civil unrest.

George Simion, the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians, said the development was a “coup d’état in full swing” but urged people not to take to the streets. “We don’t let ourselves be provoked, this system has to fall democratically,” he said.

Cristian Andrei, a political consultant based in Bucharest, said the court’s decision amounts to a “crisis mode situation for the Romanian democracy.”

“In light of the information about the external interference, the massive interference in elections, I think this was not normal but predictable, because it’s not normal times at all, Romania is an uncharted territory,” he told The Associated Press. “The problem is here, do we have the institutions to manage such an interference in the future?”

Thirteen candidates ran in the first round presidential vote in this European Union and NATO member country. The president serves a five-year term and has significant decision-making powers in areas such as national security, foreign policy and judicial appointments. On Dec. 1, Romania also held a parliamentary election which saw pro-Western parties win the most votes, but also a surge of support for far-right nationalists.

Before the first round vote, most surveys predicted the top three candidates would be Ciolacu, who came in third place, and Simion or Lasconi in second place. As the surprising results came in with Georgescu on top, and Lasconi narrowly beating Ciolacu, it sent shockwaves through the political establishment and plunged it into turmoil.

Georgescu’s surprising success in the presidential race left many political observers wondering how most local surveys were so far off, putting him behind at least five other candidates before the vote.

Many observers attributed his success to his TikTok account, which now has 6 million likes and 541,000 followers. But some experts suspect Georgescu’s online following was artificially inflated while Romania’s top security body alleged he was given preferential treatment by TikTok over other candidates.

In the intelligence release, the secret services alleged that one TikTok user paid more $381,000 (361,000 euros) to other users to promote Georgescu content. Intelligence authorities said information they obtained “revealed an aggressive promotion campaign” to increase and accelerate his popularity.

Georgescu, when asked by the AP in an interview Wednesday whether he believes the Chinese-owned TikTok poses a threat to democracy, defended social media platforms.

“The most important existing function for promoting free speech and freedom of expression is social media,” he said.

[lunarry]

While the streets of the country are full of people calling fraud and with opposition leaders Edmundo González Urrutia and Maria Corina Machado showing the tallies that demonstrate their victory, The National Telecommunications Commission (Conatel), the state agency responsible for regulating, supervising, and controlling telecommunications is giving direct orders to radio stations to maintain an editorial posture that prohibits the transmission of news that they consider “violates elements classified as violence.”

Even though this is communicated via WhatsApp, this entity is calling directly to the owners and producers of media outlets to specifically mandate that they can’t report nothing related to Machado, González, protests or the data from NGOs that reveal deaths, injuries, and arbitrary detentions by security forces and colectivos. According to local NGOs and media, 19 people were killed in the context of protest, and 711 have been victims of arbitrary detentions and 119 of enforced disappearance.

Four hundred media outlets, including print media, radio, TV channels, and digital platforms in Venezuela, have been shut down by the government in the last 20 years, according to Espacio Publico, an NGO that promotes and defends freedom of expression in the country.

The few left are now being threatened.

The persecution of press workers throughout the country accompanies the radio silence. The National Union of Press Workers (SNTP), the Press and Society Institute (Ipys), and Espacio Público, three organizations defending freedom of expression in Venezuela, have collected reports showing an escalation of repression:

Shots: in Trujillo, colectivos shot at the residence of journalist Alexander González, of Diario Los Andes and Unión Radio.

Wounded: Jesús Romero, director of the Código Urbe portal, was shot in the abdomen by members of the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB). He was covering a demonstration on Monday in Maracay (Aragua).

Online threats: The correspondent of Channel I in Sucre state, Dreully Barrios, is being investigated by pro-government supporters for her coverage of the protests. In Carabobo, a discrediting campaign is circulating through Whatsapp messages, with photos of 12 journalists from the region.

Arrest warrants: the content creator, Francisco Lunar, warned that the mayor of Guanta, Natali Bello, issued an arrest warrant against him for publishing images of street demonstrations.

Maduro also wants to hide from the rest of the world what is happening. International correspondents have been detained, threatened, and deported.

[theatre-gay-they]

As socialists, we need people to believe real, positive change is possible. Most people can’t see beyond the current system, but they can tell that it is broken. This leads to hopelessness and apathy. Complacency. I believe real change is possible, but change is not on the ballot this election, or indeed any election (except, perhaps, negative change: a cancelling of the meagre improvements to the social safety net added in the past few years under a potential conservative government, and international trade leading to the disempowerment of workers - whether that be in the form of a return to free trade or a continuation of these new tariff policies). The conservatives offer suffering, the liberals no relief, and the NDP the smallest of reforms. Socialists must be the ones who offer real change for working people. Let’s look into the failures of each of the 3 major parties.

Firstly, conservatives don’t only want to maintain the system, they want to make it worse - on an accelerated course. They’d cut from healthcare and possibly eliminate dentalcare, pharmacare, and childcare entirely. Conservatives believe cutting taxes is an affordability measure - rather than a give away to the rich. They have no plan for climate change whatsoever and are endorsed by billionaires - both Canadian and American. They hate unions, they hate the poor, the hate those who are addicted to substances or who cannot find shelter. They want to make life harder for the masses so the rich can exploit us harder. They’ve promised to repeal labour-friendly legislation, privatize more infrastructure, and weaken regulations around dangerous industries — all while offering up hollow culture war distractions to keep people divided and misinformed. Their base is kept loyal through fear and resentment, but their donors are loyal because the Conservatives deliver: lower corporate taxes, deregulation, and union-busting. Their political project is one of austerity and authoritarianism: dismantling public services, criminalizing dissent, and gutting environmental protections. While they talk about "freedom" and "choice," their policies concentrate power and wealth into the hands of corporations and the ultra-rich.

On the other hand, we’ve lived under the liberals for nearly 10 years, and things haven’t gotten better. Rent has gotten more expensive because liberals side with landlords and speculators over working people who need a place to live. Food has gotten more expensive because liberals side with big grocery chains ripping us off over the right of people to eat, and it’s not like farm workers are paid well in return. In fact, the UN recently called the temporary foreign workers program, which the agricultural sector gets the most permits for, a "breeding ground for contemporary forms of slavery." Other essentials like telecommunications have also become more expensive, as the liberals side with monopolies over people, as demonstrated by allowing Rogers and Shaw to merge. All of this while they lie and flip flop on the issue of the day, whether it be climate action or Palestinian liberation. Let us not forget, the liberal government under labour minister Steven Mickenen (now reassigned to “jobs and families”) broke 3 strikes (or 4, depending how you count it) using section 107 of the labour code last year: the rail workers in august, dockworkers in November, and the postal workers in december. Carney hasn’t shown any sign of changing this - much the opposite. He worked for Goldman sachs in the 1990’s and early 2000s - right when jeffery sachs was “advising” the post-soviet economies, otherwise known as crushing the solidarity movement in poland and helping yeltsin and his cronies sell off the state in russia. He’s more recently worked at brookfield - a corporate landlord and tax dodger, among other things, which recently announced that “the future is debt” - meaning they make money off of the suffering of the working class by burying them in debt. As prime minister, his first moves have been lowering the capital gains tax and a cabinet shuffle which seems to get rid of important positions like disability minister and gender equality minister - now subsumed into steven guilbeau’s culture ministry, and rename a whole set of ministries (including labour) into the portfolio of “jobs and families” and give this important position, now with a less pro-labour framing (not that the liberals were ever pro-labour, as discussed before) to everyone’s least favourite minister and strikebreaker in chief: steven mickenin.

So what really makes a liberal government different from a conservative? The record shows… not much, with the two parties voting together to block progressive reform over 600 times between 2004 and 2021, according to the breach. Their policy consensus includes “huge tax breaks to corporations, a punitive criminal justice system, a less generous social welfare state, a restrictive immigration system, a hugely profitable private pharmaceutical regime, pro-corporate trade deals abroad, and opposition to expanding workers’ rights.” Under Paul Martin, this came in the form of blocking anti-scab legislation, which has now been forced through by the NDP, more restrictive immigration rules and less accessible EI, maintaining unsafe federal workplaces by refusing to ban “psychological harassment,” and siding with pharmicetical companies over people who require medicine to live. Under stephen harper, the party duopoly agreed to refuse to enforce safe practices by the rail companies, allow pollution, maintain the right of the defense minister to authorize offensive overseas missions without the approval of parliament, refuse to give lighter sentences to young people, refuse to compensate those who’s employer robbed them by not contributing to their pension, passing back to work legislation (which the Harper government used many times, including against workers at Air Canada, Canada Post, and CP Rail), advancing free trade, passing bill C-51 (the anti terrorism bill), lowering the capital gains tax (which the liberal government undid and then re-did), passing the “Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act” (bet you didn’t know the liberals voted for that one), and refusing to increase safety standards for pregnant or nursing employees. Under the trudeau government (up to 2021), they refused to coordinate a strategy to end poverty, refused to guarantee housing as a right, continued selling weapons abroad (tanks to the Saudis and bombs to Israel etc.), refused to expunge records for past crimes relating to (now legal) cannabis, refused to enforce international law, allowed for discrimination based on “social condition” (which I think means class?), failed to adequately regulate commercial fishing, refused to commit to paris climate goals, refused to establish national pharmacare (now partially pushed through by the NDP), allowed the Canada Pension Plan to invest in unethical businesses including ones which do not meet basic environmental or workers’ rights standards, refused to establish national dentalcare (now partially pushed through by the ndp), and refused to establish a wealth tax or provide affordable telecommunication services. This long record shows what we’ve always known to be true: liberal, tory, same old story.

If not liberals or tories, why not the NDP? The NDP claims to be the party of the working class. They do not fill this role effectively, and they are losing ground in the polls because they cannot offer a real alternative to capitalism, instead framing themselves as slightly nicer liberals who will expand pharmacare and EI: good ideas, but not nearly enough. The NDP plays a frustrating and contradictory role in Canadian politics. On the one hand, they have used their position to push through partial wins — the early stages of pharmacare and dental care being key examples, as well as anti-scab legislation. On the other, their refusal to break with liberalism in any meaningful way makes them appear weak and directionless. Instead of mobilizing the anger and desperation many working people feel, they seek to temper it — framing small reforms as radical change while avoiding confrontation with the wealthy. They speak the language of justice but fear the consequences of acting on it. Even within their own party, there’s a tendency to sideline grassroots voices in favour of PR consultants and central office messaging. This alienates not just the left, but ordinary people who are tired of being pandered to without being listened to. If the NDP cannot define itself against both the liberals and the conservatives — if it cannot imagine and fight for a world beyond capitalism — it risks irrelevance, even as conditions worsen.

So what of the election? I do recommend voting to avoid the worst (for example, i’ll be voting for Elizabeth May next week when advance polling opens even though I don’t particularly like her or the green party) - but that is a minimum “action”, and cannot be the extent for our politics. The liberals are winning because they’re the “rally around the flag” party. Carney can get away with offering less because people are scared of Trump and American dominance in international trade - which is a real problem. But the problem isn’t america, or americans, most of whom are working class people just like in Canada and every other nation, but the american bosses and corporations who seek to take over every industry everywhere they can with the cheapest labour available. And due to this newfound (especially among liberals) nationalism, people forget the enemy at home. People cheer for loblaws and SNC lavalin (or whatever they call themselves now) as brilliant examples of Canadian industry. Company groups appear on the news - sometimes next to union representatives - in a disgusting display of class collaborationism against the perceived enemy. Canada needs neither an election nor a trade war - it needs a socialist revolution to bring true democracy and true freedom to the Canadian worker, and eventually, the workers of the world.

[thoughtportal]

December 6, 2024

BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) — A top Romanian court on Friday annulled the first round of the country’s presidential election, days after allegations emerged that Russia ran a coordinated online campaign to promote the far-right outsider who won the first round.

The Constitutional Court’s unprecedented decision — which is final — came after President Klaus Iohannis declassified intelligence on Wednesday that alleged Russia organized thousands of social media accounts to promote Calin Georgescu across platforms such as TikTok and Telegram.

The court, without naming Georgescu, said that one of the 13 candidates in the Nov. 24 first round had improperly received “preferential treatment” on social media, distorting the outcome of the vote.

Georgescu denounced the verdict as an “officialized coup” and an attack on democracy, as did the second-place finisher, reformist Elena Lasconi of the center-right Save Romania Union party.

Despite being an outsider who declared zero campaign spending, Georgescu emerged as the frontrunner who was to face Lasconi in a runoff on Sunday. Some 951 voting stations had already opened abroad on Friday for the runoff for Romania’s large diaspora, but had to be halted.

Iohannis said he would remain in office until a new presidential election could be rerun from scratch. On Dec. 1, one week after the first round of the presidential race, Romania also held a parliamentary election, which saw pro-Western parties win the most votes but also gains for far-right nationalists. Iohannis said that once the new government is formed, the date of the new presidential vote would be set.

On Wednesday the president had released intelligence files from the Romanian Intelligence Service, the Foreign Intelligence Service, the Special Telecommunication Service and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

In a televised statement Friday, Iohannis said he was “deeply concerned” by the contents of the intelligence reports. “Intelligence reports revealed that this candidate’s campaign was supported by a foreign state with interests contrary to Romania’s. These are serious issues,” he said.

The Constitutional Court in its published decision cited the illegal use of digital technologies including artificial intelligence, as well as the use of “undeclared sources of funding.” It said one candidate received “preferential treatment on social media platforms, which resulted in the distortion of voters’ expressed will.”

Georgescu slammed the verdict as putting “democracy is under attack.”

“I have only one pact … with the Romanian people and God,” he said in a video statement. “We are no longer talking about fairness but rather about a mockery that betrays the principles of democracy … It is time to show that we are a courageous people who know that the destiny and rights of the Romanian nation are in our hands.”

Lasconi also strongly condemned the court’s decision, saying it was “illegal, immoral, and crushes the very essence of democracy” and that the second round should have gone forward.

“Whether we like it or not, from a legal and legitimate standpoint, 9 million Romanian citizens, both in the country and the diaspora, expressed their preference for a particular candidate through their votes,” she said.

“I know I would have won. And I will win because the Romanian people know I will fight for them, that I will unite them for a better Romania,” she added.

Some 9.4 million people — about 52.5% of eligible voters — had cast ballots in the first round in this European Union and NATO member country. The president serves a five-year term and has significant decision-making powers in national security, foreign policy and judicial appointments.

Most surveys had predicted the top candidate would be Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu of the ruling center-left Social Democrats. They indicated that second place would be claimed by either Lasconi or the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Unity of Romanians, George Simion.

As the surprising results came in with Georgescu on top, and Lasconi narrowly beating Ciolacu, it plunged the political establishment into turmoil.

The same court last week ordered a recount of the first-round votes, which added to the myriad controversies that have engulfed a chaotic election cycle. Following a recount, the court then validated the first-round results on Monday.

Many observers have expressed concerns that annulling the vote could trigger civil unrest. The court said Friday that its decision was meant “to restore citizens’ trust in the democratic legitimacy of public authorities, in the legality and fairness of elections.”

Simion, of the far-right party, said the development was a “coup d’état in full swing” but urged people not to take to the streets. “We don’t let ourselves be provoked, this system has to fall democratically,” he said.

Cristian Andrei, a political consultant based in Bucharest, said the court’s decision amounts to a “crisis mode situation for Romanian democracy.”

“In light of the information about the external interference, the massive interference in elections, I think this was not normal but predictable, because it’s not normal times at all, Romania is an uncharted territory,” he told The Associated Press. “The problem is here, do we have the institutions to manage such an interference in the future?”

Georgescu’s surprising success left many political observers wondering how most local surveys were so far off, putting him behind at least five other candidates before the vote.

Many observers attributed his success to his TikTok account, which now has 6 million likes and 541,000 followers. But some experts suspected Georgescu’s online following was artificially inflated while Romania’s top security body alleged he was given preferential treatment by TikTok over other candidates.

In the intelligence release, the secret services alleged that one TikTok user paid more $381,000 (361,000 euros) to other users to promote Georgescu content. Intelligence authorities said information they obtained “revealed an aggressive promotion campaign” to increase and accelerate his popularity.

Georgescu, when asked by the AP in an interview Wednesday whether he believes the Chinese-owned TikTok poses a threat to democracy, defended social media platforms.

“The most important existing function for promoting free speech and freedom of expression is social media,” he said.

[the-technicolor-whiscash]

It is so funny to me that the vatican doesn't officially participate as a member nation of the UN but does participate in the International Telecommunication Union in part because they have a satellite and thus must obey international telecommunication rules

[xialite]

may we trade oersonif thoughts once again……… are any of yours in romantic relationships. in my personifverse i know for sure that france and germany are married (they genuinely like each other the EU is both their child and marriage certificate), sydney and melbourne did something to produce canberra, and icrc and ifrc got symbolically married in 1997 to prove to their family that they were gonna get their shit together but there’s nothing between them they’re just colleagues. or maybe there is something. theyd never admit it if there was though something something professionalism……………………………. enemies to lovers??? i guess???

You know I like to keep this aspect vague in my AU. Personally I don’t really go to specifics when it comes to romantic relationships, as I myself is an aroace.

Both my CHs and orgs aren’t born with reproductive systems, they’re just some sort of magical beings that got manifested(CHs especially, as orgs are man-made), though they can still be influenced by human emotions, and thus, love.

Though I would say there are some *really* close relationships that you can consider romantic?? Although many of them are simply just a headcanon based on implication about closeness of the entities in real life, lol. But I wouldn’t specify if they actually got married per se.

First and foremost, I have ISO and IEC, you might already know what ISO stands for, and I made her a Swiss-Russian perfectionist girly, born and raised in Geneva. For IEC, that’s International Electrotechnical Commission, she is a British woman who moved to Geneva around the time ISO was born, at one point they shared a house….lol. Both are standard bodies, and both have been working together for quite a longggg time…they even have matching logos sometimes so I like to consider that. ITU (International Telecommunications Union) is their third wheel btw/silly

And there’s also IUGG and WMO, so IUGG stands for International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, he a member of International Science Council. WMO stands for World Meteorological Organisation, she is a member of the UN family. Both of them have sworn to each other that they will always keep a close tie with one another in around 70s, so I consider that their marriage year, I don’t know I might just be silly lolol

For countries, I like to imply closer relationships(not exactly romantic) on France/UK(both are women), Portugal/UK(man/woman), USA/China(both men), France/Germany(woman/man), ahhh I don’t think I remember more 🥹

Yeah that’s my view on relationships about my personifs lol

[mariacallous]

The phone or computer you’re reading this on may not be long for this world. Maybe you’ll drop it in water, or your dog will make a chew toy of it, or it’ll reach obsolescence. If you can’t repair it and have to discard it, the device will become e-waste, joining an alarmingly large mountain of defunct TVs, refrigerators, washing machines, cameras, routers, electric toothbrushes, headphones. This is “electrical and electronic equipment,” aka EEE—anything with a plug or battery. It’s increasingly out of control.

As economies develop and the consumerist lifestyle spreads around the world, e-waste has turned into a full-blown environmental crisis. People living in high-income countries own, on average, 109 EEE devices per capita, while those in low-income nations have just four. A new UN report finds that in 2022, humanity churned out 137 billion pounds of e-waste—more than 17 pounds for every person on Earth—and recycled less than a quarter of it.

That also represents about $62 billion worth of recoverable materials, like iron, copper, and gold, hitting e-waste landfills each year. At this pace, e-waste will grow by 33 percent by 2030, while the recycling rate could decline to 20 percent. (You can see this growth in the graph below: purple is EEE on the market, black is e-waste, and green is what gets recycled.)

“What was really alarming to me is that the speed at which this is growing is much quicker than the speed that e-waste is properly collected and recycled,” says Kees Baldé, a senior scientific specialist at the United Nations Institute for Training and Research and lead author of the report. “We just consume way too much, and we dispose of things way too quickly. We buy things we may not even need, because it's just very cheap. And also these products are not designed to be repaired.”

Humanity has to quickly bump up those recycling rates, the report stresses. In the first pie chart below, you can see the significant amount of metals we could be saving, mostly iron (chemical symbol Fe, in light gray), along with aluminum (Al, in dark gray), copper (Cu), and nickel (Ni). Other EEE metals include zinc, tin, and antimony. Overall, the report found that in 2022, generated e-waste contained 68 billion pounds of metal.

E-waste is a complex thing to break down: A washing machine is made of totally different components than a TV. And even for product categories, not only do different brands use different manufacturing processes, but even different models within those brands vary significantly. A new washing machine has way more sensors and other electronics than one built 30 years ago.

Complicating matters even further, e-waste can contain hazardous materials, like cobalt, flame retardants, and lead. The report found that each year, improperly processed e-waste releases more than 125,000 pounds of mercury alone, imperiling the health of humans and other animals. “Electronic waste is an extremely complex waste stream,” says Vanessa Gray, head of the Environment and Emergency Telecommunications Division at the UN’s International Telecommunication Union and an author of the report. “You have a lot of value in electronic waste, but you also have a lot of toxic materials that are dangerous to the environment.”

That makes recycling e-waste a dangerous occupation. In low- and middle-income countries, informal e-waste recyclers might go door-to-door collecting the stuff. To extract valuable metals, they melt down components without proper safety equipment, poisoning themselves and the environment. The new report notes that in total, 7.3 billion pounds of e-waste is shipped uncontrolled globally, meaning its ultimate management is unknown and likely not done in an environmentally friendly way. Of that, high-income countries shipped 1.8 billion pounds to low- and middle-income countries in 2022, swamping them with dangerous materials.

High-income countries have some of this informal recycling, but they also have formal facilities where e-waste is sorted and safely broken down. Europe, for example, has fairly high formal e-waste recycling rates, at about 43 percent. But globally, recycling is happening nowhere near enough to keep up with the year-over-year growth of the waste. Instead of properly mining EEE for metals, humanity keeps mining more ore out of the ground.

Still, the report found that even the small amount of e-waste that currently gets recycled avoided the mining of 2 trillion pounds of ore for virgin metal in 2022. (It takes a lot of ore to produce a little bit of metal.) The more metals we can recycle from e-waste, the less mining we’ll need to support the proliferation of gadgets. That would in turn avoid the greenhouse gases from such mining operations, plus losses of biodiversity.

The complexity of e-waste, though, makes it expensive to process. As the chart above shows, even an ambitious scenario of a formal e-waste collection rate in 2030 is 44 percent. “There is no business case for companies to just collect e-waste and to make a profit out of this in a sustainable manner,” says Baldé. “They can only survive if there is legislation in place which is also compensating them.”

The report notes that 81 countries have e-waste policies on the books, and of those, 67 have provisions regarding extended producer responsibility, or EPR. This involves fees paid by manufacturers of EEE that would go toward e-waste management.

Of course, people could also stop throwing so many devices away in the first place, something right-to-repair advocates have spent years fighting for. Batteries, for instance, lose capacity after a certain number of charge cycles. If a phone can’t hold a charge all day anymore, customers should be able to swap in a new battery. “Manufacturers shouldn't be able to put artificial limitations on that ability,” says Elizabeth Chamberlain, director of sustainability at iFixit, which provides repair guides and tools. That includes limiting access to parts and documentation. “Repair is a harm-reduction strategy. It's not the be-all-end-all solution, but it's one of many things we need to do as a global society to slow down the rate at which we're demanding things of the planet.”

At the core of the e-waste crisis is the demand: A growing human population needs phones to communicate and fridges to keep food safe and heat pumps to stay comfortable indoors. So first and foremost we need high-quality products that don’t immediately break down, but also the right to repair when they do. And what absolutely can’t be fixed needs to move through a safe, robust e-waste recycling system. “We are consuming so much,” says Baldé, “we cannot really recycle our way out of the problem.”

[hicginewsagency]

"Witnessing regulatory leaders coming together in Uganda to balance innovation with regulation was a reminder of what we can achieve through unity."  ITU Boss Speaks at the Closure of the 4-Day Summit.

[makotoscoffee]

I see many misguided posts about how to help Palestine, the most important things you can do are:

- Donations are not making it into the country, but you can give Palestinian citizens eSIMS FOR FREE! this amazing woman is organising a project called Connecting Gaza, DM her and she'll set you up to make a difference by giving internet access to the people in Gaza who have lost all telecommunication infrastructure

- Research if there are Palestine shops in your city, or pop-ups, that sell products from Palestine. Yes, you won't be guaranteed that the money you spend is able to make a difference in the country, but it can make a difference in your community and show solidarity whilst keeping Palestinian culture alive. Anyone of any ethnicity or religion (as it is not a religious cloth and is usually used like any other scarf/headdress) can wear a kefije, as it is an international symbol of solidarity with Palestine.

- Boycott according to the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) guide. Here's their website, you can boycott more than just products and companies too! That link is to a recent post on their website, here is the 'standard' list of companies. They're not that many, and it's not that hard. In addition, many are boycotting McDonald's for donating meals to the IDF (at least 12 000), and Starbucks for suing its union over a social media post in support of Palestine. A BOYCOTT MEANS NO BUSINESS. NOT DESTROYING PROPERTY, NOT GETTING RID OF THE THINGS YOU HAVE, BUT NOT GIVING YOUR MONEY TO THESE COMPANIES. Except I would get rid of your SodaStream or any other product from the lists that forces you to purchase more products from that company.

- Protest! Manifest, disrupt, make your voice heard!! Tear down those fucking posters!! Protect your identity, it's becoming increasingly risky. But that doesn't mean you can simply skip it.

EVERY MESSAGE THAT MAKES IT OUT OF PALESTINE IS CRYSTAL CLEAR: DON'T STAY SILENT, HELP THEM SHOW THE WORLD WHAT IS HAPPENING. NEVER STOP SPEAKING ABOUT PALESTINE AND PUTTING PRESSURE ON THE PEOPLE WITH POWER TO DO SOMETHING. SHOW THE BEAUTY AND HUMANITY OF PALESTINE.

IF YOU'RE IN THE UNITED STATES AND CALLING YOUR REPRESENTATIVES, HERE IS A GUIDE FOR HOW TO MAKE THE MOST IMPACT

THIS PERSON ALSO SHARED THIS WHICH GIVES SOME IMPORTANT NUANCE AND DETAILS ABOUT THIS METHOD