#anonymous google employee

[dysaniadisorder]

guys what do u think asunaro employees called fake hinako before bc i personally think she genuinely didn't have a name

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

I must, in my capacity as a professional perpetual buzzkill, note that Myrtle is just encouraging the OP to break their facility's rules, not commit Turtle Crimes (TM).

As funny as this story is, that's not actually how the Endangered Species Act works with regards to captive animals - and that distinction is surprisingly important for lots of complicated legal and political reasons. More importantly, I am physically incapable of letting any error regarding federal wildlife laws pass my dash without commenting, so let's learn about why this is "just" a firing offense, not a felonious one.

(As always, I must emphasize up front - this is not shade on the OP or their facility. This shit is complicated, and it's easy for information to get misconstrued or misremembered. I'm just here to teach!)

So, a quick ESA overview. The law protects species that have gone through a bureaucratic process and been officially listed as endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (this is different than a species' IUCN Red List status, which is a scale from Least Concern to Critically Endangered). The law prevents anyone from "taking" a listed species. "Take" or the act of "taking" is defined by USFWS as "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." Take can be intentional or incidental, but you're responsible for the result all the same. Harass, importantly, has been additionally defined by USFWS as "an intentional or negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury to wildlife by annoying to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns which include, but are not limited to, breeding feeding or sheltering."

Enough definitions, the turtles are glaring at us ominously from their tanks. So, if you went to go scritch a wild sea turtle? Absolutely an ESA violation. All six species of sea turtles found worldwide are listed as endangered in the United States (the seventh species is also endangered, but only found in Australia). However, scritching said sea turtle wouldn't be a felony. Intentional taking of an endangered animal is a Class A misdemeanor - and while that might sound "better", it can still result in a year of imprisonment and/or a fine up to $100,000 (and that's just criminal penalties! there can be civil ones too). Don't bother endangered animals, kids.

Where this gets interesting, though, is when endangered species are in captive settings. USFWS has formally acknowledged that managing animals in human care could run into issues under the harassment statute, since it "disrupts normal behavior." Y'know, because sometimes you have to restrict food or movement or bother an animal for veterinary care. They've solved this problem by adding what is often unofficially called a "captive take provision" to the definition of harassment:

"When applied to captive wildlife, [harassment] does not include generally accepted: (1) Animal husbandry practices that meet or exceed the minimum standards for facilities and care under the Animal Welfare Act, (2) Breeding procedures, or (3) Provisions of veterinary care for confining, tranquilizing, or anesthetizing, when such practices, procedures, or provisions are not likely to result in injury to the wildlife."

What that means, practically, is that just touching endangered animals isn't inherently a violation of the ESA. As long as it's done in a manner that USDA deems appropriate and is part of normal animal care practices, it's okay. The ESA and related regulations don't go into detail on who's allowed to do what: they're broad rules and facilities are expected to understand what constitutes compliance. From a practical point of view, facility staff need to be able to touch endangered animals in their care - and not just the keepers! Vet staff, maintenance works, and many other professionals (including volunteers) might end up in a position in which they're asked to assist with handling, restraint, enrichment, etc. The ESA captive take exemption also applies to the public in specific situations. Anyone who has ever participated in an encounter where they got to touch or feed any species of rhino, any elephant species, grey wolves, African penguins, Bactrian camels, or Galapagos tortoises has participated in a program utilizing this exemption; encounters are normally set up so that you're basically participating in normal husbandry practices. (Lawsuits over things like cub petting occur when encounter are not normal practice or AWA compliant). With this context, a staff member touching a captive green sea turtle in this very specific situation should be fine, legally.

I originally wondered if maybe there were other strictures on captive sea turtles that might have been conflated with the Endangered Species Act here. All non-releasable sea turtles that live in captivity are under the jurisdiction of USFWS in perpetuity, and it turns out there are some additional rules; facilities are prohibited from letting visitors touch them, for one. But that only applies to guests, not staff, and also? Myrtle isn't actually subject to those rules! She's thought to be somewhere between 73 and 90 at this point, putting her possible year of birth at or before 1950. The ESA wasn't passed until 1973, and green sea turtles weren't listed until 1978. Myrtle is a wild-caught turtle, not a rehabbed animal, so she was in human care for decades before her species was protected. So while the ESA still applies, she's not subject to the USFWS rules about non-releasable rehabbed turts.

What does this mean? Can the OP, in good faith, now commit what is no longer considered to be turtle crimes? Sadly, no. There are still lots of good reasons that the OP is making the right choice by not giving Myrtle the shell scratches she so clearly demands.

First off, it's clearly against facility rules. The OP notes that they're not allowed to have contact with her because they're not an aquarist who works on that habitat, a vet, or a tank diver (all people who are allowed). One of the biggest rules of working at an animal facility? Thou shalt not touch animals without permission. Even if you work with other animals. Even if you've been trained on that animal previously. Touching animals without permission can quite literally be enough to get you fired. It is, quite simply, a safety issue. Animals can be unintentionally injured by your contact, or by trying to escape from it, not to mention they can get sick from a chemicals or bacteria/viruses on your skin; in the other direction, animals can intentionally or accidentally hurt people, as well as possibly share parasites, zoonotic diseases, and infections. Animal care staff are injured all the time by the collections they care for, and they've got proper training and experience - the chances are not good for people who don't work with an animal they want to pet coming out unscathed. In the best case scenarios, nobody dies (but think of how many news stories you've heard where man tries to pet animal, animal is shot to save man).

So aside from the professionalism aspect, other reasons to no touchy the turtle include her hurting the OP, the OP impacting her health, and of course the possibility of the OP falling into the tank. Older green sea turtles are huge and their beaks can do pretty serious damage. They stated Myrtle is able to shake the dive platform pretty substantially when she bumps it, so if you're leaning out over the edge to reach her... it's an awkward way to take a swim (and lose a job).

The OP also made a really good point in a subsequent reblog: when you're on public view in an aquarium or zoo, your actions are constantly observed and the example they set matters. Humans are super visual creatures, and no matter how many times you say "don't go bother endangered species," if they see people randomly petting the sea turtle, they're going to walk away with the impression it's okay to do. Zookeepers and aquarists constantly have to think about what example they're setting for guests when they interact with animals in front of the public. Even if it was allowed by their job, OP would be making the right choice to abstain.

Now, I don't know exactly why the OP has been told it's illegal to touch Myrtle. I don't know if someone misspoke or if there's an error in training materials, or what. That's okay! It helps reinforce a protocol that's appropriate for many other reasons. And, again, not a ton of non-management folk are familiar with the intricacies of the ESA, because it's not stuff they need to know to do their jobs. I broke it all down because the post is really popular, I have a deep and unabiding need to attempt to correct information on the internet, and I happen to think animal law is almost as cool as tree law. I didn't write this up because I think the facility is doing anything worth criticizing them for, so don't give the OP any negative feedback for it, please and thank you.

This concludes today's spontaneous deep dive into US endangered species management law! I will conclude by noting that, if a sea turtle did ever successfully encourage Crimes, it would absolutely be Myrtle.

one of my favorite things about my job that i can say to people that sounds utterly ridiculous but is technically 100% true is that one of our sea turtles keeps trying to get me to commit a felony on her behalf and gets SUPER cranky when i won’t do it

[mariamegale]

Alexey Luchin, former Ice Pick Lodge employee, has commented to support the allegations against Dybowski, giving more insight and making additional accusations regarding grooming, physical and emotional abuse.

One of the most noteworthy things is his claims about Dybowski's current relationship with IPL. According to Luchin, Dybowski has not cut any ties with IPL or vice versa, and is only claiming that to avoid alimony payments:

Nikolay formally removed himself from the company (IPL) in a legal sense, in order to avoid paying adequate alimony. The payments on the screenshots are as low as 100$, which isn't nearly enough. [...] He's still working, the maneur [sic] is only to avoid alimony. Though I must say, these days the team is "carrying" him mostly. New Ice-Pick Lodge is great, there are lots of motivated people who gre up on old Ice-Pick games and are doing their very best!

Full comment thread here.

I will also post his comments below, for those who may not have or wish to visit Reddit. Special thanks to user Winterlings for asking follow-up questions, and of course a massive applause to Luchin for being willing to share this under his own name.

As a former colleague (I worked on Pathologic 1, The Void, Cargo, and a bit of uncredited work on Pathologic 2), I am sad to confirm, that this is most likely true. There is a link to follow the ongoing court considering the child alimony payments, and it looks like there will be another one, considering recent occusations. (As link to Russian websites are banned, see original source in the mod comment. You will need a VPN to go further down the first link in the post to see the court progress, or use google translate on that link to bypass the need for VPNs) I know Nikolay well, from at least 2006, and unfortunatelly his "misbehaviours" have been an open secret for a long time, on which I didn't comment for two reasons. One - he is not the studio, and isn't involved much in development since The Void - do NOT take out your anger on the talanted and good people working of Pathologic 3. Second - I've been kind of a coward, until I've learnt in 2018 or so, that a girlfriend of mine was also groomed by him, while we were still dating, and since then I broke all ties with Nikolay. He has been a raging, violent and erratic alcoholic, a sociopath and a pathological liar all these years. I personally know at least 10 people who he harmed directly in relation to public accusations (but it's their stories to tell, not mine). He is a manipulative sociopath, that is very good with words, another reason why these stories only surfaced now. The reason I'm speaking up right now is because I figured that after the last ephebophilia and grooming accusations, that cost him his job as a univercity teacher, and danger of going to court, he would change his ways. But things have gotten worse and more rotten since then. There isn't a reliable "reputation institution" in Russian gamedev, but it must start at some point. I believe the best path for Nikolay would be to leave Ice-Pick Lodge to not tarnish their reputation with his own fuckups, and leave the current studio to work as is - they're doing a great job on Pathologic 3, and they once again should NOT be harrassed for a single person's misdeeds.

When asked about identity verification:

I'm easily googlable by my handle, my name is Alexey "The LxR" Luchin. Though my work is uncredited on both Pathologics ironically, but also I'm falsely credited on Knock-Knock, which I haven't worked on. Anyhow, it'll be easy to find me in the credits for The Void and Cargo and by traces of my active participation in building the early game communities on the forums. :) Also possibly another colleague of mine in this thread may verify that it is indeed me, though I'd understand if they wish to remain anonymous.

Whether or not we as a community should hold IPL as a company responsible for this in some way, or go through with some financial boycott, I am leaning more and more towards at the very least requiring some kind of statement. Not only because of what Dybowski has done in his personal life, although that's more than bad enough, but because this crosses the line into actively having an impact on the dev team, the games, and in turn the community. I want to be able to know that this is something they take seriously and that Dybowski is gone, before I give them more money. But that is just my stance, and any nuanced take is of course welcome.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Ex-Meta employee Madelyn Machado recently posted a TikTok video claiming that she was getting paid $190,000 a year to do nothing. Another Meta employee, also on TikTok, posted that “Meta was hiring people so that other companies couldn’t have us, and then they were just kind of like hoarding us like Pokémon cards.” Over at Google, a company known to have pioneered the modern tech workplace, one designer complained of spending 40 percent of their time on “the inefficien[cy] overhead of simply working at Google.” Some report spending all day on tasks as simple as changing the color of a website button. Working the bare minimum while waiting for stock to vest is so common that Googlers call it “resting and vesting.” ​ In an anonymous online poll on how many “focused hours of work” software engineers put in each day, 71 percent of the over four thousand respondents claimed to work six hours a day or less, while 12 percent said they did between one and two hours a day. During the acute phase of the Covid-19 pandemic, it became common for tech workers to capitalize on all this free time by juggling multiple full-time remote jobs. According to the Wall Street Journal, many workers who balance two jobs do not even hit a regular forty-hour workload for both jobs combined. One software engineer reported logging between three and ten hours of actual work per week when working one job, with the rest of his time spent on pointless meetings and pretending to be busy. My own experience supports this trend: toward the end of my five-year tenure as a software engineer for Microsoft, I was working fewer than three hours a day. And of what little code I produced for them, none of it made any real impact on Microsoft’s bottom line—or the world at large. For much of this century, optimism that technology would make the world a better place fueled the perception that Silicon Valley was the moral alternative to an extractive Wall Street—that it was possible to make money, not at the expense of society but in service of it. In other words, many who joined the industry did so precisely because they thought that their work would be useful. Yet what we’re now seeing is a lot of bullshit. If capitalism is supposed to be efficient and, guided by the invisible hand of the market, eliminate inefficiencies, how is it that the tech industry, the purported cradle of innovation, has become a redoubt of waste and unproductivity?

[rentalboos]

Watcher has lost almost 100 thousand subscribers

Hi babygirl, thank you for your 6 new messages, I love that you think my opinion is this important, though I genuinely don't quite get it. I'm not even a Watcher fanaccount, like, I have maybe two followers who even know the channel. What beef do you have with me lmao Since you're so interested in it though, I'm going to give it to you! FOR FREE! Since that's so important to you!

Here's the tldr: You're on anon sending hate, so you already know you're in the wrong and everyone else knows it too!

Great. Now that that's covered, here we GO! My precious opinion that you value so much! For free:

I'm sorry it offends you that I have the 5,99 to pay them and am doing it, but like. Do you do this with everyone? Do you go into people's DMs (no of course not, you only hate anonymously, wonder why that is!) to yell at them about subscribing to Twitch streams? Spotify? Youtube membership? Patreons?

What about this offends you so? That a bunch of youtubers had to make a tough choice between "we have to stop creating the art we want" and "we could try and keep creating the art we want, but we'll need to get paid for it" and chose to try and get paid for it? Is the offense, to you personally, that other people will still get to enjoy the content they like, opposed to absolutely no one getting to? It certainly can't be that you, personally, can't access their content anymore, because, quite frankly, I doubt you actually like it very much.

As for your five billion questions for why this makes you racist: You singling out Steven makes you racist. They founded this company together and they doubtlessly made this decision together and the narrative that is currently spun of "Shane (the white dude) would never, his evil non-white co-workers are forcing him to!" is .... extremely parasocial, and wildly random and coming out of nowhere.

Except for all the parts it's not, because of COURSE. Of course the evil guy and the guy who creates content "no one wants to fund" and who now everyone calls "boring" and who now has viral hate tweets saying he's "dragged Ryan and Shane down", is the asian guy who's pushed for diversity on the channel from the very start.

Like, he's well aware that his shows are the least popular. There's a reason for that, sweetie, and I promise you, it has to do with the fact that they've focused on diversity and quality rather than shittalking in front of a camera. And I'm not even a Steven girlie, I'm a Ghost Files ride or die, baby!

But this narrative that he's "homophobic and racist" because he said in a podcast once that he chooses to stay friends with people who sometimes sprout ignorant views, that's like- Get a fucking grip. I know y'all haven't reached adult life yet, it is painfully apparent, but there comes a time in life where you'll have to realize that sometimes the people around you aren't as socially aware or educated as you, but in their nature good eggs, and you can, of course, choose to drop their asses, if you don't happen to be otherwise connected to them in an adult environment, where jobs and friend groups often overlap or they're part of your family or family's circle, but the far, far better choice is to be their friend and educate them. Because that's the best way the ignorant views become less ignorant. That's literally what he's been saying in that podcast ep, by the way. I don't need to "google" that and I don't need your twitter links, I was there when that episode dropped. I listened to it as I did the dishes. I was applauding Steven for putting in the time and effort and energy to DO that with people, because I oftentimes find myself too scared to have the conversations he is having.

Watcher has donated to queer charities. They sell queer merch. They have queer employees. Their fanbase is mainly queer. He's not homophobic, y'all are insane. If any of that would go against his values, he'd a) not be in a company with Ryan and Shane, because they wouldn't be having it and b) wouldn't stand up for, employ and cater to queer people. He'd be out with the homophobes, telling us how Jesus died for our sins or whatever.

He's also not racist which- duh. Before I even knew Steven Lim, I already knew this is something he is incredibly(!) sensitive about, he literally hates racism (And I don't know if you noticed. But he's very often the target of it, you absolute bufoon) and specifically went into Watcher to be able to help marginalized voices have a platform. That was his goal for Watcher that he couldn't properly fulfil in Buzzfeed. I know that. Because I was there from the start and actually listened to them talk. And it was stated and proven many, many times.

Y'all so eager to jump on a hate train and take shit out of context, it's pathetic. And "homophobic" good God, he had a book on his bookshelf. Wow. I have Harry Potter in three different editions on my bookshelf, I've learned reading with them. They have tear stains on the pages where Dumbledore died. You're gonna say I'm a transphobe if you see them in a photo? Gonna go ahead and call me, a trans guy, a transphobe now? Knock yourself out. Because I'll care about that about as much as I care about how many angry little kids are unsubscribing from Watcher rn: Not even a little bit.

You're whining like little bitches in random fan's inboxes, are throwing insults, false accusations and racism around to stirr the pot, you're coming for Steven as if Ryan and Shane aren't literally HORRIFIED by y'all doing this in their name to someone who's their close friend. As if Watcher would even exist without him, when he saved it from going bankrupt in their first year, when Ryan and Shane couldn't be arsed to step up and figure out how to run a company.

You weren't paying them anyway. I'm subscribed to their Patreon at the highest tier, because I know good art doesn't come free and I knew they were gonna struggle on Youtube views alone and I enjoy their content and want to help them keep making it. I don't expect anyone to be able to do that - And they don't either. They also don't expect everyone to pay or be able to pay for their streaming services. They're currently working on responding to the feedback and make things more accessible. They certainly didn't handle this perfectly and they certainly didn't want to make this choice if they had another one. Neither of the three.

You won't pay for it. That's fine. That's literally all there is to it. There's no need to sling this shit around, but you're doing it anyway. Not because you care, but because you're having fun with it. Well, go ahead. The more hate you send, the more I know I'm standing up for the right people.

[originalleftist]

Musk hired spies to surveil his critics and girlfriend.

Highlights:

"One of those critics is Vernon Unsworth, who sued Musk in 2018 for calling him a "pedo guy" on Twitter. A new Tortoise investigation reveals that the scale of surveillance used against Unsworth was greater than previously known: Musk used at least two sets of private investigators, both of which used deception to try to gather information."

"Musk deployed private investigators to follow a Tesla employee "24 hours a day". A former security operative at Tesla alleges the company also hacked into the employee's phone. Other whistleblowers also allege that they were followed."

"Unbeknownst to Unsworth, Musk's tam then paid about $50,000 to a private investigator called James Howard-Higgins to dig up dirt on Unsworth. Howard-Higgins promised that he would go through Unsworth's bins, pose as a charity worker to get information, and infiltrate his partner's Facebook page.

No due diligence. A Google search would have revealed that Howard-Higgins was a fraudster, jailed in 2016 for stealing from his own company. As the US trial, which Musk won by portraying his Twitter comments as a joke, his team portrayed Howard-Higgins as a one-off. In fact another investigation firm called Orion was also tasked with getting information on Unsworth. Emails show how Orion emailed one of Unsworth's friends, telling him, incorrectly, that they were "working on behalf of Vernon"."

"Musk allegedly placed his former partner Amber Heard under surveillance in Australia having become suspicious that she was cheating on him.

Around the same time a local newspaper received an anonymous tip that an Aussie Rules footballer was "spending many nights at Amber Heard's house" and "leaving early in the morning looking like the cat that swallowed the canary".

The paper traced the message to SpaceX, one of Musk's companies.

When one of its reporters spoke to Musk, he accepted that someone close to him had sent the tip but claimed it was done without his knowledge.

"My personal belief is that [Musk] definitely sent it," says the reporter, Sally Coates."

I've seen other outlets claim that Musk used infrared technology to spy on Heard's home and detect any movement inside, but can't confirm this from a source I consider credible.

Anyway, reminder that Muskrat is a serial domestic abuser and sexual predator as well as a fascist, that his supposed support for "free speech" (as always with the Right) just means "freedom for me to say whatever I want with no consequences, and no one else has freedom to disagree with or criticize me", and that how he conducts himself in his private life and in his businesses is mirrored in his goals for society as a whole.

Also, that this "genius" is so incompetent that he couldn't even use Google for two minutes before hiring a convicted con man.

(Addendum: I know a lot of people have accused Tortoise Media of being part of some grand Right-wing/transphobic conspiracy, but so far as I've found that's mostly desperate Neil Gaiman fans trying to make out that the accusations against him by multiple unconnected women, that he partly admitted to and others in the industry corroborated, are a vast Conservative conspiracy to frame him for being pro-trans. In other words- ridiculous and misogynist. Tortoise has some credibility issues of being fairly new, without much of an established track record and, like many major media outlets, having big business money behind it. But also, far Right psy-op outlets probably aren't inclined to write detailed exposes on Elon Musk and the Saudi Royals.)

[so-much-for-subtlety]

Speaking of advertising in 2015 I worked at a tech startup advertising startup that used cookies (digital ones) to track individuals (doesn’t matter if you used a VPN) and they had a way to “inject” ads right into videos bypassing adblockers. It was very creepy tbh. The company was bought by Google and we all got two years of pay before being let go. I honestly hate it. So yes. Advertising executives are scum.

It has changed a lot over the past decade, but there used to be a perception that tech companies were generally progressive and for the benefit of their users. Google used to have “don’t be evil” as the core of their employee code of conduct but they officially dropped that in 2018 (which coincidentally was the same year that GDPR became enforceable and gave people in EU countries some decent rights for privacy).

In the United States we just don’t have equivalent federal legislation to protect citizens (California, Virginia, and Colorado do have some state-level protections).

the bottom line is that tech companies are owned and operated by extremely wealthy individuals who have a vested interest in being able to profit though digital tracking and advertising.

We’re entering the 4th era of digital surveillance:

1st era was IP address tracking (VPNs provided protection for this)

2nd era was cookies and ‘super cookies’ (a range of techniques that serve the same purpose as cookies but are harder to clear from your browser)

3rd era is fingerprinting - possible since 2005 but I think became common in practice only since ~2015 and is a method which uses a bunch of metadata and pinpoints you as an individual based on your unique set of attributes.

I think that a lot of people are still under the misconception that using Chrome incognito mode gives you some privacy

Google's Chrome browser does not provide protection against trackers or fingerprinters in Incognito Mode.

4th era is coming soon and enabled by similar technology that enable LLM and will be able to identify you by the unique way you interact with technology (e.g. the style/tone of my writing in this post has characteristics that are unique to me, and also very hard for me to avoid!).

the 4th era for me is horrifying- imagine your employer being able to take a sample of your writing (from emails or company chat) and be able to identify content you’ve posted online that you thought you were posting anonymously?

—

btw, if anyone is curious about seeing where you stand in terms of digital fingerprinting here are some online tools you can use to get an idea - both are free, no login/signup and take just a few seconds to run:

[musicalhell]

So, I say this as someone who's been following the Vivienne Medrano hoopla for years, but take what @unicornmantises has to say with a grain of salt. There's been an open hate campaign against Medrano ever since her Zoophobia days. The majority of accusations against her have been revealed to be either based on a misunderstanding, minor things she's apologized for, things she had zero control over, or straight up fabrications. Not to mention there was a Google document claiming to have evidence from ex-Spindlehorse employees against Medrano, only for it to, surprise surprise, turn out that the accusers had lied about pretty much everything. This is not to say that Medrano is a perfect little angel who has done nothing wrong, but she also isn't the anti-christ like her hatedom portrays her as.

For what it's worth, I haven't seen the Hazbin Hotel series and don't know if I'll ever have time. Maybe it'll be good. Maybe it'll be bad. Who knows? But at least I have a life outside of hating a random woman I don't personally know.

I can assure you I have spent far less time thinking about Viziepop--let alone hating her--than you have going into people's asks and posting anonymous rants in her defense.

[mariacallous]

In early 2022, two Google policy staffers met with a trio of women victimized by a scam that resulted in explicit videos of them circulating online—including via Google search results. The women were among the hundreds of young adults who responded to ads seeking swimsuit models only to be coerced into performing in sex videos distributed by the website GirlsDoPorn. The site shut down in 2020, and a producer, a bookkeeper, and a cameraman subsequently pleaded guilty to sex trafficking, but the videos kept popping up on Google search faster than the women could request removals.

The women, joined by an attorney and a security expert, presented a bounty of ideas for how Google could keep the criminal and demeaning clips better hidden, according to five people who attended or were briefed on the virtual meeting. They wanted Google search to ban websites devoted to GirlsDoPorn and videos with its watermark. They suggested Google could borrow the 25-terabyte hard drive on which the women’s cybersecurity consultant, Charles DeBarber, had saved every GirlsDoPorn episode, take a mathematical fingerprint, or “hash,” of each clip, and block them from ever reappearing in search results.

The two Google staffers in the meeting hoped to use what they learned to win more resources from higher-ups. But the victim’s attorney, Brian Holm, left feeling dubious. The policy team was in “a tough spot” and “didn’t have authority to effect change within Google,” he says.

His gut reaction was right. Two years later, none of those ideas brought up in the meeting have been enacted, and the videos still come up in search.

WIRED has spoken with five former Google employees and 10 victims’ advocates who have been in communication with the company. They all say that they appreciate that because of recent changes Google has made, survivors of image-based sexual abuse such as the GirlsDoPorn scam can more easily and successfully remove unwanted search results. But they are frustrated that management at the search giant hasn’t approved proposals, such as the hard drive idea, which they believe will more fully restore and preserve the privacy of millions of victims around the world, most of them women.

The sources describe previously unreported internal deliberations, including Google’s rationale for not using an industry tool called StopNCII that shares information about nonconsensual intimate imagery (NCII) and the company’s failure to demand that porn websites verify consent to qualify for search traffic. Google’s own research team has published steps that tech companies can take against NCII, including using StopNCII.

The sources believe such efforts would better contain a problem that’s growing, in part through widening access to AI tools that create explicit deepfakes, including ones of GirlsDoPorn survivors. Overall reports to the UK’s Revenge Porn hotline more than doubled last year, to roughly 19,000, as did the number of cases involving synthetic content. Half of over 2,000 Brits in a recent survey worried about being victimized by deepfakes. The White House in May urged swifter action by lawmakers and industry to curb NCII overall. In June, Google joined seven other companies and nine organizations in announcing a working group to coordinate responses.

Right now, victims can demand prosecution of abusers or pursue legal claims against websites hosting content, but neither of those routes is guaranteed, and both can be costly due to legal fees. Getting Google to remove results can be the most practical tactic and serves the ultimate goal of keeping violative content out of the eyes of friends, hiring managers, potential landlords, or dates—who almost all likely turn to Google to look up people.

A Google spokesperson, who requested anonymity to avoid harassment from perpetrators, declined to comment on the call with GirlsDoPorn victims. She says combating what the company refers to as nonconsensual explicit imagery (NCEI) remains a priority and that Google’s actions go well beyond what is legally required. “Over the years, we’ve invested deeply in industry-leading policies and protections to help protect people affected by this harmful content,” she says. “Teams across Google continue to work diligently to bolster our safeguards and thoughtfully address emerging challenges to better protect people.”

In an interview with WIRED, a Google search product manager overseeing anti-harm work says blocking videos using hashes is challenging to adopt because some websites don’t publish videos in a way that search engines can compare against. Speaking on condition of anonymity, she says Google has encouraged explicit websites to address that. She adds that there’s generally more for Google to do but refutes the allegation that executives had held up the work.

Advocates of bolder action by Google point to the company’s much tighter restrictions on searching for child sexual abuse material (CSAM) as evidence it could do much more. Typing “deepfake nudes kids” into Google prompts a warning that such content is illegal and ultimately directs users to news articles and support groups. Google also finds and blocks from its results almost 1 million new CSAM-containing webpages annually.

A recent Google search for “deepfake nudes jennifer aniston” yielded seven results purporting to offer just that. The search engine offered no warning or resources in response to the query, despite nearly every US state and many countries having criminalized unpermitted distribution of intimate content of adults. Google declined to comment on the lack of a warning.

The product manager says comparisons to CSAM are invalid. Virtually any image of a naked child is illegal and can be automatically removed, she says. Separating NCEI from consensual porn requires some indication that the content was shot or distributed without permission, and that context often isn’t clear until a victim files a report and a human analyzes it. But the manager wouldn’t directly answer whether Google has tried to overcome the challenge.

Adam Dodge, founder of advocacy and education group Ending Tech-Enabled Abuse, says that until Google proactively removes more NCII, victims have to be hypervigilant about finding and reporting it themselves. That’s “not something we should put on victims,” he says. “We’re asking them to go to the location where they were assaulted online to move past the trauma.”

Google started accepting removal requests for search results leading to nudity or sex in 2015 if the content was intended to be private and was never authorized to be published, according to its policy. That went largely unchanged until 2020, when the company added that being in an “intimate state” qualified.

A New York Times column that year triggered Google executives to dedicate resources to the issue, organizing projects, including one codenamed Sparrow, to help victims keep content off search for good, three former employees say. The product manager confirmed that executives at times have pushed teams to improve Google’s handling of NCEI.

Google made its takedown form friendlier to use, understand, and access, the sources say. The search giant axed legalese and outdated use of the term “revenge porn,” since porn is generally viewed as consensual. The company added instructions on submitting screenshots and greater detail on the review process.

The form became accessible by clicking the menu that appears next to every search result. Requests rose about 19-fold in one early test, one source says. A second source says that it has become among Google’s most-used forms for reporting abuse and that, after the edits, a far greater percentage of requests resulted in removal of results. Google disputes these figures, but it declined to share comprehensive data on NCEI.

Government-mandated transparency reports show Google has removed most of the nearly 170,000 search and YouTube links reported for unwanted sexual content in South Korea since December 2020, the earliest data available, and nixed nearly 300 pieces of content in response to 380 complaints from users in India since May 2021. The limited data suggest Google is finding more reports credible than its smaller rival in search Microsoft, which took action in 52 percent of the nearly 8,400 cases it received globally for Bing and other services from 2015 through June 2023.

Launched in late 2021, the StopNCII system has amassed a database of over 572,000 hashed photos and videos and blocked that media from being shared more than 12,000 times across 10 services, including Instagram and TikTok. Google hasn’t adopted the tool to block content from search due to concerns about what’s actually in the database, according to three sources.

To protect victims’ privacy, StopNCII doesn’t review content they report, and hashes reveal nothing about the underlying content. Google is worried that it could end up blocking something innocent, the sources say. “We don’t know if it’s just an image of a cupcake,” one of them says. The sources add that Google also has opted against bankrolling a system it considers better, despite internal suggestions to do so.

The Google spokesperson declined to comment on StopNCII, but in April the company told UK lawmakers who questioned Google about its decision not to use the tool that it had “specific policy and practical concerns about the interoperability of the database,” without elaborating.

Internally, Google workers have come up with some bold ideas to improve takedowns. Employees have discussed booting explicit websites, including porn companies, from search results unless they are willing to assure that their content is consensual, according to four sources. The idea hasn’t been adopted. Google’s search unit has shied away from setting rules on a thorny and taboo subject like sexual imagery, three sources say. “They don’t want to be seen as regulators of the internet,” one former staffer says.

Because Google sends significant traffic to explicit websites, it could force them to take stricter measures. About 15 percent of image searches and up to half of video searches among the billions Google receives daily are related to porn, says one former staffer, figures the company declined to comment on. “Google holds the keys to the kingdom,” the source says. Meanwhile, few others are stepping in. US lawmakers haven’t passed proposed legislation to impose consent checks on online uploads. And some popular services for sharing explicit content, such as Reddit and X, don’t require users to submit proof of subjects’ consent.

Porn producers, who collect identity information from performers as required by US law, support the sharing of a consent signal with search engines, says Mike Stabile, spokesperson for the industry trade body Free Speech Coalition. “Major adult sites already monitor and block NCII much more aggressively than mainstream platforms,” he says.

The Google spokesperson declined to comment on the consent idea but points to an existing penalty: Google last December began demoting—but not blocking—search results for websites that come up in “a high volume” of successful takedown requests.

The Google product manager and the spokesperson contend that the search team already has taken big steps over the past three years to ease the burden on survivors of image-based sexual abuse. But WIRED’s investigation shows that some improvements have come with caveats.

A system Google introduced that tries to automatically remove search links when previously reported content resurfaces on new websites doesn’t work on videos or altered images, and two sources say Google hadn’t dedicated staff to improving it. “It absolutely could be better, and there isn’t enough attention on how it could really solve victims’ problems,” one says. The spokesperson says staff are assigned to enhance the tool.

Another system called known victim protection tries to filter out results with explicit images from search queries similar to those from past takedown requests, the two sources say. It is designed to not disrupt results to legitimate porn and generally reduces the need for victims to stay vigilant for new uploads. But Google has acknowledged to South Korean regulators that the system isn’t perfect. “Given the dynamic and ever-changing nature of the web, automated systems are not able, 100 percent of the time, to catch every explicit result,” the company writes in its transparency reports.

In one of its biggest shifts, Google last August abandoned its policy of declining to remove links to content that included signs that it had been captured with consent. For years, if Google determined from the imagery and any audio that the subject knew they were being recorded without any signs of coercion or distress, it would reject the takedown ask unless the requester provided ample evidence that it had been published without consent. It was a “super-mushy concept,” one of the former employees says.

That same source says staff persuaded executives to update the policy in part by describing the importance of letting people who had become adult performers on OnlyFans out of financial necessity to later revoke their consent and shred any ties to sex work. The Google spokesperson didn’t dispute this.

The Washington, DC-based National Center on Sexual Exploitation, an anti-porn group that’s become an authority on image-based sexual abuse, argues that even after the revision, Google is falling short. It wants Google to automatically honor all takedown requests and put the burden on websites to prove there was consent to record and publish the disputed content. The Google spokesperson says that potential policy updates are constantly considered.

In the eyes of advocates, Google is being nowhere near as resourceful or attentive as it could or should be. Brad Gilde of Gilde Law Firm in Houston says he came away disappointed when his client won a headline-grabbing $1.2 billion judgment against an ex-boyfriend last August but then couldn’t get Google to remove a highly ranked search link to a sexually explicit audio recording of her on YouTube. The upload, which included the victim’s name and drew over 100 views, came down last month only after WIRED inquired.

Developing a reliable AI system to proactively identify nonconsensual media may prove impossible. But better keeping an ear out for big cases shouldn’t be too complicated, says Dan Purcell, a victim who founded removal company Ceartas DMCA. Google employees had a proposal on this issue: The company could establish a priority flagger program—as it has for other types of problematic content, including CSAM—and formally solicit tips from outside organizations such as Purcell’s that monitor for NCII. But staffing to administer the idea never came through. “​​Google is the No. 1 discoverability platform,” Purcell says. “They have to take more responsibility.” The Google spokesperson declined to comment.

DeBarber, the removal consultant who spoke with Google alongside his clients victimized by GirlsDoPorn, did a search for one of them this month while on the phone with WIRED. No links surfaced to videos of her, because DeBarber has spent over 100 hours getting those pages removed. But one porn service was misusing her name to lure in viewers to other content—a new result DeBarber would have to ask Google to remove. And through a different Google search, he could access a problematic website on which people can look up videos of his client.

Harassers regularly text that client links to her NCII, a frustrating reminder of how her past has yet to be erased. “They want to be out of sight and out of mind,” DeBarber says of his clients. “We’re heading in the right direction.” But he and survivors are counting on Google to help knock out the offenders for good. "A lot more could have been done by Google and still could be."

[thedistantshoresproject]

TDSP WEEKEND UPDATE

The Captain & The First Mate spent their weekly meeting discussing the podcast, and what has been done with the project. Here is the news on that.

-All walkthroughs for Ed and Ollie are done

-Walkthroughs of chapters 1-9 for Charlie are done

-Ollie route is formatted to go into the hands of our phenomenal programmer @shionch

Walkthroughs will be posted in PDF format on our Google Drive when the chapters are released. How you will get those PDFs are still in the works.

As for the podcast, The Captain & The First Mate are scheduling a day to record, so you still have time to ask us questions about TDSP that they will be answering. All names will be kept anonymous.

The Captain & The First Mate will brush up on that former employee review.

The Captain has learned through bitter experience that when it comes to providing what the hell is wrong with PB, it is best to provide solid proof from them, instead of relying on word-of-mouth from the fanbase.

This review counts as proof from PB.

[avocadowritesaboutavocados]

Okay I keep seeing this post on Bluesky without any alt text so decided to transcribe it:

Punchbowl's @benbrodydc.bsky.social got a copy of FTC Commissioner Andrew Ferguson's pitch to be chair under Trump: [image or embed]— Justin Brookman (@justinbrookman.bsky.social) December 6, 2024 at 5:39 PM

FTC Commissioner Andrew N. Ferguson for FTC Chairman

Commissioner Ferguson is the America First, pro-innovation choice for Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. Ferguson has impeccable legal credentials, proven loyalty to President Donald Trump, and a track record of standing up to Big Tech Censorship, DEI-wokeism, and the anti-business, anti-innovation agenda of the radical left. President Trump can designate Ferguson as Chairman of the FTC on Day 1 of the Trump Administration - no Senate confirmation is needed for sitting FTC Commissioners to become Chairman, and his term does not expire until 2030.

Major Accomplishments

Sued the Biden Administration to halt its lawless environmental, immigration and gun policies.

Directed Virginia Attorney General's efforts to bring down the Department of Homeland Security's "Disinformation Board."

Represented Virginia and numerous other States in a landmark antitrust suit against Google's ad-tech monopoly.

Successfully fought to end the Biden FTC's anti-business policy of refusing to end merger investigations early and allow firms to close their deals as soon as the FTC finds no competitive harm ("early termination").

Oversaw the effort to confirm President Trump's judicial nominations in the Senate, transforming the Supreme Court as well as the lower courts. Lead staffer for both the Kavanaugh and Barrett nominations.

Senate staff architect of President Trump's two impeachment acquittals.

Agendas for the FTC

Reverse Lina Khan's Anti-Business Agenda

Repeal burdensome regulations and provide businesses with the certainty they need. Businesses deserve to know what they can and can't do.

Support strong American companies that can beat foreign competitors. Foster innovation that improves our quality of life and makes our country greater than ever before.

Stop Lina Khan's war on mergers. Most mergers benefit Americans and promote the movement of the capital that fuels innovation. Focus FTC resources on the mergers that harm competition and hinder innovation, while permitting mergers that keep capital flowing to innovaters.

End the FTC's attempt to become an AI regulator.

No more novel and legally dubious consumer protection cases. Demand honesty and fairness to consumers, but business should not fear that the FTC will punish them for honest conduct that offends the sensibilities of bureaucrats.

Stop abusing FTC enforcement authorities as a substitute for comprehensive federal privacy legislation.

Fight the Bureaucracy to Implement President Trump's Agenda

The Constitution requires that all federal employees, even the heads of so-called independent agencies, answer to the President.

Terminate uncooperative bureaucrats.

Advance the President's agenda by taking on entrenched left-wing idealogues at the FTC who take their agenda from liberal journalists and activists. Only a strong, Trump-aligned Chairman can resist their influence.

Protect Freedom of Speech and Fight Wokeness

Investigate and proceute collusion on DEI, ESG, advertiser boycotts, etc.

End Lina Khan's politically motivated investigations.

Terminate all initiatives investigating so-called "disinformation", "hate speech" or AI "bias."

End the FTC's attacks on online anonymity.

Fight back against the trans agenda. Investigate the doctors, therapists, hospitals, and others who deceptively pushed gender confusion, puberty blockers, hormone replacement, and sex-change surgeries on children and adults while failing to disclose strong evidence that such interventions are not helpful and carry enormous risks.

Stop pursuing cases under lawless disparate impact discrimination theories. Such cases are designed to force companies to adopt de facto quotas and affirmative action policies.

Hold Big Tech Accountable and Stop Censorship

Focus antitrust enforcement against Big Tech monopolies, especially those companies engaged in unlawful censorship.

Pursue structural and behavioral legal remedies under the antitrust laws and the FTC Act to make sure large platforms treat all Americans fairly and to prevent them from using their market power to box out new entrants and stymie innovation.

Biographical Highlights

Solicitor General of Virginia

Law Clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Also clerked on D.C. Circuit, B.A. & J.D. from the University of Virginia.

Chief counsel for nominations to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Chief Counsel to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Ferguson served as a strong voice that supported President Trump's agenda within McConnell's office.

[bocceclub]

this is hysterical

All those peaks and parabolic ceiling sections apparently aren't great for Wi-Fi propagation, with the Reuters report saying that the roof "swallows broadband like the Bermuda Triangle." Googlers assigned to the building are making do with Ethernet cables, using phones as hotspots, or working outside, where the Wi-Fi is stronger. One anonymous employee told Reuters, "You’d think the world’s leading Internet company would have worked this out."

[mostlysignssomeportents]

This day in history

I'm on tour with my new novel The Bezzle! Catch me TONIGHT in SAN DIEGO (Feb 22, Mysterious Galaxy). After that, it's LA (Saturday night, with Adam Conover), Seattle (Monday, with Neal Stephenson), then Portland, Phoenix and more!

#15yrsago Tonga Room, San Francisco’s magnificent tiki bar: doomed? https://laughingsquid.com/will-the-tonga-room-be-a-casualty-of-the-fairmont-condo-plans/

#15yrsago New Zealand’s terrible copyright law suspended, may be dead https://web.archive.org/web/20090317045724/http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/86D681292534A2CCCC25756600143FD1

#10yrsago Ukrainian president Yanukovuych flees Kiev as opposition seize the palace https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/22/ukraine-crisis-uncertainty-after-yanukovych-signs-deal-live-updates

#10yrsago Cossacks horsewhip Pussy Riot at Sochi https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26265230

#10yrsago Pussy Riot use footage of cossack horsewhipping in new music video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjI0KYl9gWs

#10yrsago Austin cops violently crack down on scourge of anonymous jaywalking https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6ugqW7fFmk

#5yrsago Whatsapp abused the DMCA to censor related projects from Github https://memex.craphound.com/2014/02/22/whatsapp-abused-the-dmca-to-censor-related-projects-from-github/

#5yrsago Blockbuster Gizmodo investigation reveals probable masterminds of the massive anti-Net Neutrality identity theft/astroturf campaign https://gizmodo.com/how-an-investigation-of-fake-fcc-comments-snared-a-prom-1832788658

#5yrsago This is bad: the UAE’s favorite sleazeball cybermercenaries have applied for permission to break Mozilla’s web encryption https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/02/cyber-mercenary-groups-shouldnt-be-trusted-your-browser-or-anywhere-else

#5yrsago Google ends forced arbitration contracts for workers after googler uprising https://www.wired.com/story/google-ends-forced-arbitration-after-employee-protest/

[goshdangronpa]

When I'm not writing Danganronpa fan fiction, I moonlight as a professional content/copywriter. All the fresh discourse about plagiarism is reminding me of some formative experiences in my work life, and certain people I've met ...

My first job was with a fast-paced marketing company. The in-house writing team maintained weekly blogs for a bunch of clients, and each writer had to write two 1000-word blog posts a day. That's tough, especially for someone who was still pretty fresh in the field. We were salaried rather than hourly (!), so there was no incentive to staying late ... but that also meant the company didn't have to fret about overtime pay, so we could stay late if we needed it. I'd regularly be the last one in the office, still pumping out words in the struggle to meet deadlines.

Much of my time was spent on research. I knew little about the subjects at hand, which were sometimes highly technical, so I couldn't just BS my way through assignments. I even requested and received permission to take one client's worker education course, just so I could know what the heck I was writing about. It didn't seem at all remarkable to me. It was a job. My job. Although I could've been better, or at least faster, I simply did what needed to be done.

I learned that others took a ... different approach.

One supervisor was on sabbatical for the first couple of months I worked there. I respected them as my superior. Then I was assigned to peer-edit one of their articles, something we did with everything we wrote. One uncited claim led me to Google ... where I found a nearly identical article already published. Supervisor did the ol' switcheroo of amending sentence structures and swapping words for poorly chosen synonyms. I brought it up with them, saying I wouldn't report the incident but urged them to not do that. I can't recall what happened next, other than not trusting Supervisor anymore.

After three months passed, I was up for employee review. The bosses liked what they've read - yay! And then they said, "Here's why we're not giving you a raise." My stomach dropped. Apparently, they checked how many articles everyone wrote. I was behind on a quota I knew nothing about. If I wanted more money, I should take a page from the writer in the lead. Champ had somehow written 60 articles in the past month. Amazing! My employer set a goal much humbler than what my work friend had surpassed. If Champ could do that much, surely I could do this little.

Reader, I did my best. I stayed at the office later and later, especially as the date of my next employee review drew near. Due to my salaried status, I wasn't even paid for that overtime, but I put in the time anyway. It was all for nothing. Just a week before the next meeting, where they would've decided whether I deserved a raise or not, they laid off virtually the entire writing department. Apparently, underpaying freelancers who don't get benefits was easier.

Only one person from the crew stayed. If it was gonna be anybody, it was golden goose Champ, who maintained their insane pace. I wished them well.

Anyone wanna guess the secret behind Champ's prodigious output? It's the same reason they got fired just a few weeks later.

The reveal was a betrayal. We were friends, Champ and I, getting each other through the grind of the content mill with sarcastic humor and deep conversations. They encouraged and motivated me to keep up, all the while hiding some dirty tricks that eventually helped them stay in the race while I spun out. I was shocked to discover that I had zero empathy for them. But they deserved none, the filthy plagiarist. Haven't spoken to them since finding out.

This may not be as sordid as everything H. Bomberguy discusses in his brilliant new video. My coworkers and I were literally anonymous, with no clout to speak of, let alone abuse. Our clients were small businesses with little platform, which is why they contracted a marketing agency in the first place. Still, it hurt the hell out of me, and I wasn't even the one being copied! Plagiarism is a curse word in my household, lowest of the low (without getting into, like, actual atrocity).

And you know what? Years later, what I wrote for that company still holds up in my eyes. Those old blog posts aren't exactly the Great American Novel, or even on par with what I'd write as I gained more experience, but I put the effort into writing high-quality and original stuff. I worked hard. I still work hard. As self-deprecating and even self-loathing as I can be, I'll always pride myself on this. May you writers out there be able to pride yourselves on this, too.

[psychic-refugee]

OK, so I don’t give money to garbage articles, I’m mostly pulling from what I can remember seeing people post about it. Some things to look out for when trying to disseminate information over the internet. 

First off, be very weary of “anon” sources for gossip. PHW isn’t Richard Nixon, and this isn’t Watergate. There’s no need for anyone to be anonymous if they’re stating facts or speculating/giving an opinion. Tim Burton isn’t Kevin Feige, who employs cloak and dagger tactics for an 8-episode tv series only on one streaming network and will never be syndicated.  

NDA’s might be part of employment contracts, but they’d be hard to enforce, especially if part of the alleged information had already been leaked by a third party. If this person did have “insider” information worth anything, then their paycheque and job benefits are worth more than anything some rando clickbait gossip site could give them. Even minimum wage jobs aren’t worth risking in order to gossip about a C+ and rising star.

Secondly, beware of incredibly vague descriptions such as “Netflix Insider.” According to google, Netflix employs 12,800 people. I don’t know if this counts people they contract out to, such as people who do closed captioning or ratings wrangling, but this could range from the CEO to sanitation staff, to make up artists and PAs on sets of their movies/series.  

Or could it be an independent contractor that works for Netflix, so not technically a Netflix employee.

Or it could be some guy who has a Netflix account.

We don’t know what job this person has or from whom they heard this gossip from. Hell, it could be some rando who wandered “inside” of Netflix HQ. WHO KNOWS?!

If there is no legally regulated definition of something, then anyone can slap that label on anything and be done.

They keep it intentionally vague to bypass anyone claiming they actually said anything.

If some dumbass uses the article as a reference in a defamation suit or say to harass someone on Twitter, then the writers can say “well, we technically didn’t say that or mean it in such a way, so don’t get us involved or blame us in any way.”

Thirdly, if there is CYA (Cover Your Ass) language, just assume they’re pulling everything out of their ass. If the “insider” wasn’t vague enough, then they simply tell you ��this hasn’t been confirmed by…” and they generally put this at the end, where they assume after you read the juicy stuff, you’ve stopped reading. Or they’re counting on you not caring because you just want something that confirms your bias.

Either way, they muddied the waters of whether or not they are for sure standing behind anything they wrote. They’re basically saying “We’re claiming this sensationalist drivel…but don’t quote us on it.”

Remember, any asshole can create a website and sell ad space to create a gossip site. Literally. Just because it's online, doesn’t make it actual news.

Like with the accusers, these rag sites are normally not worth going after even if they post the biggest lies because 1) they don’t make any actual money to cover attorney fees much less punitive damages. 2) No serious or reasonable person takes them seriously, only gullible dumbasses.

So @heyharoldsboo is correct. Do not click on these pages, don’t give them money, or encourage them to write more with your internet traffic.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

Tweet translation (autotranslated by Google):

One of the Zuaiter family killed his wife, the mother of his children, with ten bullets. And there are people from the clan who are posting a video of the victim’s brother opening the killer’s coffee as evidence that there is no trace or problem between them after the crime because he said “wash their shame” and if he had not killed his wife, the brother would have been killed!!!!! And that the perpetrator's life continues as normal, and no one talks about the crime!!!!

Published: Mar 26, 2023

[ Note: Autotranslated by Google. ]

Yesterday dawn, Saturday, March 25, at around 2:30, a horrific crime took place in the Choueifat desert locality. Zainab Ali Zuaiter (26 years old, Lebanese) and a mother of three children, was killed by her husband, called Hassan Musa Zuaiter (27 years old, Lebanese) from the town of Baalbek happened when the latter fired about ten bullets at his wife, killing her instantly. Soon, the security forces and criminal investigations came to the crime scene, and the victim, disfigured by a gunshot wound to the head and eyes, was transferred to the nearest hospital, covered in her own blood. General for the surroundings and relatives of the couple. The circumstances of the crime In the details, one of the residents of the area, a 55-year-old government employee, told Al-Modon that “the crime took place between two thirty and three in the morning yesterday, when the perpetrator, who works in several professions, most notably public transport, was sitting with his friends in a café.” A relative, to receive a call from an unknown person. Dazzled and pale in face, and clearly showing discontent and rage, the offender ran towards his nearby house, and after a few minutes we heard the loud scream. The witness added: "The husband fled with his three children, leaving his wife, covered in her blood and killed, on the bed, in their apartment, which is located next to the "Zaiter" supermarket. When the security forces arrived at the vicinity of the apartment, the husband and his family were hidden from view. This is while another neighbor suggested that the motive for the crime was “honor”, ​​at the expense of the neighbor with whom Al-Modon contacted, refusing to disclose any other data.

While most of the residents near the couple's apartment indicated that the husband had been suffering from several nervous disorders for a long time, he could not bear to receive an anonymous call informing him of his wife's betrayal. They reported that the motive was that the husband searched his wife's phone (which had disappeared from the crime scene, according to security sources), and found pictures of her without a veil. This angered him, and made him kill his wife in front of his children, the eldest of whom is less than seven years old. While the husband disappeared from view, fleeing from the security forces that issued a search and investigation report against him, Al-Modon's security sources indicated that they are still examining the crime scene, the apartment, which was sealed with red wax.  Honor killing! The follow-up sources, who refused to mention her name, reported that the victim was buried yesterday, a few hours after her death, in the "Hay al-Salam" cemetery adjacent to the Choueifat desert locality, while the victim's brother, Hassan Ali Zuaiter, refused to hold the funeral, until he took his revenge on the killer. While the killer is still hiding from view, the fate of their three children is unknown. Most of those Al-Modon contacted tried to evade the answer, and even created justifications for the husband, “in his capacity as a victim of his wife’s betrayal and treachery,” hiding behind some stereotypical and repetitive scenarios that emerge at every similar crime, contenting themselves with saying that the killer with the intention of taking his honor is the authority of the truth. And his owner, who was stolen from him by force, at the hands of his wife. This is while it was difficult to communicate with the grieving and angry family of the victim, who insisted on taking their rights into their own hands.

It is noteworthy that Article 562 of the Lebanese Penal Code dealt with “honor crimes”, which allowed the perpetrator of this crime to benefit from the excuse that is exempt from punishment. i.e., whoever surprises his husband, one of his ascendants, descendants, or sister in the act of witnessed adultery or in the case of unlawful sexual intercourse, and kills or harms one of them unintentionally, while the perpetrator of the murder benefits from a mitigating excuse if he surprises his husband, or One of his ancestors, descendants, or sister is in a suspicious situation with another.

However, according to Law No. 7/99 issued on 20/2/1999, Article 562 was repealed and replaced with the following text: “He who surprises his spouse, one of his ascendants, descendants or sister in the case of witnessed adultery or in the case of unlawful intercourse shall benefit from a mitigating excuse.” So I unintentionally killed or harmed one of them.” Where the amendment dealt with the excuse excuse to become a mitigating excuse in addition to the cancellation of the second paragraph of the old Article 562. This horrific crime, which has not been discussed so far, under the shadow of secrecy adopted by those close to the perpetrator and the victim alike for fear of shame and scandal, and with all its overlapping indications and suspicions, directly reflects the reality of rights in Lebanon, women’s rights in particular, rights It is dependent on popular chaos, security chaos, official connivance, legislative reaction in enacting fair laws, the absence of a legal, judicial and security deterrent for potential perpetrators, and even the dominance of defunct laws, such as “honor and revenge” and other social ills that spread in the northern Bekaa and the southern suburbs of Beirut, and have not been addressed to this day.

"iT's CuLtUrE nOt ReLiGiOn!!1!"

https://quranx.com/18.74,80-81

So they set out, until when they met a boy, al-Khidhr killed him. [Moses] said, "Have you killed a pure soul for other than [having killed] a soul? You have certainly done a deplorable thing."

[..]

And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would overburden them by transgression and disbelief.

So we intended that their Lord should substitute for them one better than him in purity and nearer to mercy.

https://quranx.com/5.32-33

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment

https://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/USC-MSA/Volume-9/Book-84/Hadith-64/

Narrated `Ali:

Whenever I tell you a narration from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), by Allah, I would rather fall down from the sky than ascribe a false statement to him, but if I tell you something between me and you (not a Hadith) then it was indeed a trick (i.e., I may say things just to cheat my enemy). No doubt I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, where-ever you find them, kill them, for who-ever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection."

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-38/Hadith-4349/

Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib:

A Jewess used to abuse the Prophet (ﷺ) and disparage him. A man strangled her till she died. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) declared that no recompense was payable for her blood.

https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-38/Hadith-4348/

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (ﷺ) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (ﷺ) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (ﷺ) was informed about it. He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up. He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her. Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.

https://quranx.com/Hadith/IbnMajah/DarusSalam/Volume-3/Book-20/Hadith-2540/

It was narrated from `Ubadah bin Samit that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said:

“Carry out the legal punishments on relatives and strangers, and do not let the fear of blame stop you from carrying out the command of Allah (SWT).”