#currently unvetted but most likely true | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

samueldays · 7 months ago

Text

This but unironically.

Bitcoin is a "there's no rules to stop me" challenge to the State. Can you spot the flaw in posing this challenge to the State? Especially when much of the reason to do this in the first place is a hostile State?

I like Bitcoin and I think it's a clever idea and a good project and I want to see it more widely adopted, but I am pessimistic about the limitations here. I am imagining that the dream might be done. I am concerned that it's got strong Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace (1996) vibes in practice.

I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.

As it turns out, the State very much did possess methods of enforcement that the netizens have true reason to fear, and now there's a joke about the three kinds of uncensorable websites: the ones that very quickly discover a way of censoring the CP after all, the ones that get a visit from the FBI, and the ones that don't take the risk of having anything unvetted on them.

Historical analogy and vague vibes aside, let me be more specific about Bitcoin. The State has so far not promulgated rules which will allow it to centrally control Bitcoin. The State is a slow leviathan, and Bitcoin has not looked very urgently threatening yet.

I think this is an incidental fact about the current year, while a lot of Bitcoin enthusiasts mistake it for an essential eternal fact that Bitcoin can't be centrally controlled.

If Bitcoin remains ascendant and the State remains hostile, here's what I expect the State to do: deputize the financial industry some more. Order all payment processors and corporations doing business in Bitcoin and similar middlemen to collect tax, verify vendors, only accept State-approved Bitcoins and Bitcoin transactions, et cetera.

Compliance departments will go along with this because they are already state puppets. Common people will go along with this because they are shopping at companies with compliance departments. The process will be streamlined and fade into the background and most people will only see another checkbox looking something like [] "By clicking here you affirm that all your bitcoins are from legitimate sources." and clicking it will become a reflexive habit that people don't think about. It'll be pre-filled on State-approved Bitcoin spending accounts.

Much of what makes Bitcoin a useful currency rather than just another kind of funny internet points is that I can buy things with Bitcoin that are not funny internet files. For example, I can buy a computer from Newegg using Bitcoin. (One of the earliest big adopters.)

The clever techniques and arguments for the uncensorability of Bitcoin focus a lot on the uncensorability of Alice the cleverly anonymous Bitcoin user with encryption protocols and fancy blah blah blah; but Alice is a spherical cow in a vacuum and the de facto censorship of Bitcoin will come by putting pressure on Newegg.

A Newegg distribution center is four hundred thousand square feet of physical space. That distribution center cannot be put on the blockchain. It is persistently vulnerable to the men with rubber hoses enforcing rules and censorship on it, and the tone of this enforcement will not be "the State is sending men with rubber hoses to beat up a poor little protester" but something more like "the State is sending the IRS to beat up a big cheating corporation".

State-approved voluntarily self-censoring Bitcoins will be permitted spent to buy computers from Newegg, and look-at-me-I'm-uncensorable Bitcoins will be rejected.

The State does not need to crack the Bitcoin programming-protocol when it can instead enforce a social-protocol on top.

The State does not need to chase down every last anarchist when it can get 90% of the effect with 10% of the friction by threatening vendors who have physical HQs.

The State does not need to play your game.

("Sam, don't give them ideas." I assure you I'm not giving them ideas, it's the other way around, I mostly got the idea from what the State already did. There used to be some no-questions-asked payment processors and Swiss banks that were nearly immune to censorship and corruption because they lacked the internal infrastructure to engage in anything more than the very crude sort of corruption where a desk worker physically steals your package. The State in the US+EU regulated those out of existence as part of an effort to fight Russian oligarchs or corporate dark money or mafia money laundering or whatever. It is now mandatory for payment processors to have push-button censorship infrastructure, and that availability feeds back into more frequent use because it's easy.)

while it might seem the case that being an independent artist frees you of having a boss you hate, this always ignores the fact that anyone doing art becomes intimately aware of how much room there is in your hollowed out skeleton to hate payment processors

#all #bitcoin #longpost #cynicposting #nature of state

9K notes · View notes

shmegmilton · 4 years ago

Note

Hey! Just been looking through your blog and saw some of your posts re: Jumel, Burr and Alex Jr. While it’s true Chernow told the story in his biography and that’s where the popular idea that he was her lawyer came from, the story has apparently been repeated by Burr biographers long before Chernow wrote his Hamilton. There’s a book called ‘Aaron Burr and the Literary Imagination’ by Charles J Nolan (1980) who mentions the story in Chapter 1: ‘The Man who Killed Hamilton’, he gives his source as ‘Aaron Burr: Portrait of an Ambitous Man’ by Herbert S Parmet, published in 1967. I don’t own the latter book so I have no idea who he gives as his source but it seems that this story has been in currency for a long time regardless of whether it’s true or not.

Yeah, I’m aware it’s been around for a while. My first intro to the myth was in Vidal’s book on Burr in the 1973, which implies Vidal got it from the 1968 book, I imagine. As for the 1980 book (which I haven’t read), from whatever instantly accessible info about Charles J. Nolan I can find on Google, his Staff Page on the USNA website says that he was more-or-less exclusively an English & Creative Writing professor. Granted, you don’t NEED a degree is history to enjoy it, study it independently or even write a book about it, but none of his credits imply anything about him having a background with history and/or historical research.

Also, judging by the title (Aaron Burr & the American Literary Imagination) I assume that it’s less of a Burr biography and more of an essay on all of the different Burr interpretations in fiction books, plays, etc. Nancy Isenberg has a whole section covering the topic in her Burr biography, as well. If that’s the case, if Ron Chernow got his information from this 1980′s book, he’s either grossly irresponsible with his research, or an idiot. Which means that it was probably the 1968 book, or a book printed before that.

But the thing about those historians in particular (ie. pre-1960s historians) is they have a “pass” for lack of a better word; they did what they could with the info that they had, which was mostly unvetted newspapers & washed biographies written either by direct descendants/family members that had an agenda (“make them look as great as possible”), or by third parties with their own agenda. There wasn’t “standards” for research, no one was under any obligation to be truthful--not to mention, it’s hard to be truthful in the first place if your only sources aren’t truthful themselves.

As much as a hate the Hamilton play, the way Lin Manuel Miranda writes his obsession over “legacies” makes a good point; the Founding Fathers cared MORE about their legacies than historical accuracy. Case and point, this is why we didn’t know about Thomas Jefferson & Sally Hemings, or the fact that Alexander Hamilton most likely DID own slaves until relatively recently--because over the last few decades, historians have finally been getting unrestricted access to historical archives that were hidden to “protect” these people’s images. ‘History is written by the victors’, or however that saying goes.

This poses a problem for Chernow because, if he DID get his info from one of these books... that kind of diminishes his credibility, doesn’t it? Because any professional in any sort of field SHOULD know, as a general rule: the older your sources are, unless it’s a first-hand account or written documents, the less likely they are to be accurate.

This is why peer-review is an important step in a lot of fields; academics every few decades will double-check these older books or studies alongside the new information we know & realize that they’re incorrect, or that the conclusion is different than what we thought it was.

This is why we don’t think recognize outdated information like ‘humans only use 20% of their brain’, or ‘homosexuality is a choice’ as fact anymore. Because we double-checked and now we KNOW it’s wrong. Ergo, no academic who wants to be taken seriously is going to cite 3rd party books that are 30, 40, 50 years old/clearly outdated. Unless you’re Chernow, I guess.

But the BIG issue I have with the “Alexander Hamilton Jr. was Jumel’s divorce lawyer” myth (you mentioned seeing my other posts before, so you probably know that Jumel’s biographer discovered that Alexander Jr. was a real-estate broker who temporarily took ownership of her property during the divorce so Burr couldn’t get to it, which means this myth is most likely a misinterpretation), is that even though he may have sourced this from a book (not that we’ll ever know because HE never sourced it).... I have yet to see it repeated in any Burr biography before & since. Which should be a red flag, but Chernow’s confirmation bias was too great, I guess.

The two OLDEST biographies on Aaron Burr that we have, Memoirs of Aaron Burr (1837) and The Life & Times of Aaron Burr (1858) don’t even mention Alexander Jr. or much about the divorce proceedings at all. Aaron Burr: A Biography (1938) also doesn’t mention it at any point when discussing the divorce.

Some Burr biographies that I’ve read before & since Chernow’s book was written (May 2005) that ALSO don’t mention it are:

Aaron Burr (Milton Lomask, 1980)

Burr, Hamilton & Jefferson (Roger G. Kennedy, 1999)

Fallen Founder: The Life of Aaron Burr (Nancy Isenberg, 2007)

The Heartbreak of Aaron Burr (H.W. Brands, 2012)

The Secret Wife of Aaron Burr (Susan Holloway Scott, 2019)

American Emperor (David O. Stewart, 2011)

War of Two (John Sedgewick, 2015)

I haven’t read many biographies on Alexander Hamilton, but my current theory is that this myth originally started in one of his biographies because:

Judging about how Chernow wrote Burr, he didn’t care enough about him to read more than two pages, let alone an entire biography about him.

Like I said, no other Burr biography that I’ve seen verifies this information, so unless he’s an idiot it’s virtually impossible for him to have sourced this from a Burr book.

So, yes, while you’re 100% correct that Chernow isn’t the originator of this myth, he still perpetuated something that a majority of SERIOUS historians seem to be in agreement is unverifiable/false, to an audience of thousands of people & now that’s all you see when you type in Eliza Jumel or Alexander Hamilton Jr. into Google. It’s obnoxious, and he’s obnoxious.

#Alexander Hamilton Jr.#Eliza Jumel #Aaron Burr #Hamilton #Ron Chernow #AmRev

34 notes · View notes

hellyeahomeland · 5 years ago

Text

“In Full Flight”: an HYH recap

The most delightful Homeland episode since “Two Minutes” picks up with Mike, Jenna (in a chambray shirt), and Alan in Kabul station, observing drone footage of Carrie, Yevgeny, and crew. Jenna deduces that they’re probably going to Kohat, and she is correct for the first time all season.

Mike asks about an exfiltration team from Islamabad but they won’t be there until later tonight. Saul interrupts their pow-wow to ask what’s going on:

Saul: What is this about grabbing Carrie Mathison? Mike: Oh, hello, sir. Let’s go into my office. Saul: Fuck your office and fuck you, too. What are y’all talking about? Mike: No problem, sir. A special ops team is planning to grab Carrie. You know, because she’s a defector. Saul: FOR FUCK’S SAKE SHE IS NOT A DEFECTOR. Actually she’d be right here telling you that herself if you hadn’t cornered her like an animal three hours ago without telling me. Mike: Actually actually she was supposed to be back in America like a week ago but then she broke custody and started her adventure with a GRU officer. Now they’re out there doing God knows what. Sir. Saul: I’ll tell you what they’re doing. They’re finding the flight recorder. Mike: What’s a flight recorder? Saul: I can’t believe I’m still having this conversation with you. Do any of y’all have brains or critical thinking skills? Mike: By the way, sir, you’ve been called back to DC. Saul: Fuck my whole life. Fuck all of you too.

Carrie and Yevgeny are very much on their way to Kohat. It’s been just a few hours since Carrie turned her back on Saul and her loaded expression as she stares out the window is very much “questioning all my past life decisions.” That could take a while, Carrie!

Carrie and Yevgeny arrive in Kohat and begin driving under a series of … I have no idea what they are, basically overhangs in the street so you can’t tell where their car is. It’s very “From A to B and Back Again” when Quinn lost Haqqani in the classic baseball stadium game “Which hat is the ball under?” trick. The team in Kabul is annoyed and prepares for a grid search.

Carrie & Co. are checking into a hotel for the night. Yevgeny makes a very obvious performance of leading Carrie to her room and what ensues is the most sexually tense scene on this show… ever. First he offers her some Ambien and Carrie cracks a joke for the first time in eight years and says she could open up a pharmacy of her own.

She apologizes for not telling him about the flight recorder sooner. At first it was all personal, she needed to find Max, she couldn’t focus on anything else. Yevgeny asks what she thinks actually happened to the presidents’ helicopter, since she certainly doesn’t believe Jalal was involved. She thinks it was probably just a freak accident: pilot error, mechanical failures, shitty weather, any or all of the above. Then she reveals that detail from the fifth episode, that the Black Hawk fleet has had a series of mechanical issues. Oh, I should add that this conversation all takes place in the doorway of Carrie’s hotel room and every fifteen seconds or so Carrie and/or Yevgeny glance back toward the bed. You can cut the sexual tension with a knife.

Yevgeny asks if there are any more secrets she’s been keeping from him. She smiles, pauses… it’s the most interesting moment. Then she says very quietly, “I think I’m fresh out of secrets.” They stare at each other for a long time, Yevgeny probably wondering if Carrie is going to invite him in and Carrie probably wondering if Yevgeny can take a fucking hint. Finally, I exhale, and Yevgeny says to just “bang on the wall” if Carrie needs anything, which at least elicits a laugh.

Elsewhere in Pakistan, a Pakistani military officer named Aziz has come to see Bunny to ask just where the fuck Tasneem is. Aziz is pissed because Tasneem was supposed to control the Taliban—first Haissam, then Jalal—and her “incompetence” has led to the Americans threatening to invade. Bunny is the opposite of worried. The Americans are all talk, no bite. They won’t actually invade Pakistan for failing to produce a man they claim they can’t find. I guess he hasn’t met John Zabel. Anyway, he says Tasneem is off to find Jalal somewhere in the mountains.

Instead, she actually meets (Haissam) Haqqani’s right-hand. She is beyond pissed that he just let Jalal control the shura last week. This is all so fucked. He doesn’t have much of a response, beyond, “well, he was the emir’s son, so I guess so?” He offers to take Tasneem to Jalal but only if she puts a hood over her head and lemme tell ya, Tasneem is none too pleased about that either!

It’s the next morning in Kohat and Carrie and Yevgeny really are going shopping, just like the logline said. They’re winding their way through the bazaars on the street but still no luck finding this flight recorder. Enter A Kid. He’s all “pardon me, excuse me,” and Yevgeny puts on his best Dad Hat and tells him to get lost. It’s very touching. Then he says he knows what they’re looking for, which is enough to get their attention.

He takes them to a shop where Mr. Shop Owner #1 is like, “Hi, do you like flight recorders? Because I’ve got lots!” Unfortunately he doesn’t have the one they’re looking for and he also seems pretty skittish because a) what the hell are a Russian and an American doing together? and b) is this official government business or something private or, like… just generally what the hell?

Saul has arrived back to DC and meets Hayes in the Oval Office with our favorite Odd Couple, Linus and Zabel (this should really be the name of a sitcom). Saul passively aggressively says he knows of Zabel “by reputation.” Aside from that jab, the meeting unfortunately goes from meh to ugh to wtf for Saul. He has to play bad cop and tell Hayes that the video of Jalal is unvetted intelligence, completely lacking in context, and probably just a straight-up lie. Hayes has the expression of someone who’s never followed Thought A to Thought B—which is true, obviously—and Zabel has to jump in to say of course POTUS has already done the Thought A to Thought B exercise, he just arrived at a different conclusion. You know, mine! The best part of all THIS is that as Saul grows increasingly incredulous at the conversation, Linus sits there, silently, looking like he’d like to be swallowed up by an alligator. Afterward:

Saul: Wow a bit of warning would have been helpful. Or maybe just an assist there, Linus. Linus: I didn’t even know you were coming back. I’m outside the ~information flow~ Saul: God, we’re so fucked. Linus: I wish I’d get swallowed by an alligator.

Back in Kohat, Carrie has entered another shop, this time sans Yevgeny. This one proves a bit more fruitful. She actually finds Max’s rucksack, which means that flight recorder had to have been here recently. Mr. Shop Owner #2 feigns ignorance, but Carrie is relentless.

Yevgeny enters all of a sudden to let her know that that special ops team from Islamabad is here, so they need to get out of there, pronto. He leaves quickly to lose the tail and instructs her to go back to the hotel and wait. His absence gives her the perfect opportunity to keep grilling Mr. Shop Owner #2, whom I actually love and seems really sweet. Poor guy is just no match for Carrie. He finally reveals the flight recorder was there but he sold it to a broker he works with. Carrie offers him a lot of money to find the broker and get the flight recorder back there for a trade at midnight.

Tasneem gets the black hood off her head in exchange for an audience with Jalal, but homie remains pissed. Jalal is sort of confused at her reaction. A few episodes ago she was plotting to put Jalal in the place he’s currently in. What changed? Well, for starters, now the Americans are threatening to invade Pakistan. She says he’s got to go to ground, but he refuses to run.

Jalal: Who do you think I am? Tasneem: You’re the loser whom I picked up on the side of the road. I bandaged your feet and listened to you crying about your daddy issues for hours. Jalal: You think that you control us. Actually it’s the other way around.

He leads her up to a rooftop where hundreds of Taliban fighters have gathered. He says the last time the ISI got in the way, they killed a thousand of their officers on the street. And now they’re twice as strong, so you do the math. Tasneem has a general “oh fuck” expression on her face and… same.

In Kohat, Yevgeny finally shows back up in Carrie’s hotel room. He reveals that eight men are hunting her and they need to leave, now. She says they can’t, as they haven’t found the flight recorder yet. Of course we know Carrie has found it—and in hindsight, at this point Yevgeny probably does as well—but she needs to stick around a few more hours to make the trade. For a split second you think maybe Carrie is going to preoccupy Yevgeny for a few hours in her bedroom but instead she calls Jenna.

Carrie: Hey, how’s it going? Jenna: OH MY GOD I STILL HATE YOU. Carrie: Chill for a second. Also I know you’re walking toward Mike and do yourself a favor and pause and just listen to me. Jenna: Ugh, fine, I’m listening. Carrie: I need you to give up the location of the exfil team that’s looking for me. Jenna: Are you high? Carrie: I am not, but you are if you think this will end up any other way than me convincing you. Jenna: You’re putting me in an impossible position. Carrie: You must do this. I compel you. Jenna: If I give up their location, you’ll turn yourself in there? Carrie: “Sure.” Jenna: Ok I’ll call you back.

This entire conversation transpires with Yevgeny sitting on the sofa in Carrie’s hotel room, legs crossed. It’s… I’ll be honest, it’s hot. When Carrie hangs up he applauds her performance and says she was clever and convincing. That’s right, Carrie played Jenna… again. Again! Again again again!

Carrie is kinda down on selling out her own people but Yevgeny says she did it for all the right reasons and in any case, the local police will only hold them for a day (uhhhh yeah right). He starts to compliment her strong instincts. He really respects her for that.

“Why, how do you do it?” Carrie asks.

“Me? I am more of a planner,” Yevgeny answers.

The alarm bells start ringing in her head and Carrie asks him all speaking of which whether he arranged for them to “run into each other” outside G’ulom’s office way back in the season premiere (show time: 10 days???). Before he can answer, Jenna rings back and tells Carrie the safe house location. Carrie says “you did the right thing” and the amount of self-disgust in her expression for this just being too fucking easy is … significant.

A few minutes later, Mike is on the phone with one of the special ops team members in the Kohat safe house. Local police have surrounded the building. Exasperated, Mike tells them to stand down. One by one, they file out and are led into custody. Jenna watches in horror and the amount of self-disgust in her expression for this just being her life is… also significant.

In Rawalpindi, Tasneem is at Bunny’s house and freaking out. Jalal has consolidated power extremely quickly. She’s concerned, but Bunny says they just need to take him out, root and branch. Bunny is offended by the prospect of being ordered around by a smarmy teenager but Tasneem thinks they need to protect him. If Pakistan protects Jalal, they’ll protect themselves too. And they need to respond to the Americans not with concessions but with threats just as strong. Remember when they were three minutes away from a generation-defining peace agreement?

Back in her hotel room, Carrie is growing restless. She decides to get some fresh air and by that I mean she jumps out the window to get the show on the fucking road. On the way she calls Saul, to whom she is apparently still speaking. She asks if their protocols for transferring money over the dark web are still a go and he says yes. She says she’s got a lead on the black box and he promises to arrange the funds ASAP.

Carrie winds up back at Mr. Shop Owner #2’s shop. Mr. Shop Owner #1 is there, too! Plus the broker. They do a little thing, Carrie says she won’t pay any more than $999,999, she is very In Charge and it’s pretty great to see. Not that we needed any more convincing, but the kind of instincts and improvisation Yevgeny admired just a few hours earlier are on full display here. She knows exactly what to say, when to say it, and how to say it. It’s breathtaking.

What’s also breathtaking is Carrie doing something correctly with a computer. Apparently the black box just hooks up to her Macbook with a USB-C cord… whoulda thunk?! After pulling a gun on Mr. Broker and telling him to beat it, she starts listening to the cockpit recording.

Then Yevgeny arrives! She starts to apologize but he stops her—he just wants to listen. They each share an earbud like goddamn Jim and Pam and continue listening. Turns out, Carrie was right. No one shot down that helicopter. A freak mechanical malfunction, “brace for impact,” etc. “Fucking helicopters,” Yevgeny says.

Carrie attempts a segue and says, “So… what now?” She wants to get this to the embassy in Islamabad. He wants to do the opposite of that. Then Carrie starts on him. Maybe he’s not such a bad guy after all. Maybe he’s actually… good.

Carrie: Plus, I’d owe you a favor. Yevgeny: Carrie, if I drop you off at the embassy I’ll literally never see you again. Carrie: Not true. I won’t betray my country, but I’d still move to Scottsdale with you. Yevgeny: I still don’t believe you. Carrie: Why not? You’ve already helped me a ton, and it’s cost you nothing! There has to be a way where we can make a “mutually beneficial arrangement.” Yevgeny: Is that what they’re calling it these days? Carrie: What? Yevgeny: What? Carrie: …anyhow, aren’t you sick of all this bullshit? Shitty bosses, shitty politicians, clearly the current way of business isn’t working for us. We could do better. You and me. We could chart something new here. You and me. God, we’re already halfway there! Yevgeny: Our own private network, huh? That would be nice, but it’s a pipe dream. Also, I like what you’re saying, but you still lied to me. Carrie: Technically, I just withheld the truth. Which is exactly what you did to me. Yevgeny: Heh? Carrie: The asylum, Yevgeny. What actually happened? We just took long walks in the woods and shared our life stories and you just happened to be the there the day I tried to hang myself? Give me a fucking break.

She moves closer and mentions the whole “picking up where we left off” thing. Well, will he or won’t he? Because she’s already decided.

There is a long pause and then they start making out. It’s exactly what you’d expect it would be, by which I mean it’s really hot! The scene is fraught with the unknown. How much are they playing each other? How much are they being genuine? Like Carrie says, they’re living in the grey areas. And who’s the first to blink?

Evidently it’s Carrie. After a few moments she breaks away and says they need to wait until after Islamabad. “Ok,” he says quietly. She tries to kiss him again, but he pulls ever so slightly away.

She hops off the table and begins to pack up the flight recorder. At that moment, he stabs her in the neck from behind with a tranquilizer. “Sorry, baby,” he says as she falls unconscious.

In DC, Saul is waiting anxiously by the phone. It rings. It’s not Carrie, but Linus. Everyone’s in the situation room, there’s some sort of activity in one of Pakistan’s nuclear facilities. Saul’s day goes from bad to worse.

In the situation room, resident hottie Scott Ryan is giving a PowerPoint presentation about said activity. Hayes is trying to understand literally anything that’s happening. Zabel explains that Pakistan only has the nukes in the first place to defend against a possible invasion from India. They’ll never actually use them. Saul growls that that’s because India isn’t fucking stupid enough to invade Pakistan. Hayes is beginning to understand the whole concept of “consequences” but before his mind can dwell on that for too long, he decides to just up the ante. More troops, more preparations for war, more of the same.

Saul’s day is not possibly as bad as Carrie’s has wound up. Yevgeny carries her, still unconscious, back into the hotel room. He places her gingerly on the bed and then kisses her forehead. He shuts off the lights as the camera moves in slowly on her her peacefully sleeping face.

#homeland #homelandedit #an hyh recap #in full flight #*#by: sara #homeland spoilers

15 notes · View notes

swiftlythebest · 6 years ago

Note

And maybe 17 for the meet cutes?:)

17. They pull you out of the way from the busy bike path.

Okay, it’s been a bit. I was moving and then my dog died and then The Society and Grizz and Sam and GrizzandSam took over my life. But I’ve missed my two medical boys in love. Here’s a short little meet cute that I think is sweet. I have a good number of prompts to get to so expect some more Schmico from me soon. I hope you enjoy!

Levi Schmitt couldn’t believe what he was reading. His mother, the ultimate worrier, was going on a date with a man she met online. An unvetted, unknown man who did nothing more than give her a compliment or two and suggest a coffee date. In another uncharacteristic move, Myrna had texted Levi in her excitement. She was almost always a call person, even in situations that only warranted a quick update.

He began to walk faster as he typed frantically, astounded by the abruptness of his mother’s agreement to meet this man. Suddenly, he heard shouts and felt a hand grab onto the back of his sweatshirt and tug him backwards. A trio of bikes whizzed past, right where Levi had just been standing.

As he blinked quickly, trying to regain his bearings, a deep voice sounded above him: “You’ve gotta watch where you’re going, dude.”

Levi looked up and back to see his savior, only to be struck dumb by the sheer beauty of the man smiling down at him. He was tall, chiseled, and had a captivating and teasing smile. Unable to stop himself from getting lost in his eyes, Levi stared a bit longer than seemed socially appropriate.

Only recently had Levi begun to consider that he may not be as straight as he often claimed to be. For as long as he could remember, he had had feelings for boys, however he never took the initiative to act on those feelings, to afraid to fully address them. It was easier for him to just be straight; as a social outcast nerd, another label didn’t seem like the best way to fit in. But as he was finishing up medical school, it began to occur to him that maybe it didn’t actually matter all that much because underneath it all, everyone was just a mess of bones and muscle and nerves. The labels he shied away from didn’t actually hold any true negative weight to them.

Which brought him to right now, staring up at the most attractive person he had ever seen maybe ever. It suddenly felt so clear that yes, he was gay. No woman had ever made him feel as on fire as this man did; even women he had slept with, as small as that number may be, did not give him the sensations he currently felt.

Realizing he should probably say something, he stuttered out, “Thank you.”

“No problem. It would be a pity if something were to happen to that face.” Oh. Was he flirting? Was this what it was like when someone flirted? It had been so long since someone had showed any sort of genuine interest in Levi.

Blushing furiously, Levi gave a weak smile, unable to formulate a response. The man gave a small, good-natured laugh before tilting his head slightly to appraise Levi.

“Um. Would you… I… could I buy you a coffee? As a thank you?” Levi had no idea where this confidence came from, but he was not about to question it.

The man’s face lit up. “Yes, that would be great. But I have to get to work now. Give me your number and we can set something up for later?” Levi nodded eagerly, causing the man’s smile to increase. “I’m Nico, by the way.” Nico handed Levi his phone.

“Um, Levi. Hi.” He looked down to type in his number, grateful for something to do other than stare at Nico. Once he was done, he handed the phone back, making sure to lightly brush their fingers together in the transfer.

“Awesome! I’ll text you later.” Nico gave one last smile before making his way off to wherever he was needed.

Levi’s phone chimed with a text, a simple smiley face from an unknown number, followed by confirmation that it was Nico. He smiled to himself, looked both ways, and proceeded to cross the street, excited for the promise of… something with the gorgeous man who had saved his life.

#schmico #schmico prompt #asked and answered #robronisendgame #nico and levi #levi x nico #nico kim and levi schmitt #nico kim x levi schmitt #Levi Schmitt #nico kim

49 notes · View notes

plusorminuscongress · 3 years ago

Text

New story in Politics from Time: Inside a Wisconsin Army Base Where Nearly 13,000 Afghans Await an Uncertain Future

On the last morning of September, dozens of Afghan children cheered on their older brothers as they played a lively game of soccer with U.S. Army soldiers on a military base in rural Wisconsin. As the kids ran up and down the pitch, their traditional long pants and tunics mixed with flashy, donated jackets and sneakers stamped with American logos. Across the field, some of their mothers watched and waved as they hung laundry out to dry.

Fort McCoy, a sprawling Army base surrounded by miles of cornfields and Christmas tree farms, is hosting the largest population of new Afghan evacuees in the U.S. Since the first families arrived in late August, it has grown into a small city of more than 12,600 refugees, almost half of them children, along with thousands more military and support staff. For the Afghans, it has been a blur of government interviews, paperwork, vaccinations, and talking to family left behind when they fled Kabul amid the chaotic U.S. withdrawal. [time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

But by the time a small group of reporters received a tightly-controlled tour on Sept. 30—the first time journalists were allowed onto the base—their surreal new life seemed to be settling into a routine. Afghan families have been sorted into neighborhoods of orderly white barracks, where they are waiting for their immigration paperwork, employment authorizations and health screenings to be processed. Most children seem to have recovered from the initial shock of a sudden, frenzied evacuation that tore them from their homes, according to volunteers. Kids are visible everywhere on the base, high-fiving soldiers, playing outside, and making arts and crafts while their parents learn key phrases in English classes. (“Would you like to pay in cash or card?”) Along with vaccinations, they are being given culturally appropriate clothing and food, military officials say.

Afghans who spoke to TIME were optimistic they would be leaving the base soon for their new lives. “I’m not concerned at all,” says Abdulhadi Pageman, a 44-year-old former Afghan Air Force pilot. “As soon as I’m safe here I will find a job,” he explains in an interview conducted under State Department supervision. “It takes some time…but these are amazing people.”

Yet outside the welcoming bubble of what Task Force McCoy Commander Brig. Gen. Christopher Norrie called this “city of Afghan guests,” there are signs of the struggle to come.

The Biden Administration’s efforts to resettle 95,000 Afghan evacuees by September 2022—53,000 of whom are currently being housed on eight military bases across the U.S.—has become a predictable political flashpoint. A short-term spending bill narrowly passed by Congress last week includes $6.3 billion in aid for Afghan resettlement efforts. Republican lawmakers in Washington had pushed for an amendment to the bill to cut off housing, medical help, food and other aid to Afghan refugees as of March 2023. The proposal, by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, also sought to cut language attached to the spending bill that would help Afghan refugees obtain drivers licenses and identification cards by waiving the requirement for documentation they may not have.

The same day that U.S. officials were walking reporters through the resettlement efforts at Fort McCoy, former President Donald Trump railed against “unlimited money to random, unscreened, unvetted Afghan nationals.” (U.S. security officials have stressed that all Afghan evacuees had to undergo extensive security screenings before arriving in the country.) The issue has been played up by national conservative news outlets, which had previously criticized Biden for not moving quickly enough to evacuate Afghans who risked their lives by working with U.S. forces. Two criminal incidents at Fort McCoy—one in which a 20-year old man was charged with engaging in sexual acts with a minor, and another in which a 32-year old man was charged with assaulting his wife—went viral on conservative social media.

The result has been a disorienting split-screen. More than seven out of 10 Americans support resettling Afghans who worked with the U.S. government or military, according to a new NPR/Ipsos poll. That support is evident at Fort McCoy, where volunteers unpacked donated jackets and t-shirts on Sept. 30 pinned with little paper messages reading “Welcome to the USA,” “Welcome to safety,” and “We are glad you are here.” Residents near the base have stepped in to help, running donation drives and collecting toys and clothing. On a recent morning, members of a local chapter of Catholic Charities played frisbee with the kids, entertaining them while their parents attended English classes.

Yet as Republican lawmakers seize on the issue of refugee resettlement to push a hardline immigration agenda, the national spotlight on Fort McCoy has fueled rumors and safety fears that are testing the tolerance of some in this western Wisconsin community.

Barbara Davidson—Getty ImagesAfghan refugees stand outside housing in the Village, where they are temporarily living at the Ft. McCoy U.S. Army base on September 30, 2021 in Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin. The Village is the community housing for the Afghans, comprised of eight neighborhoods where the evacuees live, eat, and receive services and support.

The controversy began before the evacuees started arriving. In an open letter to Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers on Aug. 20, GOP State Sen. Patrick Testin, whose district includes Fort McCoy, raised alarm about “10,000 to 20,000 potentially unidentified, potentially unvetted, potentially unhealthy people as they pour into rural Wisconsin…from a known terrorist training ground.”

Evers, a Democrat, dismissed these allegations as “dog whistle crap.” U.S. officials have also rejected the notion that any Afghan evacuees are entering the country without the necessary security checks. “These individuals were screened and vetted by intelligence, law enforcement, and counterterrorism professionals from across the U.S. government,” Angie Salazar, the federal coordinator for the Department of Homeland Security at Fort McCoy, told reporters.

But many residents of the surrounding area remain unnerved. The towns of Sparta and Tomah, which flank Fort McCoy on either side, have populations of under 10,000, which are now surpassed by the evacuees on base. “As far as I’m concerned, they don’t belong here,” says area resident Lee O’Neill, who told TIME he threw a flier urging neighbors to be respectful of Afghan culture in the trash. “I haven’t met one person around here that’s happy about it.”

On social media, rumors circulated that refugees were “escaping” from the Army installation, forcing local authorities to respond. “Refugees from Afghanistan are lawfully in our country,” Tomah Police Chief Scott Holum wrote on the department’s Facebook page Sept. 1. “As many of you are aware, there have been several reports through social media regarding activities or sightings of refugees…the Tomah Police Department has not received any reports of criminal activity related to refugees from Afghanistan.”

That post and others became forums for heated online arguments. “There is nothing wrong with having trepidation about Afghans coming to rural Wisconsin,” one man wrote in a Facebook comment on the police page, warning that there could be “sleeper al-Qaeda/ISIS operatives mixed in with the valid refugees.”

Many residents who spoke to TIME did not know that few, if any, of the Afghan refugees at Fort McCoy are expected to be resettled in the immediate area. “When you have around 13,000 people come here from a different country that doesn’t really like you, you would be concerned also,” says Paul Bransted, a former U.S. Army Ranger who lives an hour from the base. “Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure they’re all good people, but when the Trojan horse is on the move there’s going to be a few bad apples that would love to do harm to us.”

Others say this is a minority view. “It’s strange for us to be in the national spotlight, and I think the majority of people here see the publicity we are getting as an opportunity to show off our compassion and hospitality,” says Chelsea Van Gundy of Tomah. “We have some community members who have a lot of fear related to the vetting process, and at first there was not a lot of transparency, which fueled rumors. But once our local law enforcement started briefing the community, it helped calm initial fears and reinforce that these refugees are our guests.”

The local reaction is shaped in part by the past. Many residents still vividly remember the last time the U.S. government used Fort McCoy for its refugee resettlement efforts. In 1980, in the midst of the Cold War, President Jimmy Carter vowed the U.S. would provide an “open heart and open arms to refugees seeking freedom from Communist domination” under Fidel Castro, who had just loosened emigration policies. More than 125,000 Cubans arrived in South Florida in what became known as the Mariel boatlift. Roughly 14,000 of them were flown to an improvised refugee camp at Fort McCoy.

Mary Bower—Courtesy U.S. ArmyCuban refugees step off a bus and into a holding area at Fort McCoy in 1980 after a ride from the La Crosse Municipal Airport. Fort McCoy served as a processing center for Cuban refugees from the Mariel Boatlift.

The circumstances were different. The large group of Cubans was mostly young and male, and included political prisoners and dissidents as well as those considered “social undesirables” by the Castro regime. But the scenes on the base looked strikingly similar, according to white-and-black photographs in a local archive: the same rows of white barracks, the same English classes and lines for meals and vaccination. The signs were in Spanish then, instead of Pashto and Dari, and the Cubans played baseball and dominoes instead of soccer. But then as now, news coverage amplified concerns about rising crime and the cost to taxpayers, according to Omar Granados, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.

“They were saying that Castro had basically sent them all over here to infiltrate the U.S., and that everyone should be concerned about violent crime,” says Don Porschien, a 58-year-old retired U.S. Marine who at the time was attending high school in nearby La Crosse. “My dad was on a business trip, so he told me to load up my hunting rifle and keep it handy.”

With little clarity about the immigration process or how long they would be detained, the Cuban refugees grew frustrated. There were reports of fights and extortion on the base. Many tried to escape. “Cubans are inside the compound with no protection afforded them by the U.S. government,” a fact-finding commission ordered by the Wisconsin governor found in September 1980, calling internal security to protect the refugees “nonexistent.”

That experience “looms very large for the people who were living here,” says Jared Roll, the historian for Monroe County, which encompasses Fort McCoy. “Everybody that they saw became a potential criminal and therefore someone dangerous in their backyard.” The initial response to Afghan refugees has been largely supportive, Roll says, but it remains to be seen whether the constant news coverage amplifying security concerns will change that.

U.S. officials have not given a timeline for how long Afghan refugees will be housed at Fort McCoy. The group is largely made up of people who worked with the U.S. government in Afghanistan, including translators, drivers, cooks and Afghan Air Force pilots, as well as others whose jobs put them at risk, like journalists, human-rights advocates and aid workers. There are also family members of American citizens or green card holders. Many there are on humanitarian parole while they wait for their special immigrant visas (SIV) to go through a lengthy 14-step process. For those hoping to be sponsored by family members in the country, the process could take between one to five years.

The open-ended process has driven several hundred refugees to leave the military bases where they’re being housed to join friends and family members already in the U.S., according to a report by Reuters, even though doing so means that they forfeit all federal resettlement benefits and likely complicate their immigration status.

Barbara Davidson—Getty ImagesVolunteer Sandra Hoeser plays frisbee with Afghan refugees at the Ft. McCoy U.S. Army base on September 30, 2021 in Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin.

Already there are indications that some evacuees may stay at Fort McCoy longer than they expect. Preparations have already begun for what military officials on the base called the “Winter is coming” planning effort. In a warehouse with large cardboard boxes containing donations, evacuees were being fitted for winter coats and boots. Cold-weather tents have been erected on either side of one of the mess halls to shield people waiting in meal lines once temperatures drop.

Some of the Afghan evacuees who spoke to TIME said that they’ve been following the political debate over their presence. “I never thought of getting out of my country, it all happened all of a sudden,” says Khwaga Ghani, a 30-year-old journalist from Kabul who worked for international media outlets before she had to flee. “I don’t care what anybody says—I’m just thankful for what is happening. The people who were scared for their lives, they are safe now.”

As their future continues to be debated in Washington and on cable news, most Afghan evacuees are focused on more immediate matters. “It’s a lot of bureaucratic things that I’m worried about,” says Sameer Amini, a 36-year-old former program coordinator at the U.S. Embassy, who fled Kabul with his wife and two children. “I’m worried about where I will be settled, how I will travel around because I don’t have a drivers’ license, which offices we have to be in contact with…for medical purposes or for schools for my children.”

Any leftover energy goes into thinking about his parents left behind in Afghanistan, Amini says. “I’m not worried about anything else.”

By Vera Bergengruen/Fort McCoy, Wis. on October 04, 2021 at 02:21PM

#Time #politics #PlusOrMinusCongress #±Congress #Indega±#IndegaPlusOrMinus #TimeMag #TimeMagazine

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

Why Did Republicans Vote Against The First Responders Bill

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/why-did-republicans-vote-against-the-first-responders-bill/

Why Did Republicans Vote Against The First Responders Bill

Biden Pushed For Bipartisanship What Happened

Why Did the Republican Congress Argue AGAINST the COVID Stimulus Bill?

Biden ran on wanting bipartisanship efforts on Capitol Hill, and being a;negotiator during his 36 years in the Senate.;

More:Amid calls for unity, President Biden and Republicans don’t agree what that looks like

Bipartisan efforts were made in the beginning of negotiations, with a;group of 10 Republicans meeting with Biden at the White House in early February to propose a counteroffer: a;$618 billion package.

But, those talks and communication have;since fizzled, according to Romney, who was;one of the senators who met with Biden. He told reporters;there has been very little effort on the part of the White House to find common ground with Republicans.

More:How much money will your state get if Biden’s COVID-19 relief bill passes?

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Me., who was also in the group of 10 Republicans, said;talks between the White House and her colleagues stalled.”

Biden said he hoped;”Republicans in Congress listen to their constituents,”;citing the popularity of the bill in some polls.;

Romney told reporters Thursday if some Republican amendments;got into the bill, some of his colleagues may support it.;

“But my guess is it’s not likely that many of our amendments will get any Democrat support so I think it’s very unlikely that any Republicans will support the final bill,” he said.

McConnell and other Republicans have also criticized Democrats for using;a special process called reconciliation to push forward;the legislation;without much input from the GOP.;

Gop Claims Afghan Refugees Are Arriving Unvetted That’s Not True

Thirty-five House Republican broke ranks Wednesday evening to support legislation that would establish an independent commission to investigate the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol.

Liz Cheney of Wyoming

Tom Rice of South Carolina

Dan Newhouse of Washington

Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington

Peter Meijer of Michigan

John Katko of New York

David Valadao of California

Tom Reed of New York

Don Bacon of Nebraska

Andrew Garbarino of New York

Tony Gonzales of Texas

Dusty Johnson of South Dakota

David Joyce of Ohio

Chris Smith of New Jersey

Van Taylor of Texas

Chris Jacobs of New York

David McKinley of West Virginia

Jeff Fortenberry of Nebraska

Why 21 House Republicans Balked At Medals For Capitol Police

There was a brief political consensus in the immediate aftermath of the insurrectionist attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. The left, right, and center could all agree on a simple truth: participating in a riotous assault against the nation’s seat of government, in the hopes of derailing our electoral system, is a serious attack against our democracy.

As we’ve discussed, however, that consensus broke down soon after. As winter turned to spring, many House Republicans decided to rewrite recent history, recasting the villains as heroes, and the police as heavy-handed abusers who interfered with “peaceful patriots” engaged in a lawful protest. There was fresh evidence of this yesterday: TPM reported, “During a House Oversight committee hearing Tuesday, several Republicans spent their speaking time expressing concern for a specific group of people involved in the January 6 attack: the insurrectionists themselves.”

Soon after the hearing, the House took up a measure to honor the law-enforcement officials who defended the Capitol on Jan. 6. The resolution passed, but not unanimously.

To be sure, a 406-to-21 vote is lopsided, but under normal circumstances, we’d expect zero members of Congress to vote against a measure honoring Capitol Police who kept them safe during an attack on their own institution. Yesterday, however, 21 lawmakers — each of them conservative Republicans — voted “no,” despite knowing that the resolution would pass anyway.

You May Like: Who Makes More Money Democrats Or Republicans

House Republicans Voted Against Giving Medals To Officers Who Responded To Jan 6 Riot

The House passed a bill Tuesday to award the Congressional Gold Medal to all law enforcement officers who defended the Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot, with 21 Republicans opposing the bill.

Why it matters via the Washington Post:“he vote underscored the still-lingering tensions in Congress amid efforts by some GOP lawmakers to whitewash the events of that day.”

Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets.

The measure passed the House with a bipartisan vote of 406-21.

Details: The four medals awarded under the bill one of the highest civilian honors would be displayed in the Capitol Police and Metropolitan Police headquarters, Smithsonian Institution and the Capitol building.

The bill names the three law enforcement officers who died following the attack, and singles out U.S. Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman, who lured a mob away from members of Congress.

The resolution recognizes their actions as an example of “the patriotism and the commitment of Capitol Police officers, and those of other law enforcement agencies, to risk their lives in service of our country.”

The Republicans who voted against:

Rep. Thomas Massie

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

Rep. Andy Harris

The Long Fight To Funding

Congress passed the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act in 2010, over opposition from some Republicans who balked at its original $7 billion price tag. The act was reauthorized in 2015 for 90 years. But a portion of the law the Victim Compensation Fund was only funded for five years, through the end of 2020.; The fund aimed to provide necessary financial support for the thousands who suffered serious medical issues, including a spate of cancer diagnoses, after the 2001 attacks.;

The House voted 402 to 12 to permanently reauthorize the fund through 2092 earlier in July, with the Congressional Budget Office estimating $10.2 billion in costs over the next ten years. However, Sen. Rand Paul prevented the Senate from voting to approve the bill by unanimous consent last week because of its high cost. Fellow Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah also placed a procedural hold on the legislation, further preventing it from passing in the Senate.;

Under Senate rules, any one senator can propose that a bill be considered for unanimous consent, but one senator can also block it. The bill was then brought to the floor for debate and a full vote this week.

Comedian and 9/11 first responder advocate Jon Stewart blasted Paul;over the issue, telling Fox News the move was “absolutely outrageous.”;

In a last-minute pitch before Tuesday’s vote, Paul offered an amendment he said would help offset the bill’s spending costs.;

Don’t Miss: How Many Democrats And Republicans Are In The House

/11 Responders Bill Defeated By Senate Gop Filibuster

the CNN Wire StaffSTORY HIGHLIGHTS

Motion for cloture falls three votes short of ending GOP filibuster

Republicans oppose the $7.4 billion cost; supporters hope to revive the measure

Bill would provide medical benefits, compensation for 9/11 first responders

NYC Mayor Bloomberg calls it an “example of partisan politics trumping patriotism”

Washington — Senate Democrats failed Thursday to win a procedural vote to open debate on a bill that would provide medical benefits and compensation for emergency workers who were first on the scene of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The motion for cloture, or to begin debate, needed 60 votes to pass due to a Republican filibuster, but fell short at 57-42 in favor.

While supporters said they would try to bring the bill up again, either on its own or as part of other legislation to be considered, the vote Thursday jeopardized the measure’s chances for approval in the final weeks of the current congressional session.

The House previously passed the bill on a mostly partisan 268-160 vote.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg reacted to Thursday’s result by calling it “a tragic example of partisan politics trumping patriotism.”

READ MORE STORIES ABOUT:

Clips Immigration Politics Chain Migration CPAC Donald Trump illegal alien immigration John McCain Michelle Malkin Visa Lottery visa overstays

_______________________

OPINION: Michelle, entire speech was truly, truly powerful. She is such a true Republican Conservative without a question. She is a strong individual as strong as her powerful speech was. She has most differently earned her place in American as super intelligent, strong, forceful women and stands by her believe in the American dream un-apologetically!

0 notes

ladystylestores · 4 years ago

Text

New Mac ransomware is even more sinister than it appears

The threat of ransomware may seem ubiquitous, but there haven’t been too many strains tailored specifically to infect Apple’s Mac computers since the first full-fledged Mac ransomware surfaced only four years ago. So when Dinesh Devadoss, a malware researcher at the firm K7 Lab, published findings on Tuesday about a new example of Mac ransomware, that fact alone was significant. It turns out, though, that the malware, which researchers are now calling ThiefQuest, gets more interesting from there. (Researchers originally dubbed it EvilQuest until they discovered the Steam game series of the same name.)

In addition to ransomware, ThiefQuest has a whole other set of spyware capabilities that allow it to exfiltrate files from an infected computer, search the system for passwords and cryptocurrency wallet data, and run a robust keylogger to grab passwords, credit card numbers, or other financial information as a user types it in. The spyware component also lurks persistently as a backdoor on infected devices, meaning it sticks around even after a computer reboots, and could be used as a launchpad for additional, or “second stage,” attacks. Given that ransomware is so rare on Macs to begin with, this one-two punch is especially noteworthy.

“Looking at the code, if you split the ransomware logic from all the other backdoor logic the two pieces completely make sense as individual malware. But compiling them together you’re kind of like what?” says Patrick Wardle, principal security researcher at the Mac management firm Jamf. “My current gut feeling about all of this is that someone basically was designing a piece of Mac malware that would give them the ability to completely remotely control an infected system. And then they also added some ransomware capability as a way to make extra money.”

Though ThiefQuest is packed with menacing features, it’s unlikely to infect your Mac anytime soon unless you download pirated, unvetted software. Thomas Reed, director of Mac and mobile platforms at the security firm Malwarebytes, found that ThiefQuest is being distributed on torrent sites bundled with name-brand software, like the security application Little Snitch, DJ software Mixed In Key, and music production platform Ableton. K7’s Devadoss notes that the malware itself is designed to look like a “Google Software Update program.” So far, though, the researchers say that it doesn’t seem to have a significant number of downloads, and no one has paid a ransom to the bitcoin address the attackers provide.

For your Mac to become infected, you would need to torrent a compromised installer and then dismiss a series of warnings from Apple in order to run it. It’s a good reminder to get your software from trustworthy sources, like developers whose code is “signed” by Apple to prove its legitimacy, or from Apple’s App Store itself. But if you’re someone who already torrents programs and is used to ignoring Apple’s flags, ThiefQuest illustrates the risks of that approach.

Apple declined to comment for this story.

What does it want?

Though ThiefQuest has an extensive suite of capabilities in fusing ransomware with spyware, it’s unclear for what ends, particularly because the ransomware component seems incomplete. The malware shows a ransom note that demands payment, but it only lists a static bitcoin address where victims can send money. Given bitcoin’s anonymity features, attackers who intended to decrypt a victim’s systems upon receiving payment would have no way to tell who had paid already and who hadn’t. Additionally, the note doesn’t list an email address that victims can use to correspond with the attackers about receiving a decryption key—another sign that the malware may not actually be intended as ransomware. Jamf’s Wardle also found in his analysis that, while the malware has all the components it would need to decrypt the files, they don’t seem to be set up to actually function in the wild.

The researchers also emphasize that attackers looking to conduct clandestine reconnaissance with spyware usually want to be as discrete and inconspicuous as possible. Adding ransomware into the mix simply announces the malware’s presence and would likely change a user’s behavior on the device, because all of their files are being encrypted and they’re seeing a dramatic ransom note on their screen. It’s not a situation where you would be likely to do some casual online shopping or log into your bank account. By the same token, ransomware doesn’t usually need to establish persistence on a device and endure through reboots, because it simply needs to initiate the encryption process. When a program announces itself as malware and then persists, it simply makes it more likely that the security community will flag and analyze the software to block it in the future.

“I would think if your main goal was data exfiltration you would want to stay in the background, do that as silently as possible, and have the best chance of going undetected,” Malwarebytes’ Reed says. “So I don’t really understand the point of this very noisy ransomware. When I installed it for testing, every 30 seconds the computer was screaming at me, beeping at me all the time. It’s really noisy in both the literal and digital sense.”

Hiding

The malware does include some obfuscation features to help it hide out. The malware won’t run if it detects certain security tools like Norton Antivirus. It also lays low if it’s being opened in a digital environment that’s often used for security testing, like a sandbox or virtual machine. And when analyzing the code itself, the researchers say that some components were carefully obscured so it would be difficult to understand what they do. Strangely, though, others were left out in the open for anyone to see.

Wardle theorizes that the malware may have been intended to quietly run its spyware module first, collect valuable data, and only launch the noisy ransomware as a last-ditch effort to gather some funds from a victim before moving on. In testing, some researchers found it harder than others to induce the malware to start encrypting files as part of its ransomware functionality, which may support Wardle’s theory. But the malware is buggy, and for now it’s unclear what the developers’ true intent is.

Given that the malware is being distributed through torrents, seems to focus on stealing money, and still has some kinks, the researchers say it was likely created by criminal hackers rather than nation-state spies looking to conduct espionage. It’s not entirely uncommon in the realm of Windows malware to don a ransomware guise as a distraction or false flag. The NotPetya malware, which caused the most impactful and costly cyberattack in history, pretended to be ransomware, after all. Still, given how rare Mac ransomware is, it’s surprising to see ThiefQuest take such a murky approach.

Perhaps the malware is using ransomware’s hallmark file encryption as a destructive tool in an attempt to permanently lock users out of their computers. Or maybe ThiefQuest is just looking to get as much money out of victims as possible. The real question with Mac ransomware, as always, is what will come next?

This story first appeared on wired.com.

Source link

قالب وردپرس

from World Wide News https://ift.tt/3dV9R4c

#World Wide News

0 notes

nrip · 5 years ago

Text

The Use and Abuse of Social Media in the Cath Lab

I learned something new recently. Did you know that the average person has five social media accounts and spends about an hour and 40 minutes browsing these counts every day, accounting for 28% of total time spent on the Internet? In Britain, the English are slightly less digitally obsessed, spending an hour and 20 minutes each day (courtesy of Dr. M. Chadi Alraies — see below).

Social media has become a ubiquitous part of our daily life and in particular, involves how we in cardiology and the cath lab exchange experiences, educate, discuss, notify, and create forums for information exchange. Just so we are on the same page, social media is defined as forms of electronic communication (such as websites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (such as videos) (Table 1). If you have a modern cell phone, you have access to social media and, whether we like it or not, are exposed to and influenced to various degrees by what we see on social media. At the American College of Cardiology (ACC) Annual Scientific Sessions in March 2019 in New Orleans, I was honored to be asked to participate in a debate on the pros and cons of social media. Dr. Martha Gulati, Chief of Cardiology, University of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, took the role of the proponent position on the benefits of social media. I took the role of a skeptic as to its value (although I am on Twitter @drmortkern and Facebook) (Figure 1).

The session had quite a lively discussion, bringing a wide disparity of views from both panelists and audience members. Although I am a relatively infrequent user of social media, I have a basic understanding and high curiosity, because my 30-something-year-old daughter has educated me to just above a beginner’s level. Having participated in the discussion and read a great article on the subject1, I thought this might be a good opportunity to share with our cath lab colleagues and others some of the important concepts and comments that highlighted the use and abuse of social media as it might apply to our workplace.

One of the best explanations of social media for those who are not familiar with it comes from an article by Drs Parwani, Choi, Lopez-Mattei, Raza, Chen, Narang, Michos, Erwin, Mamas, and Gulati, all members of the ACC interest group focused on social media and its opportunities in cardiovascular medicine. Their paper1 clearly summarizes the basics of social media, and its uses in education and advancement for the individual cardiologist and overall research (Figure 2). Social media is useful in creating new cardiovascular networks and communities. It is applicable for journals and conferences to notify users about recent events or publications. It has the capability for promotion of cardiovascular health initiatives. At the end of the article, Parwani et al also list suggestions for social media best practices.

The Pros of Social Media

At the 2017 Cardiovascular Research Technologies (CRT) meeting in Washington, D.C., Dr. M. Chadi Alraies, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, D.C., and Dr. Sheila Sahni, David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, presented and later published2probably the most comprehensive description of social media, describing its importance in medicine, and use in learning, educating, promoting work, and for personal branding and networking (Figure 3, Table 2).

Differences Among Social Media Platforms

Numerous social media platforms are available to the individual such as Doximity, Snapchat, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, etc. As social media users, we do not need to be conversant in all, but we should be aware that many of our professional societies, colleagues, and fellow team members will be a participant in at least one or more of these platforms. While I may be dating myself as an outmoded old guy, I use Twitter, as do many of my professional colleagues, along with a couple other modalities (e.g., Facebook and Instagram) to keep appraised of different cath lab techniques, publications, meetings, and opinions. Some media are better than others at graphic display (Instagram), notifications (Twitter, Facebook), or conversations (Twitter, Facebook) [Note: These are my own assessments. Others may disagree. MK].

Using social media helps learners by highlighting journal activities, society and organizational meetings, and by transmitting opinions from experts in the field. Social media often involves peer-to-peer and colleague collaboration and discussions. Many of our most prestigious scientific journals have and continue to make their content known through these media.

Twitter as a Search Engine and for Remote Meeting Engagement

Something shown to me by Drs. Alraies and Sahni was that Twitter can function as a search engine to look up particular topics of interest such as drug-eluting stents or left atrial closure, and allow you to see instant results. Social media has the ability to enhance participation in scientific meetings, either in person or remotely, through polling and livestreaming. The use of social media at such meetings can engage colleagues in debate or support public health care messages. Providing scientific meeting updates, updates, learning, and engagement at these meetings are just some of the benefits of the social media platforms. It is now easy to conduct online polls to get immediate feedback from peers and colleagues interested in a controversial topic. Opinions can be quickly solicited via social media by using methods such as Twitter polls to see current thought on a critical subject, presentation, or procedure.

Social Media Use for Patient Education

In some regions of the world, general clubs and chats on cardiovascular disease topics have become useful for educating both patients and care providers. Platforms such as Facebook Live have been used in academic practice and discussions. Twitter and other similar platforms have been able to expedite information exchange. Of course, any time patient information is discussed online, we must be aware of the HIPAA rules protecting our patients’ confidentiality.

Downsides of Social Media

When I was asked to discuss the pros and cons during the ACC panel session, I listed them in an old-fashioned format, with a pen and paper, a device that rarely runs out of battery, never needs to be recharged, is relatively inexpensive, and is always available, unlike some of her more modern media platforms. In my own handwriting, I listed the following 8 things I consider critical to the discussion of social media (Figure 4):

Social media is here (whether I like it or not, and I think I do).

It has its limitations as a communication tool, but it can reach huge audiences.

Its major functions appear to be marketing and notifications. It is used to share opinions and (presumed) facts.

(Anyone can be a) media expert? No qualifications needed to be a Twitter maven.

Social media posts are not peer reviewed, are not vetted science (and may be inaccurate).

Discourse may not advance science (or may be frankly rude).

Social media will not get you grants.

Social media will not advance your scientific career goals (but will advance your visibility on Twitter; see #4).

My major concern about using social media is that at times, it is a true waste of time. Moreover, the information exchange can become unreliable, personal, or unhinged. In presenting clinical material, personal or patient information may be overlooked. We should adhere to the rules of privacy and protected health care information law. However, there are no ways to enforce these or any other rules on the Internet. As a consequence, it is not rare for one to witness the dark side of social media, presenting as biased, untrue, unfair, and/or unvetted diatribes substituting as facts, making the platform substance propaganda, rather than news.

My Suggested Rules and Best Practices for Social Media

Do not violate HIPAA or the General Data Protection rules of the European Union.

Use common sense and avoid being rude. Remember your tweet is a permanent record of your thought and will stay with you wherever you go.

Comment when you think it adds to conversation or to support a position, but keep it professional. Don’t say something you wouldn’t want to see printed on the front page of The New York Times.

Don’t spend too much time when you have real things to do.

What Are # and @ Used For?

For those new users, it is confusing to be in the dark about the symbology of the social media world. For a bit of clarity, here are what the # and the @ mean if you don’t already know. A hashtag (#) is a word or phrase preceded by a hash sign (#), used on social media websites and applications, especially Twitter, to identify messages on a specific topic that can then be searched. Whenever a user adds a hashtag to their posting, that word and the post are able to be indexed by the social network and become searchable/discoverable by other users. A hashtag archive is consequently collected into a single stream under the same hashtag. For example, adding or searching for the hashtag #RadialFirst allows users to find all the posts that have been tagged using that hashtag and people (@drmortkern) who are interested in or who have participated in this topic. The @ sign is used to call out usernames in tweets. People will use your @username to mention you in tweets, send you a message, or link to your profile. A username is how you are identified on Twitter, and is always preceded immediately by the @ symbol (Figure 5).

The Bottom Line

Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms have changed the way we see our world. Social media will be the way we communicate, educate, notify, and share our views across wide groups of users, particularly in the cardiovascular space. Corporate, university, business, and personal branding provides the ability to display your profile, contact information, and likes/dislikes, as well as promote your research, clinical expertise, practice and institutional clinical programs of special note.

I hope this short review on social media is helpful. I thank Dr. Alraies and Dr. Sahni for sharing their CRT presentation with me. Finally, be safe and have some fun out there in the Twittersphere.

Disclosures: Dr. Morton Kern reports he is a consultant for Abiomed, Abbott Vascular, Philips Volcano, ACIST Medical, Opsens Inc., and Heartflow Inc.

0 notes

patriotsnet · 3 years ago

Text

Why Did Republicans Vote Against The First Responders Bill

New Post has been published on https://www.patriotsnet.com/why-did-republicans-vote-against-the-first-responders-bill/

Why Did Republicans Vote Against The First Responders Bill