#not to mention the yearly voter purges

[actuallytodojewski]

vote

Alabama: https://www.sos.alabama.gov/alabama-votes/voter/register-to-vote

Alaska: https://www.elections.alaska.gov/Core/voterregistration.php

Arizona: https://azsos.gov/elections/voters

Arkansas: https://www.sos.arkansas.gov/elections/voter-information/voter-registration-information

California: https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/voter-registration

Colorado: https://www.sos.state.co.us/voter/pages/pub/olvr/findVoterReg.xhtml

Connecticut: https://portal.ct.gov/sots/election-services/voter-information/voter-registration-information

Delaware: https://elections.delaware.gov/voter/votereg.shtml

Florida: https://www.registertovoteflorida.gov/home

Georgia: https://mvp.sos.ga.gov/s/

Hawaii: https://elections.hawaii.gov/register-to-vote/registration/

Idaho: https://voteidaho.gov/voter-registration/

Illinois: https://www.elections.il.gov/votingandregistrationsystems/register.aspx

Indiana: https://indianavoters.in.gov/

Iowa: https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/voterregistration.html

Kansas: https://sos.ks.gov/elections/voter-registration.html

Kentucky: https://elect.ky.gov/registertovote/Pages/default.aspx

Louisiana: https://www.sos.la.gov/ElectionsAndVoting/Pages/OnlineVoterRegistration.aspx

Maine: https://registertovote.sos.maine.gov/Home

Maryland: https://elections.maryland.gov/voter_registration/index.html

Massachusetts: https://www.mass.gov/topics/voting

Michigan: https://mvic.sos.state.mi.us/

Minnesota: https://www.sos.state.mn.us/elections-voting/register-to-vote/

Mississippi: https://www.sos.ms.gov/elections-voting/voter-registration-information

Missouri: https://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/goVoteMissouri/register

Montana: https://votemt.gov/voter-registration/

Nebraska: https://www.nebraska.gov/apps-sos-voter-registration/

Nevada: https://registertovote.nv.gov/

New Hampshire: https://www.sos.nh.gov/elections/register-vote

New Jersey: https://nj.gov/state/elections/voter-registration.shtml

New Mexico: https://www.sos.nm.gov/voting-and-elections/voter-information-portal-nmvote-org/voter-registration-information/

New York: https://elections.ny.gov/register-vote

North Carolina: https://www.ncsbe.gov/registering/checking-your-registration

North Dakota: https://www.sos.nd.gov/elections/voter/voting-north-dakota

Ohio: https://www.ohiosos.gov/elections/voters/register/

Oklahoma: https://oklahoma.gov/elections/voter-registration/register-to-vote.html

Oregon: https://sos.oregon.gov/voting/Pages/registration.aspx?lang=en

Pennsylvania: https://www.pa.gov/en/agencies/vote/voter-registration.html

Rhode Island: https://vote.sos.ri.gov/

South Carolina: https://scvotes.gov/voters/register-to-vote/

South Dakota: https://sdsos.gov/elections-voting/voting/register-to-vote/default.aspx

Tennessee: https://sos.tn.gov/elections/guides/how-to-register-to-vote

Texas: https://www.texas.gov/living-in-texas/texas-voter-registration/

Utah: https://secure.utah.gov/voterreg/index.html

Vermont: https://sos.vermont.gov/elections/voters/registration/

Virginia: https://www.elections.virginia.gov/registration/

Washington: https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/voters/voter-registration/register-vote-washington-state

West Virginia: https://ovr.sos.wv.gov/register/Landing

Wisconsin: https://myvote.wi.gov/en-us/Voter-Registration

Wyoming: https://sos.wyo.gov/Elections/State/RegisteringToVote.aspx

[Image ID: A series of screenshots from a Twitter thread by Jason Coupet / professajay.

Text begins: Man voting in Georgia is so different than in Illinois. When I lived in chicago, during early voting, I went to the local elementary school, waited in line about ten minutes, and they gave me a sheet of paper. I checked people off then I put it in the machine and left.

Not Georgia. We drove downtown because *every* other polling place had a line >90 minutes. We paid ten bucks to park. We went in the building, then emptied out pockets to go through a metal detector. We then saw a sign about where to park to get our parking validated. Inside.

We then waited in line ~80 minutes. We got to the end and we were given a form to fill out (?). We were told *not* to sign it until told. Then we were moved into a waiting room where we were given a ticket number, like when you are at the dmv.

We were told to get our IDs out and wait. We waited here for 15-20 minutes. When your number is called they took your form, did some stuff on the computer, then told you to sign the form. Then you get a little green card. You insert it into the machine.

Then you go through three or four prompts, including a very serious™️ warning about perjury, a totally necessary warning given how huge a problem stolen identity is for the purposes of voting on behalf of someone else.

You then finally vote, and after an “are you sure” prompt you get a sheet. You then have to walk the sheet over to feed it into a machine. About half of these were working.

The bottleneck was clearly the weird application and waiting room thing. There are two dozen people at a time sitting to have their stuffed checked. Think of it as regular voting except when you got there they had to run a credit check for *each person* like you need financing.

It was easier finishing my PhD paperwork. Thankful for the kind people (nearly all black women) the shepherded the processes. But man if you are poor or disabled or whatever, good luck yo. That should have been easier. We finished tho. Text ends.

Image ID: Two Black people are standing beside a city street and smiling at the camera, a man and a woman. The man has close-cropped hair and a beard. He is wearing a black hoodie that says Southside and has a sticker on his chest with a peach on it. The woman has large tortoiseshell browline glasses and long twist locs. She has a light brown leather crossbody bag, and is wearing a salmon-colored windbreaker. She also has a peach sticker on her chest, which she is pointing to. Her hand has a wedding ring. End ID]

[theinvinciblenoob]

After the year Mark Zuckerberg’s had, you’d think he’d struggle to appear so chipper.

“I’m proud of the progress we’ve made,” he said in an end-of-year note posted on his Facebook page for everyone to see. Acknowledging that the social network played its part in the spread of hate speech, election interference and misinformation, Zuckerberg’s note seemed more upbeat about his response to the hurricane of hurt caused by the company’s laissez-faire attitude to world affairs and less concerned about showing contrition and empathy for the harm Facebook caused in the past year — including its inability to keep its users’ data safe and, above all else, its failure to prevent its site from being used to incite ethnic violence and genocide.

Zuckerberg’s tone-deaf remarks read like 1,000 words of patting himself on the back.

But where the Facebook co-founder pledged to “focus on addressing some of the most important issues facing our community,” he conveniently ignored some of the most damaging, ongoing problems that the company has shown little desire to solve, opting instead for quick fixes or simply pretending they don’t exist.

“More than 30,000 people working on safety…” isn’t enough to police the platform

A decade ago, Facebook had just 12 people moderating its entire site — some 120 million users. Now, the company relies largely on an army of underpaid contractors spread out across the world to moderate millions of potentially rule-breaking posts on the site each week.

Zuckerberg said the company has this year increased those working on safety to “more than 30,000 people.” That’s on top of the 33,600 full-time employees that Facebook had as of the end of September. But that’s a massive task to police Facebook’s 2.27 billion monthly active users. Those 30,000 new safety contractors equates to about one moderator for every 75,660 users.

Facebook’s contractors have long complained about long hours and low pay, and that’s not even taking into account the thousands of gruesome posts — from beheadings to child abuse and exploitation — they have to review each day. Turnover is understandably high. No other social network in the world has as many users as Facebook, and it’s impossible to know what the “right number” of moderators is.

But the numbers don’t add up. Facebook’s army of 30,000 safety staffers isn’t enough to combat the onslaught of vitriol and violence, let alone against an advanced adversary like the nation-state actors that it’s constantly blaming.

Facebook trips on its own moderation failures

Facebook lost its chief security officer this year �� and hasn’t found a replacement

Zuckerberg made no mention of the photo data exposure and account breaches that the company had to contend with this year, even if he couldn’t avoid mentioning Cambridge Analytica, the voter research firm that misused 87 million Facebook users’ information, just the once.

Yet, Zuckerberg made no commitment to doubling down on the company’s efforts to secure the platform, despite years of its “move fast and break things” mentality. Since the departure of former chief security officer Alex Stamos in August, the company hasn’t hired his replacement. All signs point to nobody taking the position at all. While many see a chief security officer as a figurehead-type position, they still provide executive-level insight into the threats they face and issues to handle — no more than ever after a string of embarrassing and damaging security incidents.

Zuckerberg said that the company invests “billions of dollars in security yearly.” That may be true. But without an executive overseeing that budget, it’s not confidence-inducing knowing that there’s nobody with the years of experience needed to oversee a company’s security posture in control of where those billions go.

Former Facebook security chief Alex Stamos: Being a CSO can be a ‘crappy job’

There was no acknowledgement of Facebook’s role in Myanmar’s genocide

Fake news, misinformation and election meddling is one thing, but Zuckerberg refused to acknowledge the direct impact Facebook had on Myanmar’s ethnic violence — which the United Nations is calling genocide.

It can’t be much of a surprise to Zuckerberg. The UN said Facebook had a “determining role” in inciting genocide in the country. He faced questions directly from U.S. lawmakers earlier this year when he was told to testify to senators in April. Journalists are regularly arrested and murdered for reporting on the military-backed government’s activities. The Facebook boss apologized — which human rights groups on the ground called “grossly insufficient.”

Facebook said last week that it has purged hundreds of accounts, pages and groups associated with inciting violence in Myanmar, but continues to refuse setting up an office in the country — despite groups on the ground saying would be necessary to show it’s serious about the region.

Facebook is not equipped to stop the spread of authoritarianism

“That doesn’t mean… people won’t find more examples of past mistakes before we improved our systems.”

Zuckerberg said in his note that the company “didn’t focus as much on these issues as we needed to, but we’re now much more proactive.”

“That doesn’t mean we’ll catch every bad actor or piece of bad content, or that people won’t find more examples of past mistakes before we improved our systems,” he said. Some have seen that as a hint that some of the worst revelations are yet to come. Perhaps it’s just Zuckerberg hedging his bets as a way to indemnify his remarks from criticism when the next inevitable bad news break hits the wires.

In his 1,000-word post, Zuckerberg said he was “proud” three times, he talked of the company’s “focus” four times and how much “progress” was being made five times. But there wasn’t a single “sorry” to be seen. Then again, he’s spent most of his Facebook career apologizing for the company’s fails. Any more at this point would probably come across as trite.

Zuckerberg ended on as much as a cheery note as he began, looking to the new year as an opportunity for “building community and bringing people together,” adding: “Here’s to a great new year to come.”

Well, it can’t be much worse than this year. Or can it?

Silicon Valley’s year of reckoning

via TechCrunch

[fmservers]

Mark Zuckerberg is “proud” of how Facebook handled its scandals this year

After the year Mark Zuckerberg’s had, you’d think he’d struggle to appear so chipper.

“I’m proud of the progress we’ve made,” he said in an end-of-year note posted on his Facebook page for everyone to see. Acknowledging that the social network played its part in the spread of hate speech, election interference, and misinformation, Zuckerberg’s note seemed more upbeat about his response to the hurricane of hurt caused by the company’s laissez faire attitude to world affairs, and less concerned about showing contrition and empathy for the harm Facebook caused in the past year — including its inability to keep its users’ data safe and, above all else, its failure to prevent its site from being used to incite ethnic violence and genocide.

Zuckerberg’s tone-deaf remarks read like 1,000 words of patting himself on the back.

But where the Facebook co-founder pledged to “focus on addressing some of the most important issues facing our community,” he conveniently ignored some of the most damaging, ongoing problems that the company has shown little desire to solve, opting instead for quick fixes or simply pretending they don’t exist.

“More than 30,000 people working on safety…” isn’t enough to police the platform

A decade ago, Facebook had just 12 people moderating its entire site — some 120 million users. Now, the company relies largely on an army of underpaid contractors spread out across the world to moderate content millions of potentially rule-breaking posts on the site each week.

Zuckerberg said that the company has this year increased those working on safety to “more than 30,000 people.” That’s on top of the 33,600 full-time employees that Facebook had as of the end of September. But that’s a massive task to police Facebook’s 2.27 billion monthly active users. Those 30,000 new safety contractors equates to about one moderator for every 75,660 users.

Facebook’s contractors have long complained about long hours and low pay, and that’s not even taking into account the thousands of gruesome posts — from beheadings to child abuse and exploitation — they have to review each day. Turnover is understandably high. No other social network in the world has as many users as Facebook, and it’s impossible to know what the “right number” of moderators is.

But the numbers don’t add up. Facebook’s army of 30,000 safety staffers isn’t enough to combat the onslaught of vitriol and violence, let alone against an advanced adversary like the nation state actors that it’s constantly blaming.

Facebook trips on its own moderation failures

Facebook lost its chief security officer this year — and hasn’t found a replacement

Zuckerberg made no mention of the photo data exposure and account breaches that the company had to contend with this year, even if he couldn’t avoid mentioning Cambridge Analytica, the voter research firm that misused 87 million Facebook users’ information, just the once.

Yet, Zuckerberg made no commitment to doubling down the company’s efforts to secure the platform, despite years of its “move fast and break things” mentality. Since the departure of former chief security officer Alex Stamos in August, the company hasn’t hired his replacement. All signs point to nobody taking the position at all. While many see a chief security officer as a figurehead-type position, they still provide an executive-level insight into the threats they face and issues to handle — no more than ever after a string of embarrassing and damaging security incidents.

Zuckerberg said that the company invests “billions of dollars in security yearly.” That may be true. But without an executive overseeing that budget, it’s not confidence-inducing knowing that there’s nobody with the years of experience needed to oversee a company’s security posture in control of where those billions go.

Former Facebook security chief Alex Stamos: Being a CSO can be a ‘crappy job’

There was no acknowledgement of Facebook’s role in Myanmar’s genocide

Fake news, misinformation and election meddling is one thing, but Zuckerberg’s refusal to acknowledge the direct impact that Facebook had on Myanmar’s ethnic violence — which the United Nations is calling a genocide.

It can’t be much of a surprise to Zuckerberg. The UN said Facebook had a “determining role” in inciting genocide in the country. He faced questions directly from U.S. lawmakers earlier this year when he was told to testify to senators in April. Journalists are regularly arrested and murdered for reporting on the military-backed government’s activities. The Facebook boss apologized — which human rights groups on the ground called “grossly insufficient.”

Facebook said last week that it has purged hundreds of accounts, pages and groups associated with inciting violence in Myanmar, but continues to refuse setting up an office in the country — despite groups on the ground saying would be necessary to show it’s serious about the region.

Facebook is not equipped to stop the spread of authoritarianism

“That doesn’t mean… people won’t find more examples of past mistakes before we improved our systems.”

Zuckerberg said in his note that the company “didn’t focus as much on these issues as we needed to, but we’re now much more proactive.”

“That doesn’t mean we’ll catch every bad actor or piece of bad content, or that people won’t find more examples of past mistakes before we improved our systems,” he said. Some have seen that as a hint that some of the worst revelations is yet to come. Perhaps it’s just Zuckerberg hedging his bets as a way to indemnify his remarks from criticism when the next inevitable bad news break hits the wires?

In his 1,000-word post, Zuckerberg said he was “proud” three times, he talked of the company’s “focus” four times, and how much “progress” was being made five times. But there wasn’t a single “sorry” to be seen. Then again, he’s spent most of Facebook career apologizing for the company’s fails. Any more at this point would probably come across as trite.

Zuckerberg ended on as much as a cheery note as he began, looking to the new year as an opportunity as “building community and bringing people together,” adding: “Here’s to a great new year to come.”

Well, it can’t be much worse than this year. Or can it?

(function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = 'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v3.2'; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

For 2018, my personal challenge has been to focus on addressing some of the most important issues facing our community…

Posted by Mark Zuckerberg on Friday, December 28, 2018

Via Zack Whittaker https://techcrunch.com

[blasphemister]

Thank you all for taking the trouble and time to vote this douche canoe OUT of our lives for good.

[Image ID: A series of screenshots from a Twitter thread by Jason Coupet / professajay.

Text begins: Man voting in Georgia is so different than in Illinois. When I lived in chicago, during early voting, I went to the local elementary school, waited in line about ten minutes, and they gave me a sheet of paper. I checked people off then I put it in the machine and left.

Not Georgia. We drove downtown because *every* other polling place had a line >90 minutes. We paid ten bucks to park. We went in the building, then emptied out pockets to go through a metal detector. We then saw a sign about where to park to get our parking validated. Inside.

We then waited in line ~80 minutes. We got to the end and we were given a form to fill out (?). We were told *not* to sign it until told. Then we were moved into a waiting room where we were given a ticket number, like when you are at the dmv.

We were told to get our IDs out and wait. We waited here for 15-20 minutes. When your number is called they took your form, did some stuff on the computer, then told you to sign the form. Then you get a little green card. You insert it into the machine.

Then you go through three or four prompts, including a very serious™️ warning about perjury, a totally necessary warning given how huge a problem stolen identity is for the purposes of voting on behalf of someone else.

You then finally vote, and after an “are you sure” prompt you get a sheet. You then have to walk the sheet over to feed it into a machine. About half of these were working.

The bottleneck was clearly the weird application and waiting room thing. There are two dozen people at a time sitting to have their stuffed checked. Think of it as regular voting except when you got there they had to run a credit check for *each person* like you need financing.

It was easier finishing my PhD paperwork. Thankful for the kind people (nearly all black women) the shepherded the processes. But man if you are poor or disabled or whatever, good luck yo. That should have been easier. We finished tho. Text ends.

Image ID: Two Black people are standing beside a city street and smiling at the camera, a man and a woman. The man has close-cropped hair and a beard. He is wearing a black hoodie that says Southside and has a sticker on his chest with a peach on it. The woman has large tortoiseshell browline glasses and long twist locs. She has a light brown leather crossbody bag, and is wearing a salmon-colored windbreaker. She also has a peach sticker on her chest, which she is pointing to. Her hand has a wedding ring. End ID]