The Labor Department has teamed with Facebook to connect job seekers and employers. The Social Jobs Partnership page will host specialized resources and content designed to help job seekers and employers. (Oct. 20)
Continue reading …
An expert in the powerful anesthetic blamed for Michael Jackson’s death told jurors there is no way the pop star could have caused his own death by swallowing the drug, a theory defense attorneys suggested might be a centerpiece of their case. (Oct. 20)
Continue reading …
For all the buzz around Samsung’s latest hi-def smartphone , the absence of one little word has largely been glossed over. That word is “Plus” — the wizened Galaxy S II has a “Super AMOLED Plus” display, for example, whereas the sparkly Galaxy Nexus is merely “Super AMOLED.” Did the marketeers simply forget those extra hyperbolic keystrokes, or does the difference actually mean something? Well, regrettably, it does. Samsung uses “Plus” to refer to full RGB displays, in which each pixel possesses its own trio of red, green and blue sub-pixels. Meanwhile, a non-Plus display uses a cheaper PenTile system — which forces pixels to share each other’s sub-pixels. Aside from potential hygiene issues, this results in a lower overall sub-pixel density, reduced sharpness and worse color rendition. We saw the difference clearly enough when Engadget Spanish microscopically compared the original non-Plus Galaxy S against the GS II, and now the folks at FlatPanelsHD have undertaken a more up-to-date comparison at the source link. The upshot? They calculated that, despite its 4.65-inch screen size, the Galaxy Nexus has the same number of sub-pixels as the 3.5-inch iPhone 4/4S . Think of a word with no r, g or b in it, and you eventually arrive at “disappointed.” The Galaxy Nexus’ Super AMOLED display is a minus, not a Plus originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 21 Oct 2011 05:40:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
For all the buzz around Samsung’s latest hi-def smartphone , the absence of one little word has largely been glossed over. That word is “Plus” — the wizened Galaxy S II has a “Super AMOLED Plus” display, for example, whereas the sparkly Galaxy Nexus is merely “Super AMOLED.” Did the marketeers simply forget those extra hyperbolic keystrokes, or does the difference actually mean something? Well, regrettably, it does. Samsung uses “Plus” to refer to full RGB displays, in which each pixel possesses its own trio of red, green and blue sub-pixels. Meanwhile, a non-Plus display uses a cheaper PenTile system — which forces pixels to share each other’s sub-pixels. Aside from potential hygiene issues, this results in a lower overall sub-pixel density, reduced sharpness and worse color rendition. We saw the difference clearly enough when Engadget Spanish microscopically compared the original non-Plus Galaxy S against the GS II, and now the folks at FlatPanelsHD have undertaken a more up-to-date comparison at the source link. The upshot? They calculated that, despite its 4.65-inch screen size, the Galaxy Nexus has the same number of sub-pixels as the 3.5-inch iPhone 4/4S . Think of a word with no r, g or b in it, and you eventually arrive at “disappointed.” The Galaxy Nexus’ Super AMOLED display is a minus, not a Plus originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 21 Oct 2011 05:40:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
(Video Link) This official music video from his new album places William Shatner where he belongs: looming over us as a demi-devine figure dispensing questionable wisdom from on high. What does God need with a starship? This. -via Nerdcore Previously: William Shatner? William Shatner. William Shatner! Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Neatorama Discovery Date : 19/10/2011 11:38 Number of articles : 5
Continue reading …
(Video Link) This official music video from his new album places William Shatner where he belongs: looming over us as a demi-devine figure dispensing questionable wisdom from on high. What does God need with a starship? This. -via Nerdcore Previously: William Shatner? William Shatner. William Shatner! Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : Neatorama Discovery Date : 19/10/2011 11:38 Number of articles : 5
Continue reading …Facebook could face €100,000 fine for holding data that users have deleted
October 21, 2011 No Comment
Social network will be audited by Irish data protection commissioner after Austrian law student registers 22 complaints Facebook could face a fine of up to €100,000 (£87,000) after an Austrian law student discovered the social networking site held 1,200 pages of personal data about him, much of which he had deleted. Max Schrems, 24, decided to ask Facebook for a copy of his data in June after attending a lecture by a Facebook executive while on an exchange programme at Santa Clara University in California. Schrems was shocked when he eventually received a CD from California containing messages and information he says he had deleted from his profile in the three years since he joined the site. After receiving the data, Schrems decided to log a list of 22 separate complaints with the Irish data protection commissioner, which next week is to carry out its first audit of Facebook. He wrote to Ireland after discovering that European users are administered by the Irish Facebook subsidiary. A spokeswoman for the commissioner confirmed its officers would be investigating alleged breaches raised by Schrems as part of the audit. If the commissioner decides to prosecute and Facebook or any employees are found guilty of data protection breaches, the maximum penalty is a fine of €100,000. Among the 1,2000 pages of data Schrems was sent were rejected friend requests, incidences where he “defriended” someone, as well as a log of all Facebook chats he had ever had. There was also a list of photos he had detagged of himself, the names of everyone he had ever “poked”, which events he had attended, which he hadn’t replied to, and much more besides. The information was broken down into 57 categories, including likes, log-ons (a list of when he logged on and which IP address he used) and emails, which included some email addresses Schrems had never personally uploaded to the site but which he assumes were discerned from another user’s profile. “I discovered Facebook had kept highly personal messages I had written and then deleted, which, were they to become public, could be highly damaging to my reputation,” said Schrems in an interview between law lectures on Thursday. “I’m not saying there was anything criminal or forbidden there, but let’s just say that, as someone wanting to work in law, there was stuff which could make it pretty impossible for me to get a job.” By holding on to data its users assumed was deleted, Facebook was acting like “the KGB or the CIA”, said Schrems. “Information is power, and information about people is power over people. It’s frightening that all this data is being held by Facebook. “Of course, they are not misusing it at the moment, but the biggest concern is what happens when there is a privacy breach, either from hackers or from someone inside the firm?” A spokesman for Facebook said in a statement: “Facebook provided Mr Schrems with all of the information required in response to his request. “It included requests for information on a range of other things that are not personal information, including Facebook’s proprietary fraud protection measures, and ‘any other analytical procedure that Facebook runs’. “This is clearly not personal data, and Irish data protection law rightly places some valuable and reasonable limits on the data that has to be provided.” Facebook says any user can download their “personal archive”. But Schrems, on the campaigning website he has set up to encourage others to follow his lead, claims that: “This tool only offers access to a fraction of the data Facebook holds. “It even falls short of providing the amount of data we already received from Facebook.” Facebook Data protection Privacy Austria Social networking Internet Europe Helen Pidd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Leaked documents claim Sir Bob Geldof, Kofi Annan and Lord Patten have shown interest in EuropaBio outreach programme • Read the executive summary of the programme • Read the draft emails to potential ambassadors Europe’s largest and most influential biotech industry group, whose members include Monsanto , Bayer and other GM companies, is recruiting high-profile “ambassadors” to lobby European leaders on GM policy. Leaked documents from a PR company working for Brussels-based EuropaBio claim to have “had interest” from Sir Bob Geldof ; the chancellor of Oxford University and BBC Trust chairman, Lord Patten ; former Irish EU commissioner and attorney general David Byrne , and “potentially” the involvement of former UN secretary general Kofi Annan and pro-GM science writer Mark Lynas . The 10 or more ambassadors will not be paid directly, but the lobbyists have offered to write, research and place articles in their names, arrange interviews and speaking engagements with the Financial Times and other international media, and secure for them what could be lucrative speaking slots at major conferences. In addition, EuropaBio says it will introduce them to the highest-level European bureaucrats and MEPs in order for them to make the case for GM within EU institutions. Several people named in the documents denied all knowledge of EuropaBio. A spokesman for Annan said: “Mr Annan is not an ambassador for EuropaBio and has no intention of promoting the use of GMOs.” Geldof told the Guardian: “I have no recollection of having any knowledge of EuropaBio and have no recollection of ever being asked to be an ambassador. GM, subject to all the known and usual caveats, does have a place for instance in the fight against starvation. The trick is to ensure that this technological advance is not simply a business opportunity but a human one to the benefit of the world’s rapidly increasing population.” A spokeswoman at Oxford University said: “Lord Patten was approached about the EuropaBio outreach programme. He made it absolutely clear that given his position as chairman of the BBC Trust, he could have nothing to do with it. It would have been wholly inappropriate.” “I have never had any contact of any sort with EuropaBio, nor any ‘Christopher Flores’, who seems to have written this letter. I have not been asked to be an ambassador, nor would I accept such a request if asked,” said Mark Lynas . Flores told the Guardian: “These confidential documents should not have landed on your desk. We are exploring different options with different people. We identified people we thought could help us reach out to a broad international audience.” The six-month campaign, which will culminate in a dinner and meetings with the EU in May, will start next month when 10 ambassadors are expected to sign a letter to be placed in the Financial Times. A draft of the letter reads: “We need to shake off the complacency and embrace best farming and food production processes. We must seize the potential of all available technologies to enable us to do so, and no technology should be rejected on the basis of an initial emotional reaction or misinformation – including agricultural biotechnology. We want to produce more food in Europe, look after the environment and help our neighbours in other parts of the world, [so] isn’t it time to think again about GM?” In a briefing document sent to potential ambassadors, Christopher Flores, a senior consultant working with Aspect Consulting in Brussels, says EuropaBio wants to distance itself from the ambassadors in order to give the industry arguments more credibility. “The most important factor in terms of ensuring the legitimacy and impact of this programme is the quality of the ambassadors and the breadth of positions represented and numbers involved. Provided that a sufficiently strong pool of ambassadors is established – we are very confident that this will be the case – then it will be very difficult for anybody to make the claim that these ambassadors are somehow ‘in the pocket’ of the agricultural science companies.” The document also seeks to persuade ambassadors that their position is widely shared. “Industry, the scientific community and NGOs are already playing an important role in making the case for GM. For example, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have been supporting and advocating the use of GM crops and recently outlined six reasons for them doing so. However, more needs to be done from an advocacy and communications perspective if significant and timely progress is to be made in relation to GM crops.” The lobbyists appear to want to split the green movement in Europe which has been traditionally been sceptical of the claims of the biotech companies. “A number of senior environmental NGO activists are very critical of the dogmatic and extreme position taken by much of the environmental NGO world in relation to GM. We will bring a panel of pro-GM environmental NGO activists to Brussels for a stakeholder event focused on GM sustainability,” it says. Green MP Caroline Lucas said: “This brazen attempt by EuropaBio to recruit covert ‘ambassadors’ to ‘change the debate’ on GM is yet further proof that the powerful GM lobby will stop at nothing to push its hugely unpopular and unnecessary products onto European citizens. We need far stronger regulation on corporate lobbyists across the EU to prevent this kind of insidious behind-the-scenes manoeuvring from seriously undermining our democratic system.” David Byrne could not be reached. GM Food Farming European Union Europe Lobbying John Vidal guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Scotland Yard contacts IPCC over claims that officer took part in criminal trial under false name Scotland Yard will call in the police watchdog over allegations that an undercover officer took part in a criminal trial under a false name. Jim Boyling, a specialist operations detective constable with the Metropolitan police, is accused of maintaining an alias throughout court proceedings after being arrested following a demonstration in 1996. Scotland Yard contacted the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) on Thursday with a view to making a formal referral to them on Friday, a Metropolitan police spokesman said. The spokesman said the decision to contact the IPCC “follows consideration of allegations relating to historic covert police deployments”. The allegations forced the postponement of the publication of a review of the future of undercover policing. The review was scheduled for Thursday and was compiled by the new Scotland Yard commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, before he took the force’s top job last month. The defence solicitor Mike Schwarz, of the law firm Bindmans, said he had discovered that he represented Boyling, under the name Jim Sutton, along with other protesters. The undercover officer went on trial for public order offences with other activists from the pro-cycling campaign group Reclaim the Streets following a demonstration at the headquarters of London Underground in 1996. The lawyer said the revelation raised concerns about the “confidentiality” of discussions between the officer’s co-defendants and their legal representatives. He told the Guardian: “This case raises the most fundamental constitutional issues about the limits of acceptable policing, the sanctity of lawyer-client confidentiality, and the integrity of the criminal justice system. “At first sight, it seems that the police have wildly overstepped all recognised boundaries.” John Jordan, an activist who was convicted of assaulting a police officer and given a conditional discharge after being arrested with “Jim Sutton”, is appealing against the verdict following the allegations. He told the BBC’s Newsnight: “It was totally outrageous what happened. I’m a lecturer, I have a job where I’m working with students, and to have assault of a police officer on your record was pretty difficult.” On Thursday, Scotland Yard admitted the allegations were “serious matters” but added: “We are confident that the current legislative and regulatory framework governing the deployment of undercover officers ensures that all such deployments conducted now are lawful and appropriately managed.” In January, Boyling was placed on restricted duties and an investigation was launched by the Directorate of Professional Standards following allegations that he married an activist he was supposed to be spying on. Police said the inquiry was ongoing. The latest allegations led to the delay of the findings of a review into what went wrong after the case against six protesters accused of planning to invade the second largest power station in the UK collapsed in January. They claimed an undercover officer offered to give evidence on their behalf. Mark Kennedy, who spent seven years posing as Mark “Flash” Stone, a long-haired drop-out climber, also had sexual relationships with at least two women during the operation. He has since said he fears for his life, describing the world of undercover policing as “grey and murky” and adding: “There is some bad stuff going on. Really bad stuff.” The review, launched by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in January, was reportedly set to rule out tough judicial oversight of the deployment of undercover officers – a measure wanted by some police chiefs. It was also expected to find that a failure of supervision contributed to the problems and that police chiefs should ensure undercover officers are not left on covert assignments for too long in future. Questions were raised about the proportionality of covert tactics and of such a lengthy and costly operation targeting green campaigners planning to invade Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station near Nottingham. The policing minister, Nick Herbert, told MPs in January it was clear something had “gone very wrong” with Kennedy’s operation. Police Independent Police Complaints Commission Metropolitan police London Protest Activism guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Varying accounts claim former Libyan leader was caught in crossfire, died from earlier wounds or was shot in head at close range Muammar Gaddafi is set to be buried at an undisclosed location on Friday as Nato meets to discuss the end of the military campaign that hastened the end of his 42-year rule over Libya. Authorities from the National Transitional Council (NTC), the interim authority which led the revolt against Gaddafi and ultimately supplanted him, reportedly remain uncertain about where and when the funeral should take place. Gaddafi’s death on Thursday – which, according to conflicting reports, ultimately came when he was caught in crossfire , bled to death from earlier wounds or was executed at close range – is likely to bring an imminent end to the Nato aim campaign, which decisively turned the military campaign in the NTC’s favour. The French foreign minister, Alain Juppe – whose country’s planes, operating under the Nato remit, are believed to have attacked Gaddafi’s convoy as it fled his besieged home town of Sirte – said on Friday that the operation was over. “I think we can say that the military operation is finished, that the whole of Libyan territory is under the control of the National Transitional Council and that, subject to a few transitory measures in the week to come, the Nato operation has arrived at its end,” he told Europe 1 radio. Nato chiefs are due to gather in Brussels to discuss arrangements for the end of the campaign. The organisation’s secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen. has said only that it will be halted “in co-ordination with the United Nations and the National Transitional Council”. The British foreign secretary, William Hague, has said this should only happen once the alliance is certain that no significant pockets of Gaddafi support remain. While Gaddafi’s death has brought global reactions ranging from jubilation to quiet relief, little is certain about how the 69-year-old met his end other than that he was alive when first held by NTC forces near Sirte. Shakily filmed mobile phone video footage shows a dazed, bloodied but conscious Gaddafi being dragged off the bonnet of a vehicle as someone shouts: “Keep him alive!” Other footage, also broadcast around the world, shows his lifeless body, drenched in more blood, being paraded through the nearby city of Misrata. What happened between is the subject of several contradictory versions. A reasonably coherent and consistent account has emerged of what led Gaddafi to the moment of capture. It seems that early on Thursday morning, as it became clear that forces protecting the former leader could not hold out much longer, a convoy of vehicles carrying him, his army chief, Abu Bakr Younis Jabr, and a few dozen bodyguards, drove out of the blockade and headed west. Soon after leaving Sirte, the convoy was devastated by a Nato raid carried out by French fighter jets. Reporters who witnessed the aftermath of the attack saw more than a dozen burned-out armed pickup trucks, with up to 50 bodies lying in or near the vehicles. It seems Gaddafi was caught up in this strike, but survived. One of his personal bodyguards, Mansour Daou, told al-Arabiya television that the survivors “split into groups and each group went its own way” after the attack. He added: “I was with Gaddafi and Abu Bakr Younis Jabr and about four volunteer soldiers.” Daou said he did not know what eventually happened to Gaddafi, as he had been wounded and knocked unconscious by a shell blast. It seems Gaddafi and his dwindling band of protecters ran through trees and sheltered inside a pair of rubbish-filled drainage pipes, where they were attacked by NTC forces. “At first we fired at them with anti-aircraft guns, but it was no use,” one NTC fighter, Salem Bakeer, told Reuters. “Then we went in on foot. “One of Gaddafi’s men came out waving his rifle in the air and shouting “surrender”, but as soon as he saw my face, he started shooting at me. Then I think Gaddafi must have told them to stop. ‘My master is here, my master is here,’ he said. ‘Muammar Gaddafi is here and he is wounded.’ “We went in and brought Gaddafi out. He was saying: ‘What’s wrong? What’s wrong? What’s going on?’ Then we took him and put him in the car.” By this time, the deposed dictator had gunshot wounds to his leg and back, Bakeer added. The confusion comes next. According to an official version of events by the interim prime minister, Mahmoud Jibril , the vehicle transporting Gaddafi to hospital was “caught in crossfire” as NTC and pro-Gaddafi forces fought further. A post-mortem report showed that the fatal shot had hit Gaddafi in the head, Jibril said, adding that it was not clear which side had fired the bullet. However, Fathi Bashagha, a spokesman for the Misrata Military Council, which commanded the fighters who captured him, said Gaddafi died from his wounds as an ambulance took him the 120 miles (193km) to Misrata. Another NTC official, Abdel Majid Mlegta, said: “He was bleeding from his stomach. It took a long time to transport him. He bled to death.” A further NTC official, who asked not to be named, told the agency: “They (NTC fighters) beat him very harshly, and then they killed him. This is a war.” In yet another possibility, the New York Times said later photographs of Gaddafi dead showed what forensic experts said appeared to be wounds to the head caused by bullets fired at close range, indicating that he might have been executed in this way. Amnesty International has urged the NTC to carry out “a full, independent and impartial inquiry to establish the circumstances of Colonel Gaddafi’s death”. As yet, there has been no similar pressure from world leaders. The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, speaking in Islamabad, said Gaddafi’s death “has brought to a close a very unfortunate chapter in Libya’s history”. She continued: “It also marks the start of a new era for the Libyan people, and it is our hope that what I saw in Tripoli on Tuesday first hand, the eagerness of Libyans to building a new democracy, can begin in earnest.” Muammar Gaddafi Arab and Middle East unrest Libya Middle East Africa Peter Walker guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …