Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.

Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password


Site News

Join our Folding@Home team:
Main F@H site
Our team page


Funding Goal
For 6-month period:
2022-07-01 to 2022-12-31
(All amounts are estimated)
Base Goal:
$3500.00

Currently:
$438.92

12.5%

Covers transactions:
2022-07-02 10:17:28 ..
2022-10-05 12:33:58 UTC
(SPIDs: [1838..1866])
Last Update:
2022-10-05 14:04:11 UTC --fnord666

Support us: Subscribe Here
and buy SoylentNews Swag


We always have a place for talented people, visit the Get Involved section on the wiki to see how you can make SoylentNews better.

What would you use if you couldn't use your current distribution/operating system?

  • Linux
  • Windows
  • BSD
  • ChromeOS / Android
  • macOS / iOS
  • Open[DOS, Solaris, STEP, VMS]
  • I don't use a computer you insensitive clod!
  • Other (describe in comments)

[ Results | Polls ]
Comments:9 | Votes:23

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @11:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the pass-the-popcorn dept.

You may have heard two weeks ago that a German activist group created a parody of Google and their recently acquired Nest Labs (which is "a home automation company that designs and manufactures sensor-driven, Wi-Fi-enabled, self-learning, programmable thermostats and smoke detectors"). The domain name they used, "google-nest.org", is not obviously a parody.

Now the EFF has the story of how Google demanded that the activists "revise the site and assign the domain name to Google". And the EFF believes that Google got it wrong this time. We'll just have to wait and see whether Google follows EFF's reasoning or whether they want to get the big legal guns out.

posted by NCommander on Wednesday May 21 2014, @10:30PM   Printer-friendly
from the working-on-the-bylaws dept.
For non-US folks: 501(c)(3) refers to tax-exempt status in the United States. Unlike most countries, non-for-profit organizations are NOT automatically tax-exempt, I've included a larger summary in the 'Read More' section.

So, on the slow but progressing front of incorporation, I've been working on drafting the bylaws for the umbrella non-for-profit for SoylentNews. Our current plan is to have all the documents ready for incorporation done in a single go, then involve a lawyer to review them to make sure that we meet all the requirements. Once that is done, I'll finalize my move to New Hampshire (which has gotten unfortunately sidetracked due to real life), and submit the documentation to the state.

When I took over this site, I said that we would incorporate and (eventually) become a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. At the time, I had not dug into the specifics of what this would entail, and I've got some concerns that makes me wonder if 501(c)(3) is a good thing for our future. My biggest concern involves a prohibition that prevents 501(c)(3)'s from being involved with anything related to "political activity". While seemingly benign on the surface, this prohibition may create some difficulty for us.
What is 501(c)(3)

As I put in the summary, 501(c)(3) is a special status granted by the Internal Revenue Service that exempts non-for-profit organizations from most forms of tax. New Hampshire also grants tax-exempt status for any organization that receives this certification from the IRS.

The downside for 501(c)(3) is that in turn for being tax-exempt, the organization itself gives up some rights related to political representation. The specific term as used by the IRS is "political activity", a term which is extremely ambiguous and not defined by statute.

The Houston Business and Tax Journal ran a lengthy article on the subject called Eyes Wide Shut which goes into depth about the issues. I'll try and summarize that here, but I recommend that all take a look at it, and weigh in below.

In the Eyes Wide Shut article, it points to guidelines released by the IRS which outlined what is and isn't acceptable. This document provides examples of what is and is not acceptable behavior for 501(c)(3)'s. Two sections (reproduced below) are IMHO, most concerning.

Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention

Under federal tax law, section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate. A statement can identify a candidate not only by stating the candidate's name but also by other means such as showing a picture of the candidate, referring to political party affiliations, or other distinctive features of a candidate's platform or biography. All the facts and circumstances need to be considered to determine if the advocacy is political campaign intervention.

Key factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

Ed Note: Snipped out a *very* long list

A communication is particularly at risk of political campaign intervention when it makes reference to candidates or voting in a specific upcoming election. Nevertheless, the communication must still be considered in context before arriving at any conclusions.

Web Sites
A web site is a form of communication. If an organization posts something on its web site that favors or opposes a candidate for public office, the organization will be treated the same as if it distributed printed material, oral statements, or broadcasts that favored or opposed a candidate.

An organization has control over whether it establishes a link to another site. When an organization establishes a link to another web site, the organization is responsible for the consequences of establishing and maintaining that link, even if the organization does not have control over the content of the linked site. Because the linked content may change over time, an organization may reduce the risk of political campaign intervention by monitoring the linked content and adjusting the links accordingly.

Links to candidate-related material, by themselves, do not necessarily constitute political campaign intervention. The IRS will take all the facts and circumstances into account when assessing whether a link produces that result. The facts and circumstances to be considered include, but are not limited to, the context for the link on the organization's web site, whether all candidates are represented, any exempt purpose served by offering the link, and the directness of the links between the organization's web site and the web page that contains material favoring or opposing a candidate for public office.

So What Does It All Mean?
So, after those two walls of text, you might be having issues in understanding what the above means?

In short, and this is my personal interpretation of both the statute, and various resources on the internet, we'd be hamstrung on our ability to report or discuss issues related to politics. I realize some of you may approve of this, but the prohibition would go farther than that. If a candidate for the house/senate/president is for/against an issue, (e.g. a new version of SOPA) it's not clear we could even post on it without our risking our 501(c)(3) status.

Secondly, I'm unsure if any lawyer will be able to give us clear advice on this subject. As the Eyes Wide Shut article details, the prohibition is vague, and short of having every single article lawyer vetted, we could easily run afoul of the prohibition without intending it.

As the "Eyes Wide Shut" article points out, the current test about political activity is simply "facts and circumstances", which means its subject to the interpretations of whatever court we're in (in this case, federal courts in the first circuit). Given we aggregate and summarize news, we may run afoul the ban based on the articles we post.

Here's the hypothetical scenario I can envision; at some point in the future, a congressman introduces legislation similar to SOPA. A major advocate of rights denounces both the legislation and the congressman who introduced it. We run an article about both the introduction of SOPA 2.0, and the denouncement. By happenstance, this is an election year, and the congressman is running for re-election.

By running these articles, are we running afoul of the political action ban? The IRS examples suggest that we'd be alright, but in other places appear somewhat contradictory. The intended purpose seems to prevent us, as a hypothetical 501(c)(3) from saying "Vote for X", or "Vote for X because ...", which would likely include any content vetted by the staff as a submission.

On the flip side of the coin, the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, operates its own news service, State House News (down as of writing), and networks with several other journalistic agencies, which proves that its at least viable of being a 501(c)(3) news outlet.

As outlined by the IRS, there is a distinction between the members of a 501(c)(3) and the 501(c)(3) itself saying something. For instance, I can say "Vote for X because ..." as long as I'm not doing it in the name of the foundation. However, that distinction becomes murky, if I were to post a comment on an article saying the same thing.

The entire situation is nebulous at best; I'm currently drafting a letter to send to both the Franklin Center, and Freedom of Press Foundation in hope of finding advice and information on how to proceed

So Why Not Abandon Pursuit of 501(c)(3) All Together?

The answer is multi-fold. The first reason is very simple; its something I said we'd do, and I don't like to backtrack on a promise without explaining why and making sure the community understands; had I realized the full implications of 501(c)(3) status beforehand, I would have likely just said we'd be a non-for-profit and leave it at that.

Secondly, our ability to raise money is somewhat more difficult without this status. As of today, almost all the SN expenses are out of my personal pocket, and I'd like to move the site to a self-sufficiency model shortly after we're incorporated raising money via subscriptions and ads. As a 501(c)(3), I also envisioned the possibility of getting grants and donations from various corporations as charitable contributions are frequently used as tax writeoffs. Such status would also likely help us in getting discounts for various services, as well as allow donations/subscriptions to the site to be tax-deductible for our members.

The fact is, I'm concerned with our ability to self-support ourselves beyond hosting expenses even with advertising and subscription revenue coming in; the other site, despite all its traffic, was only generating approximately $18,000 per year before they were purchased by Andover; while such costs would allow us to pay for hosting, and perhaps a little contract work, being able to hire anyone part time or full time would essentially be out of the equation.

So Now What?

Right now, I'm pausing on my efforts to write bylaws and fill out the incorporation paperwork until I can get a clearer response. If it appears 501(c)(3) status would compromise us, or force us to self-censor, we will not pursue that status. I don't like to go back on what I've said previously, but I'm hoping, given the circumstances, the community can forgive me. Once I have my letters drafted, they will be posted as a journal article and I'll stick a link to that here.

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @09:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the getting-ready-for-the-big-day dept.

NASA's Archaeology, Anthropology and Interstellar Communications - a new 300-page volume [1.8 MB PDF] edited by Douglas A. Vakoch.

These scholars are grappling with some of the enormous challenges that will face humanity if an information-rich signal emanating from another world is detected. By drawing on issues at the core of contemporary archaeology and anthropology, we can be much better prepared for contact with an extraterrestrial civilization, should that day ever come.

You can download it here as a Kindle book or as a universal ePub here.

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @08:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the for-some-values-of-neutrality dept.

There's opposition in the US congress to FCC's suggested net neutrality rules. "FCC chairman Tom Wheeler took the hot seat today in an oversight hearing before the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology to testify about current issues before his agency, including net neutrality. The overriding theme of the day? Pretty much everyone who spoke hates the rule the FCC narrowly approved for consideration last week - just for different reasons. Wheeler himself made some interesting comments in response to their questions [no https]:

"[He said] the agency recognizes that Internet providers would be disrupting a 'virtuous cycle' between the demand for free-flowing information on one hand and new investment in network upgrades on the other if they started charging companies like Google for better access to consumers. What's more, he said, the FCC would have the legal authority to intervene. 'If there is something that interferes with that virtuous cycle - which I believe paid prioritization does - then we can move against it,' Wheeler said, speaking loudly and slowly. A little later, in response to a question from Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), Wheeler cited network equipment manufacturers who've argued that you can't create a fast lane without worsening service for some Internet users. 'That's at the heart of what you're talking about here,' Wheeler said. 'That would be commercially unreasonable under our proposal.'"

Here are instructions to send your comment to the FCC.

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @08:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the it-had-to-happen-sometime dept.

eBay Accounts Compromised

eBay is reporting that, due to the compromise of an employee account in late February/early March, all of their customers' data is possibly compromised. Their Press Release says "no evidence of any unauthorized access to financial or credit card information" was seen, but intruders got "eBay customers' name, encrypted password, email address, physical address, phone number and date of birth".

They say that "beginning later today [eBay] will be asking eBay users to change their passwords".

eBay Tells Users To Change Passwords

No longer a surprise when this happens, but hurts a little that they took 2 months to inform their users!

http://m.aljazeera.com/story/201452113462206983

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @07:04PM   Printer-friendly

Develop Code to Study the Higgs Boson and Win Cash Prizes.

Physicists at the Large Hadron Collider would like your help in studying the Higgs Boson. It' s true that they found the Higgs boson-which is responsible for giving all particles their mass-nearly two years ago, but its exact behavior is still mysterious. Now, the scientists are asking coders to develop algorithms that can reveal the Higgs' properties. The Higgs Boson Machine Learning Challenge will reward successful coders with up to $ 7,000 in actual money. But it' s hard to put a price on the chance to be involved in one of the biggest scientific discoveries of the decade. Interested? Here' s the situation. At the LHC, protons are smashed together at colossal energies, creating a chaotic shower of particles. Physicists have to hunt through the noisy mess of other particles to see the Higgs' weak decay signal. They already have code that can pull out the Higgs signal from this noise (in fact, researchers at the Higgs-hunting ATLAS experiment didn't actually see the enigmatic particle in their detector, simply its decay signal). But the scientists think the public might be able to help them get a sharper signal and figure out what the Higgs is really like.

The contest started up about a week ago and already has nearly 200 participants. But the final prizes won't be awarded until September, so there's plenty of time for interested budding scientists to get involved.

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @05:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the big-business-wants-all-your-data dept.

After getting busted for snooping on people's home networks and other slightly less intrusive spying LG promised to cut it out. Now TechDirt reports that isn't the case at all. LG has decided that if you won't agree to their corporate surveillance they will just take your toys and go home.

And, as the BBC link points out, that could also mean that LG have broken both UK and EU Data Protection laws; this is currently being investigated.

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @03:54PM   Printer-friendly
from the Radio-Gaga dept.

The reason why FM receivers are present on smartphones is that they can be used to locate your position by noting a simple thing as signal strength of transmitters. More advanced methods makes use of SNR, frequency deviation and multipath interference characteristics. And the same method can be used for WiFi which of course makes collection of such data very useful for localization purposes where GPS etc isn't useful. Arrival time of a radio signal that is reported to the operator from many devices may also be used for the same purpose.

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @02:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the Brotherhood-of-the-Coast dept.

In a statement, the Spanish Pirate Confederation said:

In 2008, Judge Baltasar Garzan considered these abductions to be crimes of illegal detention with forced disappearance of people and the kidnapping of minors. These are crimes against humanity, and therefore the statutes of limitations don't apply as many of the victims are still alive.

Unfortunately, no Government in Spain, regardless of their ideology, has done anything to put an end to this calamity.

If the Government doesn't do it, we the citizens shall.

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @01:14PM   Printer-friendly
from the Brainjacking dept.

Just as the authors of Shadowrun predicted: neurostimulating implants. They could be used to alleviate siezures or depression, give you a permanent high that you could adjust with your smartphone, or potentially even remote control you...

http://www.gizmag.com/rechargeable-medical-implant s/32150/

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @11:30AM   Printer-friendly
from the I-know-his-name. dept.

In fresher news:

Glenn Greenwald recently released a stunning story with journalists Laura Poitras and Ryan Devereaux about the NSA's ability to suck up the content of every phone call made in the Bahamas, Mexico, the Philippines, and Kenya along with one mystery country that The Intercept is refusing to reveal.
The program that the NSA uses to vacuum up the phone calls of an entire nation is part of a larger NSA program called MYSTIC. The Washington Post reported on the MYSTIC program earlier this year, but decided to not name any of the nations that MYSTIC was monitoring en masse. The Intercept took it one step further, but still did not released the name of one last country in that list due to "credible concerns that doing so could lead to increased violence."

That one step, however, was evidently not far enough for WikiLeaks. In a heated Twitter back-and-forth between John Cook, The Intercept's editor-in-chief, Jacob Applebaum, once a WikiLeaks hacker, now a Snowden document holder, WikiLeaks itself, and Glenn Greenwald, the voice behind the Wikileaks account berated The Intercept team for redacting the name of the final country. Applebaum went as far as calling that redaction "a mistake."

Could the "Chinese military into economic espionage" brouhaha be a source of noise to detract from something more damaging for NSA?

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @10:12AM   Printer-friendly
from the Boil-and-trouble dept.

M.I.A.'s latest music video for the song Double Bubble Trouble incorporates a lot of technology and themes familiar to Soylentils. Drones, 3D-printed guns, pervasive surveillance and anti-facial-recognition clothing. The street finds its own use for things. Moreover, after her label was reluctant to release the video, she posted it online herself only to have it taken down for "copyright infringement." The video was later restored to availability.

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @07:39AM   Printer-friendly
from the Blue-Monday dept.

Based on genetic analysis, the "giant sea anemone" living around deep sea thermal vents is not an anemone at all, but rather a completely different order of creature.

"It's the equivalent to finding the first member of a group like primates or rodents," says researcher Estefana Rodriguez of the American Museum of Natural History, which led the study.

posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday May 21 2014, @05:07AM   Printer-friendly
from the White-Elephant dept.

The Associated Press reports that the Thai military declared martial law Tuesday. The situation in Bangkok remains calm, with citizens and tourists going about their business as usual. The move comes "after six months of turbulent political unrest" following a political crisis.

This is a top story at BBC News. The US State Department has had a travel advisory for Thailand in effect since about May 7, which explains some more of the background. More coverage at the Christian Science Monitor, Washington Post.

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @03:01AM   Printer-friendly
from the follow-up-and-profit? dept.

As previously brought up on Crowdfunding for Novena Open-Hardware Laptop [april 5, 2014].

boing boing marks the end of the crowdfunding Last day of the Novena open source hardware laptop crowdfunding campaign. The final result is very impressive - it more than passed every target and then doubled it just to make sure!

When last we brought it up it looked like a few of you were underwhelmed by the hardware that Novena was offering.

Can someone please explain why you think that this is outside of an expected pricerange for a laptop you can update and improve?

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @01:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the not-quite-so-healthy-option dept.

New research has found that both cigarette smoke and e-cigarette vapour make drug-resistant bacteria more virulent. Alterations in the surface charge and biofilm formation of MRSA were caused by e-cigarette vapour, giving it greater resistance to attack from antibiotics and human cells, although the alterations in the bacteria were 10 times greater when exposed to conventional cigarette smoke compared to the e-cigaratte vapour.

Like cigarette smoke, e-cigarette vapour exposure also weakens our host defences, making it easier for bacteria to cause invasive infections. This means that the vapour is influencing bacteria to be more aggressive and harder to kill, and suppressing the ability of our own cells to attack and kill bacteria.

MRSA in particular is spreadable to other people via touch. There have been outbreaks on school sports teams for example. It is an aggressive bug, so it can cause disease in healthy people as well as the infirm. It already has antibiotic resistance, so making it even more resistant to antimicrobials and killing by host cells is a dangerous thing. It can be incredibly hard to clear MRSA infections, and we are running out of antibiotics powerful enough to eliminate it.

It is hard to believe that anything could be as bad as cigarette smoke. But we simply don't know enough about the effects of vapour to be able to say that it is a lesser evil. But as best as we can tell from the data we have, e-cigarette vapour is not benign. In fact, it appears that e-cigarette vapour both makes bacteria tougher to kill and weakens the immune system. Together these early findings suggest that people who vape are at increased risk of developing serious bacterial infections.

posted by janrinok on Wednesday May 21 2014, @12:15AM   Printer-friendly
from the should-I-believe-this-or-not? dept.

It turns out that people's beliefs are more influenced by their sense of self identity than facts and information. This article by Maria Konnikova of The New Yorker discusses some research conducted which led to these rather unfortunate conclusions. Nobody is safe from their pre-existing biases, so whether you're liberal or conservative, global warming believer or denier, black or white, this is worth a read and some self reflection.

Today's News | May 22 | May 20  >