SoylentNews

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UNITED_PASSENGER_REMOVED?SITE=SCAND&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

The man dragged from a full United Express flight by airport security officers in Chicago is a Kentucky physician who was convicted more than a decade ago of felony charges involving his prescribing of drugs.

But David Dao's unflattering history quickly became the focus of attention, even though there's no indication that his past influenced how he was treated or that the airline or airport police were aware of his background.

Dao, who is 69 and lives in Elizabethtown, did not return messages from The Associated Press, which has confirmed that he is the man who can be seen on the cellphone videos taken by other passengers Sunday night at O'Hare Airport.

Prospects for life in solar system are good as amino acids and water ice seem ubiquitous in asteroid belt and nearing a dozen subsurface liquid ocean worlds

List of largest lakes and seas in the Solar System

Life "on" (inside) Europa, Enceladus? Sheeeeeeit, you can have it on Dione, Titania, Oberon, or Triton. Or maybe Pluto, Charon, Orcus, Makemake, Eris, Sedna... etc.

And if there are no life forms in these places, then you can quench your thirst (as long as you live there too).

11-Year-Old Boy Kills Himself After Alleged Social Media Prank — and Another Child Is Charged

Michigan boy, 11, hangs himself after social media prank

The juvenile is being charged with malicious use of telecommunication services and using a computer to commit a crime.

11-Year-Old Boy Killed Himself After Girlfriend Faked Suicide, Mom Says

Goss said the girl and some of her friends orchestrated the prank. It was not clear who faces charges. "She had pranked her own death," Goss, 41, said of her son's girlfriend. "I don't know what possessed her to do such a weird prank. It's a twisted, sick joke." The unnamed juvenile is being charged in Marquette County with telecommunication services-malicious use and using a computer to commit a crime, Marquette city police Capt. Michael Kohler said in a news release.

Oops: 'Democrats Are Good For Gun Sales': Guess What Happened After Trump's Election

Since Trump's election, background checks have fallen three straight months from year-ago levels. And shops like Nova Firearms in McLean, Va., have detected a notable drop in sales of certain types of weapons such as AR-15 military-style semi-automatic rifles. During the heat of the campaign, says salesman Tom Jenkins, the shop couldn't keep those weapons in stock. Customers were worried the rifles would be singled out for a ban by Hillary Clinton.

"During the political crisis we had dozens of them downstairs, and then there would be zero. And it would go again and then go again. And right up to the election, literally, brought them in, brought them up and sold them."

Since Trump's victory those guns aren't moving nearly as fast, says Jenkins, pointing to five AR-15 style weapons on a rack behind the counter of the shop. He says it's a certain type of customer whose buying decisions are influenced by politics.

"The hunter doesn't care who's president. The revolver shooter or the target shooter or the competition shooter really didn't care who was president. It's the self-defense market and the people think certain guns may be tied to politics."

[...] On the day after the election shares of gun maker Sturm Ruger fell 14 percent. And the price of Smith & Wesson, which has since changed its name to the generic sounding American Outdoor Brands, fell 15 percent. Shares of both companies are still down, in contrast to the overall stock market, which has enjoyed big post-election gains. All of this points to that weird dynamic in the gun business.

Give it time?

This journal is #FAKENEWS. Statement from The Wall Street Journal.

Remember this story? Google Fails to Stop Major Brands From Pulling Ads From YouTube

If you can watch an 8m05s YouTube video, check this out: Evidence that WSJ used FAKE screenshots. [You can't, because it's down right now. It could be the user pulling it because they found out they were wrong, or it could even be retaliation from WSJ/News Corp. I will keep an eye on it.] Otherwise, read ahead:

A Wall Street Journal reporter, Jack Nicas, has been covering YouTube for a while. He apparently took some screenshots of ads playing alongside racist videos and uploaded them to Twitter. In one case, he "found" that Coca Cola and Starbucks were playing ads alongside a video with "Nigger" in the title. This video was obliquely referred to in one of his WSJ articles, and it was implied that he contacted Coca Cola and other brands to pressure them about his findings - resulting in their brands pulling advertising from YouTube.

Ethan Klein contacted the user that uploaded a video that was "screenshotted" multiple times by Jack Nicas. YouTube has detailed information and graphs related to monetization of videos, and the platform indicated that the video had been monetized for a few days back in September. The Nicas screenshots showed a view count close to the amount that the video reached towards the end of its life, before it was reported and deleted by YouTube (after being highlighted by Nicas on Twitter).

Basically, while YouTube may be scrambling to launch machine learning algorithms that automatically label ISIS beheading videos as offensive and minimize brand exposure to them, YouTube is not stupid enough to forgo implementing simple keyword filters. Content creators on YouTube have talked about how using the wrong words, even innocuous ones, in the title or description will result in a video getting demonetized. Why did it take days for that screenshotted video to get demonetized? Probably because the keyword filter flagged it, and then a Mechanical Turk came in days later and gave it the thumbs down, cutting off all revenue for good.

So either this Wall Street Journal reporter lied, or some of the details about how the YouTube system works are incorrect. Perhaps the revenue was not as flatlined as it appeared, or ads can accidentally play on videos that appear demonetized. Or maybe the evidence sent to Klein was itself faked. In the worst case scenario, a "reporter" actually edited screenshots to make it appear that major brands were advertising on offensive content, proceeded to pressure big companies to pull millions of bucks worth of advertising, and then bragged about it on Twitter.

Does WSJ have it in for YouTube? Klein puts out one theory. WSJ reporters, including Jack Nicas, were behind a recent hit piece on PewDiePie, the YouTuber with the most subscribers. Many YouTubers came to the defense of PewDiePie, recognizing that the alleged hate/anti-Semitic/"Nazi" content that he posted was in jest. WSJ ran its own video version of its article that stripped away much of the context surrounding the jokes. In the end, while PewDiePie was dropped from Disney's Maker Studios and lost his premium YouTube show, he appears to have gained rather than lost subscribers. So it is a bit of a lost cause for the WSJ.

Attacking YouTube directly has seemed to have a much bigger impact, with many brands pulling away from Alphabet/Google/YouTube and demanding stronger tools to prevent ads from appearing alongside offensive content. A tall order, since it is a machine learning task. Obviously, Ethan Klein and other YouTubers with millions of subscribers stand to lose a lot of ad revenue if YouTube's value to advertisers plummets. Klein also uploads videos that are likely to be labeled offensive and restricted to only advertisers that check the right boxes.

Why would the Wall Street Journal want to kill YouTube, other than baiting some clicks? WSJ is owned by News Corporation, which owns various old media outlets that would like to get a slice of YouTube's advertising pie and reach with younger viewers. Judging by the scale of the brand freakout, it was well worth the time it took to put together a half-dozen articles or so.

If you want, you can also watch this 13m59s video from Ethan Klein (part 1 to the part 2 this journal is about). There's also this 5m49s video from another YouTuber showing how at least one man (Eric Feinberg) stands to benefit from the ad controversy - by selling his patented offensive content detection algorithm to Google. This is the article that the video references:

Google said in a blog post that it's beefing up its tech efforts and hiring more people to prevent placement of ads with unsavory content. A spokesman declined to comment further.

But Mr. Feinberg said in an interview on Friday that he doubts Google can succeed. At least, he said, "not without violating my patent."

I'll turn this journal into a submission if there are further signs of the WSJ's narrative crumbling.

Trump takes risk with Freedom Caucus attack

A fun article.

Anti-tax and pro-life leaders who huddled with Ryan in the Speaker’s office Thursday were livid that the Freedom group scuttled the health bill. The legislation would have repealed $1 trillion in ObamaCare taxes and made $880 billion in cuts to Medicaid, while defunding Planned Parenthood.

“I didn’t understand how big this was to the pro-life community. They are pissed as hell at the people who are undercutting them. You just torpedoed defunding Planned Parenthood and you don’t think you can be primaried from the right? You are just wrong,” said Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform who attended the private meeting with Ryan.

Three transients arrested in Atlanta highway bridge collapse (CNBC)

Yes, they do mean that inter-dimensional travelers (persons staying or working in a place dimension for only a short time) are sabotaging America's infrastructure.

Tom Wheeler: Telecom/Cable Industry lobbyist, FCC Commissioner, protector of network privacy.

I always thought he just went with the flow to make sure he was getting a piece of the pie. Now I'm not so sure. In a March 29, 2017 OpEd piece in the New York Times, Wheeler decries the actions of Congress in weakening (some might say destroying) online privacy protections:

On Tuesday afternoon, while most people were focused on the latest news from the House Intelligence Committee, the House quietly voted to undo rules that keep internet service providers — the companies like Comcast, Verizon and Charter that you pay for online access — from selling your personal information.

The Senate already approved the bill, on a party-line vote, last week, which means that in the coming days President Trump will be able to sign legislation that will strike a significant blow against online privacy protection.
[...]
Here’s one perverse result of this action. When you make a voice call on your smartphone, the information is protected: Your phone company can’t sell the fact that you are calling car dealerships to others who want to sell you a car. But if the same device and the same network are used to contact car dealers through the internet, that information — the same information, in fact — can be captured and sold by the network. To add insult to injury, you pay the network a monthly fee for the privilege of having your information sold to the highest bidder.

This bill isn’t the only gift to the industry. The Trump F.C.C. recently voted to stay requirements that internet service providers must take “reasonable measures” to protect confidential information they hold on their customers, such as Social Security numbers and credit card information. This is not a hypothetical risk — in 2015 AT&T was fined $25 million for shoddy practices that allowed employees to steal and sell the private information of 280,000 customers.

I would have thought Wheeler wouldn't want to rock the boat, but apparently is willing to stand up for online consumer privacy.

Did I have him wrong? I don't know. And now I'm not really sure I care.

Today Theresa May's letter triggering Article 50, the UK's withdrawal from the EU, was delivered to Donald Tusk. Far-right populism appears to have triumphed over post-WWII cooperation. We live in interesting times. Scotland has voted to have another independence referendum, and Northern Ireland's regional assembly is in limbo as a result of a corruption scandal and republican parties have increased their presence. The UK's days are numbered.

AP link #1
AP link #2
Fox News
The Republic

(all 4 links are the same AP story)