Twitter asserts that it won’t ban Trump because he’s a world leader

Just days after President Trump’s tweets antagonized a foreign adversary over who would be first to start nuclear war, Twitter has addressed calls for the company to ban the chatty, often bellicose U.S. president. In a vague post called “World Leaders on Twitter,” Twitter awkwardly sidestepped the controversy over whether Trump’s Twitter account violates its terms… Read More

Any form of threatening, harassing, or violence / physical harm towards anyone will result in a ban

We have posted this before, but this needs to be reiterated.

We understand that many of you are emotionally driven to discuss your feelings on recent events, most notably the repeal of Net Neutrality – however inciting violence towards others is never ok. It is upsetting that we even have to post this.

Do we enjoy banning people for these types of offences? No… Many of us feel as if the system has failed and want some form of repercussion. But threats of violence and harassment are not the answer here.

And to be clear – here are some examples of what will get you banned:

I hope this PoS dies in a car fire

I want to punch him in the face til his teeth fall out

And if you are trying to be slick by using this form

I never condone violence but…

I would never say he should die but…

Im not one to wish death upon but…

Let’s keep the threads civil.

If you violate this rule, you will be banned for 30 days, no exceptions

Got a tech question or want to discuss tech?

Greetings Good People of /r/Technology,

Welcome to the /r/Technology Tech Support / General Discussion Thread.

All questions must be submitted as top comments (direct replies to this post).

As always, we ask that you keep it civil, abide by the rules of reddit and mind your reddiquette. Please hit the report button on any activity that you feel may be in violation of any of the guidelines listed above.

Click here to review past iterations of these support discussions.

cheers, /r/technology moderators.

submitted by /u/AutoModerator
[link] [comments]

Powered by WPeMatico

Intel CEO sold all the stock he could after Intel learned of security bug

Enlarge / Brian Krzanich, chief executive officer of Intel Corp., speaks during Automobility LA ahead of the Los Angeles Auto Show in Los Angeles, California, US, on Tuesday, November 15, 2016. (credit: Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Brian Krzanich, chief executive officer of Intel, sold millions of dollars’ worth of Intel stock—all he could part with under corporate bylaws—after Intel learned of Meltdown and Spectre, two related families of security flaws in Intel processors.

While an Intel spokesperson told CBS Marketwatch reporter Jeremy Owens that the trades were “unrelated” to the security revelations, and Intel financial filings showed that the stock sales were previously scheduled, Krzanich scheduled those sales on October 30. That’s a full five months after researchers informed Intel of the vulnerabilities. And Intel has offered no further explanation of why Krzanich abruptly sold off all the stock he was permitted to.

As a result of his stock sale, Krzanich received more than $39 million. Intel stock, as of today, is trading at roughly the same price as Krzanich sold stock at, so he did not yield any significant gain from selling before the vulnerability was announced. But the sale may still bring scrutiny from the Securities and Exchange Commission for a number of reasons.

Read 2 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Powered by WPeMatico

Second opinion: Ars readers’ picks for the Deathwatch errata

Enlarge (credit: Derek Bacon / Getty Images)

Welcome to 2018! We’re less than a week into the New Year, and we’ve already got a number of new dumpster fires fully ablaze. Apple’s BatteryGate PR disaster is now burning as hot as a Samsung Galaxy Note 7. Microsoft’s Kinect died, and nobody knew it—no wonder I couldn’t find an adapter for my new Xbox One S. (“Hey Cortana, find me another way to let you surveil my household!”) And Hooters is now serving crypto currency with its burgers. What a time to be alive!

Last week, we published the Ars 2018 Deathwatch—the list of companies and other entities most at risk of a fiscal, technological, or cultural-relevancy death in the coming year. We asked readers to share their own picks in the comments, just in case we missed any candidates. And, not surprisingly, many of you have strong opinions about this sort of thing.

Some of your picks matched up with companies we had debated putting on the list ourselves. Some were… shall we say, wishful thinking. Some were well-reasoned rejoinders to revive companies we’ve dropped off the list. Others were… not. But who are we to judge? We keep putting HTC on our list even though it keeps coming back year after year somehow, so we’re willing to entertain a little debate.

Read 23 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Powered by WPeMatico

Imports boom as solar tariff deadline looms and ITC reaffirms position

Enlarge / A young woman looks at a photovoltaic installation at a booth at the InterSolar Europe trade fair in the southern German city of Munich on June 1, 2017. (credit: Christof Stache/AFP/Getty Images)

In anticipation of tariffs that may be levied on solar cell and module imports, foreign solar manufacturers doubled what they shipped to the US in November 2017 compared to November 2016. That’s according to trade data seen by The Wall Street Journal.

The trade data reflects that importers hope to take advantage of good market conditions before any tariffs are imposed. And a new report from the International Trade Commission (ITC) released last week suggests their efforts won’t be wasted. The new supplemental report offers (PDF) some additional support to the Trump administration if it tries to bring a tariff decision before the World Trade Organization (WTO). Specifically, the report suggests that China “took advantage of the existence of programs implemented by the US government to encourage renewable energy consumption” and that the US couldn’t have foreseen that market shift.

The solar cell and module tariffs in question will be decided on or before January 26 by President Donald Trump. The president is permitted to make any tariff decision he pleases if the International Trade Commission (ITC) finds that trade conditions harmed a certain US industry. In September 2017, the ITC made just such a finding, saying that US solar manufacturers had been harmed by cheap foreign imports of solar cells and modules.

Read 13 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Powered by WPeMatico

How the “Original Internet Godfather” walked away from his cyber crime past

Enlarge / Brett Johnson tears up when he mentions the FBI special agent who helped him quit online fraud. (credit: Dionysios Demetis)

This article was originally published on The Conversation. An audio version of the interview is available there. It has been lightly edited. The Conversation

It’s 7:00am, and I’m driving down to Hull city centre to pick up Brett Johnson, known in cyberspace by the alias Gollumfun and dubbed the “Original Internet Godfather” by the US Secret Service.

Johnson was on the notorious US Most Wanted list in 2006 before being arrested for cyber crime and laundering US$4m. I’ve never met anyone whose name has been on that list, and so our encounter comes with some level of subliminal intimidation. Turns out, he’s both casual and friendly, and I’m keeping an open mind.

Read 25 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Powered by WPeMatico

Academic researchers fire latest shots in adblocking arms race

(credit: Shek’s Aperture)

Advertising pays much of the budget for most online publishers, making the growth of adblockers an existential threat. As such, adblocking has set off a software-based arms race, with publishers finding software solutions that keep ads appearing or entreat people using adblocking software to white-list them. Adblockers readily respond with modified software that targets these specific responses, triggering the publishers to try again.

Some academics have recently stepped into the middle of this arms race, performing an analysis that allows them to identify the specific methods used by publishers to avoid having ads blocked. And the team has gone on to try a couple of different approaches, both of which modify a webpage’s contents to keep the anti-adblocking software from having an effect.

Outside of the economics of it all, there’s an interesting computer science problem here. The code on the webpage is attempting to identify software present on a user’s browser. How do you recognize when that’s happening, and how can you possibly intervene?

Read 13 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Powered by WPeMatico