Image 01 Image 03

November 2014

The tech community is rallying in an effort to convince the Supreme Court to review a federal court decision granting copyright protection to APIs (application programming interfaces.) A few years ago, tech giant Oracle sued Google when Google's engineers used Java APIs to build the Android operating system. Although Google designed its own original programs, it based those programs off of the original Java APIs so that independent developers could create apps and programs for use on Android phones. Pause button. If everything I just said sounded like Greek, the Electronic Frontier Foundation explained in their press release about their request to SCOTUS how APIs work:
Generally speaking, APIs are specifications that allow programs to communicate with each other. So when you type a letter in a word processor, and hit the print command, you are using an API that lets the word processor talk to the printer driver, even though they were written by different people. The brief explains that the freedom to re-implement and extend existing APIs has been the key to competition and progress in both hardware and software development. It made possible the emergence and success of many robust industries we now take for granted—for example, mainframes, PCs, and workstations/servers—by ensuring that competitors could challenge established players and advance the state of the art.
After Google released its Android OS, Oracle sued Google for patent and copyright infringement. A California judge rejected the claim, saying that an API is essentially a "process or method" that allows different computer programs to talk to one another. (Source code, on the other hand, is treated like a literary work and is covered under copyright laws.) A federal circuit appeals court disagreed with the analysis and overturned the decision, instead holding that APIs are copyrightable, upending years of industry practice and sending the tech community into a frenzy. Is this a niche issue? Yes. Is it an important niche issue? Absolutely. From the perspective of a computer scientist or developer, this decision threatens their very ability to create anything new:

Today may be the day you and the rioters have been waiting for. The Grand Jury reportedly has reached a decision whether to indict Officer Darren Wilson in the killing of Michael Brown. But the decision has not yet been announced yet. That is expected to come sometime today. You can follow the Twitter stream at the bottom of the post. We will embed a live video feed when available. The announcement could come at any time.

I already have demonstrated in great detail how the narrative being peddled by supporters of Rasmea Odeh is demonstrably false and distorted, Rasmea Odeh rightly convicted of Israeli supermarket bombing and U.S. immigration fraud. For those of you who are not familiar, Odeh was recently convicted of immigration fraud in Detroit federal court for failing to disclose on her visa and naturalization papers her conviction and imprisonment in Israel for planting a bomb in 1969 in a Jerusalem supermarket killing two students, and related offenses, including an attempted bombing of the British consulate. The immigration case was open and shut. The conviction and imprisonment were indisputable facts, and Odeh falsely answered "No" to clear questions asking if she had "EVER" (caps in original) been convicted or imprisoned. Instead of defending the claims, Odeh's defense team and supporters tried to turn the case into a verdict on the Middle East dispute. The Judge did not allow it. Once of the most egregious, yet typical, descriptions about the background of the case was published on November 22 in Truthout, by Dahr Jamail, Rasmea Odeh: Victim of Institutional Oppression, From Israel to the US. http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/27590-tortured-and-raped-by-israel-persecuted-and-imprisoned-by-the-united-states# While most of the article is just conspiracy and oppression theories, the factual introduction is demonstrably inaccurate [my responses based on the documents in my prior post are bold and in brackets]:

It's not like this was unexpected. Chuck Hagel long has become the fall guy for Obama administration international failures, as we first noted in connection with the Taliban-Bergdahl swap, Taliban-Bergdahl swap unpopular, so … blame Hagel. The lone Republican in the cabinet, Hagel was supposed to lend credibility to Obama's downsizing of the military and retreat from international engagement. Hagel recently announced a realignment and refocus of the military, including some expanded capabilities. Now Hagel is resigning under pressure, according to numerous media reports. Via NBC News:
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is stepping down amid criticism of the president’s national security team on a series of global issues, including the threat posed by the militant group known as ISIS. Senior defense officials confirmed to NBC News Monday that Hagel was forced to resign. The officials say the White House has lost confidence in Hagel to carry out his role at the Pentagon. According to one senior official, “He wasn’t up to the job.” Another senior administration official said that Hagel has been discussing a departure from the White House "for several weeks."
More to follow.

In the 2003 barnburner Virginia v. Black, the Supreme Court held unconstitutional a statute that in part stated that the act of burning a cross constituted prima facie evidence of an intent to intimidate a person or group. Writing for the majority, Justice O'Connor said that "just as a State may regulate only that obscenity which is the most obscene due to its prurient content, so too may a State choose to prohibit only those forms of intimidation that are most likely to inspire fear of bodily harm." Next week, the Supreme Court will be asked to apply this standard to speech in a new and controversial venue: a man's Facebook timeline. Anthony D. Elonis was sentenced to four years in federal prison after a court determined that violent rants posted to his personal Facebook page constituted a "true threat" to his estranged wife, former coworkers, and even a federal agent. The Washington Post has the background:
About a week after Tara Elonis convinced a judge to issue a protective order against her estranged husband, Anthony, her soon-to-be ex had this to say:
“Fold up your PFA [protection-from-abuse order] and put it in your pocket Is it thick enough to stop a bullet?”
... He was fired after co-workers interpreted one of his Facebook postings as a threat to them. He responded: ““Someone once told me that I was a firecracker. Nah, I’m a nuclear bomb and Dorney Park just f----- with the timer.” ... In other postings, Elonis suggested that his son dress as “Matricide” for Halloween, with his wife’s “head on a stick” as a prop. He pondered making a name for himself by shooting up an elementary school and noted that there were so many nearby to choose from — “hell hath no fury like a crazy man in a kindergarten class.”

I don't watch Saturday Night Live anymore but when I saw this clip from Tina Nguyen on Mediaite, I have to admit it made me laugh. It's a spoof of the well known Schoolhouse Rock cartoon:
SNL’s Obama Shoves The Schoolhouse Rock Bill Down The Capitol Steps Finally, the first biting political spoof from Saturday Night Live in a while: the Bill from Schoolhouse Rock explains to a student how he becomes a law, only to be violently beat up by Barack Obama and his new best friend, “Executive Order.” Even then, the poor Executive Order still thinks he’s used for simple things, like declaring holidays and creating national parks, until Obama informs him that he’s going to be used to grant amnesty to 5 million undocumented immigrants. His reaction: “Whoa.”
Watch: As long as we're showing the spoof, let's watch the original as well.

Net Neutrality has existed for a long time in the nerd-niche of the policy world, but now that Obama has asked the FCC to impose strict new regulations on internet service providers, the issue has jumped out of the shadows and into the forefront of public debate. "Net Neutrality" provisions---new regulations that would use the authority of Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 to prevent internet service providers from granting preferential treatment to different types of online content---are controversial, and have already spurred lawsuits from companies like Verizon who are loathe to cede control of their services to the government, and the FCC is preparing for another onslaught. Via Ars Technica:
"We are going to be sued," he said in a Q&A after the FCC's monthly meeting. "That's the history. Every time in this whole discussion any time the commission has moved to do something, one of the big dogs has gone to sue... We don’t want to ignore history. We want to come out with good rules that accomplish what we need to accomplish, an open Internet, no blocking, no throttling, no fast lanes, no discrimination, and we want those rules to be in place after a court decision. So we want to be sure we’re thoughtful in the way in which we structure them and we're thoughtful in the way we present what will ultimately be presented to a court." Verizon sued to block rules passed under Wheeler's predecessor, Julius Genachowski, and has already threatened to sue the FCC over new rules under consideration. AT&T has threatened to sue as well.
Those who support Net Neutrality worry that not having a clear line in the sand will allow large corporations to throttle content from smaller content providers (read: content providers who don't have piles of money to offer up) and create an unequal playing field for the kinds of free speech the internet is so famous for. But as the great people over at Tech Freedom have explained, this desire for a bright line rule ignores the reality and nature of online content:

Wow. It's not often that I can say it but this new video from the GOP is really powerful. Whoever made this video deserves a promotion. The ad uses an audio track of Hillary Clinton criticizing George W. Bush's so-called "imperial presidency." Via the Washington Free Beacon:
An Imperial Presidency A new video released by the GOP on Friday calls out former Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton for her hypocrisy on the issue of executive action. In 2008, Clinton said the George W. Bush administration was transforming the executive branch into an “imperial presidency.” In 2014, Clinton said she supported President Obama’s decision to grant citizenship to more than four million illegal immigrants. Clinton unknowingly provided the narration for the GOP’s newest video. “Unfortunately our current president does not seem to understand the basic character of the office he holds,” Clinton said of Bush in April 2008. “Rather than faithfully execute the laws, he has rewritten them through signing statements, ignored them through secret legal opinions, undermined them by elevating ideology over facts. Rather than defending the constitution, he has defied its principles and traditions.”
Check it out:
“This administration’s unbridled ambition to transform the executive into an imperial presidency in an attempt to strengthen the office has weakened our nation.”
But that was then. This is now:

Our post and video, Cornell Pro-Israel students taunted: “F**k You Zionist scums” has started to gather attention, with articles in The Blaze, The College Fix, and elsewhere. The video has over 10,000 views as of this writing: Language Warning Please share the video, people need to see the reality of what pro-Israel students have to deal with on campuses. The open hate in the eyes and mouths of these anti-Israel activists reminds me of points I made back in June, during my interview with Larry Elder about the Boycott Divest and Sanctions movement. I had forgotten about it until it saw this Tweet this morning:

A settlement reached in early November between the EPA and two car manufacturers may have as much impact on the economic health of the country as the recent wave election that ushered in a Republican Senate. Essentially, the result of this legal case means that rules to prevent "global warming" will be implemented by the use of "lawfare" instead of science and technology. On November 3rd it was reported that Hyundai and Kia will pay a record combined $100 million penalty for overstating fuel economy estimates for many of their vehicles.
The South Korean automakers had already agreed to pay consumers for the difference in estimated fuel costs, when the discrepancy was discovered by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2012. The civil fine and other penalties announced Monday are in addition to those direct payments to vehicle owners. The vehicles involved were the Hyundai Accent, Elantra, Veloster and Santa Fe and the Kia Rio and Soul. The automakers overstated fuel economy figures for their vehicles by an average of six miles per gallon, the EPA said.
And while the mainstream media was reporting this as a big win for the environment against an evil big business, a closer look at the origin of the problem points to vague regulatory language -- a hallmark of bureaucrats who want to promote an agenda than actually address valid technical concerns. :

While we were sleeping, President Obama decided U.S. troops will stay in Afghanistan. In May, Obama said, "this year, we will bring America's longest war to a responsible end," as he discussed his plan to withdraw troops. Here was his announcement of troop withdrawal given in the Rose Garden in May:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali knows what real feminism is about. As a vocal critic of the treatment of women in Muslim countries, she has risked her life. According to a new report from Ashe Schow at the Washington Examiner, Hirsi Ali is unimpressed with American feminism:
Hirsi Ali slams feminism's 'trivial BS' Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a harsh critic of Islam’s treatment of women, said Wednesday that modern American feminism is focused on “trivial bullshit” and needs to be reclaimed. Speaking at the Independent Women’s Forum Women of Valor dinner, where she received an award for courage, Hirsi Ali reminded her audience of how far feminism has strayed from its original purpose. “I want you to remember that once upon a time, feminists fought for the access — basic right — access of girls to education,” she said... “Feminists in this country and in the West fought against that and won the battle,” she added. But now, Hirsi Ali said, feminism has taken that victory and squandered it. “What we are now doing with the victory, and I agree with you if you condemn that and I condemn whole-heartedly the trivial bullshit it is to go after a man who makes a scientific breakthrough and all that we as women — organized women — do is to fret about his shirt?” Hirsi Ali said, referring to the controversy generated by the shirt featuring cartoons of scantily-clad women worn by the scientist who helped land a robot on a comet. “We must reclaim and retake feminism from our fellow idiotic women.”
Hirsi Ali may not be alone in her views.

On December 1, Democrats will gather together in a last ditch effort to save Mary Landrieu's political career---but all the money in the world might not be able to save a race that many leftist groups have written off as a lost cause. The swanky fundraiser, headlined by Hillary Clinton, is sure to bring in a sizable chunk of cash, but it might not be a helpful optic for the embattled incumbent. Clinton headlined a rally for Landrieu days before the general election, and Landrieu still failed to rally enough voters to hit the 50% mark. In fact, it seems like Landrieu can do nothing right these days; her campaign is foundering, and even progressive strategists are looking at this runoff as a prime example of what not to do when your campaign is in trouble. From The Hill:
She's fallen back on an advertising strategy that seeks to portray her GOP opponent, Rep. Bill Cassidy (La.), as bumbling and incompetent. But nearly three weeks into their final faceoff, it is Cassidy who is ahead in the polls, and Democrats who are worried that Landrieu’s efforts are falling short. “It didn’t work before, and if all you have is Cassidy bumbling in a speech, then you’re reaching,” said Danny Ford, a Democratic lobbyist and former party official in the state. “If they had something else on him they would have played it already.” Bernie Pinsonat, an independent pollster and political consultant in Louisiana, called the ads “goofy” and said that they do nothing to alter the narrative in the state that Cassidy is bulldozing his way to the finish line. While another Democratic operative close to the race argued that Cassidy remains a relative unknown who can still be defined by the ads, nearly three weeks into their final faceoff, strategists say it’s the Republican who is running the more effective campaign.
Considering Bill Cassidy is currently polling almost 16 points ahead of Landrieu, I'd say the unnamed operative is right. Meanwhile, tea party groups and activists who worked hard to split the Republican vote in the general have joined Team Cassidy, as have volunteers brought in by the RNC and NRSC's joint grassroots effort. This is significant not just for Cassidy's race, but for races in the future.