Shared posts

02 Sep 18:22

Like They Used To

by submission

Author : C. J. Boudreau

The algae were there! In the deep permafrost. Turning up the magnification and refocusing the cam, he could see the nuclei. They were photosynthetic, the rare green color in the frozen soil. Perhaps hundreds of millions of years old. Mars was not dead! Arturo took several samples from the most populated areas. He sealed the case, and climbed back out of the ravine to the rover. He left the case in the car and went back for his remaining tools. He probably shouldn’t have been here alone but his time here was limited and he’d wanted badly to look at this site.

He was climbing out again, awkwardly, with the tools when the side of the ravine collapsed on him. He was lucky he didn’t damage his suit.

The fall back into the ravine stunned him. When he was able to appraise his condition he found himself buried. He tried his com unit and found it wasn’t working. His suit, tough, mostly carbon, told him that it was in otherwise good condition, all its heads up displays green. Most of its controls were voice op. A couple were chin switches in his helmet. A good thing, since he couldn’t move his hands. Just one foot. He ached from some bruises, but was otherwise unhurt. Someone would come looking for him soon and see the car, and his foot. His primary concern was oxygen. If he ran low, he didn’t like to think about it, but there was the Rescue Unit in his suit, Cold sleep. Not hibernation, but freezing.

He hadn’t been there long when the storm came up. Dust storms on Mars can be planet wide and last months. This one didn’t, but it was long enough. Within a few hours he and his rover were deeply buried in red dust. When his oxygen indicator showed a quarter hour left, he initiated the Rescue Unit and icy fluid roared in.

He woke cold and aching in a white room to see a pretty, but reed thin, young blonde woman leaning over him. She said “Don’t try to speak yet, just nod. Are you Doctor Arturo Hartwood?”

He nodded yes. It hurt. She turned to someone outside his field of vision and said excitedly what sounded like “Cee! Yeti Zim! Trooz!” To him, she said “Rest now, we’ll talk later.” Another woman in white, military uniform with a close fitting cap tapped something on his arm and he passed out.

Sometime later he awoke feeling somewhat better. The militaristic nurse came in, smiled at him, said something unintelligible, scanned him with a little handheld instrument and left. Then the blonde woman came in.

“Hello Doctor Hartwood, I am Dr. Enid Veeder. I’m honored to meet you.”

She’d an accent he couldn’t place.

“Hello Doctor. How long will I be here?

“I’m afraid I can’t tell you. We must ask the medics.”

“You’re not a medic?”

“No. I’m a linguist. I’m here because I speak your English.”

” No one here speaks English?”

“Not yours. You are a great celebrity. There is a statue of you in my hometown.”

“A statue to me?”

“Yes Doctor. I’m sorry your rescue took so long. They found your car and samples quickly but they couldn’t find you. Last Sixday, an aqueduct digging crew found you while checking for buried cables. Your discovery – oxygen producing native algae – made terraforming Mars practical. But your suit is amazing. It’s protected you, frozen in the permafrost, for two thousand years. They don’t make them like they used to.”

Discuss the Future: The 365 Tomorrows Forums
The 365 Tomorrows Free Podcast: Voices of Tomorrow
This is your future: Submit your stories to 365 Tomorrows

30 Aug 17:30

Phantom Limb

by submission

Author : Kate Runnels

“There,” said the doctor. “Try it now, agent Sasaki. The neural connection should be hooked in.”

Lia stared down at her cybernetic left arm, recently attached after a case went horribly wrong.

The murderer, after killing her last victim, sliced Lia’s arm, had nearly taken it off. If it hadn’t been for Ming, she’d be dead. It just didn’t feel like her limb, and yet her fingers clenched into a fist when she thought on it.

“Good.” The doctor beamed at her. “It’s responding well.”

Lia reached over with her organic right hand and felt along the seam that joined flesh to synthetic pseudo flesh material.

“That area should join and fuse together in the next few weeks. We’ll watch for any necrosis, but that shouldn’t happen. Things look good.”

Lia nodded at the doctor but her mind felt for the flesh that should be there, thinking it was there.

It wasn’t the same. It would never be the same.

Lia left the doctor’s office and went out onto the streets of Hong Kong, preoccupied- lost in her own thoughts: thoughts on the case; on her arm; on how close she had come to dying. She headed back toward the HK security agency she worked for, by routine alone. But pretty soon, she realized she was being followed. It was like an itch that wouldn’t leave and demanded attention. The person followed her.

Young, teenager, looked to be fully human without prosthetics. She turned into a coffee shop, and glanced over at him as she did so. He eyed her hungrily. No, not her, her arm. New prosthetics went for a premium on the black market.

She got her coffee and when she came out, he wasn’t in sight, but it didn’t take him long to drop on her tail. She kept walking through the streets of Hong Kong, heading in a roundabout way toward her office. She went toward the back of the building, and he came on eagerly, thinking her in his trap.

Around a corner and out of sight, she stopped and waited for him. He raced around, seeing her waiting too late to stop himself. About to run into her, he decided to tackle Lia. She swung her new left arm and it connected with his jaw.

She nimbly stepped out of the way as he hit the pavement, unconscious.

“Everything all right?” asked an Agent who had just stepped out of the building.

“Yeah. But I’ll need help taking him to lock up.”

The agent came over to help and asked, “Why’d he try to jump you?”

Lia raised her left arm. “New arm.”

“That’s right, you got cut up bad. How’s it working out?”

“Seems to be working out just fine.” Lia smiled as they hoisted the young man between them.

Discuss the Future: The 365 Tomorrows Forums
The 365 Tomorrows Free Podcast: Voices of Tomorrow
This is your future: Submit your stories to 365 Tomorrows

16 Aug 17:46

The Many Things Wrong With the Anti-Encryption Op-Ed in the New York Times

by Jenna McLaughlin

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. and his counterparts in Paris, London and Madrid took to the New York Times op-ed page Tuesday morning to pose a flawed argument against default encryption of mobile phones, a service being commercialized and implemented gradually by Apple and Google.

The op-ed misstated the extent of the obstacles to law enforcement, understating the many other ways officials bearing warrants can still collect the information they need or want — even when confronted with an encrypted, password-protected device.

The authors failed to acknowledge the value to normal people of protecting their private data from thieves, hackers and government dragnets.

And they demanded — in the name of the “safety of our communities” — a magical, mathematically impossible scenario in which communications are safeguarded from everyone except law enforcement.

Apple and Google are attempting to provide strong, reliable and user-friendly encrypted systems for their customers. A user who has installed iOS 8 on an iPhone automatically encrypts text messages, photos, contacts, call history and other sensitive data simply by using a passcode.

Android devices also include a system that encrypts downloaded files, application data, and other data with a PIN or passcode. But contrary to what the op-ed stated, that is not the default setting for most Android phones.

It’s true that when law enforcement asks for information that is encrypted with the user’s passcode, Apple and Google cannot actually deliver it. But that’s typically not the whole story.

For one: Apple, for instance, copies a lot of that data onto its own cloud servers during Wi-Fi backups, where the company can in fact access it and turn it over to law enforcement.

Plenty of other data is still available from the phone companies: SMS text messages, phone numbers called and phone calls received, and location information.

And then there’s the ability to break in. Responding to Tuesday’s op-ed, ACLU technologist Christopher Soghoian tweeted: “If law enforcement can’t hack the hundreds of millions of Android phones running out-of-date, vulnerable software, they’re not trying.”

Following the rollout of iOS 8, Lee Reiber, a cell phone forensics expert at AccessData, told Mashable that “As secure as the device can be, there’s always going to be some vulnerability that can be located and exploited.” Reiber said it’s “cat and mouse.”

The authors of the op-ed launched their argument by citing an Evanston murder investigation that they claimed was stymied by law enforcement’s inability to access the data on two phones that were found at the scene.

Unlike the laughably pathetic examples FBI Director James Comey cited in October in his argument against encryption of mobile devices, the Evanston case does actually appear to feature the rare combination of factors in which data on the phone might indeed have helped the investigation.

Ray C. Owens was shot and killed in his car in broad daylight in Evanston, Illinois, in June. Police found two phones near his body. They belonged to Owens — not the killer.

One was an iPhone 6 running on Apple’s iOS 8 operating system, the other a Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge running on Google’s Android operating system. When investigators served search warrants on Apple and Google to unlock the phones, the companies said they were unable to, because both had been password-protected.

According to Commander Joseph Dugan of the Evanston Police Department, investigators were able to obtain records of the calls to and from the phones, but those records did not prove useful. By contrast, interviews with people who knew Owens suggested that he communicated mainly through text messages — the kind that travel as encrypted data — and had made plans to meet someone shortly before he was shot.

The information on his phone was not backed up automatically on Apple’s servers — apparently because he didn’t use Wi-Fi, which backups require.

And the gun recovered two blocks away when a man fleeing police dropped it was not the gun that fired the fatal bullets, Dugan said.

So the Evanston police were stymied. “There doesn’t appear to be anything coming in the near future as far as charging anyone,” Dugan told The Intercept.

But Dugan also wasn’t as quick to lay the blame solely on the encrypted phones. “I don’t know if getting in there, getting the information, would solve the case,” he said, “but it definitely would give us more investigative leads to follow up on.”

The op-ed’s conclusion calls for an “appropriate balance between the marginal benefits of full-disk encryption and the need for local law enforcement to solve and prosecute crimes.”

But experts say there’s either a doorway in or there isn’t. And if there is, lots of other people, including criminals, can use it too.

Caption: Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. at a 2014 press conference.

The post The Many Things Wrong With the Anti-Encryption Op-Ed in the New York Times appeared first on The Intercept.

16 Aug 17:37

Democrats Continue to Delude Themselves About Obama’s Failed Guantánamo Vow

by Glenn Greenwald

As everyone knows, “closing Guantánamo” was a centerpiece of the 2008 Obama campaign. In the Senate and then in the presidential campaign, Obama repeatedly and eloquently railed against the core, defining evil of Guantánamo: indefinite detention.

On the Senate floor, Obama passionately intoned in 2006: “As a parent, I can also imagine the terror I would feel if one of my family members were rounded up in the middle of the night and sent to Guantánamo without even getting one chance to ask why they were being held and being able to prove their innocence.” During the 2008 campaign, he repeatedly denounced “the Bush Administration’s attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantánamo.”

In the seventh year of Obama’s presidency, Guantánamo notoriously remains open, leaving one of his central vows unfulfilled. That, in turn, means that Democratic partisans have to scrounge around for excuses to justify this failure, to cast blame on someone other than the president, lest his legacy be besmirched. They long ago settled on the claim that blame (as always) lies not with Obama but with Congressional Republicans, who imposed a series of legal restrictions that impeded the camp’s closing.

As I’ve documented many times over the last several years, that excuse, while true as far as it goes, does not remotely prove that Obama sought to fulfill his pledge. That’s because Obama’s plans never included an end to what he himself constantly described as the camp’s defining evil: indefinite detention. To the contrary, he explicitly demanded the right to continue to imprison Guantánamo detainees without charges or trial –– exactly what made Guantánamo so evil in the first place — based on the hideous new phrase “cannot be tried but too dangerous to release.” Obama simply wanted to indefinitely imprison them somewhere else.

In other words, Obama never sought to close Guantánamo in any meaningful sense but rather wanted to relocate it to a less symbolically upsetting location, with its defining injustice fully intact and, worse, institutionalized domestically. In that regard, his Guantánamo shell game was vintage Obama: He wanted to make a pretty, self-flattering symbolic gesture to get credit for “change” (I have closed Guantánamo) while not merely continuing but actually strengthening the abusive power that made it so odious in the first place.

All of this is worth emphasizing because the close-Guantánamo controversy is back in the news as the result of what the Washington Post today, citing anonymous U.S. officials, describes as “an internal disagreement over its most controversial provision — where to house detainees who will be brought to the United States for trial or indefinite detention.” The Post said that “as part of the plan, the administration had considered sending some of the 116 detainees remaining at the prison to either a top-security prison in Illinois or a naval facility in Charleston, S.C.” Most members of Congress who love to parade around as super-tough warriors claim to be petrified about imprisoning Terrorist super-villains in their states, even though one of the few things at which the U.S. still excels is building oppressive penal institutions.

But even Obama’s current Guantánamo plan — like all his previous ones — does not seek to end indefinite detention. It does the opposite: It insists on the right to continue to indefinitely imprison detainees, most of whom have already been kept in a cage for more than a decade with no charges or trial. In that regard, Obama — as has been true since the first day of his presidency — is not seeking to “close Guantánamo” but rather relocate it, as Human Rights Watch’s Ken Roth noted today:

The ACLU also made this point from the moment Obama first unveiled his “move Guantánamo” plan and Democratic partisans pretended it was a “close Guantánamo” plan.

As the ACLU’s Ben Wizner told me in an interview back in 2009, Obama’s Guantánamo plan — long before Congress took any action — was more likely to strengthen the camp’s scheme of indefinite detention than end it, just as Obama did with so many other once-controversial Bush/Cheney War on Terror policies:

It may to serve to enshrine into law the very departures from the law that the Bush administration led us on, and that we all criticized so much. And I’ll elaborate on that. But that’s really my initial reaction to it; that what President Obama was talking about yesterday is making permanent some of the worst features of the Guantanámo regime. He may be shutting down the prison on that camp, but what’s worse is he may be importing some of those legal principles into our own legal system, where they’ll do great harm for a long time.

Obama-excusing Democrats also love to point out that even Democratic Senators such as Russ Feingold and Bernie Sanders voted for legislation blocking Obama’s Guantánamo plan, implying that even the Senate’s most liberal members wanted Gitmo to remain open. But these Obama advocates never mention that those votes were based on their concerns about Obama’s desire to simply relocate the camp to U.S. soil and thus strengthen its core injustice. And all of that is to say nothing of all the limits on closing Guantánamo, which Obama himself (not the Republicans) imposed.

In sum, it’s true that Congress impeded Obama’s Guantánamo plan. But it’s misleading in the extreme to pretend that Obama’s plan was ever about ending the core injustice of that camp. If anything, Obama’s plan would have, and if it succeeds still will, institutionalize and strengthen the Bush/Cheney scheme of indefinite detention: the very same beyond-the-law framework that made them want to open the camp, and made it a symbol of injustice around the world, in the first place.

The post Democrats Continue to Delude Themselves About Obama’s Failed Guantánamo Vow appeared first on The Intercept.

16 Aug 04:06

MeFi: Bulldog + box

by mudpuppie
Scientifically minded bulldog seeks to answer the age-old question: "Is it possible to walk around holding a box in front of your face?"

Answer: Not really.

Trigger warning: Filmed in portrait mode.
14 Aug 17:05

If you’ve been waiting to play Fallout Shelter on Android, today’s the day you can finally get it.

by Evan Narcisse

If you’ve been waiting to play Fallout Shelter on Android, today’s the day you can finally get it. You can grab it on the Google Play store.


Contact the author at evan@kotaku.com.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

14 Aug 16:27

Hillary Clinton on the Sanctity of Protecting Classified Information

by Glenn Greenwald

It turns out that at least two of the emails which traversed Hillary Clinton’s personal email account and server were “top secret,” according to the inspector general for the Intelligence Community as reported by McClatchy. To describe that as reckless is an understatement given that, as AP notes, “There is no evidence she used encryption to shield the emails or her personal server from foreign intelligence services or other potentially prying eyes.” The FBI has now taken possession of that server.

When it comes to low-level government employees with no power, the Obama administration has purposely prosecuted them as harshly as possible to the point of vindictiveness: It has notoriously prosecuted more individuals under the Espionage Act of 1917 for improperly handling classified information than all previous administrations combined. 

NSA whistleblower Tom Drake, for instance, faced years in prison, and ultimately had his career destroyed, based on the Obama DOJ’s claims that he “mishandled” classified information (it included information that was not formally classified at the time but was retroactively decreed to be such). Less than two weeks ago, “a Naval reservist was convicted and sentenced for mishandling classified military materials” despite no “evidence he intended to distribute them.” Last year, a Naval officer was convicted of mishandling classified information also in the absence of any intent to distribute it.

In the light of these new Clinton revelations, the very same people who spent years justifying this obsessive assault are now scampering for reasons why a huge exception should be made for the Democratic Party front-runner. Fascinatingly, one of the most vocal defenders of this Obama DOJ record of persecution has been Hillary Clinton herself.

In December 2011, Chelsea Manning’s court-martial was set to begin. None of the documents at issue in that prosecution was “top secret,” unlike the documents found on Hillary Clinton’s server. Nonetheless, the then-secretary of state convened a press conference to denounce Manning and defend the prosecution. This is what she said:

If his case goes to trial and he is convicted, Manning could face life in prison. The government has said it would not seek the death penalty.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called Manning’s alleged actions damaging and unfortunate in remarks to reporters at the State Department on Thursday.

“I think that in an age where so much information is flying through cyberspace, we all have to be aware of the fact that some information which is sensitive, which does affect the security of individuals and relationships, deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so,” Clinton said.

Manning was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison. At the time, the only thing Hillary Clinton had to say about that was to issue a sermon about how classified information “deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so” because it “affect[s] the security of individuals and relationships.”

That was during the time that she had covertly installed a non-government server and was using it and a personal email account to receive classified and, apparently, even top-secret information. While there’s no evidence she herself placed those documents on the server or sent them herself, it is her use of a personal server and email account that — quite predictably — caused the vulnerability.

It goes without saying that the U.S. government wildly overclassifies almost everything it touches, even the most benign information. As former CIA and NSA Director Michael Hayden said in 2010, “Everything’s secret. I mean, I got an email saying ‘Merry Christmas.’ It carried a top secret NSA classification marking.”

For that reason, almost all of these prosecutions for mishandling classified information have been wildly overzealous, way out of proportion to any harm they caused or could have caused, certainly out of proportion to the actual wrongdoing.

But that’s an argument that Hillary Clinton never uttered in order to object as people’s lives and careers were destroyed and they were hauled off to prison. To the contrary, she more often than not defended it, using rationale that, as it turns out, condemned herself and her own behavior at least as much as those whose persecution she was defending.

The post Hillary Clinton on the Sanctity of Protecting Classified Information appeared first on The Intercept.

14 Aug 16:22

Hunger-Striking Detainee Tests Obama’s Will to Close Guantánamo

by Murtaza Hussain

Since the age of 23, Tariq Ba-Odah has been detained at the U.S. prison facility at Guantánamo Bay. Never charged with a crime, Ba-Odah went on hunger strike eight years ago to protest his indefinite detention, as well as the brutal treatment he is alleged to have suffered at the hands of his captors.

Now a 36-year-old man, Ba-Odah weighs less than 75 pounds. Despite having been cleared for release by a multi-agency review board in 2009, he remains behind bars with his release still a subject of legal wrangling by the Obama administration. In response to his rapidly deteriorating physical condition, his lawyers recently filed a petition for habeas corpus, citing the U.S. government’s legal obligations to free seriously ill prisoners.

Last week, Justice Department lawyers asked for an extension in the deadline to respond to his habeas filing. A New York Times article published at the time cited an interagency conflict between the State Department and Department of Defense as contributing to Ba-Odah’s continued legal predicament. An article published Monday by the Daily Beast, citing anonymous White House sources, purported to explain the nature of this dispute further, suggesting that Defense Secretary Ash Carter is refusing to sign release orders for the 52 Gitmo prisoners who have been cleared for repatriation or resettlement, not wanting to take responsibility for their possible future actions.

Both the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense declined to comment to The Intercept on the specifics of Ba-Odah’s case, while the DoD stated, “We are taking all practicable steps to reduce the detainee population at Guantánamo. … Unfortunately, this process can be slowed unnecessarily by burdensome legislative provisions.”

Omar Farah, a lawyer with the Center for Constitutional Rights, which is representing Ba-Odah, says that the responsibility for his continued incarceration lies with President Obama. “For so long the president has complained that Congress has tied his hands on Guantánamo, but this is a case where he could directly and unilaterally instruct the Department of Justice to not contest Ba-Odah’s habeas petition and he has refused to do it,” Farah says. “We will know how serious Obama is on Friday when the Department of Justice either agrees not to contest Ba-Odah’s case, or fights on Obama’s behalf to hold him at Guantánamo even longer despite his desperate condition.”

The Pentagon Monday said that it was planning to submit a proposal for the closure of Guantánamo for congressional approval, following the August recess. Any such proposal, however, would have to be predicated on rapidly releasing prisoners, like Ba-Odah, who have already been cleared for release. The dispute over Ba-Odah calls into question this plan.

The heart of the dispute in Ba-Odah’s case is believed to be his physical deterioration, which is the result of a hunger strike. Like several other Guantánamo prisoners, Ba-Odah has refused to eat or drink, in protest of his continued indefinite detention. In response, the government has for years subjected him to a force-feeding procedure that it maintains is both healthy and medically appropriate. The government has also fought tenaciously to keep it from public scrutiny.

Last month, a frustrated judge ordered the government to release video footage of the feeding sessions, characterizing repeated government appeals on this issue as “frivolous.”

There is precedent for releasing prisoners in grave medical condition. In 2013, Ibrahim Othman Ibrahim Idris was released from Guantánamo on medical grounds, after the government chose not to oppose a habeas petition by his lawyers that cited his “severe long-term mental illness and physical illness.” However, to do the same in Ba-Odah’s case would amount to an admission by the government that its controversial force-feeding program is ineffective at keeping hunger-striking prisoners in proper physical health. Despite force-feeding Ba-Odah for years, he is wasting away, with doctors stating that his body is cannibalizing its own internal organs for sustenance.

Farah says that on his last visit to see him in July, Ba-Odah was in “disastrous” physical condition, and that continued government contestation of his habeas petition could end up being tantamount to a death sentence. “The government has maintained that it can maintain the health of hunger-striking prisoners by force-feeding them, something that Ba-Odah’s condition clearly disproves,” Farah says. “His case in particular brings to light some of the darkest failings of Guantánamo.”

Caption: U.S. Army Military Police escort a detainee to his cell, Camp X-Ray.

The post Hunger-Striking Detainee Tests Obama’s Will to Close Guantánamo appeared first on The Intercept.

14 Aug 16:17

Jeb Bush, Hosted By Defense Contractor-Backed Group, Calls Iraq War “A Pretty Good Deal”

by Lee Fang

Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said today that the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein was a “pretty good deal.”

Bush was speaking at an event sponsored by Americans for Peace, Prosperity and Security (APPS), a group formed and backed by a number of people associated with major defense contractors.

Video of Bush’s remark was posted online by an attendee of the event:

According to journalist Alan He, Bush also criticized efforts to reform the National Security Agency’s dragnet metadata surveillance program, telling the audience that it was a “mistake to repeal the metadata provisions of the Patriot Act.”

As The Intercept previously reported, the APPS is advised by Raytheon’s Stephen Hadley, BAE Systems’ Rich Ashooh, former SAIC chief executive Walt Havenstein, among other defense contractors and defense industry lobbyists. APPS was formed earlier this year as a pressure group to “help elect a president who supports American engagement and a strong foreign policy.”

APPS, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, does not disclose its donor information. The chairman of the group, former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., a hawkish politician who has called for greater U.S. military involvement in a number of conflicts around the world, now works for a number of private interests, though he has refused to disclose them.

Costs associated with the war in Iraq, including medical treatment for war veterans, could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next decade, according to a study by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University. The war killed at least 134,000 Iraqi civillians, as well as nearly 8,000 U.S. forces and contractors, according to the study.

The period following 9/11, including the war in Iraq, has been a boon for the defense contracting industry. From 2001 through 2010, the stock prices of major defense firms surged 67 percent as the U.S. increased defense spending to manage the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well new homeland security spending.

The post Jeb Bush, Hosted By Defense Contractor-Backed Group, Calls Iraq War “A Pretty Good Deal” appeared first on The Intercept.

14 Aug 04:25

Anatomy of a Melee Fox

by Brad
Eb0
14 Aug 03:10

Twitch Goes Too Far, Tries To Play Dark Souls

by Mark Serrels

Twitch Goes Too Far, Tries To Play Dark Souls

Twitch famously played through Pokemon. And Metal Gear. But that’s given them false confidence. The hive mind has grown drunk on power.

They think they can beat Dark Souls. They can’t. Surely they can’t. They’ve gone too far this time.

Twitch Goes Too Far, Tries To Play Dark Souls

Advertisement

But holy hell, they’re going to try. Seriously, if they can get past the first boss I’ll be absolutely amazed.

I’ve been watching it for the last 15 minutes or so. They accidentally went into the settings and got lost. That was awkward. Now they’re trying to create a character. His name is ‘otwasd’.

[embedded content]

Okay, it looks like they’ve accidentally chosen the cleric class. Oh dear.

This is unmissable. This is must see TV. Can’t wait to see how it plays out. It’s not possible. They’re struggling with the menu. How in the hell are they gonna beat Ornstein & Smough?


This post originally on Kotaku Australia, where Mark Serrels is the Editor. You can follow him onTwitter if you’re into that sort of thing.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

13 Aug 14:51

Episode 1235: Recast

Bewarethewumpus

Huh, I always thought it was a rock too.

Episode 1235: Recast

We thought Luke threw a rock, right up to the point where I started getting screengrabs to make this strip. Turns out what he throws at the door control is a skull! Who knew?

See, it's always cool to have skulls around as random dungeon dressing.

12 Aug 22:41

Chelsea Manning threatened with 'indefinite solitary confinement' for expired toothpaste and asking for a lawyer

by Trevor Timm
chelsea

Whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who is currently serving an unjust thirty-five year jail sentence and who has already been tortured under US military supervision, is now being threatened with "indefinite solitary confinement" for alleged infractions that are so minor it's actually hard to believe.

Our friends at Fight to the Future have created a petition where you can sign on to a letter condemning the US Army's treatment of Chelsea.

According to the Army, Chelsea swept food onto the floor in the prison mess hall (unclear if it was an accident or on purpose). Then, when pulled aside about the incident by a corrections officer afterwards, she said, among other things, "I want a lawyer." Afterwards, prison officials found "prohibited" books and magazines in her cell, including the now famous Vanity Fair with Caitlyn Jenner on the cover. She was also charged with having "expired toothpaste" in her possession. For this, she faces "indefinite solitary confinement."

This may sound like an exaggeration, but it's not. Below are the actual charges, word for word, from the Army.

manning_charges51

Solitary confinement, as even Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy recently wrote, is a barbaric punishment that can drive prisoners mad—yet thousands of prisoners are subject to it in the United States per year. As Fight to the Future states, even if these charges against Manning are 100% true, it is no reason to throw a person in solitary confinement for an indefinite period and is a violation of anyone's human rights - whether they are a whistleblower or anyone else.

It should go without saying that the Army should drop these frivolous charges immediately.

We are taking donations to Chelsea Manning's legal fund as she tries to fight her conviction under the Espionage Act. You can donate here.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

12 Aug 15:38

Oracle security chief to customers: Stop checking our code for vulnerabilities [Updated]

by Sean Gallagher

Oracle's chief security officer is tired of customers performing their own security tests on Oracle software, and she's not going to take it anymore. That was the message of a post she made to her corporate blog on August 10—a post that has since been taken down.

Perhaps thinking that all the security researchers in the world were busy recovering from Black Hat and DEF CON and would be somehow more pliant to her earnest message, Mary Ann Davidson wrote a stern message to customers entitled "No, You Really Can't" (here in Google's Web cache; it's also been reproduced on SecLists.org in the event that Oracle gets Google to remove the cached copy). Her message: stop scanning Oracle's code for vulnerabilities or we will come after you. "I’ve been writing a lot of letters to customers that start with 'hi, howzit, aloha'," Davidson wrote, "but end with 'please comply with your license agreement and stop reverse engineering our code, already.'"

Davidson scolded customers who performed their own security analyses of code, calling it reverse engineering and a violation of Oracle's software licensing. She said, "Even if you want to have reasonable certainty that suppliers take reasonable care in how they build their products—and there is so much more to assurance than running a scanning tool—there are a lot of things a customer can do like, gosh, actually talking to suppliers about their assurance programs or checking certifications for products for which there are Good Housekeeping seals for (or “good code” seals) like Common Criteria certifications or FIPS-140 certifications."

Read 8 remaining paragraphs | Comments

12 Aug 14:55

Japanese Fan Comics Could Die Under New Trade Deal

by Brian Ashcraft

Japanese Fan Comics Could Die Under New Trade Deal

“Doujinshi” (同人誌) is Japanese for fan-created, self-published comics, magazines, and novels. While Japan has strict copyright laws, doujinshi tend to get a free pass and flourish. A new trade agreement could change that forever.

Doujinshi is a proving ground for new artists, who can create a name for themselves through their self-published works and make the leap from amateur to pro. The country’s biggest geek event, Comiket, is centered around doujinshi. Fans line up to buy independently produced parodies of famous manga and starring popular characters.

Copyright holders typically turn a blind eye to doujinshi, knowing it’s where future manga artists often get their start. But under the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), that still might not stop the police from going after doujinshi creators for violating copyright law.

Advertisement

TPP is proposed trade deal with twelve countries possibly participating, including the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Thailand, Australia, and Colombia, among others. China is currently not part of the TPP negotiations.

As The Yomiuri Shimbun explains, current Japanese copyright law dictates that violations can only be investigated once the copyright holder files a complaint. No complaint means no investigation.

TPP, however, aims to streamline the process so that the copyright holder does not have to file. A third party can report copyright violations. The reason, The Yomiuri Shimbun notes, is that U.S. companies often experience copyright violations and this TPP provision would combat those.

The rub is that by giving third parties the ability to report copyright violations, fans or rival doujinshi creators could start ratting people out to the authorities. See the below image, via The Yomiuri Shimbun:

Japanese Fan Comics Could Die Under New Trade Deal

According to The Yomiuri Shimbun, a person involved in the TPP negotiations said that the copyright provision will allow for a degree of parody.

“If creators can be prosecuted without complaints from rights holders, it could lead to some kind of snitching battle between fans,” said manga artist Ken Akamatsu, who started out in doujinshi. “Places for people to share their work will also disappear.”

Top photo: Keith Tsuji / Stringer | Getty

To contact the author of this post, write to bashcraftATkotaku.com or find him on Twitter@Brian_Ashcraft.


Kotaku East is your slice of Asian internet culture, bringing you the latest talking points from Japan, Korea, China and beyond. Tune in every morning from 4am to 8am.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

12 Aug 00:02

US lobbying for TPP to lock up clinical trial data

by Cory Doctorow


Copyright only extends to creative works, not facts, meaning that clinical trial data (and other data sources) are in the public domain as soon as they're published -- unless governments create special "sui generis" rights to scientific research data.

One of the key issues holding up the negotiations over the secretive Trans Pacific Partnership is "data exclusivity" in which the US Trade Rep is demanding that its powerful biologics industry (which produces medicines from living organisms) gets 12 years' worth of exclusive rights to use and publish clinical research data (for comparison, the first sui generis rights to data endured for six months).

This despite the fact that the Obama administration -- for whom the US Trade Rep works -- has been trying to shorten the monopoly over biologics trial data to seven years.

As Glyn Moody writes at Techdirt: "what clinical trials produce is safety data about a drug, which is simply a certain kind of scientific fact concerning a particular complex compound, as unchanging as all its other features. It is not something that depends on the ingenuity of the person measuring it, because it represents intrinsic information about a substance. Granting data exclusivity is thus nothing less than giving a monopoly on knowledge itself, since it forbids any other company from being able to use that newly-established scientific fact."

Eight years of data exclusivity won’t be an appealing option for any of the other TPP countries, with the exception of Japan and Canada, which already allow for eight years. New Zealand’s trade minister recently faced outrage at home over admissions that the cost of medicines may be expected to increase after the agreement. The country’s opposition, also Labor, has declared it won’t support a deal that raises the costs of medicines.

The US stance itself is contradictory as the Obama administration has been trying to reduce the exclusivity period for biologics to seven years, to speed up the availability of cheaper alternatives and save an estimated US$16 billion in the next decade.

It seems clear to everyone except US negotiators – and biopharmaceutical industry lobbyists – that the demand for extending data exclusivity for biologics needs to be dropped if the TPP is to be finalised.

How the battle over biologics helped stall the Trans Pacific Partnership [Deborah Gleeson & Ruth Lopert/The Conversation]

(via Techdirt)

(Image: data.path Ryoji.Ikeda - 4, r2hox, CC-BY-SA)

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

11 Aug 23:59

"I Put on My Robe and Wizard Hat"

by Don
Bewarethewumpus

NSFW, I guess.

924

Need some tips on how to properly cyber? Bloodninja has you covered.

11 Aug 05:28

Larry Lessig considers running for the Democratic presidential nomination

by Cory Doctorow
Bewarethewumpus

I'd vote for him.

He'll be a "referendum candidate": if elected, he'll immediately pass campaign-finance reform, then resign.

Specifically, he'll pass the "Citizen Equality Act," which increases access to voting, shifts to citizen-funded elections, and de-gerrymanders the Congressional districts.

By running as a "referendum candidate" who'll do just one thing, then resign, Lessig is paving the way for Republicans who're disgruntled at electoral corruption (including Tea Party members) to vote Democrat for the purpose of changing, all at once, how government works.

He's soliciting donations, and aiming to raise $1M by Labor Day, or he'll scrap the project and return everyone's money.

The Citizen Equality Act is presented here as a template for three fundamental reforms that must happen if we are to have equal citizens. We are presenting this package now, pointing to the proposed legislative source for each element. If the campaign is launched after Labor Day, then in the fall, we will crowdsource a process to complete the details of this reform, and turn it into proposed legislation by January 1. At this point, you should read the act as embracing at a minimum the reforms included within the source for each element:

Equal Right to Vote
We must have a system that guarantees a meaningfully equal freedom to vote. To achieve that, we must at a minimum enact the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015 and the Voter Empowerment Act of 2015. We should as well add automatic registration, and shift election day to a national holiday.

Equal Representation
Equal citizens must have equal representation in Congress. That means, districts must be drawn, and election systems structured, so as to give each citizen as close to equal political influence as possible. FairVote has offered the most comprehensive solution to achieve this equality. At a minimum, the Citizen Equality Act would incorporate their proposed “Ranked Choice Voting Act,” which ends political gerrymandering and creates multi-member districts with ranked choice voting for Congress.

Citizen Funded Elections
A core corruption of our political system is the concentration of funders of political campaigns. That concentration creates extraordinary inequality. The Citizen Equal Act would end that inequality, at a minimum by adopting a campaign funding proposal that is a hybrid between John Sarbanes’ Government by the People Act, and Represent.US’s “American Anti-Corruption Act.” That hybrid would give every voter a voucher to contribute to fund congressional and presidential campaigns; it would provide matching funds for small-dollar contributions to congressional and presidential campaigns. And it would add effective new limits to restrict the revolving door between government service and work as a lobbyist.

Lessig 2016 | Referendum For Citizen Equality

(Thanks, Brian!)

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

11 Aug 00:52

The Mother Of All GTA V Crashes

by Luke Plunkett

The Mother Of All GTA V Crashes

When Hoosker Don’t crashed his bike playing GTA V, he probably figured—as the opening seconds of this video suggest—that he’d just get up and get another vehicle. No big deal. Oh, how wrong he was.

Before too long, the game’s driving AI has...had some problems.

Advertisement

By 1:50 it’s a warzone.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

10 Aug 19:12

Kansas officials stonewall mathematician investigating voting machine "sabotage"

by Cory Doctorow


Wichita State University's Beth Clarkson (who is also chief statistician of WSU's National Institute for Aviation Research) discovered "odd patterns" in Kansas electoral voting records, so she requested public docs to help her get to the bottom of things -- requests that state officials ignored, dodged, and stalled.

Clarkson's analysis of results from November 2014's election indicated that some machines had been "sabotaged," so she requested the suspect machines' paper-audit tapes (which do not record how each voter voted, merely timestamped votes with associated metadata); the election officials of Sedgwick County told her she'd have to sue them to gain access to them.

The voting machines that Sedgwick County uses have a paper record of the votes, known as Real Time Voting Machine Paper Tapes, which similar machines in Kansas and around the country do not have. Because the software is proprietary, even elections officials can’t examine it and postelection audits can’t be done, according to Pamela Smith, president of Verified Voting Foundation, a nonprofit agency whose mission is to safeguard elections in the digital age.

Clarkson asked Sedgwick County to do a recount in 2013 but the time to file had expired. She then filed an open records request, but officials refused to provide the requested documents. She filed a lawsuit but the judge said the paper records were ballots, even though they didn’t identify the voter, and thus were not subject to the state’s open records law.

Wichita State mathematician says Kansas voting machines need audit [AP/Wichita Eagle]

(Image: Sedgwick County Election Office)

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

10 Aug 16:55

Modders Say Rockstar Banned Them For Making An Alternative To GTA Online

by Evan Narcisse

Modders Say Rockstar Banned Them For Making An Alternative To GTA Online

Dissatisfied with the gameplay of the PC version of GTA Online, a group of modders built a service that let them host custom multiplayer variants. Now, they’re finding themselves permanently blocked from playing Grand Theft Auto V and other games published by GTA maker Rockstar.

A small cohort of PC players didn’t like the online experience they were getting with the vanilla version of GTA Online. So they made something different, a mod that lets players connect via dedicated servers. In the words of its creators, FiveM is a “a planned multiplayer modification for Grand Theft Auto V which, much in the lines of popular modifications in the past, offers an advanced multiplayer environment for people to play on dedicated servers with user-made game modes.” Here’s how it looked back in May:

Advertisement

Over on the Grand Theft Auto V PC sub-Reddit, user qaisjp recounts how he and other GTA V PC players have had their Rockstar Social Club accounts banned, presumably because of their affiliation with FiveM:

It seems that NTAuthority and TheDeadlyDutchi were also banned. Dutchi has used mods before (but a very long time ago) and (as far as I know) NTA has never used single player mods (besides creating FiveM, of course). I found this out today, not too long before I started writing this post.

I am not a developer of FiveM, I am just the mere moderator of the subreddit, but yes, I have some sort of affiliation with the mod. I was skeptical that we were banned (screenshot) for being contributors (in some way) to the FiveM project.

NTAuthority and TheDeadlyDutchi was banned on Thursday as well... surprise surprise. I asked Dutchi what time he got the email... 1:52am. We were banned within two minutes of each other. It was certainly a manual ban. This completely rules out the possibility that I was banned for single player mods - the good news is that Rockstar doesn’t seem to be banning people for just using single player mods. The bad news is that Rockstar is trying to stifle the modding community.

PC players need to log into Rockstar Social Club to play any part of GTA V, so qaisjp and the other users have effectively been barred from accessing that game, as well as any others linked to those Social Club accounts.

When Grand Theft Auto V’s PC version came out a few months ago, Rockstar Games came out broadly in support of single-player mods and stated that they didn’t want modders to screw with the game’s online component:

We have always appreciated the creative efforts of the PC modding community and we still fondly remember the awesome zombie invasion mod and original GTA map mod for GTAIV PC among many other classics. To be clear, the modding policy in our license has not changed and is the same as for GTAIV. Recent updates to GTAV PC had an unintended effect of making unplayable certain single player modifications. This was not intentional, no one has been banned for using single player modifications, and you should not worry about being banned or being relegated to the cheater pool just for using single player PC mods. Our primary focus is on protecting GTA Online against modifications that could give players an unfair advantage, disrupt gameplay, or cause griefing.


Many of the angrier posters in the Reddit thread say that there’s a disconnect between Rockstar’s previous statement and current policing action because FiveM doesn’t connect to or interact with GTA Online. Kotaku has contacted Rockstar for comment on this sotory and will update this post if they respond.


Contact the author at evan@kotaku.com.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

10 Aug 14:58

Going Bankrupt Like Trump Did Is for High Rollers, Not Homeowners

by Dan Froomkin

Donald Trump took advantage of the nation’s bankruptcy laws four times in the last 24 years, and if ordinary Americans in this country were allowed to do the same, the country would be in markedly better shape economically, with a far stronger post-recession recovery.

Asked during Thursday night’s Republican presidential debate whether his four corporate bankruptcies were a black mark on his economic stewardship, Trump sounded a bit defensive. “I have never gone bankrupt,” he said, making a distinction between a personal and a corporate bankruptcy, and anyway it was only four times among “thousands” of deals.

But he said flatly: “I have used the laws of this country just like the greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the laws of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, for myself, for my employees, for my family, et cetera.”

Trump is absolutely correct. Every lending contract in America has the potential for bankruptcy lurking in the background. Lenders — who as Trump said “aren’t babies” but “total killers” — are sophisticated enough to know about this option when they lend people money. In fact, they not only assume the risk of bankruptcy, but price it into the deal when they lend Donald Trump or anyone else money.

Morals do not enter into the equation. No lender thinks less of Donald Trump for the using the bankruptcy process. They simply take their losses and move on.

In fact, only one group gets hit with this stigma. Only one group of people in America are denied this fully legal, fully rational, fully American opportunity to wipe the slate clean, and decried as deadbeats for even thinking about it: The homeowner of a primary residence, who by law cannot get mortgage debt discharged in bankruptcy.

During the foreclosure crisis, banks and their allies savaged homeowners who “walked away” from mortgage debt. They equated defaulting on payments with failing the duties of citizenship. They warned of “strategic defaults” by conniving homeowners who would deliberately stiff lenders to get a loan modification.

In reality, the highest-profile strategic default of the foreclosure crisis came from the leaders of the Mortgage Bankers Association, a trade group for the lending industry, who walked away from their 10-story headquarters in Washington. Just a few months earlier, their spokesperson argued that borrowers had to keep paying. “What about the message they will send to their family and their kids and their friends” if they defaulted, the spokesman asked. Indeed.

The Tea Party, the very movement whose energy Trump has tapped into so successfully, was founded on the principle of not having to “subsidize the loser’s mortgages.”

Businesspeople defaulting on each other never raised this kind of ire: only if ordinary people wanted to allocate losses in the greatest crisis since the Depression onto the banks who caused it did the rage emerge.

When Congress made an effort to change the bankruptcy laws, these same banks howled in protest. Members of the Obama administration, despite expressing support for the idea of allowing judges to modify primary mortgages during the 2008 campaign, decided to sit on their hands and let senators drowning in bank cash kill the idea, leading Sen. Dick Durbin to pronounce about Congress that the banks “frankly own the place.”

In fact, everyone would have benefited from relieving primary mortgage debt, the absence of which led to at least 6 million foreclosures. Economists Amir Sufi and Atif Mian have shown how the post-recession recovery was markedly slower because of the failure to discharge debt, which depressed consumer spending. This huge policy mistake created an unnecessary drag on the economy and made miserable the lives of millions, all so banks didn’t have to bear some of the pain of the post-housing bubble fallout.

Millions of lives were ruined by that asymmetry. When politicians rigged the bankruptcy game against ordinary people and refused to change it, many Americans felt cheated and used. Many turned against politicians who sell hope and lead them only to misery. Many get lured into thinking a non-politician armed with bumper stickers and snake oil, like Donald Trump, offers a refreshing change of pace.

If politicians didn’t make one set of rules for real estate tycoons and another for people who were fraudulently sold homes they couldn’t afford, maybe the public would trust them more. Maybe they wouldn’t look anywhere and everywhere else for leadership.

The post Going Bankrupt Like Trump Did Is for High Rollers, Not Homeowners appeared first on The Intercept.

10 Aug 14:32

Crayolas of the 1990s: World Wide Web Edition

by Brad
F93
09 Aug 16:16

Body cam captures cop shooting motorist in head, murder charges follow

by David Kravets
Warning: Graphic footage.

A Cincinnati county prosecutor released body cam footage of a police officer's "senseless" shooting of a motorist in the head—footage that paved the way for the University of Cincinnati police officer's murder indictment Wednesday.

Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters said Officer Ray Tensing "purposely killed" a 43-year-old motorist named Samuel DuBose on July 19. The officer, whom the university said had jurisdiction on the streets adjacent to the school, pulled over the motorist because the vehicle he was driving did not have a front license plate.

"I’ve been doing this for 30 years," Deters told a news conference. "This is the most asinine act I've ever seen a police officer make, totally unwarranted." The county prosecutor added that Tensing "purposely killed him."

Read 12 remaining paragraphs | Comments

09 Aug 14:34

No girl wins: three ways women unlearn their love of video games

by Juliet Kahn

“Video games are a boy thing,” my sister explains to me. “I feel like it’s a known fact. GameStop is a boy store. The commercials are for boys. It’s just something everyone knows.”

My sister is 17. She runs a One Direction fan Twitter with 10,000 followers. She plans to major in fashion marketing. She’s a cheerleader. She is as close as anyone can get to what gaming’s sweaty fever dreams envision, desire, and shame as "Girl."

Like me, she knows from personal experience that girls play video games, and would hotly defend it if challenged. But a second tenet holds sway, as contrary as it is simultaneous: video games are for boys. The video games we’ve played don’t count. They’re concessions, scraps, snatches at the lucrative attention of little girls. It's not that my sister and I don’t like real games; it's that the games we like aren’t real.

I ask about Style Savvy, Cooking Mama, Super Princess Peach—games she played without fanfare, without self-doubt, surrounded by torn-out Tiger Beat posters. Weren’t those fun? Didn’t she spend hours with friends, swapping Nintendogs? Doesn’t she remember the giggly hours she devoted to Club Penguin?

“Oh yeah, those were fun,” she says. “I don’t know. Maybe I didn’t grow out of video games. Maybe video games just didn’t grow up with me.”

It would be easy to cast my sister and I as opposites. I received a book of essays on The Scarlet Letter for my 16th birthday. She received Our Moment, the One Direction branded fragrance. I went to a college where I devoted myself to post-war politics and anime screenings. She dreams of a higher education experience full of tailgating and adorably slouched cardigans. A teen movie would have a field day: she, the blue-eyed beauty in a LOVE PINK hoodie, blinking blankly as she holds an Xbox controller upside down. I, the frizz-headed harpy, explaining that my half-elf duchess of darkness uses water spells, not fire.

But I nod in agreement. “Yeah. Same.” <pI have a Steam account. I have a favorite Soul Calibur title. But fundamentally, we feel the same: not gamers, not welcome, and not interested in most of what we see at GameStop. Those years we spent swapping DS cartridges were, for the both of us, our only experience of games as uncomplicated fun. Then we grew up, and an avalanche of qualifiers buried us.

We’re not gamers. We don’t play real games. We should stay out. My proximity to nerdhood, her proximity to the mainstream—neither matters. Video games did not grow up with us; video games did not grow up for us.

Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V

I press my sister to explain how she knows games are a “boy thing,” how everyone “just knows this.” “I don’t know,” she answers tentatively. “Y’know, the commercials, and... everything. All of it. You know?” It’s difficult to explain why and how she just knows, in part because parsing the roots of any sociological phenomenon is difficult, but also because it’s just such an immutable fact for us.

For girls who do not fight to be a part of the club, who are not conversant in that world of quarter-circles and Konami codes, it’s as codified as all the other gendered tenets of our lives. Video games aren’t for us the way football and finance aren’t for us: sure, there are girls who break in, and we applaud them for it at a comfortable distance. But where there is a welcome mat rolled out for men, there is only a bloodied stretch of briar for women. And it’s just not something we have it in us to brave.

There are girls and women who do not feel this way. Which is not to say they feel at ease in gaming, but they at least demanded a space there, and knew it to be theirs. I understand this: it’s how I feel towards the world of comic books, where I am comfortably ensconced as both a fan and critic. I knew I was not welcome, but I fought for my right to be present, to master the lingo, to insist on entering the conversation. It was a truth I knew in my bones: comics were mine, and no jumped-up fanboy who’d never even heard of Jackie Ormes could obscure my truth.

When it comes to gaming, however, I am bereft of such confidence. I shrug and sound very much like the dozens of women I have known who protest that their love of Raina Telgemeier and Archie Double Digests does not make them a real fan. I don’t get games, I argue. Don’t pass me the controller, I’ll only embarrass myself. It’s not my turf. It’s not for me. I’m a girl, ok?

This is our reality, and that of so many women, one that is silent, vast, yet largely unremarked upon wherever gaming is discussed. How did we learn this, I ask her again. How did our friends learn it? How did our mother? How do so many women, even today, learn that video games are not for them?

“It’s everything,” she says. There is a pause. “And everyone knows it. I mean, there are girls who game. But everyone knows it’s not for them. But... yeah, it’s everything.” Over the following hour, we dissect “everything” as best we can. We find that, broadly speaking, there are three forces at work in teaching girls that video games are not for them.

disqualification

The first force is disqualification: It takes into account the fact that girls almost certainly have played video games, but then carefully categorizes the games they're most likely to play as illegitimate. It’s not hard to find this attitude wherever games are discussed. A mystery thriller like Her Story, a narrative exploration game like Gone Home, bestselling titles like Animal Crossing and The Sims, all manner of virtual pet sites: Not real games! Walking simulators! Boring! Easy! Dealing with women’s emotions, not having guns, or simply being enjoyed by women en masse—all of these qualities act as disqualifiers. It's not just that women supposedly aren't interested in games; it's that the mere presence of femininity defines the games they like out of existence.

It didn't always feel this way, of course.

“All my friends had a Nintendo DS when we were little,” my sister recalls. “I was really happy to find games related to my interests. Like, Style Savvy—that was my first step into fashion, really, as something I wanted to do.” I remember her unwrapping a DS for Christmas, in fact, her eyes bright, the games beside it in a candy-colored stack. “Remember Elizabeth, across the street? I’d go up to her room when we were like, 9 years old. We’d play Nintendogs and Cooking Mama. All my friends did it. No one was shy about it.”

My early relationship to video games was similarly untroubled. I played Purple Moon games on our stout little Gateway PC, Pokemon and Harvest Moon with a chunky, colorless Gameboy, Neopets during the hottest part of the summer. And for a while, it was something everyone did. A female friend painstakingly pieced together a Pokemon newsletter and disseminated it to our entire third grade class, all of us hungry for rumors of “Pikablu.” Everyone got together for Math Blasters during free time. It was the late 1990s and my friends and I were just young enough, just high enough on Girl Power! to approach video games as we approached books, movies and TVs: as ours, inherently, and may the spirits of the Spice Girls damn anyone saying otherwise.

But something changed during those latter elementary school years, as the boys started huddling together to talk Starcraft and Grand Theft Auto—as their masculinity began to ossify around ideas of not-like-girls, our femininity limited by ideas of not-for-girls. The rules changed as we learned to mold ourselves into pleasing shapes, as the boys began to look at us less like people and more like objects to spurn and/or pursue. We were not they, and our entertainment became as segregated as everything else. And as with everything else, anything on the side of “girl” fell beneath anything on the side of “boy” in worthiness.

“Girl games,” like my sister played—games explicitly intended for that audience, often marked by glitter and pastel colors—are the sole province of those young years, before the chasm between “girl” and “boy” rips open. And in this new light, we learned to look back at them and shrug. They didn’t matter. They weren’t real games. We left them behind as artifacts of childhood: loved, but ultimately relinquished.

Games grow up with boys from that point forward. We are welcome as long as we don’t drag anything that might exclude boys along—as long, essentially, as we are assimilative and quiet about it. And even then, that variety of game—Mario Kart, Angry Birds, Bejeweled—are roundly derided as barely being games at all. Anything without the requisite genuflection to the almighty god of Boy’s Interests is not a real game, it turns out.

“Girl” becomes incompatible with “video games,” just as “boy” aligns with them. “Everyone knows it,” my sister repeats. What about the girls who do play the games that "count," I ask? Surely she knows they exist.

“They exist,” my sister ventures. “But it’s way harder for them.”

marginalization

This is the second force that teaches girls video games aren’t for them: the social hierarchy of the gaming community, and the narrow, deforming spaces it offers to the women who do persevere. “They have to become one of two types. There’s the one gamer boys think is really hot, and they want her around, and they want to play games with her. But they’re still going to make her uncomfortable and say really explicit shit. I see it happen. If she’s cute, they tell her, ‘oh, I want to fuck you,’ and if she says no, she’s a bitch. She can’t complain.”

And the other type? “The other type,” she says, “is the ‘weird’ gamer girl who sits alone in the cafeteria with her DS while the gamer dudes call her fat and ugly. Both girls get put down by guys. And anyway, gamer boys try to own gaming. They claim it as theirs, as a boy thing. They automatically think girls are doing it for attention. No girl wins.”

My sister’s insight is startling to me. She’s never seen the way online harassment of women in games often centers around a woman’s sex life or looks. She doesn’t know about projects like Feminist Frequency, and the way even its most basic critiques of overt misogyny inspire firestorms of hatred. She doesn’t know about “fake geek girl” jokes. She doesn’t know that something called “Gamergate” swamped everything having to do with games in virulent hatred for months, destroying careers and too many people’s peace of mind, and leaving me reluctant even to write this piece. But she doesn’t have to know these things. The collision of gaming and misogyny is apparent to her from a few cafeteria tables away.

She has come to understand that gaming is obsessed with her as a fuckable object, but not a human being. “It’s all about women’s bodies,” she says. “It’s gross.” Women’s bodies. Not women’s words, women’s feelings, women’s dreams, women entire.

What of those gamer boys, unto themselves? “With the really serious ones, you feel like you don’t even know enough to begin talking to them.” There is the implicit understanding of this litmus test, and of it being exclusively imposed upon girls. “Guys get older and think they’re superior and there’s just this whole other boundary put up. The older you get, the less acceptable it is for girls to play video games.” My sister pauses thoughtfully. “But it’s not like girls grow out of games, exactly... It's that can get away with it. Growing up, I stopped feeling like I could take my DS anywhere, because boys would judge.”

She goes silent. When she speaks again, her words are tentative. “But it isn’t like those games stopped being fun. I didn’t age out of games. I... gendered out of them, I guess?”

I describe games like Journey, Transistor, Life is Strange, and Portal to her: games with female protagonists, created by women, resistant to dominant norms of sex and violence. “I don’t see commercials for those, though,” she demurs. “I see those Kate Upton commercials instead.” marketing

This is the third force: marketing. “There aren’t really any games that seem positive to me,” my sister explains. “They’re all about violence and nudity. I don’t like how the female body is made out. It makes me really uncomfortable. All of the commercials are for guys.”

She doesn’t know about Never Alone. She doesn’t know about Gone Home. But she knows about Kate Upton in a strategically knotted bed sheet. She knows about Booker DeWitt and his face-shredding skyhook. Anything beneath that top stratum of blood and jiggle is invisible to her. So why would she go spelunking into gaming with no clear purpose? Why would she assume there’s anything worthwhile out there for her to discover? Without me, she’d never have heard of all the progressive indie titles I rattle off, and would have no reason to believe they exist. She doesn’t know about Steam; she doesn’t even really know about PC gaming period.

For my sister, and so many girls and women like her, the gaming marketplace begins and ends with these mainstream visions of gaming, and the mainstream stores like Game Stop that sell them. “It’s obviously for boys. The nudity of course, but even the colors. From what I see, they mostly hire boys.” We discuss the posters and cardboard stand-ups we’ve seen in their windows: stubbly white men cradling bricks of oily black weaponry, or half-naked voluptuous women with pouting, glossy lips inviting the onlooker to ogle. Be the hero, over and over again, in a million monochrome worlds: crush the bad guy, fuck the woman, do a whole lot of shooting in between. Games are fantasy and fun, the marketing tells us. Fantasy and fun built upon our backs.

life-is-strange

Our phone call falters, mired by my sister’s sad insight. How could the industry and community make this right, I ask? What would make you feel welcome? What could have kept me from a lifetime of fearful distance from gaming—even the games I love?

“Maybe if they developed games for all interests,” she says tentatively. “Stuff like the games I liked when I was little, but... grown up. Games about everything. And if the stores especially were just more friendly? And less sexual. Less violent.” She pauses. “You need to make people want to come in, you know? Girls want to be comfortable there. They don’t want to go in and be surrounded by that kind of female nudity.”

I agree, and we discuss what changes we’d make. We remember breeding Nintendogs, not-quite-swear-words on Club Penguin, Princess Peach’s magical parasol. The fun we had, the adventures we shared, the friends we made. “Cooking Mama!” she exclaims. “I loved Cooking Mama. It was so much fun.” I agree, recalling the tricky stylus technique one mastered over the course of many digital omelets. I can nearly hear her smile travel through the phone. “That’s what I want,” she says, wistfully. “More Cooking Mama games.”

And that’s certainly what we need: more games featuring women, made by women, willing to tell stories about pop stars, witches, and queens, willing to work in palettes beyond army drab. But that will be meaningless if our understanding of what a game is and who a gamer can be does not expand wide enough or visibly enough to reach and include my little sister.

She wants to play games where women make the world beautiful, save the day, make friends, or romance boys. She wants to play games without killing, without rape, without weaponry. She wants to play games that don’t assume you grew up on GameFAQS or have hundreds of dollars to shell out on hardware upgrades. She wants games on her phone. She wants game in her browser. She wants to live in a world where games are just as aligned with girlhood as boyhood, and where no one bats an eye at a girl like her loving video games alongside One Direction fanfiction and scented candles.

In a way, it's simple; she just wants games to be for her exactly what they are for boys and men: easy to love. Why does that have to be so hard?

Shutterstock

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

08 Aug 14:05

Message from Space

by submission

Author : Victoria Randall

General Jackson was not exuding patience. His lips were thinned, his gray eyebrows bristled in irritation and he snapped at the two men standing before him. “Well, can you or can you not decipher the messages?”

Charlie had never seen his boss so nervous. Howard licked his lips and shifted his weight from one foot to the other. “Yes, sir. That is, Charlie Ward here is the one who figured out the key.”

The general’s penetrating gaze moved to Charlie. “You figured it out.”

Charlie cleared his throat. “Yes, sir. My team, to tell the truth. At first we thought it was simple code, but it’s actually a language. It’s similar to Morse code, but of course with a different alphabetic base, and has elements similar to dolphin language and surprisingly, contains directional elements like the bee dances. It’s not –“

“Mr. Ward. Can you translate what is being beamed at us? There is a certain urgency, I’m sure you’re aware.” The general pointed out of the large window spanning the wall of his office, and Charlie looked out at the fleet of ovoid, gleaming dark ships hovering over New York. They had arrived yesterday, but their arrival had been seen a month in advance, as they sped into Sol system at lightspeed. They had been broadcasting messages as they came, and code breakers and language experts all over the world had been working nonstop to decipher them. Since they had arrived, the messages had stopped.

“Yes, sir. The thing is,” Charlie coughed, “the messages don’t seem directed at us.”

“They don’t.” The general folded his arms. “Who are they directed at?”

“We’re not sure.” Before the general could ask, Charlie pulled a sheet from his picket. “This is the gist of the translation.”

“Read it!”

“Yes sir. Best guesses as to alternate meanings are included. It says: Brothers/cell mates/platoon mates, greetings. We are pleased to have located you at last. While we would enjoy/love/be thrilled to take you home with us, we are sure you know that is impossible due to population/numbers/legroom. But we could transition/convey/ferry you to another location/planet/foodsource if this one does not suit. We await your reply.”

The general stared in silence. “But who –“

“No idea. But it looks like they’re waiting for an answer.”

Before the general could reply, Charlie became aware of a distant sound that had been going on for some time. He had dismissed it as a passing train, but it had been growing louder over the past few minutes until it was a rumbling thunder. The building shivered. Rustling sounds filled the room, seeming to come from the walls.

“Earthquake?” Howard gasped.

“No, look!” Charlie pointed out the window. The roofs of the city to the south were visible from their high vantage point, and black streams were pouring onto the rooftops. It looked like dark water or ink, but he could not tell what it was.

“Sir!” An aide rushed up to them and saluted. “Reports are flooding in from cities all over: Moscow, Paris, London, Beijing – it’s roaches! Cockroaches are coming out everywhere.”

A musical buzzing filled the air. Charlie moved closer to the window to hear better. He listened, translating in his head, his lips moving.

“What are they saying?” the general asked. “Can you understand that?”

Charlie nodded, his throat dry. “It’s more primitive, but – They’re saying Yes brothers. We are glad also. We are fine here, and invite you to join us. There is plenty for all, and our hosts/caretakers/domestic animals provide all we need.”

Discuss the Future: The 365 Tomorrows Forums
The 365 Tomorrows Free Podcast: Voices of Tomorrow
This is your future: Submit your stories to 365 Tomorrows

07 Aug 22:41

Bop It: Shia Labeouf Limited Edition

by Brad
649
07 Aug 22:29

Drug sniffing dogs are barely better than a coin-toss

by Mark Frauenfelder

drug-dog

Lex is a drug-sniffing police dog. His owner trained Lex by giving him a treat every time he alerted, whether or not Lex was right. Is that a good way to train drug-sniffing dogs? Maybe not for innocent people who get stripped searched when they are falsely identified as drug carriers, but it's great for police departments that use the dogs to enrich themselves with civil asset forfeitures.

Radley Balko of the Washington Post writes about how Federal Courts are making matters ever worse.

The problem here is that invasive searches based on no more than a government official’s hunch is precisely what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to guard against. Unfortunately, the way the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on this issue not only doesn’t account for the problem, but also has given police agencies a strong incentive to ensure that drug dogs aren’t trained to act independently of their handler’s suspicions. A dog prone to false alerts means more searches, which means more opportunities to find and seize cash and other lucre under asset forfeiture policies. In fact, a drug dog’s alert in and of itself is often cited as evidence of drug activity, even if no drugs are found, thus enabling police to seize cash, cars and other property from motorists. For example, I’ve interviewed dog trainers who have told me that drug dogs can be trained to alert only when there are measurable quantities of a drug — to ignore so-called “trace” or “remnant” alerts that aren’t cause for arrest. But these trainers say that police agencies don’t want dogs trained to ignore remnant odors, because any alert is an authorization for a more thorough search.

Image: Shutterstock

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

07 Aug 15:02

#BlackLivesMatter activists are monitored by U.S. Homeland Security and cybersecurity firms

by Xeni Jardin
Image: Wikipedia.


Image: Wikipedia.

The ACLU today hosted a Reddit “Ask Me Anything” chat with #BlackLivesMatter activists DeRay McKesson and Johnetta Elzie, and the ACLU’s Nus Choudhury. Together, they discussed policing and police reform in America, and the surveillance of #BLM activists will impact the movement.

We’ve also noted an alarming trend where the activists behind #BlackLivesMatter are being monitored by DHS. To boot, cybersecurity companies like Zero Fox are doing the same to receive contracts from local governments -- harkening back to the surveillance of civil rights activists in the 60's and 70's.

The conversation during the 2-hour reddit AMA was extremely compelling and highlighted a lot of sentiments surrounding the current status of the movement. Links to the AMA participant responses can be found here:

DeRay McKesson
Johnetta Elzie
Nusrat Choudhury (ACLU)

As The Intercept recently reported, hundreds of documents obtained by The Intercept through a Freedom of Information Act request confirm that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has been monitoring the Black Lives Matter movement since anti-police protests erupted in Ferguson, Missouri last summer.

The documents, released by the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Operations Coordination, indicate that the department frequently collects information, including location data, on Black Lives Matter activities from public social media accounts, including on Facebook, Twitter, and Vine, even for events expected to be peaceful. The reports confirm social media surveillance of the protest movement and ostensibly related events in the cities of Ferguson, Baltimore, Washington, DC, and New York.

This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php#publishers.

07 Aug 04:03

EA FIFA Logic: How to Block a Penalty Kick

by Brad
F95

The EA Sports’ long-running football simulator series FIFA just keeps getting more and more realistic.