- In Country
- Inspire Justice: day devotional on poverty and justice by Canadian Bible Society - Issuu
- Vietnam War
- Lots of parties, choose what tickles your fancy!
Brand new: lowest price The lowest-priced brand-new, unused, unopened, undamaged item in its original packaging where packaging is applicable. Author Dan Sutherland.
Format Hardcover. Publisher Xlibris Corporation. See details. Buy It Now. Add to cart. Be the first to write a review About this product. About this product Product Identifiers Publisher. Show More Show Less. Perhaps she should have taken that "cup of kindness" from me when I first offered. Hearts and flowers.
The perfect occasion to smother my new love with tokens of affection. I chose a dozen red roses, an assortment of truffles and a darling little lacy thing Oh, excuse me. I didn't mean to be so intimate. You might say I'd overdone it, and in truth, at that point, my love and I had not actually met. Ever the romantic, I followed her to her apartment.
Loudly proclaiming my love, I drowned out her screams of protest. Sadly, it was not to be. So instead of smothering her with gifts, I simply smothered her. Patrick, the holy man who drove the snakes from Ireland. Interesting thing about snake venom, Batman: Some are green, just like the dye used to make green beer. That made it all the easier when I hosted that St. Paddy's Day party for my old gang. As you remember, one of my henchmen tried to tip you off. I wasn't sure which one had done it, so I decided to punish them all.
One dose of green mamba venom into the beer keg and they were soon rotting under the shamrocks. So I guess that makes you responsible for their deaths too. I'll drink to that. You appear to understand the importance of dates, don't you? Let me tell you about this day, this day of fools. I remember clearly that I watched her for days, waiting for the perfect moment. It was cold that March; it felt like spring would never come.
They drank coffee and she confessed her life lacked surprises. For six more days, I watched. April 1st, A. I finished cutting through the brake lines of her car. From the camera I placed on her dash, I saw her panic. My only regret, she couldn't hear me yell, "Surprise!
Happy Mother's Day, Mommy. Seems he wrote me off as a wacko, a loser. So after I was released, I wanted to clear the air between us. The next Father's Day I dropped by his place and suggested we go fishing. You ever go fishing with your pop? Well, it's some fun, let me tell you.
The two of us, out on the water, pulling in one whopper after another.
Inspire Justice: day devotional on poverty and justice by Canadian Bible Society - Issuu
Of course, I was doing the actual pulling. Dad was baiting the hooks. You know, with a finger, a foot, an eye Even today, whenever I eat a nice piece of fish, I feel closer to my dear old dad. What better way to celebrate Independence Day? My independence, of course, from Arkham. Unfortunately I decided to be clever about it and had a calendar sent to police headquarters with the month of July ripped out.
You figured it out right away and arrived just as the fireworks were starting. You stopped me from escaping. But not before the fire swept through the intensive care ward. Management was gun-shy because of the Trending Topics fiasco; taking action against partisan disinformation—or even identifying it as such—might have been seen as another act of political favoritism. Facebook also sold ads against the stories, and sensational garbage was good at pulling people into the platform.
And then there was the ever-present issue of Section of the Communications Decency Act. If the company started taking responsibility for fake news, it might have to take responsibility for a lot more. Facebook had plenty of reasons to keep its head in the sand. Roger McNamee, however, watched carefully as the nonsense spread. First there were the fake stories pushing Bernie Sanders, then he saw ones supporting Brexit, and then helping Trump.
By the end of the summer, he had resolved to write an op-ed about the problems on the platform. But he never ran it. I really want to help them. Now I am disappointed. I am embarrassed. I am ashamed. Then, at a conference two days after the election, Zuckerberg argued that filter bubbles are worse offline than on Facebook and that social media hardly influences how people vote.
Zuckerberg declined to be interviewed for this article, but people who know him well say he likes to form his opinions from data. But the analysis was just an aggregate look at the percentage of clearly fake stories that appeared across all of Facebook. It was a number, but not a particularly meaningful one. They seemed clueless and self-absorbed. Right after he landed in Lima, he posted something of a mea culpa. He explained that Facebook did take misinformation seriously, and he presented a vague seven-point plan to tackle it.
At the conference in Peru, Zuckerberg met with a man who knows a few things about politics: Barack Obama.
But according to someone who was with them in Lima, it was Zuckerberg who called the meeting, and his agenda was merely to convince Obama that, yes, Facebook was serious about dealing with the problem. One employee compared Zuckerberg to Lennie in Of Mice and Men —a man with no understanding of his own strength. Meanwhile, at Facebook, the gears churned. For the first time, insiders really began to question whether they had too much power.
Within a few weeks the company announced it would cut off advertising revenue for ad farms and make it easier for users to flag stories they thought false. In December the company announced that, for the first time, it would introduce fact-checking onto the platform. If Facebook received enough signals that a story was false, it would automatically be sent to partners, like Snopes, for review.
She immediately became the most prominent journalist hired by the company. Soon Brown was put in charge of something called the Facebook Journalism Project. But sheer anxiety was also part of the motivation. People started panicking and getting afraid that regulation was coming. If you joined an antivaccine group on Facebook, she observed, the platform might suggest that you join flat-earth groups or maybe ones devoted to Pizzagate—putting you on a conveyor belt of conspiracy thinking. Harris had by then gained a national reputation as the conscience of Silicon Valley.
He had been profiled on 60 Minutes and in The Atlantic , and he spoke eloquently about the subtle tricks that social media companies use to foster an addiction to their services. Harris read the article, was impressed, and emailed her. And before long they found receptive audiences in the media and Congress—groups with their own mounting grievances against the social media giant.
Even at the best of times, meetings between Facebook and media executives can feel like unhappy family gatherings. News executives resent that Facebook and Google have captured roughly three-quarters of the digital ad business, leaving the media industry and other platforms, like Twitter, to fight over scraps. The social network is roughly times more valuable than the Times.
And journalists know that the man who owns the farm has the leverage. If Facebook wanted to, it could quietly turn any number of dials that would harm a publisher—by manipulating its traffic, its ad network, or its readers. News makes up only about 5 percent of the total content that people see on Facebook globally.
The company could let it all go and its shareholders would scarcely notice. The editors of major media companies, on the other hand, are worried about their next quarter—maybe even their next phone call. When they bring lunch back to their desks, they know not to buy green bananas. This mutual wariness—sharpened almost to enmity in the wake of the election—did not make life easy for Campbell Brown when she started her new job running the nascent Facebook Journalism Project.
The first item on her to-do list was to head out on yet another Facebook listening tour with editors and publishers. I think the point was really to show up and seem to be listening. He had spent the previous three months, according to people who know him, contemplating whether he had created something that did more harm than good. Shortly after issuing the manifesto, Zuckerberg set off on a carefully scripted listening tour of the country.
He began popping into candy shops and dining rooms in red states, camera crew and personal social media team in tow. He wrote an earnest post about what he was learning, and he deflected questions about whether his real goal was to become president. One of the many things Zuckerberg seemed not to grasp when he wrote his manifesto was that his platform had empowered an enemy far more sophisticated than Macedonian teenagers and assorted low-rent purveyors of bull. As wore on, however, the company began to realize it had been attacked by a foreign influence operation. Early in the campaign season, Facebook was aware of familiar attacks emanating from known Russian hackers, such as the group APT28, which is believed to be affiliated with Moscow.
Stamos was something of an icon in the tech world for having reportedly resigned from his previous job at Yahoo after a conflict over whether to grant a US intelligence agency access to Yahoo servers. According to two people with direct knowledge of the document, he was eager to publish a detailed, specific analysis of what the company had found.
But members of the policy and communications team pushed back and cut his report way down. Sources on the politics and communications teams insist they edited the report down, just because the darn thing was hard to read. But there were few specific examples or details, and there was no direct mention of Russia. It felt bland and cautious. The article quoted an unnamed senior intelligence official saying that Russian operatives had bought ads on Facebook to target Americans with propaganda. Around the same time, the security team also picked up hints from congressional investigators that made them think an intelligence agency was indeed looking into Russian Facebook ads.
Eventually, by sorting transactions according to a series of data points—Were ads purchased in rubles? Were they purchased within browsers whose language was set to Russian? There was, for example, a page called Heart of Texas, which pushed for the secession of the Lone Star State.
- The Partridge and the Pelican?
- THE PUPPET PLAY SHAH SULTAN SALIM (The Dramatic Presentations Series).
- Intel's New Chip Wizard Has a Plan to Bring Back the Magic.
- Calendar Man (Arkhamverse) | Batman Wiki | FANDOM powered by Wikia;
- Sour Lake.
- 365 Days of Mental Siege : Within Two Seasons in Nam by Dan Sutherland (2010, Hardcover)?
- Julian calendar!
And there was Blacktivist, which pushed stories about police brutality against black men and women and had more followers than the verified Black Lives Matter page. Numerous security researchers express consternation that it took Facebook so long to realize how the Russian troll farm was exploiting the platform. After all, the group was well known to Facebook. A staffer on the Senate Intelligence Committee likewise voiced exasperation with the company.
When Facebook finally did find the Russian propaganda on its platform, the discovery set off a crisis, a scramble, and a great deal of confusion. First, due to a miscalculation, word initially spread through the company that the Russian group had spent millions of dollars on ads, when the actual total was in the low six figures.
Lots of parties, choose what tickles your fancy!
Once that error was resolved, a disagreement broke out over how much to reveal, and to whom. The company could release the data about the ads to the public, release everything to Congress, or release nothing. Much of the argument hinged on questions of user privacy. Members of the security team worried that the legal process involved in handing over private user data, even if it belonged to a Russian troll farm, would open the door for governments to seize data from other Facebook users later on.
Every sentence in the post seemed to downplay the substance of these new revelations: The number of ads was small, the expense was small. She had long felt that Facebook was insufficiently forthcoming, and now it seemed to be flat-out stonewalling. A couple of weeks later, while waiting at a Walgreens to pick up a prescription for one of her kids, she got a call from a researcher at the Tow Center for Digital Journalism named Jonathan Albright.
He had been mapping ecosystems of misinformation since the election, and he had some excellent news. Albright had started digging into CrowdTangle, one of the analytics platforms that Facebook uses. And he had discovered that the data from six of the accounts Facebook had shut down were still there, frozen in a state of suspended animation.
There were the posts pushing for Texas secession and playing on racial antipathy. Albright downloaded the most recent posts from each of the six groups. He reported that, in total, their posts had been shared more than million times. To McNamee, the way the Russians used the platform was neither a surprise nor an anomaly. Then, in September, they were joined by DiResta and began spending all their free time counseling senators, representatives, and members of their staffs.
One of the early questions they weighed in on was the matter of who should be summoned to testify. Harris recommended that the CEOs of the big tech companies be called in, to create a dramatic scene in which they all stood in a neat row swearing an oath with their right hands in the air, roughly the way tobacco executives had been forced to do a generation earlier. And so on November 1, Colin Stretch arrived from Facebook to be pummeled. During the hearings themselves, DiResta was sitting on her bed in San Francisco, watching them with her headphones on, trying not to wake up her small children.
She listened to the back-and-forth in Washington while chatting on Slack with other security researchers. She watched as Marco Rubio smartly asked whether Facebook even had a policy forbidding foreign governments from running an influence campaign through the platform. The answer was no.
Rhode Island senator Jack Reed then asked whether Facebook felt an obligation to individually notify all the users who had seen Russian ads that they had been deceived. The answer again was no. After the hearings, yet another dam seemed to break, and former Facebook executives started to go public with their criticisms of the company too.
- Calendar Man (Arkhamverse)?
- Vietnam War - Wikipedia.
- 365 Days of Mental Siege: Within Two Seasons In Nam.
- days of mental siege within two seasons in nam Manual.
- 111 Facts About Christmas;
The numbers were terrific, as always, but his mood was not. Zuckerberg took a different approach. We build these tools to help people connect and to bring us closer together. And they used them to try to undermine our values. What they did is wrong, and we are not going to stand for it. Other signs emerged, too, that Zuckerberg was beginning to absorb the criticisms of his company. The Facebook Journalism Project, for instance, seemed to be making the company take its obligations as a publisher, and not just a platform, more seriously.
In the fall, the company announced that Zuckerberg had decided—after years of resisting the idea—that publishers using Facebook Instant Articles could require readers to subscribe. Paying for serious publications, in the months since the election, had come to seem like both the path forward for journalism and a way of resisting the post-truth political landscape.
WIRED recently instituted its own paywall. Plus, offering subscriptions arguably helped put in place the kinds of incentives that Zuckerberg professed to want driving the platform.