Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91

      

By The Conscious Resistance


On Tuesday October 1st, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr spoke at the 5G Futures event organized by the CTIA, the lobby for the wireless companies.


Journalist Derrick Broze questioned Carr on ongoing lawsuits in the state of Texas.



         



      

Support the Future of The Conscious Resistance: https://fundrazr.com/consciousresista…



Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
92

      

By Brian Miller


Farm subsidies are perhaps the ultimate, but secret, third rail of American politics. While entitlements are discussed out in the open, farm subsidies are rarely talked about – even though they are the most expensive subsidy Washington doles out.


All told, the U.S. government spends $20 billion annually on farm subsidies, with approximately 39 percent of all farms receiving some sort of subsidy. For comparison, the oil industry gets about $4.6 billion annually and annual housing subsidies total another $15 billion. A significant portion of this $20 billion goes not to your local family farm, but to Big Aggie.


(Note that this $20 billion annual farm subsidy figure doesn’t take into account the 30+ years of ethanol subsidies to the corn industry nor export subsidies to U.S. farmers issued by the USDA.)


The government never properly explains why this is. Certainly small farmers are growing their crops at enormous risk. However, it’s not clear that agriculture is any different than other high-risk industries – especially because the United States is blessed with some of the most fertile farmland in the world, and a highly skilled labor force.


         



      

Subsidies don’t just cost taxpayers, an expense that might properly be justified by showing a return on investment. Subsidies also provide powerful disincentives against innovation, as well as cost effectiveness and diversification of land use.


There is also a strong case to be made that farm subsidies are a major driver of the obesity and cancer epidemic in the United States. Every time Washington interferes in the private sector, they are picking winners and losers. The winners chosen are companies producing food that’s high in calories and low in nutritional density – and that helps make Americans sick and fat, because it distorts what food is available at what price.


While President Trump has sometimes discussed reducing farm subsidies, the solution to the problem is much more radical – the total elimination of all farm subsidies from the federal budget.


Food Subsidies in the United States

There have long been federal programs in the United States propping up the agricultural sector. For example, the Morrill Act of 1862 established land-grant universities with a focus on agricultural education. The Smith-Lever Act of 1914 similarly provided funding for agricultural education.


The first program similar to the farm subsidies of today was the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916. This still exists in the form of the Farm Credit System, which currently holds $280 billion in assets. This Act came out of a study done by progressive Republican President Theodore Roosevelt. At this time, rural Americans made up the bulk of the United States’ population.


The Act allowed farmers to borrow 50 percent of the value of their land and 20 percent of the value of their improvements. Loans were available between $100 and $10,000 and amortized between five and 40 years. It was intended to provide poor farmers with an alternative source of credit from large banks. The successor of this Act, the Farm Credit System, currently provides approximately a third of the credit in rural America.



The Great Depression, the New Deal and Farm Subsidies


Food is Freedom: How Washington’s Food Subsidies Have Helped Make Americans Fat and SickAs with many other aspects of American economic life, farming changed with the advent of the Great Depression and the New Deal, which, at least it was argued, sought to minimize the impact of the worst parts of the Depression.


The Agricultural Marketing Act of 1929 was passed on the watch of Republican President Herbert Hoover, widely blamed for the Depression and maligned as having “done nothing” to protect Americans from it. This Act created the Federal Farm Board, which was itself a modification of the Federal Farm Loan Board.


Hoover believed that he could halt the collapse of agricultural prices by buying, selling and storing surplus grains. Another method to prevent the collapse was to lend to farmers on generous terms. Farmers used the loans to purchase seed and feed. This was particularly important in the South, where farmers were just getting over a drought.


This had a very predictable effect: Farmers began raising more crops than they knew they could sell. They knew the government would buy whatever they produced, and the bill contained no production limit. Deflation was not countered and the Depression worsened for American farmers. The federal government spent $500 million before the program was abolished in 1933.


The real expansion of federal subsidies for the American farmer began under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Programs enacted under FDR’s New Deal included price supports for commodities, regulations on the supply of farm commodities, barriers to prevent importation of farm commodities, and crop insurance programs. These programs, while modified and greatly expanded, form the basis of current federal farm policy. There is no other way to describe this than central planning.


The first major program passed by FDR as part of the New Deal was the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933. This was the somewhat infamous program that had the government paying farmers to not plant crops, to dump out milk and the like when people were going hungry in the streets. Not only did it look bad, it was also declared unconstitutional in 1936, in the United States v. Butler case, on the grounds that the Constitution made agricultural regulations a state matter. This was in the ancient days, when the Supreme Court declared acts unconstitutional when the Constitution did not authorize them to do so.


The first replacement was the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936. This paid farmers to plant fewer crops on the basis that it was preventing topsoil erosion. A more straightforward replacement, the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, preserved many of the earlier provisions of its 1933 cousin, and was passed at a time when the Supreme Court was more amenable to the wishes of President Roosevelt following his proposed threat to pack the court with up to 15 judges. This new version of the Agricultural Adjustment Act mandated price supports for broad sections of American agriculture. When challenged in court, the Supreme Court ultimately upheld it under (what else) the commerce clause.


Commodity price and income supports are now a staple in the federal budget. But what does the money go toward?



Where Do Farm Subsidies Go?

Farm subsidies are often painted as the last refuge of the American small farmer. But even a close examination of where farm subsidies go reveals that nothing could be further from the truth. The 10 largest recipients of aid receive between $14 million and $23.7 million, averaging $18.2 million, or approximately $1.8 million per year for what are giant agricultural combines. Part of this is a deliberate result of United States agricultural policy – after the Second World War, farmers were told to “get big or get out.”


Let’s look at some startling facts about U.S. farm subsidies:



Over 6,000 farming companies and combines received more than $1 million federal aid in the years between 2008 and 2018.
This constituted a total of over $11 billion in this 10-year period.
18 different farming entities received over $10 million.
Over $626 million went to urban areas – i.e., places with over 250,000 residents and precisely zero farms.
The five most populated cities in America (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) received a collective $18 million in farm subsidies. 25 percent of all subsidies went to someone receiving over $250,000 in subsidies.
The 150 most affluent zip codes in America received $5 million in subsidies in 2017 alone.
What’s more, the government is still paying farmers to not farm.
12 members of Congress received as much as $637,059 in farm subsidies in 2017.

All of this adds up to underscore the true nature of America’s food subsidy system: It’s a massive welfare program directed at the rich and affluent, which artificially distorts food prices for everyone.


Perhaps worst of all, the massive farm subsidies aren’t keeping people out of debt. American farmer debt currently stands at $409 billion. Wheat is receiving $45.9 billion in subsidies while corn is getting $112 billion. Farmers received $12 billion in aid from the Trump Administration to help hedge against potential losses from the trade war with China. While it’s difficult to say to what extent any of this is vote-buying, it is worth noting that Iowa is the second-largest recipient of USDA subsidies, only slightly behind Texas.


But if the story here were simply one of government largesse, this would be a very short article, indeed. The story is much deeper, and goes to the heart of health and wellness in the United States.



Earl Butz: Father of the Modern Food Subsidy System

Food is Freedom: How Washington’s Food Subsidies Have Helped Make Americans Fat and SickThe subsidy system might have had its problems, but the system really went off the rails with the advent of Earl Butz as Secretary of Agriculture under both President Richard Nixon and President Gerald Ford. He was the one who pioneered the fundamental change in farm subsidies. No longer would farmers be paid to take fields out of production. Instead they would be paid for producing absolutely insane amounts of corn.


He was the man who coined the term “get big or get out.” He also urged farmers to use every available square inch of land – to plant “from fencepost to fencepost.” This change in policy had a dramatic impact on the world of American agriculture. Small family farms were crushed and big agribusiness became the norm rather than the exception.


Part of the change was due to the high cost of food during the early 1970s. The Nixon Administration (and thus, Butz) were taking heat over soaring food prices. Thus, Butz decided to switch from paying people not to grow food to paying them to grow it. He brokered the sale of 30 million tons of grain to the Soviet Union to keep prices afloat. This was not simply to help farmers, but also to keep them in the Nixon fold – there was a strong fear that they would vote for 1972 Democratic Party candidate George McGovern.


Have you read The Lost Book of Remedies?


Butz argues in the documentary King Corn that he provided a valuable service to both the American consumer and the American farmer: both the dramatic reduction of the cost per calorie of food and also the dramatic increase in the efficiency of farming techniques. Indeed, this generation spends less feeding itself than any other in human history.






Still, as we will discuss in greater detail below, one of the unintended side effects of the newly crowned “King Corn” was the development of high fructose corn syrup – the consequences of which have been a disaster for the American diet.



The Emblem of USDA: The Food Pyramid

Everyone is familiar with the food pyramid, the alleged template for a healthy diet produced by the United States Department of Agriculture in 1992. The original Food Pyramid urged Americans to eat as many as 11 servings of carbs per day, in addition to another four servings of fruit (i.e., more carbs). Meat, poultry, eggs, fish, beans and nuts were to total only two to three servings per day between all of them.


Fats – even healthy ones like avocados and olive oil – were to be “used sparingly.” They were lumped into the same group as sugars and sugary snacks. Healthy plant-based oils like olive or avocado oil were not separated from less healthy processed plant-based oils like canola or corn oil.


The USDA’s latest version of the Food Pyramid is known as MyPlate, and some insight into how it was created and what purpose it serves can be found with the previous pyramid (the Eating Right Pyramid) and why it was discontinued. The Eating Right Pyramid, the original Food Pyramid, was replaced due to industry concerns from beef and poultry farmers that their product was not being presented properly.


An alternative to MyPlate is the Healthy Eating Plate from the Harvard School of Public Health. This stresses whole grains, healthy proteins and fats, drinking water and other sugar-free drinks, and adequate amounts of vegetables.


Harvard School of Public Health Department of Nutrition Chair Walter Willett claimed that, “like the earlier U.S. Department of Agriculture pyramids, MyPlate mixes science with the influence of powerful agricultural interests, which is not the recipe for healthy eating”.


Dr. Marion Nestle, former chair of the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University stated that, “There’s a great deal of money at stake in what these guidelines say.”


A lot of money is in the subsidies themselves, but there is also a trickle-down effect. Cheap corn, for example, has totally changed the world of agriculture and food. Cows never ate corn until farmers started getting money to grow it everywhere. This is what makes the 99-cent hamburger possible. Fish, likewise, are another animal that would never eat corn if left to its own devices, but humans have trained them to eat corn because it is arguably the world’s cheapest and most plentiful food source – not due to naturally occuring market forces, but because of corn subsidies.


If you’re horrified by factory farming – the penning in of tons of cows, pigs and other animals in tiny spaces – you can lay the blame right at the feet of farm subsidies. Such practices are simply not economically viable or sustainable without massive subsidies or corn. Ethanol is another creation of the agriculture-industrial complex.


The bottom line is that the USDA Food Pyramid and its antecedents and successors have more to do with feeding money into the agricultural system – where the subsidies are – than it does with teaching Americans proper nutrition.



Corn Subsidies Are a Killer

Food is Freedom: How Washington’s Food Subsidies Have Helped Make Americans Fat and SickCorn subsidies are big business in the United States, and this can be seen in the explosion of a simple ingredient now found in everything from sodapop to hot dogs – high fructose corn syrup, also known as HFCS.


Between the development of HFCS in 1970 and 1990, the consumption of HFCS skyrocketed by 1,000 percent. It’s not just that HFCS is in just about everything. It’s also that HFCS makes a number of things possible that otherwise wouldn’t be – think the now ubiquitous 99-cent three-liter bottle of sodapop available at every big-box supermarket around the country.


The New York Times reported that junk food is the largest source of calories in the United States. The top 10 calorie sources in the United States are, according to Harvard Medical School:



Grain desserts (everything from cake to granola bars)
Bread
Chicken
Sodapop, energy drinks and sports drinks
Pizza
Alcohol
Pasta
Mexican food
Beef
Dairy-based desserts

This means that at least four out of the 10 top calorie sources in the American diet are junk food. Most of them are based on ingredients from highly subsidized food groups like corn, soybeans, wheat, and rice. Barely any subsidies exist for fruit and vegetables, the foods that Americans are ostensibly supposed to fill half of their plates with.




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!



A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, published in JAMA Internal Medicine in August 2016, was able to document a connection between heavily subsidized food sources and obesity. The study found that those subsisting on a diet of heavily subsidized foods were 37 percent more likely to be obese than those who did not. Belly fat, abnormal cholesterol, and high blood sugar levels were likewise linked to a diet heavy in foods subsidized by the federal government.


Fruits and vegetables are called, in a typical act of government doublespeak, “specialty crops.” They claim approximately 75 percent of all farmland in the United States, but net a scant 14 percent of all subsidies. These are primarily grown by small family farmers. Some subsidy bills stipulate that farms receiving subsidies for commodity crops like corn and wheat cannot grow “specialty crops.”



The Coming Tax on Meat

Meat, in particular red meat, has long been maligned as a source of unhealthy calories. However, the paleo movement, the low-carb movement, and the extreme carnivore diet movement have all championed meat, in particular red meat, as the healthiest thing you can possibly eat. Most health conscious people these days are, at the very least, avoiding simple sugars and opting for healthy complex carbohydrates in their diet, if not drastically reducing the number of calories they get from carbs.


Whether or not carbs are good for you or not is a source of continued debate, and largely centers around which carbs and how much of them. Likewise, dairy is enjoying a renaissance among people who tout the health benefits of whole milk and raw milk.


Taxing meat in the manner of cigarettes and sugar, however, is becoming an increasingly mainstream idea. The proposal is linked not just to a desire to exert even more control over what Americans eat, but also with (of course) carbon emissions and saving the environment.


Beyond the simple fact that a tax on meat would be yet another example of government overreach, there are other problems with a meat tax. It is also based on a subjective and dubious interpretation of the effects of meat on both the environment and on personal health. Such a tax would, like existing taxes on sugar and tobacco products, disproportionately impact the poorest Americans.


Given the poor job that the United States Department of Agriculture has done with attempting to dictate what people eat with the Food Pyramid, it’s unlikely that they’re going to hit paydirt with a meat tax.



Subsidies Cause Cancer

Food is Freedom: How Washington’s Food Subsidies Have Helped Make Americans Fat and SickThe consequences of subsidies are far reaching when one considers the correlation with obesity. While tobacco use is responsible for one-third of all cancer cases, obesity is considered responsible for another third. Put more directly, there is a health epidemic in the United States similar to tobacco, but rather than a public campaign against it, it’s subsidized by the federal government.


This is what led a presidential report commission on cancer to attack food subsidies in much the same way that it did tobacco.


There is another aspect to subsidizing unhealthy food, which will become increasingly expensive: healthcare. As the federal government creeps more into healthcare, the more you and other taxpayers will be subsidizing (again) by paying for treatments for those who are clinically obese, diabetic, or otherwise unhealthy from the nutrient-poor foods promoted by the United States government through its subsidies. This creates a maniac cycle, whereby the federal government subsidizes foods that make people sick and fat, then subsidizes the healthcare of sick and fat people. In all likelihood, this will all be paid for disproportionately by people who are neither sick nor fat.


It’s important to point out that more government intervention, in the form of taxation or subsidizing “healthy” (according to some) foods, is not the answer – it’s the problem. Subsidies and other government handouts are invariably shaped by those with the most political influence. The ultimate programs always bear little resemblance to how they are touting through what are effectively PR campaigns in the nominally independent media.


In the age of digital media, it has never been easier for the average person to learn what they need to know about feeding themselves and their family in the most healthy way possible. Government subsidies are not required for this and, as we have shown, have very much the opposite impact on public health. It is time for a revolution in the world of food subsidies – one of drastic reduction and ultimately the elimination of these wasteful and counterproductive programs.



This article was sourced from Ammo.com.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      








Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
Pin



Previous post


      
   
93

      

By MassPrivateI


Forget everything you have ever heard about police license plate readers and public safety, because it is all a lie.


Three major automated license plate reader (ALPR) companies have created a mind-boggling database of 14 billion license plate images that allows law enforcement to track anyone in real-time.


The Digital Recognition Network (DRN) has a database of over 8 billion license plate images and boasts about sending customers (law enforcement) live vehicle location alerts.


If you think there is nothing you can do to automatically detect vehicles, think again. DRN’s Live Alerts, part of the DRNsights for Insurance solution, uses vehicle location data gathered from over 8 billion nationwide sightings plus the 160,000 million gathered each month, to provide alerts when vehicles are detected.



         



      

Vigilant Solutions webpage has a database of over 5 billion license plate images and collects a little less than DRN daily.


We are the only ALPR provider that can offer over 5 billion nationwide detections and over 150 million more added monthly.


Vigilant Solutions also offers customers (law enforcement) a “Mobile Hit Hunter” or hotlist feature, that tracks vehicles in real-time.



credit: Vigilant Solutions



As I reported last month, Rekor Systems has a massive 30 state real-time license plate database that collects 150 million license plates every month.


But Rekor Systems does something the other ALPR companies do not. They can send law enforcement detailed descriptions of any vehicle in real-time.


Our software upgrades any IP, traffic, or surveillance camera into a vehicle recognition solution that can be used for realtime alerting of license plates. Not only does the software read a license plate number, but it also provides vehicle type, make, and color, something the competitors cannot do.




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





Rekor Systems, which is also being used by 69 countries, likely has a database of billions of people’s license plates.


Combined, these three companies alone have easily collected more than 14 billion license plates.


But why stop there? There must be other ALPR companies adding to this massive police license plate database, right?


Another ALPR company called, PlateSmart Technologies sends all their license plate data to Fusion Centers.


Our goal is to create a collaborative network for secure data sharing for fusion centers, law enforcement, and government while adhering to ALPR industry best practices and provide a means of transparency.


And Genetec’s “AutoVU” automatic license plate readers lets customers (law enforcement) create secret hotlists.


AutoVu lets you manage all of your hotlists from one system and decide whether to share plate reads or hits beyond your organizational boundaries. Advanced features, including Federation and covert hotlists, empower your organization to enlist the aid of other AutoVu systems without compromising the safety or privacy of their staff and clients. (To learn more about hotlists, click here.)




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy



Flock Safety, an ALPR company that makes its money by turning neighborhoods into a virtual police state, wants license plate readers on every street.


Recently residents of Jersey Village, Texas put “a camera on every street to create a virtual gate” that resulted in Flock Safety catching two vehicles on the NCIC Hot List.


There are many more smaller ALPR companies that contribute to a much larger police license plate database in the U.S., but hopefully you get the idea. (To find more APLR companies click here & here.)


Unless something is done to stop tracking everyone’s license plates soon, we can expect the police database to grow to 20 BILLION in a few years.What will it take for Americans to wake up and realize that license plate tracking is not about public safety? It is about creating a detailed picture of everyone’s travels.



You can read more from MassPrivateI, where this article first appeared.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      








Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
Pin



Previous post


Next post


      
   
94

      

By Aaron Kesel


FaceFirst is another company with something to lose if facial recognition regulation bans the technology. They have now entered the lobbying ring to attempt to influence laws for the Orwellian biometric technology.


FaceFirst writes in a press release:



FaceFirst is partnering with congressional lawmakers to influence future facial recognition privacy regulations. 


(Los Angeles) FaceFirst, the leading U.S. computer vision company, announced today that they are working closely with D.C. lawmakers to influence future facial recognition regulations.


A team of FaceFirst executives, led by FaceFirst President and CEO Peter Trepp, recently traveled to Capitol Hill to help the bipartisan Commercial Facial Recognition Privacy Act of 2019 (S. 847) move forward. The FaceFirst team briefed bill co-sponsor Senator Roy Blunt’s office on the need to protect consumer privacy while still allowing the public to benefit from this transformative technology.


“While we’re seeing rapid market adoption of facial recognition technology, there remain valid concerns that this technology needs to be regulated and used responsibly ,” stated Trepp. “Regulations are necessary guardrails for protecting privacy, but it’s essential that they don’t unduly compromise public safety or stifle innovation.”


“Congressional lawmakers see and understand that retailers need facial recognition technology to combat organized retail crime, shoplifter recidivism, and to keep their employees and customers safe,” stated FaceFirst Chief Revenue Officer Dara Riordan. Due to high levels of recidivism, ORC costs the U.S. retail industry $46.8 billion every year according to the National Retail Federation.


In addition to retail, facial recognition technology is currently being used by event venues, hospitals, transportation centers and other public spaces to prevent terrorism and acts of violence. FaceFirst also briefed the Senator’s office on various commercial use cases for facial recognition including enabling seamless, secure transactions and better customer experiences.


FaceFirst is currently working with congressional lawmakers to review and influence future legislation. The company will be offering recommendations intended to maximize consumer privacy without disrupting innovation.


“The right regulations can alleviate public concerns and fast-track mass adoption,” stated FaceFirst CEO Peter Trepp. “That’s why we’re partnering with lawmakers to ensure that regulations are a win-win for consumers and vendors alike.” Peter Trepp is also the author of The New Rules of Consumer Privacy: Building Loyalty with Connected Consumers in the Age of Face Recognition and AI.



         



      

For those who don’t remember or have been living under a rock, FaceFirst is the company that wants to work with retailers to implement facial recognition inside hundreds and soon thousands of stores. FaceFirst wants to build a database of shoplifters, as Activist Post reported.


So another company that has skin in the game with facial recognition technology to succeed gets to decide laws that will affect the rest of us?


The concept of the technology now being used is customers walk through a store entrance, the video camera captures repetitious images of each shopper and chooses the clearest one to then store in its database. The software then analyzes that image and compares it to a database of “bad customers” that the retailer has compiled; if there is a match, the software sends an alert to store employees that a “high risk” customer has entered the door.



Activist Post Recommended Book: The Age of Surveillance Capitalism



The problem with this is not only the blatantly obvious of stores wanting to use biometric surveillance within their establishments that would give them a database on their customers. It’s that it is up to the retailer themselves to decide whether anyone apprehended for shoplifting can later opt out of their database. Although, the software automatically purges visitor data that does not match information in a store’s criminal database every 14 days, the company’s minimum recommendation for auto-purging data.


This is extremely worrying and would enable a “pre-crime” policed environment in establishment stores, giving them the power to not only keep track of customers but store a digital profile on them without their consent. Again, this is the same company that wants to write laws on facial recognition use.


According to FaceFirst’s website they also work with “event venues, transportation centers and other organizations prevent crime and improve customer engagement while growing revenue.”


Fight For The Future launched a campaign with artists against venues using facial recognition technology to track fans. While FaceFirst argues the technology helps to “create safer communities, more secure transactions and great customer experiences.” Fight For The Future and the artists argue the technology serves as “dangers to their fans in the form of police harassment including — misidentification, deportation, arrests for outstanding charges during an event and drug use during an event, discrimination at their concerts, and fans in a permanent government database.”






On the subject of transportation, Activist Post has explored what’s happening in China with facial recognition tickets being offered for free travel on a train for elderly Chinese citizens, and how soon that reality will also become America’s own nightmare.


Last week, Activist Post reported Amazon’s own attempts to influence legislation on an industry they have a stake in with Bezos stating at a recent conference that the company was “working with law makers.”


Earlier this year, legislators called for putting a “time out” on facial recognition technology until regulations are in place. So far, Congress has held two oversight hearings on the topic and there are at least four bills in the works to limit the technology.


On top of that, some cities in the U.S. have outright banned the biometric technology like San Francisco, Somerville, Massachusetts, and Oakland, California, as Activist Post reported.


The rapid growth of this technology has triggered a much-needed debate to slow down the roll out. Activists, politicians, academics and even police forces all over the world are expressing serious concerns over the impact facial recognition could have on our society.


If that’s not enough, phone maker Motorola is also throwing its weight behind new surveillance products, essentially selling out humanity to aid the police state, NBC reported.


Since 2017, the Chicago-based tech company — now known as Motorola Solutions, after Motorola Inc. spun off its mobile phone business — has invested $1.7 billion to support or acquire companies that build police body cameras; train cameras to spot certain faces or behavior; sift through video for suspicious people; and track the movement of cars by their license plates. By consolidating these tools within a single corporation, and potentially combining them into a single product, Motorola Solutions is boosting its stature in the surveillance industry ─ and amplifying concerns about the government’s growing power to watch people almost anywhere they go.


This is all conditioning for the Trump administration’s push for a Biometric Exit database at the nation’s borders and getting Americans more subservient to government surveillance.


Trump’s executive immigration order on January 27th, 2017 — best known for suspending visitors to the U.S. from seven majority-Muslim countries — also included an article expediting the biometric exit program. The order further stated that there will be three progress reports to be made over the next year on the program. Trump’s executive order in March built on that, specifically limiting biometric scans at the border to “in-scope travelers” or those who aren’t U.S. or Canadian citizens.




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!



It is one thing to sell out humanity, it’s a whole other thing to be the fox guarding the hen house deciding the laws for a technology you have a stake in like FaceFirst and Amazon. That used to be seen as a conflict of interest until government merged with corporations and allowed them such terrifying control over our lives.


I don’t think anyone is arguing against regulation or outright banning facial recognition technology. The problem is who wants to write the laws for such an effort, and those corporations not having the best of intentions for the American people. At least Microsoft President Brad Smith has said that the tech giant “won’t sell facial recognition to governments for use in mass surveillance.”


A national survey in the U.S. of 3,151 U.S. adults in December taken by the Center for Data Innovation, found only one in four Americans believe the federal government should strictly limit the use of facial recognition biometrics technology.


The survey also indicated Americans are more likely to support a trade-off to their own privacy caused by biometric technology if it benefits law enforcement, reduces shoplifting or speeds up airport security lines.


Only 18 percent of those polled stated they agreed with strict limitations on facial recognition tech if it comes at the expense of public safety, compared to 55 percent who disagreed with such limitations.


However, a poll from the Brookings Institution in September 2018 contradicts that and found half of Americans favored limitations of the use of facial recognition by law enforcement, while 42 percent felt it invaded personal privacy rights.


Fight For The Future has previously launched a first-of-its-kind interactive map that tracks where in the U.S. facial recognition technology is being used and where it is being resisted, along with a tool-kit for local activists who want to help kickstart a ban in their city or state, as Activist Post reported.


Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Minds, Steemit, SoMee, BitChute, Facebook and Twitter.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      








Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
Pin



Previous post


      
   
95

      

By B.N. Frank


Health experts – including the American Medical Association – have been warning for many years now about biological and environmental risks associated with LED streetlights.  This has been reported by the mainstream media and other sources.


Many people have been replacing LED bulbs in their homes because of health warnings.  Communities continue to install them anyway in streetlights despite risks and opposition (see 1, 2).


         



      

From Hawaii Now:



On Tuesday, city leaders were joined at Honolulu Hale by Hawaii Energy and Johnson Controls to announce the completion of work to install some 53,000 LED streetlights in Oahu neighborhoods.


It’s a change that will likely save millions per year in utility costs.


“LED lights make the streets brighter. Now why do we like this? I think it’s obvious to most people. A brighter street is a safer street – for pedestrians maybe crossing, for people driving down the street, and also to cut down on crime,” Mayor Caldwell said.


Work to convert the street lights began in November 2017.


[…]


According to the city, the $46.6 million project was financed through Johnson Controls, so the city did not expend any upfront funds.






LED streetlights also have surveillance capabilities.  There’s been opposition reported about that as well.


Activist Post regularly reports about issues associated with LED light bulbs used for street lights, vehicle headlights, and everything else.  For more information visit our archives.



Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
96

      

By The Conscious Resistance


On October 1, 2019, Senator Ted Cruz spoke in Houston for the 5G Future event.


After the event I attempted to question Cruz on the pushback against 5G, including lawsuits in Texas.



         



      

Support the Future of The Conscious Resistance: https://fundrazr.com/consciousresista…


 



Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
97

      

By The Conscious Resistance


On Monday September 30, 2019, Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner met with Federal Communication Commission Commissioner Brendan Carr and other officials to discuss the future of 5G in Houston. Mayor Turner and Mr. Carr discussed the potential for job opportunities relating to 5G technology. However, there was no discussion on the ongoing lawsuits in Texas and across the United States, where local and state officials allege that the FCC and the wireless industry are usurping local power and forcing the 5G rollout down the throats of communities.


I asked Commissioner Carr about the concerns regarding his connections with the Wireless industry. Carr worked at the law firm Wiley Rein and his clients were Verizon, AT&T, Centurylink, CTIA, the wireless association and the USTA, the telco lobby/association. I also asked Mr Carr about the Captured Agency report released by Harvard’s School of Ethics. Unfortunately, Mr Carr had no interest in addressing these questions….


         



      


Support the Future of The Conscious Resistance: https://fundrazr.com/consciousresista…



Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
98

      

By B.N. Frank


Experts have determined that anything wirelessly connected has the potential of being hacked – including medical devices and implants.  In 2007, Former Vice President Dick Cheney had the wireless connection disabled on his pacemaker because he was afraid someone would try to murder him by hacking into it.


This possibility has been reported by many experts over the years and in 2017, the FDA recalled almost ½ million pacemakers due to hacking fears.  This is why it makes NO sense that the FDA continues to approve the use wireless medical devices and implants anyway.  But they have, and may continue to do so despite new risks they reported in July and again yesterday.


From Press Release 1:



Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is informing patients, health care professionals, IT staff in health care facilities and manufacturers of a set of cybersecurity vulnerabilities, referred to as “URGENT/11,” that—if exploited by a remote attacker—may introduce risks for medical devices and hospital networks. URGENT/11 affects several operating systems that may then impact certain medical devices connected to a communications network, such as wi-fi and public or home Internet, as well as other connected equipment such as routers, connected phones and other critical infrastructure equipment. These cybersecurity vulnerabilities may allow a remote user to take control of a medical device and change its function, cause denial of service, or cause information leaks or logical flaws, which may prevent a device from functioning properly or at all.


To date, the FDA has not received any adverse event reports associated with these vulnerabilities. The public was first informed of these vulnerabilities in a July 2019 advisory sent by the Department of Homeland Security. Today, the FDA is providing additional information regarding the source of these vulnerabilities and recommendations for reducing or avoiding risks the vulnerabilities may pose to certain medical devices.


“While advanced devices can offer safer, more convenient and timely health care delivery, a medical device connected to a communications network could have cybersecurity vulnerabilities that could be exploited resulting in patient harm,” said Amy Abernethy, M.D., Ph.D., FDA’s principal deputy commissioner.



         



      

From Press Release 2:



Some medical device manufacturers are already actively assessing which devices that use these operating systems are affected by URGENT/11 and identifying risk and remediation actions. Several manufacturers have also notified their customers consumers with devices determined to be affected so far, which include an imaging system, an infusion pump, and an anesthesia machine. The FDA expects that additional medical devices will be identified that contain one or more of the vulnerabilities associated with the original IPnet software.


Recommendations for Patients and Caregivers


Talk to your health care provider to determine if your medical device may be affected. Please be aware that health care providers may not have access to this information at the time of issuance of this communication. Device manufacturers should be reaching out to their customers as more information becomes available.
Seek medical help right away if you think operation or function of your medical device changed unexpectedly.





According to The FDA, they are an agency that protects public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness, and security of many products including ones that give off electronic radiation.


Yet they continue to approve these potentially hackable devices that emit electronic and wireless radiation which is also harmful to people?


Wireless radiation has biological effects. Period. This is no longer a subject for debate when you look at PubMed and the peer-review literature. These effects are seen in all life forms; plants, animals, insects, microbes. In humans, we have clear evidence of cancer now: there is no question We have evidence of DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, which is the precursor of congestive heart failure, neuropsychiatric effects…5G is an untested application of a technology that we know is harmful; we know it from the science. In academics, this is called human subjects research. – Dr. Sharon Goldberg






Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy





Activist Post has reported many times about FDA debacles (see 1, 2, 3, 4).  Feel protected?



Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
            


Free ebook How To Survive the Job Automation Apocalypse


Free ebook How To Get Started with Bitcoin: Quick and Easy Beginner’s Guide




      








Activist Post Daily Newsletter

         




   Email address:
   



     Yes - I consent to receive emails
   



   

Leave this field empty if you're human:


Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

      

Share
Tweet
Pin



Previous post


      
   
99

      

By John Vibes


For the past few years, a large auto show called H2oi held near the end of September has attracted tens of thousands of car enthusiasts to Ocean City, Maryland, for a weekend of partying and showing off their custom-built vehicles.


In 2016, the organizers of H2oi were forced to cancel the event, after city officials refused to issue permits, citing reckless driving and rowdy crowds. However, thousands of people still showed up to Ocean City that year, and created their own unsanctioned celebration, which strained an already complicated relationship between the local police and many members of the east coast car community.


Now, more people continue to show up on the same weekend every year, and each year, tensions between the police and the H2oi visitors continue to rise.


         



      

In 2018, the official H2oi organizers moved the show to Atlantic City, likely to distance themselves from the unsanctioned event in Ocean City, but the unauthorized gathering just won’t go away. In fact, it continues to grow in popularity despite the official event having moved to another city.


Local police and government officials have increased fines and began towing cars for very common modifications in an attempt to scare away attendees of the unsanctioned gathering, but the increased enforcement has only escalated hostilities.


Attendees of the event have told the Mind Unleashed that they believe Ocean City is discriminating against them because their crowd is younger than the attendees of bike week and the classic car weeks, which happen to have just as many injuries and arrests during their events.


This year, the Ocean City Police Department increased fines yet again, and declared a “special event zone,” which instituted a 30mph speed limit throughout the entire city. H2oi attendees showed up planning to get ticketed or even towed—but were determined to have fun regardless.




 












View this post on Instagram


















 


Fuck a protest i start mosh pit.

100

      

By Sean Walton


United Parcel Service Inc on Tuesday said it won the U.S. government’s first full approval to operate a drone airline, which gave it a lead in the nascent U.S. drone delivery business over rivals Amazon.com Inc and Alphabet Inc.


The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) granted UPS’ Flight Forward drone subsidiary a Part 135 Standard certification on Friday. The company said the certificate allows it to expand its delivery service in campus settings such as hospitals and universities, but added that residential deliveries are years away.


The certification allows UPS pilots to fly drones beyond their line of sight and opens the door for the delivery company to expand Flight Forward. The fledgling unit is immediately doubling the number of drone flights it does for its flagship customer, Raleigh, North Carolina’s WakeMed Health & Hospitals.


         



      

“We’ll easily get to 20-plus flights per day, per drone,” said Scott Price, UPS’ chief strategy and transformation officer.


“It’s a business, it’s not a prototype or a test,” Price said of Flight Forward, which is paid to ferry blood and tissue samples to WakeMed’s central laboratory from points around its main hospital campus.


UPS said its latest certification clears the way for Flight Forward to add other campus delivery projects without seeking government approvals for each one.


“There are hundreds of campuses in the United States,” said Price, who added that UPS is eyeing drone deliveries on hospital, corporate and university campuses as it builds Flight Forward.


“This is a big step forward in safely integrating unmanned aircraft systems into our airspace,” U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao said in a statement.


Under the new FAA approval, UPS Flight Forward pilots may now operate multiple drones under one certificate.


Earlier this year, Alphabet’s Wing, the sister unit of search engine Google, was the first company to get U.S. air carrier certification for a single-pilot drone operation. It is testing home deliveries in a rural area around Blacksburg, Virginia.


Amazon, known for its splashy drone delivery tests, also has won experimental certifications to test its drones.


The FAA is writing rules for drone operations, including guidelines for sharing airspace with passenger planes and flying over populated areas.


Residential deliveries, Price said, are “years out.”


Source



Sean Walton is a researcher and journalist for The Daily Sheeple, where this article first appeared. Send tips to s[email protected]


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]