Displaying posts published in

May 2020

‘Behemoths who control’: Barr says Trump executive order on social media companies will go further if necessary by Mica Soellner

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/behemoths-who-control-barr-says-trump-executive-order-on-social-media-companies-will-go-further-if-necessary

Attorney General William Barr praised President Trump for his executive order that could allow federal regulators to take punitive action against social media giants for the way they regulate online content.

Trump’s order rolls back the long-standing legal protection known as Section 230, which spares tech companies from being held liable for the content they allow online and how they decide to monitor it.

Barr said the protection, which was adopted about 25 years ago, has been stretched beyond its original intention of not holding tech companies accountable for the content created by third-party users.

“It’s been completely stretched to allow what have become really behemoths who control a lot of the flow of information in our society to engage in censorship of that information and to act as editors and publishers of the material,” Barr said.

“So when they put on their own content, like fact-check content onto other people’s content and when curate their collection, they start censoring particular content, including in many cases the direction of … governments like communist China, they become publishers. They shouldn’t be entitled to the same kind of shield that was set up earlier,” he continued.

The order comes days after Twitter put a fact-check alert on one of Trump’s tweets, linking mail-in voting to increased voter fraud.

Twitter has taken steps to combat misinformation in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic to avoid what it deems potentially dangerous medical hoaxes or advice from spreading throughout the public.

Trump has aggressively pushed back on the action, accusing the company of political bias.

Barr said Trump’s order is a strong step in addressing the problem of increased oversight of tech companies on its users and allow Section 230 to return to its original intent.

“They are using that market power with particular viewpoints,” Barr said. “That is wrong. It has to be addressed, not only to this executive order, but I think litigation going forward.”

South Korea is the pivot in the Huawei wars Restrictions on semiconductor sales to Chinese companies are ‘unacceptable’ to Seoul: David Goldman

https://asiatimes.com/2020/05/south-korea-is-the-pivot-in-the-huawei-wars/

South Korea has told Washington that restrictions on semiconductor sales to Huawei and other Chinese companies are “unacceptable,” according to industry sources. Seoul is trying to mediate between Beijing and Washington following the US Commerce Department’s May 18 announcement that sales of computer chips to companies on its “entity list” will require a license if they are produced with US technology, even if they are produced overseas by foreign companies.

After the US temporarily banned exports of high-end smartphone chips to China’s ZTE Corp in Aprl 2018, Huawei began a crash program to design its own chips. The Commerce Department’s new rules are designed to close what it calls a loophole in US export restrictions, the fabrication of Chinese-designed chips in Taiwan.

The extraterritorial assertion of control over third-party sales of products made with US equipment is unprecedented, and has no basis in international law, South Korea has remonstrated with Washington. China bought almost twice as much from South Korea during the last 12 months as the United States. Sixty percent of all Asian trade stays within Asia, due to tight integration of industrial supply chains. The Korea Times in a May 27 editorial denounced “Washington’s egocentric actions and Beijing bashing,” warning that “a  new Cold War and a trade war will deal a severe blow to Korea.”

President Trump bet the farm on the Huawei chip ban, I argued in a May 22 analysis. The US present has a monopoly on some key chip-making technology, in part because the R&D cost of challenging US companies is huge compared to the size of the equipment market. If the US uses its advantage to suppress technology elsewhere, China and other countries will put the resources required into breaking the US monopoly. China may not be able to buy chips made with US companies, but Chinese companies can hire anyone they want, and Chinese electrical engineers are conducting most of the research in the field. The US may extract short-term advantages, but at the cost of losing one of its last remaining advantages in high tech.

Norway health chief: lockdown was not needed to tame COVID A country should only enforce this draconian measure if it is sure that the academic foundation for lockdown was sound Fraser Nelson

https://spectator.us/norway-health-chief-lockdown-tame-covid/

Norway is assembling a picture of what happened before lockdown and its latest discovery is pretty significant. It is using observed data — hospital figures, infection numbers and so on — to construct a picture of what was happening in March. At the time, no one really knew. It was feared that virus was rampant with each person infecting two or three others — and only lockdown could get this exponential growth rate (the so-called R number) down to a safe level of 1. This was the hypothesis advanced in various graphs by Imperial College London for Britain, Norway and several European countries.

But the Norwegian public health authority has published a report with a striking conclusion: the virus was never spreading as fast as had been feared and was already on the way out when lockdown was ordered. ‘It looks as if the effective reproduction rate had already dropped to around 1.1 when the most comprehensive measures were implemented on March 12, and that there would not be much to push it down below 1… We have seen in retrospect that the infection was on its way down.’ Here’s the graph, with the R-number on the right-hand scale:

The FISA Bill Flops The surveillance court dilutes political accountability. Better to abolish it.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fisa-bill-flops-11590708290?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

Nancy Pelosi is known for her iron political control over the House, but on Wednesday the Speaker suffered a rare defeat as she pulled a FISA reauthorization bill before what would have been a losing vote. This is a victory for security and political accountability, and it’s worth rehearsing how we got here.

The need to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has been clear since last year’s damning report by Inspector General Michael Horowitz. In March Attorney General Bill Barr worked out a deal with Democratic and GOP House leaders to renew surveillance authority for the FBI and include measures to prevent a repeat of James Comey’s 2016 interference in a presidential campaign.

These provisions included a requirement that the Attorney General sign off personally on any FBI investigation of a presidential campaign, that the FBI set up an office of compliance, and that any application for a FISA court warrant include evidence or information that might be exculpatory. That bill easily passed the House, 278-136, in March.

Then the mischief began. The Senate added an amendment from Mike Lee (R., Utah) and Pat Leahy (D., Vt.) to require an outside “amicus curiae” to review and perhaps rebut surveillance requests. These amici would have extraordinary access to sensitive information.

How Xi is using fear of COVID to crush Hong Kong’s autonomy The leader believes freedom is another dangerous virus Charles Parton

https://spectator.us/xi-using-fear-covid-crush-hong-kong-autonomy/

The Hong Kong government has recently extended its COVID regulations banning gatherings of more than eight people until June 4. How convenient. Last year, according to organizers, 180,000 people gathered to commemorate the anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre on June 4, 1989. In future, being an organizer may well land you in court under a new national security law, which Beijing announced last week at its annual National People’s Congress.

Perhaps we should have expected it. After all, the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s ‘constitution’, lays down that the Hong Kong government should enact such a law, and the big party meeting in October told us that the ‘legal systems and implementation mechanisms for protecting national security’ would be set up. But given the recent protests, now did not seem the time to add fuel to the fire. In 2003, the then chief executive Tung Chee Hwa tried, but backed down in the face of 500,000 protesters. Later he resigned on the grounds of ill health, although he is still curiously vigorous in his support of Beijing’s interests.

The General Secretary in Beijing is not for turning. Xi Jinping is a man who doubles down. The attempt to introduce an extradition law in Hong Kong led to massive protests. Beijing allowed HK Chief Executive Carrie Lam to agree only to withdrawing the extradition bill. It gave instructions that continuing protests were to be met with increasingly fierce police tactics — ruining the excellent relations ‘Asia’s finest’ had hitherto enjoyed with the people.