🚀 Billionaire, Jared Isaacman, becomes the first civilian/commercial astronaut to complete a spacewalk.

Isaacman spent a total of 10 minutes outside the spacecraft. The 2nd commercial astronaut to complete a spacewalk was his colleagues, SpaceX engineer, Sarah Gillis.

@CIG_telegram

🏛 Harvard has chosen to defy the Supreme Court's ruling against it and is continuing to blatantly engage in racial discrimination in admissions.

Bizarrely, their Class of 2028 profile doesn't even list Whites. Instead, they're treated as a residual race.

🔗 Crémieux

🧬 Don’t Even Go There

The National Institutes of Health now blocks access to an important database if it thinks a scientist’s research may enter “forbidden” territory.

A policy of deliberate ignorance has corrupted top scientific institutions in the West. It’s been an open secret for years that prestigious journals will often reject submissions that offend prevailing political orthodoxies—especially if they involve controversial aspects of human biology and behavior—no matter how scientifically sound the work might be. The leading journal Nature Human Behaviour recently made this practice official in an editorial effectively announcing that it will not publish studies that show the wrong kind of differences between human groups.

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist’s research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is “stigmatizing.” Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn’t receive satisfactory answers.

What is NIH’s justification? Studies of intelligence do not pose any greater threat to the dignity of their participants than research based on non-genetic factors. With the customary safeguards in place, research activities such as genetically predicting an individual’s academic performance need be no more “stigmatizing” than predicting academic performance based on an individual’s family structure during childhood.

📝: The American government forbids any further research on the proven genetic links to race and IQ

🔗 https://www.city-journal.org/article/dont-even-go-there

🇲🇽🇲🇽 Video of Mexican soldiers being attacked in Culiacán, Sinaloa.

📝 Thomas van Linge: As some had predicted the Mexican state of Sinaloa has descended into war as a struggle of power has erupted within the Sinaloa cartel.

fighting seems to be centered around the regional capital Culiacan where Chapo's sons are fighting it out with those loyal to El Mayo.

🔗 All Source News

🇺🇸 Share of foreign-born people in the US is at its highest rate in over a century, survey says

The share of people born outside the United States increased in 2023 to 14.3% from 13.9% in 2022, according to estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s annual American Community Survey.

🔗 https://apnews.com/article/immigration-census-foreign-born-florida-26741d9659eb91a58891b97e6b56f72c

🇺🇸 A Springfield, Ohio homeless advocate tells the city council that landlords are kicking people out of their homes and replacing them with Haitians and that the Biden-Harris government is paying them to do it.

He says he personally knows someone who lived in a house for seven years. The landlord told them to leave under the guise of completing renovations only to replace them with a Haitian and charge the government triple the rent.

"I don't know of a single homeless Haitian in this town because they all got vouchers! But I can show you a whole bunch of people that have been displaced."

🔗 Greg Price

🇷🇺❌🇺🇸 President Putin warns that NATO will enter a direct war with Russia if Ukraine uses long-range Western missiles to strike inside Russia.

🔗 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/sep/12/putin-ukraine-missile-restrictions-nato-war-russia

🇨🇳 A new world record was set last week in Shenzhen when an 8,100 drone formation lifted off to show a stunning performance

📝 This isn't just a light show. It's a demonstration of futuristic military power. You are looking at an unarmed drone swarm.

🔗 Zhang Meifang

🇪🇺❌🔐 Thought the chat control EU regulation has gone away? Think again!

Back in June, a blocking minority of EU government prevented the adoption of a chat control tool which would have ended all end-to-end encryption messaging apps in the European Union as the EU would have mandated messaging apps to implement AI tools with which to scan images, videos and URLs sent by users. It would have affected apps from the likes of What's Up and Facebook Messenger to Telegram, Discord & others.

The bill in its latest form looks like this:

➡️ A limited use of the tool for "high risk services". What does "high risk service" mean? Well it will be up to your government do decide what "high risk service" means so the tool can be used to check one app or every app for that matter, depending on how paranoid or totalitarian your specific government is.

➡️ Technologies used for detection in end-to-end encrypted services would be “vetted” with regard to their effectiveness, their impact on fundamental rights and risks to cyber security. However the so-called “client-side scanning” on our smartphones creates risks for hacking and abuse, and destroys trust in the confidentiality of private communication. Since several providers (Signal, Threems) have announced they would rather cease services in the EU than implement bugs in their apps, the proposal would effectively cut Europeans off communication with other users of these apps.

➡️ Scanning would be limited to visual content and URLs. But it is exactly the scanning of visual content which under the current voluntary scheme exposes intimate family photos to viewing by unknown persons, results in thosands of false positives and leads to mass criminalisation of teenagers.

➡️ Using AI to automatically search for previously unknown CSAM would result in the disclosure of chats only after two hits. But this limitation will usually be ineffective as falsely flagged beach photos or consensual sexting rarely involve just a single photo. The EU Commissioner for Home Affairs has herself herself stated that three out of four of the disclosed chats and photos are not actionable for the police. Algorithms and hash databases are generally unreliable in distinguishing legal from illegal content.

➡️ Scanning (“upload moderation”) would be applied only to users who consent. If a user does not agree to the scanning of their chats, they would still be able to use the service for sending text messages, but would no longer be able to send or receive images, videos, iconography, stickers or URLs. Clearly this does not give users a real choice, as using messenger services purely for texting is not an option in the 21st century. (EU continues to violate its own laws specifically art. 7 of the GDPR in regards to consent)

➡️ Professional accounts of staff of intelligence agencies, police and military would be exempted from the scanning of chats and messages. This exception proves that interior ministers know exactly just how unreliable and dangerous the snooping algorithms are that they want to unleash on us citizens. Ministers themselves do not want to suffer the consequences of the destruction of digital privacy of correspondence and secure encryption that they would impose on us.

What's new is that on September 4th, the Hungarian-led European Council made the use of AI tools to scan potential child abuse materials not mandatory.

It doesn't end there. On September 23rd, 2024, the Justice and Home Affairs Council (JHA) will deliberate on the bill again. On October 10-11th all ministers of the interior/internal affairs of the EU will be required to adopt a position on the matter in the hopes that, in the future, a chat control tool will pass the EU's institutions.

🔗 https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/