Items tagged with: arbitrary
HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19666148
Posted by dessant (karma: 702)
Post stats: Points: 167 - Comments: 68 - 2019-04-15T15:47:08Z
#HackerNews #adblock #arbitrary #code #execute #filter #lists #may #pages #plus #web
HackerNewsBot debug: Calculated post rank: 134 - Loop: 220 - Rank min: 100 - Author rank: 51
On Ted Cruz' (R - TX) lawsuit agains tthe Federal Election Committee
No matter what you say about the case, the article or the entire website I hereby share, they personally had me at the first chapter already: «The unlikable, craven hypocrite has a point». This was beyond hilarious. :'D
Cruz is challenging an FEC rule that limits the amount of money candidates can reimburse themselves for personal loans given to their own campaigns. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act limits repayments candidates can give themselves from post-election fundraising to $250,000. Cruz claims he loaned his campaign $260,000 during his Texas Senate battle against Beto O’Rourke.The equalisation of speech to money is such a fundamental issue to this country, I guess we could sum up our entire planet's fundamental problems to this one universal, yet utterly false equalisation of speech to money.
Wealthy candidates have a First Amendment right (so the story goes) to spend as much as they want to buy themselves an election. But limiting how much they can reimburse themselves arguably disincentivizes profligate personal financing of elections. After $250K, all additional “speech” is a sunk cost. If that means some candidates will not loan themselves quite as much “speech,” so be it.
I don’t agree with the fundamental premise here, as I don’t think money is speech. But even if I did think that, I don’t see how Cruz’s speech rights are violated given that he was allowed to spend all the “speech” he wanted to. Nobody is limiting what Ted Cruz can say (would that somebody could) or how much money he can spend on himself to say it. Cruz’s First Amendment rights are secure.
#US #USA #Cruz #TedCruz #FEC #FederalElectionCommittee #Arbitrary #Arbitrariness #Politics #News #Election #GeneralElection #Election2020 #Elections2020 #ORourke #BetoORourke #FreeSpeech #Reimbursement #FirstAmendment #FreedomOfSpeech
To be sure, as a for-profit enterprise with its own unique set of #corporate "ethics", #Facebook has every right to impose whatever #filters it desires on the #media shared on its platform. It is entirely possible that one or more posts was flagged by Facebook's "triggered" readers who merely alerted a #censorship algo which blocked all content.#classy #response from #zerohedge Wish they'd open an instance on D*... #1a
Alternatively, it is just as possible that Facebook simply decided to no longer allow its users to share our content in #retaliation for our extensive coverage of what some have dubbed the platform's "many problems", including #chronic #privacy #violations, mass #abandonment by younger users, its gross and ongoing #misrepresentation of #fake users, ironically - in retrospect - its systematic #censorship and back door #government cooperation (those are just links from the past few weeks).
Unfortunately, as noted above, we still don't know what event precipitated this censorship, and any attempts to get #feedback from the company with the $500 billion market cap, have so far remained #unanswered.
We would welcome this opportunity to engage Facebook in a #constructive dialog over the company's decision to impose a blanket ban on #ZeroHedge content. Alternatively, we will probably not lose much sleep if that fails to occur: unlike other websites, we are lucky in that only a tiny fraction of our inbound traffic originates at Facebook, with most of our readers arriving here directly without the aid of search engines ( #Google banned us from its News platform, for reasons still unknown, shortly after the #Trump victory) or referrals.
That said, with Facebook increasingly under #political, #regulatory and market #scrutiny for its #arbitrary internal decisions on what content to promote and what to snuff, its ever #declining user engagement, and its soaring content #surveillance costs, such censorship is hardly evidence of the #platform's "openness" to discourse, its advocacy of #freespeech, or its willingness to listen to and encourage non-mainstream opinions, even if such "discourse" takes place in some fake user " #clickfarm " somewhere in Calcutta.
Published Date: 02/18/2019 Last Modified Date: 02/19/2019 In the Linux kernel through 4.20.10, af_alg_release() in crypto/af_alg.c neglects to set a NULL value for a certain structure member, which…
Article word count: 49
HN Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19210727
Posted by robin0 (karma: 71)
Post stats: Points: 125 - Comments: 72 - 2019-02-20T18:46:34Z
#HackerNews #42010 #arbitrary #code #execution #found #kernel #linux #through #vulnerable
* Published Date: 02/18/2019 * Last Modified Date: 02/19/2019
In the Linux kernel through 4.20.10, af_alg_release() in crypto/af_alg.c neglects to set a NULL value for a certain structure member, which leads to a use-after-free in sockfs_setattr.
Note: This page is generated by our securitybot and has not been checked for errors.
HackerNewsBot debug: Calculated post rank: 107 - Loop: 112 - Rank min: 100 - Author rank: 59
Jordan Peterson, a Canadian professor who has built a reputation for fighting ‘political correctness’ and ‘cultural Marxism,’ and the Libertarian comedian and pundit Dave Rubin announced Monday that they would launch an alternative to the crowdfunding website Patreon after the removal of several high-profile right-wing users of the service.