#... i accedently deleted the original | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

hollowinky · 1 year

Photo

#hollowart #my art #kabuto yakushi #naruto #i did something very stupid #i deleted original post by accedent #but i have that post reblogged #LOL????#i am sorry if you have already seen this D:#just how idiotic of me >////////<

21 notes · View notes

ao3feed-grammander · 2 years

Text

Newt scamander One shots

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/6RftkSG

by KiwiSandy

Eyo, Some One shots about our favourite magizoologist.

(ACCEDENTLY DELETED THIS YESTERDAY)

(I have dyslexia so there will be some grammar mistakes but I'm trying my best to reduce them)

Words: 780, Chapters: 1/1, Language: English

Fandoms: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (Movies)

Rating: Not Rated

Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings

Categories: M/M

Characters: Gellert Grindelwald, Original Percival Graves, Theseus Scamander

Relationships: Original Percival Graves/Newt Scamander, Newt Scamander & Theseus Scamander, Gellert Grindelwald/Newt Scamander, Albus Dumbledore/Newt Scamander, Albus Dumbledore/Gellert Grindelwald/Newt Scamander

Additional Tags: BAMF Newt Scamander, Autistic Newt Scamander, Hurt Newt Scamander, Cinnamon Roll Newt Scamander, Newt Scamander is a Sweetheart, Newt Scamander Needs a Hug

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/6RftkSG

#IFTTT #ao3feed #fanfic #grammander #fbawtft

0 notes

failingradish · 3 years

Photo

Giving past avatars a face part 15/23

#... i accedently deleted the original #sorry it's late #atla #tlok #lok #Avatar The Last Airbender #avatar the legend of korra #giving past avatar a face #my art

2K notes · View notes

mathewingram · 6 years

Text

A generation is growing up in China accustomed to a censored Internet

Note: This is something I originally wrote for the daily newsletter at the Columbia Journalism Review, where I’m the chief digital writer

Free speech and censorship are hot topics in North America, with heated debates over issues such as Facebook’s decision to delete pages belonging to conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, Twitter’s refusal to ban neo-Nazis, and whether Google should remove controversial or offensive YouTube videos. But none of these topics stir much interest in China, according to a recent piece by Li Yuan, a technology writer for The New York Times—mostly because an entire generation has never heard of Facebook, Twitter or Google, and censorship isn’t something they seem to care much about.

For anyone with an interest in the open, uncensored web, Li’s portrayal of how millennials and their ilk in China experience the Internet is likely to be profoundly depressing. She mentions an 18-year-old named Wei Dilong, who lives in a city in southern China and likes basketball, hip-hop music and Hollywood superhero movies. He has never heard of Google or Twitter, and has a hunch that Facebook might be a bit like Baidu, the Chinese search engine. Wen Shengjian, a 14-year-old who likes playing basketball, said he had heard of Google, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, but said a friend of his father’s told him they were blocked because some of their content wasn’t appropriate for the development of socialism with Chinese characteristics. “I don’t need them,” Wen said.

Li’s piece raises the possibility that the Chinese government has achieved some or all of its original goal in blocking certain sites and services, and heavily censoring others: It has managed to keep almost an entire generation away from content it disapproves of, and has replaced Western apps and services with its own heavily censored versions, to the point where young Chinese men and women show little or no interest in—or even awareness of—the alternative. According to Li, two economists found most college students were not interested in uncensored sites even when they were given free tools to access them.

This has become particularly relevant with the news that Google is reportedly trying to re-enter China after almost a decade of being blocked there, and in order to achieve that goal it is considering offering the Chinese government a search app and a news app that will both be heavily censored. One of the fears that some critics have of this move is that not only will Google be acceding to the demands of a repressive and totalitarian state, but its decision to cater to China’s demands could lead to requests from other repressive governments around the world for their own censored versions of the Internet.

Here’s more on China and its tangled relationship with the web:

A Chinese-based cloud: According to Bloomberg, Google is in talks with Chinese Internet giant Tencent about a partnership that would see it offer cloud services such as Google Drive and Google Docs in the country. In most markets, Google’s services are hosted on its own servers, which it runs via giant server farms in various locations around the world, but Chinese law requires that any such service using Chinese data must be located in the country, so Google is reportedly looking for partners.

Baidu talks tough: After news of Google’s plan to possibly re-enter the country broke, the chief executive of China’s largest search engine, Baidu, said he was confident his company would be able to prevail over the US-based giant. Robin Li wrote on his WeChat account that if Google returned, “we are very confident we can just PK and win again,” using a popular video-game term meaning “player kill.”

A disappearing article: People’s Daily, the largest newspaper in China and an official organ of the Communist government, published a piece of commentary about Google’s plans in which it said the company would be welcome to return to China, provided it abided by all of the requisite laws of the country (such as censorship). A number of China-watchers note that the article in question seems to have disappeared.

Questions from Congress: A bi-partisan group of six Senators have sent Google a letter asking the company to explain its plans to re-enter China by acceding to the government’s demands for censorship. The group, which includes Senator Marco Rubio and Senator Mark Warner, called reports of the plans “deeply troubling” and said that a move back into the country “risks making Google complicit in human rights abuses related to China’s rigorous censorship regime.”

Other notable stories:

Alex Jones, whose conspiracy-peddling Infowars site has been blocked by Facebook, YouTube, Apple and Spotify, has accused the tech giants of censorship, and called on his followers to rise up against anti-Trump “sociopaths.” Jones told The New York Times the moves were part of a plot involving Democrats, China, “globalists” and “corporatists,” and argued that his support for Donald Trump was the main reason he was being censored, not his role in publishing misinformation or hate speech.

Two months after the European Community introduced its GDPR or General Data Protection Regulation, which imposes strict requirements on the handling of user data by publishers and platforms, more than 1,000 news websites are still unavailable in the European Union, according to a report from Nieman Lab. Some publishers appear to have decided that serving EU users isn’t worth the cost of complying with the rules.

Grace Shulman, who was the poetry editor at The Nation from 1971 to 2006, says in an opinion piece for The New York Times that the magazine “betrayed” poet Anders Carlson-Wee and its own principles when it apologized for a poem that Carlson-Wee wrote in which he used black vernacular (Carlson-Wee is white). Shulman criticized what she called “the backward and increasingly prevalent idea that the artist is somehow morally responsible for his character’s behavior or voice.”

According to a survey done by Ipsos, more than 40 percent of Republicans said the President should have the authority to shut down media outlets if they misbehave, according to a report from the Daily Beast. Almost half of Republican respondents also agreed with the statement that “The media is the enemy of the people,” a phrase that President Donald Trump has used many times.

Jim Friedlich writes for CJR about the legacy of H.F. “Gerry” Lenfest, the Philadelphia-based cable TV mogul turned philanthropist who passed away on the weekend at the age of 88. Lenfest bought The Philadelphia Inquirer and Daily News four years ago and then created and funded a public-benefit corporation, the Lenfest Institute, designed to enable the newspapers to continue publishing in perpetuity.

A generation is growing up in China accustomed to a censored Internet was originally published on mathewingram.com/work

0 notes

nevilleconnolly-blog · 5 years

Text

God’s Will: Serving Patients – Excerpts of Caring from Called to be a Surgeon, Not for Bread Alone Dr. Neville K. Connolly, MA, MD, FRCS, FACS, FAAP

I was asked, one day, to see a patient with acute abdominal pain. A simple physical examination convinced me that he had acute appendicitis and I recommended immediate surgery. He refused and went home. I was very worried and could not get him out of my mind. That evening, though it was pouring with rain, I drove out to his house to see him again. I found that he was no better, perhaps a little worse. This time he acceded to my demands that he be operated on. I put him in my car and drove him to the hospital where I removed an appendix which was about to rupture. He and his wife were very grateful and I got to know him quite well while he was recovering. I found out that he worked for a radio company and was an expert on such things as amplifiers and radio receivers. By this time, we had moved into our house in Washington and I had set up my ‘Hi-fi’ system. I had this made for me by a friend in England before transistors had replaced vacuum tubes. Also, it used 240-volts rather than the 120-volt current used in American houses. Someone had told me that houses in America had two incoming electric lines and an earth line. If one connected the input of the two incoming power lines, one got 240-volts. I had done this, connecting the input of my machine with one terminal to each of the incoming lines in the main box. It had worked quite satisfactorily for some time but now it had died. I was at a loss to find someone who could repair it. I asked my recovering patient if he would be able to help me out, since he was an expert in that field. Perhaps out of a sense of gratitude, he agreed to come to my house to see what he could do. When he arrived and saw how I had managed to get an input of 240-volts into the machine I thought that he would have a heart attack. After rapidly disconnecting my brilliant solution, he explained that I needed a transformer to adapt my machine to work on 120-volts and that he could get one for me. I had never really understood much about electricity and always felt lucky that I had learned, rather parrot-wise, enough physics to get into medical school. I am still not quite sure why electricity does not run all over the floor when you pull a plug out of a wall socket. I accept the fact that it does not do so as a merciful act of God. Apparently, God was on my side when I did the original wiring as there was no explosion and the house did not burn down. My patient kindly sorted out the whole mess and got my Hi-fi working again. Other than the cost of the transformer he would not charge me. He said that my unexpected zeal in coming to his house that night had saved his life and he felt this small service scarcely repaid me. I wonder if he realized just how significant a service he had rendered to me. I became involved in a situation which was very revealing and, to me, rather unhappy. One of the senior pediatricians asked me to see a small child with intractable constipation. I examined the child, found that I needed to evacuate the impacted stool from high in the intestine and did so with the aid of an anesthetic. My examination convinced me that the child had Hirschsprung’s disease. This is a condition where the nerves in the lowest part of the intestine have not developed properly. As a result, the contents of the intestine are propelled only so far. They cannot be pushed through the area which has the deficient nerve supply. Though the condition had been known for many years, its true cause was only discovered in the late 1940's by the group at Boston Children’s hospital. At Great Ormond Street in London we had learned about their work and copied them. The cure was to remove the malfunctioning part of the distal bowel and connect the remainder to the anal canal. This is a somewhat tricky operation but pediatric surgeons were performing it with great success. Having seen this particular child, I wrote a note on the chart suggesting the diagnosis and recommending an X-ray which would confirm my opinion. I also called the referring physician. Most apologetically he informed me that he had only seen the child because the child’s own pediatrician was out of town. This pediatrician had returned and did not wish me to see the patient any more. He had his own surgeon. This surgeon did not believe in Hirschsprung’s disease. He had the child transferred to another hospital where he performed several misguided operations without improving the situation. I was very frustrated but did not see what I could do. A couple of years later a baby was admitted to the ‘staff’ service and was seen by Dr. Hawfield. He called me and said that he had a baby that he would like me to see with him. I went to the ward with him. Before he could tell me anything about the problem I noticed the name of the baby. It was the same last name as the child mentioned above. I said; “Are you suspecting Hirschsprung’s?” He said he was but how did I know. I told him the sad story of the other child who turned out to be the older sister of the current patient. It turned out that the older sister was still in trouble. The parents had spent all their money on the medical expenses of the older child and had to send the second child to the hospital for free care. We confirmed the diagnosis on the baby and Harold asked me to operate as he was not familiar with the procedure. I made the necessary plans and arranged for one of the anesthesiologists with whom I had developed a very satisfactory relationship to give the anesthetic. The night before the operation I went to the hospital to check that everything I would need would be ready. There I met the Chief of Anesthesia. He said to me; “Why are you going to kill that baby tomorrow?” I spent a miserable night appreciating how much depended on the next day. Besides the life of the baby, my whole reputation hung in the balance. I went ahead and performed the operation as I had done before under the tutelage of Denis Browne. Actually, the baby was only 3 months old and the standard recommendation was to wait until the baby was at least 6 months of age. The procedure went very smoothly and the baby had a normal bowel movement on the way to the recovery room. She never looked back and was discharged within a week. This is not the end of the story. The parents, who were very grateful to me, were working for an embassy in Washington at that time. They were subsequently transferred to New York. A couple of years later they called me up from New York to tell me that their older daughter was still suffering from her original problem. Since their younger daughter was now completely healthy, they asked if they could bring the older one down for me to cure. I told them that should not be necessary because there were excellent pediatric surgeons in New York. I would contact the one I knew on their behalf. I rang up Dr. Santulli and explained the situation to him. He agreed to take on the child which he did. He found that she was nearly moribund but he revived her and then cured her. I went over the hospital records of this child when I had first seen her. To my amazement and utter disgust, I found that my notes, consultation and recommendations had been removed in total. This made clear to me the difficulty I would have in establishing a purely pediatric surgical practice in Washington at that time. Perhaps I could sow the seed for others to follow. This was my thinking at that time but, with hindsight I realize that I might have done much more if I had pursued the issue of the original ignorant mistreatment of the older daughter or I had brought up the deletions to her chart when I discovered them. I was too acutely conscious of my foreign back ground and surgical training to face the repercussions that almost certainly would have ensued. Maybe if I had done so at that time the upgrading of the surgical care of children in Washington would not have had to await the arrival of Judson Randolph as the full time surgical chief. Read the full article

#CalledtobeaSurgeon #Dr.NevilleConnolly #medical #ServingPatients

0 notes

riddleless-rhymes · 5 years

Text

Unwelcomed Stalwart

I've already filed the stalking,

Yet still it comes 'round gawking.

Can it prevent from squawking,

Lest orange garb will it be walking?

I know it will peek,

For it's will is weak.

It will always seek,

What it feels meek.

When my privacy it rescinded,

Without my permissions acceded.

When it decided it contended,

The time of manipulation ended.

With slime it creeps,

Leaving digital heaps.

It's fate it slowly reaps,

As tears it finally weeps.

Though the law it does foresake,

Seeding beyond it's criminal wake.

Knowing that it's grandest mistake,

Was thinking I'ld eventually break.

June Marie Willman

(Quick short...possibly unfinished...accidentally deleted the original trying to edit it)

0 notes

endenogatai · 5 years

Text

Advisor to Europe’s top court favors regional limit to ‘right to be forgotten’

Google will be cheered by the view of an influential advisor to Europe’s top court vis-a-vis the territorial scope of the so-called ‘Right to be Forgotten’.

Since a 2014 Court of Justice decision, search engines operating in Europe have been required to accept and review requests from private citizens to delist outdated or irrelevant search results associated with their name, balancing decisions against any public right to know.

Google has been carrying out these delistings on regional European subdomains, rather than globally. But in 2016 the French data protection agency, CNIL, fined it for failing to delist results globally — arguing that regional delistings were not strong enough to comply with the law.

Google filed an appeal against the CNIL’s order for global delisting and a French court later decided to refer questions vis-a-vis the scope of the rtbf to the Court of Justice of the EU.

The CJEU heard the case last fall, with Google arguing that global delistings would damage free speech, and enable authoritarian regimes to get stuff they don’t like scrubbed off the Internet.

On the flip side those who advocate for global delistings argue without them there’s a trivial workaround to the rtbf.

Although the intent of the rtbf ruling was never to remove information from the Internet but rather to allow old and erroneous data to sediment (rather than be artificially kept in public view by algorithms). And given most web users don’t look past the first page (or even the first few) search results regional delistings seems a fair enough balance — at least as things stand.

That balanced view is also now the published opinion of an influential advisor to Europe’s top court.

Advocate general Maciej Szpunar’s opinion, released today — ahead of the court making its own judgement on the matter — proposes that the regional rtbf should be limited in scope to local sub-domains, rather than being applied globally as the French data protection agency has been pushing for for several years.

In a press release summarizing the AG’s opinion, the court writes that Szpunar believes “a distinction must be made depending on the location from which the search is performed” and that “[h]e is therefore not in favour of giving the provisions of EU law such a broad interpretation that they would have effects beyond the borders of the 28 Member States”.

“[I]f worldwide de-referencing were permitted, the EU authorities would not be able to define and determine a right to receive information, let alone balance it against the other fundamental rights to data protection and to privacy,” it continues.

“This is all the more so since such a public interest in accessing information will necessarily vary from one third State to another depending on its geographic location. There would be a risk, if worldwide de-referencing were possible, that persons in third States would be prevented from accessing information and, in turn, that third States would prevent persons in the EU Member States from accessing information.”

That said, the AG is not ruling out the possibility that “in certain situations” a search engine operator may need to delist something “at the worldwide level”.

Rather, the court emphasizes, “he takes the view that the situation at issue in the present case does not justify this”.

So his current advice to the court is summarized as follows:

… the search engine operator is not required, when acceding to a request for de-referencing, to carry out that de-referencing on all the domain names of its search engine in such a way that the links in question no longer appear, irrespective of the location from which the search on the basis of the requesting party’s name is performed.

At the same time the AG emphasizes that — for valid requests — search engines must “take every measure available to it to ensure full and effective de-referencing within the EU, including by use of the ‘geo-blocking’ technique, in respect of an IP address deemed to be located in one of the Member States, irrespective of the domain name used by the internet user who performs the search”.

While the AG’s opinion is not binding on the CJEU the court tends to take a similar view so it’s a good indicator of where the final judgement will land, likely in three to six months’ time.

We reached out to Google for comment and a spokesperson emailed us the following statement, attributed to Peter Fleischer, its senior privacy counsel:

Public access to information, and the right to privacy, are important to people all around the world, as demonstrated by the number of global human rights, media and other organisations that have made their views known in this case. We’ve worked hard to ensure that the right to be forgotten is effective for Europeans, including using geolocation to ensure 99% effectiveness.

The search giant, which remains massively dominant in the European market, publishes a report detailing the proportion of requests it accepts and declines here, which shows both a steady growth in requests and that Google continues to grant only a minority of delisting requests.

Since the original 2014 rtbf decision, the EU has doubled down on the right — extending the principle by baking it into an updated data protection framework, the GDPR, which came into force in May last year and gives EU citizens rights to ask data controllers to rectify or delete their personal information.

from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8204425 https://tcrn.ch/2Fk4COO via IFTTT

#IFTTT #RSSMix.com Mix ID 8204425

0 notes

williamsjoan · 5 years