Thursday, October 18, 2012
What’s Next for GMOs? How About Genetically Modified Trees!
Industries are all about making more money, at any cost. If they can develop something now that will save money and produce more down the road, they will—often tossing ethical concerns to the side. Need proof? Just look at Big Pharma’s sales of harmful drugs, their cycle of side effects and treatments, or even how they want to make genetically modified plants to produce pharmaceutical drugs. Need more proof? Look at Monsanto and environmentally destructive herbicides. The latest movement towards increased production at a lesser cost comes in the form of genetically modified trees.
Further Altering Nature, Now with Genetically Modified Trees!
Genetically modified trees are being developed in the U.S. and around the world. A new paper, circulated at outside of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the Convention on Biological Diversity cautions that GM tree research is being done without much oversight and with limited information.
As reported on the Science and Development Network, the industries pushing this research are those that can serve to make money off of the GMO trees. They are testing their genetic alterations in the lab with poplars, pines, acacias, and eucalyptus trees just to name a few.
So far, the U.S. has the most patents with 53% and Brazil follows close behind. In all, 21 countries are working on the GMO trees. So, what are they trying to do? From an industrial standpoint, they are looking to “perfect” the trees—make them more useful and more valuable, not recognizing the value of trees goes far beyond their ability to make nice paper or fancy hardwood floors.
They are working on developing wood with less lignin, for instance, which will make it easier to process. They are also working to develop trees that are more pest-resistant, obviously ignoring the issues of GMO crops and their damage to the delicate natural balance.
Isis Alvarez, of the Global Forest Coalition, cautions that these researchers are being hasty in their projects. She says they are pushing the industry to “escalate without any consideration to the environmental or social impacts, and with little or no oversight or monitoring from governments”.
One has to wonder if they’ve thought ahead, to what would happen, for instance, if the trees were completely pest resistant. What would happen to the pests who no longer had wood for homes and food? When they died off, what would happen to the birds who depend on them for their own food—and so on. Likely, the corporations which are no doubt behind the research are concerned with one thing and one thing only—their bottom line.
Source: Activist Post
Google threatens to drop links to French media
Google has threatened to exclude French media sites from its search results if France implements a proposed law forcing search engines to pay for content, according to a letter obtained by AFP. The letter sent by Google to several ministerial offices this month said it "cannot accept" such a move and the company "as a consequence would be required to no longer reference French sites."
Google has threatened to exclude French media sites from its search results if France implements a proposed law forcing search engines to pay for content, according to a letter obtained by AFP. The letter sent by Google to several ministerial offices this month said it "cannot accept" such a move and the company "as a consequence would be required to no longer reference French sites."
Google has threatened to exclude French media sites from its search results if France implements a proposed law forcing search engines to pay for content, according to a letter obtained by AFP.
The letter sent by Google to several ministerial offices this month said it "cannot accept" such a move and the company "as a consequence would be required to no longer reference French sites."
It said such a law, which would require Google to make payments to media sites for displaying links to their content, would "threaten (Google's) very existence".
It also noted that Google "redirects four billion 'clicks' per month towards the Internet pages" of French media.
Leading French newspaper publishers last month called on the government to adopt a law to force Internet search engines such as Google to pay for content.
They said a law should impose a settlement in the long-running dispute with Google, which receives high volumes of advertising revenue from user searches for news contained on media websites.
Culture Minister Aurelie Filippetti told a parliamentary commission this week that she was in favour of the idea, calling it "a tool that it seems important to me to develop".
Google France said earlier that it believed such a law "would be harmful to the Internet, Internet users and news websites that benefit from substantial traffic" sent to them by Google's search engine.
Newspapers around the world have seen their bottom lines come under pressure as their print advertising revenues slide and online readers resist paying for access when so much content is free on the Internet.
French lawmakers last year rejected plans for a tax on online advertising revenues, fearing the project would hurt small local companies more than global Internet giants like Google, Facebook or Twitter.
Google France representatives are to meet Friday with officials from the finance ministry to discuss the project and this week's statement from European data protection agencies saying Google's new privacy policy does not comply with EU laws.
Google rolled out the new privacy policy in March, allowing it to track users across various services to develop targeted advertising, despite sharp criticism from US and European consumer advocacy groups.
The EU agencies told Google it had a few months to fix the policy or face legal action.
Patent could shackle 3D printers with DRM
(Image: Martine Roch/Flickr/Getty)
One of the greatest benefits of 3D printing technology - the ability to make replacements or parts for household objects like toys, utensils and gadgets - may be denied to US citizens thanks to the granting of a sweeping patent that prevents the printing of unauthorised 3D designs. It has all the makings of the much-maligned digital rights management (DRM) system that prevented copying of Apple iTunes tracks - until it was abandoned as a no-hoper in 2009.
US patent 8286236, granted on 9 October to Intellectual Ventures of Bellevue, Washington, lends a 3D printer the ability to assess whether a computer design file it's reading has an authorisation code appended that grants access for printing. If it does not, the machine simply refuses to print - whether it's a solid object, a textile or even food that's being printed.
The piracy of 3D designs is an emerging concern, and 3D object sharing - rather than file sharing - sites have already sprung up. While no 3D printer maker has adopted what might be called "3D DRM", international treaties like the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement mean it is not out of the question. Clamping down on moves to 3D-print handguns may fuel such moves, for instance.
What has riled some tech commentators (here and here for instance) is the fact that Intellectual Ventures that does not make 3D printers at all, but simply trades in patent rights - a practice detractors call patent trolling.
The firm, run by Microsoft CTO Nathan Myhrvold, quietly files patents under the names of a great many shell companies (as this Stanford University analysis shows) and then licenses them to companies using the ideas it lays claim to, litigating if it has to. Intellectual Ventures is thought to hold more than 40,000 patents.
The new patent may face challenges to its validity, however, because it extends rights management beyond 3D printing to much older computerised manufacturing techniques, such as computer-controlled milling, extrusion, die casting and stamping.
Companies in those businesses are likely to have previously considered some kind of design rights authentication, says Greg Aharonian, of bustpatents.com in San Francisco. He says that museums were wondering how to protect 3D sculptures against printer piracy back in 2002 and that DRM was in the frame then. So Intellectual Ventures' claim to novelty - a key part of whether any patent is determined to be valid and enforceable - looks weak.
Google opens window into secretive data centers
CORRECTS LOCATION- This undated photo provided by Google shows a Google data center in Douglas County, Ga. Google is opening a virtual window into the secretive data centers that serve as its nerve center. The unprecedented peek is being provided through a new website unveiled Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2012. The site features photos from inside some of the eight data centers that Google Inc. already has running in the U.S., Finland and Belgium. (AP Photo/Google)
Google is opening a virtual window into the secretive data centers where an intricate maze of computers process Internet search requests, show YouTube video clips and distribute email for millions of people.
The unprecedented peek is being provided through a new website unveiled Wednesday at http://www.google.com/about/datacenters/gallery/#/ . The site features photos from inside some of the eight data centers that Google Inc. already has running in the U.S., Finland and Belgium. Google is also building data centers in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and Chile.
Virtual tours of a North Carolina data center also will be available through Google's "Street View" service, which is usually used to view photos of neighborhoods around the world.
The photographic access to Google's data centers coincides with the publication of a Wired magazine article about how the company builds and operates them. The article is written by Steven Levy, a journalist who won Google's trust while writing "In The Plex," a book published last year about the company's philosophy and evolution.
This undated photo provided by Google shows a Google technician working on some of the computers in the Dalles, Ore., data center. Google is opening a virtual window into the secretive data centers that serve as its nerve center. The unprecedented peek is being provided through a new website unveiled Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2012. The site features photos from inside some of the eight data centers that Google Inc. already has running in the U.S., Finland and Belgium. (AP Photo/Google)
The data centers represent Google's nerve center, although none are located near the company's headquarters in Mountain View, California.
As Google blossomed from its roots in a Silicon Valley garage, company co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin worked with other engineers to develop a system to connect low-cost computer servers in a way that would help them realize their ambition to provide a digital roadmap to all of the world's information.
This undated photo provided by Google shows a Google data center in Council Bluffs, Iowa. Google is opening a virtual window into the secretive data centers that serve as its nerve center. The unprecedented peek is being provided through a new website unveiled Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2012. The site features photos from inside some of the eight data centers that Google Inc. already has running in the U.S., Finland and Belgium. (AP Photo/Google)
Initially, Google just wanted enough computing power to index all the websites on the Internet and deliver quick responses to search requests. As Google's tentacles extended into other markets, the company had to keep adding more computers to store videos, photos, email and information about their users' preferences.
The insights that Google gathers about the more than 1 billion people that use its services has made the company a frequent target of privacy complaints around the world. The latest missive came Tuesday in Europe, where regulators told Google to revise a 7-month-old change to its privacy policy that enables the company to combine user data collected from its different services.
This undated photo provided by Google shows a Google data center in Hamina, Finland. Google is opening a virtual window into the secretive data centers that serve as its nerve center. The unprecedented peek is being provided through a new website unveiled Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2012. The site features photos from inside some of the eight data centers that Google Inc. already has running in the U.S., Finland and Belgium. (AP Photo/Google)
Google studies Internet search requests and Web surfing habits in an effort to gain a better understanding of what people like. The company does this in an effort to show ads of products and services to the people most likely to be interested in buying them. Advertising accounts for virtually all of Google's revenue, which totaled nearly $23 billion through the first half of this year.Even as it allows anyone with a Web browser to peer into its data centers, Google intends to closely guard physical access to its buildings. The company also remains cagey about how many computers are in its data centers, saying only that they house hundreds of thousands of machines to run Google's services.
Google's need for so many computers has turned the company a major electricity user, although management says it's constantly looking for ways to reduce power consumption to protect the environment and lower its expenses.
The company's data centers are located in: Berkeley County, South Carolina; Council Bluffs, Iowa; Douglas County, Georgia; Mayes County, Oklahoma; Lenoir, North Carolina; The Dalles, Oregon; Hamina, Finland; and St. Ghislain, Belgium. Other data centers are being built in Quilicura, Chile; Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan.
Is The Nation of India Rearing To Kick Monsanto Out?
A report from the August 17 edition of the American Association for the Advance of Science's journal Science titled, "Negative Report on GM Crops Shakes Government's Food Agenda," revealed that an Indian high-profile parliamentary panel, only a week before, recommended that GM crop "field trails under any garb should be discontinued forthwith," and that further GM agricultural research should "only be done under strict containment."[i]
Moreover, in a press conference after the report's release, the panel's chair, Basudeb Acharia, said in no uncertain terms: "India should not go in for GM food crops."
According to the Science article's author, Pallava Bagla, the panel's recommendation is being regarded by some "as the death knell of the development of genetically modified food crops in India." Dissenting interests, such as India's chief of crop research, Swapan Dutta, a rice geneticist and deputy director at the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, responded to the report by suggesting that if implemented, the panel's recommendations would paralyze research and threaten India's food security, and "hope for GM research in India is lost."
The Indian government has been sending mixed signals about its commitment to agricultural GM technology. For instance, in 2002 the government approved Bt-toxin carrying cotton as the first GM commercial crop in India. Today, there are over 1100 Bt varieties of GM cotton, accounting for 93% of all the cotton sown in India. The prime minister of India himself, Manmohan Singh, voiced his support for GM crops in a recent interview with Science (24 Feb, p. 907), stating: "In due course of time," he said "we must make use of genetic engineering technologies to increase the productivity of our agriculture."
But, as the Science article points out, Singh's own ministers are not toeing the party line. For instance, in 2010, former environment minister Jairam Ramesh imposed a moratorium on the commercialization of Bt brinjal, a traditional Indian eggplant, even after the ministry's scientific advisory panel had given the GM variety approval.
Moreover, GM crop researchers in India were already having problems since 2011, because state governments refused to issue certificates that allow GM crop field trials to commence. Also, in the June issue of Science, environmental minister Jayanthi Natarajan was quoted as saying: "genetically modified foods have no place in ensuring India's food security."
While the primary justification within Indian government for supporting GM agriculture is based on the fact that it has increased production of economically important products such as cotton, which skyrocketed from .02 million hectares in 2002 to 9.33 million hectares in 2011, the latest panel's decision was influenced by the fact that all Bt cotton grown commercially in India is derived from technology sold by the multinational food giant Monsanto, who by owning and controlling the seeds has seriously compromised India's food sovereignty and security.
It has been estimated that 70% of India's 1.2 billion people are farmers who have no alternative but to buy Bt cotton seed from Monsanto. Also, Monsanto relationship to India farmers is already tenuous considering it was accused of biopiracy earlier this year by India's National Biodiversity Authority.[ii] The panel also stated "there is a connection between Bt cotton and farmer's suicides," as thousands of indebted farmers in India's cotton producing regions have committed suicide in a desperate attempt to rid themselves and their families of debt.
The next step is for government ministries to digest the panel's report and to decide if the report's recommendations, which carry political weight but are not mandatory, will be implemented. The Science article concluded:
If the government doesn't make a forceful case for GM crops, Bhan says, there may be no alternative but to 'stop all use of GM crop technology till it has been totally made in India.' And if Monsanto becomes 'a nuisance,' he added, 'it can be kicked out.' [emphasis added]
Source: Activist Post
How Facebook Is Trying to Kill Independent Media
For years we’ve been sold the lie that the internet was the last great refuge for the freedom of speech. People talk about how the internet has helped small business and independent media sites compete with the large corporations of the world.
But is that really true anymore? Was it ever true?
What most people fail too realize, is these corporate powers have rigged the system. The whole thing is complete bullshit! 99.9% of people who use the internet use one of three search engines to find their information. They primarily use one social network to communicate with their friends and family, and most of the video and news consumed online is done so through YouTube.
What’s the problem?
That’s a lot of power in the hands of a couple large internet corporations. Now I know the powers that be would like you to believe that these corporations can do no wrong, but a growing number of people are starting to wake up to the fact that these large internet corporations are manipulating what you see, choosing when you see it and determining how you share it with your friends and family.
“What that can’t be” you say.
Well then let me share with you a small example of how the system is becoming increasingly rigged against small independent news websites. In fact, I’ll share with you an example from our own site.
The picture above is what I have to spend in order to have my posts shared with my friends and followers on Facebook. You see, Facebook has a new policy that completely screws independent news companies and small business owners.
Even though over 15,000 people have subscribed to receive our updates, via our facebook page, the corporate bigwigs over at Facebook have decided that you no longer get to choose which type of media you actually see. If I want my posts shared with the 15,000 people who specifically asked to receive them through facebook, I will now have to pay over $75 per article. If more people subscribe, that price can get even higher.
Well, I can’t do that. I’m not selling products, I’m reporting on the news and helping people become better prepared.
So Facebook has effectively censored my posts, along with hundreds of thousands of other small business people and independent media companies, in favor of promoting posts that can now only be purchased by major media companies and large corporations.
Yes, we still have our loyal readers who come directly to the site, but how long will that last?
With a growing number of companies following the Facebook model of Censorship, the internet will soon resemble the crap we see on T.V. – A couple of large corporations deciding what we can and can’t see, what news we can and can’t hear about and what product and services the drones should buy.
WHAT CAN WE DO?
Fight back using their own technology against them. At first I though about leaving Facebook altogether, but then I realized I would be helping to perpetuate the problem. Sometimes the best way to fight the war is from within the enemy’s camp. While I refuse to share anything created by the corporate media; I will continue to share my posts (even if only a fraction of the people actually see them) I hope you’ll do the same.
While I am in no way against people making money, I would rather see small business owners have the opportunity to compete. What’s most ironic about that statement is the fact that companies like Facebook are the ones out there talking about “greedy business owners” and supporting candidates who talk about the “evils of capitalism”, all the while screwing the small guy every chance they get.
Share and Promote independent media. The Corporate bigwigs have all the money in the world to promote their propaganda. The only way we can fight back is to start setting up our own networks and promoting each other. As part of this effort we list a number of survival websites and then promote it on ever page on this site. We will soon be setting up a section for independent news media. While technically some of these people may be our competitors; if we don’t stand together, pretty soon none of us will have a voice.
While I may not agree with everything that’s said on some of these sites, at least the opinions expressed are not scrubbed through mass media filters.
Break out of the Matrix. Although I still think we should use some of these systems to spread other independent viewpoints – especially to those who haven’t woken up – it’s time to start networking outside the system.
- Visit other independent websites.
- Join the discussion and talk to people who are commenting at the end of articles.
- Instead of wasting your time commenting on Facebook, where they decide who sees the message, start engaging in conversations with people on this site and other sites like it.
In fact, if you have a unique point of view or think you can help people that visit this site, please join the conversation.
GMO madness: Frankenscientists develop genetically-modified chickens they claim will halt avian flu transmission
For their work, Laurence Tiley, a molecular virologist at the University of Cambridge in the U.K., and his colleagues injected a short-hairpin RNA gene into chicken embryos that artificially produces what the Guardian describes as a "decoy" molecule in the birds' cells. This decoy molecule is then picked up by the bird flu virus, which incorporates it, rather than its own genetic material, into the virus' genetic line, preventing it from replicating and spreading.
In tests, birds modified with the decoy molecule were fully capable of contracting H5N1 avian flu, but they were unable to spread it to other birds, including other GM birds. Infected non-GM birds, on the other hand, were fully able to spread the disease as they normally would, which the scientists claimed was evidence that their experiment was a success.
You can read an abstract of the study, which was published in the journal Science, here:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6014/223.short
Like all other GM foods and animals, the GM chickens developed for the study have yet to undergo any long-term safety studies, which means there is no indication that they are in any way safe for human consumption. Even the Frankenbirds' creators admit that their science experiment is only intended for research purposes, and not for human consumption.
It is the unintended consequences of such research that are the most concerning; however, as much of the scientific community is now literally obsessed with genetically-altering every plant, food crop, animal, and even human being it can get its hands on. There is nothing sacred, in other words, when it comes to leaving things alone in their natural form -- every living being and organism is now considered to be "flawed" and in need of genetic correction.
The answers to flu prevention are right in front of us, and every single one of them exists in nature. Vitamin D, medicinal mushrooms, aloe vera, garlic, olive leaf extract, oil of oregano -- these are just a few of the many natural compounds that possess powerful immune-boosting, flu-fighting capabilities. Why are researchers not spending more time investigating these natural solutions to disease rather than tampering with the blueprints of life at every chance they get?
Source: Natural News