Hackers force quick iOS update
Apple is urging iPhone and iPad users to promptly update their operating systems to fix security bugs that may have already been exploited by hackers.
Apple is urging iPhone and iPad users to promptly update their operating systems to fix security bugs that may have already been exploited by hackers.
While most of us are lamenting what are, if any, limitations of free speech in our democracy, one thing is certain – it does not come without consequences! While the first amendment states that our democracy gives its citizens the freedom of speech and to peaceful protest. There are in fact limitations to the first amendment in our country. Nothing online is protected for “free speech”, all platforms, hosts, apps, and Internet companies are exactly that – companies who have the ability to limit, as they see fit, speech from any American. Just like the company you work for has rules and limitations of your work environment, companies like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Amazon, Google, Apple, and more are within their rights to limit anything on their platforms or devices they feel or see as unfit for publication.
In fact there are limitations in this country for Free Speech. They are as follows:
Speech that incites imminent lawless action was originally banned under the weaker clear and present danger test established by Schenck v. United States, but this test has since been overturned by the imminent lawless action test established in Brandenburg v. Ohio.
Inflammatory words that are either injurious by themselves or might cause the hearer to immediately retaliate or breach the peace. Use of such words is not necessarily protected “free speech” under the First Amendment.
See Watts v. United States, Virginia v. Black.
Obscenity, defined by the Miller test by applying contemporary community standards, is a type of speech which is not legally protected. It is speech to which all the following apply: appeals to the prurient interest, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (This is usually applied to more hard-core forms of pornography.)
The 1998 Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act in Alabama applies to sex toys. The similar 1973 Texas obscenity statute (updated in 2003) was declared unconstitutional in 2008.
See New York v. Ferber.
Limits placed on libel and slander attach civil liability and have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The Court narrowed the definition of libel with the case of Hustler Magazine v. Falwell made famous in the movie The People vs. Larry Flynt. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan established the actual malice standard, a high bar for public figure plaintiffs. Making false statements in “matters within the jurisdiction” of the federal government is also a crime.
See Time, Inc. v. Hill.
See Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, Texas v. Johnson.
See Buckley v. Valeo and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.
See Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
The government speech doctrine establishes that the government may censor speech when the speech is its own, leading to a number of contentious decisions on its breadth.
Statements made by public employees pursuant to their official duties are not protected by the First Amendment from employer discipline as per the case of Garcetti v. Ceballos. This applies also to private contractors that have the government as a client. The First Amendment only protects employees from government employers albeit only when speaking publicly outside their official duties in the public interest Pickering v. Board of Ed. of Township High School Dist., updated and clarified by Lane v. Franks. Speech is not protected from private sector disciplinary action.
A number of cases consider speech related to or required by an employer, or speech retaliated against by a third party such as an employer. The case Lane vs. Burrows (previously Lane vs. Franks) considers a number of these matters and summarizes the outcome. A person who testifies in a court, and where that testimony is not part of their employment duties, testifies as a citizen and has First Amendment protection, whereas a person whose speech is an actual part of their duties and is not merely related to their duties may have no such protection.
The issues raised in such cases include the overriding need for persons in court to feel safe to speak the truth, and to in fact speak the truth; the requirement of employers to be able to act in the event that an employee speaks in a manner damaging to the employer; the rights of whistleblowers; the benefit to society if people who know the reality of a matter and are well informed of it, are able to speak of it.
In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), the Supreme Court extended broad First Amendment protection to children attending public schools, prohibiting censorship unless there is “substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others”. Several subsequent rulings have affirmed or narrowed this protection. Bethel School District v. Fraser (1986) supported disciplinary action against a student whose campaign speech was filled with sexual innuendo, and determined to be “indecent” but not “obscene”. Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) allowed censorship in school newspapers which had not been established as forums for free student expression. Guiles v. Marineau (2006) affirmed the right of a student to wear a T-shirt mocking President George W. Bush, including allegations of alcohol and drug use. Morse v. Frederick (2007) supported the suspension of a student holding a banner reading “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS” at a school-supervised event which was not on school grounds. In Lowry v. Watson Chapel School District, an appeals court struck down a school dress code and literature distribution policy for being vague and unnecessarily prohibitive of criticism against the school district.
Such protections also apply to public colleges and universities; for example, student newspapers which have been established as forums for free expression have been granted broad protection by appeals courts.
Publishing, gathering, or collecting national security information is not protected speech in the United States. Information related to “the national defense” is protected even though no harm to the national security is intended or is likely to be caused through its disclosure. Non-military information with the potential to cause serious damage to the national security is only protected from willful disclosure with the requisite intent or knowledge regarding the potential harm. The unauthorized creation, publication, sale, or transfer of photographs or sketches of vital defense installations or equipment as designated by the President is prohibited. The knowing and willful disclosure of certain classified information is prohibited. The unauthorized communication by anyone of “Restricted Data”, or an attempt or conspiracy to communicate such data, is prohibited. It is prohibited for a person who learns of the identity of a covert agent through a “pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents” to disclose the identity to any individual not authorized access to classified information, with reason to believe that such activities would impair U.S. foreign intelligence efforts.
In addition to the criminal penalties, the use of employment contracts, loss of government employment, monetary penalties, non-disclosure agreements, forfeiture of property, injunctions, revocation of passports, and prior restraint are used to deter such speech.
The Voluntary Tender Act of 1917 gave the Commissioner of Patents the authority to withhold certification from inventions that might harm U.S. national security, and to turn the invention over to the United States government for its own use. It was replaced in 1951 with the Invention Secrecy Act which prevented inventors from publishing inventions or sharing the information. Both attached criminal penalties to subjected inventors. The United States was under a declared state of emergency from 1950–1974, after which peacetime secrecy orders were available.
The government issued between approximately 4,100 to 5,000 orders per year from 1959 to 1974, a peak of 6,193 orders in 1991, and approximately 5,200 per year between from 1991 to 2003. Certain areas of research such as atomic energy and cryptography consistently fall within their gamut. The government has placed secrecy orders on cold fusion, space technology, radar missile systems, and Citizens Band radio voice scramblers, and attempts have been made to extend them to optical-engineering research and vacuum technology.
The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 automatically classifies “all data concerning (1) design, manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy”. The government has attempted and failed to prohibit publication of nuclear information, including bomb design, in Scientific American in 1950 and The Progressive in 1979.[circular reference]
Pub.L. 106–54 (text) (pdf) of 1999, a bill focused on phosphate prospecting and compensation owed to the Menominee tribe, added 18 U.S.C. § 842(p) making it an offence “to teach or demonstrate the making or use of an explosive, a destructive device, or a weapon of mass destruction, or to distribute by any means information pertaining to, in whole or in part, the manufacture or use of an explosive, destructive device, or weapon of mass destruction” either intending or knowing that the learner/viewer intends “that the teaching, demonstration, or information be used for, or in furtherance of, an activity that constitutes a Federal crime of violence”. This is in addition to other federal laws preventing the use and dissemination of bombmaking information for criminal purposes. The law was first successfully used against an 18-year-old anarchist in 2003, for distribution of information which has since been republished freely.
Despite the common misconception that the First Amendment prohibits anyone from limiting free speech, the text of the amendment only prohibits the US Congress (and, by extension, those that derive their powers from Congress) from doing so. A major issue in freedom of speech jurisprudence has been whether the First Amendment should be interpreted to merely run against state actors, or whether it can run against private actors as well. Specifically, the issue is whether private landowners should be permitted to use the machinery of government to exclude others from engaging in free speech on their property (which means balancing the speakers’ First Amendment rights against the Takings Clause). The right of freedom of speech within private shopping centers owned by others has been vigorously litigated under both the federal and state Constitutions, most notably in the cases Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner (1972) and Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins (1980).
Some observers have decried an erosion of free speech due to widespread use of the Internet and social media, which has allowed large groups of people who disapprove of particular speech have been able to swarm upon certain speakers and harass them with death and rape threats, send SWAT teams by making false reports to police, trigger boycotts of businesses, and in at least one case motivate a shooting. Targets have included a Massachusetts businessman who was seen in a photo apparently supporting Donald Trump, female video game designers and commentators, a diner where an anti-Trump employee made a negative comment to a pro-Trump customer, a public relations executive who tweeted an offensive joke before boarding a plane, and even victims of the 2017 Las Vegas shooting accused by anti-gun-control activists of faking the event.
While personal freedom of speech is usually respected, freedom of press, and mass publishing meet with some restrictions. Some of the recent issues include:
See also Roth v. United States
In 2002, the United States was ranked 17th of 167 countries in the annual worldwide Press Freedom Index of Reporters Without Borders. “The poor ranking of the United States (17th) is mainly because of the number of journalists arrested or imprisoned there. Arrests are often because they refuse to reveal their sources in court. Also, since the September 11 attacks, several journalists have been arrested for crossing security lines at some official buildings.” In the 2006 index the United States fell further to 53rd of 168 countries; indeed, “relations between the media and the Bush administration sharply deteriorated” as it became suspicious of journalists who questioned the “War on Terrorism“. The zeal of federal courts which, unlike those in 33 U.S. states, refuse to recognize the media’s right not to reveal its sources, even threatened journalists whose investigations did not pertain to terrorism. The United States improved, moving up to 48th place in 2007, however, and to 20th in 2010. In the following years, the rank again declined, placing the United States 45th in 2020.
Internet access has changed the game in communication across the world and has opened new opportunities for Americans to express their First Amendment Rights. Internet speech takes place in a digital environment where both speakers and listeners can participate via computers, smart phones, and other electronic devices, being able to network and communicate with anyone at anytime.
Governments have offered many proposals to privately controlled online platforms for regulatory rules that can be enacted to ensure users First Amendment rights are upheld on the internet. If these regulations are infringed upon, the platform has the right to remove content that is copyright material or is offensive. Laws that regulate online harassment, defamation and so on face a delicate balancing act. Most online content, as such, limits risk by suppressing adult speech as well. They must be written narrowly to avoid encroaching on speech protected by the First Amendment while still restricting the undesirable conduct in practice.
The ICCPR which inhibits international laws for human rights enforces a strict clause that ‘[a] ny advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.’ Discrimination and hate speech of any kind is not tolerated according to this clause and accounts for online forums. Even with laws in place monitoring online harassment, defamation and so on face a delicate balancing act. They must be written narrowly to avoid encroaching on speech protected by the First Amendment while still restricting the undesirable conduct in practice.
In a 9–0 decision, the Supreme Court extended the full protection of the First Amendment to the Internet in Reno v. ACLU, a decision that struck down portions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, a law that prohibited “indecent” online communication (that is, non-obscene material protected by the First Amendment). The court’s decision extended the same Constitutional protections given to books, magazines, films, and spoken expression to materials published on the Internet. Congress tried a second time to regulate the content of the Internet with the Child Online Protection Act (COPA). In 2002, the Court again ruled that any limitations on the internet were unconstitutional in American Civil Liberties Union v. Ashcroft.
In United States v. American Library Association (2003), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress has the authority to require public schools and libraries receiving e-rate discounts to install content-control software as a condition of receiving federal funding. The justices said that any First Amendment concerns were addressed by the provisions in the Children’s Internet Protection Act that permit adults to ask librarians to disable the filters or unblock individual sites.
In Facebook v. Sullivan, a neo-Nazi turned a Charlottesville, V.A. rally deadly when running over an innocent bystander in the crowd of people, later taking to Facebook about his actions with pride. The social media platform took down his profile and any posts related to this incident that portrayed it in any other way besides tragic. Even though this platform is not bound by the First Amendment, the platform has regulations based on preserving free expression but also omitting harmful speech.
Most online forums are censored by the governments as a means of media regulation in the U.S. Because internet networks are unfathomably large and accessible at one’s fingertips, not every piece of online content can be watched and regulated. If governments suddenly impose censorship on previously uncensored information, people become accustomed to acquiring this information through methods of censorship evasion which is deemed unconstitutional and illegal. The more online censorship being enforced, more effort is being made by citizens at bypassing the firewalls, and in China round 18 million Internet users are using online tools to bypass the Great Firewall and access unblocked online content.
Four people are dead following Wednesday’s violent protests in Washington, D.C., where supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol.
One woman and two men suffered “medical emergencies” during the anarchy and have subsequently died, according to Robert Contee, chief of the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia.
Another woman was shot and killed during a standoff inside the Capitol between law enforcement and protesters, Conte said. An angry mob of Trump supporters had breached the building, forcing a lockdown with members of Congress holed up inside the chambers.
The woman was shot by a U.S. Capitol Police officer in plainclothes, after “multiple individuals forced entry into the Capitol building” and “attempted to gain access to the House room, which was still in session,” according to Conte. She was transported to an area hospital where she was pronounced dead, Conte said.
Rep. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., told ABC News he saw the shooting happen, saying he “never thought” he would witness such a scene unfold in the United States.
“I get people being passionate and being frustrated, but there’s a right way and and wrong way to do things and yesterday was wrong. There was absolutely no excuse for it,” Mullin said in an interview Thursday on “Good Morning America.”
“We’re very fortunate a lot more people didn’t actually lost their life,” he added. “One is way too many.”
The rioting began Wednesday afternoon after Trump and his allies held a rally earlier in the day, urging Congress to not certify the results of the November presidential election. Trump vowed to “never concede” and urged his supporters “to fight,” as he continued to push baseless claims of election fraud.
“All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical Democrats,” Trump told the crowd on the Ellipse park, just south of the White House. “We will never give up. We will never concede. It will never happen. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore.”
Protesters — some of who were seen wearing body armor — made their way up the Capitol steps around 2:15 p.m. ET, pushing their way through barricades, officers in riot gear and other security measures that were put in place in anticipation of the protest. Once inside the Capitol building, the pro-Trump mob moved freely and shouted chants while holding “Trump 2020” flags. One person was also seen waving a Confederate flag inside the building.
Law enforcement officers inside the building instructed elected officials, staff and journalists to shelter in place as the protesters broke in. In a bulletin sent to Capitol building staff, the U.S. Capitol Police ordered people to lock their doors, remain quiet and silence their electronics.
“If you are in a public space, find a place to hide or seek cover,” the bulletin said.
As the mob breached the Capitol building, Trump took to Twitter, saying Vice President Mike Pence “didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution,” and that the “USA demands the truth!” He also tweeted, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”
Meanwhile, Pence, who was escorted out of the Capitol building, pleaded for the “violence and destruction” to stop and for anyone involved to “immediately leave the building.”
Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., tweeted that he and his colleagues inside the House chamber were told by police “to be prepared to get under our chairs” and to put on gas masks because “there has been tear gas used in the rotunda.”
Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., tweeted that the “Electoral College ballots were rescued from the Senate floor.”
“If our capable floor staff hadn’t grabbed them, they would have been burned by the mob,” he added.
Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, told reporters who were with him in a secure position that “this is what the president has caused today, this insurrection.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., released a joint statement around 3:50 p.m., calling on Trump “to demand that all protestors leave the U.S. Capitol and Capitol Grounds immediately.”
Trump’s former chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, even called out the president for not doing enough to put an end to the violence.
“He can stop this now and needs to do exactly that. Tell these folks to go home,” Mulvaney tweeted.
Following repeated calls from leaders on both sides of the aisle, Trump finally released a video message via Twitter on Wednesday afternoon, telling his supporters to go home. But he also continued to push baseless, false claims about the election.
“I know you’re in pain, I know you’re hurt. We had an election that was stolen from us,” the president said in the one-minute, prerecorded video. “But you have to go home now.”
Twitter removed Trump’s tweet with the video, along with two other tweets. At 7 p.m., Twitter announced that it has locked Trump’s account for 12 hours and will continue to keep it locked until the tweets are deleted.
“Future violations of the Twitter Rules, including our Civic Integrity or Violent Threats policies, will result in permanent suspension of the @realDonaldTrump account,” the social network company tweeted.
Later in the night, Facebook announced that it would not allow Trump’s official page to post for 24 hours.
The move came just as Trump’s successor, President-elect Joe Biden, held a news conference to address the situation. He called on the outgoing president to tell his supporters to stop.
“This is not dissent, it’s disorder. It’s chaos. It borders on sedition, and it must end now,” Biden said. “I call on this mob to pull back and allow the work of democracy to go forward.”
The entire District of Columbia National Guard was activated and the Metropolitan Police Department was deployed to assist the U.S. Capitol Police in dispersing the protesters and restoring order. Several other law enforcement agencies in the region were also deployed to help.
A source told ABC News that Pelosi requested the National Guard’s help to secure the Capitol building.
Police declared the scene a riot “due to the violent behavior towards the police officers there and their intent on gaining access to the Capitol,” Conte, the D.C. Police chief, said at a press conference Wednesday night.
Mayor Muriel Bowser issued a citywide curfew that began at 6 p.m. and ended Thursday at 6 a.m. She called the violence “shameful, unpatriotic” and “unlawful.” Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam also declared a 6 p.m. curfew in the nearby cities of Alexandria and Arlington.
It took hours for law enforcement to clear the Capitol building and establish a perimeter around the area. Later in the evening, authorities fired tear gas to disperse the rioters.
As of 9:30 p.m., police had made “in excess of 52 arrests” related to the protests, 26 of which were made on Capitol grounds, according to Conte.
Conte said two pipe bombs were recovered, one at Republican National Committee headquarters and the other at Democratic National Committee headquarters, both of which are located near the Capitol building. A cooler was also recovered from a van on Capitol grounds containing a long gun as well as Molotov cocktails, according to Conte.
Meanwhile, Conte said more than a dozen D.C. Police officers were injured while responding to the protests.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation issued a bulletin on Wednesday night, calling for witnesses to submit information to assist in identifying individuals who were involved with the “rioting and violence” at the Capitol building and in the surrounding area.
Almost exactly 12 hours after the protests began, the U.S. Capitol Police sent a notice to all staffers on Capitol Hill, stating that the threat was cleared and operations could return to normal while police “continue to maintain a security perimeter.”
The Senate resumed its session at around 8 p.m., where both Vice President Mike Pence and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell condemned the violence.
“We will not be kept out of this chamber by mobs or thugs or threats. We will not bow to lawlessness or intimidation,” McConnell said. “We are back at our posts. We will discharge our duty under the Constitution and for our nation — and we’re going to do it tonight.”
McConnell went on to describe Wednesday’s event as a “failed insurrection.”
Both the Senate and the House ultimately went on to vote against Republican objections to certify Electoral College votes in the presidential election, with Pence declaring Biden the winner early Thursday morning.
In a statement tweeted by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino following the news, Trump said: “Even though I totally disagree with the outcome of the election, and the facts bear me out, nevertheless there will be an orderly transition on January 20th. I have always said we would continue our fight to ensure that only legal votes were counted. While this represents the end of the greatest first term in presidential history, it’s only the beginning of our fight to Make America Great Again!”
It was the first time Trump has publicly accepted Biden’s victory and agreed to a peaceful transfer of power.
ABC News’ Luke Barr, Jack Date, John Parkinson, Allie Pecorin, Ben Siegel and Trish Turner contributed to this report
UPDATE: Current guidelines allow travelers to New York to “test out” of the mandatory 10-day quarantine. Travelers from states that are contiguous with New York will continue to be exempt from the travel advisory. Covered travelers must continue to fill out the Traveler Health Form. Check for important details on how to test out here along with other updates.
As of January 4, there were no statewide travel restrictions in Wyoming. Check here for updates.
The year 2020 has become remarkable in many ways, especially when it comes to the surge in cyber attacks. The Covid-19 pandemic has given an unprecedented opportunity to cyber attackers to hack and break down the organizations’ IT infrastructure. The work-from-home working module adopted by such organizations has been attributed to the rise of cyber attacks.
The security gap between the home and office network has played a key role to make way for the data breaches in 2020. This issue has resulted in the theft of confidential information, leading to the loss of millions of dollars for breached organizations.
Today, cyber attackers have come up with more innovative ideas to set a new trend in phishing, cryptojacking, ransomware attack, IoT attack, etc. According to a security research firm, 81 global firms from 81 countries reported data breaches in the first half of 2020 alone.
In fact, 80% of firms have seen an increase in cyber attacks this year. Coronavirus is alone blamed for a 238% rise in cyber attacks on banks. Phishing attacks have seen a dramatic increase of 600% since the end of February.
Whereas due to pandemic, ransomware attacks rose 148% in March and the average ransomware payment rose by 33% to $111,605 as compared to Q4 2019. (Source: Fintech News)
We discussed how cyber attacks have dramatically increased today. Let us walk you through the five major cyber attacks that have happened in 2020 till now. These staggering cyber attacks have crippled some famous organizations across the world.
The second-largest software vendor in Germany and the seventh-largest in Europe, Software AG has been reportedly hit by a ransomware attack in October 2020. ZDNet reported that the German tech firm has been attacked by the Clop ransomware and the cyber-criminal gang has demanded more than $20 million ransom.
The report also says that the company has still not recovered from the attack completely. The company disclosed that the ransomware attack disrupted a part of its internal network. But services to its customers, including cloud-based services, remained unaffected. The company also tried to negotiate with the attackers but it all went in vain.
As per the statement released by Software AG, the company is in the process of restoring its system and database for resuming orderly operation.
French IT service giant Sopra Steria was attacked by ransomware on the evening of 20th October, as confirmed by the company. Its fintech business, Sopra Banking Software, identified the virus which is a new version of the Ryuk ransomware and previously unknown to cyber security providers.
Sopra Steria claimed that it was able to confine the attack to a limited part of its IT framework, even though it caught the attack after a few days. However, following an in-depth investigation, the company did not identify any leaked data or damage caused to its customers.
Ryuk is one of the most inventive ransomware which has already targeted organizations like EWA, a US defense contractor, and Prosegur, a Spanish logistics firm.
In September 2020, hackers gained access to Telegram messenger and email data of some big names in the cryptocurrency business. Hackers used Signaling System 7 (SS7), which is used for connecting mobile networks across the world, to hack the data.
According to cyber security experts, the hackers were most probably after two-factor authentication (2FA) login codes. They spoofed the short message service center (SMSC) of mobile network operators to send a request on location updates to at least 20 targeted high-profile victims.
This attack is believed to have occurred to obtain cryptocurrency. This type of cyber attack is well known in the cryptocurrency community but the users are generally aware of such requests.
Therefore, there are better authentication methods than just SMS or call-based 2FA in the cryptocurrency community. Cyber security experts think telecom standards must move away from using protocols like SS7, which cannot resolve modern issues.
Chicago based leading global legal firm, Seyfarth Shaw LLP became a victim of an “aggressive malware” attack. This attack was later confirmed by the firm as a ransomware attack. The cyber attack reportedly took place on October 10, 2020, and downed the firm’s email system completely, as per a statement published by the company.
The firm claimed in its statement that there was no evidence of client data or firm data unauthorized access or removal. However, many of its systems were found encrypted, following which the firm shut down all of those as a precautionary measure.
The global legal firm notified law enforcement and the FBI has already started investigation. Apart from this, no further information was revealed on how the attack occurred and what family of ransomware hit the firm.
The world’s largest cruise line operator, Carnival Corporation reported a data breach due to a ransomware attack that took place in the month of August 2020. Hackers stole confidential information of customers, employees, and crew members at the time of the attack.
On August 15, 2020, the company detected the ransomware attack that breached and encrypted one of its brand’s IT infrastructure. Following the attack, the cruise line operator notified law enforcement and hired legal counsel and cyber security experts and launched an investigation.
Though the company claimed that no misuse of exposed personal data has come to light, the type of ransomware and how the attack happened have remained unrevealed.
The global transition to the work-from-home culture has made a way for cyber-criminals to execute incredibly advanced cyber attacks. Moreover, ransomware, phishing, DDoS, malware, etc., are amongst the most prominent forms of cyber attacks that we have experienced this year, till now.
Here are some of the “must follow” measures to secure your organization against emerging cyber attacks:
“I’m quitting social media,” you declare. Suddenly a feeling of freedom washes over you as you’re no longer concerned with likes, views and who’s doing what. You stop hunching over your phone and your posture straightens, elongating your spine and immediately you’re an inch taller than just before. You weightlessly drift away from the endless scroll to a trailhead in the mountains. Your free time is filled by strolling through meadows, journaling, meditation, long conversations and lots and lots of “being present.”
Or at least that’s what some of the “I quit social media and it changed my life” blog posts would have you believe. Unfortunately, dropping social media alone will not lead you to full self-actualization. But that doesn’t mean the idea is entirely without merit, either.
In improving your health and wellness, no one change is going to drastically alter your entire life (We know. We’re sorry. We were really hoping it would be green smoothies.). A series of small behavioral changes that lead to positive habits make a lasting impact. Can quitting social media be one of those changes? Absolutely. Some research suggests that social media is harming us in several ways. But that doesn’t mean it’s all bad and cutting it off entirely could have both positive and negative effects on your life.
We weigh the pros and cons.
Quitting social media is not just a trend or something to make you seem ultra-enlightened. Research has revealed some valid reasons why you might want to toss aside your virtual networks.
Happiness and Mood
Our happiness is one of the most important aspects of our lives. Still, we check on the very thing that might be chipping away at our happiness dozens – or hundreds! – of times a day.. Studies have shown that social media can have a negative effect on your life satisfaction and subjective well-being. Evidence also suggests that social media is linked to depressive symptoms.
We know more about the end result, that those who use social media more tend to be less satisfied, than we do about what causes this result. Social comparison is often cited, because your friends are likely posting about the new job they got and not the 14 jobs they applied for and didn’t get before that. Looking at others’ perpetual highlight reel, versus your own behind-the-scenes life, can make you feel inadequate if you don’t feel like you have anything “post-worthy” at the moment. The Happiness Research Institute also found that people on Facebook had trouble concentrating, felt less present and thought they were wasting their time at a higher rate than peers not using Facebook.
If you’re on social media a lot, enough research suggests that you might want to run your own little experiment to see if a social media break or decrease can boost your mood.
Self-Esteem
What if you can’t hit those selfie angles quite like a Kardashian? (P.s. They hired a photographer for that “selfie.”) Or your entire Facebook community seems to be getting promotions while you can’t seem to impress your boss or get ahead at work?
Social media makes you a lot more aware of what is happening in your world and if you feel like you don’t stack up to those around you it can have a negative effect on your self-esteem. The era of filters, Instagram models and influencers, online fitness celebrities and readily available photo-editing tools can be particularly burdensome on our self-esteem. Two studies looked particularly at the effect of selfies and determined that looking at others’ selfies harmed self-esteem and caused women to compare themselves negatively to others. Another study found that social media use correlated with feeling unattractive.
Going back to social comparisons, Facebook might also be making you feel less successful in your career and relationships.
In just minutes, you can easily be inundated with images of people who seemingly have it better than you in one way or another. Just remember that social media is not real life and every post is made by a person (Well, except for the bots. Actually, there are a lot of bots posting.) and that person has ups and downs, too.
Sleep
So many of us are not getting enough sleep. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that 35 percent of Americans don’t get the recommended seven hours of sleep a night. But when it comes time to actually go to sleep so many of us get in our comfortable pajamas and cuddle up cozilly with a … cold chunk of glass, metal and plastic that emits a hue of light and messages that inhibit our sleep.
Yes, the light from our devices, particularly the blue hue that is common, is disruptive to sleep in itself. And one study found that young adults who check social media more frequently and for more time, have greater sleep disturbances.
And given the impact sleep has on the rest of our health, it’s wise to find a way to detach your phone from your bedtime routine.
Frankly, this argument is not as common. And you’re not going to shake up your social networks when you post, “I’ve decided to continue using social media at my current pace!” But particularly in our current reality there are advantages to using social media, provided you do it judiciously.
No Mo’ FOMO
We may not love it, but much of the news about our friends and family is communicated via social media. Particularly as we age, spread out geographically from old friends and family and start families, we have less time to check in via the old-fashioned methods. And the Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) is a well-known feeling to certain generations raised with social media as the norm.
So if you disconnect from social networks you’re simply going to miss pregnancy and engagement announcements, baby pictures, birthday invites, good news and the latest and greatest in memes, goofy kids and cat videos. The thing about quitting social media is all the people you care about don’t magically also quit at the same time and spend their newly-found free time texting and calling you with updates.
Yes, you can make other efforts to stay in touch and up-to-date with what is happening with your friends and family. Certainly, previous generations manage this feat. But sometimes social media simply makes keeping up easier and without it your could feel out of touch and isolated.
The Internet is Good, Actually (Sometimes)
We’ll level with you, a lot of content on social media is probably mean, not particularly useful, unwanted ads, false or somehow otherwise bad. But it also doesn’t take that much digging to find some really positive, uplifting content online.
Body positivity is represented, heard and seen on social media in a way it simply wasn’t in previous generations. Writers with relatively modest Twitter followings can cultivate a loyal community that has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to charity, including $132,000 to Hurricane Harvey victims. Social media aids in many natural disasters, human rights revolutions and other worthy endeavors. Not to mention crowdsourcing local recommendations for everything from finding a handyman to planning a vacation.
These are just a few ways social media can and has been used for good. You can find your own way. Just remember that you’re in control of your feeds. Bring in the positive and block out the rest. That’s what the mute and block functions are for, or at least that’s how we choose to employ them.
Expand Your Networks
Social media has helped us break down our geographical and ideological barriers and connect with people we wouldn’t be able to otherwise. Sure, that means some overly intense political and sports opinions find their way into your feed, but it also allows you to learn about groups and opinions you don’t see in your everyday life.
Particularly if you live in a remote or non-diverse area, social media can expose you to people and viewpoints you simply wouldn’t encounter where you live. Ideas about new books, movies, activities and interests all help to create a more well-rounded view of the world. If you’ve recently moved, social media can help you build a network around common interests or causes.
And while LinkedIn can be kind of a punchline online, if you sift through the spam and use it to your advantage, it can be a worthwhile networking tool and resource for professional development. And depending on your industry, Twitter, Instagram or lesser-known platforms can be just what your business needs to reach that next rung of success.
This is far from a comprehensive list. Do your own research if you’re considering deleting social media.
Yes, social media is bad. It’s also good. Like most things on the internet, it depends on how you use them. Filter out the negativity, limit your social media exposure, use it for the right reasons and bring your own positivity to your online world.
If you feel like social media is making you less happy, then maybe it needs to go. Just make a plan to replace the positive you do find in social media.
As federal, state and local governments increasingly contemplate big tech and mass surveillance as a tool to combat the spread of the deadly virus, we must guard against surveillance opportunists who will endanger public health and the health of our democracy. For some Americans, the consequences of expanded data collection could be as deadly as the disease itself.
As we’ve seen in China, Taiwan and South Korea, every facet of modern life can become a tool for tracking the virus’s spread. Whether it’s the government using cellphone tower data to track the movement of travelers from Wuhan to other parts of China, or pushing for using new apps that predict if users have been exposed to the disease, or gathering information from social media to map where users are posting from, our digital lives are becoming medical diagnostic tools.
As much as this surveillance might seem like a smart way to fight the pandemic, these programs can get it wrong. There is a profound risk that these types of artificial intelligence systems will mirror the prejudices of their human designers, falsely targeting Asian Americans and other marginalized groups. There is also the risk that they drive many of those who have been infected into the shadows, worsening the spread. And once the period of contagion is over, these emergency surveillance tools may easily be co-opted for other purposes — everything from tracking graffitiing to tax evasion — making Orwellian surveillance a permanent part of American life.
Perhaps the most high-profile public health tech tool that’s actually been put in place to deal with the coronavirus, rather than merely discussed, is the partnership (albeit fraught) between the Trump administration and Google to create a screening triage website to determine whose symptoms, travel history, and other risk factors mean that they should be prioritized for treatment. Users seeking tests at participating facilities log in with their google account, enter their health data, then get a referral to COVID-19 testing if they are deemed a priority.
Making Google part of the national emergency response (long before it was agreed to by Google), caused privacy advocates to ask what would happen with the data. The law is completely unclear on whether this data can also be used by government agencies ranging from public health authorities to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Furthermore, if potential patients have to register with a Google account using their real name, it could dissuade certain groups of individuals from getting screened. Take a moment to imagine what it is like for undocumented immigrants living through the coronavirus crisis. For those who have the symptoms of COVID-19, a trip to the emergency room could bring a death sentence: deportation to a far-off country even less equipped to handle the threat of the pandemic. If even a small fraction of undocumented immigrants feel unsafe getting medical treatment, the virus could expand.
Similarly, those Americans who have outstanding police warrants may also be dissuaded from handing their information to public-private partnerships. And some Americans will avoid registration on ideological grounds to avoid giving corporate entities or the government their intimate health details.
The potential for far-reaching consequences from faulty technology is also greatly enhanced by using surveillance widely to cope with this pandemic. For instance, it’s not that far out to imagine government officials using current tracking software such as HealthMap (which scours social media sites for flu-related words to identify incipient flu outbreaks) or Flu Near You (which asks its users to self-identify their flulike symptoms) to impose quarantines or otherwise restrict people’s movements; local governments in Chicago and New York have relied on similar programs that scraped people’s social media for terms related to foodborne illnesses in order to identify and shut down restaurants prone to food poisoning.
But despite successes using these apps for food poisoning and the flu, the effectiveness of this sort of mass surveillance system is decidedly unclear, especially if expanded more broadly by relying on cellphone locations and internet history. Previously, systems might have been able to guess who had seasonal flu based on their Google queries, for example, but in the midst of this pandemic nearly every American is running these same searches. Other attempts to develop this technology, such as Google Flu Trends, were abandoned as failures.
Moreover, using artificial intelligence to determine who can leave their home or take transit raises the risk of AI bias. In the U.S. (and particularly New York City), where housing is appallingly segregated, it’s easy to imagine how AI could lead to a form of COVID-19 redlining or otherwise replicate the worst shortcomings of “predictive policing,” which often draws on racially biased crime data to recommend even more racially biased policing.
Ultimately, there’s the threat this technology poses to our civil rights and the rule of law. Government access to this type of tracking and personal data means officials will have the power to exclude people from society, effectively subjecting them to home confinement without trial, appeal or any semblance of due process. It’s an appealing response when the government gets that decision right, but a chilling power if abused.
In China, residents have been forced to install phone apps that track their movements and assign them a red, green or yellow coronavirus score. Get a bad score and suddenly public transportation, work and school are out of bounds. And, as people in China are learning, when a computer program quarantines you, that automated judgment can be impossible to challenge and reverse. Disturbingly, there’s growing evidence that the expanded behavioral tracking will stick around long after the crisis is over, giving Beijing a new way to track religious minorities and political dissidents.
In the weeks ahead, we must be vigilant. Whether it was the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, the profiling of Muslim Americans following the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or the mass incarceration for petty and nonviolent crimes when crime rates spiked in the ’80s and ’90s, our rights are most at risk when we feel scared. And the changes we accept in times of crisis can last far longer than the immediate crisis.
In the weeks following 9/11, Congress hastily expanded surveillance powers through the USA PATRIOT Act. Many of those emergency provisions were originally supposed to expire more than a decade ago. This week, Congress voted to renew them yet again. Taking evidence-based steps to protect public health will save lives in the coming days, but any damage we do to our Constitution may not heal for decades.
Are you planning on making a lifestyle shift to one where you go off the grid? If so, it’s important to know the best states for homesteading. A change this big requires you to leave the conveniences of the suburban or urban life. However, living a life of self-sufficiency is possible in the best states for homesteading.
Once you find the right piece of land, you’ll be able to change the way you live by focusing on nature’s methods and tools. Whether you want to live off the grid or have a more modern homesteading life, there are plenty of options across the United States for experienced and beginning homesteaders.
Before settling on a place to live, first ask yourself, “What states allow homesteading?” Below, you’ll find the top five states to consider for planting your family’s roots.
Homesteading is allowed in all states; however, not every area is applicable. For example, in New York, there are specific boroughs where homesteading is permitted. Where the differences come into play are the exemptions per state and whether they have federal exemptions available or not.
It is also crucial for you to consider the benefits of homesteading in one state over another. For example, Arizona might have coverage for more of your belongings than Arkansas.
Tennessee is fantastic for homesteading, especially if you enjoy seasonal changes. With its mild and moderate climate, you’ll get all four seasons and have access to fertile land. Also, if you opt for more middle and western regions, you’ll find farming is particularly advantageous in these areas.
There are several picturesque landscapes for you to enjoy in Tennessee, too. More than that, you’ll have the added advantage of a low cost of living, which is approximately 10% less than the rest of the United States.
To help boost homesteading in the state, Tennessee even hosts the Great Appalachian Homesteading Conference.
The main concern for new residents is that although you get four seasons, you also get natural disasters. This state is known for flooding, tornadoes, and inclement weather that you should be prepared for.
The homestead law in the state protects families from having to give the entirety of their property to creditors. This point comes into play if you experience financial hardships. For your property to be considered a homestead, it must be your primary residence. To help make your transition simpler, you can apply for the Rural Homesteading Land Grant.
There is also a homesteading exemption in the state of up to $5,000. Compared to other states, Tennessee has a competitive exemption program.
Currently, there are over 60,000 homesteads in Idaho, making it one of the most popular places to settle. Not only will you be able to acquire land, but you will also have access to the incredibly fertile soil.
There are different climates and ecosystems in Idaho, depending on where in the state you live. If natural disasters are a worry for you, Idaho rarely experiences any, apart from wildfires.
One of the most respected elements of the state is that there isn’t a shortage of outdoor activities. Your family will love maintaining your farm, skiing, whitewater rafting, fishing, and hunting.
The majority of residents are welcoming to homesteaders, as it is a lifestyle that most residents already participate in. It is possible to have plenty of privacy in Idaho, too, especially as some towns have low populations.
Also, it has a substantially lower crime rate than many other states that offer homestead possibilities.
The homesteading laws in Idaho benefit homesteaders more than the government. You’ll find coverage for homeschooling, growing your crops, and even raising livestock.
The homesteading law states explicitly that your permanent homestead will be protected in a financial crisis. In terms of protection from creditors, you can get up to $100,000, as long as you are the property owner.
You will also need to have a Declaration of a Homestead filed with the government. It’s important to note that even if you own a previous piece of property, new paperwork is required for each.
Also, only one of your residences may be declared in your Homestead Declaration.
Oregon is a beautiful state, and it also offers plenty of opportunities for managing your farm. Families will easily be able to grow an assortment of crops and gardens and orchards with fertile lands for livestock.
Known for their exemplary farmer’s markets, you can even transition your homestead into a profitable venture. You’ll love being surrounded by beautiful mountainous regions that appear specifically designed to promote self-sufficient living.
Unlike other states, you won’t have to worry about living in a secluded area, as most homesteaders in Oregon have neighbors.
There are entire homesteading towns, too, so that you can build connections and friendships with your neighbors.
If you are married, you can receive exemptions of up to $50,000 in the state for homesteading. Single individuals, on the other hand, will receive up to $40,000.
It is also important to note that where you live can have a significant bearing on your coverage.
Homesteaders who live outside of the city or town limits can protect up to 160 acres. Whereas, if you live within limits, you can cover up to one city block of your property.
Interestingly enough, you can also use the homestead exemption to protect the proceeds you receive from selling your homestead. There are regulations and rules about the exemptions to consider.
With an ample growing season, homesteading in Missouri can be a beneficial experience. It has a pleasant climate with some extremes, although they’re not typical. You can expect the last spring frost between the middle of April and the beginning of May.
If you’re in the land market, Missouri is one of the best states to consider, as their plots are large.
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, the average size of Missouri farms in 2019 was 290 acres.
Farmers will easily be able to grow an assortment of carrots, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, collard greens, peas, and potatoes.
The hardiness zones for the majority of the state fall within zones five, six, and seven.
Similar to Oregon, there are plenty of farmer’s markets where you can sell your vegetables. U-pick farms are also booming in popularity, as well as farmers selling their produce to small restaurants and eateries.
Farming and homesteading bring up to $88.4 billion to Missouri annually, making it a highly favorable option.
Missouri offers a $15,000 exemption for homesteaders, as long as the home you’re declaring is your permanent residence. Within the statute, it is evident that the total exemption cannot be more, even if there are two co-owners.
Another aspect of the homesteading law in Missouri is that a co-owner may not sell the property if the other owner claims homestead protection. Before you are allowed to declare your settlement as a homestead, you must be living on the land for 40 consecutive months.
If you’ve been interested in brushing up on your greenhouse gardening, Michigan is a great opportunity.
Located in the Great Lakes region of the United States, it’s very agriculturally diverse. As a bonus, if you start a farm, you will be protected by the “right to farm” laws.
Michigan ensures farmers are protected from nuisance complaints from neighbors, as long as you are performing approved agricultural practices.
There are over 47,000 farms in Michigan, ranging from one to 209 acres, depending on the crop and livestock. With an average growing season of 140 days, you’ll manage tomatoes, pumpkins, peppers, and beans, to name a few.
The majority of the state falls within hardiness zones four, five, and six. However, you might also want to consider greenhouse equipment, as Michigan is prone to inclement weather.
They surely have warm summers and springs, but their winters can be frigid. With a greenhouse setting, you can ensure your homestead is profitable year-round.
One of the essential laws in Michigan about homesteading is how you keep your livestock. They must be in secured pastures with adequate shelter to exhibit good farming practices.
As for the state’s homesteading law, you can allocate up to 40 acres of rural land to be a homestead. If you’re more interested in metropolitan homesteading, you can mandate up to $3,500 worth of urban land to be your homestead.
If you are approached with financial hardship, Michigan protects homesteaders in specific ways.
For example, the state prohibits creditors from seizing the following:
The concept of getting free land might sound unbelievable, especially in today’s day and age. However, thanks to the Homestead Act of 1862, families can still receive free land, as long as you meet specific guidelines.
There are plenty of states that offer free property, although the majority do so in small towns to boost population rates.
If you’re wondering what states offer free land, a few examples include:
Narrowing your search to a state which offers free land can be a good place to start when you are relocating to homestead.
Unfortunately, no, the Homestead Act was eliminated in 1976. Most homesteading occurred between 1863 and 1900, with it coming to an end near the early 1930s.
Although the Homestead Act no longer exists, you can still find plenty of free lands.
If you have a specific part of the state that you want to live in, free land might not be an option. Most states will provide free land in particular areas to boost the economy and population throughout the state.
Nonetheless, just because you can’t get free land doesn’t mean that you won’t find cheap land. The following states are highly recommended for inexpensive land prices:
Tennessee is particularly attractive because it doesn’t have a state income tax but has a low cost of living. It also has some of the least expensive land available; some plots can go as low as $0.37 per square foot.
On average, you can expect to buy a 251,911 square foot lot for as little as $59,408. As an added benefit, the state is quite large, so you are bound to find numerous inexpensive lots.
Still, if you want to move to Tennessee, it’s best to do so quickly. The population is increasing drastically as the years go on.
Tennessee has continued to grow since PC 1101’s passage, although some areas are growing much faster than others. The amount of developed land in Tennessee increased 18% from 1997 to 2012, according to the National Resources Inventory of 2012.
The counties surrounding Metropolitan Nashville-Davidson County are the fastest growing areas in Tennessee. The Nashville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, which is the regional transportation planning agency for seven counties, estimates an additional one million people will live in the area by 2035.
Apart from its hot summers in much of the state, Arizona is also known to be a highly popular tourist destination.
If you’re interested in buying land in the state, you could pay less than you would think. On average, a 91,088 square foot lot can run you $45,420.
There are plenty of things to find in Florida, from famous attractions to miles of beaches. You’ll even find charming neighborhoods spanning from Orlando to Sarasota.
Fortunately, it is also an incredibly affordable place to buy land, though the ritzier the neighborhood, the more expensive it is.
For example, land in Winter Park is bound to be substantially more expensive than in Tampa Bay. On average, some plots can be as low as $0.16 per square foot.
For homesteaders searching for the cheapest state to buy land, we highly recommend Arkansas. It offers plenty of outdoor activities, highly fertile soil for farming, and is perfect for nature lovers.
Also, it is incredibly diverse, with country-friendly and urban dwellings depending on where you live. Above all else, it has a low cost of living, and a booming economy makes it a fantastic investment.
The cheapest land available in Arkansas can be found near Clay County for approximately $0.07 per square foot. However, prices across the state are quite competitive.
There’s a lot to consider when living off the grid, especially if you want your life to be comfortable.
You’ll need to consider climate and weather first and foremost, as they can affect everything, even alternative power. You’ll want to start by learning about what off grid living and surviving outdoors entails along with realistic off grid power sources such as solar and other methods.
From the soil’s quality to how much sun you get per day, finding the ideal place to live away from society is challenging. It will be important to learn about the rainfall in the area and rainwater collection.
When trying to answer what state is best for off grid living, among the things to consider are land prices, property taxes, and land quality.
To give you an idea, here’s a list of the top choices:
Both the state laws and zoning requirements work in favor of off-the-grid searchers in Maine. You’ll also appreciate the bonus of remote areas, inexpensive land options, and a low population density.
With plenty of access to natural resources, you’ll find rock, timber, and water are always in abundance.
Even though they don’t have the most impressive growing season, you can easily use greenhouses.
For people who enjoy cold and warm weather, Montana is an exciting location to consider. You can guarantee that population density is one of its least significant issues.
Also, their laws are beneficial for people who are interested in living self-sufficiently. With low crime rates and a low cost of living, finding land in the state is easy.
Although the growing season in Montana is short, it’s one of the best locations for raising livestock.
Clearly one of the best states for homesteading, Tennessee is another fantastic option for off-the-grid living.
There are plenty of resources for people who want to live away from densely populated areas. Also, rural living is incredibly friendly to small budgets, especially in terms of land prices.
Tennessee also has a far better growing season than the other states we’ve mentioned. You can grow crops up to 260 days per year thanks to its moderate climate.
Like any other big change, switching from urban living to homesteading is never easy.
What’s more, if you’re wondering if can you still use the Homestead Act, you’d find that the original no longer applies. Nevertheless, there are plenty of exceptional states that offer homesteading land and inexpensive land.
So, whether you want to live off-grid or are ready to start your own farm in a rural town, embracing the homesteading lifestyle is possible. The key is to know how and where to start.
Homesteading in Canada has similarities and areas similar in appearance and homestead possibilities to many of those in the U.S.
Most of the differences between Canadians and U.S. citizens come from the differences in the way each country operates.
Where are the best Homestead Areas in Canada?
The best homestead areas are: The Okanagan Valley of British Columbia; The Canadian Rockies bordering Alberta and British Columbia; The Southern portion of New Brunswick; Portions of the Maritime Island Provinces.
To successfully homestead in Canada you need to have the same critical aspects for homesteading that you need if homesteading in the U.S.
In brief those critical aspects include water, good soil, trees, access to property and a good homestead location.
More can be found in an article I wrote titled, “Homestead – Critical Aspects And Important Considerations.”
This article about the best homestead areas in Canada will start out with the main differences and similarities between Canada and the U.S.
This will allow citizens in each country to have a better understanding if they choose to look for land across their border in the other country.
In Canada Legal Access to property that is reached by crossing other privately owned land is by an Express Grant.
In the U.S. Legal Access across private property is called a Deeded Easement.
In spite of the difference in terminology the legal effect is the same.
Permission is granted for a landowner to cross someone else’s private property to access his land.
The Express Grant is registered in the Land Registry Office and is written into the title to the dominant land and the servient land.
The dominant land is the property that benefits from the express grant of an easement.
The servient land is the land that is burdened, the land over which access is allowed, under the express grant of the easement.
The Legal Description of the Express Grant in the dominant land’s title begins with the words “together with” and goes on to describe the location of that access easement granted across the private land.
The Legal Description of the Express Grant in the servient land’s title begins with the words “subject to” and goes on to describe the area of access easement across the private land that the neighbor can use to get to his land.
Canada is much less densely populated than the U.S. is.
This allows for more homesteads to be located in the southern portion of Canada than if there was a denser population there.
There are less Military Bases in Canada than in the U.S.
This means there is less problems in locating a homestead away from an area of potential collateral damage from a strike on a military base in case of a war.
The Eastern Canadian Providences of Newfoundland and Nova Scotia have little military importance other than a location to begin or end crossing the Atlantic Ocean.
They have much more areas suitable for homesteading than the Eastern States in the U.S. have.
Many Canadian areas bordering the U.S. have the same mix of advantages or disadvantages for homesteading as the adjacent area in the U.S. has.
Canadians are very similar to Americans in many ways besides language.
They share much the same ethics, pioneering spirit, desire to live independently and to care for their families that American’s have.
Canadian lifestyle is very similar to American lifestyle.
Even large Canadian cities have many of the same problems with crime and immigration that are found in American large cities.
So homestead locations, to be safe, need to be away from large Canadian cities.
Even the French Canadians living in the providence of Quebec have more in common with Americans than they do with Frenchmen.
In theory the Canadian Government has more power and authority than the American Government has.
Like Britain, Canada has a Parliamentary system with no separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government.
This can lead to a more centralized and powerful national government.
One effect of this difference between Canadian and U.S. Government is that laws can change faster in Canada than in the U.S.
That said, Canadians have the same basic rights to trial by jury, representation by a lawyer and protection from searches without a warrant that Americans have.
Canada’s National Healthcare System is much more socialized than America’s Healthcare System.
This means there are more Doctor shortages in Canada than in the U.S. and access to medical specialists is more restricted in Canada than in the U.S.
Canada’s National Healthcare system is called “Medicare” but no one is forced to use the system.
It can help families achieve self-sufficiency because there is no need of health Insurance in Canada.
Canada’s medicare pays for most medical care.
The problem arises when a particular medical specialist is needed.
There can be a long wait to get an appointment or one may have to travel long distances to find the medical specialist needed.
This problem has many wealthy Canadians visiting the U.S. when they need specialized medical care.
Homesteading in Canada can be done off-the-grid.
Homesteaders in Canada can grow their own food, own their own land and generate their own electricity.
Media reports of off-grid living in Canada being against the law involve people living inside city limits who do not want to be connected to municipal utilities, not to homesteaders living out in the countryside.
As is also found in America, there are areas of Canada where there are over zealous local authorities who can cause problems.
The solution is to learn where these areas are and avoid them.
You can learn about those areas by careful internet research, research in Canadian newspapers and talking to locals in any area where you might be considering homesteading.
There is a back-to-the-land movement in Canada just like there is in the U.S.
More and more couples are choosing to move away from the cities.
And choosing to learn how to live off-the-land by raising their own food and preserving and preparing it with traditional methods.
Since Canada is experiencing a growing crime problem, much as the one being experienced in the U.S. more Canadians are looking at homesteading as an option to live in a quieter and a safer area.
This is a large area in the center of British Columbia just above the U.S. border.
It is arguably the best homestead location in all of Canada.
It has plenty of lakes, fertile soil, good climate, normal growing season and forests on both sides of the valley.
The best locations would include plenty of trees and may be on the edges of the valley.
There are several small towns such as Osoyoos and Penticron and the people are friendly.
The largest town is Kelowna located on Lake Okanagan.
This area is far enough away from the Cascadia Subduction Zone lying off the coast of Vancouver Island to be safe from a potential earthquake and the predicted resultant tsunami.
The area north of Kamloops, B.C. is a good area for homesteading if there is no need of a job away from the homestead in order to survive.
As long as you stay about 50 miles away from the only Canadian Air Force base located there, the coastal area of British Columbia has several good homesteading locations.
You would want to do some research to see whether Vancouver Island is predicted to be an effective barrier to a tsunami caused from the Cascadia Subduction Zone before deciding to homestead along the southern coast of British Columbia.
Another possibility for homesteading in British Columbia is on the western edge of the Rocky Mountains above the Okanagan Valley region.
The foothills of the Western Rockies would be the place to start looking if this was the area you choose.
Some of the best homestead area around the Eastern Canadian Rockies are located in the foothills of the mountains on the Alberta side.
Just be sure that all the critical aspects necessary for a good productive homestead are present on the land you are considering as I share in “Homestead – Critical Aspects And Important Considerations.”
It is best to avoid areas near the popular tourist locations of Banff and Lake Louise.
These areas are beautiful and tend to have fairly expensive land prices.
The areas near Edmondton and Red Deer to the north have some good homesteading areas as long as you stay away from the military base north of Edmonton and the one near Cold Lake.
The Canadian Plains to the east of Calgary have a much drier climate with warm summers and extremely cold winters due to Arctic air masses coming down in the winter.
Winter temperatures in the Canadian Plains can be 50 below zero.
Because of the severe weather in the winter, the Canadian Plains in Alberta are not the preferred areas to homestead.
Southern New Brunswick is probably the best area to Homestead in Eastern Canada.
It has good farmland, areas of hills or higher ground that allow for basements under houses and low population density.
This area is close to the Atlantic which is a plus for those who like sea food or might want to add deep sea fishing to their homestead endeavors.
The biggest problems to bother a homesteader are likely to be the cold and dampness of winter and the humidity and bugs in the summer.
The Maritime Provinces includes New Brunswick and the Islands of Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island.
The Maritime Island Provinces are quite large and sparsely populated.
This makes the Islands of Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island with their proximity to the mainland much better places to homestead than most islands.
The Gulf Stream from the Atlantic moderates the climate here quite a lot.
Thus the Maritime’s are not as cold as the Central and Western provinces and even warmer than many locations in the State of Maine in the U.S.
The area toward the center of Nova Scotia has soil that is extremely fertile.
Prices for land in the Maritime’s are quite reasonable compared to the rest of Canada.
An additional factor, mentioned earlier, is that there is no real military value to the Maritime’s except as a location to begin or end crossing the Atlantic.
The northern portions of Canada are very bleak, remote and isolated.
They are only suited as homesteads for a few people who can stand the extreme cold and long winters.
This includes the northern portions of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Quebec and the entire regions of Labrador, Yukon and the Northwest Territories.
Going northwest of the City of Quebec there are areas in the mountains and hills that can be homesteaded.
You will want to stay about 30 minutes away from the city of Quebec.
Thirty minutes northwest of Montreal there are also areas than can be suitable for homesteads.
The peninsula of land between Toronto and Windsor that is surrounded by the Great Lakes is not a good area to try and homestead because of the density of population.
Once you get above Peterborough, especially to the northwest the chances of finding suitable land for homesteading improve.
Manitoba is basically agricultural in the southern half of the Province.
There are a lot of lakes scattered throughout this Province.
The southern portion is at the far north end of the plains called Tornado Alley in the U.S.
This portion of Manitoba averages 12-15 tornadoes a year including the strongest F5 twister in Canadian history.
Summers are hot and humid and Manitoba holds the Canadian record for the highest percentage of humidity in the nation.
If Homesteading here, it is not going to be easy to find an area with all the critical aspects needed for a homestead and a comfortable summer climate.
Saskatchewan is agricultural and mostly plains with much less water than that in Manitoba.
Forty-five percent of all grains grown in Canada are grown here.
The population is sparse and Saskatchewan holds the record for both the highest temperature in Canada, 113 degrees F and the lowest temperature in Canada, -60 degrees F.
It is possible to find forested areas where one could homestead as long as there was adequate water to be found.
However, the wide range of temperatures make this a less desirable portion of Canada to homestead.
The answer to that question depends on how you define the word “free.”
There is a portion of the Yukon, that Province located between British Columbia and Alaska where there are still remnants of the old fashioned homesteading.
But to participate you must have lived in the Yukon for at least a year.
Becoming a “sourdough” to the locals.
Plus you must show that you have a knowledge of farming by filling out a Farm Development Plan that is 9 pages long.
Question four on this 9 page development plan says; “Please explain how and where you plan to market your farm products so that your operation will achieve financial viability.”
This program, most recently updated in 2006, is called the Agricultural Lands Program.
It has a stated mission to “make new land available for agriculture.”
No where in the program do you find the word “homestead.”
Once the Farm Development Plan is accepted, the wannabe landowners can sign up for a plot in an already surveyed agricultural land subdivision.
Or look through government maps to locate another piece of land.
This program is headquartered in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory but the nearest land available is about 100 km, (62 miles) outside of Whitehorse.
Once a plot of land is chosen, the Yukon Agriculture Branch determines the lands assessed valuation.
The applicant must make enough improvement on the land to equal the assessed valuation.
If the property is assessed at $100,000 the homesteader has to make $100,000 worth of improvement before receiving title to the “free land.”
The improvements can be fencing, building roads or a house and there has to be “two thirds of 80% of the land cleared, developed and in production.”
The practical application of this is that the land has to have viable crops growing on that large portion of it before the title passes from the government to the homesteader.
As can be seen, this is a multiple years process and in the end it is arguable that you are getting “free land.”
Some of the comments collected over several years from those who successfully received their “free land” include;
“Your chances of doing it as Joe Blow off the street are really slim.”
“There’s nothing free about it all. If you’ve got to pay $100,000 for $100,000 of assessed land, that’s not free.”
“As long as you’ve shown it green … you get title to it, and then you’re not compelled to farm.”
There is the concept of “sweat equity.” It can take up to 20 years to develop the land and receive a title to it.
How much is that person’s hard work, the “blood, sweat and tears” worth?
Is it only worth $5,000 a year if the land finally titled to the homesteader was assessed at $100,000?
For that matter, if the work was completed in only 10 years and the property was assessed at $100,000 is the homesteader’s hard work only worth $10,000 a year?
At some point in time, the Yukon will probably stop this program or the available land will run out.
Maybe another province will have a similar program in the future?
Does Canada still have free homestead land?
Each person has to answer that question for themselves.
Is it worth moving a family that far north and putting up with the cold and problems associated with clearing land, making improvements and working to obtain “free land?”
That is another question each potential neo-homesteader has to answer for themselves also.
Can foreigners buy land in Canada?
Yes they can, but there are different restrictions than on permanent Canadian citizens.
It is common for foreigners to have to put 35% down payment.
Several provinces have maximum acreage limits which can be 5, 10 or 20 total acres.
Is there free land in Canada?
Depends on what you call free.
A portion of the Yukon Territory has a land program open to those who have lived there for at least 1 year.
But it is not really free.
If you are granted a piece of land that is valued at $100,000.00 you must make $100,000.00 worth of improvements on it to get the land.
Where is the best agricultural land in Canada?
The Okanagan Valley, portions of the Maritime Islands and northwest of the City of Quebec are the best agricultural areas in Canada to homestead in.
I have for a long time, or at least since its emergence, been against all varieties of DNA testing kits you can order at home. The Internet has already more than enough information on us as it is, why give them your DNA too?
If you\’re delusional to think that your DNA test won\’t be shared with any 3rd party or able to be accessed by the government or law enforcement agencies, your DEAD wrong. That\’s not to say any law biding citizen would generally worry about this information being out there but one can make the case for mistaken DNA.
Imagine your sitting at home, minding your everyday hum-drum life, and the door comes crashing down with officers to arrest you for something you weren\’t involved in. Could it be because there was a DNA match? A match that perhaps was tainted or labeled improperly?
Or, even more of an Orwellian thought, your DNA was tagged because it contains information about a possible disease outbreak that could be caused by hidden information in your DNA.
At some point, as citizens, have to say enough is enough when protecting our privacy and our own personal information or intellectual properties.
If you\’re not one of these people who are concerned, at least take some steps to keep your DNA as private as you possibly can get it.
Eric Ravenscraft helps with his article in the New York Times.
Consumer DNA testing kits like those from 23andMe, Ancestry.com and MyHeritage promise a road map to your genealogy and, in some cases, information about what diseases you’re most susceptible to. They also ask for a lot of trust with your DNA information — trust that, in some ways, may not be earned. Here’s how to protect and delete your data if you use any of these services.
Home DNA testing kits usually involve taking a cheek swab or saliva sample and mailing it off to the company. In that little sample is the most personal information you can share: your genetic code. Some companies share that data with law enforcement, and most sell your DNA data to third parties, after which it can become difficult to track. For some people who work for small companies or serve in the military, it can affect insurance premiums and even the ability to get insurance at all.
While DNA testing has been used in medical and scientific contexts for decades, direct-to-consumer testing kits are still relatively new and legal policies that govern the private use of consumer data are still being developed.
According to Dr. James Hazel, a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Genetic Privacy and Identity in Community Settings, there are fewer protections for your data with consumer DNA testing kits than there would be if you were taking a medical test. If a doctor takes a DNA sample, that sample is protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and there are limits on how it can be shared.
“In the United States, if you’re talking about genetic data that’s generated outside of the health care setting, there’s a relatively low baseline of protection,” Dr. Hazel said. “And that’s provided generally by the by the Federal Trade Commission. So the Federal Trade Commission, although it’s not specific to genetic data, has the ability to police unfair and deceptive business practices across all industries. Other than that, there are really no laws in the United States that apply specifically.”
In other words, if you want to make sure your data is safe, you’re going to have to do the unthinkable: read the company’s privacy policy. That policy will tell you what data the company collects, how it’s used and what control you have over it. If a company deceptively violates its own policy, the F.T.C. can step in. Beyond that, though, you’ll have to read a company’s policy carefully before signing up.
For most DNA testing companies, the best way to protect your data is to not hand it over in the first place. In 2017, Dr. Hazel’s team studied 90 DNA testing companies and found most of their privacy policies wanting. Some companies only had policies governing use of their website, while others failed to indicate whether they strip away personally identifiable information from a sample before sending it off for testing. A few of the larger companies may have acceptable policies, but Dr. Hazel said you probably shouldn’t trust smaller testing companies that you haven’t heard of.
“When we looked in 2017, we found that 40 percent of companies appear to have no written policy that specifically mentioned genetic data,” Dr. Hazel said. “We saw these smaller companies that you might not have heard of had privacy policies that were a paragraph long, a couple paragraphs long, and really didn’t provide any information whatsoever.”
The more well-known testing companies are safer bets — perhaps because they’re so well-known. “And so when we have larger companies that are constantly sort of in the public spotlight, I think the result has been that these companies are generally more accountable,” Dr. Hazel said. “And their privacy policies are generally much more comprehensive.”
Three of the biggest names in home DNA tests are 23andMe, Ancestry.com and MyHeritage. You can find their privacy policies and specific instructions on how to delete data from each of them below. Wirecutter, the product review website owned by The New York Times Company, evaluated 15 DNA testing kits and recommended AncestryDNA or 23andMe.
When you first set up a new smartphone, you might be asked to give a company permission to track your location or share data about how you use your phone. In the same way, once you’ve picked a DNA test to try, there are a few things to watch out for. DNA testing companies tend to ask a lot of questions that may strike you as boring, but if you want to protect your data, you’ll want to read them all carefully.
Consumers “want to look at what choices they have, in terms of the activities that they can opt into, or opt out of,” Dr. Hazel said. Some companies like 23andMe have a separate agreement asking permission to use your DNA data in research studies. This data is stripped of identifying labels like your name or address that tie it to you specifically, but that’s not always guaranteed to protect your privacy.
In some cases, Dr. Hazel said, companies use what’s called “de-identified aggregate data,” which is relatively safe. This kind of data might include summaries that don’t specifically call out individuals, like what percentage of people have a certain ancestry.
“But these companies also use what’s called de-identified individual-level data, where there is, you know, always a risk that a person can be re-identified from that data,” Dr. Hazel said. This kind of data might describe your unique genetic makeup without using your name. While it may be unlikely that this information could be linked back to you, researchers have shown it is possible. Law enforcement famously used crime-scene DNA that was shared with a genealogical research site to track down a suspect in the Golden State killer case, even though he never used a DNA test himself, demonstrating that even anonymized data can be used to identify people.
If you give a company permission to share your data with another research organization, you can revoke that permission later. However, it will be difficult or impossible to delete your data from third parties that have already received it. It’s also hard to guarantee that those third parties won’t also share your data with yet another company or research organization down the road. “Once that data has been shared with a third party, it’s really difficult to control further sharing,” Dr. Hazel said. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t share data with researchers, but you should know the risks going in.
You may also be asked for permission to allow the DNA testing company to store your sample, meaning that it can go back and test it again if more advanced techniques are developed in the future. Some sites also offer a family finder feature that lets potential relatives contact you if your DNA matches. All of these can be very personal permissions to give. Reputable companies will make sure to inform you as much as possible, but be sure to read everything you’re presented with before you click “Agree.”
Each company has its own steps for deleting your data. We’ll cover the steps for each of the Big Three companies below, as well as what deleting your data with that company entails.
To delete your 23andMe data, head to your account settings page and find the “Delete Your Data” option under “23andMe Data.” You can download any or all of your data before you destroy it. If you agreed to have your sample saved, it will also be physically destroyed.
However, 23andMe uses a laboratory that must follow regulations under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, or CLIA. This means that some data, including your DNA, sex and date of birth will be retained in order to comply with these regulations. The company will no longer use that information, though. You can read more about the company’s deletion process here.
To delete data from Ancestry, sign into your account, click the “DNA” tab and choose “Your DNA Results Summary.” From there, click “Settings” and choose “Delete Test Results.” You’ll have to enter your password again to confirm that you want to delete your information.
This process will delete your DNA data, as well as prevent you from appearing in any family finder results. You can also delete your entire Ancestry account. As with 23andMe (and any federally compliant DNA-testing company), your DNA information will be retained for regulatory compliance purposes, but nothing else, according to Ancestry’s privacy policy.
To delete data from MyHeritage, log into your account, click your name in the upper-right corner, and choose “Account Settings.” From there, scroll to the bottom of the page and click “Delete Account.” You can also choose to delete your Family Tree Builder projects or sites without deleting your entire account, but this will not necessarily delete your data. Since MyHeritage labs are CLIA-certified, they will also retain some information about you.
DNA testing companies have improved their methods for deleting your data over the years. However, since the United States government requires these companies to retain DNA information in order to comply with quality control guidelines, it’s never really possible to delete it forever. Before you sign up for a testing kit, always make sure you know what you’re agreeing to and that you’re comfortable signing that permission away.