First blog post

https://www.recharge.com/en-US/MTN?aid=6&utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=en-US%20%7C%20Beltegoed%20%7C%20Carrier%20%7C%20MTN&utm_term=mtn&utm_content=mtn%20%7C%20exThis is your very first post. Click the Edit link to modify or delete it, or start a new post. If you like, use this post to tell readers

Advertisements

Internet Yahoo, Google, Facebook and more face fight to salvage reputations over NSA leaks Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple have been floundering for a response Lisa O’Carroll @lisaocarroll Tue 11 Jun 2013 12.38 BST First published on Tue 11 Jun 2013 12.38 BST This article is over 5 years old Shares 7 Google. Apple. Facebook. Microsoft: they are the brands that want the world to trust them with personal information, emails, photos, documents – yet they are now facing a battle to maintain that trust after disclosures that the US government was given access to their customers’ data online via the Prism programme operated by the NSA. The companies involved – Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple – vigorously deny giving the Obama administration backdoor access to users’ internet information, but the potential damage to their brand reputation has left the companies floundering for a way to respond. Advertisement Viktor Mayer-Schonberger, professor of internet governance and regulation at the Oxford Internet Institute, believes there could be serious consequences for the collective reputations of all internet companies who have meticulously built their trade on trust. Sign up to the Media Briefing: news for the news-makers Read more He cites Amazon – not one of the companies involved in Prism – as a case in point when the company took the side of consumers after publishers protested about bad reviews. “It may have dissuaded someone to buy a book, but it instilled trust in Amazon which was far more important to it long-term,” said Mayer-Schonberger. “If you violate that trust, it is difficult to re-establish. Even if it turned out to be a hoax, trust has been destroyed because everyone is talking about it.” He added: “These companies depend on their users being sufficiently trusting to give them personal data. Many of us are perfectly fine for these companies to use this information for their own commercial benefit, to place more relevant adverts on the right hand side, but we do not want it passed on to the government or to tax authorities for instance.” Greg Nojeim, senior counsel at Centre for Democracy and Technology in New York said that for Google – a company which has Don’t be Evil as an informal company slogan and has pioneered online openess, “more transparency would be helpful”. He said: “An important step would be for these companies to exert even more pressure; pressure on the intelligence authorities to disclose more information about intelligence related surveillance that they are compelled to conduct.” In his statement following the Prism revelations, Google CEO Larry Page indicated this was the tack his company would be taking to protect its brand reputation. “The level of secrecy around the current legal procedures undermines the freedoms we all cherish,” he said. Civil liberty activists have also been alarmed. In the UK, the US surveillance, even of high level data, has raised questions about breaches of domestic data protection laws. Since you’re here … … three years ago, we knew we had to try to make The Guardian sustainable by deepening our relationship with our readers. The revenues from our newspaper had diminished and the technologies that connected us with a global audience had moved advertising money away from news organisations. We knew we needed to find a way to keep our journalism open and accessible to everyone, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. And so, we have an update for you on some good news. Thanks to all the readers who have supported our independent, investigative journalism through contributions, membership or subscriptions, we are starting to overcome the urgent financial situation we were faced with. Today we have been supported by more than a million readers around the world. Our future is starting to look brighter. But we have to maintain and build on that level of support for ev

Economy

Opinion In California, I saw the virtues – and vices – of the new economy Will Hutton As a country we don’t get the importance of computer code or the scale of the revolution unleashed by the digital world Sat 14 Sep 2013 20.30 BST First published on Sat 14 Sep 2013 20.30 BST It might sound absurd, but Palo Alto, where I spent a part of last week, reminds me of Pompeii or the remains of those other Roman cities I’ve explored over the years under a sweltering sun. For this vibrant centre of California’s Silicon Valley is planned on Roman grid principles, is low storey, presumes sunshine and is surprisingly ordered. Perhaps for a city built on computer code nobody should be surprised. This is a place where invention, new ways to assuage human need and the hunger to make cool fortunes interact. A third of the students at Stanford University, across the railway line from Palo Alto, opt to take computer science for all or part of their degree. It’s the precondition for anyone who wants to make Californian-style riches, even for joining in certain key conversations. That’s one point about Twitter and its ambition announced last week to sell its shares on the New York Stock Exchange valuing the company at up to $15 billion. Its founders – Jack Dorsey, Biz Stone and Evan Williams – will join a roll-call of other San Francisco/Palo Alto-based internet entrepreneurs who turned super-rich. There’s Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook), Larry Ellison (Oracle), Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Google). What unites these names is the ability to write code. If you want to be very wealthy, be listed as one of the most influential Americans and do good in the world by promoting connectivity or enabling something momentous to happen with greater ease or reduced cost, you can’t begin unless you write code. Without a sophisticated structure that can turn the idea into companies that can grow explosively, it might all be worthless. Palo Alto boasts an extraordinary world-class research university on its doorstep in Stanford, an institution that is hard-wired to connect research, code-writing and start-ups . Almost everyone you meet is either involved in a start-up or contemplating getting involved. At best, only one in 10 ventures will succeed. But all over the valley, countless entrepreneurs regularly pitch their ideas to a room full of angel investors and venture capitalists. The idea has to be original and solve a human problem, but, crucially, it has to be scalable: unless there is faith the fledgling company can reach a billion dollars turnover fast, it won’t raise a single dollar. Having a single market of 315 million at their feet ready to experiment with the novel – and allow the prospect of scale – is yet another building block. The angel investors and venture capitalists are very un-British. Many are former entrepreneurs or senior executives in hi-tech companies, recycling the fortunes either they or their own investors have made . Many write code too – and while keen to make money, many speak of changing the world for the better, building an insurgent business. This is not a state-driven ecosystem, in European terms, but is governed by a sense of “publicness”. There is also an understanding that one person alone, given all the technical complexity and potential to make colossal mistakes, is unlikely to crack whatever problem presents itself. You have to collaborate, open up, build fluid teams and work together. Our story today of Airbnb in Tech Monthly is typical: its success is about three people – not one. In this respect, what is happening in California is a bit like Britain’s industrial revolution. James Watt, Richard Arkwright, Samuel Crompton and Josiah Wedgewood wanted to embrace the new and to change the world. They collaborated and shared. There was a nobility of intent that united them, even while they made fortunes. Nobility of intent is not usually associated with successful capitalism. For the ideologues of the right, cargo cult

The Nigerian politics in rivers state.

WAY FORWARD FOR RIVERS APC A university teacher Prof. Ned Nwokocha has called on the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Comrade Adams Oshiomhole to forward the names of candidates that emerged from the direct primary of the party held in Rivers State to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Nwokocha, who is a Constitutional Lawyer and senior lecturer at the Rivers State University made the call during a Radio programme in Port Harcourt, the state capital, weekend. He explained that the judgment of the Supreme Court, delivered on October 22, had laid to rest the argument that the candidates that emerged from the indirect primary were not affected by the defective ward, local government and state congresses, held on October 19, 20 and 21, respectively. He said, “The Supreme Court judgement of Thursday, October 22, has laid to rest issues emanating from the congresses which provoked the crisis currently rocking the Rivers State chapter of the APC. “Those who are still pursuing the matter, hoping that the apex court will change its judicial reasoning when the case finally terminates at the Supreme Court should put their house in order. The decision of the Supreme Court was on an interlocutory application challenging the stay of execution of an interlocutory injunction granted by a Rivers State High Court. “The truth is that the matter has gone beyond that because the matter was not in favour of those who violated the restraining order of the high court. “But the matter has gone beyond violating the restraining order of the high court. There is a conclusive position now. What is important about the Supreme Court judgement is that it settled the question of the interlocutory application. “And it is also a judgment that sounded a clear warning as to what the future position of the Supreme Court will be in the event that this matter eventually comes to the apex court. “One of the justices clearly stated that the contemptnous cannot be allowed to benefit from their stupidity. If the Supreme Court tells you that, then, you must know what you are looking for to still go back to them on the same matter,” Nwokocha stated. Prof. Nwokocha stressed that the leadership of the APC should be more bothered about the subsisting judgement of the Rivers State High Court rather than worry about the interpretation of the Supreme Court judgement on the matter. “What the Supreme Court has done, really, is to revalidate the position of the high court. It simply affirmed the judgment of the high court on the matter. What the Supreme Court has done is to say that the judgment of the high court is sound and valid.” Pro Nwokocha further warned the leadership of the APC thus: “The situation in Rivers State is slightly different from that of Zamfara State. Two Rivers State parallel primary were conducted by the APC in Rivers State. What The party can do is to submit the names of candidates that emerged through direct primary. But if the party does otherwise, it fall into the same situation with Zamfara State. “On the premise of the Supreme Court judgement, the candidates that emerged through indirect primary are defective because the delegates that emerged from the congresses that elected candidates through indirect primary are unknown to the law.” “In the eyes of the law, APC currently has no existing candidates for elective positions in 2019 because those elected through indirect primary were elected in breach and violation of the court order. “The party will be deceiving itself if it forwards the list of candidates that emerged through indirect primary and thinks it has eligible candidates for the 2019 general elections in Rivers State,” the Law professor stated.

Breaking News: National Assembly okays autonomy for local governments, INEC to be in charge of Local Government elections!!! The National Assembly on Tuesday, granted full financial and administrative autonomy to all the 774 local council authorities across Nigeria by amending section 124 of the nation’s constitution. The section provides a consequential provision for the making of the local councils, a full third tier government without undue interference from the state governments. The ammendment was one of the 22 others approved by the House of Representatives last week and ratified by the Senate on Tuesday. Both chambers had through a conference committee harmonised versions of the ammendments into the constitution carried out by each of them last month. By the development, the National Assembly had ratified all the 23 clauses and sections that had been ammended by both chambers. The newly ammended document which would be sent to States Houses of Assembly, for approval, also approved the creation of the Office of Auditor – General of the Local Government as well as the State Local Government Service Commission. The section equally deleted the State Independent Electoral Commission from the constitution thereby vesting the powers to conduct council elections on the Independent National Electoral Commission. It however, retained the immunity clause in the constitution for the President and Governors by adopting the Senate version of the ammendments on the issue and rejected the House of Representatives version which removed the immunity clause. The National Assembly also made provisions for Independent candidacy in future elections in Nigeria by ammending sections 65 and 106 of the 1999 constitution!!!

OGONI WILL NOT BE PART OF BIAFRA—OGONIS ARE NOT IGBOS AND CAN NEVER BE!!! Let me reiterate what I have said previously and other Ogonis likewise emphasized. Based on my knowledge of late Mr. Naakuu Timothy Paul Birabi’s dream and work for Ogoni under illegal and criminal British rule, which of course availed Ogonis their self-determination (self-rule) bid in 1947, I can state without efforts that Ogoni is Ogoni and will remain Ogoni without having anything to do with Biafra. By my knowledge of Ken Saro-Wiwa’s commitment, hard work that brought the Ogoni Bill of Rights (OBR) in 1990, hence the new era Ogoni struggle via MOSOP to actualizing Birabi’s dream after the British left and illegal Nigeria took over and denied Ogoni the aforementioned self-determination status, I can confidently and categorically, unequivocally state that Ogoni will not be part of Biafra in any form or shape. The exception, which is near zero chance is that Ogonis will have to meet in an All-Ogoni Congress and discuss then agree to meet and discuss with Igbos if they learn from the failed Biafra’s experience before and during the 1967 to 1970 Civil War; respectfully and genuinely invite Ogonis for a status talk, which will involve external witnesses. Whatever Ogonis discuss and agree will rule based upon what is offered and any possible agreement that will result from the talk in favor of Ogoni having full autonomy and control its resources in addition to the projected or anticipated central Biafra government (which isn’t in any way in motion as I write) not having any kind of control including any portion of Ogoni oil and gas, other natural resources Igbos want so bad, not even Petroleum Profit Tax or other taxes paid by Ogoni Autonomous Territory (OAT) to Biafra. Of course, Biafra aka Igbos will not accept the summary terms I have put forward. I only add above section to show openness and reasoning with others, giving them chance to prove themselves against outright rejection of any invitation by Igbos assuming they have what it takes to respect other groups and treat members of these groups, Ogonis especially as human beings who are equal to them in rights and deserve the best of life. My raw position and belief, however, is that inasmuch as Igbos of current Nigeria have the right to seek external self-determination also known as independence from Nigeria the ethnic nation of Ogoni and its people have no interest in Biafra so will not be part of any such Igbo arrangement. Igbos are free to invite other ethnic groups in the geographical landscape known as Niger delta. If any or all of these groups pleases, such or all may join the Biafra’s wagon, but Ogoni will not, rather it will stand on its own as distinct independent country if Nigeria breaks or at anytime the great people of Ogoni decides to seek external self-determination or independence. Currently, Ogoni is seeking internal self-determination. This means political autonomy, which shall allow Ogonis control their sociopolitical and economic, cultural and religious affairs as distinct ethnic group or nation like Hausa-Fulanis, Yorubas, Igbos and Ibibios (out of 250 ethnic groups that make up Nigeria) with Ijaws jointly have about 26 to 27 out of current 36 states in Nigeria. . Thank you for reading, understanding or asking questions where necessary and sharing. Sincerely, Ben Ikari

KYC BITCOIN TRADING

The KYC requires you to upload a photo of your ID and your selfie with your ID. You must hold you ID next to your face so that ID does not hide your face and both face and the ID fit into the area of the photo. The KYC software needs your selfie photo to compare your face with the face on ID. Only IDs issued by government are accepted. ID is either a passport or a national ID card or driver’s license. Student or healthcare cards and other IDs issued by institutions are not accepted. Resolution at least 300dpi, size at least 500kb, bright, readable text on both ID and selfie photos, the whole ID and your face must fit into the area of photo. For KYC you can only upload the JPEG and PDF files. You MUST NOT use graphic editing software to improve or cut the image! Please refer also to this page https://sumsub.com/how-to-pass-verification.