Month: July 2020

Google Blacklisting vs Copyright

To create its search index, Google crawls websites. On each website, Google Crawler copies the entire content of the website and processes it.  It stores the full content into its database, extracts links to other websites, aiding its efforts to rank them, uses it to train its artificial intelligence, etc.

But the most websites’ content is protected by copyright. What gives Google the right to copy this content and to benefit from it without permission or compensation. Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s response – “This is how Google works” – is not good enough. This is not fair use. A trillion-dollar company cannot simply take the labor of millions of individuals or small companies and claim fair use.

The only possible justification is an implicit contract between the website owner and Google. The website owner allows Google to crawl the website and copy its content, in exchange for a fair chance that Google would display links to the website to its search users, thereby sending traffic to the website. A website owner might rely on Google’s promise to Google Search users that it would return results that are useful, helpful, and authoritative for them (not for Google). Google Search is a service, and it does not have to be perfect or errors free. Google has a lot of leeway.

Starting around 2016, Google has been blacklisting or “greylisting” many conservative and dissenting sites, including Breitbart, American Thinker, PJ Media, and WattsUpWithThat. It has been taking copyrighted content from them, exploiting it far more than what the site owners knew or permitted it, but not showing links to them, as would be expected from such implicit agreement.

This is a copyright infringement. Breitbart and other blacklisted website owners can sue Google and ask the court for an injunction to enjoin Google against continuing infringement. Google cannot stop infringing just by removing websites from its index – their content and derivatives of it have been used to build the very heart of the Google index, databases, and algorithms.

A website owner can exclude Google from crawling its website by adding an appropriate line in /robots.txt, and Google crawler respects such requests. Nevertheless, Google retains the content that it has already appropriated from that website and its derivatives and represents that it indexes the entire web.

I am not familiar with the precedents on this issue. I think some litigation happened more than a decade ago and was resolved in the circuit courts, in favor of Google, based on the situation at that time, and without much technical expertise on the part of the courts. The circumstances have drastically changed since then.

Using one’s copyrighted content for blacklisting also violates another fair use requirement: that the use does not decrease the demand for the copyrighted content. For example, blacklisting and substitution links to Breitbart by links to other news companies is obviously unfair use.

Remark: Eric Schmidt is quoted from the memory.

Draft

via Science Defies Politics

https://ift.tt/2DgSKgE

July 29, 2020 at 04:39PM

The Deadliest Animal in the World

Guest News Brief by Kip Hansen – 29 July 2020

featured_imae_mosquitoesfeatured_imae_mosquitoes“What makes mosquitoes so dangerous? Despite their innocuous-sounding name—Spanish for “little fly”—they carry devastating diseases. The worst is malaria, which kills more than 600,000 people every year; another 200 million cases incapacitate people for days at a time. It threatens half of the world’s population and causes billions of dollars in lost productivity annually. Other mosquito-borne diseases include dengue fever, yellow fever, and encephalitis.”   — this quote and this essay’s title come from the blog of Bill Gates:

A recent biology study asks the interesting question:  “Why do  some mosquitoes prefer humans?”  The new study is titled “Climate and Urbanization Drive Mosquito Preference for Humans”.

Let’s hit the new study’s high point right from the start:

Despite the use of the word “climate” in the paper’s title, Climate Change does not drive mosquito preference for humans.  Climate, however,  has  played a role in the evolutionary selection for the human-preferring sub-species of Aedes aegyptiwhich is the main insect vector that spreads Zika, yellow fever and dengue. (This is not the same mosquito that spreads malaria, that is the Anopheles mosquito.)

The NY Times coverage of study states : “The Current Biology paper focused on evolutionary history, but its findings might have implications for public health. The results, combined with climate and population data from the United Nations, suggest that there will be more human-biting mosquitoes in sub-Saharan Africa by 2050, caused mostly by urbanization.”  When it says “there will be more”, what is really meant here is that the Aedes mosquito population will shift towards the human-preferring sub-species.  The actual number of mosquitoes will depend on the effectiveness of (or lack of) mosquito control efforts of each urbanized area.

The reason they expect the shift is that the study found that the “more human-loving mosquitoes tended to come from areas with a dry climate and dense human population.” [NY Times]. In the areas of sub-Saharan Africa studied, the shift of rural populations to densely urbanized areas over the next few decades is projected to continue.

The hypothesis on how this came to be is based on the fact that mosquitoes need  small pools of still water for reproduction.  In drier climates, in which the rainy season is short, mosquito reproduction depends on human-supplied pools of water for much of the year – like flower pots, old tins cans, abandoned automobile tires and household water barrels.  Urbanized areas thus supply not only the blood-meal needed by female Aedes for reproduction, by providing plenty of humans to feed on,  but the small still  pools of water needed for egg-laying as well.  This two-barreled advantage, they believe, has favored the human-preferring genes (which they consider a sub-species) especially in these densely populated urban areas.

One of the authors of the study, Dr. Carolyn S. McBride, in this quote from the NY Times article, sounds disappointed that they were unable to blame Climate Change:

“I think it’s counterintuitive, because people know the climate is changing rapidly, so that should be the driving force,” Dr. McBride said. “But the features of the climate that we found to be important for this mosquito aren’t predicted to change in strong and clear ways that would affect the mosquito.”

Urbanization, in contrast, is occurring very quickly. “You could easily imagine that having an effect on disease transmission in big cities,” Dr. McBride said.

From the paper’s Summary:  “Our findings suggest that human-biting in this important disease vector originally evolved as a by-product of breeding in human-stored water in areas where doing so provided the only means to survive the long, hot dry season. Our model also predicts that the rapid urbanization currently taking place in Africa will drive further mosquito evolution, causing a shift toward human-biting in many large cities by 2050.”

This study is really about the evolution of the Aedes mosquito and tracking the gene flow of the specific genes they have identified as being associated with the sub-species that seems to prefer biting humans (as opposed to other red blooded animals).  The author team bravely tried to come up with a finding that would blame bad future outcomes on Climate Change (see the methods section of the study’s “Extended PDF”) but it was just no good.  Model predictions of climate variables just didn’t change the finding:  the shift had to be laid at the feet of human urbanization.

As with all modern news about mosquitoes, it is necessary to clear up common misunderstandings.

1.    “….Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, which are responsible for Zika, yellow fever and dengue.”  And, from the Bill Gates’ blog at the beginning of the essay: “they carry devastating diseases.”

Mosquitoes are not responsible for any of those diseases.  Mosquitoes simply spread the disease from one infected host (usually human) to another host – mosquitoes pick up the disease from one infected human source and carry it around a while, then drop it off in another human.    The diseases do not originate in the mosquitoes.

“…the infected mosquito carries the disease from one human to another (acting as a “vector”), while infected humans transmit the parasite to the mosquito, In contrast to the human host, the mosquito vector does not suffer from the presence of the parasites.”  CDC

and

“people serve as the primary vertebrate hosts for Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus mosquitoes spreading chikungunya, dengue, yellow fever, or Zika virus.”  CDC  [my bold – kh]

The presence of mosquitoes does not mean the presence of mosquito-vectored diseases.  For instance, Aedes aegypti [left panel] are found through much of the southern parts of the United States, yet we are almost entirely free of Zika, yellow fever, and dengue.

mosquito_rangemosquito_range

Today, dengue is only reported to be locally acquired in the very southern tip of Florida, where many residents come and go from the Caribbean Islands. So far this year, there has been one (1) locally transmitted case of dengue. [ source ]

The same is true for the malaria-vector mosquito, Anopheles:

malaria_USmalaria_USAs can be seen, malaria was ubiquitous throughout the Eastern United States in 1882, except for in the eastern mountain ranges. By 1932, it has been beaten back to a few hold-out areas, but broke out in 1934-1935.

After a long campaign against malaria, the CDC currently reports:  “Now approximately 1,500 malaria cases and five deaths are reported in the United States annually, mostly in returned travelers.”

2.    To nearly eliminate human cases of mosquito-vectored diseases is fairly simple in a country like the United States, and almost impossible in less-developed countries.

In the United States, humans sick with such diseases are taken to hospitals, where they cannot be bitten by mosquitoes and therefore cannot further transmit the disease. Neighborhoods where the disease showed up are heavily treated to knock out the existing generation of mosquitoes that might have been responsible for the transmission of known cases and the neighborhood is searched diligently for further cases.   Then, with no (or very few) sick humans and few mosquitoes, there is no further transmission.

In the developing world, where health care systems have fewer resources and the people have less access to that system, sick people only end up in the hospital when they are already very sick (if then) and have, in all probability, already infected many local mosquitoes, who are busy infecting other humans.  In this case, the procedure is for local officials to stage a wide area campaign of mosquito control by spraying, distributing treated mosquito nets, running a Anti-Mosquito Breeding Sites campaign, and bringing in nurses and doctors to find,  quarantine and treat the sick.

A typical campaign poster (this one in the Caribbean) to eliminate breeding sites:

mosquito_breedingmosquito_breeding

These campaigns are not limited to the Third World – see this  Fight The Bite  game from Miami/Dade County, Florida.

In my personal experience in humanitarian work in the Caribbean, the local officials almost never have the equipment or chemicals necessary for wide-spread mosquito control and have only limited, already-stretched-to-the-limit medical resources.  It is heart-breaking.

The long fight against mosquito-vectored diseases has involved DDT – which itself is a very controversial issue – but is not the primary focal point of the fight.  Many local mosquito populations have developed varying degrees of resistance to DDT.  It is, however, still effective when used to treat indoor walls and bed-nets.

[And NO – “bringing DDT back” into wide use in Africa will not be an (or the)  instant silver bullet solution to mosquito-vectored diseases. That is a myth.  DDT is already widely used in Africa. ]

Then there are:

Permethrins  Treat clothing and gear

    • Use permethrin to treat clothing and gear (such as boots, pants, socks, and tents) or buy permethrin-treated clothing and gear.
      • Permethrin is an insecticide that kills or repels mosquitoes.
      • Permethrin-treated clothing provides protection after multiple washings.

For years, while living on our sailboat in the Caribbean, we regularly treated our hatch screens and cabin surfaces with permethrin – and had great success with it.

In the United States, synthetic pyrethroids are used in aerial spraying to control adult mosquitoes along with malathion and naled.

Mosquito-vectored diseases are a major, world-wide health problem and the use of insecticides in their control remains a hugely controversial topic at all levels of government and a matter of much concern from health and environmental groups.   The controversies swirling around the issue are highly politicized.

One thing that is certain:  The propaganda meme that Climate Change will spread mosquito-vectored diseases is categorically false and based on gross, seemingly intentional,  misunderstanding of the mechanisms involved in disease spread.

# # # # #

Author’s Comment:

I was reluctant to bring up DDT – in the past it has overwhelmed the comment section.  I suppose it will again today, so I had my say on the topic.  I will not be responding to the controversy in the comments here.  After all, there have been whole books written on the topic, on both sides, and yet the controversy remains – it will not be resolved here.

On a personal note, I am allergic to mosquito bites.  When I get them they swell up, they itch sometimes for weeks and if I get very many, I get body-wide allergy symptoms and have to rely on medication. Living in the Caribbean for so long was challenging.  I nearly drove my wife crazy with my repeated rants and mania about mosquitoes.  Suffice it to say: “I don’t like mosquitoes.”

All that said, neither my wife or I ever contracted any of the many nasty mosquito-vectored diseases endemic to the Northern Caribbean.

The featured study presents an interesting finding on why some mosquitoes like humans better than birds or dogs or goats.

# # # # #

Like this:

Like Loading…

Related

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/33acIEy

July 29, 2020 at 04:10PM

Agriculture May Already By Climate Neutral

IPPC does not take photosynthesis into account when measuring carbon footprint of agriculture industry.

Greenhouse gases.
Every sector in society emits greenhouse gases. But agriculture is different from most other sectors because of the large-scale photosynthesis. Crops produce oxygen (O2) and emit it to the atmosphere, while at the same time they capture and bind carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. Per Frankelius

The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claims that agriculture is one of the main sources of greenhouse gases, and is thus by many observers considered as a climate villain. This conclusion, however, is based on a paradigm that can be questioned, writes Per Frankelius in an article in Agronomy Journal.

The fundamental process in agriculture is large-scale photosynthesis, in which carbon dioxide is captured by crops and at the same time oxygen is produced. A fraction of the carbon is bound in the plant roots, while most of it is bound in the form of carbohydrates that are harvested and used in other sectors of society. This involves various form of cereal, oilseed crops, vegetables and grassland.

The fact that the carbon is bound in the crops, which at the same time produce oxygen, just as growing forest does, is a positive effect that is not included in the IPCC calculations. These only consider the greenhouse gases that have a negative impact on the climate. This is also the case in The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, which is a well established standard for calculating the emission of greenhouse gases”, says Per Frankelius, associate professor in business administration at Linköping University, who has recently written an article in the prestigious Agronomy Journal, published by the American Society of Agronomy.

Understanding the complete range

This view is based on a paradigm that has essentially never been questioned. Politicians and decision-makers must understand the complete range of the climate impact of agriculture, otherwise there is a risk that many decisions that influence long-term sustainability in a negative manner will be taken”, says Per Frankelius.

Per Frankelius
Per Frankelius Linköpings Universitet

The justification that crops are not included as a positive factor is probably that carbon dioxide is formed in the next step along the chain, when the crops are consumed by humans. “But that takes place in another sector: it’s not part of agriculture”, Per Frankelius points out.

In an earlier article in The Lancet, he warned that erroneous decisions in agricultural policy may lead to both social and medical disasters. “Furthermore, biological diversity may be compromised if agriculture and animal husbandry are subject to less advantageous conditions for their development, as is the case in natural grazing land”, he says.

A climate villain or not?

Per Frankelius gives an example calculation in the article in Agronomy Journal: 

Many different crops are cultivated as agricultural products, and all of them perform photosynthesis. One common crop is cereals, such as wheat, and in 2019, global production of cereals was 2.7 billion tonnes. This corresponds to approximately 1 billion tonnes of carbon, which in turn corresponds to 3.8 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide. The figure would be significantly higher if we included other crops such as oilseed crops and sugar beet.

The total agricultural production has been estimated to be 9200 million tons by FAOSTAT. Different crops have different water content, but a good guess is that the total production corresponds to approximately 9100 million tonnes of carbon dioxide”, adds Per Frankelius.

Agriculture produces also grasslands and grazing that bind carbon, and a further 2.7 billion tonnes of carbon is bound in the soil. 

So is agriculture one of the world’s largest climate villains, or does the sector actually have a positive impact on climate?” asks Per Frankelius.

Need for innovation

He does not question the fact that agriculture also produces a significant amount of negative greenhouse gases, and it is important to reduce this in a sustainable manner. 

Per Frankelius, who is also process manager at Agtech 2030, an innovation platform at Linköping University, presents in the article no less than seven concrete measures that can both advance the sector and reduce emissions. The measures range from ensuring that fields are green throughout the year to the marketing of animal ecosystem services, the use of fossil-free mineral-based fertilisers, the spread of biochar, replacing diesel by fossil-free biodiesel, electricity, fuel cells or even steam to power engines, planting trees in rows along the edges of fields and placing solar panels there to follow the sun with a recently patented technology, and various ways to reduce soil compaction. He refers to concrete examples in all cases.

The conclusions Per Frankelius draws are unambiguous: in order to achieve long-term sustainability, all aspects of global agriculture must be developed, not wound down or given less advantageous economic conditions. One key to success is innovation.

Frankelius, Per (2020). A proposal to rethink agriculture in the climate calculations, Agronomy Journal (published by American Society of Agronomy), vol 112, issue 4, pp. 3216-3221. DOI 10.1002/agj2.20286

Full story

The post Agriculture May Already By Climate Neutral appeared first on The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF).

via The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

https://ift.tt/2CZW53Q

July 29, 2020 at 03:44PM

Hump Day Hilarity – BANNED by Big Tech

Or maybe not so funny. We still have that video that has been banned on Facebook, YouTube, CNN, BBC, and Twitter. It seems that big tech doesn’t like it when people think for themselves and go off the rails of the official narrative.

They’ve apparently never heard of the The Streisand Effect.

Josh sums it up:

Do watch if you have not already – the video is here.

Meanwhile…this study happened.

Like this:

Like Loading…

Related

via Watts Up With That?

https://ift.tt/30aswW0

July 29, 2020 at 02:10PM