It's meant to have people (show) concern for their safety. "This is a messaging that's coming from a racist political consultant," Pritzker said at a recent press conference.What they're saying: "Instead of engaging in a serious debate about pretrial policy, Dan Proft has chosen to blow his racist dog whistle while spreading disinformation meant to confuse Illinoisans about the impacts of the law," the Illinois Network for Pretrial Justice said in a statement. "It's going to be literally the end of days," a Democratic state's attorney said to one of Proft's newspapers.Law enforcement is worried it will limit arrest powers and put criminals back on the streets after committing crimes.Illinois will be the first state to do away with cash bail, which advocates say punishes poor people and continues the cycle of incarceration.He also teamed up with then-governor Bruce Rauner in 2016 to deliver fake newspapers.īetween the lines: The papers focus mainly on the Safe-T Act, the criminal justice reform law going into effect in January that includes the elimination of cash bail in Illinois.
JB Pritzker is speaking out against a new round of political ads disguised as newspapers being delivered in Chicago and the suburbs. It's a step in the wrong direction and I think it's something we need to continue to fight for.Gov. Any reversal there is terrible, just like the reversal to say that Comcast and AT&T and similar companies can also get into the game of collecting our data and monitoring us and showing us tailored ads. Net neutrality is a term that people don't necessarily understand, but it just means equal access to information and equal access to services that provide information. WIRED: What do you think of the proposed change to net neutrality? What is happening today is way beyond what we would think as being prudent or right at any one time. It's wrong.Ī few years back I remember having discussions on what we could collect and how we could use it. It's not their equal right to our private information. Shouldn't ComCast and AT&T be able to do the same?" That's just making the problem bigger.
Its saying: “So Facebook and Google can collect all this information and target you with ads. The trouble is, the US is heading in the wrong direction. I think you would see an effect if the EU was to put laws in place that would put stricter privacy rules and targeting rules. JvT: Most of the larger companies are US based so, in a lot of ways, the US has the say. WIRED: Who could tell the tech companies to stop tracking? This is not only about irritating ads – about things that you looked at or bought two weeks ago following you around on sites – it's about the potential of analysing who you are. Then there are politicians who think privacy isn't important, that no-one cares about privacy. On the technical side, when you have a company it's so easy to say: “We're just doing what the customer wants and the paying customer wants more targeting.” And it's a slippery slope. Read more: Google's ad-tracking just got more intrusive. Partly that’s because we have let privacy go out the window and I think we need to reverse that. The tools we made for the internet are being misused. That's a problem if we want to make sure quality content continues to be freely available and that's crucial because when quality content is removed it can be replaced by content that is, in the worst case, simply propaganda. At the same time it reduces the value of news sources because they compete for clicks: they become clickbait. They can get your ads as tailored as possible. The fact you can target people in the extent you can today is great for advertisers. Part of the problem is actually lack of privacy.
0 kommentar(er)
