The battle lines are drawn once again. U.S. law enforcement agencies and Silicon Valley are getting ready to face off on the issue of privacy. This latest battle is focused on a 30-year-old law on government access to electronic communications and associated data. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act was a forward-looking statute when enacted in 1986, but technology has dramatically outpaced the ECPA. The U.S. Congress has been looking into ways to revise the law in order to preserve the privacy of internet users while also preserving the legal tools necessary for government agencies to enforce the law and protect the public. The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called privacy "the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by a free people." The Senate Judiciary Committee this week is considering an amendment to the ECPA that would expand the government's ability to collect data using a National Security Letter, which doesn't require a court order. The amendment would authorize the FBI to demand a person's internet browser history and internet protocol address, enabling investigators to see what websites a person visits, how much time is spent on a particular site and the location of the internet user — all without judicial oversight. The FBI contends that such data is covered implicitly under current statute, which was written years ago and only explicitly covers data normally associated with telephone records. FBI Director James Comey has said the amendment is needed to fix "a typo" in the ECPA that has hindered the bureau's ability to work in "a very, very big and practical way." But a letter sent earlier this week warned Congress that such an amendment is opposed by tech giants and civil liberties organizations. "This expansion of the NSL statute has been characterized by some government officials as merely fixing ‘a typo' in the law,” the letter said. "In reality, however, it would dramatically expand the ability of the FBI to get sensitive information about users' online... After the end of the story, the Senate Judiciary Committee probably is: Pick the correct answer from the following options: - still trying to negotiate with tech giants - not enough information - still trying to find an amendment to the ECPA - still worried about the NSL statute
still trying to find an amendment to the ECPA

A few times. Mostly whilst doing this job and trying to help drunk people or assholes. Sadly it's becoming a regular occurrence for crews to be assaulted. My last time was a few days ago and the worst thing about it was watching my crew mate and several police officers curl up laughing. I'll set the scene. Imagine. If you will. A large rather expensive hotel. Then add to that image a rather drunk and buxom young lady who is lying on the floor in a drunken slumber after taking off a lot of her clothes. She was just in her underwear. We were called to look after her. On our arrival she was absolutely fine. Stood up, walked to the stretcher and lay down. Whining about how we were the ' oppressors of society', and other such drivel Because I had the cheek to try and give her a tiny bit of dignity by covering her up with a blanket. She didn't want that. We made it to the ambulance without any hassle and started to do the necessary checks we do on every patient. Blood pressure etc etc when out of the blue she decided that she wanted to release her rather large breasts. Try as I might to give her a little bit of dignity she wasn't interested so we just made sure no one could see inside the ambulance. After a few minutes she calmed down so I put the blanket over her. Something I do for almost every patient. Without warning THWACK. she hit my in the face with her boob. Then. As I reeled from this waiting for my brain to catch up and make sense of everything, THWACK she did it again. Right round the face with a large breast!! I turned around to get some support from my colleagues who were crying. Both my crew mate and the officer. Crying. Neither able to speak……….. I didn't know what to say for a while after that…something my crew mate called 'a blessing' Sigh Who took their clothes off Pick the correct answer from the following options: - a gentleman - the young lady - not enough information - his mate
the young lady

I am currently waiting for peer reviews of two books I’ve worked on: one sole-authored, one co-authored. We don’t talk much about the experience of waiting for reviews, and it’s not something that appears to have been researched. Yet it’s something everyone doing academic work has to go through and it may be bad for our mental health. I’m finding it particularly difficult at the moment because a lot rides on these reviews. The sole-authored book, which is on a contentious topic, has already had one set of reviews. Reviewer 1 was utterly damning, saying “I couldn’t find anything to praise”. Luckily, Reviewers 2 and 3 were more measured, offering both praise and constructive criticism, and their input helped me to revise and strengthen the typescript. However, in the process, my editor and I realised that we needed further reviews from people with a particular kind of specialist knowledge. My editor approached around ten potential reviewers, but only one agreed to do the job. So I’m gibbering – what if that person agrees with Reviewer 1? The co-authored book is in a contentious format. My co-authors and I decided that I would be the person to liaise with publishers, as I have form in this process. The last time I liaised with academic publishers for a co-authored book was in the early 2000s, and I’d forgotten how heavily responsible it makes me feel. Fortunately, I’ve found a publisher that is interested and has sent the book out for reviews, to two professional academics and two students. This is great – and terrifying – but at least there are four reviewers. Even so, what if they all think it’s rubbish? In many ways I love the peer review system. I welcome feedback on my writing, and I’m not at all averse to constructive criticism. I am by no means arrogant enough to think I can write a good book without input from others. Yet peer review, as a process, is fraught with uncertainty. Comments may not be constructive, or may not come at all. They may be positive, or negative, or in between, or a mixture. The narrator believes that Pick the correct answer from the following options: - Most reviewers are not fair - The peer review system is unfair - The peer review system is great - not enough information
