WebProNews

Tag: united states

  • China Confident Brazil Will Choose Huawei For Its 5G Mobile Network

    China Confident Brazil Will Choose Huawei For Its 5G Mobile Network

    Huawei has come under fire from countries throughout the West, with allegations the telecommunications equipment company engages in spying for the Chinese government. The United States, Britain, Australia and Germany have expressed concern in some cases, and gone as far as to ban the company in others.

    In spite of Huawei’s reputation, at least one major country is undeterred: Brazil. Bloomberg is reporting that the Chinese government is confident Huawei will be chosen to build out Brazil’s 5G mobile network.

    “I am confident in terms of the cooperation between China and Brazil over 5G technology”, China’s Ambassador to Brasilia Yang Wanming told Bloomberg in response to emailed questions. He added that Brazil “will take into account its own development interest” when analyzing Huawei’s bid.

    Yang also indicated that Brazil has remained objective and had not been moved by what he described as the United States’ campaign of “bad faith and defamation.”

    Nonetheless, if China’s assessment is correct, and Huawei is chosen, it could ratchet up tension between the U.S. and Brazil. The U.S. has been warning allies of the dangers of relying on Huawei and has already informed Brazil it may downgrade security cooperation if Huawei is chosen.

    Telecom companies in other countries have already been sounding the warning regarding the added cost and time that will be incurred building 5G networks without Huawei’s equipment. Countries, especially ones with limited options, will no doubt be watching closely to see who blinks in this game of 5G brinksmanship.

  • Germany Won’t Exclude Huawei 5G Equipment

    Germany Won’t Exclude Huawei 5G Equipment

    Germany has completed its ‘security catalog,’ a set of rules telecommunications companies must comply with as they deploy 5G networks. Reuters is reporting that, despite pressure from the U.S., German officials have not excluded Huawei from participation.

    The U.S. and Huawei have been at odds over allegations the equipment vendor has backdoors in its 5G equipment—backdoors that enable China to spy on other countries. Huawei has vehemently denied the allegations, but that hasn’t stopped the U.S. from taking action to implement bans, export controls and tech sharing restrictions. This has impacted all aspects of the company’s business, even resulting in it losing full access to Google’s Android. The U.S. has also put pressure on European allies to limit Huawei’s ability to do business in the EU.

    In what some are seeing as a snub of U.S. interests, Germany declined to single out any vendor, including Huawei. This is likely due to warnings from German operators who have said banning Huawei could cost billions and add years to a successful 5G rollout.

    “We are not taking a pre-emptive decision to ban any actor, or any company,” German government spokesman Steffen Seibert told a news conference in Berlin on Monday.

  • Jimmy Carter Calls Out Climate Skeptic Nutcases

    In 1979, President Jimmy Carter became the first president to install solar panels on the White House. At the time, the nation was facing an impending oil crisis from the Arab Oil Embargo and Carter was cementing his presidential legacy as the one president, besides Teddy Roosevelt, to give a damn about the environment. Not only did he add 32 solar panels to the White House (only later to be taken down by Ronald Reagan…), but President Carter was also responsible for expanding the national parks system into Alaska, establishing a national energy policy, creating the Department of Energy, and for telling Americans to stop turning up the heat in the winter and put on a damn sweater or something.

    Jimmy Carter was an environmental activist as president, and he still is today.

    In speaking at the American Renewable Energy Day Summit in Aspen, Colorado, Carter expressed his views and opinions on the current state of energy and the environment in the United States.

    Carter began by chastising the United States for its failure to keep up with other countries in terms of providing energy through renewable resources. Whereas Canada provides approximately 64 percent of its energy through renewables, “The United States is right at the bottom, with only 10 percent of our energy coming from renewable sources. So we still have a tremendous opportunity to do what we haven’t done.”

    While the United States ranks at the bottom of the list, Carter does not blame the president, who he feels is doing his job but is constantly limited by Congress’s petty grudges. Instead, Carter blames the nutcase climate change deniers:

    I would say the biggest handicap we have right now are some nutcases in our country that don’t believe in global warming. I think they are going to change their position because of pressure from individuals, because the evidence of the ravages of global warming are already there.

    However bad the current status of the United States is, though, it isn’t doomed. Carter stated that “we [the United States] need something like a carbon tax, which is a reasonable approach.” Due to Congressional blockage, however, Carter believes that there may be a better solution:

    I don’t look at the present hold-up concerning changing to renewable energy to be an insoluble problem. I have always felt that the best key to get international support, in this case global warming, is for the United States and China to agree on anything. I think we are going to begin to realize that a superpower is not just who dominates economics and military, but I would say that one of the characteristics of a superpower is to take the leadership or make a pledge to the rest of the world to [address] climate change.

    With the leaders of the United States currently being obsessed with conflicts in foreign countries and international concerns, former President Carter’s approach may be longer in the making than he or any other environmentalist could care for.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • Osama bin Laden Expressed Fear of I.S. in 2011

    When the death of Osama bin Laden, former leader of Al-Qaeda, was announced in May 2011, the western world was assured that it had rid itself of the last great terror to plague the Earth for quite some time. After all, who or what would be able to cause more devastation than bin Laden when he orchestrated the attacks on the World Trade Centers, ultimately resulting in two wars and the loss of millions of people. Unbeknownst to the western world at the time, though, were bin Laden’s private fears. With the recent discovery of a 21-page article found in bin Laden’s final hiding place, those fears have been reified.

    First unveiled by the Daily Mail, a British news publication, Osama bin Laden’s fears in 2011 centered around the rising power of the Islamic State of Israel and Syria (ISIS) – now simply referred to as the Islamic State (IS).

    The letter, the exact details of which having not been released yet, was apparently written by one of bin Laden’s top officials, cites IS’s extreme violence as the reason why bin Laden feared the group so much – acts such as the use of chlorine gas, mosque bombings, and the brutal massacre of Christians. In fact, Osama bin Laden was so worried about the reputation of IS ruining the already-tarnished reputation of Al-Qaeda so much that he pushed for the two organizations to part ways and cease support of one another – a move which Al Qaeda finally made earlier this year.

    On June 29, 2014, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of IS, proclaimed a caliphate for the organization and was named its caliph. As it currently stands, IS holds a chunk of land in Iraq bigger than the nation of England and has some six million people under its control. The objective of IS is to bring as much land and people under its caliphate as possible, with Syria and northern Iraq being the group’s immediate targets.

    The United States has responded to the threat of ISIS by sending air strikes to northern Iraq in hopes of protecting the US embassy nearby. However, President Obama has stated that the bombing will not expand past the area of northern Iraq.

    If Osama bin Laden was worried about the evil, brutal nature of the IS, then perhaps the United States should be, too.

    Image via YouTube

  • Xi Jinping Meets with US; Talk Economy & Security

    When Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the President of the People’s Republic of China, came into office a little over one year ago, he faced several monumental challenges as the leader of the world’s largest and potentially most powerful country. The main issue plaguing Xi was China’s economy, which had gone into quite a slump despite being the world’s second largest. Over the past two years, Xi has made every decision to expand China’s influence and grow its global market – a decision which has been at odds with the intentions and wants of the world’s largest economy, the United States. On Wednesday, Xi Jinping met with several US diplomats, including Secretary of State John Kerry, at the sixth round of the United States-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) to discuss the ongoing issues between the world’s two economic juggernauts.

    This year marks the 35th year of the establishment of diplomatic ties between the US and China, going back to the Nixon administration. While relations have improved over time, recent decisions by Xi have increased tensions between the US and China.

    Xi has given orders to allow China to become more aggressive in the South Pacific, pushing against US allies such as South Korea and Japan, reaffirming his notion that “The vast Pacific Ocean has ample space to accommodate two great nations.”

    While Xi’s statement may be true, his unilateral decision making (powers granted to him by being both the General Secretary and President of China) has led the US to question the ideas of state sovereignty and the intentions of China in the near future.

    On Tuesday, President Obama released a statement concerning the upcoming S&ED meeting in which he acknowledged the differences between the two nations, but also the need to create some similarities:

    The United States and China will not always see eye-to-eye on every issue. That is to be expected for two nations with different histories and cultures. It also is why we need to build our relationship around common challenges, mutual responsibilities, and shared interests, even while we candidly address our differences.

    President Obama is not attending the S&ED, but Secretary of State Kerry reiterated the President’s message on Wednesday with his opening remarks: “Let me emphasize to you today: The U.S. isn’t seeking to contain China.” Instead, Kerry emphasized that the US is simply seeking to make the South Pacific and China a more stable place, enabling the global market to continue to operate without hinderance or strife.

    At first glance, Xi seemed to agree with Kerry and the US on Wednesday, saying, “A conflict between China and United States will definitely be a disaster for the two countries and the world.” However, Xi would go on to add that “We should respect and treat each other equally, and respect the other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and respect each other’s choice on the path of development,” seemingly hinting at the fact that he thinks the United States and China should stop interfering in each others’ affairs and just let it be.

    With recent comparisons to Mao Zedong’s ideological warfare against his own people and China’s aggressive actions in the South Pacific, the US need be wary of its communications with China in the near future. While China is still currently the world’s second largest economy, it is projected to surpass the United States in the very near future. With increased economic power and its ownership of much of the US economy, any disruption in peaceful relations could end in much more disaster for the US than China.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • U.S. vs Ghana: Third Time The Charm?

    U.S. vs Ghana: Third Time The Charm?

    I confess that I watched with a certain amount of glee when Ghana saw their World Cup hopes dashed to pieces by Uruguay in 2010.

    It was the bitterness of an American football fan who saw the United States advance from the group stage in South Africa, only to lose to Ghana. Again.

    Ghana has knocked out the United States in two consecutive World Cups. As someone who has been through this disappointment before, I really don’t care about Germany or Portugal.

    That’s quite the confession considering these teams are the major heavyweights in our group, the pair that seems the most likely to advance from Group G.

    Portugal boasts of having a capable captain and goal scorer in Cristiano Ronaldo. Germany was a stone’s throw away from advancing to the finals in in the 2010 World Cup.

    They’re certainly not teams to dismiss…Ever.

    My momentary indifference towards these high caliber teams isn’t a dismissal of their abilities. I just couldn’t care less about either of those opponents at the moment.

    Right now it’s all about Ghana and whether or not the United States will FINALLY step up and collect a win.

    A small desperate part of me would be happy with a draw. After all, collecting a point would be only slightly less humiliating than a three game shutout, which isn’t exactly beyond the realm of possibility.

    At least taking a point away from Ghana would see us break the spell and leave with a bit of dignity.

    However, I feel strongly that it’s not enough to go halfway. The US men’s team needs to beat their rivals in this opening Brazil fixture. This team must outscore Ghana and bring an end to this losing streak once and for all.

    Walking away from the “Group of Death” with at least a win over Ghana would be a small victory that I’d gladly accept.

    Yes that sounds pathetic in the grand scheme of things, but I’ve always been pragmatic about the United States’ chances given their World Cup history.

    I don’t hold any illusions that this American team could win the tournament. I’d be utterly stunned if it somehow limped out of Group G and into the knockout phase.

    Beating Ghana MUST be the main objective.

    Who knows? Getting a result could be enough of a pick me up to guide the United States to a shocking upset of either Germany or Portugal.

    A girl can dream, can’t she?

    Image via YouTube

  • Ukraine and Russia Make Plans to Ease Tensions

    Thursday morning, a four-party meeting was held in Geneva between the United States, the European Union, Russia, and Ukraine, with the intention being to create a plan which would lead to decreased overall hostilities between Ukraine and Russia and the end of the current violence in Eastern Ukraine. After six hours of talks, the four parties have come to an agreement as to how to alleviate the Ukrainian crisis, for now.

    The agreement the parties came to had three key criteria toward ending the current hostilities:

    1) All “illegally armed groups” in eastern Ukraine must lay down their weapons and cease violent activities.

    2) All government buildings and belongings which have been seized by insurgents must be returned to their proper owners.

    3) All pro-Russian insurgents will be given amnesty by the Ukrainian government as long as no capital crimes have been committed.

    The meeting came after Ukraine launched an anti-terror campaign on Tuesday to nullify the pro-Russian hostilities taking place in the eastern Donetsk region of Ukraine. The move was made in response to pro-Russian sympathizers seizing governmental buildings in ten eastern Ukrainian cities.

    In spite of the peace-talk meeting on Thursday, violence from the insurgents did not cease, with 300 pro-Russians attacking a military base in Mariupol, Ukraine. This attack was coupled with a message from the chairman of the people’s council in Donetsk asking for an early referendum to occur in May to decide if the Donetsk region of Ukraine wants to be annexed to Russia as Crimea did previously.

    Perhaps of more import, however, were the statements made by Russian president Vladimir Putin Thursday morning on national television.

    Until Thursday, Putin had denied any Russian troop involvement in Crimea prior to the vote for annexation. On Thursday, Putin’s tone changed completely.

    “Of course we had our servicemen behind the self-defense units of Crimea. We had to make sure what is happening now in eastern Ukraine didn’t happen there,” Putin defended.

    Putin would go on to add, “In Crimea, the threats to the Russian-speaking population were quite real, palpable. They turned to Russia for help. Russia never planned any annexation or military actions in Crimea… But when this situation came up, when people said they wanted self-determination, that’s when we knew what we had to do. Everyone in the National Security Council agreed. Everything was done quickly and decisively. There have been no analogues in global history.”

    Despite stating that the reason for Russian troops being deployed to Crimea was to ensure a fair and proper vote, Putin condemned Ukraine’s military presence in the east and warned that Russia would not deem Ukraine’s elections for a new president valid unless their current hostilities against the Russian-sympathizers in Ukraine changes.

    If Russia does not help bring about the end of the hostilities in eastern Ukraine, the United States is prepared to enact more sanctions against the Russian government. When asked if this Geneva agreement was the last of talks between the four-parties, Secretary of State John Kerry remained pragmatic: “All of this we are convinced represents a good day’s work, but on the other hand, this day’s work has produced principles, and it has produced commitments and it has produced words on paper. And we are the first to understand and agree that words on paper will only mean what the actions taken as a result of those words produce.”

    Image via YouTube

  • North Korea Threatens U.S., South Korea

    North Korea Threatens U.S., South Korea

    North Korea likes to threaten the United States and South Korea; this is common knowledge. It’s their baseball. Yet, every threat from the extremely isolated nations sets off alarms, which is the case currently.

    As annual “Foal Eagle” join exercises between the U.S. and South Korea approach, the North is again trying to flex its unimpressive muscles. In the past the country has threatened to destroy both Seoul and Washington D.C. if the drills were not cancelled. As anyone who doesn’t live in a cave knows, they have not made good on those threats.

    You may ask, what has them up in exaggerated arms this time? As Northern official Rodong Sinmun puts its, “It is the strategic goal of the US to invade the DPRK, bring its neighboring countries under its control with it as a stepping-stone and, furthermore, dominate the whole Asia-Pacific region.” Yeah. Sure.

    The reason the threats are being treated with such disregard is because both countries have heard it all before and no action was taken by the North. The drills in question take place every year and see no opposition from the DPRK. Despite all of the flexing and talking the exercises go off without a hitch and ruling party loses a little bit more credibility, something which seems to be in short supply what with all of the Dennis Rodman visits.

    Another major reason the countries cannot compromise about the exercises is the DPRK’s unwillingness to dismantle its nuclear program, which is the only real ace it has up its sleeve. Until such a time, it is unlikely that any real talks will take place between the three powers.

    [Image via YouTube]

  • Surprise: Studies Confirm That The U.S. Has Slow Internet

    For the past few years, a common complaint among tech circles is that Internet access in the United States is slow and spotty, especially when compared to the rest of the world. It all started to change last year when Google Fiber launched in Kansas City thus inspiring other cities to ditch corporate monopolies, and offer their residents better speeds at half the price. Despite the rise in gigabit connectivity, a new report finds that the United States is still well behind the curve when it comes to Internet access and speeds.

    The New York Times reports that Internet access in the United States has been the focus of multiple studies over the last year as more and more think tanks try to diagnose and solve our Internet problem. Funny enough, most would agree that the U.S. is behind. The problem is that many don’t feel that we’re so behind that improving Internet access and speeds needs to be a priority moving forward.

    While ISPs and other cable providers will tell you that current speeds are good enough, the Obama administration says that “fast, affordable and reliable broadband service” is needed to “create jobs and grow wages at home.” Unfortunately, the administration and ISPs continue to classify “broadband” as anything above 10 Mbps – speeds which are easily and affordably achieved in most metro areas.

    So, what’s the big deal if we’re already hitting the target of what the government considers broadband speeds? It’s all a matter of competition really. Future jobs are moving to the Web and a fast, reliable Internet connection will be the difference between a company scoring a lucrative contract or losing out to another firm. The economy is increasingly going global and faster Internet speeds in Eastern Europe and Asia will ensure that they stay one step ahead of the American companies that either don’t have access to or can’t afford enterprise Internet connections.

    Besides the issue of speed, access is also a big issue. The New York Times points to data that says over 70 percent of South San Antonio residents don’t have access to the Internet at home. As schools and other public institutions increasingly move their work online, those without will be left behind.

    So, how can we improve Internet access and speeds? Well, it’s certainly easier said than done. The U.S. is a large nation and most of its metropolitan infrastructures were put in place before the rise of broadband Internet. Such a scenario makes it hard to convince ISPs to invest in all new infrastructure when what’s already there is good enough for what they offer.

    To help the American Internet better compete with the world, Susan Crawford, a law professor at Yeshiva University, argues that we have to completely rethink how we classify the Internet. Since its inception, the Internet has gone from a luxury to a commodity. From there, it can only evolve into a utility and it needs to do that before it becomes accessible enough to make a difference.

    Just think, clean water and electricity both started out as luxuries that only the wealthy could afford. As civilization progressed, they became more affordable and accessible to the point that they became utilities. As citizens of a modern world, we have an expectation of clean water and electricity. It’s argued that the Internet should be viewed in much the same way – as a basic human right. The United Nations said just as much in 2011 when it issued a report calling for nations to recognize that Internet access is a fundamental human right.

    Despite all this, you’re probably not going to see Internet access or speeds improving anytime soon. Most cities are still kept under the thumb of monopolistic telecoms that can charge whatever they want as they know consumers have nowhere else to go. Google Fiber and local municipalities are trying to change that one city at a time, but progress is slow. Until then, American consumers will continue to be extorted by their friendly Internet and cable provider.

    Image via picolsigns/YouTube

  • Caitlin Cahow Pinned For Sochi Olympic Delegation

    Although President Barack Obama will not be attending the Sochi Olympics, he has picked several interesting candidates to send in his place as part of the presidential delegation. The delegation will be headed by former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and will include tennis player and LGBT activist Billie Jean King, and the openly gay hockey player Caitlin Cahow. This will mark the first time since 2000 that the United States has not sent the president, former president, first lady or vice president to the Games.

    It appears as though President Obama is sending a clear message to Russia, who currently has extremely strict anti-gay laws. Cahow doesn’t seem to mind that she is being sent to make a statement. She actually said that she was elated to be invited to attend. “It’s obviously a statement that’s being made, but I think it’s an incredibly respectful one,” Cahow said.

    “Basically, the White House is highlighting Americans who know what it means to have freedoms and liberties under the Constitution. That’s really what we’re representing in Sochi and it’s not at all different from what’s espoused in the spirit of Olympism,” Cahow continued. “So I think it’s just a great group of people. I can’t believe I’ve been named one of them because it’s a remarkable roster and I just think that we’re going to represent what the best America can be. Hopefully, it will unify all of Team USA and send a message of love and acceptance to the world.”

    King has also communicated her gratification for being named to the delegation. “I am equally proud to stand with the members of the LGBT community in support of all athletes who will be competing in Sochi and I hope these Olympic Games will indeed be a watershed moment for the universal acceptance of all people,” said King.

    Russia has been under extreme criticism for passing their “gay propaganda” laws, however President Vladimir has announced that gay athletes and spectators will not face discrimination if they choose to attend the Sochi Games in February.

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

  • What Does Afghanistan And Iran Pact Mean For U.S.?

    Afghanistan and Iran are moving in a more harmonious direction thanks to a long-term pact agreed to Sunday morning in Tehran. Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani agreed to various terms during a one day visit by Karzai.

    Reuters quoted Karzai’s spokesperson Aimal Faizi as saying that the move, “will be for long-term political, security, economic and cultural cooperation, regional peace and security.” Faizi also stated that a document is being prepared to make the matter official.

    While the two nations may see their pact as mutually beneficial, it’s worrying to US officials. Afghanistan has been slow to show the same level of consideration regarding finalizing a security agreement with the United States. American forces have been working towards strengthening the Afghan military so that a troop withdrawal process will go smoothly. However, Karzai has requested certain conditions be changed in the agreement before agreeing to a deadline.

    The United States wishes to avoid simply withdrawing troops haphazardly. There is concern that the lack of a stable and strong military presence will lead to the dominance of terrorist organizations in the region. The move to improve relations with Iran could be seen as an alternate remedy to this problem. Iran’s own questionable nuclear policies is concerning to the international community. There is still a trade sanction severely limiting Iran as a result of their nuclear program, but they could still prove to be a powerful ally. Afghanistan’s level of vulnerability means they’ll have to seek friends closer to home than the United States, which despite thousands of troops remains a half a world away.

    The distance doesn’t lessen the presence of foreign influence in the eyes of Iran’s president. Rouhani has been very vocal about his distrust of Western influences in the region, even going as far as taking his feelings to his official Twitter account:

    Image: Wikimedia Commons

  • World Cup Pots Announced; US Potentially Doomed

    The draw for the 2014 World Cup pots will happen on Friday in Brazil, the host country for the event. However, in a press conference which demonstrates once again why Americans aren’t in love with the most popular sport in the world, the final draw pot allocations were announced today. In looking at the potential match-ups the US could find itself facing, the odds are not in the United States’s favor to advance far in 2014.

    Pot 1 consists of the highest ranking FIFA qualifying members and host country Brazil:

    Pot 1: Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Uruguay, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Switzerland

    Pot 2 is comprised of 5 unseeded African teams, 2 South American countries, and a yet-to-be-determined European team:

    Pot 2: Algeria, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Nigeria, Chile, Ecuador, European Team TBD

    Pot 3 is made up of the 4 CONCACAF qualifying members, Australia, and 3 Asian competitors:

    Pot 3: USA, Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras, Australia, Iran, Japan, Korea Republic

    Pot 4 is composed entirely of 9 unseeded European teams:

    Pot 4: Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, England, France, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia

    In order to decide who plays who this Friday, the process works as such: 8 pools will be created (labelled A-H), and each pool will consist of 4 competitors. Brazil, as host, is already slotted to post A-1. In order to ensure geographical separation, slots 2-4 in Pot A will be filled by one competitor each from Draw Pots 2-4.

    The initial process is fairly simple, but there is a special caveat this year due to the high number of qualifying European teams. As it currently stands, there are 9 teams in Pot 4 and 7 teams in Pot 2. In order to balance the teams, there will be a preliminary drawing on Friday to put another European team from Pot 4 into Pot 2. That European team will be guaranteed to play one of the top-ranked South American teams in a move that is supposed to create the most fair and equally balanced World Cup. In essence, all this means that one of the 8 pots will contain 2 European teams, something no country wants to face due to the high quality of European teams this year.

    What all of this also means is that the odds of the United States winning the 2014 World Cup are terribly slim. No matter how one cuts the cake, the US is almost predetermined to be placed into an unfortunately difficult pot. The best case scenario places the United States into a Pot with Switzerland, Algeria, and Croatia (The odds of the US advancing from this pool are at 73.6%).

    Unfortunately, the US will most likely not receive a favorable draw, though, due to the fact that the US has been placed in an initial pot with the lowest ranked teams, ensuring that they will not be placed with these teams in the final draw. The worst Group of Death scenario for the US team places them into a Pot alongside Spain, the Netherlands, and Chile. In this scenario, the United States would have only a 15.3% chance of advancing to the second round.

    If the people of the United States needed another reason to add to their list of reasons why they don’t have an affinity for soccer, here it is.

    [Image via Facebook]

  • Syria Weapons Stockpile to be Destroyed by US

    John Kerry could have never predicted the consequence of his sarcastic answer to the question of how the US could avoid war with Syria following Syria’s use of chemical weapons against its own citizens. Despite the seriousness of Kerry’s initial proposal, plans are moving forward with the elimination and destruction of Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile, a plan that was voted for by the UN in late September.

    In a statement released by Ahmet Üzümcü, the Director-General of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, it was revealed “that the United States has offered to contribute a destruction technology, full operational support and financing to neutralise Syria’s priority chemicals,” weapons that are required to be removed from Syria by December 31 per the UN resolution.

    The technology the US is offering in order to destroy said weapons is a mobile Field Deployable Hydrolysis System, a new invention created by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency arm of the Pentagon.

    To neutralize and destroy the chemical weapons, the Field Deployable Hydrolysis System uses hydrolysis, a process which includes mixing the chemicals with water and other chemicals and then heating the solution with a titanium reactor.

    Unfortunately, this particular hydrolysis process produces large amounts of liquid waste called effluent. Current estimates by the OPCW state that 798 tons of chemicals from Syria need to be destroyed, which will result in 7.7 million tons of effluent byproduct created.

    The United States will be responsible for providing the ship and technology by which the chemical weapons will be neutralized but will not be able to dispose of all the waste. There has been some worry from environmental agencies concerning destroying the weapons at sea due to the potential contamination of whatever body of water the process will take place in (most believe it will occur in the Mediterranean Sea).

    Luckily, the OPCW has been able to persuade 35 independent, private agencies to come aboard and provide the means of disposal for the effluent produced. In order to ensure that these companies do not simply dump the waste somewhere in order to turn a quick and large profit, the OPCW has stated that the companies “will be required to comply with all applicable international and national regulations pertaining to safety and the environment.”

    Thus far, the OPCW has proven more than adequate toward finding practical and reliable solutions to the Syrian weapon problem. The organization, which is the active body of the Chemical Weapons Convention, was able to destroy all weapons-making facilities before the November 1st deadline and has also neutralized and obtained all the weapons which need to be removed from Syria by December 31. Last month, the OPCW was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize due to its work toward ridding the world of nuclear weapons, something the Nobel committee has been committed toward for some time now.

    The move by the United States to offer its ship and technology in order to help destroy Syrian chemical weapons is an important move to help the State department save face after the Kerry gaffe. Perhaps this action will show that the US was and is committed toward achieving peace, and not war, in the Middle East and will help to disprove the notion that the only reason for US compliance in this deal was to not let Russia gain the political upper-hand and international clout.

    Image via Facebook

  • Average Global Internet Speeds Are Still Increasing

    Average Global Internet Speeds Are Still Increasing

    Most of us in the U.S. love to rag on our ISPs and blame them for what we perceive as painfully slow Internet speeds. Our ISPs certainly do deserve their fair share of criticism, but we should also celebrate when things are headed in a positive direction. The latest report from Akamai is cause for celebration as it shows things are looking up in the ol’ U.S. of A.

    Akamai released its quarterly State of the Internet report today. The report covers Q1 2013, or the three month period beginning in April and ending in June. The big takeaway from the report is that average global Internet speeds are increasing with the worldwide average now at 3.1Mbps, or a 17 percent increase over last year.

    Breaking the global Internet speeds down, we see that South Korea is still the global king of broadband with average connection speeds of 14.2Mbps. What’s interesting about this, however, is that South Korea’s average speed is down 10 percent from last year. It’s the only country in the top 10 to see a decline. In fact, it’s two closest Asian competitors – Japan and Hong Kong – came in second and third place respectively with average speeds of 11.7Mbps and 10.9Mbps. That’s a year-over-year increase of 6.8 and 16 percent respectively.

    So, where is the United States in all of this? We’re in ninth place with average speeds of 8.6Mbps, or a whopping 27 percent year-over-year increase. It’s also a 7.4 percent increase over last quarter’s average speeds of 7.4Mbps.

    Average speeds are important, but an increasingly important metric is the percentage of Internet users who have access to Internet speeds of 10Mbps or higher. The report found that South Korea is once again in first place with a whopping 50 percent of its population having access to speeds of 10Mbps or higher. The U.S. is showing positive signs in this area as well with 25 percent of its population having access to what Akamai calls “high broadband.” Amazingly, that’s a year-over-year increase of 69 percent.

    Next, Akamai’s report moves to the United States to look at which states have the highest average Internet speeds. Like always, New England has the fastest Internet with Vermont coming in first place with average speeds of 12.7Mbps, or a year-over-year increase of 40 percent. New Hampshire and Delaware come in second and third place with 12Mbps and 11.9Mbps respectively. The only state not on the East Coast/New England to make the top 10 is Utah coming in at fifth place with average speeds of 11Mbps.

    As for states with the most high broadband, the top 10 list is dominated by New England/East Coast states. New Hampshire comes in first with 48 percent of its population having access to Internet speeds equal to or higher than 10Mbps. That’s a year-over-year increase of 65 percent. New Jersey came in second with 45 percent, or an astounding 100 percent year-over-year increase.

    One could argue that the average Internet speeds in the U.S. are going up thanks to an increasing number of cities that are rolling out gigabit Internet services. Akamai points out that gigabit Internet is now available in or coming to 13 cities across the U.S., including Kansas City, Chattanooga, Lafayette, Bristol, Seattle, Cedar Falls and others. It’s unlikely that these cities had any real impact on this quarter’s numbers, but it’s a positive sign to see the number of gigabit cities increasing.

    It’s encouraging to see that the Internet is picking up pace around the world. There’s still much work to be done, however, as Akamai notes many countries are still underserved by slow national ISPs that prevent the people in these countries from taking advantage of the numerous innovations brought about faster broadband.

    If you want to see more from Akamai’s report, you can check out the executive summary here. If you want to read the full report, you’ll have to register here.

  • Egypt Says To Disregard US Warning About Pyramids

    The US recently sent a warning to its citizens traveling in Egypt about the area surrounding the pyramids. Now Egypt is telling those same citizens that the warning is “baseless.”

    Last week, the US embassy in Egypt sent out a message to US citizens in the country telling them to be extra cautious around the pyramids. The embassy pointed to a number of recent events involving “angry groups of individuals surrounding and pounding” on tourist vehicles.

    Egypt fired back this week saying that the area around the pyramids is “totally secure.” The country says that tourists are safe in the area, and that the situation has improved greatly since the Egyptian uprising of 2011.

    Even if the area is safe, it’s still best to heed the embassy’s suggestion of elevating “your situational awareness.” That goes for anybody traveling anywhere – even your own backyard. It’s always smart to be a little paranoid.

    If the warning has scared you off from visiting Egypt, take a bird’s eye stroll of the area with Google Maps:


    View Larger Map

    [h/t: AP]

  • Motorola Will Make Its Next Smartphone In The U.S.

    Google is creating 2,000 jobs in Texas this year with the announcement that its Motorola division will be building its next smartphone at a Forth Worth factory.

    During an All Things D talk in which Motorola unveiled its own Mark of the Beast, the company also revealed that it’s building a new smartphone called the Moto X. Unlike its competitors that build their smartphones in Chinese or Southeast Asian factories, Motorola will be building the phones right here in America.

    It’s always good to see manufacturing jobs come back to the U.S., but what of the phone itself? Motorola CEO Dennis Woodside wasn’t exactly forthcoming on details, but he did hint at a few of the phone’s features. For one, it will have sensors that will wake it up from sleep mode when the phone is taken out of a pants pocket or purse.

    More excitedly, he also said that the phone will include two processors to preserve battery life. Smartphones have always walked a thin line between processing power and elongating battery life. Motorola, with Google’s help, may finally be able to solve this problem.

    You can expect to see the Moto X, and maybe even a new version of Android, hitting markets by October.

    Motorola isn’t the first major tech company to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. Apple announced last year that it would start to assemble Mac computers in the U.S. as well. The Cupertino-based company will still have its flagship mobile devices assembled overseas though.

    [h/t: Bloomberg]

  • New Research Once Again Confirms That Pirates Are The Best Customers

    The media industry really hates pirates. The companies that produce music, movies and everything else constantly berate pirates and tell the world that these people are destroying their business. These companies used to sue alleged file sharers, but now they’re content with just throttling the bandwidth of accused pirates. A new study suggests they may want to rethink their tactics.

    The American Assembly at Columbia University has teamed up with Google to publish a report titled “Copy Culture in the U.S. & Germany.” As the name suggests, the study looks at the culture surrounding file sharing in the two countries where IP laws “play oversized roles in setting international IP policies.” Some of the findings may be a little surprising to some, but it’s kind of expected in today’s connected world.

    First of all, file-sharing is rampant in the U.S. and Germany. The study found that nearly half of all residents in both countries have “copied, shared, or ‘downloaded for free’ music, movies and TV shows.” The trade off of these high numbers is that most of these “pirates” aren’t downloading everything. Only 14 percent of adults acquired most of their digital music or video collections through illegal downloads. Going even further, only 2 to 3 percent of “pirates” have amassed a large collection, over 1,000 songs or TV shows, through illegal downloading.

    All of this looks pretty grim for the media industry. It’s no wonder that they are so hell bent on punishing file sharers. These pirates are not doing their part to support the labels and companies that criminally underpay the artists that they represent. If only these people would start buying music instead of illegally downloading all of it, right?

    In all reality, file sharers are by and large the heaviest consumers of legal media content. The study found that file sharers “buy as many legal DVDs, CDs, and subscription media services as their non-file sharing, Internet-using counterparts.” The study also found that file-sharers in the U.S. buy 30 percent more digital music and “display marginally higher willingness to pay.”

    This new study lines up with a report late last year that found pirates to be the media industry’s biggest supporters. Of course, this report came out of Europe, but it found that “pirates” bought way more digital content than their file-sharing peers. As for physical media, both studies found that pirates and non-pirates buy about the same amount of content.

    The most interesting part of The American Assembly’s study, however, was when it looked at the differences in IP laws between the U.S. and Germany. The U.S. has a strict no sharing law even when making physical copies of CDs for friends and family from a physical CD that you purchased. Germany protects most of these actions through a “private copy” provision in copyright law that makes it okay to copy music for “noncommercial personal uses.”

    It seems that Germany’s IP laws seem to understand that copying does not equate to a lost sale. In fact, the study found that those who copy music, movies, etc are still buying plenty of content. It says that “there is no significant difference in buying habits between those who copy or file share and those who do not.”

    Alongside these findings, consumers in both markets also support initiatives that would make it harder to access pirated content. A majority of Internet users in the U.S. support “a soft requirement that Web services like Facebook and Dropbox ‘try to screen user activity and remove pirated files.’” That support begins to drop off once you bring government or the word “censorship into the mix.” Support for self regulation could be why most Internet users are not raising a stink about the six-strikes anti-piracy plan going into effect early this year, yet raised high hell when SOPA and PIPA were making the rounds.

    The final question posed in the study is by far the most interesting. Respondents were asked if they would be willing to pay a little extra a month to creators in Internet fees to legalize file sharing. An amazing 61 percent of Germans and 48 percent of Americans said they would gladly pay an extra €16.43/$18.79 a month for it.

    These kind of studies pop up from time to time, but they are largely ignored by the media industry as it continues to push the dialog that all piracy is harmful. It’s worrisome because these industries may push too hard one day, and as a result lose their most loyal customers. Most file sharers don’t want to see their favorite creators stop making content, but they also wanted to be treated fairly by the companies that distribute said content. Consumers have been ready to find some middle ground for years, so now it’s all in the hands of the media industry to reach out and work together with their fans for a brighter future.

    [h/t: Ars Technica]

  • ACTA Is Officially Dead In Europe

    ACTA Is Officially Dead In Europe

    There was much rejoicing in the streets earlier this year when the European Parliament rejected ACTA, a multinational trade agreement that many felt would hurt online innovation in profound ways. There was one sliver of hope for ACTA’s continued existence, however, as the European Commission submitted the treaty to the European Court of Justice for review. Now that last avenue of validation is gone.

    The Register reports that the European Commission has pulled its request for the European Court of Justice to review ACTA. After pulling it, the commission stated that there was “no realistic chance” of the treaty ever gaining ground in Europe. The statement marks the official end of a fight against a treaty that Europeans fought tooth and nail against.

    Although ACTA may be dead in Europe, the treaty lives in other nations around the world. The U.S. has claimed ACTA is a “sole executive agreement” that is binding after President Obama signed the treaty in late 2011 despite only Congress having the power to approve treaties. The treaty has not taken effect, however, and its death in Europe pretty much kills it in the U.S.

    The treaty has, however, been ratified in one country. Back in September, Japan’s House of Representatives ratified the treaty in the middle of the night so there would be no blowback from the country’s citizens that are already prone to protests. The new conservative government that was just elected, however, may revisit the ratification.

    Despite all of this, the ghost of ACTA still lingers in some parts of the world. Some of the worst parts of ACTA have made their way into CETA, or the Canada-European Trade Agreement. The treaty has faced little resistance, and it looks like it may pass by year’s end.

  • House Approves VPPA: Americans Might Soon Be Able To Share Netflix Viewing Data On Facebook

    In the last few weeks of the current congress, members seem to going into overdrive as they introduce some last minute bills. The latest bill to reach approval in the House is of particular significance as its an update to the archaic, and frankly rather stupid, VPPA.

    The Hill reports that the House, by voice vote, approved H.R. 6671 which is an update to the Video Privacy Protection Act. The bill, originally passed in 1988, was meant to prevent the press and other groups from accessing video rental records of citizens without their written consent. Video rentals are a thing of the past, however, and now the bill only impedes the ability of Netflix to let its users share their viewing history on Facebook and other social networks.

    This is the second time that the House has approached an update to the VPPA. Last year, the House passed H.R. 2471 which the current H.R. 6671 draws heavily from. The bill never made it past the Senate, but the legislative body did offer some suggestions that made it into the new iteration of the bill.

    The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, had this to say about the updated bill:

    “With today’s technology, consumers can quickly and efficiently access video programming through a variety of platforms, including through Internet protocol-based video services, all without leaving their homes. This bill updates the VPPA to allow videotape service providers to facilitate the sharing on social media networks of the movies watched or recommended by users.”

    Ignoring Goodlatte’s use of the antiquated term “videotape,” the bill itself has some good stuff in it. Those who fear that the proposed update gets rid of all privacy protections in the VPPA will be happy to know that individual privacy plays a major role in the House bill after taking suggestions from the Senate.

    The first update to the bill includes a clause that requires video rental companies (i.e. Netflix) to give consumers a “clear and conspicuous” option to stop sharing their video viewing data on social networks at any time. The second update requires a consumer’s consent to expire after 24 months unless they choose to opt in again.

    H.R. 6671 will reportedly benefit from bipartisan and bicameral support. It should see easy passage in the next few weeks after lawmakers are able to sort through the current fiscal cliff mess.

  • Foxconn Is Bringing Manufacturing Plants To The US [Report]

    Foxconn Is Bringing Manufacturing Plants To The US [Report]

    A big sticking point during the presidential debates this year was the loss of jobs to overseas companies. Both candidates pointed fingers at China, a country that has taken on much of the world’s manufacturing. Now one of China’s most infamous companies, Foxconn, may be bringing some jobs back to the US.

    A report from Digitimes says that Foxconn is in the planning stages to bring manufacturing plants to the US. The report mentions that Los Angeles and Detroit are prime candidates for these new plants. Unfortunately, the plants wouldn’t bring much in the way of new jobs to American workers though. It’s said that Foxconn would focus on LCD TV production which is highly automated.

    Interestingly enough, Foxconn is also starting up a training program for US-based engineers. Foxconn chairman Terry Gou said at a recent public event that his company would invite engineers to Taiwan and China for hands-on training in product design. The engineers would also get a chance to learn the Chinese language while they’re at it.

    Gou also said that his company is currently in talks with the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology in regards to the program. It sounds like one heck of an internship, and I’m sure many students at MIT would jump at the chance to learn more about design and a new language.

    Of course, all of this depends on approval from the US government. Distrust of China is at an all-time high in Congress with lawmakers investigating Chinese companies’ ties to the Chinese government. Foxconn isn’t included in the investigation just yet, but it will have to overcome some initial scrutiny if it intends to move to the US.

  • The Internet Is Still Slowly Gaining Speed Around The World

    The Internet Is Still Slowly Gaining Speed Around The World

    The Internet is constantly evolving around the world. The speed at which it’s evolving, however, is an entirely different story. It’s this evolution that has proven to be one of the more interesting things to watch as world moves towards faster Internet and new technologies like IPv6.

    Once again, we have a front row seat to the changes occurring to the Internet thanks to Akamai’s State of the Internet report that covers Q2. The previous Q1 report found that the Internet was slowly getting faster around the world. How is Q2 shaping up? Things are still slowly getting faster, but individual countries are seeing declines.

    In Q2 2012, the average internet speed around the world was 3 Mbps. That’s a quarter-over-quarter increase of 13 percent. Even better, it’s a year-over-year increase of 15 percent. Unfortunately, it doesn’t look that good for the top ten countries around the world. South Korea, bastion of fast Internet, actually saw a quarter-over-quarter decrease of 9.8 percent to 14.2 Mbps. The United States is in 9th place with an average of 6.6 Mbps which is a quarter-over-quarter decrease of 1.4 percent.

    In worrying news, global broadband speeds are down this quarter. Akamai defines high broadband as connections over 10 Mbps and this bracket saw a sizable decline. Globally, the percentage of Internet users with high broadband is at 10 percent which is a quarter-over-quarter decrease of 1.6 percent. Getting into individual countries, 49 percent of South Korea has high broadband which is a quarter-over-quarter decrease of 7.4 percent. The United States pulls in at 7th place with 16 percent of the population using high broadband which is a quarter-over-quarter increase of 5.5 percent.

    Things look a little better as we head into general broadband territory which is defined by speeds faster than 4 Mbps. The global average is at 39 percent which is a quarter-over-quarter decline of 2.8 percent. South Korea is once again at the top with 84 percent of its citizens at broadband speeds which is a quarter-over-quarter decrease of 2.2 percent. The United States is not even in the top 10 this time as it pulls in at 13th place with 57 percent of the population at broadband speeds. This is a quarter-over-quarter decline of 4.6 percent.

    Moving on to the United States, New England is still dominant force in the country when it comes to fast Internet speeds. The top 10 average Internet speeds mostly belong to Northeastern states with New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut belonging to the top 10. The fastest average Internet in the U.S., however, belongs to Delaware with average speeds of 12.1 Mbps which is a quarter-over-quarter increase of 18 percent.

    The breakdown is largely the same when it comes to the percentage of citizens who are on high broadband connections. Delaware is still number one with 39 percent of its citizens enjoying high broadband, which is a quarter-over-quarter increase of 19 percent. Unlike the average speeds, however, most of the states with the highest percentages of high broadband users belong on the east coast. Washington state is the only West Coast state that features a high percentage of citizens on high broadband.

    General broadband availability is still mostly present in the Northeastern states, but there’s one surprise here. Florida pulled in at 10th place with 69 percent of its citizens using regular broadband. That’s an quarter-over-quarter increase of 2.7 percent.

    Beyond Internet speeds, Akamai also took time out this quarter to look at the increasing adoption rates of IPv6. IPv6 was made available to everyone on June 6, and since then IPv6 growth has been at seven percent in 2012. Akamai points out that this is actually lower than the growth rates from the past three years. One possible reason is that most large organizations and networks had already switched to IPv6 in the years leading up to the official rollout.

    As for the rest of the report, you can request a copy here. It breaks down Internet penetration rates for other geographic regions including the explosive Internet regions in Asia that are just starting to make a presence on the Internet. You can also check out the latest cyber threats and where they’re coming from.