Sniping is one of the most satisfying things you can do in an Extraction Shooter. If you want to put your opponents down in one shot in Arena Breakout Infinite, let me show you some of the best sniper loadouts. The best sniper builds in Arena Breakout Infinite Before we dive into the builds, let me quickly explain the most essential part of any kit, as you’ll get nowhere without it. Your ammunition is more important than your weapon. Screenshot: PC Invasion Every ammunition in the game has a Pierce Level, which dictates the Armor Class it penetrates. For example, the Mosin Nagant Bolt-Action Rifle is chambered in 7.62×54 caliber ammo. You could buy LBS Ammo as it’s the cheapest but only penetrates Class 4 Armor. Alternatively, you could buy 7N37 Ammo, which is four times the price, but it penetrates everything up to Class 7. With this in mind, if you’re going to splash out anywhere, do it with your ammunition. On that note, it’s always worth ...

Sniping is one of the most satisfying things you can do in an Extraction Shooter. If you want to put your opponents down in one shot in Arena Breakout Infinite, let me show you some of the best sniper loadouts. The best sniper builds in Arena Breakout Infinite Before we dive into the builds, let me quickly explain the most essential part of any kit, as you’ll get nowhere without it. Your ammunition is more important than your weapon. Screenshot: PC Invasion Every ammunition in the game has a Pierce Level, which dictates the Armor Class it penetrates. For example, the Mosin Nagant Bolt-Action Rifle is chambered in 7.62×54 caliber ammo. You could buy LBS Ammo as it’s the cheapest but only penetrates Class 4 Armor. Alternatively, you could buy 7N37 Ammo, which is four times the price, but it penetrates everything up to Class 7. With this in mind, if you’re going to splash out anywhere, do it with your ammunition. On that note, it’s always worth ...

PCGamesN's Hardware Editor, Ed Chester, reports from Computex, one of the world's largest computer and tech trade shows.

Here's some of the cool kit and PC hardware that Ed's spotted.

Ultimate Descendants stand head and shoulders above their regular counterparts, so it makes sense that they are much harder to acquire. If you want the best, let me show you everything in our The First Descendant Ultimate Descendant farming guide where I’ll show you all unlock requirements, locations, bosses, and Amorphous Materials. Table of contentsWhat is an Ultimate Descendant in the First Descendant?How to get every Ultimate Descendant in The First DescendantHow to farm Ultimate Bunny in The First DescendantUltimate Bunny Enhanced CellsUltimate Bunny StabilizerUltimate Bunny Spiral CatalystUltimate Bunny CodeHow to farm Ultimate Ajax in The First DescendantUltimate Ajax Enhanced CellsUltimate Ajax StabilizerUltimate Ajax Spiral CatalystUltimate Ajax CodeHow to farm Ultimate Valby in The First DescendantUltimate Valby Enhanced CellsUltimate Valby StabilizerUltimate Valby Spiral CatalystUltimate Valby CodeHow to farm Ultimate Viessa in The Last DescendantUltimate Viessa Enh...

Gate keeping.

Elden Ring players have discovered a risk free way of instantly defeating one of Shadow of the Erdtree’s main bosses, Rellana, the Twin Moon Knight.

The exploit works without ever setting foot in her arena, by travelling to the Scadu Altus area before visiting the legacy …

Scientists are looking to create a lunar ark of cryogenically preserved animal samples on the Moon, all in an attempt to safeguard Earth’s declining biodiversity and support future efforts to terraform inhospitable planets.

Earth is the only world we're aware of that is known to play host to a magnificent and diverse abundance of life. However, a host of factors ranging from over-exploitation to climate change have forced biodiversity on Earth to plunge into a dramatic decline. Some scientists believe that we have entered a sixth mass extinction event of life on our planet, in which ecosystems are becoming destabilized and countless species face extinction threats that are accelerating at a rate beyond our ability to counter.

Now, an international group of scientists have come together to propose an ambitious decades-long endeavour which would see partners attempt to preserve our planet’s biodiversity by storing samples taken from across the animal kingdom in a vault on the Moon.

Several institutions already exist in the present day that specialise in storing cryogenically frozen living cells, which can potentially stay alive for hundreds of years before being thawed out. These can be analysed by scientists hoping to recover DNA, cells, or even entire organisms. The problem is that these Earthly facilities require expert human management and ready supplies of electricity and liquid nitrogen. On top of that, they are vulnerable to wars, natural disasters, and a host of other dangers.

A lunar arc situated near the Moon’s south pole, on the other hand, would be isolated from many of these threats, while simultaneously benefiting from the naturally stable -196°C temperatures present in permanently shadowed craters pitting the barren surface. According to the authors of a new paper published in the journal BioScience, these conditions would allow for the design of a passive, low-maintenance base with a reduced emphasis on active cooling technology and manpower relative to its terrestrial counterparts.

Of course establishing any such lunar vault would be a leviathan enterprise, requiring international backing and expertise from entities ranging from nations and agencies, to private and scientific partners. Alongside shouldering the inevitable cost, these partners would need to develop the hardware and technologies required to safely transport the samples to their new home on the Moon, and to ensure that they are adequately protected from solar and cosmic sources of radiation. The effects of microgravity will also need to be explored, potentially by sending samples for a prolonged stay aboard the International Space Station (ISS).

Once operational, the Moon vault would initially be used to preserve biological samples of species that face the greatest threat of extinction. However, the collaboration's overarching goal is to establish a biorepository that will house most of the animal species on Earth, before eventually extending to accommodate plant life.

Looking to the far future, the scientists hope that the arc specimens could one day prove useful to explorers hoping to terraform worlds for human settlement both in our solar system, and beyond. For more science news read up on SpaceX’s plan to bring down the ISS using a powered-up Dragon spacecraft, or find out about how scientists scanned the interior of an ancient tunnel extending beneath the surface of the Moon.

Image credit: NASA, Bill Anders.

Anthony is a freelance contributor covering science and video gaming news for IGN. He has over eight years experience of covering breaking developments in multiple scientific fields and absolutely no time for your shenanigans. Follow him on Twitter @BeardConGamer

Ultimate Descendants stand head and shoulders above their regular counterparts, so it makes sense that they are much harder to acquire. If you want the best, let me show you everything in our The First Descendant Ultimate Descendant farming guide where I’ll show you all unlock requirements, locations, bosses, and Amorphous Materials. Table of contentsWhat is an Ultimate Descendant in the First Descendant?How to get every Ultimate Descendant in The First DescendantHow to farm Ultimate Bunny in The First DescendantUltimate Bunny Enhanced CellsUltimate Bunny StabilizerUltimate Bunny Spiral CatalystUltimate Bunny CodeHow to farm Ultimate Ajax in The First DescendantUltimate Ajax Enhanced CellsUltimate Ajax StabilizerUltimate Ajax Spiral CatalystUltimate Ajax CodeHow to farm Ultimate Valby in The First DescendantUltimate Valby Enhanced CellsUltimate Valby StabilizerUltimate Valby Spiral CatalystUltimate Valby CodeHow to farm Ultimate Viessa in The Last DescendantUltimate Viessa Enh...

I'm working on converting a 3D game to VR. I've made some progress, but the UI has been challenging. From my understanding (and use) a canvas rendered in world space is recommended in VR.

Here is a video of what I see after converting the overlay canvas to world space. The two arrow sprites follow the hand correctly, but from some angles, we end up looking at them edge-on like this:

But I want them to always face the player's head flat-on like this:

I feel I have identified the issue, but my programming is a work in progress. I'm wondering if this could be the problem:

public static float Atan2(float y, float x);

Description
Returns the angle in radians whose Tan is y/x.

Return value is the angle between the x-axis and a 2D vector starting at zero and terminating at (x,y).

using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using Unity.Mathematics;
using UnityEngine;
using UnityEngine.SocialPlatforms;

public class UIManager : MonoBehaviour
{
    public GameObject WindVectorUI;
    public GameObject SailDirectionUI;
    public GameObject ApparentWindUI;


    // Start is called before the first frame update
    void Start()
    {

    }

    // Update is called once per frame
    void Update()
    {
        UpdateWindVectorUI();
        UpdateSailDirectionUI();
        UpdateApparentWindUI();
    }

    // calculates the angle of the wind vector using Mathf.Atan2() which returns the angile in radians between the x-axis and the vector pointing to (x,y)
    void UpdateWindVectorUI()
    {
        float AngleInRad = Mathf.Atan2(WindManager.instance.CurrentTrueWind.y, WindManager.instance.CurrentTrueWind.x);
        WindVectorUI.transform.rotation = Quaternion.Euler(0, 0, AngleInRad * Mathf.Rad2Deg);

    }

    void UpdateSailDirectionUI()
    {
        SailDirectionUI.transform.rotation = Quaternion.Euler(0, 0, -BoatManager.Player.Sail.transform.localRotation.eulerAngles.y + 90 - BoatManager.Player.transform.localRotation.eulerAngles.y);
    }

    void UpdateApparentWindUI()
    {
        float AngleInRad = Mathf.Atan2(BoatManager.Player.ApparentWind.y, BoatManager.Player.ApparentWind.x);
        ApparentWindUI.transform.rotation = Quaternion.Euler(0, 0, AngleInRad * Mathf.Rad2Deg);
    }
}

I am trying to generate a set of points distributed in such a way as to give a "rough circle" sort of shape. The points should not deviate too far from neighboring points, with larger jumps being rarer, though the radius can gradually deviate from whatever the starting mean radius was. The angular seperation of the points are equally distributed, but the number of points can vary.

My first strategy was to do a random walk around the circle, with the next point having a radius that's different by a normally-distributed random number. The problem is once we get to the last point, it will more often than not have a big discontinuity with the first point, larger than what we would expect from the normal variation in neighboring points.

Now I don't need the last point to be exactly the same as the first, but I would like an approach that has the first and the last points to be as near as we would expect any other two adjacent points to be. Is there some way to pick random points in such a way, so that a random walk "returns to its starting position" so to speak?

For context, the use case is the creation of objects in an Asteroids (the arcade game) sort of style. Those asteroids simply used a uniformly distributed random radius for each point in the polygon, but that produces objects more jaggedy than what I would like, and lead to more visually spherical objects as you add more points. But my polygons still have few enough points where a full application of Perlin noise or some other fractal method would be overkill I would think.

In less than six months, Joe Biden and Donald Trump will once again face off for the presidency. While a presidential rematch is relatively rare — this marks the first time since 1956 — the outcome of this particular rematch will have an outsized impact on our civil rights and civil liberties. Beyond any one issue being on the ballot this November — freedom is on the ballot in no uncertain terms.

While the ACLU does not endorse or oppose candidates for elected office, we know that a potential second Trump administration and a potential second Biden administration will be drastically different when it comes to our civil rights and civil liberties. A second Trump administration will be disastrous for our most fundamental rights and freedoms, while a second Biden administration will bring a mix of challenges and opportunities that largely leaves these rights and freedoms intact. At the ACLU, we’re prepared for either scenario. Our legal, policy, and advocacy experts have identified the constitutional challenges that each candidate will bring, and the concrete actions the ACLU will take in response.

Starting next week, we will share our findings in a series of 13 memos — seven memos on a potential second Trump administration and six on a potential second Biden administration — to be released through August. The memos will address a range of issues, including immigrants’ rights, abortion access, LGBTQ justice, racial equity, police reform, and more.

To move the national discourse beyond agonizing over potential challenges to analyzing potential solutions, our memo series outlines not only the threats to our freedoms, but also includes comprehensive, substantive, and actionable solutions the ACLU will use to block the punches — egregious attempts to ignore the Constitution — or lessen the blows.

I believe in the strength of our commitment because I’ve seen what our organization is capable of accomplishing when our freedom is on the line. In 2016, the ACLU was the only national organization to issue a comprehensive plan for the policies of a potential Clinton administration, but also those of a potential Trump administration. That plan laid the groundwork for us to file 434 legal actions against the Trump administration, including the first lawsuit to halt the Trump Muslim ban within hours of its enactment.

Our detailed analysis of Trump’s policies foreshadowed a constitutional crisis that, nearly a decade later, continues to impact our nation as a whole. Today, our analysis once again prepares us to continue that fight, over the course of the next administration and beyond, just like we did in 2016.

Right now, Trump maintains a lead in most polls. While much can change between now and November, we must be prepared for the possibility that Trump may return to the White House. We know that a second Trump administration will be significantly more aggressive and effective in executing its plans to fundamentally erode our democracy, take away our freedoms, and violate our Constitution.

If Trump wins, we stand ready to meet his administration head on — in the courts, in Congress, at the state and local level, on the street, and at the ballot box. Already, we’ve taken note of the extremist rhetoric he’s used on the campaign trail, including promises to:

• Erase protections for LGBTQ people across the entire federal government and mandate discrimination, including banning transgender people from serving in the armed forces.
• Pursue retrogressive immigration policies — including reinterpreting the 14th Amendment to apply only to people who are born in the United States and have at least one parent who is a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident — that harm communities of color.
• Restrict refugee resettlement and asylum and end deportation protections for DACA recipients and those with Temporary Protected Status.
• Appoint justices who will carry out the Trump administration’s intentions to use antiquated laws to ban abortion or limit access to contraception.
• Eliminate race-conscious instruction in schools and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training in the workplace.
• Undermine press freedoms by regularly attacking media organizations he dislikes, and invoke the Insurrection Act to intimidate opponents and shut down dissent.
• Renew efforts to make it harder for Americans to vote and to spread false, debunked theories to undermine confidence in the integrity of our voting system.
• Promote unconstitutional and brutal state policing and federal law enforcement practices, dehumanize people in our criminal legal system, and accelerate mass incarceration.

Four years after Trump was elected, our nation was reeling from relentless attacks on fundamental rights and freedoms. When President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took office, the ACLU released a wish list that called on the Biden administration to do two things: reverse Trump-era policies, and protect and extend our freedoms as part of a vision for our country that included justice, fairness, and equality for all.

Since then, the Biden administration has made progress toward this vision by expanding voting rights and abortion protections, as well as advocating for equal access for transgender individuals and for students’ right to receive an inclusive education. We remain concerned, however, that the administration has not fulfilled its critical civil rights and civil liberties responsibilities across a range of issues, including:

• Fully banning racial and other profiling. The Biden administration has permitted profiling for national and homeland security purposes, and at the border. These contexts can be pretexts for law enforcement to target Muslims, communities of color, and immigrants.
• Ending suspicionless surveillance of Americans under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The Biden administration instead pressured Congress to dramatically expand Section 702, resulting in legislation that creates new ways for the government to spy on us without a warrant.
• Restoring the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to its full strength. While restoring the Voting Rights Act requires congressional action that has been blocked, the Biden administration has yet to fully implement its executive order promoting access to voting.
• Ending the federal death penalty – a commitment Biden campaigned on in 2020 – and fully implementing the reforms promised in his executive order on policing.

The ACLU is determined to hold a future Biden administration accountable for, among other things, protecting the right to abortion and contraception, preserving our asylum system and providing a path to citizenship, safeguarding the right to vote for all Americans, and bringing necessary reforms to our criminal legal system. The ACLU’s commitment to this work remains unchanged now, and for years to come.

In less than six months, our nation will send one of these candidates back to the White House. But this election is not just about who will be president — it’s about our freedom, our future, and the trajectory of our democracy. Rest assured, however, that no matter who wins, the ACLU will be ready to use all of the tools at our disposal — litigation, legislation, advocacy, and grassroots mobilization – to ensure that our nation lives up to the promise of the Constitution.

The Pale Heart is littered with tasks and events, some of which are easier to beat than others. If you’re struggling, here’s how to complete the Offering event in Destiny 2. What is the Offering event in Destiny 2: The Final Shape The Offering event is one of the many ways to increase your Overthrow level in the Pale Heart. Screenshot: PC Invasion You can start the event by interacting with one of these Offering chests (pictured above). When the event begins, you’ll see a ball of light with a tail floating nearby. Go toward it and try to head in the direction the tail is pointing. If you do this correctly, another ball of light will appear before you, indicating a new direction to travel. Screenshot: PC Invasion Once you’ve repeated the process several times, you’ll find an orange target (pictured above). Destroy it, and the Offering chest you started the event with can be opened. Make sure to claim your reward, as you’ll receive...

You have a 15-character password, shield the ATM as you enter your PIN, close the door when you meet with your banker, and shred your financial statements. But do you truly have financial privacy? Or has someone else been sitting silently in the room with you this whole time?

While you might feel you have secured your financial information, the government has very much wedged its way into the room. Financial privacy has practically vanished over the last 50 years.

It's strange how quickly we have accepted the current state of financial surveillance as the norm. Just a few decades ago, withdrawing money didn't involve 20 questions about what we plan to use the money for, what we do for a living, and where we are from. Our daily transactions weren't handed over in bulk to countless third parties.

Yet, what is even stranger is that most people continue to believe in a version of financial privacy that no longer exists. They believe financial records continue to be private and the government needs a warrant to go after them. This belief couldn't be further from reality. Americans do not have financial privacy. Rather, we have the illusion of financial privacy.

Why is this? Put simply, financial surveillance has been kept hidden in three major ways: Encroachments into privacy have evolved gradually through obscure legislation, the scope of surveillance has constantly expanded through inflation, and much of the process is kept intentionally confidential.

Years of Obscure Legislative Changes

Compared to today, customers in the 1970s had far more freedom in opening accounts and interacting with their own money. Back then, the decision to transact with a bank could be based on the cash in one's pocket. Transactions were not scrutinized for threats of terrorism or drug trafficking. Customers were not legally required to supply a photo ID to set up an account. Banks decided for themselves what information they needed to set up an account, and this information remained effectively confidential between the customer and the bank.

This changed in the 1970s when a pivotal piece of legislation was passed: the Bank Secrecy Act. Stemming from concerns in Congress regarding Americans concealing their wealth in offshore accounts, the legislation aimed to gather financial information to detect such activities. For example, financial institutions were required to monitor and report transactions over $10,000 to the government.

It didn't stop there. Over the years, Congress came up with more ways to expand financial surveillance in what is now best referred to as the "Bank Secrecy Act regime."

In 1992, the Annunzio-Wylie Anti–Money Laundering Act led to the introduction of suspicious activity reports (SARs), where, instead of just reporting anything over $10,000, financial institutions had to report "any suspicious transaction relevant to a possible violation of law or regulation." Two years later, the Money Laundering Suppression Act authorized the secretary of the treasury to designate the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) as the agency to oversee these reports.

Following the September 11 attacks, the USA PATRIOT Act significantly expanded surveillance powers, granting the government easier access to communication records. Hidden among the pages of this sprawling omnibus bill was a set of "know your customer" requirements that forced banks not only to investigate who you are but also to verify that information on behalf of the government.

Again, Congress didn't stop there.

Another extensive omnibus bill, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, quietly introduced a rule intended to surveil all bank accounts with at least $600 of activity. Luckily, the controversial measure was noticed and met with immediate pushback. The Treasury Department responded by informing people that the government already has access to much of everyone's financial information.

While the proposal was retracted, the initiative was only shut down partially. Instead of affecting all bank accounts, the law narrowed its scope to require reporting for transactions over $600 made through a payment transmitter such as PayPal, Venmo, or Cash App.

Then the 2022 Special Measures To Fight Modern Threats Act aimed to eliminate some of the checks and balances placed on the Treasury, granting it the authority to use "special measures" to sanction international transactions.

While the Special Measures To Fight Modern Threats Act hasn't been passed, it remains a persistent presence in legislative proposals. It has been introduced in various forms, including as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act and as an amendment to the America COMPETES Act of 2022 (both of which failed), as well as a standalone bill.

Similar challenges exist in other bills that try to expand financial surveillance such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Transparency and Accountability in Service Providers Act, Crypto-Asset National Security Enhancement and Enforcement Act, and Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act. Each new bill that passes could further chip away at our financial privacy.

Considering these laws and proposals are buried within thousands of pages of legislation, it's no wonder the public doesn't know what's going on.

A Constant Expansion Through Inflation

Even if every member of the public could read every bill front to back, there are still other ways that the Bank Secrecy Act regime has been able to expand silently each year. Surprisingly, inflation has also contributed to the erosion of our financial privacy.

Following the Bank Secrecy Act's requirement that financial institutions report transactions over $10,000, concerns were raised in court. A coalition including the American Civil Liberties Union, California Bankers Association, and Security National Bank argued that the Bank Secrecy Act violated constitutional protections, including the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure, as well as the First Amendment and Fifth Amendment. They successfully obtained a temporary restraining order against the act.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court later held that the Bank Secrecy Act did not create an undue burden considering it applied to "abnormally large transactions" of $10,000 or more.

Let's put this number into context: In the 1970s, $10,000 was enough to buy two brand-new Corvettes and still have enough money left to cover taxes and upgrades. So perhaps the court's description of these transactions as "abnormally large" was fair at the time.

The problem is that this reporting threshold has never been adjusted for inflation. For over 50 years, it has stayed at $10,000. If the threshold had been adjusted this whole time, it would currently be around $75,000—not $10,000. Not adjusting for inflation would be like not receiving a cost-of-living adjustment for your income; it means losing money each year.

Each year with inflation is another year that the government is granted further access to people's financial activity. In 2022 alone, the U.S. financial services industry filed around 26 million reports under the Bank Secrecy Act. Of those, 20.6 million were on transactions of $10,000 or more, with around 4.3 million filed for suspicious activity. However, the second-most-common reason for filing a SAR was for transactions close to the $10,000 threshold. It almost makes one wonder why Congress bothered with a threshold at all if you can be reported for crossing it and also reported for not crossing it.

While the public has been focusing on the prices of groceries and gasoline when it comes to inflation, the impact of inflation on expanding financial surveillance has largely gone unnoticed.

Much of the Process Is Confidential

With millions of reports being filed each year as both Congress and inflation continue to expand the Bank Secrecy Act regime, shouldn't members of the public at least know if they were reported to the government? For a little while, Congress seemed to think the process should operate that way.

Realizing the need to establish boundaries after the Supreme Court gave the green light to deputizing financial institutions as law enforcement investigators, Congress enacted the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978. The legislation mandated that individuals should be told if the government is looking into their finances. Not only did the law establish a notification process, but it also allowed individuals to challenge these requests.

So why don't we see complaints of invasive financial surveillance on the news?

Put simply, the Right to Financial Privacy Act doesn't live up to its name. Although it should result in some protections, Congress included 20 exceptions that let the government get around them. For example, the fourth exception applies to disclosures pursuant to federal statutes, including the reports required under the Bank Secrecy Act.

Making matters worse, the Annunzio-Wylie Anti–Money Laundering Act made filing SARs a confidential process. Both financial institution employees and the government are prohibited from notifying customers if a transaction leads to a SAR. And it's not just the contents of the reports that are confidential: Banks cannot even reveal the existence of a SAR.

With these laws, banks went from protecting the privacy of their depositors to being forced to protect the secrecy of government surveillance programs. It's the epitome of "privacy for me, but not for thee."

The frustration and harm this process causes might not be so secret. There are numerous news stories about banks closing accounts without any explanation. While many have blamed the banks for giving customers the silent treatment, they may be legally prohibited from disclosing that a SAR led to the closure.

As one customer described it, "I feel that I was treated unjustly and at least I deserve to get an explanation. I had no overdrafts, always paid my credit cards on time and I consider myself to be an honest person, the way they closed my accounts made me feel like a criminal." Another customer said, "Any time I asked about why [my account was closed] they said they were not allowed to discuss the matter."

The government claims this process should be kept secret so that it doesn't tip off criminals. Yet SARs are not evidence of a crime by default.

The exact details of the reports are confidential but some aggregate statistics are available. These suggest that the top three reasons for a bank to file a SAR include (1) suspicions concerning the source of funds, (2) transactions below $10,000, and (3) transactions with no apparent economic purpose. These are not smoking guns.

There are many reasons why a bank might close an account, including inactivity, violations of terms and conditions, frequent overdrafts, and internal restructuring. But when banks refuse to explain closures, it might just be because they are prohibited from doing so, further keeping the public in the dark about financial surveillance activities.

A Balancing Act

Many might still ask, "If these reports catch a couple of bad guys, aren't they all worth it?" This raises a fundamental societal question: To what extent are we OK with pervasive surveillance if it stops bad people doing bad things?

To answer this question, we should first recognize that the optimal crime rate is not zero. While a world without crime might seem preferable, the costs of achieving that can be prohibitively high. We can't burn down the entire world just to stop somebody from stealing a pack of gum. There is a percentage of crime that is going to exist—it's not ideal, but it is optimal.

Similarly, the cost of pervasive surveillance is also too high. Maintaining a balance of power by protecting people's privacy is essential for a free society. Surveillance can restrict freedoms, such as the freedom to have certain religious beliefs, support certain causes, partake in dissent, and hold powerful people accountable. We need to have financial privacy. We have too many examples where surveillance has gone wrong and allowed these freedoms to be squashed. We have to be careful about creeping surveillance that tilts the balance of power too far away from the individual.

Removing this huge financial surveillance system doesn't mean ending the fight against terror or crime. It means making sure that Fourth Amendment protections are still present in the modern digital era. It's not supposed to be easy to get this magic permission slip that lets you into everyone's homes. The Constitution was put in place to prevent such abuses—to restrict the powers of government and protect the people.

Breaking the Illusion of Financial Privacy

Over the past 50 years, the U.S. government has slowly built a sprawling system of unchecked financial surveillance. It's time to question whether this is the world we want to live in. Instead of having a regime that generates 26 million reports on Americans at a cost of over $46 billion in a given year, we should have a system that respects individual rights and only goes after criminals.

Yet, government officials seem to have another vision in mind. Through obscure legislative changes, inflationary expansions, and a process of confidentiality, financial privacy has been continuously eroded over time.

Changing this reality is an uphill battle, but it's one that's worth fighting. The first step is raising awareness about how far financial surveillance norms have shifted in just a few decades. Changes won't happen until we dispel the illusion of financial privacy.

The post The Illusion of Financial Privacy appeared first on Reason.com.

pemExecutive Director Anthony D. Romero spoke to graduates at the Colin Powell School for Civic and Global Leadership. He stressed the critical need to protect free speech on college campuses. He calls on universities to uphold the principles of open debate and academic freedom, while also prioritizing the safety and well-being of students from discrimination and violence. Romero inspires graduates to seize leadership opportunities with bravery and compassion, recognizing their potential to make a positive impact on the world./em/p pa href=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23x7S79H88APlay the video/a/p img width=1280 height=720 src=https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail.jpeg class=attachment-16x9_1400 size-16x9_1400 alt=Anthony Romero giving the commencement speech at the Colin Powell School of City College of New York. decoding=async srcset=https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail.jpeg 1280w, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail-768x432.jpeg 768w, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail-400x225.jpeg 400w, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail-600x338.jpeg 600w, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail-800x450.jpeg 800w, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail-1000x563.jpeg 1000w, https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2024/05/anthony-romero-commencement-speech-colin-powell-school-city-college-ny-video-thumbnail-1200x675.jpeg 1200w sizes=(max-width: 1280px) 100vw, 1280px / pWhen I was coming up here, it felt like I was coming home. I spent my early childhood not far from here, in the Castle Hill projects of the Bronx. Google maps says it’s only six miles from here, but it feels like worlds away. After the Bronx, we moved out to New Jersey, and I came back to New York after law school. I’ve now spent most of my adult life here in New York City. So, as a proud New Yorker – a proud Nuyorican – it is a special honor to be asked to speak at an institution woven so thoroughly and wonderfully into the fabric of the greatest city on earth./p pAs graduates of the Colin Powell School for Civic and Global Leadership, you have chosen to hone your leadership skills in a world where it is easier to retreat than to lead. At a time when it’s easier to give up and climb into a cocoon where the internet delivers your food, your clothes, and your opinions to your door. But thank God you chose a different path – as leadership has never been more important than it is now. You have decided to become a part of something bigger – to fight for the changes this nation and this world so desperately need. And I am grateful that you’ve chosen this path./p pHaving made the journey from public housing to this commencement podium, I feel joyful as I look out over a crowd of young people about to embark on your own journey. Standing here at your graduation, I can’t help but recall my own. With my Papi, Mami, my sister. All dressed in our Sunday best. Over the years, my heritage as a proud Puerto Rican was a source of great strength for me. It shaped my upbringing and continues to inform my worldview to this day. Looking out at this diverse sea of students, I suspect many of your ancestors may not have arrived on the Mayflower either. But all of you – each and every single one of you – earned your place to be here. And for many of you in the Class of 2024 – just like me and my family – you’ve had to overcome extraordinary odds to reach this moment./p pI’m sure that somewhere in this class, I am looking at the next Felix Frankfurter, a City College graduate who became one of the greatest Supreme Court Justices ever to serve on the Court. Or the next Faith Ringgold, the brilliant artist and activist for gender equity and racial justice. Or the next Herb Sandler, a titan of industry who would ultimately give away a significant portion of his wealth to organizations and causes championing free speech, civil rights and social justice. Or, of course, the next Colin Powell, who broke racial barriers throughout his career and served his country for decades in military and civilian life./p pYou have accomplished a great deal and you should be proud – real proud. But let’s also remember to give credit to folks who helped you along the way. Your friends, of course. Your professors and administrators at City College. And the people who sacrificed to provide for you. The people who worked overtime to pay for tuition. The people who kept immaculate homes you came back to. The people who cooked you your meals. Who put a roof over your head. The people who had dreams for you. The people who pushed you. Believed in you. Hugged you. Picked you up when you fell down. The people who taught you how to walk. Say your first words. The people who taught you how to read. The people who showed you the meaning of the word LOVE. Of course, I am talking about your families. Your loved ones./p pAnd graduates, you can feel real proud that you’re in that cap and gown …. that you’re about to walk across this stage – styling your way as you get your diploma. But you know that that diploma is as much theirs as it is yours. So why don’t you, the graduates, get on your feet and join me in giving the moms and dads, tías and tíos, grandmeres, dadis, bubbies, nanas, abuelas and countless others, a round of applause for everything they have done to make this day happen. Thank you./p pSince we are talking about people who supported us along the way, I’d like to say a few words about someone who chose to be part of my journey – my late friend and former mentor Herb Sandler, City College Class of 1951. Founder and CEO of Golden West Financial. Herb used what he learned here to make enough money in banking that he could have built himself a castle and forgotten the problems faced by regular folks. But instead, he used what he learned at City College – and what he learned growing up poor on the Lower East side – to reach out and lift up others, as well./p pHerb used his wealth to advance freedom and justice for everyone in America. Over the years, he gave me advice, support when I was struggling, and love when I needed it./p pHerb was a true believer when it came to freedom of speech. He valued hearing divergent viewpoints – even when those viewpoints were critical of his industry, his bank or himself, personally. The press was sometimes unkind and even unfair to him, but Herb walked the walk when it came to free speech and a free press. He always believed that the answer to criticism, even if unfair or unfounded, was more speech – not less. He believed in open debate. Not censorship./p pAnd he understood the centrality of real journalism to our democracy. With his philanthropy, he helped create Pro Publica, one of the most important institutions doing tough, nonpartisan reporting./p pAt the ACLU, we believe deeply that freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and academic freedom are all interconnected – that they’re all critically important to a functioning democracy. The ability to collect and impart information. The ability to discuss, debate and even hotly contest ideas. This is especially true for challenging ideas. Controversial ideas. Even repugnant ideas. We have zealously fought for the rights of people and groups of varied ideologies and beliefs to speak their minds. From gun owners and gun opponents; anti-LGBTQ organizations and pro- LGBTQ groups, Trump supporters and anti-Trump activists./p pThat’s why the ACLU fights so passionately to protect freedom of speech on college campuses right now when it is under attack./p pAs a domestic organization, the ACLU takes no position on wars between foreign countries. Yet we champion the right of students to express themselves. Whichever side they are on, whatever it is they believe./p pUniversities have a responsibility to ensure they maintain an environment in which all students can thrive and learn, but it’s not their job to protect students from hearing or engaging with upsetting or even hurtful ideas. In fact, it’s the universities’ job to prepare the leaders of tomorrow by exposing them to challenging worldviews, competing analyses. The leaders of tomorrow – you the Class of 2024 – need to be comfortable with the contestation of facts and the clash of ideologies./p pSometimes this is a hard line to walk. As passionately as students care, free speech is not a license for violence, property destruction, or physical intimidation or harassment of other students./p pAnd as worried as administrators are, they must respect their students’ free speech rights and honor the long and important tradition of student campus activism./p pThat means that universities must not single out particular viewpoints for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment. Whether students carry Palestinian, Israeli, or American flags, whether they are progressives, moderates, or conservatives, everyone must be accorded the same rights and accept the same responsibilities./p pUniversities have also an obligation to protect students from discriminatory harassment and violence. This year, too many universities have failed to meet this obligation to their Jewish, Muslim, Arab, Israeli, and Palestinian students./p pAt the same time, universities must not penalize students for expressing their views, even if they do so in deeply offensive terms./p pThey can announce and enforce reasonable content-neutral time, place, or manner policies on protesting activity, but they must leave ample room for students to express themselves./p pUniversities must also recognize that armed police on campus can endanger students – students of color in particular – and should be a measure of last resort./p pAnd, finally, administrators must recognize that many of the pressures that are being placed on them are coming from politicians seeking to exploit campus tensions. Recognizing the source of these pressures is the first step, resisting them is the second./p pClass of 2024, you are graduating at a challenging moment. No one would blame you if you wanted to reconsider your career in leadership and public service right now./p pBut I’m guessing that’s not going to happen. You are New York City tough. You are City College trained. You follow in the footsteps of Frankfurter, Reinggold, Sandler and Powell. You are meant for more. Much has been given to you and even greater things are expected from you./p pReach out and make a difference in peoples’ lives like your parents and professors did. Get off the beaten path, discover new communities. Respect and engage with people whose passions and opinions differ from your own. Speak your mind with courage and clarity, but also stand up for the right of your opponents to do the same. Become part of institutions that will magnify your voice and drive change./p pLeadership isn’t ordained from above. It doesn’t come from yelling the loudest and it certainly isn’t possible from a self-imposed isolation chamber. It comes from your heart. From your mind. From the sweat of your brow. It comes from your communities; from the institutions you will populate and lead – and from the people whose lives you will touch./p pCongratulations, graduates. And thank you in advance for what I know you are going to achieve. The world desperately needs the 2024 graduates of the Colin Powell School for Civic and Global Leadership. It will be thrilling to watch you rock it. And now, give yourselves the round of applause you so deeply deserve./p

Diablo 4’s unique items dramatically change how a class is played. If you’re a Rogue player like me and are tired of Twisted Blades, Here’s how to get the Scoundrel’s Kiss Unique and the best build for it. What is the Scoundrel’s Kiss in Diablo 4? The Scoundrel’s Kiss is a Rogue-exclusive Unique Ring that augments the Rapid Fire ability. Instead of the usual flurry of arrows, Rapid Fire lobs exploding arrows, which deal increased damage.  How to get the Scoundrel’s Kiss Unique Ring in Diablo 4 Like most Uniques, you can only find the Scoundrel’s Kiss while playing on World Tier 3 or 4. You can technically obtain the Scoundrel’s Kiss from any loot source, but World Events usually yield the best “bang for your buck” rewards. That said, Helltides are phenomenal for loot in Season 4. World Bosses and the Legion Event are great for high-tier loot, and you’ll usually find a large group of p...

"...the games I can play now are leaps and bounds better than previous ones".

The first human Neuralink implant recipient is playing Slay the Spire, Old School RuneScape, and a range of other popular games by using the implant to translate his neural signals.

Elon Musk’s neurotechnology company also revealed in a new update that a number of the implant’s electrode-bearing threads had retracted from …

The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has issued a severe geomagnetic storm watch alert following the eruption of at least seven coronal mass ejections earlier this week. Material ejected during the intense bout of solar activity is expected to reach Earth on Friday, May 10, potentially triggering colorful aurora that could be visible accross swathes of North America over the course of the weekend.

Coronal Mass Ejections (CME) are colossal stellar explosions brought about by shifts in the Sun’s magnetic field, which launch vast clouds of charged particles accounting for billions of tons of coronal material to the farthest reaches of our Solar System. These stellar temper tantrums often occur alongside the appearance of smaller, short lived stellar explosions known as solar flares.

Whilst they may sound apocalyptic, CMEs are actually a regular occurrence on our Sun, and tend to take place with a higher frequency when our star is at the height of its 11-year activity cycle - which we’re coming up to now, by the way. The reason that we rarely experience the effect of these colossal outbursts is simply because powerful CMEs usually occur on a part of the Sun’s surface that is facing away from our planet.

The Space Weather Prediction Center (@NWSSWPC) has issued the first G4 (Severe) geomagnetic watch since 2005. The aurora tonight/tomorrow morning may become visible over much of the northern half of the country, and maybe as far south as Alabama to northern California.
Story:… pic.twitter.com/bqgd9qqnNI

— National Weather Service (@NWS) May 10, 2024

However, starting on May 7 and continuing through to May 9, Sun-facing telescopes captured a series of at least seven powerful CMEs and accompanying solar flares exploded into life on a region of our star marked by a cluster of enormous sunspots. According to NOAA, the onslaught of stellar material cast out by the solar upheaval is even now on an intercept course with Earth, and will reach our planet in a matter of hours.

Whilst the impending solar storm poses no threat to human life, the observations have been sufficient to prompt NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center to issue an extremely rare ‘Severe (G4) Geomagnetic Storm Watch’ for Friday May 10 - the first alert of its kind in almost 20 years.

According to NOAA, the material from the CMEs should merge and begin to interact with Earth’s atmosphere on Friday evening (UTC). Over the course of the weekend, the storm of high energy charged particles could interact with our planet’s magnetosphere to create auroras that will be visible across swathes of North America, and could even be seen as far south as Alabama, and northern California.

There is also the potential that interference brought on by the solar storm could disrupt orbital satellites and Earthbound communications, with the most powerful events being capable of affecting power grids, and GPS navigation systems. The operators of these critical infrastructure elements have already been notified of the potential risks, allowing them to put safeguards in place where possible.

Keep an eye on the NOAA's Space Weather Predictions website, and NASA socials for updates on the solar storm over the course of the weekend.

Image credit: NOAA

Anthony is a freelance contributor covering science and video gaming news for IGN. He has over eight years experience of covering breaking developments in multiple scientific fields and absolutely no time for your shenanigans. Follow him on Twitter @BeardConGamer

pDear College and University Presidents:/p pWe write in response to the recent protests that have spread across our nation’s university and college campuses, and the disturbing arrests that have followed. We understand that as leaders of your campus communities, it can be extraordinarily difficult to navigate the pressures you face from politicians, donors, and faculty and students alike. You also have legal obligations to combat discrimination and a responsibility to maintain order. But as you fashion responses to the activism of your students (and faculty and staff), it is essential that you not sacrifice principles of academic freedom and free speech that are core to the educational mission of your respected institution./p pThe ACLU a href=https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/the-streets-belong-to-the-people-always-have-always-willhelped/a establish the right to protest as a central pillar of the First Amendment. We have defended those principles for more than a century. The a href=https://www.aclu.org/documents/united-states-bill-rights-first-10-amendments-constitutionFirst Amendment/a compels public universities and colleges to respect free speech rights. And while the Constitution does not apply directly to private institutions, academic freedom and free inquiry require that similar principles guide private universities. We approach this moment with appreciation for the challenges you confront. In the spirit of offering constructive solutions for a way forward, we offer five basic guardrails to ensure freedom of speech and academic freedom while protecting against discriminatory harassment and disruptive conduct./p div class=wp-heading mb-8 h2 id= class=wp-heading-h2 with-standardSchools must not single out particular viewpoints for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment/h2 /div piFirst/i, university administrators must not single out particular viewpoints — however offensive they may be to some members of the community — for censorship, discipline, or disproportionate punishment. Viewpoint neutrality is essential. Harassment directed at individuals because of their race, ethnicity, or religion is not, of course, permissible. But general calls for a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea,” or defenses of Israel’s assault on Gaza, even if many listeners find these messages deeply offensive, cannot be prohibited or punished by a university that respects free speech principles./p pThese protections extend to both students and faculty, and to speech that supports either side of the conflict. Outside the classroom, including on social media, students and professors must be free to express even the most controversial political opinions without fear of discipline or censure. Inside the classroom, speech can be and always has been subject to more restrictive rules to ensure civil dialogue and a robust learning environment. But such rules have no place in a public forum like a campus green. Preserving physical safety on campuses is paramount; but “safety” from ideas or views that one finds offensive is anathema to the very enterprise of the university./p div class=wp-heading mb-8 h2 id= class=wp-heading-h2 with-standardSchools must protect students from discriminatory harassment and violence/h2 /div piSecond/i, both public and private universities are bound by civil rights laws that guarantee all students equal access to education, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. This means that schools can, and indeed must, protect students from discriminatory harassment on the basis of race or national origin, which has been a href=https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/sharedancestry.htmlinterpreted/a to include discrimination on the basis of “shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics,” or “citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.”/p pSo, while offensive and even racist speech is constitutionally protected, shouting an epithet at a particular student or pinning an offensive sign to their dorm room door can constitute impermissible harassment, not free speech. Antisemitic or anti-Palestinian speech targeted at individuals because of their ethnicity or national origin constitutes invidious discrimination, and cannot be tolerated. Physically intimidating students by blocking their movements or pursuing them aggressively is unprotected iconduct/i, not protected ispeech/i. It should go without saying that violence is never an acceptable protest tactic./p pSpeech that is inot/i targeted at an individual or individuals because of their ethnicity or national origin but merely expresses impassioned views about Israel or Palestine is not discrimination and should be protected. The only exception for such untargeted speech is where it is so severe or pervasive that it denies students equal access to an education — an extremely demanding standard that has almost never been met by pure speech. One can criticize Israel’s actions, even in vituperative terms, without being antisemitic. And by the same token, one can support Israel’s actions in Gaza and condemn Hamas without being anti-Muslim. Administrators must resist the tendency to equate criticism with discrimination. Speech condoning violence can be condemned, to be sure. But it cannot be the basis for punishment, without more./p div class=wp-heading mb-8 h2 id= class=wp-heading-h2 with-standardSchools can announce and enforce reasonable content-neutral protest policies but they must leave ample room for students to express themselves/h2 /div piThird/i, universities can announce and enforce reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on protest activity to ensure that essential college functions can continue. Such restrictions must be content neutral, meaning that they do not depend on the substance of what is being communicated, but rather where, when, or how it is being communicated. Protests can be limited to certain areas of campus and certain times of the day, for example. These policies must, however, leave ample room for students to speak to and to be heard by other members of the community. And the rules must not only be content neutral on their face; they must also be applied in a content-neutral manner. If a university has routinely tolerated violations of its rules, and suddenly enforces them harshly in a specific context, singling out particular views for punishment, the fact that the policy is formally neutral on its face does not make viewpoint-based enforcement permissible./p div class=wp-heading mb-8 h2 id= class=wp-heading-h2 with-standardSchools must recognize that armed police on campus can endanger students and are a measure of last resort/h2 /div piFourth/i, when enforcement of content-neutral rules may be warranted, college administrators should involve police only as a last resort, after all other efforts have been exhausted. Inviting armed police into a campus protest environment, even a volatile one, can create unacceptable risks for all students and staff. University officials must also be cognizant of the history of law enforcement using inappropriate and excessive force on communities of color, including Black, Brown, and immigrant students. Moreover, arresting peaceful protestors is also likely to escalate, not calm, the tensions on campus — as events of the past week have made abundantly clear./p div class=wp-heading mb-8 h2 id= class=wp-heading-h2 with-standardSchools must resist the pressures placed on them by politicians seeking to exploit campus tensions/h2 /div piFinally/i, campus leaders must resist the pressures placed on them by politicians seeking to exploit campus tensions to advance their own notoriety or partisan agendas. Recent congressional hearings have featured disgraceful attacks by members of Congress on academic freedom and freedom of speech. Universities must stand up to such intimidation, and defend the principles of academic freedom so essential to their integrity and mission./p pThe Supreme Court has forcefully a href=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/408/169/rejected/a the premise that, “because of the acknowledged need for order, First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large.”/p p“Quite to the contrary,” the court stated, “the vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools.” In keeping with these values, we urge you to resist the temptation to silence students or faculty members because powerful voices deem their views offensive. Instead, we urge you to defend the university’s core mission of encouraging debate, fostering dissent, and preparing the future leaders of our pluralistic society to tolerate even profound differences of opinion./p

Finish the fight?

Arrowhead’s PvE squad-based shooter Helldivers 2 is one of the major success stories of 2024, with millions of PlayStation 5 and PC gamers opting to don the cape of humanity's finest to defend managed democracy and hold back the tide of bugs and robots seeking to sweep Super Earth …

"Video games are an integral part of Hasbro's strategy going into the next 100 years".

Hasbro has already invested over $1 billion in its internal studios as part of an ambitious long-term strategy, according to Wizards of the Coast head of game studios and publishing Dan Ayoub.

"Video games are an integral part of Hasbro's strategy going into the next 100 years and we have to …

How Axiom combines sewing and 3D printing to create the new Artemis spacesuits

The post Artemis Mission: Making NASA’s New Moon Suits appeared first on Make: DIY Projects and Ideas for Makers.

Warbonds in Helldivers 2 are like catalogs full of new toys to defeat the Terminid and Automaton scum. At the time of writing, there are already three Premium Warbonds. If you’re ready to spend your hard-earned currency, let me answer the question: What is the best Warbond in Helldivers 2? What are Warbonds in Helldivers 2 Let me quickly explain what Warbonds are for new or returning players. Warbonds are packs of items, cosmetics, and weapons. Everything in the Warbond costs Medals, which are earned by completing missions and orders. You can access the Warbonds list from the Acquisitions menu. The default Warbond is called Helldivers Mobilize and is open to all players. At the time of writing, the other available Warbonds are: Steeled Veterans Cutting Edge Democratic Detonation The big difference is that the listed Warbonds are Premium and cost 1000 Super Credits to open. You can find Super Credits through regular gameplay or purchase them as a mic...

How Axiom combines sewing and 3D printing to create the new Artemis spacesuits

The post Artemis Mission: Making NASA’s New Moon Suits appeared first on Make: DIY Projects and Ideas for Makers.

For more than 100 years the American Civil Liberties Union has defended the right to free speech – no matter the speaker, and regardless of whether we agree with their views.

The defense and protection of free speech and expression span many forms and issues at the ACLU. In the last year alone, it has included efforts to actively oppose book bans; represent educators fighting classroom censorship aimed at suppressing important race perspectives; defend protesters responding to police shootings or overseas wars; protect the ability of Indigenous students to wear tribal regalia at their graduation ceremonies; and fight against retaliatory arrests for protected speech.

While the faces of the free speech movement continue to change, the significance of defending free speech remains unchanged. This work lies at the heart of the ACLU’s core principles and values.

On March 18, the ACLU appeared before the U.S. Supreme Court to argue another free speech case of great significance. In this case, the ACLU represented the National Rifle Association (NRA) against government overreach and censorship. Some may have wondered why the ACLU was representing the NRA, since the ACLU clearly opposes the NRA on gun control and the role of firearms in society. In fact, we abhor many of the group’s goals, strategies, and tactics. So, the reality that we have joined forces, notwithstanding those disagreements, reflects the importance of the First Amendment principles at stake in this case.

The ACLU made the decision to represent the NRA in this case because we are deeply concerned that if regulators can threaten the NRA for their political views in New York state, they can come after the ACLU and allied organizations in places where our agendas are unpopular.

If reelected, President Trump has already promised to use the power of the government to go after his political adversaries. In a second Trump administration, opposition from the ACLU and its allied organizations will be top of mind for political leaders who may seek to go after their rivals the way New York targeted the NRA. The principal issue at stake in this case is one in which the ACLU deeply believes: preventing government blacklists of advocacy groups. Indeed, the timing couldn’t be better for drawing a bright line that would help bind a future Trump administration and other government officials who misuse their power.

In this case, the ACLU argues that Maria Vullo, New York’s former chief financial regulator, threatened to use her regulatory power over banks and insurance companies to coerce them into denying basic financial services to the NRA and, in Vullo’s own words, “other gun promotion” groups. The ACLU argues that coercing private parties to blacklist the NRA because of its advocacy violates the First Amendment, just as punishing the group directly for its “gun promotion” views would. And if New York can do this to the NRA, Texas or Florida could use the same tactics against groups advocating immigrants’ rights or the right to abortion.

The NRA has a right, like all other advocacy organizations, to pursue their mission free from reprisals by government officials who disagree with its political viewpoint. The government should not be able to evade the Constitution by doing indirectly what it plainly cannot do directly. History has, consistently, underscored the importance of this protection.

Nevertheless, we’ve faced criticism of our representation of the NRA on the theory that even if the NRA wins in this Supreme Court case, officials will still try to stifle the speech of people on the left, and courts will side with them. These critics are correct in one sense — those in power have an unfortunate tendency to try to stifle the speech of those with whom they disagree, and we will certainly continue to bring new cases to stop them. But the critics are wrong about the impact of the precedents we win, especially at the Supreme Court. People of every ideological stripe benefit with every decision vindicating the right to freedom of speech.

When we defend clients with positions with which we disagree, or even abhor, it’s because we are defending values crucial to the work of civil rights advocates in the past and present. These values include doctrines that protect our rights — at the local, state, and federal level — to join economic boycotts, hold protests, and publicly dissent. In fact, a significant amount of the ACLU’s modern day First Amendment advocacy work is predicated on principles stemming from landmark civil rights legal victories of the 1960s and 70s.

Take one of our most controversial cases, which is also one of the most important cases in the entire First Amendment canon — our defense of the Ku Klux Klan. In 1969, Klan member Clarence Brandenburg addressed a rally held in Ohio where he called for “revenge” against the government and Black individuals. He was convicted of violating the state’s Criminal Syndicalism law, which prohibited speech that “advocate[d] … the duty, necessity, or propriety of crime, sabotage, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political reform.”

The ACLU represented Brandenburg at the Supreme Court, which reversed his conviction. The court ruled that Brandenburg’s speech was protected by the First Amendment, and that the government can make it a crime to advocate illegal conduct only “where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

Brandenburg’s speech was reprehensible. But in preserving his First Amendment rights, the ACLU helped establish critical protection for all dissidents’ and activists’ speech. Before Brandenburg, governments had regularly charged their critics with advocating illegal activity. The Brandenburg precedent has been used to defend all kinds of political speech; indeed, today the ACLU is applying the decision in a Supreme Court case defending civil rights activist DeRay Mckesson, who took part in a Black Lives Matter protest in Louisiana.

Simply put, the right to speak freely applies to everyone. Otherwise, any elected official would be able to decide whose speech is acceptable, “safe,” or politically palatable. That is why we defend speech we hate. It’s why in 1978 the ACLU represented a neo-Nazi group that sought to demonstrate in Skokie, a Chicago suburb with a substantial Jewish population, including many survivors of the Holocaust. Notwithstanding the odious views of the protesters, we believed that once government officials are empowered to block demonstrations because they disagree with their message, the right to protest would be illusory. The Supreme Court agreed, and that decision ensures that city, state, and federal officials cannot suppress protests because they disapprove of their message.

The power to censor the neo-Nazis would have opened the door to censoring any protester, including civil rights activists or anti-war protesters. The ACLU’s position in this case was famously controversial and Aryeh Neier, the ACLU’s executive director in the 70s and a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, withstood withering criticism. But it was the right thing to do.

The ACLU knew in the past, as we recognize now, that if the First Amendment protected only popular ideas, it would serve little purpose. If we do not take a principled stand on behalf of those with whom we disagree, we weaken our case the next time we defend those fighting for the values we share. At our core, the ACLU believes that rights and liberties are universal and “indivisible” – meaning they attach to all people, not just our friends.

Our mandate to advance all rights and liberties for all people was forged more than 100 years ago when we combatted political repression against dissidents, immigrants, workers, and other so-called radicals. Over the years the ACLU has defended the free speech rights of countless individuals and groups with which we disagree. We defended their speech rights — despite our disagreements — because we believe in free speech, and because we realize that once you chip away at one person’s rights, everyone’s rights are at risk.

Defending speech we hate is admittedly a controversial part of our mandate. Some of our allies and supporters don’t always agree with this stance. In fact, there are even some ACLU staff, leaders, and volunteers who believe that defending speech we hate does more harm than good. Some believe we shouldn’t use our limited resources defending individuals and causes with whom we disagree. Reasonable people can — and always will — disagree on the ACLU’s stance, including our own staff. Yet this is what we have done for over a century and, as the ACLU’s executive director, I respectfully believe it’s the right thing to do — for free speech and for the ACLU.

Ours is an organization that increasingly reflects all of America. We celebrate our growing diversity, just as we embrace the dissent and debate that attend it. Our commitment to free speech extends to dissent within our ranks. Dissent and debate are healthy for society — and for a civil liberties organization. This principle has long been the lifeblood of the ACLU. And it is that commitment that underlies our defense of the NRA’s free speech rights at the Supreme Court.

ConcernedApe isn't saying, but Stardew Valley fans have some good guesses.

Stardew Valley’s 1.6.4 update is now live on PC, bringing with it an impressively long list of bug fixes, quality-of-life improvements, and fresh content, along with the mysterious removal of two ‘inappropriate names’ from the game’s random name generator.

Among the new 1.6.4 additions are over 20 …

“In a sense, this result is theirs too and they should feel proud about it".

In April 2020, Borderlands 3 developer Gearbox Software teamed up with a group of biomedical researchers - and Big Bang Theory actress/scientist Mayim Bialik - to create a novel minigame for the popular looter shooter with a unique scientific twist.

The goal of the Borderlands Science project …

Weapon Bunkers offer players a great place to spend Gold Bars in exchange for powerful upgrades. These areas function similarly to Vaults from C5S1 but with several key differences. Here’s how to find Weapons Bunkers and use Mod Benches in Fortnite Chapter 5 Season 2. How to find Weapon Bunkers in Fortnite Chapter 5 Season 2 Screenshot: PC Invasion Weapons Bunkers can be found in five locations on the map, and I’ve marked the areas in the picture above. These Bunkers will appear in the same place every match but aren’t always open. If you find a Bunker Door wrapped in chains, it won’t open for the entire game.  The remaining doors will open mid-way into the match. Bunkers are heavily contested at the time of writing, although I expect them to quiet down as the season progresses. Weapon Bunkers are great loot spots containing rare Weapons, Gold Bars, and a Mod Bench. Screenshot: PC Invasion How to use Mod Benches in Fortnite Chapter 5 Seas...

Gold Bars are a unique currency in Fortnite as they persist for the entire season. If you want to stockpile some riches quickly, here’s the fastest way to get bars in Fortnite — Week 0 Strategy. What are Gold Bars in Fortnite? Gold Bars are found all over the map in Fortnite and have many different applications. You can spend your hard-earned Bars at Vending Machines or Mod Benches. You can even hire specific NPCs or take bounties from a Bounty Board. As previously mentioned, Bars are unique as they persist across the season. You don’t lose Bars when you die, and you can hold a maximum of 5000 at a time. While there’s no right way to spend Bars, I’m usually a little stingy until I have at least 2000 to play with.  How to get Gold Bars fast in Fortnite  You’ll often grab a small number of Bars in Treasure Chests, and you can quickly amass a decent amount by looting busy areas. I find the Visual Sound...

Many polls suggest if the presidential election were held today, Donald Trump could return to the White House. Fears of irreparable threats to our democracy and freedoms are neither abstract nor hyperbolic.

We must believe Trump when he reveals his authoritarian plans for a second term and take these threats seriously. He has made clear he intends to deploy the military to crush protests; activate state national guards to deport millions of immigrants; build on his legacy of gutting reproductive freedoms by implementing a nationwide abortion ban; create a police state in which anyone who he views as an “enemy” is surveilled and our law enforcement are further empowered to use lethal force; and undermine the integrity of our elections.

Terrifying as these threats are, despair and resignation are not a strategy. We and our allies are prepared to fight back, informed by our experiences in his first term.

Molly Kaplan/ACLU

The ACLU filed 434 legal actions against the Trump administration, and hundreds of other lawsuits were filed by sister organizations, state attorneys general and even private citizens.

We turned to the courts during Trump’s first week in office when we, with the International Refugee Assistance Project and other partners, filed the first lawsuit challenging Trump’s Muslim ban. We got our first win the day after Trump’s executive order was signed. As the administration pivoted to “perfect” its unconstitutional ban, we fought every subsequent version. Along with our allies, we defeated the first two iterations of the ban, and ramped up pressure for President Biden to revoke the third and final ban on day one of his presidency.

We employed a similar strategy when the administration started forcibly separating families at the southern border. Initially, we only wanted to reunite one mother and her daughter, but subsequently learned that the government had codified this horrific practice into standard policy. We quickly expanded our suit and did everything possible to have the full extent of this tragedy revealed to the public. We, Kids in Need of Defense, the Women’s Refugee Commission and Justice in Motion mobilized thousands of people to march in opposition. Under significant, sustained public and legal pressure, the administration finally reversed their family separation policy, with our lawsuit helping reunite approximately 3,200 families.

Litigation remains a powerful tool even in the face of Trump’s 245 judicial appointments. Much to his chagrin, many of his appointees proved willing to buck his agenda as Trump-appointed judges stood up nearly en masse for the rule of law and civil liberties in response to attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. Trump appointees also ruled against the administration’s anti-immigrant policies around Title 42 and the third-country transit ban.

AJ Mast/ACLU

Should Trump return to the White House, advocacy organizations will need to come together like never before. No single organization will be able to stop the power of the federal government at Trump’s disposal. If he unleashes a deportation force to remove 13 million immigrants or deploys the National Guard to crack down on demonstrations, we and our partners will be in court daily challenging these unconstitutional and immoral policies. But that’s not enough.

Even more so than the first, the second resistance will be one of the people, not just lawyers. We will activate our 6.5 million supporters and our 54 affiliates in every state and territory. In partnership with grassroots organizations, labor unions, religious congregations and community leaders, we will exercise our First Amendment rights to mobilize the people in the streets, lobby in their statehouses, and advocate for local leaders to resist. General strikes, economic boycotts, and worker walk-outs will be critical tools to demonstrate that Americans will not sit idly by while a constitutional crisis is perpetrated.

Bonnie Cash/UPI/Shutterstock

In a second Trump administration, the public must force Congress to serve as a co-equal branch of government, not the lap-dog of the executive branch. We have to hold Congress accountable to do its job—keeping the pressure on through calls, lobbying, and grassroots visits, reminding them they work for us.

But fixing a broken Congress can’t just come from the Democratic Party. With the future of our democracy at stake, we need a bipartisan commitment to govern. We’ve seen glimmers of it. If a group of bipartisan Senators found common ground to reform the antiquated Electoral Count Act—which would now prevent Donald Trump, or any president, from pressuring their vice president to refuse certifying election results—surely they can agree to update the two-centuries old Insurrection Act and ensure its not abused by President Trump to shut down legitimate forms of dissent and debate.

As we ramp up the pressure on our representatives, the ballot box is where the people will get the final say. The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade—all thanks to a new Trump majority on the bench—illustrated the extent to which states are our last line of defense to bring forth the will of the people on issues such as abortion. And wherever reproductive freedom has been on the ballot since, we’ve won. Since Dobbs, we spent more than $23 million in key elections to protect abortion rights. This year, that playing field has significantly expanded: there are abortion ballot measures under consideration in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Maryland, New York, Montana, Nebraska, and Nevada.

Admittedly, ballot initiatives won’t be enough if Trump enacts a nationwide ban that restricts abortion services everywhere. But direct democracy efforts, through state constitutional amendments and local elections, will send strong signals that a power grab by the federal government will not be tolerated, and help make a case on states’ rights and federalism that might convince even conservative judges to limit these power grabs.

Trump and his allies have spent the last four years plotting his return and revenge. They will be more organized, deliberate, and aggressive. But if Trump does return to the Oval Office, the first “resistance” will look tame by comparison. Trump’s anti-liberty and fundamentally anti-American policies will assuredly be met with the full firepower of the ACLU, the might of our allies, and the commitment of the American people.

Donate today

Summon Crystals are valuable in FF7 Rebirth as they make Summons stronger while making them easier to obtain. If you’ve arrived in the Junon Region, let me show you all the Phoenix Summon Crystal Locations in Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth (FF7). How to find every Phoenix Summon Crystal in FF7 Rebirth Screenshot: PC Invasion There are three Phoenix Summon Crystals to find, and I’ve labeled their locations on the map above. When you reach the region, you can gather two of them, but the final one is a little harder to obtain. Before you go hunting for Summon Crystals, you’ll need a Chocobo, so make sure you hit the ranch before exploring. Let me explain how to get each Summon Crystal. Phoenix Summon Crystal #1 Screenshot: PC Invasion You’ll likely stumble upon this Summon Crystal by accident, as there’s a side quest nearby. The area looks complex, but it’s pretty straightforward, and you’ll need a Chocobo to scale the walls.  W...