It’s summer and the mosquitos are biting you everywhere. I know that you are hating it. You wouldn’t have clicked on this link if you were enjoying the pain. It’s time we did something about it. Here are the top ways to bite a mosquito back! It’s time for humanity to ...

The post How To Bite a Mosquito Back appeared first on Marks Angry Review.

Every writer has their own creation process. These processes are rarely to never set in stone. People change, and their habits and routines can change as well. Now for a few weeks now, I have been thinking… What is my process? How do I decide on which game to write, and how do my actual thoughts get into an article? So, I think it would be fun to explore some of those things in this article. While I have written a similar article back in 2018, I also think it would be fun to just start this article as if I have never written that article. So, here we go, from choosing the game to clicking on the button “publish”… How do I do it?

Choosing the subject

When I look at the taglines I have chosen for my blog in the past, most of them have one thing in common. They represent in a way what this blog actually is. This blog is a public diary of a Belgian game collector who shares his opinions on the games he plays. Sometimes I play with the idea to create series, where I look at each game from a series or look at several games I have played in the past.

While that could be fun, I don’t like forcing myself to play a certain game because I have to write an article about it. That’s because I might not enjoy the game since I need to rush my play through, so I can have an article out. On top of that, it might reflect in my article as well. I like to take my time when writing about a certain game. Writing about a game right away without giving it time to let things settle is such a risky idea. Since, you never know if you are overreacting on something or not.

Now, when I’m playing games, I have a rule. I never go into playing a game thinking how to turn it into an article. The only exception I make to that rule is when a developer requests me to write an article about their game. While playing the game, I let myself enjoy the game. Now, there comes a moment while playing the game, where I think… “Should I write an article about this game or not?”.

In the past, I used to have a long list of games where I answered yes to that question. When my writing day arrived, I opened the list and picked a game from that list and started the process of writing an article. But, I felt that, that system didn’t work for me anymore. I can’t tell you exactly when I stopped using that system, but I wanted to write more in-depth articles, so I wanted to more research on the game I was writing about and that was taking a lot more time compared to just having a list of games I want to write about.

So, the decision of choosing the game for the next article is a bit more complicated. Sometimes I have a game in mind that I want to write about, and sometimes I don’t. When I have a game in mind, it’s easy to move on to the next process. When I don’t, I look at the games I have played in the past months/weeks and decide from there.

Now, what do I take in consideration when deciding if a game can become a good article? The first question I ask myself is this, what can I say about this game? There are several games I play that don’t have enough things going on for me to write about. Even when they are fascinating like Yeti Quest, it’s your typical match three game like Bejeweled. But in this game, you can choose between three different play styles on the fly in this genre, and that makes it more interesting. But, besides that, there is not too much else going on. Maybe I might turn them in a short game quicky. But I find writing and creating shorter articles about a game less rewarding than writing a longer article about them.

The second question I ask myself is the same question as the first but in a different direction. The first question is actually more, how much is there to talk about, and the second question is what is there to talk about. Something I dislike writing is very negative articles. I don’t want to write an article where I just rip into the game and only talk about the weak points of a game. I also don’t enjoy reading those articles myself, and I personally rather write and read a balanced article over an overly positive or negative article any day of the week.

Now, when a developer requests an article from me and I notice that I’m going to write mostly a negative article… I actually scrap the article. From talking to various developers, I learned how much time and effort goes into creating games, and it takes a lot of courage reaching out to the press to show off your game. People sometimes base their decision on this kind of articles, and I don’t want to turn people away if the game doesn’t click with me or if I’m not the correct person to review the game. But, I do give a list of feedback back to the developer. This feedback exists out of bugs/issues I found or suggestions for improvement. That’s the least I can do for declining the article.

While I answer both of these questions, I start coming up with the theme of the actual article. What will be the core of my message? On what do I want to focus the article? The music, the game mechanics, the visuals, the writing style? It’s mostly now that I come up with the subtitle of the article. A great recent example is how I came up with the core of the Another Code – Recollection article. While playing that game and streaming it with Klamath, I remembered that I wrote an article about that game in the past. One of the game’s core story mechanics is how memory works and how people grow with them. At that moment, I decided to make that the main focus of my article. To show how I have grown as a writer, while using the memories of the past game and articles to take a new look at the game.

The actual review process

Now that I decided on which game I want to review or write about, it’s time to talk about the actual process of preparing the article.

The first thing I start to look at is the story of this game. The reason why I start with the story is simple, it’s one of the best ways to start your article, in my honest opinion. With that, you can set the scene for your readers and explain the mechanics, visuals amongst other things more easily as well. I have tried several times to write about the mechanics or something else first, but I felt that these articles didn’t flow well enough, and I rewrote the whole article. By now, it has become a habit of mine that I don’t know how to change and even if I should change it.

Then, depending on the message I have chosen of my article, I chose something else next. In most cases, that is the pacing or the gameplay, but it can also be the world building or the visuals. Besides having a core message, I also want the article to flow well. My main goal in writing these articles is not only to inform and entertain those who are reading my articles, but also as a way to easily share my opinion on the games I’m playing.

When you read my articles, you’ll notice that I don’t focus on the same things that most big reviewing outlets do. For example, I don’t focus on how realistic the visuals are or if the game is using the latest technology or running at the highest frame rate. Personally, I don’t really care about those things too much. I rather focus on the actual game over those things.

Now, when I’m looking at the visuals for example for my article… I look more at how consistent everything is. How well does everything fit together and fit together with the story and themes of the game. Are there models and moments that look rough or unpolished? Are there animations that look out of place and unnatural? Now, since I sometimes review a retro game, I take in consideration the technology of the time and the size of the studio that developed the game.

I mostly put my focus when writing about a game on the whole package. For example, if you introduce a certain mechanic in a game… how often is it used and what does it bring to the gameplay. There is nothing that annoys me more than having a mechanic in a game that is underused when it’s shown off with a lot of potential. I’m looking at you, for example, Death Mark II. There were some mechanics like the shop or the hidden teeth that were just underused. If a mechanic is going to be underused, don’t put so much focus on it.

Something I also find very important is consistency. While it can be interesting to break consistency in a game to surprise the player to keep them on their toes, there is no excuse to have an inconsistent game. I’m talking for example about huge difficulty spikes or the UI having different ways of working in the game. Let me give you a specific example, in Suikoden Tierkreis, the final boss of the game is so much stronger than all previous enemies, and it felt just unfair. Without any warning, you also had to know you had to grind certain characters and build them in a certain way. Maybe it might be less of a problem now that I know that, but it felt like a slap into the face after the balance of the game being very consistent.

So, do I take notes while I play through the game I’m going to write about? In the past I used to do that, but I stopped doing that. I started to have this bad habit of only writing down the negatives moments or just trying to work everything in from my notes and forcing some sections in. I do have an alternative when writing about a game now.

First, I play the game for at least an hour before I write about it. So, things are fresh in my mind. Also, I leave the game running while I’m writing my article. In case I’m hesitating on something, I can quickly jump in the game and replay to test something out.

And second, I’m abusing my visual memory. I have a very strong visual memory when it comes to games and I found out that when I play the soundtrack of the game, I start to remember quite a lot of things. I can’t write an article without playing the soundtrack of the game.

Sadly, a lot of things in a review are extremely subjective. The biggest thing here is finding a right balance for me. For example, if I didn’t enjoy certain tracks in the soundtrack of a game but I don’t see that complaint while doing some research, I mention it that way in my article. That it might be that the tracks didn’t click with me but that the overall impression of the soundtrack is positive.

The final part I usually do before I sit down and write is doing my research. This research consists out of just looking up this game in Google, reading through other articles, reading through press material, looking at the voice actors, looking at other projects of the developers… I have a whole list of things I want to answer and know about the game. Like how big was the studio that developed it? How long was the game in development? Sometimes reading up on the game helps to clear up things on why certain creative decisions where taken.

Writing the article

Now that I have chosen the game, played through (most of) it and did some research it’s time to start writing the article. The first thing I do is put in the title and it’s subtitle. And then, I create the subtitles and screenshots for the article. In case of a game review, I write in brackets the main themes of that section. For example: (gameplay, controls, music).

Then I put on the soundtrack of the game and I start writing the introduction and just continue to write. While writing, I look at the flow of the article and when I notice that a certain section would fit better in an earlier section, I move it. Now, when I remember a certain detail that fits in a later section, I add a small note in that section before returning to the point I was writing.

I don’t like writing out of order, since I find it more difficult to make sure my core message shines through or the flow/theme of my article stays consistent. So, that’s why I’m doing the article editing somewhat at the same time. When I’m finished with a paragraph, I re-read what I have written and think about the flow of the article and when it doesn’t fit, I just remove the whole paragraph and rewrite it. Now, I also read my paragraph again since my mother tounge isn’t English and sometimes I use certain expressions that don’t exist in English or just make silly typo’s.

While I use two spelling correctors to help me to avoid mistakes, I rather review it myself as well. Too many times I see that spellings correctors fail at understanding gaming terms or make the strangest corrections. While I know that my articles contain grammar issues and typo’s in the end, I try to catch as many as I can before they go live. During some breaks, I spend a couple of hours going through old contect and correcting typo’s and grammar issues. Also, when readers point them out to me, I try to fix them right away. Since, you start to read over your own mistakes way too easily.

While writing, I usually try to not take a break. I find it quite important to do everything in one go while writing. Apart from refilling my glass or taking a quick bathroom break, I try to keep writing. Usually, the whole writing process takes me around 4 hours on average.

After I have fully written my article, I copy it from the WordPress editor to Microsoft Word and let it check again for typo’s and grammar mistakes I missed. I also quickly skim through my article to make sure I haven’t left a paragraph on something stupid like an incomplete thought or sentence.

Now, if you would ask me what I enjoy the least in this whole process… I have to answer the whole SEO process. It’s one repetitive task that is just boring to do in my honest opinion. Looking for the right keywords, pasting the links everywhere and making sure you did everything to make the article appear in search engines. I’m always happy when that process is over and done with.

The opposite question is a more difficult to answer. I can’t really say what I enjoy the most in writing gaming articles. At one hand, I love the interaction with people who read my blog. The developers who found my blog by reading my articles and decide to request a review from me. It’s a rewarding feeling that people enjoy your creative hobby and are able to relax or find new games.

I also love talking about underrated or forgotten games. I just love when I get a reaction from people: “I totally forgot about this game! This game was part of my childhood.” It’s a great way to connect with people and make new friends and/or discover new games.

But, I also just love writing itself. I just love being creative and trying to entertain people and I find that writing and just using languages in creative ways is something I love doing the most. I love telling stories and being able to tell them through a game article without it overpowering the actual article is just a lot of fun to do.

Of course, playing the actual games is quite a lot of fun as well. Since I have such a broad taste in games, I play so many different games and it’s just a blast. I love discovering things about games and how they are developed and how the whole creative process works behind it. Especially since people don’t always stand still by the fact that a lot of things have to come together perfectly in order for a game, movie, album or any creative work to get created.

I just enjoy the whole process. If I have to give an average on how much time one article takes, I have to say that it takes at least 20 to 30 hours. And that’s when everything goes perfect. When I don’t have a writers block or when I don’t have other things going on in my personal life. I’m happy that I found this hobby for me and I’m surprised at how much you are all enjoying it. It still surprises me that some students of the school I work for discovered certain games through my blog and talk to me about them. I even have coworkers who come and ask me for game advice for themselves or their childern. Besides that, I get a lot of reaction through Discord and other platforms and it makes me just happy. Being able to make someones day or just help them (re)discover games and/or entertaining them… It’s one of the main goals of this blog and that’s just perfect.

Now, I think I have said everything wanted to say about this for now. Know that what I talked about in this article is my personal process and feel free to copy (parts of) my process but I highly advice you to make sure that your process works for you. Since, if it doesn’t work for you, you’ll hit a brick wall eventually and either burn out or just loose interest. Enjoy the process and stay true to yourself. That’s how I managed to write around ~ 600 articles over almost 15 years.

Thank you for reading this article and I hope you enjoyed reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it. What is your creative process or did you learn something from this article? I’m curious to know, so feel free to leave a comment in the comment section down below. I’m also curious if I’ll be able to welcome you in another article but until then, have a great rest of your day and take care.

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

"I work at a nice restaurant in Charlotte, and I need you guys to see what just came in the door," TikTok user t_bjork said in the below video.

What came in the door was a fellow and his lunch date, a blow-up doll. — Read the rest

The post Restaurant server fired over video of man dining with blow-up doll appeared first on Boing Boing.

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

“Odor of marijuana” still remains — even in an era of widespread legalization — a favorite method of justifying warrantless searches. It’s an odor, so it can’t be caught on camera, which are becoming far more prevalent, whether they’re mounted to cop cars, pinned to officers’ chests, or carried by passersby.

Any claim an odor was detected pits the officer’s word against the criminal defendant’s. Even though this is a nation where innocence is supposed to be presumed, the reality of the criminal justice system is that everyone from the cops to the court to the jury tend to view people only accused of crimes as guilty.

But this equation changed a bit as states and cities continued to legalize weed possession. Once that happened, the claim that the “odor” of marijuana had been “detected” only meant the cops had managed to detect the odor of a legal substance. The same thing for their dogs. Drug dogs are considered the piece de resistance in warrantless roadside searches — an odor “detected” by a four-legged police officer that’s completely incapable of being cross-examined during a jury trial.

As legalization spreads, courts have responded. There have been handful of decisions handed down that clearly indicate what the future holds: cops and dog cops that smell weed where weed is legal don’t have much legal footing when it comes to warrantless searches. Observing something legal has never been — and will never be — justification for a search, much less reasonable suspicion to extend a stop.

The present has yet to arrive in the Seventh Circuit. Detecting the odor of a legal substance is still considered to be a permission slip for a warrantless search. And that’s only because there’s one weird stipulation in the law governing legal marijuana possession in Illinois.

In this case, a traffic stop led to the “detection” of the odor of marijuana. That led to the driver fleeing the traffic stop and dropping a gun he was carrying. And that led to felon-in-possession charges for Prentiss Jackson, who has just seen his motion to suppress this evidence rejected by the Seventh Circuit Appeals Court.

Here’s how this all started, as recounted in the appeals court decision [PDF]:

The officer smelled the odor of unburnt marijuana emanating from the car. He knew the odor came from inside the car, as he had not smelled it before he approached the vehicle. During their conversation about the license and registration, the officer told Jackson he smelled “a little bit of weed” and asked if Jackson and the passenger had been smoking. Jackson said he had, but that was earlier in the day, and he had not smoked inside the car.

Through the officer’s training, he knew the most common signs of impairment for driving under the influence were the odor of marijuana or alcohol and speech issues. He was also taught to look for traffic violations. Concerned that Jackson might be driving under the influence because of the head and taillight violation, the odor of marijuana, and Jackson’s admission that he had smoked earlier, the officer asked Jackson whether he was “safe to drive home.” Jackson said he was. His speech was not slurred during the interaction, and his responses were appropriate.

Now, I’m not a federal judge. (And probably shouldn’t be one, for several reasons.) But I think I would have immediately called bullshit here. According to the officer’s own statements, his “training” led him to believe things like unburnt marijuana and unlit headlights/taillights are indicators of “driving under the influence.” I would have asked for the officer to dig deep into the reserves of his “training” to explain these assertions. The only one that fits is Jackson’s admission he had smoked “earlier.” And, even with that admission, Jackson cleared the impairment test.

The officer, however, insisted he had probable cause to engage in a warrantless search of the car, based exclusively on his detection of the odor of “unburnt” marijuana. The officer told Jackson he was going to cite him for weed possession (not for the amount, but for how it was stored in the car). He also told the passenger he would make an arrest if Jackson did not “agree” to a “probable cause search.”

Jackson moved to the back of his car as ordered by the officer. Shortly before the patdown began, Jackson fled, dropping a handgun he was not legally allowed to possess.

Jackson challenged the search in his motion to suppress, arguing that marijuana legalization meant an assertion that the odor of a (legal) drug had been detected by an officer meant nothing in terms of probable cause for a warrantless search. The lower court rejected Jackson’s argument. The Seventh Circuit Appeals Court agrees with the trial court.

First, the court says marijuana, while legal in Illinois, is still illegal under federal law. And the suspicion a federal law has been broken (even if it can’t be enforced locally) is still enough to justify further questions and further exploration of a car.

Furthermore, state requirements for transporting legal marijuana in personal vehicles were not met by Jackson’s baggies of personal use weed.

[T]he [Illinois] Vehicle Code […] clearly states that when cannabis is transported in a private vehicle, the cannabis must be stored in a sealed, odor-proof container—in other words, the cannabis should be undetectable by smell by a police officer.”

That’s a really weird stipulation. It basically tells residents that in order to legally transport drugs they must act like drug smugglers. And, while I haven’t seen a case raising this issue yet, one can be sure people have been criminally charged for following the law because officers believe efforts made to prevent officers from detecting drugs is, at the very least, reasonable suspicion to extend a stop or, better yet, probable cause to engage in a warrantless search.

And this is likely why that particular stipulation (which I haven’t seen in other places where weed is legal) was included in this law: it doesn’t remove one of the handiest excuses to perform a warrantless search — the “odor of marijuana.”

The smell of unburnt marijuana outside a sealed container independently supplied probable cause and thus supported the direction for Jackson to step out of the car for the search.

That’s pretty handy… at least for cops. It allows them to “detect” the odor of a legal substance in order to treat it as contraband. And they need to do little more than claim in court they smelled it — something that’s impossible to disprove. Illinois has managed to do the seemingly impossible: it has legalized a substance while allowing law enforcement officers to treat it as illegal. That’s quite the trick. And because of that, it’s still perfectly legal to pretend legal substances are contraband when it comes to traffic stops in Illinois.

In this week's The Reason Roundtable, editors Matt Welch, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, and Peter Suderman scrutinize President Joe Biden's executive order updating asylum restrictions at the U.S.-Mexico border in response to illegal border crossings.

01:32—Biden's new asylum restrictions

21:38—The prosecution of political opponents: former President Donald Trump, Hunter Biden, and Steve Bannon

33:25—Weekly Listener Question

39:56—No one is reading The Washington Post

48:09—This week's cultural recommendations

Mentioned in this podcast:

"Biden Announces Sweeping Asylum Restrictions at U.S.-Mexico Border" by Fiona Harrigan

"Biden's New Asylum Policy is Both Harmful and Illegal" by Ilya Somin

"Travel Ban, Redux" by Josh Blackman

"Immigration Fueled America's Stunning Cricket Upset Over Pakistan" by Eric Boehm

"Libertarian Candidate Chase Oliver Wants To Bring Back 'Ellis Island Style' Immigration Processing" by Fiona Harrigan

"Donald Trump and Hunter Biden Face the Illogical Consequences of an Arbitrary Gun Law" by Jacob Sullum

"Hunter Biden's Trial Highlights a Widely Flouted, Haphazardly Enforced, and Constitutionally Dubious Gun Law" by Jacob Sullum

"Hunter Biden's Multiplying Charges Exemplify a Profound Threat to Trial by Jury" by Jacob Sullum

"The Conviction Effect" by Liz Wolfe

"Laurence Tribe Bizarrely Claims Trump Won the 2016 Election by Falsifying Business Records in 2017" by Jacob Sullum

"A Jumble of Legal Theories Failed To Give Trump 'Fair Notice' of the New York Charges Against Him" by Jacob Sullum

"Does Donald Trump's Conviction in New York Make Us Banana Republicans?" by J.D. Tuccille

"The Myth of the Federal Private Nondelegation Doctrine, Part 1" by Sasha Volokh

"Federal Court Condemns Congress for Giving Unconstitutional Regulatory Powers to Amtrak" by Damon Root

"Make Amtrak Safer and Privatize It" by Ira Stoll

"Biden Threatens To Veto GOP Spending Bill That Would 'Cut' Amtrak Funding to Double Pre-Pandemic Levels" by Christian Britschgi

"This Company Is Running a High-Speed Train in Florida—Without Subsidies" by Natalie Dowzicky

"Do Not Under Any Circumstances Nationalize Greyhound" by Christian Britschgi

"With Ride or Die, the Bad Boys Movies Become Referendums on Masculinity" by Peter Suderman

"D.C. Water Spent Nearly $4,000 On Its Wendy the Water Drop Mascot" by Christian Britschgi

Upcoming Reason Events:

Reason Speakeasy: Corey DeAngelis on June 11 in New York City

Send your questions to roundtable@reason.com. Be sure to include your social media handle and the correct pronunciation of your name.

Today's sponsor:

• We all carry around different stressors—big and small. When we keep them bottled up, it can start to affect us negatively. Therapy is a safe space to get things off your chest—and to figure out how to work through whatever's weighing you down. If you're thinking of starting therapy, give BetterHelp a try. It's entirely online. Designed to be convenient, flexible, and suited to your schedule. Just fill out a brief questionnaire to get matched with a licensed therapist, and switch therapists any time for no additional charge. Get it off your chest, with BetterHelp. Visit BetterHelp.com/roundtable today to get 10 percent off your first month.

Audio production by Justin Zuckerman and John Carter

Assistant production by Luke Allen and Hunt Beaty

Music: "Angeline" by The Brothers Steve

• Producer: Hunt Beaty
• Video Editor: César Báez

The post Partisan Border Wars appeared first on Reason.com.

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

Chase Oliver, who secured the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination on Sunday night, says "there are few better examples of 'bad government' than the overly complex current laws and regulations involving immigration."

"If we can allow peaceful people to be peaceful, we can more easily and effectively end actual crimes at our border and make our communities, immigrant and non-immigrant alike, more safe and prosperous," explains a statement provided by the Oliver campaign.

Neither President Joe Biden nor former President Donald Trump has an immigration platform—or record—that is a clear fit for supporters of free migration and a less intrusive federal government. Oliver's campaign argues that he offers a different approach, calling out the use of eminent domain "to build permanent walls or structures on properties that do not wish to have them" and the "arbitrary caps" that are prevalent in the U.S. immigration system.

"What Chase offers is a way for peaceful people to move freely, safely, and lawfully," continues the statement.

The Libertarian candidate proposes that the U.S. "return to an Ellis Island style of processing immigrants," which would involve simplifying the immigration process "for those who wish to come here to work and build a better life." It shouldn't take "months or years" for those immigrants to receive medical and criminal checks and work authorization, but days "at most."

Oliver also supports creating a path to citizenship for the country's undocumented immigrants. Millions of undocumented immigrants are "doing essential jobs, paying payroll taxes, and contributing to our economic growth," reads his platform. "Formalizing this arrangement" will "allow them to further contribute to the economy by meeting critical labor demand and reducing inflationary pressures" and save "taxpayers billions of dollars in enforcement costs," Oliver's website says.

The platform outlines a pathway to citizenship for recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, the policy enacted by President Barack Obama that defers deportation action and offers work authorization to immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as kids. Oliver's platform also includes a pathway to citizenship for the children of long-term temporary visa holders, a class of legally present immigrants who must self-deport at 21 if they can't secure legal status before then. There are currently over 200,000 dependent visa holders waiting for relief.

The last point is a unique one. Dip Patel, founder of Improve the Dream, an organization that advocates for solutions for those visa holders, noted that it may be the first presidential platform to outline that relief explicitly.  "It is great to see this common sense idea to allow children raised and educated in America with lawful status be [explicitly] mentioned on a presidential candidate's immigration platform," Patel tells Reason. He hopes that all future candidates' platforms will "include this and other nuanced solutions affecting so many who have spent their entire lives in America."

Oliver wants to expand the H-1B visa program, a nonimmigrant visa pathway for highly skilled, highly educated workers. He also supports a startup visa, noting that 55 percent of American startups valued at over $1 billion or more were founded or co-founded by immigrants. This was the conclusion of 2022 research by the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP), which also found that almost 80 percent of those billion-dollar companies have an immigrant founder or an immigrant in a key leadership position.

"It was great to see the Libertarian Party advocate for a startup visa and a higher level of H-1B visas for high-skilled professionals, particularly since Democrats and Republicans often try to coopt ideas from third parties," says Stuart Anderson, NFAP's executive director. "Our research shows making it easier for highly skilled individuals to remain in the United States, including as entrepreneurs, leads to more jobs, innovation and cutting-edge products for Americans."

Oliver's views on immigration have proven somewhat controversial among some in the Libertarian Party, including members of the Mises Caucus (which "advocated this year in an internal strategy document" to "rid references to…free immigration" from the party platform, reported Reason's Brian Doherty). Quizzed on Reason's Just Asking Questions podcast this week about whether he considered himself "an open borders libertarian," Oliver called it a "very ambiguous term" and reiterated his support for a "21st century Ellis Island."

"If you're there for peace, you just go right on in and get to work and contribute to the economy. You get a job," he continued. "And that will get 99.9 percent of the people quickly filed through the process so they can get to work and contribute to the economy instead of being stuck on welfare or charity programs as they are right now."

The post Libertarian Candidate Chase Oliver Wants To Bring Back 'Ellis Island Style' Immigration Processing appeared first on Reason.com.

Jeremy Haney, a former police officer in Appleton, Wisconsin, has pleaded no contest to felony misconduct in public office for falsifying information in a report. Haney forged the signatures of a prosecutor and a judge on paperwork to authorize placing a tracking device on a suspect's vehicle as part of a drug investigation. An assistant district attorney spotted the discrepancy when he was reviewing the documents and realized they were not the ones he signed. Haney claimed that he lost the original paperwork, so he reprinted it and forged the signatures. He will receive no jail time but will have to pay fines and fees totaling more than $1,000.

The post Brickbat: Sign on the Dotted Line appeared first on Reason.com.

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

In December 2022, Reason reported that both state and federal wildlife agents routinely trespass onto private land and plant cameras. Two Tennessee homeowners successfully sued the state over the practice, and a three-judge panel ruled in their favor. The state appealed the decision, and this week the court of appeals ruled in the homeowners' favor.

At issue is a state law allowing officers of the Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency (TWRA) to "go upon any property, outside of buildings, posted or otherwise," in order to "enforce all laws relating to wildlife." In the case of Terry Rainwaters and Hunter Hollingsworth, TWRA officers not only entered their respective properties but also installed trail cameras to look for hunting violations, all without a warrant and ignoring "No Trespassing" signs. A lawsuit filed by the Institute for Justice (I.J.) on behalf of Rainwaters and Hollingsworth asked the court to declare the law unconstitutional and issue an injunction against the TWRA, barring it from carrying out any further unwarranted intrusions.

Under the "open-fields doctrine," Supreme Court precedent dating back to Prohibition holds that undeveloped land on someone's property lacks the same rigorous Fourth Amendment protections as their home and the "curtilage," the area immediately surrounding the home.

In March 2022, a three-judge panel from the Benton County Circuit Court ruled in the homeowners' favor, finding that the state constitution provided more protections than the Fourth Amendment. It determined that the state law allowing the TWRA practice created an "intolerable risk" of abuse and was "facially unconstitutional," but it stopped short of issuing an injunction. The state appealed the decision the following month.

In a hearing before the Tennessee Court of Appeals Western Section on June 20, 2023, I.J. attorney Josh Windham argued that the state law is unconstitutionally broad. "It allows TWRA officers to enter and roam around private land, fishing for evidence of crime," Windham said. "It doesn't require consent. It doesn't require warrants. It doesn't require probable cause….It's a blank check for officers to invade private land whenever and however they please."

Amanda Jordan argued for the Tennessee Attorney General's office that the statute was not unconstitutional and that the policy was necessary for the TWRA to do its job. She argued that "it's the particular purpose and function of the TWRA which makes such warrantless entry reasonable."

Judge Jeffrey Usman asked Jordan why, if the state would need a warrant in order to enter someone's property to look for criminal violations, it should not also need a warrant to do the same for civil violations of hunting laws. Jordan agreed that "while normal law enforcement officers would not be able to enter" without a warrant, "you have to look at the state's interest in furthering its duty of protecting and preserving" Tennessee's wildlife.

But Usman pressed further, asking whether the state has "an even stronger interest in protecting persons than wildlife." Further, he asked, "If you can't enter to investigate a crime being committed against a person…why is the interest greater to enter to protect wildlife?"

In a decision issued Thursday, the court of appeals ruled in favor of the property owners. The TWRA claimed that the homeowners' claims of injury were "speculative" as "TWRA agents have not entered the Plaintiffs' lands since September 2018." The court disagreed: Writing for a unanimous court, Usman noted in the decision,

Even if the TWRA has not entered the Plaintiffs' properties since 2018, it continues to assert its power to do so. The TWRA has asserted a continuing right to enter upon the Plaintiffs' properties. At oral argument, the TWRA suggested that if the Plaintiffs want to keep the TWRA off of their land in the future that they should desist in hunting.

"At the most foundational level," the court determined, "the statute is facially constitutional because there are applications of the statute that are constitutionally permissible," including "wild waste land areas." But in this specific scenario, where wildlife agents planted cameras on homeowners' land without ever even pursuing a warrant, the court found the TWRA's actions unconstitutional as applied.

"The TWRA's contention is a disturbing assertion of power on behalf of the government that stands contrary to the foundations of the search protections against arbitrary governmental intrusions in the American legal tradition, generally, and in Tennessee, specifically," Usman wrote. "What the TWRA claims is reasonable is not."

"Our entire theory of the case was vindicated by this decision," Windham tells Reason. "The part that goes against the trial court ruling [says] that the statute can be constitutionally applied to land where people haven't taken any steps to exert control or exert their privacy, which is a rule we don't particularly object to."

The post Tennessee Appeals Court Rules Against Wildlife Agents Who Planted Cameras on Private Land appeared first on Reason.com.

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

The Northeast Microelectronics Internship Program (NMIP), an initiative of MIT’s Microsystems Technology Laboratories (MTL) to connect first- and second-year college students to careers in semiconductor and microelectronics industries, recently received a $75,000 grant to expand its reach and impact. The funding is part of $9.2 million in grants awarded by the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition (NEMC) Hub to boost technology advancement, workforce development, education, and student engagement across the Northeast Region.

NMIP was founded by Tomás Palacios, the Clarence J. LeBel Professor of Electrical Engineering at MIT, and director of MTL. The grant, he says, will help address a significant barrier limiting the number of students who pursue careers in critical technological fields.

“Undergraduate students are key for the future of our nation’s microelectronics workforce. They directly fill important roles that require technical fluency or move on to advanced degrees,” says Palacios. “But these students have repeatedly shared with us that the lack of internships in their first few semesters in college is the main reason why many move to industries with a more established tradition of hiring undergraduate students in their early years. This program connects students and industry partners to fix this issue.”

The NMIP funding was announced on Jan. 30 during an event featuring Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey, Lt. Governor Kim Driscoll, and Economic Development Secretary Yvonne Hao, as well as leaders from the U.S. Department of Defense and the director of Microelectronics Commons at NSTXL, the National Security Technology Accelerator. The grant to support NMIP is part of $1.5 million in new workforce development grants aimed at spurring the microelectronics and semiconductor industry across the Northeast Region. The new awards are the first investments made by the NEMC Hub, a division of the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, that is overseeing investments made by the federal CHIPS and Science Act following the formal establishment of the NEMC Hub in September 2023.

“We are very excited for the recognition the program is receiving. It is growing quickly and the support will help us further dive into our mission to connect talented students to the broader microelectronics ecosystem while integrating our values of curiosity, openness, excellence, respect, and community,” says Preetha Kingsview, who manages the program. “This grant will help us connect to the broader community convened by NEMC Hub in close collaboration with MassTech. We are very excited for what this support will help NMIP achieve.”

The funds provided by the NEMC Microelectronics Commons Hub will help expand the program more broadly across the Northeast, to support students and grow the pool of skilled workers for the microelectronics sector regionally. After receiving 300 applications in the first two years, the program received 296 applications in 2024 from students interested in summer internships, and is working with more than 25 industry partners across the Northeast. These NMIP students not only participate in industry-focused summer internships, but are also exposed to the broader microelectronics ecosystem through bi-weekly field trips to microelectronics companies in the region.

“The expansion of the program across the Northeast, and potentially nationwide, will extend the impact of this program to reach more students and benefit more microelectronics companies across the region,” says Christine Nolan, acting NEMC Hub program director. “Through hands-on training opportunities we are able to showcase the amazing jobs that exist in this sector and to strengthen the pipeline of talented workers to support the mission of the NEMC Hub and the national CHIPs investments.”  

Sheila Wescott says her company, MACOM, a Lowell-based developer of semiconductor devices and components, is keenly interested in sourcing intern candidates from NMIP. “We already have a success story from this program,” she says. “One of our interns completed two summer programs with us and is continuing part time in the fall — and we anticipate him joining MACOM full time after graduation.”

“NMIP is an excellent platform to engage students with a diverse background and promote microelectronics technology,” says Bin Lu, CTO and co-founder of Finwave Semiconductor.  “Finwave has benefited from engaging with the young engineers who are passionate about working with electronics and cutting-edge semiconductor technology. We are committed to continuing to work with NMIP.”

As we keep more and more personal data on our phones, iPhone and Android devices now have some of the most advanced encryption technology in existence to keep that information safe from prying eyes. The easiest way around that, of course, is for someone to gain access to your phone.

This week, a federal court decided that police officers can make you unlock your phone, even by physically forcing you to press your thumb against it.

In November 2021, Jeremy Payne was pulled over by two California Highway Patrol (CHP) officers over his car's window tinting. When asked, Payne admitted that he was on parole, which the officers confirmed. After finding Payne's cellphone in the car, officers unlocked it by forcibly pressing his thumb against it as he sat handcuffed. (The officers claimed in their arrest report that Payne "reluctantly unlocked the cell phone" when asked, which Payne disputed; the government later accepted in court "that defendant's thumbprint was compelled.")

The officers searched through Payne's camera roll and found a video taken the same day, which appeared to show "several bags of blue pills (suspected to be fentanyl)." After checking the phone's map and finding what they suspected to be a home address, the officers drove there and used Payne's keys to enter and search the residence. Inside, they  found and seized more than 800 pills.

Payne was indicted for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine.

In a motion to suppress, Payne's attorneys argued that by forcing him to unlock his phone, the officers "compelled a testimonial communication," violating both the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable search and seizure and the Fifth Amendment's guarantee against self-incrimination. Even though the provisions of his parole required him to surrender any electronic devices and passcodes, "failure to comply could result in 'arrest pending further investigation' or confiscation of the device pending investigation," not the use of force to make him open the phone.

The district court denied the motion to suppress, and Payne pleaded guilty. In November 2022, he was sentenced to 12 years in prison. Notably, Payne had only served three years for the crime for which he was on parole—assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer.

Payne appealed the denial of the motion to suppress. This week, in an opinion authored by Judge Richard Tallman, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled against Payne.

Searches "incident to arrest" are an accepted part of Fourth Amendment precedent. Further, Tallman wrote that as a parolee, Payne has "a significantly diminished expectation of privacy," and even though the conditions of his parole did not require him to "provide a biometric identifier," the distinction was insufficient to support throwing out the search altogether.

But Tallman went a step further in the Fifth Amendment analysis: "We hold that the compelled use of Payne's thumb to unlock his phone (which he had already identified
for the officers) required no cognitive exertion, placing it firmly in the same category as a blood draw or fingerprint taken at booking," he wrote. "The act itself merely provided CHP with access to a source of potential information."

From a practical standpoint, this is chilling. First of all, the Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that police needed a warrant before drawing a suspect's blood.

And one can argue that fingerprinting a suspect as they're arrested is part and parcel with establishing their identity. Nearly half of U.S. states require people to identify themselves to police if asked.

But forcibly gaining access to someone's phone provides more than just their identity—it's a window into their entire lives. Even cursory access to someone's phone can turn up travel history, banking information, and call and text logs—a treasure trove of potentially incriminating information, all of which would otherwise require a warrant.

When they drafted the Fourth Amendment, the Founders drew on the history of "writs of assistance," general warrants used by British authorities in the American colonies that allowed government agents to enter homes at will and look for anything disallowed. As a result, the Fourth Amendment requires search warrants based on probable cause and signed by a judge.

Tallman does note the peculiar circumstances of the case: "Our opinion should not be read to extend to all instances where a biometric is used to unlock an electronic device." But, he adds, "the outcome…may have been different had [the officer] required Payne to independently select the finger that he placed on the phone" instead of forcibly mashing Payne's thumb into it himself.

The post Appeals Court Rules That Cops Can Physically Make You Unlock Your Phone appeared first on Reason.com.

Since late 2020, Border Patrol along the United States–Mexico border has encountered over 6.9 million illegal crossers. A recent Pew Research survey reveals that 57 percent of respondents consider "dealing with immigration" a top policy priority this election year—just below "defending against terrorism" at 63 percent. 

Amid this backdrop, politicians and pundits have been quick to conflate these issues, holding numerous congressional hearings on the purported threat of terrorists entering the U.S. to commit acts of terror. This has given rise to a flood of rhetoric about said terrorists exploiting border chaos to harm Americans. 

Despite this fearmongering, the actual threat of foreign-born terrorism is relatively minor and manageable. New research from the Cato Institute indicates that since 1975, the annual likelihood of an American being murdered in a foreigner-committed terrorist attack is about one in 4.5 million.

Nonetheless, the public remains on edge. A serious car accident and explosion by a port of entry in upstate New York on November 22, 2023, was initially mistaken by many reporters and pundits as a terrorist attack. At the same time, patently fake videos on X (formerly Twitter) claiming that a terrorist had crossed the border circulated widely. 

Reports that illegal border crossers who are on the terrorist watch list have been apprehended seem to validate these fears. One person detained and released by Border Patrol in March 2023 was later discovered to be on the watch list. Similarly, Isnardo Garcia‐Amado was detained in Arizona in early 2022, released, and then promptly arrested after the government determined he was on the terrorist watchlist. 

Since late 2020, Border Patrol has encountered 357 foreigners on the terrorist watch list attempting to cross the southwest border illegally. But being on the watch list does not necessarily indicate an intent to commit terrorism on U.S. soil—which is what the public actually cares about.

Despite these apprehensions, there have been no convictions, nor have any of the watch-listed individuals been charged with actually planning a terrorist attack—an implausible result if they were all actually terrorists. The watch list seems to largely be leading to apprehensions of Colombians previously involved with groups like the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), which pose no direct threat to the United States. 

The government should be vigilant, but the public should moderate their fears regarding terrorists crossing the U.S. border. According to the Cato study, not a single American has been killed in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil carried out by an immigrant who entered illegally by crossing a land or water border. That's not to suggest such an event could never happen—it absolutely could. But so far, there's scant evidence to suggest terrorists are using this route or have any intention to do so. 

The actual risk posed by foreigners who enter in ways other than across the southern border varies considerably. For instance, the annual chance of being murdered in a terrorist attack committed by any illegal immigrant since 1975 was zero. Almost 98 percent of all victims of foreign-born terrorists were murdered in the 9/11 terror attacks—the deadliest in world history. The 9/11 hijackers entered as tourists and students, all with visas. 

This is not to trivialize the threat posed by foreign-born terrorists to the lives, liberty, and private property of Americans. Since 1975, there have been 3,046 people murdered by foreign-born terrorists on U.S. soil. Every one of those deaths is a tragedy, justifying some level of continued governmental vigilance and resources.

However, perspective is crucial. During the same period, almost 990,000 people were murdered in the U.S. through regular criminal homicides—about 323 times more than those killed by foreign-born terrorists.

If media and political discussions were proportional, they would spend about one minute addressing foreign-born terrorist threats for every 5.5 hours they spend on the threat of regular homicide. However, Republicans on the House Subcommittee on Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement have held as many hearings on illegal immigrant terrorists along the border as on normal crime, despite there being no attacks to speak of. 

It's vital that Americans grasp the real extent of the terrorist threat to avoid the overblown fears that lead to poor policy decisions. Those misguided policies, informed by inaccurate assessments of the risk, have led U.S. politicians to allocate disproportionate resources to a relatively minor and manageable threat. A rational evaluation of the facts should allow us to breathe a cautious sigh of relief, recalibrating our focus toward more pressing domestic issues.

The post The Manufactured Crisis of Migrant Terrorists at the Border appeared first on Reason.com.

In an innovative move, a chain of New York City restaurants introduced virtual cashiers, who are taking customers' orders over Zoom from their homes in the Philippines. The approach has sparked heated debates, with some claiming it is a step toward a dystopian, impersonal future. But the technology might not be as bad as critics think. 

Customers at Sansan Ramen and Sansan Chicken in the Long Island City neighborhood in Queens are no longer greeted by a cashier face-to-face but instead interact with one displayed on a flat-screen monitor. Although physically half a world away, the virtual cashiers handle menu inquiries and take customers' orders just like in any other restaurant.

this is insane

cashier is literally zooming into nyc from the philippines pic.twitter.com/opAyS8AYUs

— brett goldstein (@thatguybg) April 6, 2024

The initiative, launched by New York–based Happy Cashier, has been under testing since October. It currently operates in several stores in Queens, Manhattan, and Jersey City, including the dumpling joint Yaso Kitchen. 

Yet since the virtual cashiers started trending on social media, the system has faced criticism. A New York Times reporter who visited a Sansan Chicken said the cashier had a spotty connection, making it hard to hear. Another reporter tried to order something off the menu at Yaso Kitchen, but the virtual cashier didn't seem to know what they were ordering. And a New York Post article seemed to care more about the system's tipping standards than the benefits of the technology.

Beyond technical glitches, the model has sparked broader economic and social concerns. Critics argue that virtual cashiers are taking away job opportunities from New Yorkers, especially amid the shrinking local fast-food work force. Meanwhile, others have come to the defense of foreign workers who are being "exploited" with a meager salary of $3 an hour—way under New York City's $16.

Despite these concerns, employing virtual cashiers could have several advantages. For struggling businesses, it offers a way to reduce operational costs and maintain lower consumer prices. 

Chi Zhang, the founder of Happy Cashier and a former restaurant owner himself, sees the model as a necessary adaptation. Facing high rents and operational costs, having "a virtual-assistant model, somewhat akin to that employed by overseas call centers, could help maximize small retail spaces and improve store efficiency," he told The New York Times.

"I simply cannot avoid discussing this topic," he told Fortune, referring to using outsourced labor to cut down costs. "The cost is admittedly cheaper than the U.S."

While the operational costs of virtual cashiers are lower for restaurant owners, the wages are also competitive by Philippine standards. According to Zhang, his virtual cashiers are earning over 150 percent more than the average cashier earns back home. It's a win-win situation.

The concept of virtual cashiers is not entirely new. Back in 2022, the Canadian food chain Freshii hired almost 100 workers from places like Nicaragua to take orders and payments through a video calling device after the company was left grappling with staffing shortages caused by the pandemic. 

With the technology still in its pilot stage, improvements are expected. Zhang hopes to quickly scale up the number of virtual assistants by the end of the year, positioning his venture as the leader of a transformative trend in the restaurant industry. 

The post Could Virtual Cashiers Be the Future of the Restaurant Industry? appeared first on Reason.com.

Republican lawmakers in Arizona are advancing a collection of bills targeting illegal immigrants and their activities in the state. One in particular, House Concurrent Resolution (HRC) 2060, has the potential to disrupt all manner of peaceful economic interactions.

Arizona law requires that all employers use the federal E-Verify program to ensure that hired employees are eligible to work in the United States. HCR 2060 would add to existing requirements by mandating that employers use E-Verify to check the legal status of subcontractors and independent contractors. Noncompliant employers could face felony charges and fines of $10,000 per undocumented employee.

HCR 2060 has already passed the Arizona House. If it passes the Senate, it will appear on the ballot in November. And though its sponsor, House Speaker Ben Toma (R–Glendale), says the proposal would keep "Arizona from becoming like California" and stop illegal immigrants from "tak[ing] advantage of Americans," plenty of Arizonans are concerned about its economic consequences.

That includes over 100 Arizona business, faith, and community representatives, who charged in an open letter to state politicians that the "anti-immigrant proposals" being considered by the Legislature "will cause unnecessary disruption to the workforce." Given that "Arizona currently only has 71 available workers for every 100 open jobs," the letter calls for elected officials "to support legal work permits for long-term immigrant contributors" rather than participating in "political gamesmanship."

For all the support E-Verify receives from state and national politicians, the employment verification system has many downsides. It's costly (especially for small businesses), it negatively affects lower-skilled native-born workers, and it's easily gamed. Rather than just impacting undocumented immigrants who want to work, it punishes employers for consensual hiring practices and forces native-born workers to get yet another permission slip to do their jobs and live their lives.

"Nationwide, the surge of E-Verify queries has not coincided with any significant reduction in the number of illegal workers," wrote David J. Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, in 2019. "From 2007 to 2016, the number of illegal workers hovered around 8 million, even as the number of E-Verify queries increased tenfold….The only independent audit of the E-Verify system in 2012 concluded that half of all illegal workers run through the system evaded detection, primarily by borrowing the identification of legal workers."

"The E-Verify program has made significant improvements over the years," says Sam Peak, senior policy analyst at Americans for Prosperity, a libertarian advocacy group. "Despite this, making it mandatory for more people likely exposes them to many uncertainties that could disrupt the hiring process."

HCR 2060's vague language might also leave the door open for Arizonans to face legal consequences, perhaps unknowingly, if the businesses they patronize don't comply with E-Verify mandates. According to the resolution text, any person who "commits obstruction of the legal duty to use E-Verify," including acts "in association with any person who has the intent to obstruct, impair or hinder any person from using the E-Verify program as required by law," is "guilty of a class 6 felony."

What exactly the phrase in association with means is not clear. "What happens if a household unknowingly hires a roofing company that does not use E-Verify?" asks Peak.*

Mandating E-Verify for more Arizona workers will inevitably lead to headaches and increased compliance costs for employers and consumers. Voters would do well to remember those consequences if HCR 2060 appears on the ballot in November.

*CORRECTION: This quote has been updated to correct a mistyped word in the source's comment.

The post Arizona Is Weighing Nonsensical New E-Verify Measures appeared first on Reason.com.

I really enjoy following the Random Restaurant Bot account (@restaurant-bot.bsky.social) on the BlueSky social media app.

Every half hour or so, it posts to your feed the name and address of a randomly chosen restaurant from somewhere in the world, along with the first four pictures in its Google Maps entry. — Read the rest

The post Follow the Random Restaurant Bot for random restaurants from around the world appeared first on Boing Boing.

Very rarely do you see anyone prevail in court when any form of forfeiture is in play. The forfeiture litigation deck is firmly stacked in favor of the government, which rarely needs anything approaching actual proof to walk off with someone’s property.

It’s even more rare to see someone awarded damages in a civil lawsuit against law enforcement officers. In most cases, qualified immunity terminates the lawsuit. If qualified immunity is not awarded, agencies and governments are often swift to offer plaintiffs no-fault settlements that allow the accused to walk away from the lawsuit without having to admit any wrongdoing, much less pay out of their own pockets for their misdeeds.

This case contains both rarities. Not only does it involve regular people securing some sort of justice for their violated rights, but the underlying set of rights violations included officers walking out the home they’d raided without a warrant with all the valuables they could get their hands on, including $4,000 in cash.

Here’s how the raid went down, as recounted by C.J. Ciaramella for Reason back in 2019.

On January 31, 2018, a Randolph County sheriff’s deputy showed up at the home of Greg and Teresa Almond in Woodland, Alabama, to serve Greg court papers in a civil matter.

Greg, 50, wasn’t home, but his wife Teresa told the deputy he would be back before long. About two hours later, after Greg had returned home, he heard loud knocking on the door. He remembers shouting “hang on” and walking toward the door when it suddenly flew open. The next thing he knew he was on the floor—ears ringing, dazed, wondering if he’d just been shot.

Several deputies from the Randolph County Sheriff’s Department had kicked in his front door and thrown a flashbang grenade at his feet. The officers handcuffed and detained the couple at gunpoint, then started searching their house. The deputy from earlier had reportedly smelled marijuana, and so a county drug task force was descending on the Almonds’ home, looking for illegal drugs.

The supposed odor of marijuana eventually led the deputies to a small marijuana plant, a few scattered leaves, and a single prescription pill that was not located in its bottle. The home invasion also led deputies to other stuff they wanted, but had no legitimate reason to take. They took the cash they found in the house, a wedding ring, some guns, a coin collection, and a couple guitars.

To the Sheriff’s Office, the $4,000 probably seemed insignificant. But it was pretty much all they had. They were in the middle of refinancing an agricultural loan to ensure their chicken farm remained solvent. Thanks to being forced to spend most of two days in jail, they missed their refinancing deadline. That ultimately resulted in the couple losing their house. They were residing in an insulated shed by the time the court took up their lawsuit.

More than four years after the raid, the couple has finally secured some form of justice. The $1 million in damages awarded by the jury will likely be appealed by the sheriff’s department, but for now, that’s what a jury has said the couple is entitled to.

The judge overseeing the case issued an order [PDF] along with the directed verdict, stating that the “rarity” of a directed verdict in a civil rights lawsuit necessitates some explanation.

The explanation reveals just how much of a blatant violation of rights this raid was. Deputy Kevin Walker had no excuse for his actions.

During trial, Judge Amy Newsome testified that she never issued a telephonic warrant to Defendant Walker, or to the drug task force, on January 31, 2018, for a search of the Plaintiffs’ home. She also testified that she did not tell Walker that he had a warrant. In addition, Defendant Walker testified that Judge Newsome did not tell him that he had a telephonic search warrant, although she did tell him that he probably had enough for a warrant.

He also acknowledged that the requirements for a telephonic warrant were not satisfied, that he did not have a search warrant, and that it was a warrantless search. Given this undisputed testimony, even when considered in the light most favorable to Defendant Walker, the search of the Plaintiffs’ home was without a warrant, even a defective one, and therefore violated the Fourth Amendment. No reasonable jury could have concluded otherwise as there was no question of fact on this issue.

Yeah. That’s inexcusable. And yet, Walker had an excuse: good faith. He attempted to avail himself of the good faith warrant exception. But, as the judge points out, good faith relies on someone believing a valid warrant has actually been issued, not just thinking they could probably obtain one at some point in the future. On top of that, the good faith exception invoked by the deputy only applies in criminal trials, not civil trials. Even if it did apply in this content, Walker would still lose. (Emphasis in the original.)

But even if the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule can apply in the civil context, the good faith exception still would not apply in the circumstances of this case. First, per Judge Newsome and Defendant Walker, there was no warrant, telephonic or written, and thus there was nothing upon which Walker could rely in good faith. In other words, because Defendant Walker knew that he did not have a warrant at the time of the incident, the good faith exception does not apply.

And the cases Walker cites are inapplicable to the facts here: Taylor, Moorehead, Henderson,
and Ganzer all involved situations where written warrants were issued, not situations where a warrant was never issued in the first place. And secondly, as a matter of law, given the undisputed facts concerning the non-existence of a warrant, it was objectively unreasonable for an experienced law enforcement officer to believe that he could search an occupied home when no warrant existed, when no judge told him that he had a warrant, when he was merely told that he had enough for a warrant, and when none of the formalities or requirements associated with a telephonic or written warrant were followed.

As the court notes in this order, it fully expects Walker to raise the other form of good faith in a future motion, indicating that while a jury has already said the couple is owed $1 million in damages, the court has yet to issue an order blessing that payout. Hopefully, if nothing else, this utter failure to salvage a blatantly unconstitutional search will urge Walker’s employers to cut a check, rather than continue to embarrass itself in court.

"The United States is being overrun by the Biden migrant crime. It's a new form of vicious violation to our country," said former President Donald Trump during a visit to the U.S.-Mexico border in Eagle Pass, Texas, on Thursday.

Trump's remarks come at a tense moment in the nation's sentiment toward immigration. Americans now say that immigration is "the most important problem facing the U.S.," according to the results of a Gallup poll published this week. Earlier in February, 57 percent of Americans surveyed by the Pew Research Center said that "the large number of migrants seeking to enter the country leads to more crime." For many, those ideas became more salient last week, when Jose Antonio Ibarra, a Venezuelan man who immigrated to the U.S. illegally, was charged with the murder of Georgia college student Laken Riley.

Riley's murder, along with incidents such as migrants drinking alcohol and consuming drugs in public and getting into fights in New York City, have spurred increased coverage of a "migrant crime" wave. "Over the past month, Fox News hosts, guests and video clips have mentioned 'migrant crime' nearly 90 times, more than half of those in the past 10 days," reported The Washington Post's Philip Bump on Thursday. Numerous right-of-center media outlets have similarly warned about the "migrant crime wave" in recent headlines.

There's no question that some undocumented immigrants have committed heinous crimes. But there are many reasons to be doubtful that recent incidents are evidence of a surging migrant crime wave.

For one, crime is down in the cities that received the most migrants as a result of Texas' busing operations under Operation Lone Star, per an NBC News analysis. "Overall crime is down year over year in Philadelphia, Chicago, Denver, New York and Los Angeles," NBC News reported.

David J. Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, echoes that finding. "We don't have real-time data, but the partial crime data that exist for this year show consistent declines in major crimes in major cities," he says. "The most significant crime spike in recent years occurred in 2020—when illegal immigration was historically low until the end of the year."

"National crime data, especially pertaining to undocumented immigrants, is notoriously incomplete," since it "comes in piecemeal and can only be evaluated holistically when the annual data is released," cautions NBC News. What's more, "most local police don't record immigration status when they make arrests."

However, several analyses conducted at both the state and federal levels find that immigrants—including undocumented ones—are less crime-prone than native-born Americans. Looking at "two decades of research on immigration and crime," criminologists Graham Ousey and Charis Kubrin found that "communities with more immigration tend to have less crime, especially violent crimes like homicide," wrote The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler. A 2015 Migration Policy Institute report indicated that undocumented immigrants have a lower rate of felony convictions than the overall U.S. population does.

The Cato Institute's "research has consistently shown that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes and less likely to end up incarcerated than natives," Bier continues. An article this week by Alex Nowrasteh, vice president for economic and social policy studies at the Cato Institute, indicated that illegal immigrants have a lower homicide conviction rate in Texas than native-born Americans do, while legal immigrants have a lower conviction rate than both groups.

"Few people are murderers, and illegal immigrants are statistically less likely to be murderers. Still, some illegal immigrants do commit homicide, and that statistical fact is no comfort to victims and their families," wrote Nowrasteh. But "we should understand that more enforcement of immigration laws will not reduce homicide rates."

This has not been Trump's conclusion. "Migrant crime is taking over America," he said in a video posted to Truth Social on Wednesday. "How many more innocent victims must be harmed and how much more innocent blood must be spilled until we stop this invasion…and remove these illegal alien criminals from our country?"

Politicians on both sides of the aisle have proposed tightening legal pathways, such as asylum, as a way to reduce border crossings and improve security. "Banning asylum is not the answer," counters Bier. "Under Title 42 from 2020 to 2023, asylum was completely banned for many crossers, which only led to more people evading the Border Patrol, eliminating the opportunity for people to be screened at all."

Rather than relying on broad-stroke enforcement to capture once and future criminal migrants, there are several more targeted policies the U.S. government could adopt. "It should be legal [for migrants] to obtain a visa in their home countries, which would allow more people to be vetted more carefully abroad and free up Border Patrol to interdict those who evade detection," Bier says. The U.S. could also "negotiate better access to criminal databases in other countries and improve the quality of their data," and "supply foreign governments with advanced fingerprinting and booking technology on the condition that U.S. border agencies have access to the data," he continues.

Riley's death is unquestionably a tragedy. But U.S. immigration policy will be better served by statistically informed conclusions than the emotions sparked by individual crimes.

The post The Myth of the Migrant Crime Wave appeared first on Reason.com.

Only 3 percent of the people who have applied for green cards will receive one in FY 2024, as the backlog continues to grow and migrants continue to choose illegal migration pathways in large numbers. Today's green card processing "reveals a legal immigration system that is utterly failing to direct aspiring immigrants to pursue the American dream in lawful and orderly ways," wrote David J. Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, in a report released last week.

About 1.1 million green cards may be issued in FY 2024, but there are currently 34.7 million pending applications. The backlog has its roots in the Immigration Act of 1924 and subsequent eligibility restrictions. While 98.1 percent of immigrant applicants were allowed to enter the country with permanent status from 1888 to 1921, just 16 percent of applicants were admitted in an average year once caps were imposed, per Bier. The rate fell to 3.8 percent in 2023.

Adding to the problem is the fact that the government has let 6.3 million green cards go to waste since 1921, failing to meet caps in large part due to processing delays.

Certain nationalities and green card categories experience more severe backlogs and selective processing. "Indians—who make up half the applicants in the employer-sponsored categories—must wait more than a century for a green card," wrote Bier. People who try their luck at the green card lottery, which currently has about 22.2 million applicants, only have a 1 in 400 chance of getting a green card in a given year. Some who apply for family-based green cards "will face lifetime waits for many country-category combinations," according to Bier.

By granting green cards to such a low percentage of applicants each year, the U.S. is leaving a lot of potential growth on the table. "Backlogged immigrants are likely to enter the United States and start working at higher rates than the general population, and they also appear to be more educated on average," wrote Bier. And beyond being an important addition to the labor force, immigrants are helping to reduce the massive federal budget deficit and stave off population decline.

The Cato report suggests that Congress do away with "the unnecessarily onerous rules and arbitrary caps to approve current green card applicants." After tackling the existing backlog, policy changes could be more modest, since "annual legal immigration would only need to increase more gradually to meet future demand."

This report echoes the findings of June 2023 Cato Institute research, which found that "fewer than 1 percent of people who want to move permanently to the United States can do so legally." A variety of factors keep people from qualifying for the existing green card categories, including low annual visa caps, a lack of U.S.-based sponsors (either employers or qualifying family members), narrow definitions of eligible nationalities, and cost.

Green card inaccessibility affects people who are already in the U.S., those who have applied and are still abroad, and those who would apply if not for the daunting and restrictive process. Policies that reduce the backlog and improve future processing could only benefit the American economy and incentivize would-be immigrants to pursue legal rather than illegal migration pathways.

The post Green Card Process 'Utterly Failing' To Help Immigrants 'Pursue the American Dream in Lawful and Orderly Ways' appeared first on Reason.com.

Taking crazy pills: Former President Donald Trump said last evening that the civil fraud verdict that will force him to pony up $355 million for inflating his net worth to banks is actually "a form of Navalny" and "a form of communism or fascism."

When asked about the Russian state's imprisonment and killing of dissident Alexei Navalny, Trump responded: "It's happening here." The indictments are "all because of the fact that I'm in politics," in his telling.

He made these comments last night during a Fox News town hall. On Truth Social, his own alternative social media platform, Trump said, "the sudden death of Alexei Navalny has made me more and more aware of what is happening in our Country."

Alexei Navalny, who was reported dead on Friday, served as an opposition leader in a state that disallows opposition and legitimate voting. Navalny garnered a massive following—more than 6 million YouTube followers, for starters, with at least one video viewed 130 million times—by doing legitimately good journalism digging into the kleptocratic, repressive Putin regime. Navalny offered normal Russians legitimate, well-sourced explanations for why they are so poor: their leaders consistently abdicate responsibility, choosing to enrich themselves. Their leaders are content with everyday people living in squalor and dysfunction, as long as they stay comfortable.

Running for office, and cutting through the state's propaganda, made him so disfavored by the regime that he went into exile. Navalny returned to Russia in 2021 with full awareness that he would be locked up but a devout belief that he ought to continue his work domestically, displaying courage in the face of certain persecution. And sure enough, he was locked up, then sent to an even more remote prison camp called IK-3, in Kharp, which is in the Arctic Circle. His death there was reported last week, but the opposition movement will not die with him. "In killing Aleksei, Putin killed half of me, half of my heart and half of my soul," said his widow, Yulia, "but I have another half left—and it is telling me I have no right to give up."

Trump, on the other hand, misrepresented his net worth to banks, defrauding lenders (who…still had a responsibility to do due diligence, a fact ignored in much mainstream media reporting of the case). "Trump claimed his apartment in Manhattan's Trump Tower was 30,000 square feet, nearly three times its actual size," writes Reason's Jacob Sullum. "He valued Mar-a-Lago, his golf resort in Palm Beach, based on the assumption that it could be sold for residential purposes, which the deed precluded." But "[New York Attorney General Letitia] James was not able to identify any damages to lenders or insurers," writes Sullum, and "the striking absence of any injury commensurate with the punishment lends credibility to Trump's reflexive complaint that he is the victim of a partisan vendetta."

Both things can be true, that Trump attracts politically motivated ire—which attorneys general and judges are wrong to indulge—and that he also did something wrong by inflating his net worth. But he's a far cry from Navalny—Trump enjoys self-dealing more than fact-finding and truth-telling—and the way this went down, via the court system, where Trump had the right to defend himself, is a far cry from how "justice" gets dispensed in Russia—by Putin, in penal colonies, via murders of anyone whose beliefs threaten the man in charge.

Scenes from New York: Nobody asked for this.

What are we doing as a city?? pic.twitter.com/iaEBWGPMmh

— Cynical (@CynicalNYK) February 18, 2024

QUICK HITS

• "Clinical psychologists with the Department of Veterans Affairs faced retaliation and ostracization at work after they publicly opposed a gender-inclusion policy that allows men to access women's medical spaces within the VA," reports National Review.
• RFK Jr.'s "origin story makes this like Odysseus returning to the manor, stringing the bow, this is that iconic moment," said Bret Weinstein on Joe Rogan's podcast. If you say so, Bret.
• Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton just announced a lawsuit against El Paso's Annunciation House, an NGO in charge of a shelter network for migrants, for "facilitating illegal entry to the United States, alien harboring, human smuggling, and operating a stash house." But going after charities that help migrants—whatever you think of the behavior they engaged in to get here—seems like a wrongheaded stunt.
• I do not think this is true or that there's much evidence for it:

do you want a black pill?

like… a really really black pill?

George Carlin would be pro-censorship if he were alive today b/c he didn't actually love free speech, he just fucking hated Christians

— PoIiMath (@politicalmath) February 20, 2024

• "The enormous contrast between [Alexei] Navalny's civic courage and the corruption of [Vladimir] Putin's regime will remain," writes The Atlantic's Anne Applebaum. "Putin is fighting a bloody, lawless, unnecessary war, in which hundreds of thousands of ordinary Russians have been killed or wounded, for no reason other than to serve his own egotistical vision. He is running a cowardly, micromanaged reelection campaign, one in which all real opponents are eliminated and the only candidate who gets airtime is himself. Instead of facing real questions or challenges, he meets tame propagandists such as Tucker Carlson, to whom he offers nothing more than lengthy, circular, and completely false versions of history."
• Related: People were arrested for laying flowers in memory of Navalny.

People being arrested in Moscow for laying flowers for Navalny. pic.twitter.com/8YnLpHcB0s

— Eleanor Beardsley (@ElBeardsley) February 17, 2024

• Wow:

NEW: California's Legislative Analyst's Office says the state's budget problem has grown by $15 Billion.

LAO says because of weak revenue collections so far, the state's deficit could reach $73 Billion. https://t.co/oz83vntalh

— Ashley Zavala (@ZavalaA) February 20, 2024

• We live in the stupidest simulation:

I dunno if he qualifies as a "hero" lol this ain't exactly Normandy https://t.co/C3fXsLcnkZ

— Liz Wolfe (@LizWolfeReason) February 21, 2024

The post A Form of Navalny appeared first on Reason.com.

The government and private companies spy on us.

My former employee, Naomi Brockwell, has become a privacy specialist. She advises people on how to protect their privacy.

In my new video, she tells me I should delete most of my apps on my phone.

I push back. I like that Google knows where I am and can recommend a "restaurant near me." I like that my Shell app lets me buy gas (almost) without getting out of the car.

I don't like that government gathers information about me via my phone, but so far, so what?

Brockwell tells me I'm being dumb because I don't know which government will get that data in the future.

Looking at my phone, she tells me, "You've given location permission, microphone permission. You have so many apps!"

She says I should delete most of them, starting with Google Chrome.

"This is a terrible app for privacy. Google Chrome is notorious for collecting every single thing that they can about you…[and] broadcasting that to thousands of people…auctioning off your eyeballs. It's not just advertisers collecting this information. Thousands of shell companies, shady companies of data brokers also collect it and in turn sell it."

Instead of Google, she recommends using a browser called Brave. It's just as good, she says, but it doesn't collect all the information that Chrome does. It's slightly faster, too, because it doesn't slow down to load ads.

Then she says, "Delete Google Maps."

"But I need Google Maps!"

"You don't." She replies, "You have an iPhone. You have Apple Maps…. Apple is better when it comes to privacy…. Apple at least tries to anonymize your data."

Instead of Gmail, she recommends more private alternatives, like Proton Mail or Tuta.

"There are many others." She points out, "The difference between them is that every email going into your inbox for Gmail is being analyzed, scanned, it's being added to a profile about you."

But I don't care. Nothing beats Google's convenience. It remembers my credit cards and passwords. It fills things in automatically. I tried Brave browser but, after a week, switched back to Google. I like that Google knows me.

Brockwell says that I could import my credit cards and passwords to Brave and autofill there, too.

"I do understand the trade-off," she adds. "But email is so personal. It's private correspondence about everything in your life. I think we should use companies that don't read our emails. Using those services is also a vote for privacy, giving a market signal that we think privacy is important. That's the only way we're going to get more privacy."

She also warns that even apps like WhatsApp, which I thought were private, aren't as private as we think.

"WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted and better than standard SMS. But it collects a lot of data about you and shares it with its parent company, Facebook. It's nowhere near as private as an app like Signal."

She notices my Shell app and suggests I delete it.

Opening the app's "privacy nutrition label," something I never bother reading, she points out that I give Shell "your purchase history, your contact information, physical address, email address, your name, phone number, your product interaction, purchase history, search history, user ID, product interaction, crash data, performance data, precise location, course location."

The list goes on. No wonder I don't read it.

She says, "The first step before downloading an app, take a look at their permissions, see what information they're collecting."

I'm just not going to bother.

But she did convince me to delete some apps, pointing out that if I want the app later, I can always reinstall it.

"We think that we need an app for every interaction we do with a business. We don't realize what we give up as a result."

"They already have all my data. What's the point of going private now?" I ask.

"Privacy comes down to choice," She replies. "It's not that I want everything that I do to remain private. It's that I deserve to have the right to selectively reveal to the world what I want them to see. Currently, that's not the world."

COPYRIGHT 2023 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

The post Government Is Snooping on Your Phone appeared first on Reason.com.

Every year, thousands of New York City families are subjected to invasive home searches as part of child abuse and neglect investigations. While less than 7 percent of these investigations lead the agency to file claims of abuse or neglect, a new lawsuit alleges that the city's Administration for Children's Services (ACS) workers often make misleading—or outright false—threats to coerce parents to allow ACS to conduct warrantless searches of their homes.

According to the lawsuit, which was filed on Tuesday, ACS employs a widespread policy of coercing families under investigation to allow case workers into their homes. ACS workers allegedly often tell families that they "must" or "have to" let them search their homes, insist that they do not need a warrant for the search, and even threaten to take noncompliant parents' children away. 

Even though ACS workers are technically legally required to obtain a warrant to search homes, the agency very rarely seeks them. According to the suit, of the almost 53,000 investigations conducted by ACS in 2023, it only sought 222 court orders to search families' homes.

"Even assuming ACS completed only one home search during each investigation (it typically conducts several), ACS sought court orders for just 0.4% of home entries," the suit states. "This means over 99.5% of home searches that ACS conducts are 'presumptively unreasonable' under the Fourth Amendment."

Once inside a family's home, the suit claims that ACS workers engage in incredibly invasive tactics, looking "inside medicine cabinets, under beds, in closets and dresser drawers, in the refrigerator, and in cupboards." Even more troubling, strip searches of children are common, with workers demanding that children lift up their shirts or pull down their pants. Over the course of an investigation—the average length is 60 days—families are typically subjected to these searches more than once.

The agency itself seems self-aware about the impact of these coercive techniques. According to one 2020 report by the National Innovation Service, ACS policy "incentivizes [staff] to be invasive and not tell parents their rights." The report noted how "the experience of an investigation, even when an allegation is ultimately determined to be unfounded, too often traumatizes parents and children."

Further, agency leadership has also acknowledged that many reports of child abuse and neglect are completely unfounded, as individuals are allowed to make anonymous reports. A 2023 letter from the New York City Bar went so far as to state that a "significant percentage of" child abuse hotline callers "make false reports, for the purpose of harassment."

In all, the suit argues that ACS' policy of using coercive tactics to enter families' homes without a warrant constitutes a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights, arguing that the agency's "failure to adequately train or supervise ACS caseworkers regarding the protection of parents' Fourth Amendment rights" has directly led ACS workers to use manipulative, false tactics to persuade families to allow them to "conduct warrantless, non-exigent searches of Plaintiffs' and class members' homes."

The post NYC Child Protection Agency Uses 'Coercive Tactics' To Bully Parents Into Allowing Warrantless Searches appeared first on Reason.com.