HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » PatSeg » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Female
Current location: New Hampshire
Member since: Sat Jan 10, 2004, 06:50 AM
Number of posts: 27,362

Journal Archives

Mark Zuckerberg: Why is Facebook still using Kaspersky Lab?

I am familiar with Kaspersky. I remember hearing Rachel talking about him and I saw Richard Engel interview the former KGB student a couple months ago. Meanwhile, the U.S. government has banned the use of Kaspersky Lab software and the FBI is advising private businesses to discontinue using it. Possibly too little, too late I suppose, considering all that has transpired the past two years.

Today Facebook logged me out, something which has happened on occasion, but this time it would not let me login unless I downloaded the Kaspersky scanner to "clean" my computer. After I screamed "No" to my computer, I did an anti virus scan with my own software. Then I went to Google to see if this was happening to other people as well. It appears this has been happening for over two years, often with very negative consequences, including removing existing anti virus programs.

In order to get into my Facebook account, I had to use my laptop. I am not ready to give up Facebook, as I keep in touch with family and friends there, but I absolutely will not use Kaspersky software on my computer.

Here is the message I received this morning when I tried to login to Facebook:

Let's Check Your Device for Malicious Software

Hi Pat, we're continuously working to keep you account secure. We've noticed that this device may be infected with malicious software. To continue to use Facebook, you can either use other devices or clean this device by downloading the scanner provided by Facebook and Kaspersky Lab.

I did clear my cache and restarted my computer, but still can't get in. Meanwhile, I wonder how much damage has been done throughout the world with this tactic.

New Peer-reviewed Paper's Bold Statement

One of the benchmark moments in the movement for GMO transparency came in 2012 when professor Gilles-Eric Séralini of France and his team published a study showing the toxic, carcinogenic effects of Monsanto’s Roundup and Roundup-Ready corn on lab rats.

The study was retracted, however, amid a firestorm of controversy and questionable ethics surrounding the Biotech industry and its role in getting the paper taken out of the peer-reviewed journal Food and Chemical Toxicology.

Eventually, Séralini and his study were able to resurface as it was later published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe, a development that was far less covered in the mainstream media than the retraction of the paper, and the controversy surrounding Monsanto’s role in that process as well.

Now, yet another peer-reviewed paper is once again backing the Séralini study and asking deeper questions about what has become of science in an era where commercial and corporate interests are taking an active role in deciding what results should be deemed acceptable.


Science must be defended against commercial interests that attempt to get important papers on GMOs and pesticides retracted rather than encouraging further research to clarify any uncertainties, says an important new peer-reviewed paper published in Environmental Sciences Europe.

The paper, authored by Drs John Fagan, Terje Traavik and Thomas Bøhn, details the events that followed the publication of the research study led by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini on GM maize NK603 and Roundup. The Séralini study found toxic effects in rats, notably liver and kidney damage, from NK603 maize and Roundup, both individually and in combination.

The paper was attacked by pro-GMO scientists, who argued that it should be retracted. Eventually the journal editor capitulated and retracted the paper, though it was subsequently republished in Environmental Sciences Europe.

The authors of the new paper comment on this row, lamenting the growth of “a trend in which disputes, between interest groups vying for retraction and republication of papers that report controversial results, overshadow the normal scientific process in which peer-reviewed publication stimulates new research, generating new empirical evidence that drives the evolution of scientific understanding”.


You might want to give this whole "peer-reviewed" meme a break.

Okay, some of my pics from Nashua rally yesterday

Waiting on Main street about 10:30 am.

Kid's self-voting station.

The early, early, early birds got to sit down.

Waiting (still a long way to go, but didn't realize it at the time).

Secret Service

Panoramic view of rally

James Taylor - amazing of course

I couldn't actually see the president (too short) but my son held my camera up high to take some pics.

I think every TALL man in New Hampshire moved in front of me as soon as the president took to the podium! It was a great experience anyway.

Rick Santorum, you are a cruel, insensitive SOB

Your children had a stay at home mom, they even were home schooled. Yet you brag about your contribution to welfare reform in the nineties, sending single mothers of very young children back to work.

I was a single mom and for a couple of years I was on welfare. I was sick, had no car, family support, or even a phone, but Rick Santorum would have insisted that I go back to work even though I could not afford childcare. My children did not deserve even one full-time parent because we were poor. I'm trying to picture how I was suppose to take my 3-year-old to a childcare facility in the middle of winter without a car and then find my way to a job that probably didn't pay the most basic expenses.

My children are grown now and they are assets to society, but if people like Santorum had their way, their lives would have been much different. Welfare got us through a couple of really rough years and my children had a parent at home, even though things were difficult in most respects.

Rick Santorum's comments about welfare reform were like a kick in the gut for me this morning. Enduring the hardships of my life were difficult enough, but to have them trivialized by a self-righteous ass like him, is like rubbing salt in the wound. Walk a mile in my shoes Mr. Santorum, even a quarter of a mile you idiot, and then talk to me about welfare reform! When you open your mouth, you make a mockery of my life and you discredit the value of my children. How Christian of you.

Romney tells gay vet that he may repeal same-sex marriage rights in NH

During a stop in Manchester, New Hampshire this morning Mitt Romney suggested to 63-year-old gay veteran Bob Garon that he would support the repeal of the state’s marriage equality law, despite previously claiming that marriage is the purview of the states and advocating for states rights in the tenth amendment:

Garon, who is gay and was seated with his husband, Bob Lemire, then said to Romney: “It’s good to know how you feel, that you do not believe everyone is entitled to their constitutional rights.”

Romney replied: “Actually, I think at the time the Constitution was written marriage was between a man and a woman and I don’t believe the Supreme Court has changed that.”

Garon, a political independent later, told reporters he was unimpressed with Romney.


There's video of the exchange.
Go to Page: 1