Full title: Α Fox dressed as a Monk is greeting a passing Hare Etching by A. Fox after Joseph Wolf, 1853

“Le Grand Cloisonné” (2017), driftwood, linen twine, and wallpaper, 120 x 90 x 5 centimeters

Tiff are you ok? These are starting to resemble a series of increasingly unhinged post it notes stuck to the wall somewhere. 💀

>Despite those words of caution, Moore is one of several high-profile genetic genealogists who exploited a loophole in a commercial database called GEDmatch, allowing them to search the DNA of individuals who explicitly opted out of sharing their genetic information with police.The loophole, which a source demonstrated for The Intercept, allows genealogists working with police to manipulate search fields within a DNA comparison tool to trick the system into showing opted-out profiles. In records of communications reviewed by The Intercept, Moore and two other forensic genetic genealogists discussed the loophole and how to trigger it. In a separate communication, one of the genealogists described hiding the fact that her organization had made an identification using an opted-out profile.

Never trust opt outs 🫠

Ghost archive link

hi

Something not high energy, and interesting but not too interesting lol

Examples I've been enjoying include 99% Invisible, Ologies, and Common Descent

Archive link

Full text:

HAYWARD — While the 28-foot cross that the Lions Club erected on public land atop Albany Hill 52 years ago may seem like an obvious violation of the Constitution’s “Establishment Clause” that is widely interpreted as requiring a separation of church and state, the community service group’s lawyers have gone to court to argue that city officials failed to find a solution that preserved the Christian symbol — without ever genuinely entertaining efforts to compromise.

A trial kicked off Tuesday to decide whether local officials had the right to remove the controversial steel and plexiglass cross last month, culminating in four hours of witness testimony and a host of legal objections at the Hayward Hall of Justice.

Instead of justifying the cross’ removal, attorneys representing the city of Albany called no witnesses, submitted no exhibits and asked scant questions during testimonies “because it’s (the Lions Club’s) challenge.”

Rather, Albany’s legal team asked one question to each of the three witnesses that took the stand Tuesday: did they make an effort to oppose the Albany City Council’s unanimous decision to acquire the land under the cross by eminent domain at their April 2022 meeting? No one said “yes.”

Early on June 8, the city quietly removed the electrically illuminated cross, which the Albany Lions Club installed in 1971 on then-private land. The quiet removal was Albany’s attempt to finally allay accusations of constitutional violation, address residents’ resentment about one religion being given preference over others, and free up more space on the 1.1-acre plot of what is now public park space.

A federal judge and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled that the cross violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment because governments are forbidden from promoting one religion over another, but the structure sat on an easement granted to the Lions Club to ensure its preservation.

But at Monday’s trial, Lions Club’s attorneys Robert Nichols and Richard Covert effectively doubled down on the cross’ overt Christian symbolism and message; they argued that the cross’ perch on the hill has historically been a sacrosanct destination for church services, memorials, weddings and everyday prayer for the local Christian community, including the roughly dozen “Friends of the Cross on Albany Hill” who gathered outside of the courthouse Tuesday morning to show their support.

Kevin Pope, president of the Albany Lions Club, and Dorena Osborn, the granddaughter of the Lions Club member who installed the cross, both testified that the cross was a “sacred location” for Christians to worship, pray and see a symbol of Jesus Christ’s death, resurrection and love.

Nichols argued the city had an obligation not to burden religious practices like the ones on Albany Hill unless there were no other alternatives.

Technically, Albany could have skirted constitutional problems by selling the land under the cross to the Lions Club, but Mayor Aaron Tiedemann said the decision to get rid of the Christian symbol altogether was more aligned with values of many in the current community, who have long complained that the cross symbolizes a preference of one religion over others, offends some members of the city’s diverse communities, is reminiscent of KKK cross-burnings in the East Bay hills in the 1920s, and is an eyesore.

However, the defense submitted transcripts of past council meetings, Facebook posts and city documents into evidence that they allege show how past and present councilmembers did not facilitate any debate about the trade-offs of the controversial decision. Instead, they claim the city’s public actions regarding the cross — including requesting that PG&E shut off power to the structure — were a “sham and charade” because they simply wanted to move forward with its removal from the park, which the attorneys argued was a publicized goal since at least 2016.

Nichols contended those preconceived notions were on display during the April 2022 meeting. While the Albany City Council had a robust discussion on the cost, style and necessity of police cars, when the vote regarding the cross came up, Tiedemann only recited a pre-written motion about the eminent domain lawsuit without any followup by his colleagues.

The attorneys representing the city, Andrew Saghian and Scott Ditfurth, repeatedly objected to dozens of items of evidence and questions posed by the Lions Club attorneys, arguing issues of hearsay, relevance, authenticity, legislative privilege and foundation. The issues in question were all sourced from city documents, but the lawyers said the Lions Club often failed to authenticate or adequately frame the information shared in court.

Judge Somnath Raj Chatterjee was generally split on the lawyers’ arguments, but ultimately sustained a number of the challenges. He will rule on a final list of accepted exhibits after both legal teams file briefs in the coming weeks.

Full text:

HAYWARD — The Hayward City Council declared a local emergency Thursday over an ongoing cyberattack, in an effort to more quickly acquire resources to respond to what officials have described as intruders trying to hold municipal computer systems and networks hostage.

The attack has gripped the city since it was discovered Sunday — affecting an array of services from emergency dispatching to electronic payments to library check-out systems — and left officials without an answer for when the disruption will be fully resolved.

“We’re still trying to assess that at this point,” Hayward City Manager Kelly McAdoo told the council, adding that some services such as the city website have been restored while others remain offline. “Our priority is ensuring public safety services are restored to the extent that those need to be.”

McAdoo said the city’s 911 dispatch center has “had to pivot the most in this emergency” while it continues to answer calls and help police officers and firefighters respond in a timely manner.

The city manager declined to elaborate on how the center was affected, but the city’s mayor, Mark Salinas, suggested at the meeting that emergency dispatch communications had been knocked down to an “old-school” mode of operation in which public safety personnel kept track of calls for service and location and other information using “pen and paper.”

Hayward will remain under a local emergency indefinitely. Officials said the designation allows the city to respond more flexibly to the cyber crisis by suspending certain rules and regulations to obtain equipment and protect city staff, residents and property.

In what’s become a familiar refrain this week, Chuck Finnie, a city spokesperson, said no evidence has yet been found of a breach or theft of confidential or private personal information of current or former city employees, residents or other members of the public. If such evidence is found, the city will contact those affected directly, he said.

The cyberattack was detected before sunrise Sunday, Finnie said, adding that intruders managed to penetrate city defenses “but weren’t in there for very long.” He said the city continues to evaluate the ransomware “infection.”

“We assume that they don’t just get in, get caught and go away,” Finnie said.

He declined to comment on the people who may be responsible for the attack or whether hackers have presented any demands for payment to the city.

The attack has also caused disruptions to the city’s electronic permitting and payment services. The online portal to submit permit applications for development projects, pay fees and schedule inspections remained offline Friday; the permit center at City Hall has temporarily expanded its hours in the meantime. And Finnie said public-facing electronic payment systems have also been interrupted, such as the city’s bill-payment kiosks at City Hall. Finnie said grace periods are being offered to those burdened by system disruptions.

Hayward is the latest East Bay city to be hit by a ransomware attack this year, following a February attack against Oakland that resulted in the exposure of sensitive personal data stored by the city and a class-action lawsuit by employees. And experts say local governments can be particularly vulnerable to attacks.

Local governments “don’t pay enough attention to security,” said Levent Ertaul, a Cal State East Bay professor who specializes in cybersecurity issues and chairs the computer science department, speaking generally. “Their systems are not up to date, and they don’t have, maybe, enough budget to update the systems.”

In Hayward, the attack shows emergency dispatch systems can be disrupted, potentially exposing police officers, firefighters and the public to added risk. Salinas, the city’s mayor, said in an interview some emergency communication systems were compromised amid the cyber intrusion.

A review of police and fire dispatch transmissions by Bay Area News Group showed disruptions being reported by emergency personnel in the early morning hours Sunday, including the failure of the city’s computer-aided dispatch system, or CAD; problems with officers’ mobile car computers; and the inability to run vehicle license plates for associated information.

“All systems have gone down,” a dispatcher alerted city firefighters sometime between 5:30 and 6 a.m. Sunday, according to transmissions archived by Broadcastify.

The full scope of the disruption on dispatching services has remained unclear. City officials have repeatedly declined to comment on police and fire operations in the wake of the cyberattack, only stressing that 911 dispatching services and police and firefighter response times have been maintained.

Scott Zuschin, a private investigator who served as a law enforcement officer in California for 20 years before retiring from the Chico Police Department in 2018, said CAD systems can automate many call-taking tasks, keep track of officers in the field using GPS and serve as an electronic filing cabinet for such information as address history and warrant information. CAD systems can also be used to access DMV records and the National Crime Information Center, a federal index that stores information about a person’s criminal record history, stolen property, missing people and fugitives.

When a CAD system fails, accessing criminal justice information can take more time for local agencies, and they may turn to outside agencies for assistance, Zuschin said.

“A lot of things that were made very easy by CAD are now extremely time-consuming, and probably causing a great amount of officer-safety issues for the cops out in the field,” Zuschin said. He added: “Proactive traffic stops are probably put on hold until this is resolved.”

The Alameda County Sheriff’s Office confirmed it was assisting the Hayward Police Department but did not comment further.

“We’re certainly not out of the weeds,” Mayor Salinas said in an interview, adding that his top concern is ensuring sensitive information about city employees, members of the public and transactions is protected. “This is definitely a front that we really need to continue focusing on. … Just like we focus on public safety.”

This week the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the drug lecanemab after research showed it slowed the progression of Alzheimer’s disease in some patients with mild cognitive impairment.

This is undoubtedly a breakthrough for treatment of an irreversible, progressive brain disorder affecting more than 6.5 million Americans. While the drug was granted so-called accelerated approval in January, full FDA approval means wider coverage by Medicare so it can better reach patients.

Named Leqembi, lecanemab’s approval has triggered less controversy than a related drug called Aduhelm, or aducanumab, because its clinical trial results are more definitive.

With help from Stanford and UC San Francisco experts, we answer questions about the new drug.

Q: What is lecanemab?

A: It’s a drug that is designed to remove amyloid beta, a sticky plaque that builds up in the brain in people with Alzheimer’s disease, causing disease progression. It is the first anti-amyloid treatment to earn full approval by the FDA.

The drug, developed by the Japanese pharmaceutical company Eisai and sold in partnership with Biogen, is priced around $26,500 annually per patient.

Q: Does the drug cure Alzheimer’s?

A: No. Patients continued to experience decline in cognition and independence. But lecanemab causes a modest reduction in the progression of the earliest stages of the disease, slowing the rate of cognitive decline by 27% compared with a placebo in an 18-month study of 1,800 patients with early Alzheimer’s disease. This translated to a roughly 6-month delay in symptom progression, giving patients more meaningful time with their friends and families.

Q: Who is eligible for lecanemab?

A: This drug will only be prescribed for patients who are in the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease with a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia.

Patients with moderate or severe dementia or other diagnoses are not eligible, because there is no safety or effectiveness data on its use in people with more advanced disease.

It is not recommended for patients with a history of stroke or seizures, bleeding disorders or treatment with blood thinners, immune conditions or treatment with immunosuppressants, other serious conditions such as cancer, MRI abnormalities with evidence of a tumor or hemorrhage or hypersensitivity to monoclonal antibody treatment.

Q: What is needed to get treatment?

A: Before starting lecanemab, your doctor will need to confirm the presence of amyloid in your brain. This requires either an amyloid PET scan or spinal tap. Because patients who have a specific genetic variation called ApoE4 are also at higher risk of side effects, genetic testing prior to receiving treatment is required.

At Stanford Health Care, neurologists will consider treatment for patients who are: ages 50 to 90 years, able to undergo frequent MRI scans and have PET scans or cerebrospinal fluid to confirm the presence of brain amyloid. Patients must be willing to undergo ApoE4 genotype testing. It is also recommended that they have have a care partner or someone else to support their frequent visits.

Q: How is lecanemab administered?

A: Lecanemab is given intravenously — infused through a vein — every two weeks.

Q: Where will treatment be offered?

A: Because neurologists and special equipment are needed to evaluate patients and administer the drug, its use will be limited to large academic hospitals and specialty clinics.

Q: What are some potential risks of lecanemab?

A: The drug is known to cause brain swelling or bleeding, called amyloid related imaging abnormality (ARIA) in about 20% of patients. While most patients with ARIA show no symptoms, some may experience headache, visual changes, and confusion. The majority — seven to eight of 10 cases — of ARIA resolve within three to four months. While severe symptoms and complications occur in fewer than 1 in 100 patients with ARIA, at least three people have died of serious brain bleeds after taking the drug.

The drug can also cause infusion-related reactions in about 20% of patients. Most of these reactions occurred with the first treatment. These symptoms may include changes in blood pressure, changes in breathing, skin changes, fevers, and chills. The majority of infusion reactions caused by lecanemab have been easily treatable.

Q: Is lecanemab covered by Medicare or other insurance?

A: To be covered by Medicare, a patient must be diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease and participate in a registry.

Amyloid PET scans are not currently covered by insurance. Coverage for other required tests – such as MRI scans, blood tests or cerebrospinal fluid analysis — is not yet certain.

The availability of private insurance coverage is not yet known.

Q: How does lecanemab differ from aducanumab, or Aduhelm, which won the FDA’s accelerated approval in June 2021?

A: The two drugs act through a similar mechanism. But Aduhelm targets a different version of amyloid and may be less effective at removing the plaque. Two large trials of Aduhelm in people with early symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease were discontinued prematurely, and one trial did not show a benefit in symptoms. Because of conflicting results on whether it slowed cognitive decline, Aduhelm is not covered by most insurers.

For more information:

UCSF’s Memory and Aging Center: https://memory.ucsf.edu/lecanemabStanford Health Care Center for Memory Disorders: https://stanfordhealthcare.org/campaigns/lecanemab.html

Interesting bot, hope this works!