https://t.co/PtU69Touv6
Resignations in the news 12/21/2020 thru 12/25/2020
From Anon
Longtime executive at Maine Public retiring after 40
https://t.co/Vq4IBTHE9j
https://t.co/PnEtmHe3RN
https://t.co/C8YrtZnIjb
https://t.co/nQ4lRwbn9U
https://t.co/H6f2ivrb1b
https://t.co/LBONH7Z0Y9
https://t.co/rcSnBW07wt
https://t.co/HxdqhnqRnK
https://t.co/7TIteZcCPl
https://t.co/4bBrwtp4EN
https://t.co/QpWO11Rxf5
https://t.co/1rQo2WuNpV
https://t.co/vlCtGhNeEJ
More from News
I'm hesitating to read or listen to this for fear it oversimplifies. I worked for about a year @NYPDnews on this. We learned a LOT. Most of the $320 million I estimate was lost by New Yorkers on Cyber-enabled scams in 2019 began with voice calls to set the hook...
Looking through our empirical data, we see that scam calls dominate the world of Cyber-enabled (which doesn't include ransomware or network intrusion/takeover, but does include crime that leverages a digital channel for some aspect of the attack).
We found that NYPD officers, when empowered to combat this kind of crime with training and tools, were champing at the bit to get out there and fight it. They all know the scams are out there - many told us of family members who'd fallen victim - but they felt powerless to act...
I personally blame the Feds, who over the past two decades have worked hard to make all "Cybercrime" seem (a) mysterious and sophisticated to the extent that (b) only the Feds could combat it, through tools like the IC3 survey. That tool is actually quite ineffective.
As I said at RSA2020, for Cyber-enabled scams, IC3's survey is the place where good leads go to die. For example, in 2018 around zero point three three percent of cases reported to it were ultimately investigated by a task force. They're just snowed under. https://t.co/IxjM6t0cfm
Looking through our empirical data, we see that scam calls dominate the world of Cyber-enabled (which doesn't include ransomware or network intrusion/takeover, but does include crime that leverages a digital channel for some aspect of the attack).
We found that NYPD officers, when empowered to combat this kind of crime with training and tools, were champing at the bit to get out there and fight it. They all know the scams are out there - many told us of family members who'd fallen victim - but they felt powerless to act...
I personally blame the Feds, who over the past two decades have worked hard to make all "Cybercrime" seem (a) mysterious and sophisticated to the extent that (b) only the Feds could combat it, through tools like the IC3 survey. That tool is actually quite ineffective.
As I said at RSA2020, for Cyber-enabled scams, IC3's survey is the place where good leads go to die. For example, in 2018 around zero point three three percent of cases reported to it were ultimately investigated by a task force. They're just snowed under. https://t.co/IxjM6t0cfm
This week marks 12 months since Josephine Cashman supplied Andrew Bolt with a letter falsely attributed to a Yolngu lawman that Bolt published via NewsCorp on Jan 26 as parcel of his persecution of Bruce Pascoe. Cashman & Bolt still haven’t provided a satisfactory explanation
Terry Yumbulul didn’t write the letter and didn’t agree with its content. He said so himself in a video published the next day https://t.co/IJ6ricZeRi and in a written statement published later the same day
The weird thing was, it soon emerged that large sections of the letter had been cribbed from other sources. Weird because as a Yolngu lawman, Terry didn’t need to borrow his knowledge from unrelated, alternate sources ... pretty much verbatim
The fallout was swift. Bolt was compelled to do a correction on his column and Cashman was just as swiftly dumped from her position of the Morrison government’s Senior Advisory Group for an Indigenous Voice to Government
There was no apology from either of them or from NewsCorp tho, and with the assistance of Sky News After Dark they desperately attempted to obfuscate the reality that everybody involved had been caught out and left red faced
Terry Yumbulul didn’t write the letter and didn’t agree with its content. He said so himself in a video published the next day https://t.co/IJ6ricZeRi and in a written statement published later the same day
The weird thing was, it soon emerged that large sections of the letter had been cribbed from other sources. Weird because as a Yolngu lawman, Terry didn’t need to borrow his knowledge from unrelated, alternate sources ... pretty much verbatim
The fallout was swift. Bolt was compelled to do a correction on his column and Cashman was just as swiftly dumped from her position of the Morrison government’s Senior Advisory Group for an Indigenous Voice to Government
There was no apology from either of them or from NewsCorp tho, and with the assistance of Sky News After Dark they desperately attempted to obfuscate the reality that everybody involved had been caught out and left red faced
You want to know about Barockschloss Ludwigsburg? Too bad, I'm going to tell you some stuff about it, as it's my 'local'...
It all came about because Eberhard Ludwig, Duke of Württe.berg, decided in 1704 that he wanted a big old palace from which to be an absolutist Duke, and do absolutist things. So, picking an old hunting lodge, he started to extend it...
Thing is, though, to build a residential palace, you need a workforce. To gain a workforce, they needed somewhere to live. So, alongside the palace, he founded the town of Ludwigsburg, now adjacent to Stuttgart.
Ludwig resided at Ludwigsburg until 1733, when, childless, he kicked the bucket. Then Carl-Eugen, a relative, became Duke, and that's when things became lit.
See Carl Eugen had been raised in the court of Frederick the Great, and had been deprived of fun and female company - they were banned from the Prussian court.
So, he was essentially a big fat party animal from the get-go.
Ludwigsburg Residential Palace is often nicknamed the \u2018Versailles of Swabia\u2019! Take with our #DailyDrone a bird\u2019s-eye view of one of the largest Baroque palaces in Germany. pic.twitter.com/9nn8oY34HG
— DW Culture (@dw_culture) December 21, 2020
It all came about because Eberhard Ludwig, Duke of Württe.berg, decided in 1704 that he wanted a big old palace from which to be an absolutist Duke, and do absolutist things. So, picking an old hunting lodge, he started to extend it...
Thing is, though, to build a residential palace, you need a workforce. To gain a workforce, they needed somewhere to live. So, alongside the palace, he founded the town of Ludwigsburg, now adjacent to Stuttgart.
Ludwig resided at Ludwigsburg until 1733, when, childless, he kicked the bucket. Then Carl-Eugen, a relative, became Duke, and that's when things became lit.
See Carl Eugen had been raised in the court of Frederick the Great, and had been deprived of fun and female company - they were banned from the Prussian court.
So, he was essentially a big fat party animal from the get-go.
