The shootings that left 10 dead at an Oregon community college on Thursday are focusing attention on security measures on U.S. campuses and stoking debate over whether firearms should be allowed on campus for protection.Or, we could ban the guns.
In recent years, colleges across the U.S. have implemented measures to identify potentially violent students and respond more effectively to mass shootings. Many of the changes came in the wake of the 2007 rampage at Virginia Tech that killed 33 people, in the deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history.Or, we could ban the guns.
Colleges have focused broadly on two areas: improving emergency notifications to people on campus and responding quickly and forcefully to crises, said S. Daniel Carter, director of a campus-safety initiative at VTV Family Outreach Foundation, which was formed as a result of the Virginia incident.
The number of campus attacks at colleges has increased in recent decades, according to a 2010 study by a group of federal agencies, including the U.S. Secret Service. Under the study’s definition of such incidents, they grew to 83 in the 2000s—including data only through 2008—from 79 in the 1990s and 40 in the 1980s. Data compiled by Everytown for Gun Safety, which advocates for stricter gun controls, show that shootings at colleges increased to 31 in 2014 from 14 in 2013. Thursday’s incident was the 17th this year, according to the group.Or, we could ban the guns.
More broadly in the U.S., federal authorities also have reported an increase in mass shootings in recent years....
The Virginia Tech shootings highlighted weaknesses in identifying potentially troubled students and intervening to prevent them from acting violently, security experts say. Though the gunman had raised concerns among numerous people on campus who encountered him, there was no centralized system to gather such warning signs.
Since then, many colleges have implemented “threat-assessment programs” that bring together law enforcement, administrators, counselors and others to share information and investigate worrisome reports....
Institutions also have rolled out far more robust emergency notification systems to alert people about dangerous situations. The University of Texas has a system that can send text messages to 68,000 students, faculty and staff within three to four minutes...Or, we could ban the guns.
Colleges are also increasingly replacing security guards with police officers they have hired or enhancing existing police departments on campus, said William Taylor, president of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators. Agencies are outfitting officers with equipment such as body armor, ballistic helmets and rifles. And they are providing more training on how to respond to active shooters.Or, we could ban the guns.
One program at Texas State University has been adopted as a model by the FBI. The main areas of training involve how to neutralize a gunman on a rampage—moving in quickly rather than waiting to establish a perimeter—and how to tend to victims before medical personnel can arrive, said J. Pete Blair, executive director of the program.Or, we could ban the guns.
Smaller community colleges often have to rely on agreements with local police, who can’t respond as quickly and aren’t as familiar with the layout of campus buildings, said Mr. Deisinger, of Sigma Threat Management Associates, a consulting firm whose clients include colleges. In addition, many students and faculty are part-time, making it more difficult to observe warning signs, he said.So ... maybe we could ban the guns?
“My opinion is these people target gun-free zones knowing there is no defense they will meet,” said Lester Fanning, 64 years old, a retired land surveyor and events coordinator of the Roseburg Rod & Gun Club. “I strongly believe there should be teachers who are armed and trained in the defense of others.”Yes, I suppose that's what we'll end up doing.
Companies Move Beyond Passwords With Human Behavior Algorithms
The greatest threat to every corporate network remains the typical employee, a creature known to use the same password across multiple websites and occasionally click on links found in suspicious emails. But now companies like Google Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. and Aetna Inc. are starting to look at employee behavior differently—not as a threat, but as the possible key towards building a more secure enterprise.
They are researching or starting to implement behavioral biometrics, a field of study that seeks to identify unique patterns in the way people perform various activities, such as the way a person types or swipes the screen, or even how she walks while she holds her smartphone. The goal is to take those patterns, collected by sensors and other technology, and create a unique digital persona that can be used to identify and continuously verify trusted users in the network. Security experts say that how people behave is very difficult to copy, especially when several metrics are combined.
On the commercial banking side where customers are wiring big dollar amounts, Wells Fargo has installed technology that can compare a user’s normal pattern of behavior to what’s currently happening on a real-time basis. The technology tracks how a customer typically clicks through a Wells Fargo application, where they went within the application,and how fast they clicked, said Mr. Ellis. If the behavior doesn’t match, Wells Fargo quarantines the transaction and takes other steps to verify the customer such as calling them.
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has run two research programs with a number of universities, research labs and companies looking at behavioral biometrics. A number of those research projects have looked at so-called continuous behavioral authentication, where computers or mobile devices constantly look at multiple types of behaviors to continually identify and authenticate a user. Research that company BehavioSec conducted as part of DARPA’s Active Authentication program shows that cybercriminals trying to hijack employee accounts can be caught quickly. The 2013 study observed user keystrokes, mouse movement and application usage and found that the correct user can work through a regular workday without being falsely rejected while an incorrect user would be detected within 18 seconds using a keyboard or 2.4 minutes using a mouse.
She responded that she'd never been, in part because she's so used to getting casual massages among friends at parties that she kind of resents paying for them now.
I understand the principle of resenting certain charges - I myself have gone far out of my way to avoid online fees for movie tickets - but I explained to her, there's no such thing as a free massage. Among friends, for example, there's always the expectation of a reciprocal massage. And if you want the full lie down/strip down massage, well, then you usually pay in sex.
Not that there's anything wrong with either of those things. It's just that when it comes to massages, I prefer to pay in cash.
Which is why I need to find a place where it's easier to make appointments than Massage Envy.
Fandom: Captain America (Movies)
Rating: Teen And Up Audiences
Warnings: Graphic Depictions Of Violence
Relationships: James "Bucky" Barnes/Steve Rogers
Characters: Steve Rogers, James "Bucky" Barnes, Natasha Romanov, Pepper Potts, Phil Coulson, Sam Wilson (Marvel), Bobbi Morse
Additional Tags: PTSD, Recovery, Coping Mechanisms, SHIELD, Action/Adventure, Drama, Angst, Psychological Drama
There wasn’t anything left to salvage. That’s what Fury believed. It would have been a kindness to put him down.
When SHIELD finally releases Bucky from custody, Steve struggles to decode behavior that ranges from curious to downright alarming. But with Hydra scrambling to regroup and SHIELD taking more and more questionable measures, Steve is dragged back into battle, forced to weigh what's best for Bucky against what's best for the fate of the free world.
Can I just add how interesting it is that, like, all fanfic these days (as far as I can tell) casts the Agents of SHIELD team as the villains?
Netflix knows your TV relationship status.
New data from the streaming-video service reveal the point at which users fully committed to some of the most popular TV shows on Netflix. For instance, it took only two episodes of “Breaking Bad” for the vast majority of viewers to buy into the crime drama and complete the first season. “How I Met Your Mother,” on the other hand, was a more acquired taste: The high-concept sitcom didn’t hit a critical mass of loyal Netflix viewers until its eighth episode.
Netflix examined viewing patterns in the first season of 25 of the most-watched TV series in its catalog, including its own original series like “House of Cards” and “Orange Is the New Black.” The company identified the episode where 70% or more of viewers went on to finish at least the show’s first season.
Netflix uses such data, including the popularity of certain subjects and actors, to predict viewing patterns and determine how much money to spend on original or licensed shows. Netflix Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos says these statistics do not influence creative decisions about the company’s original series....
Netflix also tracks statistics on attrition—when viewers bail out on a series for whatever reason—but the company declined to share that research.
Volkswagen Is Told to Recall Nearly 500,000 Vehicles Over Emissions Software
The Obama administration on Friday directed Volkswagen to recall nearly a half million cars from the road, saying the German automaker used software intentionally designed to circumvent environmental standards for reducing smog.
The Environmental Protection Agency issued the company a notice of violation and accused the company of breaking the law by installing software known as a “defeat device” in 4-cylinder Volkswagen and Audi vehicles from model years 2009-15. The device is programmed to detect when the car is undergoing official emissions testing, and to only turn on full emissions control systems during that testing. Those controls are turned off during normal driving situations, when the vehicles pollute far more heavily than reported by the manufacturer, the E.P.A. said.
If you live in the Bay Area and have looked for something special to spice up a birthday party, you might have discovered the Freakin’ Awesome Karaoke Express, a truck that promises to deliver an unbelievable selection of songs to your doorstep. You might have seen a review on Yelp that said it’s perfect for a girl’s night out or a Facebook review that mentioned it being a crowd-pleaser at a neighborhood block party. You may have been impressed by its 19,000 Twitter followers, and considered hiring this mobile song-slinging truck to drive up to your next outdoor shindig.Sigh. I mean, I always cast a gimlet eye on online reviews but I do depend on them for a lot of things.
What you probably didn’t realize was that there is no such thing as the Freakin’ Awesome Karaoke Express (or F.A.K.E., for short). I made it up and paid strangers to pump up its online footprint to make it seem real. I didn’t do it to scam anyone or even for the LULZ. I wanted to see firsthand how the fake reputation economy operates. The investigation led me to an online marketplace where a good reputation comes cheap.
For $5, I could get 200 Facebook fans, or 6,000 Twitter followers, or I could get @SMExpertsBiz to tweet about the truck to the account’s 26,000 Twitter fans. A Lincoln could get me a Facebook review, a Google review, an Amazon review, or, less easily, a Yelp review.
The terms of service on the website Rentboy.com said that people could not use it to exchange money for sex. But federal authorities, who called it the largest online male-escort service and arrested the site’s chief executive and several other employees on Tuesday, said that was exactly what was happening.
You guys understand how significant this is? This is real. I’m having trouble processing it. Like, my legs are shaking.--GOP pollster Frank Luntz, after holding a focus group on the sources of Donald Trump's appeal