Looking for E-Mail Distribution Service That Won’t Limit What We Write

Google’s FeedBurner, which we use to deliver the Volokh Daily e-mail to our ≈3,000 subscribers, is stopping its e-mail service. My plan was to move to Google Groups instead, and we still might if we can’t get a good alternative, but I’m not wild about its content limits, including on whatever speech Google views as “Misleading content related to civic and democratic processes,” “Misleading content related to harmful health practices,” “hate speech,” and more.

Naturally, I don’t think our posts fit any such categories, and it’s probably unlikely, at least today, that Google would think that they do. But I want us to make these decisions for ourselves, and have our users decide for themselves what they choose to read, rather than being subjected to the tender mercies of Big Tech. And while I haven’t heard of Google enforcing its Google Groups content policies yet, a lot of tech companies have sharply stepped up their restrictions in recent years—the trend seems to be towards greater and greater exercise of control by such companies.

Can anyone recommend a convenient and reliable e-mail distribution service, with a built-in daily delivery option as well as post-by-post delivery (I expect all such services have them), but without these sorts of content limits? I’m basically looking for a service that views itself as akin to a phone company or UPS or FedEx or the post office—infrastructure with a hands-off attitude to content (setting aside outright illegal content, which they may have a legal obligation to block once they know about it).

I realize that the most blacklist-resistant alternative would be to run this on our own servers, and perhaps things have come to the point where we can’t really trust any third parties on such matters. But I’m also looking for convenience and technical reliability, and appreciate the virtues of division of labor for promoting that. So if there is a good third-party service to which we can outsource the technical work, I’d like to use it. Please let me know if the comments if you have some recommendations.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3x1RlBR
via IFTTT

N.Y. Government Pressuring Regulated Insurance Companies into “Diversity” Hiring

From the N.Y. Department of Financial Services last month:

To:  All New York Domestic and Foreign Insurance Companies

Re:  Diversity and Corporate Governance

As Superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), I have consistently stressed the critical importance of diverse perspectives to problem-solving.  Research shows that diverse teams perform better, innovate more, and are more effective at managing risks….

For all the reasons outlined in this circular letter, DFS expects New York-regulated insurers to make the diversity of their leadership a business priority and a key element of their corporate governance….

DFS has evaluated different regulatory approaches to promote DEI in the insurance industry, including the imposition of quotas and the collection and disclosure of diversity data on a company-by-company basis…. Based on our research and outreach, we have determined that the best way for DFS to support the insurance industry’s DEI efforts is by collecting and publishing data relating to the diversity of corporate boards and management. Data collection is essential to identify areas for improvement, set goals and measure progress toward those goals. Given the limited availability of insurance-specific diversity data, making that information public will allow companies to assess where they stand compared to their peers and, we hope, raise the bar for the entire industry. Transparency is a powerful catalyst for change….

As a first step, DFS will collect data from New York domestic and foreign insurers with more than $100 million in annual New York premiums relating to the gender, racial and ethnic composition of their boards and management as of December 31, 2019 and 2020, including information about board tenure and key board and senior management roles….

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/32n6aB4
via IFTTT

Poll Shows 69 Percent of Americans Favor Legal Weed, a New Record High


dreamstime_l_187555054

Public support for marijuana legalization has reached a new high.

According to pollsters at Quinnipiac University, 69 percent of all Americans and clear majorities in every demographic group now favor the legalization of marijuana. That’s up from 51 percent of Americans who said they favored legalization in 2012, the first year Quinnipiac included questions about marijuana in their national surveys, and up from 60 percent who backed legalization in 2019. The trend is unmistakable.

Support isn’t just growing, it is broadening. The Quinnipiac poll found that 78 percent of self-identified Democrats, 62 percent of self-identified Republicans, and 67 percent of self-identified independents favor legalization. The only age demographic where support for legalization falls short of 70 percent is for respondents who are 65 and older—though even that cohort supports legalization by a slim margin (51 percent).

The Quinnipiac poll, which surveyed 1,237 American adults between April 8 and 12, is in line with other recent snapshots of the electorate. A Gallup poll taken in November 2020 found 68 percent of Americans favor legal weed.

Those numbers show that politicians who continue to oppose legalization are increasingly out of step with the anti-prohibition sentiments of the general public.

That includes President Joe Biden, who recently reiterated his opposition to legal marijuana. “He believes in decriminalizing the use of marijuana, but his position has not changed,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters last month.

But such politicians are in the minority. Outside of the White House, the political trend is almost as clear as the trend within public opinion. New York and New Mexico recently became the 16th and 17th states to legalize marijuana for recreational use. Significantly, as Reason‘s Jacob Sullum highlighted, both states changed their stance on marijuana by passing legislation rather than using a ballot initiative, which is how most states have moved to legalize weed.

Similarly, the Virginia General Assembly voted earlier this year to accelerate the process of legalization in that state—which was originally set to legalize possession of marijuana in 2024, but will now do so on July 1 of this year (sales will still be illegal until 2024, however).

These are important changes, because they signal that state lawmakers are starting to catch up with prevailing public opinion—which, in turn, means that legalization efforts may no longer have to route around state legislatures and governor’s offices in order to succeed.

Congress and the White House are a different story. But Biden has always been something of a rusty weather vane when it comes to policy, and the wind is blowing hard in a clear direction on this one.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/32jJFg2
via IFTTT

Looking for E-Mail Distribution Service That Won’t Limit What We Write

Google’s FeedBurner, which we use to deliver the Volokh Daily e-mail to our ≈3,000 subscribers, is stopping its e-mail service. My plan was to move to Google Groups instead, and we still might if we can’t get a good alternative, but I’m not wild about its content limits, including on whatever speech Google views as “Misleading content related to civic and democratic processes,” “Misleading content related to harmful health practices,” “hate speech,” and more.

Naturally, I don’t think our posts fit any such categories, and it’s probably unlikely, at least today, that Google would think that they do. But I want us to make these decisions for ourselves, and have our users decide for themselves what they choose to read, rather than being subjected to the tender mercies of Big Tech. And while I haven’t heard of Google enforcing its Google Groups content policies yet, a lot of tech companies have sharply stepped up their restrictions in recent years—the trend seems to be towards greater and greater exercise of control by such companies.

Can anyone recommend a convenient and reliable e-mail distribution service, with a built-in daily delivery option as well as post-by-post delivery (I expect all such services have them), but without these sorts of content limits? I’m basically looking for a service that views itself as akin to a phone company or UPS or FedEx or the post office—infrastructure with a hands-off attitude to content (setting aside outright illegal content, which they may have a legal obligation to block once they know about it).

I realize that the most blacklist-resistant alternative would be to run this on our own servers, and perhaps things have come to the point where we can’t really trust any third parties on such matters. But I’m also looking for convenience and technical reliability, and appreciate the virtues of division of labor for promoting that. So if there is a good third-party service to which we can outsource the technical work, I’d like to use it. Please let me know if the comments if you have some recommendations.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3x1RlBR
via IFTTT

N.Y. Government Pressuring Regulated Insurance Companies into “Diversity” Hiring

From the N.Y. Department of Financial Services last month:

To:  All New York Domestic and Foreign Insurance Companies

Re:  Diversity and Corporate Governance

As Superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), I have consistently stressed the critical importance of diverse perspectives to problem-solving.  Research shows that diverse teams perform better, innovate more, and are more effective at managing risks….

For all the reasons outlined in this circular letter, DFS expects New York-regulated insurers to make the diversity of their leadership a business priority and a key element of their corporate governance….

DFS has evaluated different regulatory approaches to promote DEI in the insurance industry, including the imposition of quotas and the collection and disclosure of diversity data on a company-by-company basis…. Based on our research and outreach, we have determined that the best way for DFS to support the insurance industry’s DEI efforts is by collecting and publishing data relating to the diversity of corporate boards and management. Data collection is essential to identify areas for improvement, set goals and measure progress toward those goals. Given the limited availability of insurance-specific diversity data, making that information public will allow companies to assess where they stand compared to their peers and, we hope, raise the bar for the entire industry. Transparency is a powerful catalyst for change….

As a first step, DFS will collect data from New York domestic and foreign insurers with more than $100 million in annual New York premiums relating to the gender, racial and ethnic composition of their boards and management as of December 31, 2019 and 2020, including information about board tenure and key board and senior management roles….

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/32n6aB4
via IFTTT

Poll Shows 69 Percent of Americans Favor Legal Weed, a New Record High


dreamstime_l_187555054

Public support for marijuana legalization has reached a new high.

According to pollsters at Quinnipiac University, 69 percent of all Americans and clear majorities in every demographic group now favor the legalization of marijuana. That’s up from 51 percent of Americans who said they favored legalization in 2012, the first year Quinnipiac included questions about marijuana in their national surveys, and up from 60 percent who backed legalization in 2019. The trend is unmistakable.

Support isn’t just growing, it is broadening. The Quinnipiac poll found that 78 percent of self-identified Democrats, 62 percent of self-identified Republicans, and 67 percent of self-identified independents favor legalization. The only age demographic where support for legalization falls short of 70 percent is for respondents who are 65 and older—though even that cohort supports legalization by a slim margin (51 percent).

The Quinnipiac poll, which surveyed 1,237 American adults between April 8 and 12, is in line with other recent snapshots of the electorate. A Gallup poll taken in November 2020 found 68 percent of Americans favor legal weed.

Those numbers show that politicians who continue to oppose legalization are increasingly out of step with the anti-prohibition sentiments of the general public.

That includes President Joe Biden, who recently reiterated his opposition to legal marijuana. “He believes in decriminalizing the use of marijuana, but his position has not changed,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters last month.

But such politicians are in the minority. Outside of the White House, the political trend is almost as clear as the trend within public opinion. New York and New Mexico recently became the 16th and 17th states to legalize marijuana for recreational use. Significantly, as Reason‘s Jacob Sullum highlighted, both states changed their stance on marijuana by passing legislation rather than using a ballot initiative, which is how most states have moved to legalize weed.

Similarly, the Virginia General Assembly voted earlier this year to accelerate the process of legalization in that state—which was originally set to legalize possession of marijuana in 2024, but will now do so on July 1 of this year (sales will still be illegal until 2024, however).

These are important changes, because they signal that state lawmakers are starting to catch up with prevailing public opinion—which, in turn, means that legalization efforts may no longer have to route around state legislatures and governor’s offices in order to succeed.

Congress and the White House are a different story. But Biden has always been something of a rusty weather vane when it comes to policy, and the wind is blowing hard in a clear direction on this one.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/32jJFg2
via IFTTT

“Governments [May Be Constitutionally Obligated] to Provide ‘Vaccine Passports'”

An interesting short article from Prof. Kevin Cope (Virginia) and my UCLA colleague Prof. Alexander Stremitzer (also at ETH Zurich). An excerpt:

In general, governments can restrict certain fundamental rights only if no less-restrictive alternatives exist for accomplishing the same objectives. In countries like Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, this argument holds generally under the so-called “proportionality test.” In the United States, governments may not tread on fundamental rights unless the policy is “the least restrictive means” to achieve a “compelling” government interest…..

Throughout 2020, when temporary bans on certain high-risk, non-essential activities like high-density religious services, political rallies, public dining, theater attendance, and international travel were challenged, they generally (though not always) passed constitutional muster. For good reason, national legal systems tend to defer to officials’ policy judgements when it comes to combating public-health crises. And indeed, many of those measures represented the best available means to slow the virus.

As we approach wider vaccine availability, however, that is no longer the case. Now, facilitating mass immunity—and exempting the immunized from restrictions—is not only the least liberty-restricting method for ending the pandemic through herd immunity, but the most effective one….

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/32oZgLi
via IFTTT

Spy City Lives Up to Its Name with Complex Cold War Intrigue


SpyCity_1161x653

Spy City. Available now on AMC+.

In the new AMC+ spy-thriller minseries Spy City, set in Berlin in the early 1960s, somebody always seems to be walking past a billboard for a movie called Via Mala. It’s an authentic bit of set dressing—Via Mala was a German-made crime melodrama released in 1961—but it’s also something of a tongue-in-cheek commentary on Spy City itself. In Via Mala, somebody kills a tyrannical old paterfamilias, and practically everybody in his family is a suspect; and in the end, nearly all of them turn out to be guilty in some degree or other. (Um, did I mention “spoiler alert”?) It’s perhaps a blueprint for Spy City, in which rival teams of Cold War spies sweep across Berlin in search of moles and murderers, and when they meet the enemy, he turns out to be us.

Though the Via Mala allusion is clever, the better stylistic reference for Spy City would be the early novels of John le Carre and the films based on the themes: bitter, cynical, accounts of how intelligence agencies go off the rails and wage private little wars among themselves, fraught with collateral damage, using the Cold War as an excuse to settle old scores even if they scuttle the supposed larger issues. When one spy, startled by a disclosure of misanthropic blackguardery by his boss, murmurs, “I thought we were fighting for our values,” the old man doesn’t even answer.

The younger spy is Fielding Scott, an officer of Great Britain’s MI6 foreign intelligence service, who has been under a cloud since killing a popular MI6 colleague in a deserted Berlin public bathroom a year earlier. Scott claimed he acted in self-defense when the other officer tried to kill him, but with no other witnesses, MI6 fired him. He’s gets his job back only because a potential Soviet defector, the inventor of a threatening new missile guidance system, says he’ll bolt to the West only if Scott will handle the escape.

But the defection is blown when the Soviets learn of it. Now Scott must clear himself not only of the murder charge but the suspicion that he’s a Soviet mole who betrayed the escape plan. The only two people who knew the details of the defection were Scott and his girlfriend, a French intelligence officer; presumably, one of them must be the mole. Meanwhile, she’s given him yet another assignment—she wants his help in finding the former Nazi Gestapo officer who tortured her Resistance boyfriend to death in the waning days of World War II.

If that seems like a lot of spies per square foot, it’s not at all unbelievable. The botched defection takes place in spring of 1961, on the razor’s edge of Cold War tensions. The Bay of Pigs invasion, the Berlin Wall and the Cuban missile crisis are all in the offing. Berlin, governed jointly by the Soviets, the French, the British, and the Americans, was lousy with spies of every ideology and nationality. The advice Scott’s boss in London gives him upon departure—”Berlin’s a snakepit”—was doubtless repeated many times by spy chieftains on both sides of the Iron Curtin.

William Boyd, the creator and main screenwriter of Spy City, skillfully recreates the miasma of intelligence treachery of 1961 Berlin without pushing into high-camp James Bond territory. Though the show’s body count is not insubstantial, for every scene of violence there are two or three of deductive analysis—often leavened with wit, but sometimes slow-moving, like real intelligence work. That perhaps a third of the dialogue is delivered in subtitled German adds to the occasional torpor.

So does the complexity of the plot; Spy City is not a show to be watched while helping the kids with their homework. There were moments—only a couple, but they were there—when I remembered a Mad magazine parody of the film version of Le Carre’s novel The Spy Who Came in from the Cold in which one East German border guard is wondering why they’re shooting somebody who hasn’t done them any harm. Another guard explains that the victim was carrying a secret canister of film: “It contained a detailed explanation of the plot! So we had to kill him! He was the only one who finally understood the movie!”

Yet Spy City can still be frenetic. In a single sequence of probably no more than five minutes—I certainly wasn’t going to look away to glance at a clock—the target of a search is located by one character, murdered without warning by another, both acts surprisingly detected by ominous surveillance and countersurveillance that seems to promise more of the same. Fielding, at one point, proclaims to a colleague that “I love boring, I long for boring.” But he’s certainly not getting it.

Scott is played, mostly stoically but with flashes of lethal rage, by Dominic Cooper, the loopy minister in FX’s Preacher. Cooper certainly has the macho elegance to play James Bond, but he wisely gives Scott the opposite reading: weary and wary and just a step or two short of burnout. He’s ably paired with a superior supporting cast. The best of them is one of his operatives, a phlegmatic German photographer (Johanna Wokalek, The Baader Meinhof Complex) who lives in East Berlin, where she likes the stability, and declines his offer to help her defect. “But I’m always interested in making some money,” she quickly adds. Really-existing socialism, as the nomenklatura used to say.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mXdMU7
via IFTTT

“Governments [May Be Constitutionally Obligated] to Provide ‘Vaccine Passports'”

An interesting short article from Prof. Kevin Cope (Virginia) and my UCLA colleague Prof. Alexander Stremitzer (also at ETH Zurich). An excerpt:

In general, governments can restrict certain fundamental rights only if no less-restrictive alternatives exist for accomplishing the same objectives. In countries like Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, this argument holds generally under the so-called “proportionality test.” In the United States, governments may not tread on fundamental rights unless the policy is “the least restrictive means” to achieve a “compelling” government interest…..

Throughout 2020, when temporary bans on certain high-risk, non-essential activities like high-density religious services, political rallies, public dining, theater attendance, and international travel were challenged, they generally (though not always) passed constitutional muster. For good reason, national legal systems tend to defer to officials’ policy judgements when it comes to combating public-health crises. And indeed, many of those measures represented the best available means to slow the virus.

As we approach wider vaccine availability, however, that is no longer the case. Now, facilitating mass immunity—and exempting the immunized from restrictions—is not only the least liberty-restricting method for ending the pandemic through herd immunity, but the most effective one….

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/32oZgLi
via IFTTT

Spy City Lives Up to Its Name with Complex Cold War Intrigue


SpyCity_1161x653

Spy City. Available now on AMC+.

In the new AMC+ spy-thriller minseries Spy City, set in Berlin in the early 1960s, somebody always seems to be walking past a billboard for a movie called Via Mala. It’s an authentic bit of set dressing—Via Mala was a German-made crime melodrama released in 1961—but it’s also something of a tongue-in-cheek commentary on Spy City itself. In Via Mala, somebody kills a tyrannical old paterfamilias, and practically everybody in his family is a suspect; and in the end, nearly all of them turn out to be guilty in some degree or other. (Um, did I mention “spoiler alert”?) It’s perhaps a blueprint for Spy City, in which rival teams of Cold War spies sweep across Berlin in search of moles and murderers, and when they meet the enemy, he turns out to be us.

Though the Via Mala allusion is clever, the better stylistic reference for Spy City would be the early novels of John le Carre and the films based on the themes: bitter, cynical, accounts of how intelligence agencies go off the rails and wage private little wars among themselves, fraught with collateral damage, using the Cold War as an excuse to settle old scores even if they scuttle the supposed larger issues. When one spy, startled by a disclosure of misanthropic blackguardery by his boss, murmurs, “I thought we were fighting for our values,” the old man doesn’t even answer.

The younger spy is Fielding Scott, an officer of Great Britain’s MI6 foreign intelligence service, who has been under a cloud since killing a popular MI6 colleague in a deserted Berlin public bathroom a year earlier. Scott claimed he acted in self-defense when the other officer tried to kill him, but with no other witnesses, MI6 fired him. He’s gets his job back only because a potential Soviet defector, the inventor of a threatening new missile guidance system, says he’ll bolt to the West only if Scott will handle the escape.

But the defection is blown when the Soviets learn of it. Now Scott must clear himself not only of the murder charge but the suspicion that he’s a Soviet mole who betrayed the escape plan. The only two people who knew the details of the defection were Scott and his girlfriend, a French intelligence officer; presumably, one of them must be the mole. Meanwhile, she’s given him yet another assignment—she wants his help in finding the former Nazi Gestapo officer who tortured her Resistance boyfriend to death in the waning days of World War II.

If that seems like a lot of spies per square foot, it’s not at all unbelievable. The botched defection takes place in spring of 1961, on the razor’s edge of Cold War tensions. The Bay of Pigs invasion, the Berlin Wall and the Cuban missile crisis are all in the offing. Berlin, governed jointly by the Soviets, the French, the British, and the Americans, was lousy with spies of every ideology and nationality. The advice Scott’s boss in London gives him upon departure—”Berlin’s a snakepit”—was doubtless repeated many times by spy chieftains on both sides of the Iron Curtin.

William Boyd, the creator and main screenwriter of Spy City, skillfully recreates the miasma of intelligence treachery of 1961 Berlin without pushing into high-camp James Bond territory. Though the show’s body count is not insubstantial, for every scene of violence there are two or three of deductive analysis—often leavened with wit, but sometimes slow-moving, like real intelligence work. That perhaps a third of the dialogue is delivered in subtitled German adds to the occasional torpor.

So does the complexity of the plot; Spy City is not a show to be watched while helping the kids with their homework. There were moments—only a couple, but they were there—when I remembered a Mad magazine parody of the film version of Le Carre’s novel The Spy Who Came in from the Cold in which one East German border guard is wondering why they’re shooting somebody who hasn’t done them any harm. Another guard explains that the victim was carrying a secret canister of film: “It contained a detailed explanation of the plot! So we had to kill him! He was the only one who finally understood the movie!”

Yet Spy City can still be frenetic. In a single sequence of probably no more than five minutes—I certainly wasn’t going to look away to glance at a clock—the target of a search is located by one character, murdered without warning by another, both acts surprisingly detected by ominous surveillance and countersurveillance that seems to promise more of the same. Fielding, at one point, proclaims to a colleague that “I love boring, I long for boring.” But he’s certainly not getting it.

Scott is played, mostly stoically but with flashes of lethal rage, by Dominic Cooper, the loopy minister in FX’s Preacher. Cooper certainly has the macho elegance to play James Bond, but he wisely gives Scott the opposite reading: weary and wary and just a step or two short of burnout. He’s ably paired with a superior supporting cast. The best of them is one of his operatives, a phlegmatic German photographer (Johanna Wokalek, The Baader Meinhof Complex) who lives in East Berlin, where she likes the stability, and declines his offer to help her defect. “But I’m always interested in making some money,” she quickly adds. Really-existing socialism, as the nomenklatura used to say.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/3mXdMU7
via IFTTT