Tag: news

You can probably quit holding out any
hope that additional recovery efforts might retrieve some of the
missing emails from former Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official
Lois Lerner’s hard drive: The drive, which the IRS says crashed in
2011, just days after Republicans began investigating the tax
agency’s scrutiny of conservative non-profits, was apparently
thrown away.

House Oversight Committee Darrell Issa subpoenaed the hard drive
earlier this week, but he’s not likely to get it. Multiple sources
tell Politico that the IRS has indicated that
the drive was destroyed.

Congressional investigators are interested in the drive because
the IRS says that it contained archives of Lois Lerner’s email
correspondence; without the drive, the agency claims it cannot
produce emails between Lerner and outside groups or agencies.
Lerner was the head of the agency’s tax-exempt division, and she is
at the center of investigation, but she has repeatedly declined to
answer congressional questions about the IRS scrutiny of
conservative groups, citing her Fifth Amendment right to avoid
self-incrimination.

If the crashed hard drive had the only copies of Lerner’s email,
then those communications are likely gone forever.

But is the hard drive really the only place those emails would
have been stored? Records-retention protocols released by the IRS
indicate that before May of last year, employee inboxes were
limited, external backup tapes kept only six months of data and
were then recycled, and that, as a result, there was no centralized
backup of email. Employees were individually responsible for
preserving much of their own email correspondence.

Yet just a few months ago, current IRS Commissioner John
Koskinen—who promised to cooperate fully with the
investigation—indicated in a congressional hearing that the emails
were not stored on individual computers, but “taken off and stored
in servers.”
Via Townhall’s Guy Benson, here’s the relevant exchange between
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Koskinen:

Chaffetz: What email system do you use there at the IRS?

Koskinen: What email system do we use?

Chaffetz: Yeah, is it Outlook, or…

Koskinen: Yes, we have actually Microsoft — or at least I have
— Microsoft Outlook.

Chaffetz: So you go on there, and you want to find all of the
items you sent under your name, how long would that take?

Koskinen: Well it’d take awhile because they’re not all on my
computer. They’re all stored somewhere….

[Some discussion about how long it might take to collect
emails with Lerner’s address.]

Chaffetz: That’s [part] of the brilliance of the email system.
You go in and you check the ‘sent’ box, and the inbox, and you
suddenly have all of the emails, correct?

Koskinen: Right. They get taken off and stored in
servers…

Watch the full clip at the bottom of the post.

It’s of course possible that Koskinen, who is not a tech
staffer, just didn’t understand the specifics of the IRS backup
protocols, and didn’t know that emails were only stored centrally
for a short period of time.

But if Koskinen, who was being questioned about the agency’s
compliance with documents requests and surely had to have been
briefed on the agency’s efforts to gather documents up to that
point, was correct when he said that the emails are taken off
individual desktops and “stored in servers,” then Lerner’s hard
drive shouldn’t be necessary.

It’s also worth asking what Kosinen knew about the destroyed
drives and lost emails when he was speaking before Congress: The
hearing occurred in March—but according to the House Ways and Means
Committee, the agency has known about the crash since at least
February, but held off on telling House investigators.

Lerner isn’t the only IRS official whose communications have
gone missing thanks to convenient computer troubles. According to
the House Ways and Means Committee, the agency says it cannot
produce some records for six more employees, including Nicole Flax,
a regular visitor to the White House and former chief of staff in
the IRS commissioner’s office. Flax’s communications were also
apparently lost due to hard drive failures. If there are still
email records “stored in servers,” as Koskinen says, then it would
be nice to have them. 

The great jazz pianist Horace Silver has passed away at age 85.
For a nice selection of his work, check out Boing
Boing‘s tribute
here. Below, hear his band playing “Señor Blues”:

Marijuana legalization is making impressive
headway, but now states must face a different problem when it comes
to one of America’s favorite drugs—driving while stoned.

The limitations of current tests used to determine if someone is
impaired by marijuana are well documented. Hair, saliva, and blood
tests all may indicate if someone has consumed marijuana recently,
but they do a poor job of determining whether someone is actually
high or not. The Marijuana Policy Project reported
that:

“The inability to accurately measure marijuana impairment is why
both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the
National Institute on Drug Abuse have stated that marijuana
impairment testing via blood sampling is unreliable.”

Despite this, Colorado has persisted in its law that 5 nanograms
of THC per milliliter of blood is enough evidence to convict
someone of a DUI. Many states where medical marijuana is legal such
as Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Nevada have an even lower cut-off of 2
nanograms. Jacob Sullum, senior editor at Reason, profiled
all the problems associated with such an antiquated means of
measuring marijuana impairment in the July 2014 issue. 

A new device called the Cannabix may offer a much-needed
solution to this problem. Vice
reported that the breathalyzer, being developed by a Canadian
police officer named Kal Malhi, will theoretically be able to
detect whether someone had smoked marijuana in the past two hours.
A study
published last fall in the peer-reviewed medical journal
Clinical Chemistry demonstrated the plausibility of
such a test. The research concluded that:

“Breath may offer an alternative matrix for testing for recent
driving under the influence of cannabis, but is limited to a short
detection window (0.5–2 h).”

If the Cannabix is all that it is cracked up to be and is
actually capable of determining whether someone is too high to
drive, then the pot-loving community should support its
implementation in law enforcement. Having a legitimate means of
measuring marijuana intoxication would unclog court dockets, lead
to safer roads (even though
traffic fatalities have decreased since marijuana was
legalized), and allow cannabis consumers to travel unencumbered by
the fear of getting pulled over by a cop that could potentially
give them a DUI even though they are stone sober. It might also
provide a nudge for states on the fence about marijuana
decriminalization and/or legalization.

Marijuana legalization is making impressive
headway, but now states must face a different problem when it comes
to one of America’s favorite drugs—driving while stoned.

The limitations of current tests used to determine if someone is
impaired by marijuana are well documented. Hair, saliva, and blood
tests all may indicate if someone has consumed marijuana recently,
but they do a poor job of determining whether someone is actually
high or not. The Marijuana Policy Project reported
that:

“The inability to accurately measure marijuana impairment is why
both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the
National Institute on Drug Abuse have stated that marijuana
impairment testing via blood sampling is unreliable.”

Despite this, Colorado has persisted in its law that 5 nanograms
of THC per milliliter of blood is enough evidence to convict
someone of a DUI. Many states where medical marijuana is legal such
as Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Nevada have an even lower cut-off of 2
nanograms. Jacob Sullum, senior editor at Reason, profiled
all the problems associated with such an antiquated means of
measuring marijuana impairment in the July 2014 issue. 

A new device called the Cannabix may offer a much-needed
solution to this problem. Vice
reported that the breathalyzer, being developed by a Canadian
police officer named Kal Malhi, will theoretically be able to
detect whether someone had smoked marijuana in the past two hours.
A study
published last fall in the peer-reviewed medical journal
Clinical Chemistry demonstrated the plausibility of
such a test. The research concluded that:

“Breath may offer an alternative matrix for testing for recent
driving under the influence of cannabis, but is limited to a short
detection window (0.5–2 h).”

If the Cannabix is all that it is cracked up to be and is
actually capable of determining whether someone is too high to
drive, then the pot-loving community should support its
implementation in law enforcement. Having a legitimate means of
measuring marijuana intoxication would unclog court dockets, lead
to safer roads (even though
traffic fatalities have decreased since marijuana was
legalized), and allow cannabis consumers to travel unencumbered by
the fear of getting pulled over by a cop that could potentially
give them a DUI even though they are stone sober. It might also
provide a nudge for states on the fence about marijuana
decriminalization and/or legalization.

Now’s the time for summer
fun…warnings. New Jersey’s Star Ledger
lists “46
Ways to Have a Safer NJ Summer.” That’s right,  almost 50
helpful precautions to digest before the children of the Garden
State are faced with the horror of the great outdoors.

The tips range from the helpful (“If you’re caught in a rip
current…swim parallel to the shore”) to the blindingly obvious
(“Use insect repellent”) to the stunningly, blindingly, in
case you just arrived from Alpha Centauri obvious (“If you see
a bear while out hiking, do not feed or approach it”). Really? Not
even if it’s a cute cub out with its mama?

While it’s not a bad idea to learn how to take a bee stinger out
(although the words “venom sac” do give pause), it is truly a
terrible idea to plan for an afternoon outside as if it’s the
invasion of Normandy.

Some of these tips almost guarantee you and/or your kids will
cower inside all day with Call of Duty: Advanced
Warfare instead of heading out to enjoy the warm
weather.

For instance:

“Avoid forests”

Swear to God, the list says to avoid God’s gift. After all, you
could get ticks.

“Soak in the sun…for five to 10 minutes a day.”

If you go out for any longer than that unslathered in sunscreen,
you might as well call Sloan-Kettering right now.

“Talk to the lifeguards”

That is, distract them from looking out for drowning folks while
you grill them about “water conditions and the existence of
dangerous currents.”

“Don’t dig too deep”

Because once, in 2012, a child smothered in a sand tunnel, you
should worry about every hole your kids dig from now on.

And my favorite:

“Supervise children on playgrounds. Adults
should always [boldface, mine] be nearby
when children are on playgrounds. When kids are playing on the
equipment, they can sometimes stumble or become off balance for a
moment….If parents are nearby, they can catch the child before
they fall and possibly injure themselves.”

So put down that peach, stop talking to the other moms, and
stand, arms outstretched, under the jungle gym. After all, your kid
could “become off balance for a moment.” No children have ever been
known to survive that condition.

Be prepared.

Now’s the time for summer
fun…warnings. New Jersey’s Star Ledger
lists “46
Ways to Have a Safer NJ Summer.” That’s right,  almost 50
helpful precautions to digest before the children of the Garden
State are faced with the horror of the great outdoors.

The tips range from the helpful (“If you’re caught in a rip
current…swim parallel to the shore”) to the blindingly obvious
(“Use insect repellent”) to the stunningly, blindingly, in
case you just arrived from Alpha Centauri obvious (“If you see
a bear while out hiking, do not feed or approach it”). Really? Not
even if it’s a cute cub out with its mama?

While it’s not a bad idea to learn how to take a bee stinger out
(although the words “venom sac” do give pause), it is truly a
terrible idea to plan for an afternoon outside as if it’s the
invasion of Normandy.

Some of these tips almost guarantee you and/or your kids will
cower inside all day with Call of Duty: Advanced
Warfare instead of heading out to enjoy the warm
weather.

For instance:

“Avoid forests”

Swear to God, the list says to avoid God’s gift. After all, you
could get ticks.

“Soak in the sun…for five to 10 minutes a day.”

If you go out for any longer than that unslathered in sunscreen,
you might as well call Sloan-Kettering right now.

“Talk to the lifeguards”

That is, distract them from looking out for drowning folks while
you grill them about “water conditions and the existence of
dangerous currents.”

“Don’t dig too deep”

Because once, in 2012, a child smothered in a sand tunnel, you
should worry about every hole your kids dig from now on.

And my favorite:

“Supervise children on playgrounds. Adults
should always [boldface, mine] be nearby
when children are on playgrounds. When kids are playing on the
equipment, they can sometimes stumble or become off balance for a
moment….If parents are nearby, they can catch the child before
they fall and possibly injure themselves.”

So put down that peach, stop talking to the other moms, and
stand, arms outstretched, under the jungle gym. After all, your kid
could “become off balance for a moment.” No children have ever been
known to survive that condition.

Be prepared.

I can’t imagine what kind of people follow
pharmaceutical companies on Twitter, but apparently some do. Seeing
as following folks on Twitter is completely voluntary, I assume
those who do find their tweets informative, interesting, or useful
in some way. But
tweeting about pharmaceuticals will be effectively banned if
new Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines are adopted.
Under
draft guidelines proposed Tuesday, any pro-prescription drug
tweet from a drug company would also have to list risks and side
effects.

Because Twitter is a medium built on non-voluntary brevity, the
new rule would make legally tweeting about prescription drugs
nearly impossible. According to the FDA, risk information includes
“all risk concepts from a boxed warning, all risks that are known
to be fatal or life-threatening, and all contraindications from the
approved product labeling,” in addition to a hyperlink to more
detailed information.

There are potential workarounds—attaching an image with a
drug’s complete warnings label to all tweets, using a tweet
extension app like TwitLonger—but whether these would suffice for
the FDA is anyone’s guess. The draft guidelines would also require
drug companies to include a product’s exact indication (“mild to
moderate memory loss” as opposed to just “memory loss” was the
FDA’s example).

“If a firm concludes that adequate benefit and risk information,
as well as other required information, cannot all be communicated
within the same character-space-limited communication, then the
firm should reconsider using that platform for the intended
promotional message,” the agency says.

The whole matter (like so many the FDA tackles)
seems to involve searching for a problem that doesn’t exist. There
are already ample ways a person can find out about a drug’s risks
and side effects; and because these
are prescription drugs, it’s not as if a person can run
out and buy them based on one Tweet. At some point, a doctor,
pharmacist, and boatload of pharmaceutical literature will confront
patients before they get their hands on it, providing ample
opportunity for discussions about, recitations of, and printed
warnings listing risks and side effects. 

Thomas Sullivan, editor of the Policy and Medicine blog
for medical education company Rockpointe,
said it wasn’t clear whether abbreviations or shortened
words would be allowed. 

“The FDA isn’t necessarily up on the realities of social media,”
Sullivan said, adding that the agency has offered to allow
companies to submit their tweets for approval beforehand.

Sullivan said that Facebook, which has no character limitations,
might still be useful for drug sellers looking for some traction on
social media. So far the agency has refrained from suggesting
regulations for image sharing sites like Pinterest and Instagram,
Sullivan said.

I’m sure it’s only a matter of time, the way things are
going.

But should we automatically dismiss the idea of regulating how
drug companies can advertise on social media? Twitter and Facebook
are, after all, advertising platforms in this context; and the FDA
governs how drug companies advertise in more traditional mediums.
Rightly or wrongly, the FDA currently has the authority to require
risk disclosures in printed or broadcast drug advertisements. But
it can’t compel a person, even a company spokesperson, to follow
all statements about X with Y and Z. So is a drug tweet more like a
television ad or an uttered statement? Does it matter? 

Advertisement or not, commercial speech is still afforded
protections by the First Amendment—even
commercial speech from drug companies. And I’m a fan of erring
on the side of free speech. If a drug company makes false
statements on Twitter, there are already existing legal correctives
for that. But that’s not what we’re facing. The FDA’s Twitter
guidelines seem to surpass what consumer protection warrants and
cross over into unconstitutional speech infringement.

The
gross U.S. government debt now stands at $17 trillion, more than
double what it was a decade ago. It’s still expanding, as the
Treasury Department pays out more than it takes in, and the
shortfall is expected to grow over the next decade. So it’s deeply
gratifying to learn that Americans are “highly concerned” about the
problem.

Americans do want Washington to bring the budget under control.
The catch is that they have no idea what it would take—and reject
the steps that would be needed, writes Steve Chapman. They want it
in the same way they want to be thin, rich and well informed: only
if the goal can be achieved with no effort.

Americans, in short, are willing to do anything to cut the
deficit and restrain the debt except what needs to be done. They
overwhelmingly prefer bogus remedies to real ones and magical
thinking to reality, according to Chapman.

View this article.