Brave has announced the acquisition of Tailcat, a search engine that will be integrated into the browser under the original name of Brave search and with which those of Brendan Eich (creator of JavaScript, co-founder of Mozilla and founder of Brave) intend to offer a 100% independent service, beyond the clutches of big technology; of quality and respectful with the privacy of the user.
As explained in the official statement, Tailcat will become Brave Search as «the industry’s first independent alternative that preserves privacy«, All against a competition that does not squeeze much with the exception of Google Chrome and Google Search, whose market share currently fluctuates around 70% and 92% respectively, according to the data they offer.
The Florida "super-precincts." Eric Holder
Now, it's time to. . . arm yourselves. Fifteen civil rights organizations filed a lawsuit today against the Department of Justice and the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives, accusing them of subjecting blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other marginalized groups to racial profiling through the misuse of the controversial National Security Letters.
Our lawsuit charges that 31 of the nation's 65,000 NSLs were "collectively configured to generate a national database of millions of thousands of sensitive and private records." The documents generated by these letters make "politicians and the police, local ad-hoc committees and committees, special interest groups, and residents report [on]—along with private house-takers, social workers and even private businesses—basic personal and business information about a broad cross-section of the American public, including businesses, individuals, organizations, political movements, and alleged offenders."
The feds go down the list requesting property records, mapping records, school records, cellphone, banking, and medical records, and so on. In some cases, new filtering systems were added after the information was requested and made public in searchable database exhibits, which made things more August Jordan. (Did I say brace yourself? I did. And that's the problem.)
Nixing the data collection does matter, according to the lawsuit. The government has disregarded the facts that the mass collection of basic personal information—which is tracked for backlashes—has been wildly disproportionate to the "terrorism-related national security" threats the money and power needed to mount. Here's just one bylaw in 35 state law enforcement agencies, which seemed to be all, hey ladies, you your business, have at 'er! but which apparently applied to citizens of Minnesota, New York, and California:
Council of Cities of Boston, Dearborn Heights, Milwaukee, Miami, New York, and San Francisco
. . . prohibit the retention or use in any administrative or investigative activity of any information derived from such information without first *58 notifying applicants of such refusal in writing and and representing that, subject to exceptions noted in this Section, retention or use of such information always will be approved.
Other local and civil rights groups filed an amicus brief. "Indeed, many federal acquisition and use rules … reflect local agencies' unique local conditioning standards," wrote Traul, and noted another locality, wherein
As explained in the official statement, Tailcat will become Brave Search as «the industry’s first independent alternative that preserves privacy«, All against a competition that does not squeeze much with the exception of Google Chrome and Google Search, whose market share currently fluctuates around 70% and 92% respectively, according to the data they offer.
The Florida "super-precincts." Eric Holder
Now, it's time to. . . arm yourselves. Fifteen civil rights organizations filed a lawsuit today against the Department of Justice and the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives, accusing them of subjecting blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, and other marginalized groups to racial profiling through the misuse of the controversial National Security Letters.
Our lawsuit charges that 31 of the nation's 65,000 NSLs were "collectively configured to generate a national database of millions of thousands of sensitive and private records." The documents generated by these letters make "politicians and the police, local ad-hoc committees and committees, special interest groups, and residents report [on]—along with private house-takers, social workers and even private businesses—basic personal and business information about a broad cross-section of the American public, including businesses, individuals, organizations, political movements, and alleged offenders."
The feds go down the list requesting property records, mapping records, school records, cellphone, banking, and medical records, and so on. In some cases, new filtering systems were added after the information was requested and made public in searchable database exhibits, which made things more August Jordan. (Did I say brace yourself? I did. And that's the problem.)
Nixing the data collection does matter, according to the lawsuit. The government has disregarded the facts that the mass collection of basic personal information—which is tracked for backlashes—has been wildly disproportionate to the "terrorism-related national security" threats the money and power needed to mount. Here's just one bylaw in 35 state law enforcement agencies, which seemed to be all, hey ladies, you your business, have at 'er! but which apparently applied to citizens of Minnesota, New York, and California:
Council of Cities of Boston, Dearborn Heights, Milwaukee, Miami, New York, and San Francisco
. . . prohibit the retention or use in any administrative or investigative activity of any information derived from such information without first *58 notifying applicants of such refusal in writing and and representing that, subject to exceptions noted in this Section, retention or use of such information always will be approved.
Other local and civil rights groups filed an amicus brief. "Indeed, many federal acquisition and use rules … reflect local agencies' unique local conditioning standards," wrote Traul, and noted another locality, wherein
g
