#IT Security Company in South Africa

[collinsareer]

Collins Career Solution

Phone: 068 576 1532

Address: Pretoria West, Pretoria 0183, South Africa

Website: https://collinscareersolution.co.za/

Welcome to Collins Career Solution, your go-to platform for job seekers and employers in South Africa. At www.collinscareersolution.co.za, we connect top talent with leading companies across various industries. Our user-friendly website offers comprehensive job listings and efficient hiring solutions. Join us today to advance your career or find the perfect candidate!

[communist-ojou-sama]

Okay so I'm gonna go ahead and put a disclaimer up top that these are the ramblings of a dilettante that shouldn't be taken too seriously, but I think that people (understandably) frustrated with with the ICJ ruling and convinced it will have no material consequences should consider some things before they say that.

The first thing I want to remind everyone is that the west is far from invincible. Their rule is not iron-clad and their ability to enforce their will on the world is far from complete and is waning apace.

I think a lot about how in the process of the transition to late capitalism (as I personally define it), one consequence of the mass financialization of the economy is the pricing-out of most common consumer commodity-based manufacturing enterprise in favor of transactions that are most elastic in price, and how the result of that is a mass outflow of raw productive capacity from the imperial core to the global periphery.

If I can frame that in another way, and forgive me in framing this in very neutral terms, but it turns these countries from production-rich countries to production-poor countries with economies defined by the phenomenon of asset-price inflation.

The resulting global situation is that, similar to the assertion that Africa for example is rich because it's where the natural resources that facilitate the global economy are located, Mexico is rich. Vietnam is rich. Bangladesh is rich. These countries are awash in raw capacity to create goods that have a use value. What is the one thing that keeps them relatively cash-poor?

That is, the law. There's a bit of poetry in the idea that just as how within imperial core economies the most important economic instruments are legal contracts to either some percentage of a company's equity or its debt, what sustains its (nominal) riches over the global periphery is a legal regime of ownership that entitles them to the rights to all of the profits going on in these incredibly production-rich countries in the Global South.

It is absolutely correct to say that at the highest level, these legal regimes are enforced at the barrel of the gun, we've seen how too much refusal to to honor these laws by heads of state can lead to mass disinvestment and eventually coups d'état, and even now it would not be a good idea to say, seize the productive assets of a bunch of US firms.

However, and this is where the ICJ comes back in to my point, let's not think about the US. Let's think about, for example, the Netherlands or Belgium. These countries maintain fantastic financial wealth via contracts of ownership with countries in the global south but they are also small and geopolitically unimportant, with little in the way of individual military power.

For little countries like these, genuinely the Only thing that secures their ability to act as a parasite on the global productive economy is the strength of legitimacy that international law affords them, and the position of overwhelming power the west Once had, decades ago.

But the power and prestige of the West continues, as I said, to wane apace. it's too early to happen now but these less militaristic countries are aware of how exposed their assets are to simple seizure if over time international law comes to be seen as a joke.

As awful and condamnable as the current global system is, it is not total dictatorship. It is only able to perpetuate itself because the overwhelming majority of countries that are parties to it have buy in and because, albeit much more slowly than they could have under socialism, they have been able to make dents in their own poverty with it.

The exposure of the international law framework as having absolutely no legitimacy, as being a naked tool of domination of rich countries over poor countries has knock-on effects that stand to be incredibly dangerous to less militarily capable countries that rely on them for their economic structures. On a long-term scale, especially as these countries become richer and more geopolitically influential in their own right, they may well begin to pose the question: why Shouldn't I seize these french factories in my country? Why Shouldn't I seize this Belgian-owned diamond mine? Why Should I pay back this IMF loan, if the ICJ framework can't even compel the Zionist Enemy to end a genocide? And I promise you, this is a reality of which at least some people in those countries are highly cognizant and wary, so I'd wait and see a bit before being Too pessimistic.

[probablyasocialecologist]

In the late 1960s and early ’70s the Black Consciousness Movement, a grassroots anti-apartheid movement, also expressed support for the Palestinian struggle. So too did one of Africa’s greatest independence heroes, Amílcar Cabral, who said: ‘We stand with the Palestinian refugees and support everything that the children of Palestine do in order to free their country, and… the Arab and African countries do to aid the Palestinian people to recover its dignity, its independence and its right to life.’

South Africans recognise Israel’s culpability in their own historic oppression. In the 1970s, this extended to the field of nuclear weaponry – Israeli experts helped South Africa develop at least six nuclear warheads. In 1977, after the murder of anti-apartheid activist Steve Biko by South African security police, the UN imposed a mandatory arms embargo on the country. And by the 1980s the global anti-apartheid movement forced states to impose sanctions.

But as late as 1980, 35 per cent of Israel’s arms exports were destined for South Africa and, in the same decade, Israel imported South African goods and re-exported them to the world as a form of inter-racist solidarity. Meanwhile Israeli companies subsidised by the apartheid regime were established in a number of bantustans, all the while paying workers a pittance.

[mariacallous]

Faruk Fatih Özer stood in front of a passport control officer at Istanbul Airport, a line of impatient travelers queuing behind him. He pulled his face mask below his chin for the security camera. Surely he was nervous. The 27-year-old had unruly black hair, a boy-band face, and a patchy beard. Normally he overcompensated for his callow features by dressing in a pressed three-piece suit. But this spring day he wore black trainers and a navy-blue sweater hastily pulled over a white polo shirt, as if he had dressed in a dash. A small backpack was slung over his right shoulder. He looked like someone who could have been going on a last-minute day trip—or someone planning to never come back. At 5:57 pm on April 20, 2021, the guard stamped his Turkish passport and Özer shuffled through the crowd to Gate C, a flash drive containing a rumored $2 billion (£1.6 billion) in crypto stashed in his belongings.

After Özer’s plane reached Tirana, Albania, at 9:24 that night, he checked into the Mondial, a popular 4-star business hotel in the capital’s commercial district. A couple of days later, he looked at his social media accounts. A mob was very angry with him: Customers couldn’t access their money on the exchange Thodex, where he was founder and CEO, and people were accusing him of absconding with their funds.

Özer posted a public letter to his company’s website and his social accounts. “I feel compelled to make this statement in order to respond urgently to these allegations,” he wrote. The accusations weren’t true, he said. Thodex—which had nearly half a million investors and $500 million (£400 million) in daily trade volume—was investigating what Özer claimed was a suspected cyberattack that caused “an abnormal fluctuation in the company account.” Assets would be frozen for five days while Thodex resolved the issue. This was terribly bad timing for the big business deal he said he was en route to make: selling the company, or so he had told some employees and his brother and sister before he left. All would be made right. “There will be no victims,” he promised. “I personally declare that I will return to Turkey within a few days and ensure that the facts are revealed in cooperation with judicial authorities and that I will do my best to prevent users from suffering.” Of course, there was this possibility too: He was in the midst of pulling off the biggest heist in Turkey’s history.

Before dawn the day after Özer posted the letter, police squads fanned out across Istanbul and public prosecutors opened an investigation. Law enforcement arrested 62 people, including Thodex employees at all levels of the company—and Özer’s older brother and sister, Güven and Serap. Interpol issued a red notice, a request for law enforcement worldwide to find and “provisionally arrest” Özer pending his extradition to Turkey. Search teams deployed across Albania, Montenegro, Kosovo, and North Macedonia. There were reported sightings of the dark-haired young man across Tirana, rumors that he had gone to a poultry farm, that an executive from the Albanian football league was sheltering him. Soon, the Albanian police arrested people accused of aiding and abetting him. But no one seemed to know exactly where Özer was.

Özer had vanished at a particularly precarious time in crypto’s annals: In the weeks leading up to his disappearance, so-called rug pulls—when a cryptocurrency exchange or altcoin developer absconds with investors’ funds—had crypto investors around the globe flabbergasted. The CEO of Mirror Trading International, a crypto trading company based in South Africa, defrauded users of more than $1 billion, then skipped town; TurtleDex, an anonymous decentralized finance storage project on Binance, reportedly vanished with $2.4 million; another decentralized finance project, Meerkat, reportedly fleeced investors out of $31 million (of which they paid back 95 percent). Blockchain analysis firm Chainalysis ranked rug pulls as the primary scam of 2021, accounting for 37 percent of all cryptocurrency scam revenue that year, up from 1 percent the year before.

Thodex was at the top of that roster, and nearly every major outlet from Bloomberg to Newsweek published headlines like “Turkish Crypto Exchange Goes Bust as Founder Flees Country” and “Turkish Cryptocurrency Founder Faruk Fatih Özer Seen Fleeing Country With Suspected $2 Billion From Investors.” CoinGeek called it “the biggest scam in the digital asset industry in 2021.” The New York Times’ headline read, “Possible Cryptocurrency Fraud Is Another Blow to Turkey’s Financial Stability.” In Turkey, the country I now call home, people were reeling: For years, crypto had been built up—largely by Özer but by others too—as a way out of economic volatility. Now it seemed like just another way to lose your life savings. But something felt off to me, like the whole story wasn’t being told.

[meartemesia]

Hollywood's Modern Sensorship.

(My opinion as a young, queer, white person from South Africa who is aware of my own privilage as well as being discriminated against as a gay Afrikaans person who grew up in a church ruled, largely white Afrikaans community .)

As many fans mourne the loss of yet another show with queer and poc representation, it has become more evident that there is a pattern in Netflix's recent shows.

The graveyard of shows inclusive of positive queer representation wherin the queerness is not made out to be hyper sexual, destructive of friendship or lets the character have a happy ending, grows with another show. Dead Boy Detectives.

Sensorship is defined as: the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.

"the regulation imposes censorship on all media"

While Hollywood has made trives in recent years to abolish its former Haze code, it has managed to find a legal loophole in the inherent capitalism of showbusiness.

Shows with a dedicated fanbase and essence are being cancelled for not meeting a specific quota of income. While that might sound reasonable regarding the unbelievable amounts studios spend on media, this quota isnt just about the financial aspect. Studios rely on a show's fanbase and potential growth or popularity concerning future fans and a growing audience.

This means any shows that might be co troversial in the future stand less of a chance to be invested in.

2024 was a wildly restless political year globally and while every country had its own worries, all eyes have been targeted on the shitshow that is the powerhoise of the Unitedd States as the media hub of western culture.

America'a influence on the world is no small feat and while it can be argued that that might not be a good thing, it is a fact as true as South Africa's concerning history of corrupt governance.

The uptick in sexism, homophobia and especially transphobia that has become rampant in recent hears has become reflective in the media we consume. From the cancellation of First Kill to now, we are seeing the effects of homophobia as a meand of income.

The movement against rainbow capitalism and other movements exposing the exploitation of human right campaigns by companies seeking money from "trends" has lead to more and more companies dropping their former "support" as the views of the clientele shift with recent political unrest.

It is not onlt shows that are being cancelled.

Companies have removed pride month lines, stopped funding lgbtqia+ charities, have started supporting conversion charities, anti lgbtqia+ charities and have begun pandering to a wider and more sensorred audience.

This is a blatant disregard for human rights in the sense of spreading awareness, representation and watering down human lives to trends that can bolster an income.

These executives don't care about the audience. They do not care about "the sanctity of morals". They dont care about us or the conservative side of any government.

They care about money.

We need to start seperating corporations from government. No one is immune to propaganda. Not even you.

Sensorship isnt about moral rights or wrongs. Its about money. So wherever you lean on the political spectrum, anywhere in the world. The media you consume isn't made for representation, moral righteousness, serving a higher power, nor is it about the appreciation of art and film and writing.

This is an attack on art as a means of expression. It is the sensorship of what art is fundamentally about: The Expression of Ideas weather people like them or not.

Art has been turned into a money grab. A means of corporate propaganda and somehow, even in their attempt to overtly sensor art, they are exposing their true intentions and reflecting the larger issues happening in the world around us.

Queer people, wen, people of colour, trans people, disabled people and anyone who doesnt fit into the rigid framework of humanity's "perfection", we are being silenced by having our art silenced.

This is your sign to start supporting local artists. Lgbt owned foundations and other minority foundations. The lgbtqia+ community has shown a large support for Palestine in the past year and as we are aware, Hollywood doesnt agree with supporting the end of a genocide. So we, as well as anyone who politically aligns themselves with this humanitarian view of sacrid human life, are silenced. Why?

Because you can't profit off fair means. No empire has ever been built fairly. Capitalism has its pros and cons. So does any other form of politics.

But we must not let the future generations wonder why we couldnt stop the downfall of our communities. We must act now so that future generations will not have to be burdened with another Stone wall, Apartheid, Suffragette movement.

We are provilaged enough now by having rights thanks to the martyrs who fought for human life.

Religious or not, we can all agree that the chances of us existing is miraculous. Human life is sacred. Do not let the 1% fool you.

The only dangerous minority, are the rich.

[septembriseur]

From Stanley Cohen's States of Denial:

My earliest memory that could be called ‘political’ goes back to a winter night in Johannesburg in the mid-nineteen-fifties. I must have been twelve or thirteen. My father was away from home for a few days on business. Like many South African middle-class families (especially Jewish and anxious ones), we employed for these rare occasions a ‘Night Watch Boy’: that is, an adult black man – in this case an old Zulu (I vividly remember the wooden discs in his ear lobes)– working for a private security company. Just before going to bed, I looked out of the window and saw him huddled over a charcoal fire, rubbing his hands to keep warm, the collar of his khaki overcoat turned up. As I slipped into my over-warm bed– flannel sheets, hot water bottle, thick eiderdown brought by my grandmother from Poland– I suddenly started thinking about why he was out there and I was in here.

My mother always used to tell me that I was ‘over-sensitive’. This must have been my over-sensitivity at work, an inchoate feeling not exactly of guilt– this came later– but that something was wrong. Why did this old man have to sit out in the cold all night? Why had our family (and everyone like us) been allocated black men and women (who were called ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ or just ‘natives’) as domestic servants? Why did they live in tiny rooms in the backyard? Where were their wives, husbands and children? Why did they address me as ‘baas’, or ‘master’?

I don’t remember what I did with my bedroom epiphany. Almost certainly, I just dropped off to sleep. But later, even when I began to think sociologically about apartheid, privilege, injustice and racism, I would still return to some version of that early psychological unease. I saw this unease– correctly, I believe– as arising from a sense of knowing that something was deeply wrong, but also knowing that I could not live in a state of permanent awareness of this knowledge. Without my deliberate intention, this awareness would switch itself on or, more often, off. There might be weeks or months of blindness, amnesia and sleepwalking. Political education – later called ‘consciousness raising’ – made these phases less frequent, just as it should do.

Later, I started asking another question, one that I still discuss with people who grew up with me. Why did others, even those raised in similar families, schools and neighbourhoods, who read the same papers, walked the same streets, apparently not ‘ see ’ what we saw? Could they be living in another perceptual universe – where the horrors of apartheid were invisible and the physical presence of black people often slipped from awareness? Or perhaps they saw exactly what we saw, but just didn’t care or didn’t see anything wrong....

...By this time, my obsession appeared from an unexpected direction. In 1980, I left England with my family to live in Israel. My vintage sixties radicalism left me utterly unprepared for this move. Nearly twenty years in Britain had done little to change the naïve views I had absorbed while growing up in the Zionist youth movement in South Africa. It soon became obvious that Israel was not like this at all. By the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, I was already disenchanted with the liberal peace movement in which I thought I belonged. I drifted into what in Israeli terms is the ‘far left ’ – the margins of the margins.

I also became involved in human rights issues, particularly torture. In 1990,I started working with Daphna Golan, the Research Director of the Israeli human rights organization, B’Ttselem, on a research project about allegations of torture against Palestinian detainees. Our evidence of the routine use of violent and illegal methods of interrogation was to be confirmed by numerous other sources. But we were immediately thrown into the politics of denial. The official and mainstream response was venomous. Liberals were uneasy and concerned... Yet there was no outrage. Soon a tone of acceptance began to be heard. Abuses were intrinsic to the situation; there was nothing to be done till a political solution was found; something like torture might even be necessary sometimes; anyway, we don’t want to keep being told about this all the time.

This apparent normalization seemed difficult to explain. The report had an enormous media impact: graphic drawings of standard torture methods were widely reproduced, and a taboo subject was now discussed openly. Yet very soon, the silence returned. Worse than torture not being in the news, it was no longer news. Something whose existence could not be admitted, was now seen as predictable...

...It was natural to make the claustrophobic assumption that this problem was unique because Israel was uniquely horrible. Luckily our visitors from the international human rights community reminded us that the problem was universal. They were interested in information circulating in the international arena. How did audiences in North America or Western Europe react to knowledge of atrocities in East Timor, Uganda or Guatemala? I started imagining a nice thirty- something couple sitting, with their breakfast coffee and croissants, in New York, London, Paris or Toronto. They pick up the morning news- paper: ‘Another Thousand Tutsis Massacred in Rwanda’. In the mail plop two circular letters, one from Oxfam: ‘While you are eating your breakfast, ten more children starve to death in Somalia’, and one from Amnesty: ‘While you are eating your lunch, eight street-children are killed in Brazil’. What does this ‘news ’ do to them, and what do they do to the news? What goes through their minds? What do they say to each other?

[ptseti]

PRIVATE MILITARY COMPANIES IN AFRICA: SERVING WHOSE INTERESTS?

Insecurity in Africa has proved profitable for several shadowy private military companies (PMCs). Non-state ‘guns for hire’ are contracted in by top government officials and foreign companies, often involved in extractive industries. In this clip, Zimbabwean lawyer and activist Brian Kagoro (@tamukaKagoro77) points out that PMCs are partly responsible for keeping conflicts in Africa on a slow boil, as it ensures their services are needed. Some are well-known, such as the Wagner Group, now incorporated into Russia’s armed forces. The French Foreign Legion was active in the Sahel during France’s Operation Barkhane (2014 - 2022). US companies CACI and Academi are among the most prominent PMCs present in Africa. Others are Secopex from France, Britain’s Aegis Defence Services, Ukraine’s Omega Consulting Group, South Africa’s Dyck Advisory Group and Xeless from Germany.

Why are all these ‘guns for hire’ in Africa if not for the interests of foreign entities milking the continent dry? Should Africa sort its security challenges out without using PMCs?

Video credit: Kigali Today

[magz]

"Uber Eats drivers in South Africa are unionizing"

(Article date: July 20, 2023)

Article quotes:

Uber Eats delivery drivers in South Africa are looking to form a union to hold the company accountable. -

Drivers say they lack basic equipment and benefits, and that Uber Eats has not been responsive to their grievances, forcing them to consider unionizing. -

Uber says it has done its best to create flexible and rewarding work conditions for its drivers, including providing insurance. But drivers say they have not received any such benefits.

The working conditions for gig workers in South Africa are far worse than their peers in other parts of the world,

according to studies by Fairwork — a global research project that analyzes digital labor platforms — and the University of the Witwatersrand’s Southern Centre for Inequality Studies. [...]

Globally, unionizing has been effective in helping gig workers fight for their rights.

In 2021 the U.K. Supreme Court ruled that two dozen of its drivers were workers — and not independent contractors — which set a precedent for the tens of thousands of drivers who operate in the country. [...]

According to the Uber spokesperson, the company offers both funeral and accidental insurance to all its drivers in South Africa.

But drivers allege they have been unable to access these benefits.

“As drivers, we are having to find our own way to survive by contributing money for funerals, forming our own security teams to guard against bike theft, and doing cash stokvels [community-based savings schemes] to assist each other in the case of robberies, sickness, or accidents,” Dlodlo said.

“Uber must be pushed to play its part and that’s where a union comes in.” [...]

The union, with its over 90,000 members, is attempting to unite all South African gig workers — including cabbies and food delivery drivers — under one body, Tamela told Rest of World.

[tomorrowusa]

Elon Musk understands Eastern Europe about as much as he understands how to run a social media company.

Elon's clueless actions may have prolonged the war in Ukraine.

Elon Musk ordered his Starlink satellite communications network to be turned off near the Crimean coast last year to hobble a Ukrainian drone attack on Russian warships, according to a new biography. CNN quoted an excerpt from the biography Elon Musk by Walter Isaacson, which described how armed submarine drones were approaching their targets when they “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly”. The biography, due out on Tuesday, alleges Musk ordered Starlink engineers to turn off service in the area of the attack because of his concern that Vladimir Putin would respond with nuclear weapons to a Ukrainian attack on Russian-occupied Crimea. He is reported to have said that Ukraine was “going too far” in threatening to inflict a “strategic defeat” on the Kremlin. Musk’s threats to withdraw Starlink communications at various stages of the conflict have been previously reported, but this is the first time it has been alleged he cut off Ukrainian forces in the middle of a specific operation.

The 2020s are not even half over but Musk is already a top contender for Putz of the Decade.

At the time of the submarine drone attack, according to the extract reported by CNN, Mykhailo Fedorov, one of Ukraine’s deputy prime ministers, pleaded with Musk to restore Starlink communications. “I just want you – the person who is changing the world through technology – to know this,” Fedorov reportedly told Musk. According to Isaacson’s account, Musk refused, saying Ukraine was “now going too far and inviting strategic defeat”. Musk has in the past echoed Russian talking points on Twitter, suggesting that some parts of eastern Ukraine be handed to Russia to reflect “the will of the people”.

Musk is more worried about future business deals with Russia than he is about Putin committing genocide in Ukraine.

The only way to end the war is for Russia to be defeated. The shit-for-brains tankies, Putin marionettes, and foreign policy illiterates push "negotiations" the way Neville Chamberlain pushed negotiations with Hitler over Czechoslovakia in 1938. Hitler kept his part of the Munich agreement for less than six months; and then Hitler invaded Poland less than a year after Munich.

"Peace in our time" should not be dependent on the whims of Putin who has already openly violated international agreements, signed by Russia, regarding Ukraine's security. Bothsiderism is a safe space for idiots.

Playing footsie with imperialistic dictators by caving to them only makes them more voracious.

Dilettante meddlers like Musk, who grew up as a privileged and insulated white boy in apartheid South Africa, should keep their lame asses out of Eastern European affairs. People in the West are usually underinformed about Eastern European history and culture and Elon Musk is worse than most.

[reasonandempathy]

How do you overlook/downplay the atrocities and breach of human rights in communist countries?

Can you please name all the huge, systemic atrocities committed by capitalist, developed nations? A few potential arguments would be homelessness/healthcare not being a human right, both of which don't even compare to the brutality seen even in the 'best' communist regimes.

Not a communist.

Have you...seen...US History or US Foreign Policy?

"Yes, millions of people were bought transferred, and sold as livestock to ensure a cheap working class that benefited rich capitalists across Europe and the Americas, forming significant portions of international wealth and economic practice, both in agriculture unskilled labor, but that's not capitalism."

"Yes, the largest companies across the U.S. had internal police and security, forced employees to move to towns they controlled, and killed union leaders who tried to organize against them, leading to what is commonly referred to as 'Almost America's 2nd Civil War', but that's not connected to the underlying economic and political power dynamics of a capitalist system."

"I mean, yeah, the US killed millions of people directly in the Korean and Vietnam wars as explicitly capitalist, anti-communist actions, and sponsored/installed military juntas and dictatorships all across South and Middle America and across the Middle East and SE Asia to ensure private companies could always make a profit and an international capitalist system thrived, but that's not the same."

That's just one Capitalist, Developed Nation. And even internally we've got endless "those Native Americans have gold/food/arable land under their feet. Time for another genocide."

Then you have the DE India and DW India trading corporations, the British Empire (including Irish Occupation and the Irish Genocide and the Troubles), you've got the German Congo genocides, South Africa, the actual literal ongoing genocide in Ghaza.

And before any rebuttal of "those nations weren't developed when they did that!", neither were Russia nor China when the main thrusts of their horror stories happened. Those genocides and abuses that people fall back to describing (Holodomor, the Great Leap Forward, etc.) were their fucked up and wrong attempts to develop their countries. If we're exempting Capitalist systems their atrocities because "they weren't developed yet" then we need to do the same to communist countries/systems as well.

[codingquill]

What is Cloud Computing ?

Cloud computing has become a widely discussed topic in recent years, but explaining it in simple terms to someone without a background in computer science can be challenging. Allow me to break it down for you.

Cloud computing is a method of storing and accessing data and programs over the internet, rather than keeping them on your personal computer or mobile device. To illustrate this, let's consider online email services like Gmail or Outlook. When you use these services, you can access your emails from anywhere because they are stored in the cloud. This means you don't need to install any special software or save your messages on your hard drive. Instead, your emails are stored on remote servers owned by companies like Google or Microsoft. You can access them from any device connected to the internet, regardless of your location.

Understanding Servers in the Cloud

Now, let's delve into the concept of servers in the cloud.

The data stored in the cloud is saved on physical servers, which are powerful computers capable of storing and processing vast amounts of information. These servers are typically housed in data centers, which are specialized facilities that accommodate thousands of servers and other equipment. Data centers require significant power, cooling, security, and connectivity to operate efficiently and reliably.

Microsoft and Google are two of the largest cloud providers globally, and they have data centers located in various regions and continents. Here are some examples of where their data centers are located, according to search results:

Microsoft has data centers in North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia.

Google has data centers in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia.

[catdotjpeg]

Yesterday (6/7 Dec) kayakers were able to successfully prevent the ZIM/ZIM Partnered ships from departing the dock for the day. Photos from Whistleblowers, Activists, and Communities Alliance (WACA).

Their media release, sent out while the action was taking place, reads: 

A group of activists in kayaks has blocked the path of multiple container ships attempting to depart the Port of Melbourne this afternoon.  The ships, the Dax, the Vanessa, and the Star, are currently unable to pass the protestors flotilla of around 40 vessels, which has created a line across the Yarra near the West Gate Bridge. The kayakers held Palestinian flags and were joined by a group of protestors onshore. The three ships are currently operating on ‘partner voyage’ arrangements with the israeli company ZIM. The Dax is owned by Contships Management Inc, and the Vanessa and Star are operated by the Mediterranean Shipping Company, who in September expanded their partnership agreement with ZIM to include further vessel sharing.  Shams Moussa, a Palestinian activist, had this to say: “Australian politicians have Palestinian blood on their hands. Weapons and parts manufactured in Australia are shipped to israel using companies like Zim to commit evil acts of genocide, land theft and ethnic cleansing. Children have lost their families and homes, happiness has been bombed and burned. Yet, with each loss, a seed of resistance is planted, a determination to liberate and seek justice, that is the true Palestinian spirit.”  Anna Angel, a Registered Emergency Nurse, said: “As a nurse, I have an ethical responsibility to denounce israel’s war crimes past and present. israel is targeting hospitals filled with nurses, doctors, healthcare workers and patients.  ZIM and their partners Contship and MSC directly profit from the multi-trillion weapons trade that commodifies this loss of life, creating devastating impacts on human rights and on health outcomes.”  Another protestor onshore, Elsa Tuet-Rosenberg, said: “As a Jewish educator, I applaud those taking action against the occupation. ZIM has a well-documented history of shipping weapons to israel. Targeting these ships costs israel money and, in tandem with actions all over the world, makes the occupation less viable.  This has been a successful strategy in ending apartheid in South Africa. In recent months ZIM’s CEO Eli Glickman has pledged the use of the company’s ships and infrastructure to support the israeli government, with israeli security touted as the company’s ‘top priority.’” 

[wolfliving]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Cyber National Mission Force (CNMF), and National Security Agency (NSA) assess that People’s Republic of China (PRC)-linked cyber actors have compromised thousands of Internet-connected devices, including small office/home office (SOHO) routers, firewalls, network-attached storage (NAS) and Internet of Things (IoT) devices with the goal of creating a network of compromised nodes (a “botnet”) positioned for malicious activity. The actors may then use the botnet as a proxy to conceal their identities while deploying distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks or compromising targeted U.S. networks.

Integrity Technology Group, a PRC-based company, has controlled and managed a botnet active since mid- 2021. The botnet has regularly maintained between tens to hundreds of thousands of compromised devices. As of June 2024, the botnet consisted of over 260,000 devices. Victim devices part of the botnet have been observed in North America, South America, Europe, Africa, Southeast Asia and Australia.

While devices aged beyond their end-of-life dates are known to be more vulnerable to intrusion, many of the compromised devices in the Integrity Tech controlled botnet are likely still supported by their respective vendors.

FBI, CNMF, NSA, and allied partners are releasing this Joint Cyber Security Advisory to highlight the threat posed by these actors and their botnet activity and to encourage exposed device vendors, owners, and operators to update and secure their devices from being compromised and joining the botnet. Network defenders are advised to follow the guidance in the mitigations section to protect against the PRC-linked cyber actors’ botnet activity. Cyber security companies can also leverage the information in this advisory to assist with identifying malicious activity and reducing the number of devices present in botnets worldwide.

For additional information, see U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) press release....

[venomous-ragno]

Writing advice...

... About military things by a soldier :)

You wanna write a story with a militaristic setting, like CoD or R6S? You wanna create  XXXXX, but you don't know where to start?

Well, lucky for you or not I know what that feels like and I've also got the combat / real life experience to help ya out!

Feel free to hop in my askbox or dm's and ask questions. I'll gladly elaborate and do my best to answer in full and plenty.

Disclaimer: My experiences and knowledge are mostly based on the German military, the Bundeswehr. They may differ from those of other countries.

Happy writing y'all :)

Pt. 10 / ?: PMC's and PMSC's

What's a mercenary / PMC / PMSC?

PMC = Private Military Contractor

PMSC = Private Military Security Company

A mercenary, sometimes also referred to as a "soldier of fortune" or a "hired gun", is a party joining a militaristic conflict for personal gains. They're not affiliated with any official military force and are an outsider to the conflict.

Mercenaries are defined as follows:

• A mercenary is “specially recruited”

• A mercenary is to “take direct part in hostilities”

• A mercenary is “motivated by private gain”

• A mercenary is not “a national of a party to the conflict”

• A mercenary is not “a member of the armed forces of a party to the conflict”

• A mercenary is not “sent on official duty by a non-party state” 

Now, militaries nowadays don't just go and hire mercenaries as in people to help them fight or even conduct attacks. The term mercenary isn't even used in its traditional sense, and that's where the so called PMC's / PMSC's come in - the private military contractors. One could argue that a PMC is nothing other than a mercenary with a fancy name, however, they don't meet the definition of a mercenary in the Geneva convention. (Hence why governments get away with hiring them, among many other reasons.)

PMC's specialise in providing combat and protection forces, their work ranging from small scale training missions to providing highly trained and professionally equipped combat units. The UN has officially banned the use of mercenaries in 2001, considering the services provided by PMC's to be mercenary activity. The United States, China, and Russia however reject the notion of PMC's being mercenaries and continue to employ them.

Legality and why PMC's get off the hook so easily

PMC's are murky at best and downright evil at worst. They've been a staple in the Afghan and Iraq wars, as well as Africa, making headlines with nothing less than gruesome war crimes. There is an abundance of journalism covering the West’s reliance on PMCs, especially their heavy use by the American government to lower troop counts in non-lucrative wars like Iraq and Afghanistan. There is also an abundance of reports on the various war crimes and human rights abuses committed by PMCs, like the contractors who gunned down and tortured civilians during aforementioned conflicts. (Operation Blackwater in case you wish to go down the rabbit hole of war crimes.)

By hiring contractors, governments can lower troop counts and official death tolls. All the while, the imperialist ambitions of nations can advance through the use of these forces, while keeping their own name clean. Someone else does the work for them, and if things go south, everyone acts surprised and denounces affiliations with any mercenaries. In other words: PMC's provide an opportunity for deniability.

What makes these PMC's so unique is their status as private entities: They're not registered businesses that investors can buy into. It's a network carefully woven and upkept by the highest ranking, most influential people, like an open secret.

What services to PMC's / PMSC's provide?

• Armed guarding & protection of weapons systems and persons

• Prisoner detention

• Advice & training of local forces & security personnel

• Military consultancy

• Generate and regenerate combat power

• Other criminal warfare activities

[mariacallous]

In the days before South Africa’s May 29 election, there was a euphoric atmosphere in parts of the cosmopolitan but largely Zulu port city of Durban. People who would usually pass each other anonymously could be overheard telling each other, “We are going to fix the country!” There was, though, an ugly underside to this, with current President Cyril Ramaphosa, who is from the smaller Venda ethnic group, often dismissed in vulgar ethnic terms.

The African National Congress (ANC), after 30 years of comfortable rule, took a heavy blow in this election. It secured only 40.2 percent of the vote nationally and took its hardest hit in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, where Durban is located. There, it came in far behind the newly formed uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party—whose figurehead is former President Jacob Zuma. MK finished first with almost 46 percent of votes for the national assembly, taking a large number of votes from the ANC—which won around 17 percent—and many from the Zulu-nationalist Inkatha Freedom Party.

KwaZulu-Natal is South Africa’s second-most populous province—and it is notorious for political violence—including open armed battles fought through the late 1980s and early 1990s, assassinations, and major riots in July 2021.

The electoral success of Zuma’s new party in the recent election has raised fears of further violence.

Organized around the charisma of Zuma, who was the staggeringly corrupt president of South Africa from 2009 to 2018, the MK party takes its name, meaning “spear of the nation,” from the armed wing of the ANC formed by Nelson Mandela and others in 1961. The party lays claim to that history and has adopted a militaristic posture.

Apartheid was, of course, not brought down by that army, which was, in military terms, a failed project. Before Western opinion turned at the end of the Cold War, apartheid was rendered nonviable by the mass democratic politics that began with a series of strikes in Durban in 1973, a popular movement that does not appear in Zuma’s militaristic misrepresentation of political history.

MK endorses an extreme version of the authoritarian populism that has surged in elections around the world. It is best described as ethnically inflected nationalism; while the party has an anticolonial dimension in so far as it seeks to build a counter-elite, it is also socially predatory and deeply conservative on social issues. Zuma has suggested doing away with same-sex marriage, which has been legal in South Africa since 2006; elevating aristocratic tribal authorities over elected representatives; holding a referendum on the death penalty; hiring more police officers; and introducing conscription.

Like other authoritarian populist parties in South Africa and elsewhere, Zuma’s party also takes a hard-right line on immigration. This is a matter of serious concern in South Africa, where African and Asian migrants are often targeted by the state and, periodically, by violent mobs.

MK also has a clear ethnic dimension. This is in sharp contrast to the ANC, which was founded in 1912 with an explicit commitment to build a national sense of African identity that eschewed the politicization of ethnic identities. It remains an ethnically diverse organization led by a member of an ethnic minority group.

Like figures such as Hungary’s Viktor Orban, MK is also enthusiastically pro-Putin. Some MK supporters have been seen wearing T-shirts with side-by-side images of Zuma and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

But unlike forms of right-wing populism elsewhere, MK also promises economic inclusion in a country where impoverishment and inequality are rampant, along with the effective provision of basic services. It proposes nationalizing banks, mines, and insurance companies; expropriating land and placing it under the control of the state and traditional authorities; and providing free education and full employment.

Due to this platform, newspapers outside South Africa have sometimes referred to Zuma’s party as being “far left.” But the left in South Africa has not rallied in support of MK’s proposals for expropriation and nationalization—largely because Zuma’s record during his nine years as president was dire in terms of creating jobs; providing basic services, decent health care, education, and public housing; and achieving long-promised land reform.

Indeed, corruption during Zuma’s presidency did massive damage to the state, its institutions, and its publicly owned companies and was so extreme that a single family took in just under 50 billion rand (then around $3.2 billion) from public budgets in what came to be known as “state capture.” Zuma’s presidency was also marked by a sharp increase in state repression, including the massacre of 34 striking miners by South African police in 2012 and frequent assassinations of grassroots activists.

A number of commentators across the political spectrum have reduced Zuma’s popularity and electoral success in KwaZulu-Natal to “tribalism,” sometimes with the implication that atavistic forces are at play. The recourse to this deeply colonial idea of the “tribe” is unfortunate. But the ethnic element in Zuma’s politics cannot be overlooked either.

Zuma has sought to stoke ethnic sentiment since he was tried for rape in 2006, when, along with chanting, “Burn the bitch,” in reference to his accuser, some of his supporters wore T-shirts with the slogan “100% Zuluboy.” In the lead-up to the recent election, it was common to hear people in Durban speak of the need to achieve the unity of the Zulu people.

KwaZulu-Natal has a long history of violent ethnic mobilization. Mpondo people from the neighboring Eastern Cape province have been sporadically attacked and driven from their homes for more than a century, including when ethnic sentiment escalated as Zuma ascended to the presidency in 2009.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was open war between Inkatha, then a conservative Zulu-nationalist organization backed by the apartheid state, and the United Democratic Front, a popular anti-apartheid organization that allied itself with the ANC in exile. It is estimated that around 20,000 people were killed between the late 1980s and early 1990s. The apartheid state saw Inkatha as a conservative ally against the Soviet-linked ANC and an ally equally opposed to the ANC’s vision of a unitary democratic state.

The war came to an end when, in secret negotiations between the last apartheid president, F.W. de Klerk, and Inkatha leader Mangosuthu Buthelezi on the eve of the first democratic election, huge concessions were made to Inkatha, most notably via the massive transfer of land in KwaZulu-Natal—around 11,000 square miles, almost the size of Belgium—to the Zulu monarchy. This boosted the power of what is termed “traditional authority” over democratic authority, as people living on the land must pay rent to a trust headed by the Zulu king and are governed by customary law administered by traditional leaders.

The end of the war did not bring peace, though. The province swiftly became notorious for political assassinations within the ANC, between the ANC and other parties, and against grassroots activists. Many hundreds of people have been killed. The problem of assassinations was never seriously dealt with in the province and, as a result, has been steadily making its way into other parts of the country.

In the latter years of Zuma’s presidency, he sought to protect himself against mass outrage at brazen corruption by cynically spinning his government’s kleptocracy as “radical economic transformation.” This was taken up outside of the state by armed so-called business forums that shook down established businesses at gun point and by local party gangsters who appropriated public land for private profit. The capacity for violence developed in this milieu includes access to professional assassins and, in some cases, local militias.

In July 2021, when Zuma was briefly jailed for being in contempt of court, KwaZulu-Natal was ripped apart by riots in which 354 people were killed. The riots were sparked by a breakdown in the social order as supporters of Zuma, some dressed in military fatigues, openly attacked migrants from elsewhere in Africa in downtown Durban while the police stood down. There were also more covert attacks on trucks on the main road to Johannesburg, and many were left burnt. Again the police stood down.

The riots began with the mass appropriation of food in a carnival atmosphere. In the main, there was not much sense that this was a political event, and many participants were clear that they were not motivated by support for Zuma. But the riots soon took on a more ominous tone, and infrastructure was systematically destroyed by groups of armed men acting with military precision. Zuma’s daughter Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla celebrated the destruction on social media.

Now that the country is suspended between an election result that fundamentally changes its politics and the outcomes of the ongoing high-stakes negotiations to form national and provincial governments, the atmosphere in Durban is more febrile than euphoric.

False claims are being pushed through social media with a startling velocity, with Zuma-Sambudla taking a leading role in the promotion of conspiracy theories. There has been a particular focus, repeated by Zuma in various public statements, on the Trumpian move of declaring, without evidence, that the elections were rigged. The general view is that Zuma and his supporters are making this claim to set the stage for violence, although it is not quite clear what their intentions are.

It is common to hear people say that when the new provincial government comes into power, migrants will be “dealt with” and ethnic minorities will “know their place.” It is not uncommon to hear talk of secession, of an independent Zulu kingdom. There are widespread fears of coming violence, something that a number of grassroots activists say is inevitable. Mqapheli Bonono, one of the most prominent grassroots activists in Durban, said: “There will definitely be violence. We don’t know when or where, but for sure it’s coming.”

Migrants have already been threatened and intimidated. Last Wednesday, an MK organizer was gunned down in Durban. Although there is not yet any evidence of a specific motive, it is being reported by some media as a political killing. It is widely assumed that this is the beginning of an internal struggle for positions and power within MK. Some ethnic minorities fear that they may have to move out of the province. Some have returned to rural family homes outside the province while they wait to see how things play out.

Ramaphosa wishes to establish a national unity government so the ANC can continue to govern the country. It is not yet clear if this will work or if MK will participate in such an arrangement. In KwaZulu-Natal, it is possible that a deal between other parties could keep MK in opposition despite it winning the largest share of the vote. If MK is not part of the deal struck to form a national government, tensions will inevitably escalate. This will be dramatically compounded if the party is kept out of government in KwaZulu-Natal by an alliance of other parties.

If MK does form a government in KwaZulu-Natal, the country will have its second-most populous province governed by a political force directly opposed not just to the national government but to the principles and legal foundations on which the country was founded.

The militaristic posture of Zuma’s party escalates fears of violence, and Zuma himself often makes implicit threats of violence via dog whistles. Speaking in English, he has warned that he should not be “provoked.” Speaking in Zulu, he has said: “Abasazi singo bani” (They don’t know who we are).

The idiomatic meaning here is clear, but, in literal terms, South Africans know exactly who Zuma and his party are.

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from DeSmog Blog:

With its unparalleled purchasing power and exacting demands, fast food has long shaped agricultural systems in the United States, Europe, and China. But as major American fast food brands, like KFC, expand into so-called “frontier markets,” taxpayer-funded development banks have made their global expansion possible by underwriting the factory farms that supply them with chicken, a DeSmog investigation has found. 

In all, the investigation identified five factory-scale poultry companies in as many countries that have received financial support from the International Finance Corporation (IFC, the private-sector lending arm of the World Bank Group), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), or both since 2003, and that supply chicken to KFC. A sixth company has benefited from IFC advisory services but has not received financing. 

A review of press accounts, financial disclosures, and the companies’ websites shows this support aided these firms’ KFC-linked operations in up to 13 countries in Asia, Africa, and Europe. 

In Kazakhstan, both banks helped a Soviet-era poultry factory become a KFC supplier. In 2011, the IFC lent poultry company Ust-Kamenogorsk Poultry (UKPF) invested $2 million in refurbishing housing for chickens, among other projects. In 2016, the EBRD made a $20 million equity investment in the company’s parent, Aitas, to finance the construction of a new facility to raise and process poultry. In 2018, two years after announcing the financing deal, UKPF revealed it had become a supplier to KFC in Kazakhstan. The EBRD sold its stake in the company in 2019. 

In South Africa, the IFC helped one KFC supplier bolster its operations across the region. In 2013, the bank loaned Country Bird Holdings $25 million to expand existing operations in South Africa, Botswana, and Zambia. Country Bird supplies KFC in all three countries, as well as Mozambique and Zimbabwe. Three years later, in 2016, Country Bird also became KFC’s sole franchisee in Zambia.

In Jordan, the EBRD’s technical support and a 2015 loan worth up to $21 million helped poultry company Al Jazeera Agricultural Company upgrade its facilities and expand its retail presence. Al Jazeera claims to produce half the country’s restaurant-sold chicken. It includes the local franchisees of KFC and Texas Chicken (known by its original name, Church’s Chicken, in the U.S.) as clients. 

With this Global North-financed fast-food expansion comes a host of environmental, social, and health concerns in regions often unprepared to field them.

“It’s so clear that these investments are not consistent with any coherent notion of sustainable development,” Kari Hamerschlag, deputy director for the food and agriculture program at Friends of the Earth US, told DeSmog. 

Providing Financial Security for Fast Food Suppliers 

Both the IFC and the EBRD are financed primarily by the governments of developed countries for the benefit of developing countries. The IFC was founded in 1956 under the umbrella of the World Bank Group to stimulate developing economies by lending directly to businesses. Founded in 1991, the EBRD was formed to support Eastern Europe’s transition to a market economy. Since then, it has extended its geographic reach to include other regions. 

Development banks often finance companies and projects in regions that more risk-averse commercial banks tend to avoid. The idea is to help grow a company’s operations and lower the risk for private sector investors. 

Both of these development banks’ investments cover a range of sectors, including manufacturing, education, agribusiness, energy, and tourism. Because large agro-processors, such as poultry companies, can transform bushel upon bushel of local crops into more valuable products, like meat, they make especially attractive clients. 

The world’s largest restaurant company, U.S.-based Yum! Brands, owns KFC, and calls the fried chicken powerhouse, which oversees more than 30,000 locations across the globe, a “major growth engine.”