instruction:
Given a document, find the main entity about whom the author is writing. Write the full name if mentioned in the text. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].
question:
The Roman Empire  a police state in its own right  had ordered that a census be conducted. Joseph and his pregnant wife Mary traveled to the little town of Bethlehem so that they could be counted. There being no room for the couple at any of the inns  they stayed in a stable  where Mary gave birth to  a baby boy  Jesus .
Unfortunately   Jesus  was born into a police state not unlike the growing menace of the American police state. And when  he  grew up   Jesus  did not shy away from speaking truth to power. Indeed   his  teachings undermined the political and religious establishment of  his  day.  He  was eventually crucified as a warning to others not to challenge the powers-that-be.
Yet what if  instead of being born into the Roman police state   Jesus  had been born and raised in the American police state?
Instead of being born in a manger   Jesus  might have been born at home. Rather than wise men and shepherds bringing gifts  however  the baby’s parents might have been forced to ward off visits from state social workers intent on prosecuting them for the home birth. One couple in Washington had all three of their children removed after social services objected to the two youngest being birthed in an unassisted home delivery.
From the time  he  was old enough to attend school   Jesus  would have been drilled in lessons of compliance and obedience to government authorities  while learning little about  his  own rights. Had  he  dared to step out of line while in school   he  might have found  himself  tasered or beaten by a school resource officer  or at the very least suspended under a school zero tolerance policy that punishes minor infractions as harshly as more serious offenses.
Had  Jesus  disappeared for a few hours let alone days as a 12-year-old   his  parents would have been handcuffed  arrested and jailed for parental negligence.
From the moment  Jesus  made contact with an “extremist” such as John the Baptist   he  would have been flagged for surveillance because of  his  association with a prominent activist  peaceful or otherwise. Since 9/11  the FBI has actively carried out surveillance and intelligence-gathering operations on a broad range of activist groups.
Jesus’ anti-government views would certainly have resulted in  him  being labeled a domestic extremist. Law enforcement agencies are being trained to recognize signs of anti-government extremism during interactions with potential extremists who share a “belief in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”
While traveling from community to community   Jesus  might have been reported to government officials as “suspicious” under the Department of Homeland Security’s “See Something  Say Something” programs.
Rather than being permitted to live as an itinerant preacher   Jesus  might have found  himself  threatened with arrest for daring to live off the grid or sleeping outside. In fact  the number of cities that have resorted to criminalizing homelessness by enacting bans on camping  sleeping in vehicles  loitering and begging in public has doubled.
Viewed by the government as a dissident and potential threat to its power   Jesus  might have had government spies planted among  his  followers to monitor  his  activities  report on  his  movements  and entrap  him  into breaking the law. Such Judases today — called informants — often receive hefty paychecks from the government for their treachery.
Had  Jesus  used the internet to spread  his  radical message of peace and love   he  might have found  his  blog posts infiltrated by government spies attempting to undermine  his  integrity  discredit  him  or plant incriminating information online about  him . At the very least   he  would have had  his  website hacked and  his  email monitored.
Had  Jesus  attempted to feed large crowds of people   he  would have been threatened with arrest for violating various ordinances prohibiting the distribution of food without a permit. Florida officials arrested a 90-year-old man for feeding the homeless on a public beach.
Had  Jesus  spoken publicly about  his  40 days in the desert and  his  conversations with the devil   he  might have been labeled mentally ill and detained in a psych ward with no access to family or friends.
Without a doubt  had  Jesus  attempted to overturn tables in a Jewish temple and rage against the materialism of religious institutions   he  would have been charged with a hate crime. Currently  45 states and the federal government have hate crime laws on the books.
Rather than having armed guards capture  Jesus  in a public place  government officials would have ordered that a SWAT team carry out a raid on  Jesus  and  his  followers  complete with flash-bang grenades and military equipment. There are upwards of 80 000 such SWAT team raids carried out every year.
answer:
Jesus Was Born


question:
The 32-year-old Wisconsin man was not a threat to Sundayâs Chicago Marathon  and it was believed he was in town to drop off a friend at OâHare International Airport  said  chief Chicago police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi .
Around 8 a.m.  Chicago police assigned to O'Hare stopped a vehicle for speeding near the Kennedy Expressway on Cumberland Avenue   Guglielmi  said.
Once police pulled them over  an officer saw a handgun in the 2005 Mitsubishi Galant. Police were then told that an AR-15 rifle was in the trunk   Guglielmi  said.
In addition to 217 rounds of ammunition  police found a pressure cooker device in the trunk of the car. But it was inspected by Chicago police and the FBI  who determined that the device was not being used as a weapon  but rather for cooking   Guglielmi  said.
Three people were inside the vehicle  and all were taken into custody   Guglielmi  said.
"Runners and spectators in Sunday's marathon "can expect to see a very visible presence of Chicago police officers ''  Guglielmi  said in an emailed statement.
answer:
Anthony Guglielmi


question:
In her witty new book Australian technology author and TED celebrity Rachel Botsman tells us why it did not work. Who Can You Trust? How Technology Brought Us Together and Why It Could Drive Us Apart might be a bit too perky for some but it reveals some deep truths.
With industrial power collapsed  social media’s “distributed trust” began its run to win popular trust.  Botsman  even claims to have predicted the next stage of evolution  anticipating Airbnb  Zipcar and Uber in  her  previous book. At first the masses took to social technology like ducks to water but few thought through the costs of power flowing from institutional experts to less sophisticated individuals. It turned out that these social media had institutions too  if less hierarchical  but still leading to someone at the top with a great degree of control over the people’s “open” media below them.
 Botsman  says  she  would not have written  her  book if  she  did not think distributed networks could solve many problems and develop popular trust  but the many examples presented in  her  book demonstrate that “distributed trust always seem to lead us back to centralized power ” with Facebook  Amazon  and Alibaba leading the list.
 Her  thesis is that distributed systems need to know who is telling the truth in order to be social but their media technology develop so fast and anonymously it becomes difficult to trace accountability. Perhaps 75 percent of automobiles will self-drive by 2040. How can sufficient trust develop in such a major activity in such a short time? Blockchains like Bitcoin may replace governmental currency and financial transactions. Robots threaten to take everyone’s job. The most famous bot was HAL 9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey and we all know what happened then. Some “trust pause” will certainly be necessary for such major social transitions.
Take the number one social media technology guy  Mark Zuckerberg  who created Facebook to be an open forum for public discussion. Yet  after social media was accused of biasing the presidential election even  he  had to reluctantly concede (the second time) that there was an abundance of fake news on  his  site  which  he  then promised to fix in a socially positive way.  His  solution was to balance alternative views by adding “additional perspectives ” including noting after doubtful material that fact checkers disputed the claims in the original published news. But who would do the “fact checking”?
 Botsman  does not mention  it  but Google’s top scientist Ray Kurzweil had bigger ideas. Computers would be thinking for themselves by 2014 with humans becoming immortal soon after. Humans would become immortal under Kurzweil’s Calico project to replicate nature’s control of mitochondrial DNA by moving toxic bacteria into the cell nucleus to stop aging. With age under control people would live forever. At the same time  artificial intelligence would develop computers that learn by themselves. Ageless individuals could then link an AI machine to their brain so they could give accurate and immediate responses to every kind of question. But if this takes place instantly  is that a person still a person or a computer?
China’s Social Credit System would produce a “social credit score” for every Chinese citizen and introduce national networks of shame to ameliorate and control unruly segments of the population. This system should have a bullish future in much of the world now under authoritarian governments.  Botsman  quips: “Today China  tomorrow a place near you.”
Not a place in the U.S. with its democratic government protecting privacy  right? One big obstacle to such protection mentioned by  Botsman  is that government regulation simply cannot keep up with the explosive rate of change in private social media technology. There is that free speech and press stuff but Congress just approved another renewal of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act seventeen years after 9/11 and few doubt that some similar future horrendous terrorist act would make the government’s surveillance even more intrusive.
 Botsman ’s general solution to increase social trust is to rely upon reputation  which is sound  but extremely difficult to evaluate as  her  book proves.
How do we even know if  Botsman  isn’t a bot already  predicting China for us all?
answer:

Rachel Botsman