The battle lines are drawn once again. U.S. law enforcement agencies and Silicon Valley are getting ready to face off on the issue of privacy. This latest battle is focused on a 30-year-old law on government access to electronic communications and associated data. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act was a forward-looking statute when enacted in 1986, but technology has dramatically outpaced the ECPA. The U.S. Congress has been looking into ways to revise the law in order to preserve the privacy of internet users while also preserving the legal tools necessary for government agencies to enforce the law and protect the public. The late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called privacy "the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by a free people." The Senate Judiciary Committee this week is considering an amendment to the ECPA that would expand the government's ability to collect data using a National Security Letter, which doesn't require a court order. The amendment would authorize the FBI to demand a person's internet browser history and internet protocol address, enabling investigators to see what websites a person visits, how much time is spent on a particular site and the location of the internet user all without judicial oversight. The FBI contends that such data is covered implicitly under current statute, which was written years ago and only explicitly covers data normally associated with telephone records. FBI Director James Comey has said the amendment is needed to fix "a typo" in the ECPA that has hindered the bureau's ability to work in "a very, very big and practical way." But a letter sent earlier this week warned Congress that such an amendment is opposed by tech giants and civil liberties organizations. "This expansion of the NSL statute has been characterized by some government officials as merely fixing 'a typo' in the law," the letter said. "In reality, however, it would dramatically expand the ability of the FBI to get sensitive information about users' online... Question: Who believes the right most valued by free people is privacy? Options: - FBI - James Comey - not enough information - Louis Brandeis === The correct answer is
Louis Brandeis

(Question)
I repeatedly see people asking advice on forums as to which is the best detox to do. Whenever I see this question I want to scream at the person 'no, don't do it. It is a waste of your time and money'...but I don't. I don't want to cause a scene, or start a barrage of backlash from people claiming that it worked for them. Instead, I will present the facts and let you decide for yourself if it is worth doing. Before I start, I just want to clarify that when I am referring to detox I mean the ones that you buy where you have to take a million various tablets a day and stick to a very restricted diet. If you are going to 'detox' by simply eating healthily then all power to you. That will most definitely do wonders for your body. These detox kits won't. They will produce results; however, the results will be temporary. Why detoxes don't work Firstly, the companies who are marketing the detoxes talk about removing toxins that have built up in the body. So, what are these toxins? They don't say. They remain vague and just leave you to let your imagination run wild. Do they mean chemicals, waste products from digestion, bacteria? I guess I imagined it as the waste products from digestion but it would be interesting to hear what other people perceive as the 'toxins' in their bodies. I read an interesting article on British Beauty Blogger about how Veet gave Chinese women a problem they never had. Chinese women naturally have very little body hair so hair removal products have always been poor sellers. Therefore, Reckitt Benckiser (who own Veet) devised a marketing campaign to convince Chinese that any body hair is unsightly and released ads equating hair free skin with health, confidence and "shining glory" (the full marketing concept can be read here). I feel that this is the same as what is happening in regards to detoxes. The marketers of the products have convinced us that our bodies are full of these so called 'toxins', from our unhealthy lifestyles, that need to be removed with a detox. Question: What is probably true about marketing campaigns? Options: - They trick people into buying products - not enough information - They help people lose weight - They are always honest === The correct answer is
(Answer)
They trick people into buying products

Miguel Diaz-Canel has been named Cuba's next president, marking the first time in 60 years the communist-run country has had a president outside the Castro family. The 57-year-old Diaz-Canel, the only candidate for the job, won a five-year term, according to state media. The move was not expected to usher in drastic change. Upon being sworn in Thursday, Diaz-Canel promised to continue the Castros' socialist revolution. "The mandate given by the people to this house is to give continuity to the Cuban revolution in a crucial historic moment," Diaz-Canel said. Diaz-Canel, a former first vice president, appears to be socially liberal and is considered an acceptable successor to the retiring elderly leaders who fought in the revolution. He succeeds 86-year-old Raul Castro, who is resigning after 10 years in office. Raul Castro's late brother, Fidel, served as prime minister and president after the armed Cuban Revolution in 1959 until he became ill in 2006. While the leadership transition is elevating younger leaders, Raul Castro and other older revolutionaries are expected to retain their power, due to their hold on the Communist Party. Castro will remain party leader. "Raul Castro, as first secretary of the Communist Party, will lead the decisions about the future of the country,'' Diaz-Canel said in his speech. "Cuba needs him, providing ideas and proposals for the revolutionary cause, orienting and alerting us about any error or deficiency, teaching us, and always ready to confront imperialism.'' Castro told members of the National Assembly that Diaz-Canel could serve two years as president, and that he will likely eventually take his place as head of the Communist Party. Diaz-Canel will face pressure to bring greater prosperity to the Caribbean country and revitalize its economy, which is weaker than it was in 1985 when it was supported by the former Soviet Union. Since Fidel and Raul Castro led a guerrilla movement that overthrew a dictatorship and took over the country in 1959, the name Castro has been... Question: When did Diaz-Canel go into office? Options: - During Raul Castro's term - not enough information - After Raul Castro - Before Raul Castro === The correct answer is
After Raul Castro