Aggregator

経済産業省は、工場を建設する目的で平成27年（1月～12月期）に1,000平方メートル以上の用地を取得した製造業、ガス業、熱供給業、電気業の事業者を対象に「工場立地動向調査」を実施し、結果を取りまとめました。

4月5日から9日まで、韓国のソウルにおいて、日中韓自由貿易協定(FTA)交渉の第10回交渉会合(局長/局次長会合)が開催されます。

経済産業省は、昨年10月に「活力あふれる『ビンテージ・ソサエティ』の実現に向けた取組に係る研究会」を立ち上げ、検討を重ね、今般報告書をとりまとめました。

交通事故の削減や渋滞緩和、環境負荷低減等の課題解決が期待される協調ITS（※）の実現普及に必要とされる地図データベースの整備や維持・更新のコスト削減に役立つ日本発の国際規格が制定されました。

平成28年3月4日に、東京電力からありました改正電気事業法に基づく会社分割に係る申請について、このたび申請のとおり認可しました。

　　　　　　 　　　　原爆ドーム前でアピールするJCJメンバーたち　広島「平和記念式典」は８月６日、平和公園の各入場口に通じる道路で警察が厳戒態勢を敷き、市が昨年に続き「公園全域入場規制」を強行する中で行われた。ＪＣＪ広島支部は今年も「８・６取材班」を編成。式典当日の「会場」内外を取材した。平和公園に持ち物検査を受けて入場し、核兵器廃絶などを訴えるボードを掲げる初めてのアピールにも取り組んだ。　午前7時30分、支部メンバーと市民計10人は、歩道を占拠する集団や大音量が響く原爆..

2021年3月に名古屋出入国在留管理局の収容施設で亡くなったスリランカ国籍のウィシュマ・サンダマリさん。遺族は、名古屋入管が衰弱していくウィシュマさんに対して適切な措置を取らなかったことが死亡の原因として、2022年3月に国家賠償請求訴訟を提起した。12月には事件に関与した医師など4人の証人尋問が行われる予定で、裁判はいよいよ重要な局面を迎える。　こうした中、遺族は14日、東京都内で事件の経緯や裁判の経過について説明する報告会を開いた。妹のポールニマさんのほか、遺族側弁護団の指宿昭一弁護士や支援団体「BOND」のメンバーが登壇し、参加した市民に向けて思いを語った。（岩中健介）

One of the reasons we opposed the TikTok "ban" is that the First Amendment is supposed to protect us from government using its power to manipulate speech. But as predicted, the TikTok "ban" has only resulted in turning over the platform to the allies of a president who seems to have no respect for the First Amendment.

TikTok was never proven to be a current national security problem, so it's hard to say the sale will alleviate those unproven concerns. And it remains to be seen if the deal places any limits on the new ownership sharing user data with foreign governments or anyone else—the security concern that purportedly justified the forced sale. As for the algorithm, if the concern had been that TikTok could be a conduit for Chinese government propaganda—a concern the Supreme Court declined to even consider—people can now be concerned that TikTok could be a conduit for U.S. government propaganda. An administration official reportedly has said the new TikTok algorithm will be "retrained" with U.S. data to make sure the system is "behaving properly."

This is the fourth installment in a blog series documenting EFF's findings from the Stop Censoring Abortion campaign. You can read additional posts here. 

One of the goals of our Stop Censoring Abortion campaign was to put names, stories, and numbers to the experiences we’d been hearing about: people and organizations having their abortion-related content – or entire accounts – removed or suppressed on social media. In reviewing survey submissions, we found that multiple users reported experiencing shadowbanning. Shadowbanning (or “deranking”) is widely experienced and reported by content creators across various social media platforms, and it’s a phenomenon that those who create content about abortion and sexual and reproductive health know all too well.

Shadowbanning is the often silent suppression of certain types of content or creators in your social media feeds. It’s not something that a U.S-based creator is notified about, but rather something they simply find out when their posts stop getting the same level of engagement that they’re used to, or when people are unable to easily find their account using the platform’s search function. Essentially, it is when a platform or its algorithm decides that other users should see less of a creator or specific topic. Many platforms deny that shadowbanning exists; they will often blame reduced reach of posts on ‘bugs’ in the algorithm. At the same time, companies like Meta have admitted that content is ranked, but much about how this ranking system works remains unknown.  Meta says that there are five content categories that while allowed on its platforms, “may not be eligible for recommendation.” Content discussing abortion pills may fall under the umbrella of “Content that promotes the use of certain regulated products,” but posts that simply affirm abortion as a valid reproductive decision or are of storytellers sharing their experiences don’t match any of the criteria that would make it unable to be recommended by Meta.

Whether a creator relies on a platform for income or uses it to educate the public, shadowbanning can be devastating for the growth of an account. And this practice often seems to disproportionately affect people who are talking about ‘taboo’ topics like sex, abortion, and LGBTQ+ identities, such as Kim Adamski, a sexual health educator who shared her story with our Stop Censoring Abortion project. As you can see in the images below, Kim’s Instagram account does not show up as a suggestion when being searched, and can only be found after typing in the full username.

Earlier this year, the Center for Intimacy Justice shared their report, "The Digital Gag: Suppression of Sexual and Reproductive Health on Meta, TikTok, Amazon, and Google", which found that of the 159 nonprofits, content creators, sex educators, and businesses surveyed, 63% had content removed on Meta platforms and 55% had content removed on TikTok. This suppression is happening at the same time as platforms continue to allow and elevate videos of violence and gore and extremist hateful content. This pattern is troubling and is only becoming more prevalent as people turn to social media to find the information they need to make decisions about their health.

Reproductive rights and sex education have been under attack across the U.S. for decades. Since the Dobbs v. Jackson decision in 2022, 20 states have banned or limited access to abortion. Meanwhile, 16 states don’t require sex education in public schools to be medically accurate, 19 states have laws that stigmatize LGBTQ+ identities in their sex education curricula, and 17 states specifically stigmatize abortion in their sex education curricula.

In a world that is constantly finding ways to legislate away bodily autonomy and hide queer identities, social media platforms have an opportunity to stand as safe havens for access to community and knowledge.

Online platforms are critical lifelines for people seeking possibly life-saving information about their sexual and reproductive health. We know that when people are unable to find or access the information they need within their communities, they will turn to the internet and social media. This is especially important for abortion-seekers and trans youth living in states where healthcare is being criminalized.

In a world that is constantly finding ways to legislate away bodily autonomy and hide queer identities, social media platforms have an opportunity to stand as safe havens for access to community and knowledge. Limiting access to this information by suppressing the people and organizations who are providing it is an attack on free expression and a profound threat to freedom of information—principles that these platforms claim to uphold. Now more than ever, we must continue to push back against censorship of sexual and reproductive health information so that the internet can still be a place where all voices are heard and where all can learn.

This is the fourth post in our blog series documenting the findings from our Stop Censoring Abortion campaign. Read more in the series: https://www.eff.org/pages/stop-censoring-abortion

　ノンフィクション･ジャンルからチョイスした本の紹介です(刊行順･販価は税別)。◆平野雄吾『パレスチナ占領』ちくま新書　9/11刊 950円「パレスチナ占領」.jpg〓パレスチナ自治区ガザの戦闘は、イスラエル軍によるガザの死者は６万人を超える未曽有の大惨事に至った。これは長い間のイスラエルによるパレスチナ占領が招いた悲劇である。2024年までエルサレム特派員を務めた著者は、パレスチナの人々が抱き続ける故郷喪失と抵抗の記憶を聞きとり、イスラエル国内で被害者意識が強化される構造を..

Statewatch is a small, non-profit organisation and our work is greatly enhanced by our network of volunteer contributors across Europe.

If you would like to contribute work to Statewatch, please read the following and contact office [at] statewatch.org.

If you would like to contact us using encrypted email, please write to secure [at] statewatch.org using the PGP key here.

Before making a submission, please read and make use of our editorial guidelines. These are designed to make our work clear, accessible and consistent.

Contributing work does not guarantee that it will be published, but we will always read contributions and respond to the author(s).

Statewatch contributors group

The Statewatch contributors group is a network of people who support our work by writing articles, providing information, translating material, or sharing contacts to support our research projects.

Anyone who is interested in supporting our work can request to join the Statewatch contributors group by filling in this form.

It is not necessary to request to join the grop to submit an article for publication. However, we will ask all authors of articles accepted for publication if they wish to join the group.

Types of contributions

We accept the following types of contributions:

• news articles – 200-1,500 words;
• analyses – 1,000 – 10,000 words;
• documentation – official documents; and
• links – to articles, reports, analyses or information relevant to Statewatch’s work.

Translations of material into English are always welcome, provided that permission is sought from the original author/publisher (where necessary).

News articles

News articles can be based on:

• first-hand reporting;
• reports published by NGOs, government bodies or other organisations;
• write-ups of campaigns, protests or other actions;
• write-ups of statements or announcements (e.g. by a campaign group);
• write-ups of academic work;
• official documentation;
• official speeches; or
• book reviews.

Examples of news articles:

• Polish government proposes life-long EU entry bans for deportees
• Italian ministers should face justice for freeing fugitive war criminal, says legal complaint
• EU: Outsourcing borders and migration control: no parliamentary scrutiny in sight

News articles should report facts and other peoples' opinions, but not the author's own opinions.

Analyses

Analyses should take an in-depth look at an issue or situation. An analysis should provide the author's opinion on the topic in question, as long as that opinion is backed up by evidence.

Analyses can be between 1,000 and 10,000 words in length. Please bear in mind that longer your contribution, the longer it will take us to consider it for publication.

Documentation

We frequently publish official documentation, both from the EU institutions and national governments.

If you are submitting for us to publish, we would greatly appreciate a short summary of its content.

If you have material you would like to send to us securely, please write to secure [at] statewatch.org using this PGP key.

Links

Through our bi-weekly bulletin we share links to material published by newspapers, NGOs, official bodies and other organisations. You are welcome to send us links to relevant material.

Summaries of the content of those links would be much appreciated, in particular summary translations into English.

Police are using their drones as flying automated license plate readers (ALPRs), airborne police cameras that make it easier than ever for law enforcement to follow you. 

"The Flock Safety drone, specifically, are flying LPR cameras as well,” Rahul Sidhu, Vice President of Aviation at Flock Safety, recently told a group of potential law enforcement customers interested in drone-as-first-responder (DFR) programs. 

The integration of Flock Safety’s flagship ALPR technology with its Aerodome drone equipment is a police surveillance combo poised to elevate the privacy threats to civilians caused by both of these invasive technologies as drone adoption expands. 

flock_drone_flying_police_platform.png

A slide from a Flock Safety presentation to Rutherford County Sheriff's Office in North Carolina, obtained via public records, featuring Flock Safety products, including the Aerodome drone and the Wing product, which helps convert surveillance cameras into ALPR systems

The use of DFR programs has grown exponentially. The biggest police technology companies, like Axon, Flock Safety, and Motorola Solutions, are broadening their drone offerings, anticipating that drones could become an important piece of their revenue stream. 

Communities must demand restrictions on how local police use drones and ALPRs, let alone a dangerous hybrid of the two. Otherwise, we can soon expect that a drone will fly to any call for service and capture sensitive location information about every car in its flight path, capturing more ALPR data to add to the already too large databases of our movements. 

ALPR systems typically rely on cameras that have been fixed along roadways or attached to police vehicles. These cameras capture the image of a vehicle, then use artificial intelligence technology to log the license plate, make, model, color, and other unique identifying information, like dents and bumper stickers. This information is usually stored on the manufacturer’s servers and often made available on nationwide sharing networks to police departments from other states and federal agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ALPRs are already used by most of the largest police departments in the country, and Flock Safety also now offers the ability for an agency to turn almost any internet-enabled cameras into an ALPR camera. 

ALPRs present a host of problems. ALPR systems vacuum up data—like the make, model, color, and location of vehicles—on people who will never be involved in a crime, used in gridding areas to systematically make a record of when and where vehicles have been. ALPRs routinely make mistakes, causing police to stop the wrong car and terrorize the driver. Officers have abused law enforcement databases in hundreds of cases. Police have used them to track across state lines people seeking legal health procedures. Even when there are laws against sharing data from these tools with other departments, some policing agencies still do.

Drones, meanwhile, give police a view of roofs, backyards, and other fenced areas where cops can’t casually patrol, and their adoption is becoming more common. Companies that sell drones have been helping law enforcement agencies to get certifications from the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA), and recently-implemented changes to the restrictions on flying drones beyond the visual line of sight will make it even easier for police to add this equipment. According to the FAA, since a new DFR waiver process was implemented in May 2025, the FAA has granted more than 410 such waivers, already accounting for almost a third of the approximately 1,400 DFR waivers that have been granted since such programs began in 2018.

Local officials should, of course, be informed that the drones they’re buying are equipped to do such granular surveillance from the sky, but it is not clear that this is happening. While the ALPR feature is available as part of Flock drone acquisitions, some government customers may not realize that to approve a drone from Flock Safety may also mean approving a flying ALPR. And though not every Flock safety drone is currently running the ALPR feature, some departments, like Redondo Beach Police Department, have plans to activate it in the near future. 

ALPRs aren’t the only so-called payloads that can be added to a drone. In addition to the high resolution and thermal cameras with which drones can already be equipped, drone manufacturers and police departments have discussed adding cell-site simulators, weapons, microphones, and other equipment. Communities must mobilize now to keep this runaway surveillance technology under tight control.

When EFF posed questions to Flock Safety about the integration of ALPR and its drones, the company declined to comment.

Mapping, storing, and tracking as much personal information as possible—all without warrants—is where automated police surveillance is heading right now. Flock has previously described its desire to connect ALPR scans to additional information on the person who owns the car, meaning that we don’t live far from a time when police may see your vehicle drive by and quickly learn that it’s your car and a host of other details about you. 

EFF has compiled a list of known drone-using police departments. Find out about your town’s surveillance tools at the Atlas of Surveillance. Know something we don't? Reach out at aos@eff.org.

(訳者まえがき)ここに訳出したのは、マイクロソフト社によるガザのジェノサイドへの共犯を内部告発してきたテック労働者や支援する労働者たちの運動No Azure for Apartheidのサイトに掲載された宣言文だ。日付けはないが、ジェノサイドから22ヶ月という文言があること、そしてここで「解放区」と呼ばれている場所が設置されたのが、2025年8月19日とVerge誌が報じている(日本語訳)ので、今年の8月頃に書かれたものだろう。大学キャンパスの野営キャンプに倣って設置された「解放区」だが、即座にマイクロスフフト社と警察による弾圧が始まる。8月19日、20日、8月26日と連日のように、抗議に参加したマイクロソフトの労働者たちが次々に解雇され、28日には、開放区の抗議行動に参加したユダヤ人労働者が解雇されている。同時に多くの逮捕者も出す。Arab DAily Newsは次のように報じている。「これらの一連の措置には、8月26日の座り込みに参加したアンナ・ハトルとリキ・ファメリの解雇、8月19日と20日の解放区キャンプに参加したニスリーン・ジャラダットとジュリアス・シャンの解雇が含まれる。ジョー・ロペスはMicrosoft Build 2025基調講演での抗議活動、イブティハル・アブサドとヴァニヤ・アグラワルは4月4日のMicrosoft創立50周年記念イベントでの抗議活動、そしてホッサム・ナスルとアブド・モハメッドは昨年10月24日のパレスチナ殉教者追悼集会と募金活動が理由で解雇されている。」以下の声明は、まだこうした弾圧が始まる前に出されたものだろう。この声明はジェノサイド加担企業で働く労働者の共犯性を自問するとともに、労働者への呼びかけだけではなく、マイクロソフト社のサービスの消費者でもある私たち一人一人への厳しい問いかけでもある。マイクロソフト社のジェノサイド加担が、これほどまでに明白であるのに、それでもなお、マイクロソフトのソフトウェアを今まで通り使い続けることでいいのかどうか、とりわけ反戦平和運動が運動の文化のなかでマイクロソフトのサービスを許容する文化をそのままにしていいのか、という厳しい問いかけでもある。なお、この運動の8月の経緯については、Real Change News8月25日のGuy Oronの記事(英語)が詳しいと思う。(としまる)

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会　電波有効利用委員会価額競争の実施方法に関する検討作業班（第4回）

IPネットワーク設備委員会 モバイル網固定電話作業班（第1回）・電気通信番号政策委員会（第44回）合同会合　開催案内

行政通則法的観点からのAI利活用調査研究会　中間整理の公表

第28回万国郵便大会議の結果

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会　電波利用環境委員会（第64回）開催案内