Umberto Eco, who owned 50,000 books, had this to say about home libraries:
“It is foolish to think that you have to read all the books you buy, as it is foolish to criticize those who buy more books than they will ever be able to read. It would be like saying that you should use all the cutlery or glasses or screwdrivers or drill bits you bought before buying new ones. There are things in life that we need to always have plenty of supplies, even if we will only use a small portion. If, for example, we consider books as medicine, we understand that it is good to have many at home rather than a few: when you want to feel better, then you go to the ‘medicine closet’ and choose a book. Not a random one, but the right book for that moment. That’s why you should always have a nutrition choice! Those who buy only one book, read only that one and then get rid of it. They simply apply the consumer mentality to books, that is, they consider them a consumer product, a good. Those who love books know that a book is anything but a commodity.” (credit:
Psychiatrist.com (@PsychiatristCNS) posted at 11:34 am on Thu, May 01, 2025:
Vitamin B12 deficiency is often overlooked in patients with neuropsychiatric symptoms. A new case highlights a woman whose delusions, pain, and cognitive decline improved with B12 treatment despite borderline labs. Borderline B12 deficiency can still cause serious neurological
META’S GLASSES, META’S RULES: YOUR VOICE NOW TRAINS THEIR AI Ray-Ban Meta glasses just flipped the script: AI features are now on by default. That means Meta gets to scan your photos, analyze your voice, and keep recordings for up to a year — all without asking first. No, you can’t opt out. You’ll have to delete each file manually from their app. Meta says it’s about improving AI. Translation: you’re the free training data. From voices to faces, your moments become their model fuel. Just like Amazon’s new Echo policy, this is privacy erosion dressed up as innovation. Welcome to the era of smart glasses, dumb consent. Source: TechCrunch
Quote
Mario Nawfal
@MarioNawfal
·
Mar 17
META: SMART GLASSES & AI HEADSETS WILL REPLACE SCREENS Meta executives predict the future of computing will revolve around AI-powered smart glasses and headsets that assist users with daily tasks. VP Alex Himel suggests devices like Meta’s Orion AR glasses will eventually let
Let’s face it: it’s never been a particularly good time to be an elderly internet user. Folders can be tough to navigate, Facebook statuses are virtually indistinguishable from the Google search bar, and the mouse pointer is just so darn tiny.
Unfortunately, it’s not about to get any easier. Though fake profiles have long been used to scam undiscerning internet users, a growing trend of live-video fakes fueled by AI is targeting the young and old alike.
Called “realtime deepfakes” — deepfakes referring to spoofed images that are growing nearly impossible to distinguish from real life — scammers are now altering their appearance and voices in live videos. It’s all powered by generative AI, the same tech that’s stuffing the internet with reams of computer-generated slop.
A deep dive by 404 Media reveals the ways fraudsters are using the lifelike tech to fool users. One video they obtained showed a young Black man appearing as a white guy with a grey beard to a woman he was talking to over Facetime. Another showed a man appearing as a younger woman.
Once a scammer secures their target’s confidence through their lifelike voice and appearance, the actual fraud can begin. 404 notes the users of this tech typically deploy romance scams, Medicare fraud, and photo verification schemes.
Another horrifying example called the “grandparent scam” involves
It’s easy to rag on the elderly, but the growing sophistication of these tools means that young people, too, are highly susceptible. Research in 2021, for instance, found that the younger generations of gen Z, millennials and gen X were 34 percent more likely to have lost money to fraud than people over the age of 60, though they were more likely to have been conned by fake products and crypto schemes than romance scams.
The 2024 presidential election also caused mountains of deepfake slop to rain down on social media.
Used to spread memes and disinformation alike, deepfake tools allowed posters like Elon Musk to spoof figures such as Kamala Harris denigrating herself. The line with parody can be blurry; one viral example is the infamous Trump/Biden duet, in which the two political rivals sing a tender Mandarin love song to each other.
Advertisement
Other examples abound, like one audio deepfake that purported to show a Baltimore area principal making derogatory and racist comments, and a financial worker who forked out $25 million after scammers faked a multi-person Zoom call, including an AI fake of the company’s chief financial officer.
If celebrities, financial workers, and entire communities can find themselves at the mercy of unscrupulous deepfakers, what chances do our elderly have of resisting deepfake scams?
Yes, in the 1800s, MacNamaras in County Clare did indeed intermarry with the O’Loghlens, particularly in the Ballyvaughan area. This is supported by records and family histories of the time.
The MacNamaras, a prominent Gaelic family in County Clare, were known for their connections to the O’Briens, even holding hereditary positions of influence. The O’Loghlens were another significant family in the area, and their connections to the MacNamaras are evident in marriage records and landholdings.
Here’s why this is important:
Family Connections: Marriage between these families solidified land ownership, political influence, and family connections within the community.
Historical Context: The 1800s was a time of significant social and political change in Ireland, and these intermarriages reflect the dynamics of the time.
Genealogical Research: This information is crucial for genealogists researching their family history and tracing lineage through these prominent families.
For further information and resources, you may find useful:
Clare County Libraries:Clare Library provides a wealth of information on the MacNamara family and their connections.
Genealogical Websites: Websites like Genemonkey and The Irish Rose Gifts offer detailed family histories and connections, including those between the MacNamaras and O’Loghlens.
#OnThisDay 1169 The Normans first landed on Bannow Bay, Wexford. This contingent was led by Robert FitzStephen to reinstate Dermot MacMurrogh to his Leinster kingdom. They quickly took Wexford &when reinforcements came, Waterford & Dublin. The rest is history.
The first piece of US AI legislation hits Trump’s desk – it’s anything but clear-cutSource: Unsplash
The U.S. House of Representatives this week passed (409-2) what could amount to the country’s first official foray into AI-related legislation.The “Take It Down” Act, a bipartisan bill introduced in January by Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), covers two main areas: first, it would criminalize the nonconsensual publication of “intimate” imagery, specifically including that which is generated artificially, and second, it would require digital platforms to remove such instances of that imagery within 48 hours of receiving verified reports from victims.
President Donald Trump endorsed the bill during a joint session address in March, saying that he is looking “forward to signing it into law.” Fundamentally, the Take It Down Act was offered up as one of several legislative remedies to the crisis of deepfake pornography, something that had been around for years before ChatGPT kicked off a proliferation of cheap, accessible and realistic generative AI tools.
Deepfake technology thus entered into the hands of the masses, and the results have been predictably horrifying: instances of deepfake sexual harassment, specifically targeting young women and girls, have spread across middle- and high-school campuses and social media alike, impacting both teens and Taylor Swift alike. Of the laws offered up in the wake of this crisis, this is the only piece of legislation to reach the President’s desk; the Defiance Act, which passed the Senate nearly a year ago, was never introduced to the House.
It’s unclear how platforms intend to establish the infrastructure needed to accommodate the legislation.
Neither Meta nor Google responded to requests for comment.
The good, and the bad: While a number of groups have lauded the bill for the protections it offers, many more have expressed a variety of concerns with the letter of the law, here. In a statement published on Monday, the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) welcomed “the long-overdue federal criminalization of NDII (nonconsensual distribution of intimate images), but said that “we regret that it is combined with a takedown provision that is highly susceptible to misuse and will likely be counter-productive for victims.
”The CCRI has a couple of problems with the legislation, namely that it doesn’t provide any safeguards for false complaints. “It would be entirely possible for a platform to be overwhelmed with reports of content that are not intimate visual depictions at all.”Further, a failure to “reasonably” comply with takedown requests will be subject to enforcement by the FTC under the FTC Act, something that has the CCRI concerned based on the recent politicization of the organization.
In March, Trump said: “I’m going to use that bill for myself too if you don’t mind, because nobody gets treated worse than I do online, nobody.”Slade Bond, a former Department of Justice official, however, said that the legislation’s definitions are narrow enough that the Act would make a “poor tool for politicized enforcement.
”The Electronic Frontier Foundation, meanwhile, has said that the bill, beyond increasing risks of censorship, puts encrypted messaging services (like Signal) at risk, since they — unlike email providers — are not excluded from the provisions of the legislation. “How could such services comply with the takedown requests mandated in this bill? Platforms may respond by abandoning encryption entirely in order to be able to monitor content — turning private conversations into surveilled spaces,” EFF wrote.
There’s an app for that: Meta on Tuesday launched a stand-alone version of its AI assistant in the form of its Meta AI App. Built with Llama 4, the app brings Meta into more direct competition with OpenAI.In the red: Shares of Snap tumbled 11% in after-hours trading despite a strong earnings report, due to the company’s decision not to offer second-quarter guidance in the face of macroeconomic uncertainties. But the broader market had another good-ish day following hints that a trade deal with an unnamed country is close to being signed.
Citizen Journalism article concerning Michael Comyn KC and the Clifford and O’Sullivan case.
15 web pages
Citizen Journalism Article: Michael Comyn KC and the Clifford and O’Sullivan Case – A Legal Battle for Justice
In the turbulent years of Ireland’s struggle for independence, one legal case stood out as a testament to the power of innovative legal strategy and the fight for justice: the Clifford and O’Sullivan case of 1921. At the heart of this landmark case was Michael Comyn KC, an Irish barrister whose bold approach saved 42 men from execution and left an indelible mark on constitutional law. This citizen journalism piece explores Comyn’s role, the case’s significance, and its broader implications, drawing on historical accounts and reflecting on its relevance today.
The Context: Ireland Under Martial Law
In 1920, Ireland was engulfed in the War of Independence, with tensions between Irish republicans and British authorities at a boiling point. The British administration imposed martial law in areas like County Cork, where Viscount French, the Lord Lieutenant, issued proclamations to curb republican activity. One such decree, enforced by British Commander-in-Chief Sir Nevil Macready, required civilians to surrender all arms, ammunition, and explosives by December 27, 1920. Failure to comply meant trial by military court and, upon conviction, a death sentence. General Sir E.P. Strickland was appointed to oversee these military courts, which operated with little regard for due process.
In April 1921, 42 men, including Clifford and O’Sullivan, were arrested near Mitchelstown, County Cork, for possessing arms. Tried by a military tribunal, they faced execution. The situation was dire, and the military courts’ authority seemed absolute. Enter Michael Comyn, a barrister with a reputation for defending republican prisoners and a deep commitment to justice.
Michael Comyn: The Man Behind the Defense
Michael Comyn (1871–1952) was no ordinary lawyer. Born in County Clare to a tenant farmer and Land League activist, Comyn’s early life was shaped by the injustices of British rule, including his family’s eviction in 1879. A nationalist at heart, he was in Kansas City with Sinn Féin founder Arthur Griffith during the 1916 Easter Rising. Upon returning to Ireland, he became a fierce advocate for republican prisoners, arguing cases before the House of Lords and earning a reputation for tenacity.
When solicitor James G. Skinner from Mitchelstown approached Comyn and his brother James with the desperate plea, “Do anything but do something… Invent something if necessary,” Comyn rose to the challenge. The Clifford and O’Sullivan case was not just a legal battle; it was a matter of life and death for 42 men.
The Legal Strategy: Prohibition as a Novel Defense
Comyn’s genius lay in his decision to apply for a writ of Prohibition, an obscure legal remedy rarely used in such contexts. His argument was bold: the military court was illegal and lacked jurisdiction to try the defendants or adjudicate their cases. This approach was a gamble, as it challenged the very foundation of British military authority in Ireland.
The case began in the Chancery Division in Ireland, where Mr. Justice Powell heard Comyn’s application. Despite the compelling argument, Powell felt constrained to dismiss it, citing legal precedents. Undeterred, Comyn appealed to the Court of Appeal, where the Crown argued that Powell’s order was made in a “criminal cause or matter” under the Supreme Court of Judicature Act of 1877, meaning no appeal was permissible. The Court of Appeal, led by O’Connor, M.R., and Lord Justices Ronan and O’Connel, upheld this view and dismissed the appeal.
Comyn’s persistence led the case to the House of Lords on June 16, 1921, just six weeks after the military court’s verdict. Led by Sir John Simon KC, Comyn, his nephew James Comyn, Joe McCarthy (later a judge), and Richard O’Sullivan presented their case. The House of Lords, however, ruled against the appeal on July 28, 1921. Their Lordships, including four Scottish judges and Lord Atkinson from Ireland, held that Prohibition was inappropriate because the military court was not a judicial tribunal and its officers were functi officio (no longer in office). They also avoided delving into the case’s merits, wary that habeas corpus might be attempted next.
The Outcome: A Royal Intervention
Despite the legal setback, the Clifford and O’Sullivan case had a remarkable outcome. Comyn later revealed that King George V, shocked by the prospect of executing 42 men, personally intervened. According to Comyn, the king secured a promise from the prime minister that no executions would take place and that peace negotiations would proceed. None of the 42 men were executed, and following the Anglo-Irish Treaty later that year, they were freed.
This intervention underscored the case’s significance beyond the courtroom. James Comyn, Michael’s nephew and a distinguished barrister, later cited Clifford and O’Sullivan as a leading authority in constitutional law, highlighting its impact on challenging unchecked military power. Notably, no republican prisoner defended by Comyn during the “troubles” faced the death penalty, a testament to his skill and dedication.
Reflections: Citizen Journalism and Historical Memory
As a citizen journalist, revisiting the Clifford and O’Sullivan case offers valuable lessons. It highlights the power of individuals like Comyn to challenge systemic injustice through creativity and courage. In an era when professional journalism often struggles to cover local and historical stories due to resource constraints, citizen journalists can fill the gap by uncovering and sharing narratives that might otherwise be forgotten.
The case also resonates with contemporary debates about the rule of law and the rights of the accused. Military tribunals, then and now, raise questions about due process and fairness. Comyn’s use of Prohibition reminds us that legal innovation can be a tool for justice, even in the face of overwhelming odds.
Moreover, the case underscores the importance of public pressure and high-profile intervention. King George V’s role, while controversial, shows how visibility can sway outcomes. Today, citizen journalists amplify marginalized voices and hold power to account, much like Comyn did in the courtroom.
Conclusion: A Legacy of Justice
Michael Comyn KC’s defense in the Clifford and O’Sullivan case was a masterclass in legal strategy and moral conviction. By leveraging an obscure remedy and navigating a hostile legal system, he saved 42 lives and set a precedent in constitutional law. His story, preserved in historical records and family accounts, deserves to be remembered as a beacon of resistance against injustice.
As citizen journalists, we have a duty to unearth such stories, connecting past struggles to present challenges. The Clifford and O’Sullivan case reminds us that one person’s ingenuity can change history—and that the fight for justice is never truly over.
Sources:
Wikipedia entry on Michael Comyn
Canisgallicus.com, family history notes on Michael Comyn KC
James Comyn’s legal writings on the Clifford and O’Sullivan case
Note: This article is written from a citizen journalism perspective, aiming to inform and inspire while critically examining historical narratives. For further details, readers are encouraged to explore primary sources and legal archives.
Source: Unsplash
There’s an app for that: Meta on Tuesday 
