Latest news with #TreatyofGhent
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Yahoo
Please, kids: Do not set your Chromebook on fire
The "Chromebook challenge" is a TikTok trend in which kids jam a paperclip into a laptop to make it smoke. Several kids are facing charges for messing with their Chromebooks. Take it from me, kids. Don't do it. *Grabs chair, spins it around, and sits on it backward.* Hey teens, it's me. Your friendly local 44-year-old tech blogger at Business Insider, every high schooler's favorite website. And I'm here to say: Setting your Chromebook on fire is "skibidi Ohio." Don't do it. Sure, there's a viral TikTok challenge going around that encourages kids like you to jam a paperclip, gum wrapper, or other item into the USB drive of your school-issued Chromebooks, which causes them to start smoking, shoot sparks, or even catch on fire. But don't do it. Even though you may be bored, and lighting stuff on fire is undeniably cool-looking, and it's almost summer break, and your teacher has a negative aura, and Chromebooks represent the tyranny of the prison called "school" where they indoctrinate your mind with algebra and facts about the Treaty of Ghent that you will never need in real life because there's calculators, and Prussia isn't real, and there's ChatGPT anyway that can do this all for you, and adults will all be using it in the future, it's still not worth it. (Note: No AI was used to write this important public service message.) So please, do not light your Chromebook on fire — it can cause serious injury. This is a rizzless and sus road you don't want to go down. There is no sigma here. TikTok has taken some action. Searching "Chromebook challenge" on the app generates a warning message saying: "Some online challenges can be dangerous, disturbing, or even fabricated." (Though searching Chromebook still generates plenty of videos of smoking Acers.) TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment. You're a teen, you know how silly grown-ups are about this stuff. We're always yapping about some moral panic "challenge" on TikTok that's not even real. But this time? No cap, it's real. Kids are facing charges in several states for messing with their Chromebooks. A 13-year-old was arrested on suspicion of arson in Long Beach, California, and students at schools in Arizona face criminal charges, according to the Bullhead City Fire Department. Two teens in Southington, Connecticut, are facing misdemeanor charges including criminal mischief and reckless endangerment. Fellow kids, I understand that you're living in a time where you might feel under the yoke of technology. You feel complicated about how much you use social media, and, meanwhile, your parents read "The Anxious Generation" and are now freaking out because they regret giving you a phone in sixth grade, even though that phone has had Life360 surveillance software installed this whole time. You know that the future of work involves AI, but your teachers get weird and mad about you using it for homework (even though literally everyone does). And this whole time you're supposed to be getting good grades to go to college, but the institution of higher education is under attack and kids are getting arrested on campus for protesting, and you're taking on a lifetime of debt for some degree for a job that could be replaced by a chatbot in five years anyway. So like the Luddite cloth workers of the Industrial Revolution, you take a stand and fight and break against the machine that yokes you. Why not just jam a paperclip in that Chromebook just to see if something real happens, something tangible, like smoke or fire, just to remember that you're here, you're alive, you're young, you exist? But kids, harming laptops isn't cool. So please, don't do the Chromebook challenge. Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
16-05-2025
- Business Insider
Please, kids: Do not set your Chromebook on fire
*Grabs chair, spins it around, and sits on it backward. * Hey teens, it's me. Your friendly local 44-year-old tech blogger at Business Insider, every high schooler's favorite website. And I'm here to say: setting your Chromebook on fire is "skibidi Ohio." Don't do it. Sure, there's a viral TikTok challenge going around that encourages kids like you to jam a paperclip, gum wrapper, or other item into the USB drive of your school-issued Chromebooks, which will cause them to start smoking, shoot sparks, or even catch on fire. But don't do it. Even though you may be bored, and lighting stuff on fire is undeniably cool-looking, and it's almost summer break, and your teacher has negative aura, and Chromebooks represent the tyranny of the prison called "school" where they indoctrinate your mind with algebra and facts about the Treaty of Ghent that you will never need in real life because there's calculators, and Prussia isn't real, and there's ChatGPT anyway that can do this all for you, and adults will all be using it in the future, it's still not worth it. [Note: No AI was used to write this important public service message.] So please, do not light your Chromebook on fire — it can cause serious injury. This is a rizzles and sus road you don't want to go down. There is no sigma here. TikTok has taken some action. Searching "Chromebook challenge" on the app generates a warning message saying "some online challenges can be dangerous, disturbing, or even fabricated." (Though searching Chromebook still generates plenty of videos of smoking Acers.) TikTok did not immediately respond to a request for comment. You're a teen, you know how silly grown-ups are about this stuff. We're always yapping about some moral panic "challenge" on TikTok that's not even real. But this time? No cap, it's real. Kids are facing charges in several states for messing with their Chromebooks. A 13-year-old was arrested on suspicion of arson in Long Beach, California, and students at schools in Arizona face possible criminal charges, according to the Bullhead City Fire Department. Two teens in Southington, Connecticut, are facing misdemeanor charges including criminal mischief and reckless endangerment. Fellow kids, I understand that you're currently living in a time where you might feel under the yoke of technology. You feel complicated about how much you use social media, and meanwhile your parents read " The Anxious Generation" and are now freaking out because they regret giving you a phone in sixth grade, even though that phone has had Life 360 survellience software installed this whole time. You know that the future of work involves AI, but your teachers get weird and mad about you using it for homework (even though literally everyone does). And this whole time you're supposed to be getting good grades to go to college, but the institution of higher education is under attack and kids are getting arrested on campus for protesting, and you're taking on a lifetime of debt for some degree for a job that could be replaced by a chatbot in five years anyway. So like the Luddite cloth workers of the Industrial Revolution, you take a stand and fight and break against the machine that yokes you. W hy not just jam a paperclip in that Chromebook just to see if something real happens, something tangible, like smoke or fire, just to remember that you're here, you're alive, you're young, you exist?
Epoch Times
26-04-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Southern Insurrection and Lincoln's Suspension of the ‘Great Writ'
For 27 hours, British ships bombarded Fort McHenry, but, as Francis Scott Key eloquently recalled, 'Our flag was still there.' This attack on the Maryland fort took place more than three months before the Americans and British signed the Treaty of Ghent on Dec. 24, 1814. More than two weeks later and 1,000 miles away, the British landed its fleet 60 miles east of New Orleans, preparing to take the city. To maintain order, Gen. Andrew Jackson took the unprecedented step for an American general and issued martial law. Beginning on Dec. 16, New Orleans would be under his military authority. Starting on Dec. 23 and over the course of the next two weeks, hostilities ensued between the Americans and British, culminating in the lopsided victory for Jackson and his makeshift army on Jan. 8, 1815. The British retreated and finally sailed from New Orleans on Jan. 18. The threat was gone; martial law, however, remained. Gen. Andrew Jackson standing on the parapet of his makeshift defenses as his troops repulse attacking Highlanders during the defense of New Orleans, the final major and most one-sided battle of the War of 1812. Public Domain New Orleans remained under martial law for three months. When a newspaper published an article critical of Jackson's measures, he had the author, State Senator Louis Louaillier, arrested. When U.S. District Judge Dominick Hall issued a writ of habeas corpus for Louaillier, Jackson had the judge arrested. Jackson In mid-March, Jackson received official word about the Treaty of Ghent and immediately lifted martial law. Hall fined Jackson $1,000 for contempt of court—a fine the general quickly paid. His actions raised constitutional questions—questions that arose during his presidential election bids in 1824 and 1828. Less than 50 years later, constitutional questions centering around military authority and the writ of habeas corpus again arose. False Moves Before Abraham Lincoln took the oath of office to become president on March 4, 1861, seven states had already seceded from the Union over the issue of slavery. During Lincoln's inauguration, he His assurances to the Southern states, however, were not be enough to stem the rolling tide of secession. By Feb. 18, the seven states had formed the Confederate States of America and inaugurated its first president, Jefferson Davis. South Carolina had been leading the charge of secession, and now it had its sights set on Fort Sumter, which was garrisoned by 80 federal troops. Related Stories 1/8/2025 8/21/2024 Over the course of several months, Fort Sumter became the focal point between the U.S. government and the new Confederate government. One false move by either side could lead to all-out war. The result was several false moves. Before Lincoln took office, President James Buchanan attempted to have the federal troops at Fort Sumter resupplied. The ship carrying supplies was forced to retreat under fire from cadets at the Citadel Military College. Lincoln was left with the Fort Sumter situation, and his cabinet was split on whether to resupply or surrender the fort. On April 4, Lincoln informed the Confederacy of his plan to resupply the troops. Davis consulted his cabinet. The Confederates chose to attack the fort and force its surrender, before the supply ships arrived. On April 12, at 4:30 a.m., nearly 36-hour bombardment began. The outgunned and outmanned federal troops under the command of Maj. Robert Anderson, fired back, but eventually capitulated. Although there were no casualties on either side during the attack on Fort Sumter, it nonetheless began the Civil War. An engraving of the bombardment of Fort Sumter by the Batteries of the Confederate States, on April 13, on the same day Lincoln advised the Confederacy of his plans to resupply Fort Sumter, Virginia's delegates voted to remain in the Union. Three days after the Fort Sumter attack, Lincoln issued a The attack on Fort Sumter proved to be the Confederacy's false move. Lincoln's proclamation and gathering of 75,000 troops to quell the rebellion was the Union's false move, as Virginia immediately voted to secede on April 17, followed by Arkansas on May 6, North Carolina on May 20, and Tennessee on June 8. With the addition of Virginia into the Confederacy, Washington could now only be supplied overland through Maryland. The state, however, was full of Confederate sympathizers, and it seemed on the precipice of seceding and joining the Confederacy. The Baltimore Riot When Lincoln issued his April 15 proclamation, the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment boarded a train the next day for Washington to protect the capital. From Boston through Springfield, Hartford, New York City, Trenton, and Philadelphia, the volunteer regiment was met with cheers from thousands of citizens. It was a very different scene when it reached Baltimore. A mob had gathered, prepared to make the regiment's passage through the city far from a welcoming experience. Since trains were not allowed to pass through the city limits, the soldiers boarded horse-drawn train cars. Citizens, however, had thrown sand and boat anchors onto the tracks, forcing the militia members to travel the rest of the journey on foot. Before continuing, all the soldiers were ordered to load their weapons and be prepared to fire if fired upon. "Massachusetts Militia Passing Through Baltimore (Baltimore Riot of 1861)," 1861, engraving of F.F. Walker. Public Domain One soldier Lincoln's Infamous Order Fearing more violent provocation from the arrival of federal troops, Maryland Governor Thomas Hicks ordered the destruction of railroad bridges connecting Baltimore to the Northern states. While bridges were destroyed, Maryland secessionists destroyed communication lines with Washington. Hicks, who had long advocated for neutrality between the Northern and Southern states, finally called for a special session to vote on secession. Instead of Annapolis, he recommended the session be held in Frederick where there was strong Union sentiment. The session would begin on April 26. Lincoln received word that a special session would be held, and he informed Commanding General of the Army of the United States Winfield Scott to take measures to ensure Marylanders did not arm themselves against the federal government. Two days after his communication with Scott, Lincoln took an unprecedented step for a president. It was during this week in history, on April 27, 1861, that Lincoln issued the following The writ of habeas corpus, which can be traced back to the Magna Carta of 1215, is a stalwart legal protection against false imprisonment, allowing the arrested person to plead their case in court. Much like Andrew Jackson had done in 1815, citizens could be arrested and held in prison without trial. Just as with Jackson's order, Lincoln's order was deemed unconstitutional. Testing Lincoln's Order Lincoln was aware of the constitutional quandary that came with such an order, but with Congress out of session until July, he was compelled to act. A month after his order to Scott, its constitutionality was tested. On May 25, John Merryman, a lieutenant in the Baltimore County Horse Guards who had assisted in destroying the Baltimore bridges, was arrested, indicted for treason, and held indefinitely at Fort McHenry. Merryman's lawyers petitioned Maryland's U.S Circuit Court for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition fell to Roger B. Taney, who oversaw the circuit court and was also chief justice of the Supreme Court. Taney issued a writ to Gen. George Cadwalader, the arresting officer, to bring Merryman before the court. Cadwalader refused, citing Lincoln's order. Reminiscent of Jackson and Hall, Taney cited Cadwalader for contempt of court. Portrait of Gen. Cadwalader by Thomas Eakins. Public Domain Taney wrote an opinion on the matter called ' Lincoln's Response Before the July 4 session, Lincoln further extended his suspension of the writ of habeas corpus to part of the Florida coast and between Philadelphia and New York. When the president stood before Congress, he addressed Taney's opinion, Lincoln relented somewhat, stating, 'Whether there shall be any legislation upon the subject, and, if any, what, is submitted entirely to the better judgment of Congress.' Congress, for some reason, did not pass legislation regarding the suspension of the writ until March 3, 1863. Before then, Lincoln had issued another Regarding the suspension clause, Lincoln Interestingly, since 1815, 600 years after the Magna Carta was created, this suggestion that 'the Constitution itself is silent as to which or who is to exercise the power' continues to be a subject of constitutional debate among legal scholars. Never miss a This Week in History story! Sign up for the American History newsletter What arts and culture topics would you like us to cover? Please email ideas or feedback to
CBC
29-01-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Why this B.C. fence along the U.S. border may be violating War of 1812 treaty
An unguarded, black chain-link fence erected in B.C. along the U.S.-Canada border is now the subject of an international investigation and could be in violation of a more than 200-year-old treaty, according to one immigration lawyer. The fence, roughly 30 metres long, was put up at the end of English Bluff Road in Tsawwassen, a community within the Metro Vancouver suburb of Delta, B.C., on Jan. 16. That side of the border adjoins a park in the Washington state community of Point Roberts. The International Boundary Commission, a bi-national organization responsible for regulating construction close to the Canada-U.S. border, confirmed to CBC News Wednesday that it did not authorize the fence and is now investigating the matter. The Delta Police Department recommended the fence be built to prevent people from unintentionally crossing into the U.S. following a 2023 incident in which a Tsawwassen senior went for a walk and didn't return home. He was found dead a few days later in Point Roberts after inadvertently crossing into the U.S. The police force said the fence was implemented in collaboration with the city's engineering team. Monument Park in Point Roberts, which has grassy space that extends across the border into Canada, is a place where Canadians and Americans have historically been able to meet together for picnics without going through border patrol. It became a particularly popular meeting place during the COVID-19 pandemic when the borders were officially closed. War of 1812 treaty In 1814, Britain and the U.S. signed the Treaty of Ghent, which ended the War of 1812, agreeing to return to pre-war boundaries under the condition that neither country could erect a barrier within 10 feet or three metres of the border. (Canada was still under the British Crown then, only becoming a fully sovereign nation in 1867). The fence in Delta is mere inches away from a sign that says "no construction or trees" within 10 feet or three metres of the international boundary. "Whoever put up this fence was obviously not reading this placard," said U.S. immigration lawyer Len Saunders. "The Canadian government, directly through the municipality of Delta, has violated the Treaty of Ghent," Saunders said, adding that he's surprised the fence has not yet been taken down. Motion to bring fence down Delta Mayor George Harvie said neither he nor the rest of council knew about the fence before it went up. Harvie said a motion to take it down will be put to council on Monday. He told CBC News he expects a unanimous vote or at least for a large majority of councillors to vote in favour of the motion. He said council will then immediately notify the International Boundary Commission of its actions and conduct an investigation to determine how a fence was put up without its knowledge to prevent it from happening again in the future. The Canada Border Services Agency said it was not involved in the installation of the fence and referred questions to Delta police. While there was previously no fence along this part of the border, there were and still are border patrol cameras that monitor the area. Many other parts of the short border are marked by a variety of private property fences or, as Harvie described, low barriers that prevent cars from crossing over.
