Demi Lovato’s family is asking for privacy following her apparent drug overdose on Tuesday, according to a statement given to Access from Demi’s rep.
In an interview with Beats 1, Cardi B opens up about those pesky pregnancy rumors.
MTV News breaks down what songs on Cardi B’s ‘Invasion of Privacy’ have the best possible chance of eclipsing the success of ‘Bodak Yellow.’
When it comes to traveling we value convenience as well as safety and security. No one likes to wait on long TSA lines, crowded waiting areas or “invasive scanning” so Monday, Delta announced they will be rolling out biometric scanners at their lounges across the country.
With the press of two fingers, you are given access to one of Delta’s 50 exclusive lounges where drinks, magazines snacks, and comfort is your reward.
Is this convenience worth giving up your privacy, though?
Thanks to Delta’s partnership with Clear, a biometrics company who specializes in offering what they call a “frictionless travel experience” travelers can jet set comfortably minus the headaches. For either a one-time fee of $ 59 for a visit or $ 495 year you can gain access to Delta Sky Clubs, the fingerprint scanning is free.
Clear is hoping to make biometric scanning at airports a thing as their deal with Delta isn’t the only thing they got going for travelers at airports. For an annual fee of $ 180, you can bypass the TSA lines, pat-downs and have to remove your shoes and belts and instead check in at a Clear self-service kiosk where passengers will match their irises and fingerprints against stored biometric data they have on file.
Tinfoil hat wearers are probably screaming conspiracy to the high heavens at the mere mention of this but it is very convenient to use. In a press release, Delta points out that the use of biometric scanners is surging across the world. With people constantly complaining about long lines at airports they will be easily enticed by the lure of this idea. At the same time, this is a murky territory with surveillance and the use of peoples data and respect for privacy a topic of discussion more than ever.
With that said would you sign up for the new biometric program? Would you give your biometric data to Clear just for the ability to skip a line? Sound off in the comment section below.
Photo: PeopleImages / Getty
Cardi B wasn’t kidding when she said she was holed up working on her debut. Taking to Twitter, the Bronx rapper announced her debut, Invasion Of Privacy, will be out next week.
“My album “INVASION OF PRIVACY” will be out APRIL 6!Thanks for the love,” tweeted Cardi today (March 26) along with a photo fo the album cover.
Despite her fiancee beefing with an alleged momma and rumors of her own pregnancy. Cardi is still hella focused.
Cardi B will be the musical guest on Saturday Night Live on 7. Perfect timing.
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg finally came out of hiding to address how his company allowed a shady election data firm, Cambridge Analytica, to misuse the personal data of 50 million Facebook users.
In a CNN interview with Laurie Segall, Zuckerberg said he is “really sorry that this happened”.
You think, Mark?
In the interview where he repeated from the sound of it carefully prepared statements, Zuckerberg pointed out that it’s Facebook’s “responsibility to make sure that it doesn’t happen again”. He also admitted that the tech giant made mistakes by allowing app developers way too much access to Facebook user data and trusting Cambridge Analytica and the other companies involved to delete the user data.
In response, the Facebook creator promised the company would conduct a “full forensic audit” to find out exactly which apps went too far and gained access to user data before tighter rules were implemented in 2014. As you can imagine folks on Capitol Hill want to have some words with Zuckerberg and he is open to the meeting. Zuckerberg said about talking to Congress “happy to if it’s the right thing to do,” but “what we try to do is send the person at Facebook who will have the most knowledge.”
Congress has made it very clear that person who has the most knowledge is him and they don’t want to talk to anyone else but him. Zuckerberg has been looking funny in the light after his fortune took a $ 9 billion dollar hit and shaved about 8.5 percent of his company’s stock during it’s tanking after the scandal broke.
Coincidence? We think not. Mark and Facebook better get it’s act together before the 2018 Mid-term elections we can’t afford anymore Russia meddling or more Trump liking politicians in office. Watch the Mark get totally awkward and say he’s sort of sorry below.
Photo: David Ramos / Getty
America has a new president who is, how should we say, unpredictable.
There’s no telling how the NSA and the surveillance state will evolve in the next four years. So, if you’re worried about keeping your private communications private, here’s what to do.
By CRACKED Store Published: January 05th, 2018
Kim Kardashian confirmed she and Kanye West are using a surrogate for their third baby, but Kim is not the only celeb who has used the services of a surrogate. Access explores the everything that goes into being a celeb surrogate.
After years of preaching about the importance of website operators posting their privacy practices on their websites, another state has joined the party.
XBIZ.com – Opinion
Have you begun preparing for GDPR? If you are like most, you haven’t even heard of GDPR, but also if you are like most, it is going to affect your business, starting May 25, 2018.
XBIZ.com | Top Stories
If you live in a dictatorship, personal privacy might be the only thing keeping you out of jail. And you need that privacy to plan your revolution against the dictator.
If you live in a Republic, such as the United States, you still want some privacy because you don’t want the government to have more power over you than it already has. But the issue is not a life-and-death situation in most cases. Citizens keep an eye on the Republic so it can’t get too far out of hand.
But here is the interesting part: Would you need privacy from the government if you lived in a true democracy, in which every citizen voted on every topic? My guess is that you would not need privacy because most of what you want to do would be legal. And there would be no real “government” in terms of power or leadership. Only the bureaucracy would be left to execute the will of the people.
Thanks to state propositions, the government in the United States is moving from a Republic to more of a pure democracy. And I would argue that the Supreme Court is essentially voting with the majority on social issues and making us less of a Republic than ever.
My hypothesis is that personal privacy (from the government) is neither good nor bad by its nature. What matters is that your privacy level matches up with your political system. If you live in an oppressive regime, the more personal privacy the better. But in a pure democracy, so long as you don’t violate the law, no one cares what you do on your own time. In fact, now that I know my neighbor also likes to wear a kilt and watch the BBC, I have someone to hang out with on weekends.
Would you agree with the general proposition that the more political freedom you have, the less privacy (from the government) you need?
My book seems to be catching on.
Following months of rumors, it’s been revealed that Privacy and National Security were secretly married weeks ago in Las Vegas, Nevada. “We’re tired of all the naysayers constantly describing us as incompatible. We’ll show you. We’ll show you all! Ha!” the couple wrote in a phone text message to friends that was, ironically, extracted by government analysts randomly searching piles of metadata.
The pair exchanged vows at the Holy Chapel of the Inebriates and chose a Western-themed ceremony which featured tumbleweeds, yodelers, but did not include a cash-only minister fee of $ 60. “They made such a lovely couple,” said one of the witnesses who wished to remain anonymous; he was later identified as 58-year-old Byron Hattentoll through information extracted by government analysts randomly searching piles of metadata.
(Breaking news: Eight hours after the wedding, Privacy and National Security filed for divorce, citing Constitutionally irreconcilable differences. Their mutual acquaintance Due Process noted: “Duh.”)
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
“Last week when President Obama was asked about the Sterling episode, he said, ‘When ignorant folks want to advertise their ignorance, just let them talk.’ But Sterling didn’t advertise,” Maher explained, “He was bugged. And while he may not be worth defending, the 4th Amendment is.”
It’s a difficult point to make, given the collective outrage that sprung up once Sterling’s comments were broadcast. Maher’s studio audience broke into fewer rounds of applause during the segment than is usual for one of his New Rules. But as the host laid out his argument that we need to maintain the ability to speak our minds in private, he seemed to win them over.
In response to a Washington Post op-ed by Kathleen Parker which suggested you, “Say what you will, but you’d best check for recording devices… [or] check your thoughts,” Maher chafed, “I’d rather be a Mormon.”
He went on to sum up Parker’s sentiment: “So let me get this straight, we should concede that there’s no such thing anymore as a private conversation, so therefore remember to ‘lawyer’ everything you say before you say it, and hey, speaking your mind was overrated anyway, so you won’t miss it. Well, I’ll miss it, I’ll miss it a lot.”
Watch the segment above (the Sterling New Rule begins at 2:14) and let us know what you think.
Comedy – The Huffington Post
ENTERTAINMENT NEWS-Visit Mobile Playboy today for the hottest adult entertainment online!