Antarctica is one of the few places left on earth that remains virtually untouched by humans. There’s no native population and it’s not controlled by any particular country. It’s difficult to get to, and even if you manage to get there, you‘re limited in where you can go.
There are 16 restricted areas in Antarctica, and these restrictions are enforced by the Antarctic Treaty. This treaty includes 12 countries. I find it odd that our world’s leaders cannot agree on anything, but they can agree on this?
The Nazis, who were known for their outlandish and otherworldly beliefs, also had an interest in the supposedly barren continent. They explored the arctic region and even claimed a large plot of land there, which they named New Swabia. It was named after a place in Germany.
After WWII, Admiral E. Byrd led 4,000 military troops from the U.S., Britain and Australia in what was basically an invasion of Antarctica. This was known as Operation Highjump. It resulted in several casualties and a missing catapult ship, the USS Pine Island.
Conspiracy theorists say this was because of a battle with a fleet of UFOs. While this is obviously unconfirmed, I find it odd that right after the failed mission, Admiral Byrd declared it was imperative that we take immediate defense measures against this hostile region.

You May Also Like

Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇

It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details):
https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha

I've read it so you needn't!

Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.

The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.

Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.