Category Big Tech -Vs- MAGA

May 17 2022

The Twitter Bot Inquiry Intensifies as Musk is Seemingly Stiff Armed


Posted Originally on the conservative tree house on May 16, 2022 | Sundance

The ramifications for Twitter surrounding fake users or algorithmic bots are considerable.  One issue is overcharging advertisers for ad impressions based on mDAU’s, which are “monetized Daily Active Users.”  The second issue is an outcome of the first and relates to the valuation of Twitter.  If Twitter bots are higher than Twitter estimates, then the mDAU rate is overstated.

Elon Musk is indicating there may need to be a lowering of the purchase price unless Twitter becomes transparent with how they are calculating the number of bot users at less than 5%.  All outside reviews attempting to estimate the number of fake accounts, or bots, puts the estimations considerably higher than the claims by Twitter.  Elon Musk tweeted:

At “The All In Summit 2022,” Elon Musk gave the impression the purchase price of Twitter may be tenuous.  He said that a deal with a lower price tag is not “out of the question,” Bloomberg reported.  “Currently, what I’m being told is that there’s just no way to know the number of bots… It’s like, as unknowable as the human soul,” Musk said at the Miami conference, per a social media video, Bloomberg added.

Twitter CEO Parag Agrwal has responded to the controversy in a very obtuse twitter thread:

Let’s talk about spam. And let’s do so with the benefit of data, facts, and context…

First, let me state the obvious: spam harms the experience for real people on Twitter, and therefore can harm our business. As such, we are strongly incentivized to detect and remove as much spam as we possibly can, every single day. Anyone who suggests otherwise is just wrong.

Next, spam isn’t just ‘binary’ (human / not human). The most advanced spam campaigns use combinations of coordinated humans + automation. They also compromise real accounts, and then use them to advance their campaign. So – they are sophisticated and hard to catch.

Some final context: fighting spam is incredibly *dynamic*. The adversaries, their goals, and tactics evolve constantly – often in response to our work! You can’t build a set of rules to detect spam today, and hope they will still work tomorrow. They will not.

We suspend over half a million spam accounts every day, usually before any of you even see them on Twitter. We also lock millions of accounts each week that we suspect may be spam – if they can’t pass human verification challenges (captchas, phone verification, etc).

The hard challenge is that many accounts which look fake superficially – are actually real people. And some of the spam accounts which are actually the most dangerous – and cause the most harm to our users – can look totally legitimate on the surface.

Our team updates our systems and rules constantly to remove as much spam as possible, without inadvertently suspending real people or adding unnecessary friction for real people when they use Twitter: none of us want to solve a captcha every time we use Twitter.

Now, we know we aren’t perfect at catching spam. And so this is why, after all the spam removal I talked about above, we know some still slips through. We measure this internally. And every quarter, we have estimated that <5% of reported mDAU for the quarter are spam accounts.

Our estimate is based on multiple human reviews (in replicate) of thousands of accounts, that are sampled at random, consistently over time, from *accounts we count as mDAUs*. We do this every quarter, and we have been doing this for many years.

Each human review is based on Twitter rules that define spam and platform manipulation, and uses both public and private data (eg, IP address, phone number, geolocation, client/browser signatures, what the account does when it’s active…) to make a determination on each account.

The use of private data is particularly important to avoid misclassifying users who are actually real. FirstnameBunchOfNumbers with no profile pic and odd tweets might seem like a bot or spam to you, but behind the scenes we often see multiple indicators that it’s a real person.

Our actual internal estimates for the last four quarters were all well under 5% – based on the methodology outlined above. The error margins on our estimates give us confidence in our public statements each quarter.

Unfortunately, we don’t believe that this specific estimation can be performed externally, given the critical need to use both public and private information (which we can’t share). Externally, it’s not even possible to know which accounts are counted as mDAUs on any given day.

There are LOTS of details that are very important underneath this high-level description. We shared an overview of the estimation process with Elon a week ago and look forward to continuing the conversation with him, and all of you.  (Link to Twitter Article)

Methinks Parag Agrwal doth protest too much….  Especially if you overlay the ideological incentives that Twitter carries into its operational platform.

If you accept that Twitter is manipulating the public conversation intentionally (they are), then Twitter bots would serve an ideological function.  However, the issue of ‘bots’ operating on the Twitter platform is interesting when you consider the cost of platform operation.

On one hand, extensive auto-generated ‘bots’ would be an issue of cost and data-processing, a net negative.  On the other hand, the use of bots would be a manipulative practice for the creation of false impressions to generate advertising revenue.

If the scale of data-processing was subsidized, an outcome of a network of data processing centers -the AWS cloud- linked to government resources, the bots would not be a cost issue for the operation.  Despite the false impressions generated, bots would, however, under this weird situation, be useful for the manipulation of the conversation.

At the root of Elon Musk’s line of inquiry is the need to discover if this suspicion is true.

If the scale of bots has been underestimated (likely by a willfully blind operation) the advertising fees charged by Twitter were potentially fraudulent.  This is another operational reason (mitigating lawsuits from advertisers) for Musk to make the determination prior to the final purchase of the platform.

Taking Twitter private as a company, eliminating bots (which is essentially removing fraudulent users) then carries the potential benefits of both lowering costs and positioning the company to increase genuine ad revenue from authenticated users as real people.

Many people suspect the size of the political left on the Twitter platform is manipulated by programatic bots.  Meaning there seems to be more people on the left side of the spectrum because bots are deployed to give the impression of like-minded users.  I am one of the people who believe this suspicion is accurate, because it would be a typical way the ideological left operates.

The bots would be in addition to the deployment of algorithms that are designed to suppress speech the platform operators do not like.

I have long suspected the Twitter algorithm process is essentially assigning certain users into specifically designed data-processing containers where their voice is suppressed.   Some people call this ‘shadow-banning,’ I simply call it suppression.

Elon Musk represents a threat to the way the platform was/is designed to operate.  If Musk removes the discussion constraints, opens the containers and removes the restrictions, while simultaneously eliminating bots and fake accounts, the entire perspective of the platform could change very quickly.  This is what I think the current board and operators are trying to avoid.

Another rudimentary way to look at it…. Think about the last several months of public opinion polls.   Despite the efforts of a compliant media, repeatedly we see a 75/25 split against Biden and leftist policies.  The 3:4 and/or 4:5 ratio has been a consistent pattern for several months.  That ratio shows up in almost every poll.  However, if you look at Twitter that ratio is not present in the “organic” conversation about the same issues.

As CTH has said for many years, there are more of us than them.  However, Big Tech controls the mechanisms we use to communicate – and as a consequence the scale of our assembly is severely understated.

Twitter user fraud is the digital and social media equivalent to voter election fraud.   The voices raised in opposition to researching both issues are exactly the same.

Suspicious Cat remains, well, suspicious….

May 7 2022

Elon Musk Entry into Social Media Has Triggered Techtonic Plates to Start Shifting


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 6, 2022 | Sundance 

Ever since Elon Musk announced his intention to purchase a social media platform, take it private as a company and emerge as a new free speech communication force, things in the tech world have been all, well, a twitter (pun intended).

It’s not just the potentially game-changing social conversation shift that is driving the news; where –GASP– actual independent expression of opinion might be permitted in the digital space; there’s also a major worry amid the preexisting platform control offices of media about simultaneously arriving financial impacts.

Business Insider has reported that Facebook parent company Meta has initiated a hiring freeze through the remainder of this year.  Additionally, following the news that woke Netflix is being rejected by subscribers, suddenly payroll obligations are a concern over there.

This comes on the heels of Amazon, and the omnipresent AWS cloud services, looking a little shaky as a business model, amid reports they have “overstaffed” their operation, according to the Washington Post.  And as we would expect, the ever tech-heavy stock market is being driven into the basement by a series of tremors in the land of all thing’s Bezos.

Techtonic tremors are surfacing everywhere while people watch for the potential of an actual, dare we say, competitive eruption?   Oh my.

The rag-tag rebel alliance is reporting to be nearing completed assembly of the ultra-MAGA Truth Social platform hopefully by the end of this month with a dedicated web application allowing all devices to connect to a larger scaled version of the Trump-inspired network.  It appears Truth Social is using the combined technology partnership with Rumble cloud operations and a partnership for dedicated server banks.

Into this maelstrom of technological competition, enters the world’s most technologically cutting-edge entrepreneur, who also happens to be the world’s richest man, who also happens to be building out his own satellite internet platform called StarLink.

The scale of consequence for Elon Musk purchasing Twitter, is akin to the metaphorical John Galt purchasing the ma’ Bell telecommunications system of the 70’s.  Yup, things be a changin’…. the Eye of Sauron, aka Google, is being challenged.

Even the Fourth Branch of Government recently appears to have taken a few body blows.   The risk of corrupt and cancerous everything being connected to corrupt and cancerous everything else becomes problematic when one unstable card in the house collapses.  If the U.S. intel community lose control of the Twitter narrative engineering platform, things get sketchy for all the dependents.

Meanwhile, the serious and stable tech engineers who never got down with the wokeism, yet kept their heads low to avoid isolation and social detection, are now starting to smile as fellow Asperger’s ally Elon Musk shows them how to have fun again, again.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand the human resource flight path toward Twitter for bright engineering minds that value innovation over social isolation.  A whole lot of people are currently stuck amid a tribe of co-workers perpetually angry about something stupid.

FORTUNE – […] It’s still unclear how a Musk-run Twitter might impact the company’s ability to retain current staff and recruit new employees. The company presented the takeover as a potential threat to its staffing abilities in an SEC filing Monday. 

But at least casual interest in open positions at the company has skyrocketed since the Tesla billionaire showed serious interest in taking over the company. 

In a statement to Fortune, Zhao clarified that interest is defined by the average daily clicks on Twitter job postings on the platform, compared to the average daily job clicks in a March 2022 baseline prior to the news breaking of Musk’s plans for the company.

Though clicks do not necessarily correlate to actual job applications submitted, and likely reflect current media attention, the increase shows that people appear to be interested not just in the media story, but in work available at the company.  

“Say what you will about Elon, he does have a large fanbase of ppl excited to work for him,” Zhao tweeted. “He’s much more likely to capitalize on that attraction as CEO than owner.”

On Friday, Musk shared some of his own thoughts about hiring at Twitter, sharing Fortune’s reporting.

“If Twitter acquisition completes, company will be super focused on hardcore software engineering, design, infosec & server hardware,” he tweeted on Friday morning. (more)

Giddy up.

May 5 2022

NY Times Run Laughable Tucker Carlson Hit Piece, His Reaction Is Perfect | DM CLIPS | Rubin Report


The Rubin Report  Published originally on Rumble on May 2, 2022 

Dave Rubin of “The Rubin Report” talks about Tucker Carlson responding to yet another baseless hit piece from the New York Times and proves what really motivates their baseless attacks on him.

May 5 2022

Overruling Roe v Wade – To Be or Not To Be


Blog/Rule of Law

Posted May 4, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Spread the love

When Roe v Wade was decided, it was highly questionable both on a constitutional level as well as on a moral basis. The basic religious objection stems from the Ten Commandments – Thou Shalt Not Kill. You had a lot of people arguing that a child is not a child until it is born and thus abortion is not a crime of murder. The reasoning was akin to the distinction of killing people on a wholesale basis which is deranged murder as distinguished by being a soldier who is ordered to kill by your head of state which makes it patriotic. Then you have people carving out exceptions to kill people calling it a Holy War somehow sanctioned by God or the execution of a prisoner sentenced to death. Then there is the argument of self-defense and a police officer who shoots to kill because he thought the guy was reaching for a gun instead of his wallet. There has always been a gray area when it comes to killing someone else.

I have to look at this question from a rule of law perspective and not one of personal preference or based upon a religious belief or lack thereof. Appellant Jane Roe, a pregnant mother who wished to obtain an abortion, sued on behalf of all women similarly situated in an effort to prevent the enforcement of Texas statutes criminalizing all abortions except those performed to save the life of the mother. The other case being overruled is Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which altered the standard for analyzing restrictions on the right of abortion, crafting the undue burden standard for abortion.

What NEEDS to be stated is that the promoter of abortion was none other than Bill Gates’ father who was the head of Planned Parenthood which promoted abortions. Aside from the scandal about Planned Parenthood selling body parts from abortions, it has long been pointed out that 86% of Planned Parenthood abortion operations have been in minority areas. This has always led to the question was this really about Eugenics.

To sell the idea of abortions like the insurance industry that could not sell Death Insurance so they called it Life Insurance, abortion was marketed as a woman’s right issue avoiding any discussion of the life of the unborn. It was often alleged that this was Eugentics to reduce the black population. So while Whoopi Goldberg is screaming it’s her body and sees everything else as racist, has she actually taken the blue pill when it comes to abortion that was intended to racially impose Eugenics?

Indeed, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg bluntly told the truth, when she was for equal rights for women. “Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” Ginsberg spoke bluntly in an interview published in the New York Times Magazine which was an article on women in the court. So it was not simply a woman’s rights agenda. That was the cover story to hide the real agenda which has always existed – eugenics and to reduce the population of the minorities. Consequently, there are what girls on our staff call Feminine Nazis for they just have taken the blue pill. Others will lash out at me and say this is a man taking a man’s view or that based on religion. They close their minds to the truth for they do not want to admit that they have been manipulated in their thinking.

SORRY! It’s time to take the Red Pill. Today, they are still very much more concerned about population growth but Bill Gates has carried on his father’s concerns about the population growth of the wrong kind of people. Bill Gates has experimented with implanting chips to turn off and on a woman’s ability to even have children. He devotes his money to carry out his father’s alleged prejudice.

Gates – Vaccines & Population Growth | Armstrong Economics

People like Whoopi have taken the blue pill and spit out the very argument that Gates has pushed to reduce the population using women’s rights. Gates is tormented at night worrying about all the black babies being born in Africa where he claims the population will double by 2050. Gates has moved to provide free condoms in Africa. Gates was offering rewards for those to create a condom that men would use. Gates selected 11 contenders. In the USA, this effort to depopulate the world has been the marketing of abortion as a woman’s right because it’s her body. Can you also throw your baby out the window because it cries using the same theory it’s your baby? Hence, the debate conjures up religion and those in support of abortion seem to argue there is no God so just F–K off!

The question of abortion from ancient times varied. Under the Persian Empire, it was a criminal act. The Hippocratic Oath from Greece varied somewhat according to the particular translation. Nevertheless, it was unanimously clear:

“I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion,” or “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly, I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.”

Abortion was practiced predominantly among the poor and slave class in Roman times. Abortion was considered amoral lacking any law forbidding it. Tertullian, the early Christian apologist, described how doctors of the time performed abortions using instruments that would effectively chop up a child in the womb dissecting it. A woman could be prosecuted for having an abortion if she failed to tell the father since the right of an heir was critical in property inheritance.

When Roe v Wade was announced, there was deep concern over the logic of the decision. It was based on an earlier decision Griswald v Connecticut which established the Right to Privacy. That was a law that married people would not use birth control. How do you enforce such a law? Does a police officer have to inspect you before having sex? It was held that such a law could not be enforced and there was the right to privacy. Therefore, Roe v Wade has rooted in that principle aside from if you agree or disagree with the subject of abortion. It is indeed inconsistent as a matter of law that you can mandate vaccines but uphold Roe v Wade and the Right to Privacy. It is entirely two different things to carry out an abortion by a doctor on the theory that the woman has a Right to Privacy.

Clearly, in this era of mandatory vaccines, you are fired if you refuse and cannot travel without one which is in direct opposition to Roe v Wade. The two are completely inconsistent. Honestly, this is becoming so messed up that it is hard to keep track of all the twists and turns. Logic has completely vanished today. I would argue if the court approves the vaccine mandate to protect society then there can be no Right to Privacy concerning your body. I previously argued that in light of Roe v Wade, then vaccine mandates would be also unconstitutional. The court appears to overrule this decision yet leave the Griswold Right to Privacy intact.

This leaked decision was clearly by someone trying to create a controversy to force the Supreme Court to uphold Roe v Wade. Ironically, it will now force the Supreme Court to maintain that position. The draft reads:

Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s his- tory and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U. S. 702, 721 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted)

Overruling Roe v Wade -initial-draft

Roe v Wade being overturned would simply remove the Constitutional Right to kill your unborn child. This will not prohibit abortions, but it will send it to the states allowing them to pass their own legislation. Some states have adopted legislation to govern the “right to die” which is the idea that a person has the right to end their life or be voluntarily euthanized. Eight states have enacted that legislation.

In Texas, once a heartbeat is detected, abortions would be illegal. In Florida, Governor DeSantis’ law, restricts abortion after 15 weeks – when babies are scientifically proven to be able to smile, yawn, feel pain and respond to their mother’s voice.

One email that came in asked:

“if this is about states’ rights then it seems that this upends voting or gay marriage or everything built on the 14th amendment. Is this what splits hastens the fall of the US and perhaps causes it to split as most of the country appears to want to overturn women’s right to their own body and not consequence to the sperm source or circumstances.

Rape is again legal it seems in this instance”

Legally, gay rights and the rape of a woman or an abortion to save the life of a woman are not impacted by overruling Roe v Wade. From a legal perspective, Roe v Wade is bad law. It is inconsistent and in fact when you have mandatory vaccines and mandatory masks and quarantines, then clearly there is no such thing as a Right of Privacy. So for this reason as a matter of law, Roe v Wade should be overruled.

That does NOT mean that all abortions would be outlawed. Let the states legislate the question as they do for just about everything else. While the United States may be one country overall, the cultural differences between California and the Midwest and South are completely different. If someone wants to die because of a disease, they can go to Oregon. If someone wants to have a totally unrestricted abortion, go to California. It is time that there should be fewer mandates from Washington and more states’ rights. We also have the right to live in a culture that meets our personal beliefs. What if those in Washington suddenly approved ancient law and stoned to death those who committed adultery? Would it be even moral to force the entire country to comply with that law even if it offends your personal religion?

What will break up the country is the attempt by either side to impose their view as mandatory upon the whole nation. There are cultural differences throughout the United States. Even people have sent in emails saying that vaccines and who you voted for are just two common issues that arise today in dating. This is reflecting the deep divide and if we DO NOT respect these differences, then the only resolution will be civil war. The very term, “United States”, is not a justification to impose one political belief upon the whole. This is what is wrong with socialism under the Biden Administration punishing some for the benefit of others.

Slavery was an issue that one human being cannot own another. There are those who equate abortion to that same logic – a mother has no right to terminate a child’s life for convenience. Hence Pro-Life argues it is the same principle to be against abortion as it is to be against slavery. These are philosophical questions that are also rooted in culture just as the Persians regarded it to be a crime if a woman had an abortion and the Romans were indifferent.

This is why States’ Rights are critical and federalism must be curtailed to save the United States. You can get grits in the south just as you can get Boston Cream Pie or clam chowder in Boston. There are cultural differences and we better respect that or there is no reason to be part of a UNION. If California allows wholesale abortions and Texas does not, then both must respect the culture of the other and let God sort things out.

Personally, my first son died shortly after birth. To this day, I will never forget that. So while personally, I would never agree to an abortion, my opinion is not sufficient grounds to force others to comply with my beliefs. This is a State’s Right Issue and it is time we begin to respect the fact that there was never to be a dictatorship of the majority over the minority creating an eternal battle to force the opposition to live by their rules. That is the recipe for the decline and fall of every empire, nation, or city-state.

May 5 2022

Plastic Bag Ban


Armstrong Economics Blog/Climate Re-Posted May 4, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

COMMENT: The grocers near me have banned plastic bags. Off timing. Grocery bills are more than I’ve ever seen ..ever. I wont buy as much if theres a few bags per trip. We are lucky to own our homes. Climate change or the food crisis? I see it as a new distraction since they talked of banning them for a long time .. so why now?

REPLY: It is not a far-fetched theory to wonder whether the push to eliminate plastics goes beyond the climate change agenda. Grocery stores have begun banning plastic bags at a time when food inflation is in the double-digits, and the supply chain stalemate has dampened availability. Think about it – the typical American will fill up their grocery cart with food. In other nations, they purchase the ingredients they need for a few days instead of going on major grocery hauls. Limiting American consumers to the bags in their possession could lead to fewer items purchased. This would lower the visibility of inflation and overall consumption.

Over the pandemic, Americans became more self-reliant and began cooking at home 49% more, according to the US Grocery Shopper Trends report. The powers that be, such as Bill Gates, have been pushing for a major change in grocery trends by requesting that first-world nations refrain from eating meat. Gates also cites climate change and not his massive investments in farmland and meat alternatives.

The Environment Agency of the UK released a report in 2011 that found reusable cotton and paper bags have a higher carbon footprint than single-use plastics. A cotton bag, for example, would need to be used 131 times to lower its impact on the environment. While no one is saying plastic bags are ideal for the environment, the rush to ban them is not entirely due to climate change concerns. I believe they are also aiming to change consumer habits at the grocery store.

May 5 2022

2000 Mules – Another Banned Movie?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Politics Re-Posted May 4, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

May 4 2022

Musk Goes Full Galt, Challenges Woke Activists Who Pressure Corporations with Sunlight


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 3, 2022 | Sundance 

CTH has been watching carefully for several weeks; looking, reading and observing the expressed priorities of Elon Musk in an effort to evaluate his free speech intents and purposes.  After careful and cautious consideration, I can now say Elon Musk is the closest thing to John Galt in our lifetime.

Today, Mr. Musk drew attention to one of the central cancers. Musk is highlighting the strategy leftists use to target corporations, demand they withdraw advertising dollars, and force them into compliance against any unapproved platform designated by the woke mob.

[CNN Story Here – MMfA Letter Here – Elon Musk Tweet Link Here]

David Brock’s Media Matters for America (MMFA) has organized an activist campaign against companies who advertise on Twitter. [SEE LETTER HERE]  Their intent is to assemble all of the radical activist groups, directly target any company who would advertise on Twitter and by extension force woke compliance by the social media platform Musk is purchasing.

The letter urges advertisers to make their next ad deals with Twitter contingent on changes to platform policy under Mr Musk.  However, Musk is pushing back against the effort by asking, “who funds these organizations that want to control your access to information? Let’s investigate.” He then goes on to tweet, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

(CNN) – Some of the nation’s biggest brands including Coca-Cola (CCEP), Disney (DIS) and Kraft (KHC) are facing calls to boycott Twitter if the company’s soon-to-be owner, billionaire Elon Musk, rolls back content moderation policies limiting hate speech and election misinformation.

In a letter sent to brands Tuesday ahead of the 2022 NewFronts digital advertising conference, more than two dozen civil society groups said marketers should secure commitments from Twitter to retain its most critical policies, including on civic integrity and hateful conduct, and threaten to withdraw funding if Twitter does not comply.

“As top advertisers on Twitter (TWTR), your brand risks association with a platform amplifying hate, extremism, health misinformation, and conspiracy theorists,” the letter said, adding: “Your ad dollars can either fund Musk’s vanity project or hold him to account.” (read more)

Musk has advocated for increased transparency on the mechanisms and algorithms within the Twitter platform, in order to gain public trust.  Everyone knows that Twitter management manipulates the platform based on ideology.  Even the original creator of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, has admitted the political preferences within the company are directly connected to the control mechanisms that have been built within it.

One of the key tell-tale sentences in the MMFA led letter is this:

“Consider the implications of full-scale public visibility into Twitter’s algorithm”..

The left-wing organizations and activist groups are worried about what public disclosure of the Twitter censorship and control mechanisms might mean. As a result of their fear, their strategy is to ask advertising corporations to pressure Elon Musk into keeping the background engineering hidden from review.  There is no incentive for Musk to do that as a private company, except this type of blackmail effort.

The need for control is a reaction to fear.  MMfA and their allies fear a free, open and uncontrolled information platform; and they fear that people will discover just how much has been done to tilt the discussion in their favor by controlling and silencing their opposition.

I can appreciate that Musk is taking the issues of free communication seriously. He is dealing with challenges of incredible consequence, he yet he carries on that battle with a light spirit and does not take himself seriously.  That is a remarkably valuable skillset.

If the full purchase deal can be finalized, Musk will take the company private. However, Musk has also reportedly shared that after a few years of private ownership, he would be willing to make the company a public offering again. Per the Wall Street Journal, “Mr. Musk said he plans to stage an initial public offering of Twitter in as little as three years of buying it, according to people familiar with the matter. The deal is expected to close later this year, subject to conditions including the approval of Twitter shareholders and regulators, the company has said.

[READ THE LETTER HERE]

May 3 2022

The Declaration for the Future of the Internet


Armstrong Economics Blog/BigTech Re-Posted May 3, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

The internet has become the main source of social interaction, entertainment, and media. Almost everything we do is tied to the internet, which was once a free space. Governments across the world are now attempting to control the world wide web. In fact, the US, EU, and 32 other nations have announced a “Declaration for the Future of the Internet.”

The declaration claims to promote “interconnected communications” and “democracy, peace, the rule of law, sustainable development, and the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.” They would like to make the internet accessible to everyone, and while this may sound good and well on the surface, the motive behind this declaration is to give governments full control over the internet.

The fine print reads:

“Over the last two decades, however, we have witnessed serious challenges to this vision emerge. Access to the open Internet is limited by some authoritarian governments and online platforms and digital tools are increasingly used to repress freedom of expression and deny other human rights and fundamental freedoms. State-sponsored or condoned malicious behavior is on the rise, including the spread of disinformation and cybercrimes such as ransomware, affecting the security and the resilience of critical infrastructure while holding at risk vital public and private assets.”

“Disinformation” is the new hot-button word for government censorship. Uncoincidentally, this declaration comes the same week that US President Biden arranged a “Disinformation Governance Board” with members who solely support his agenda and are willing to hide his lies. “Disinformation” allows governments to determine what is factual.

“Online platforms have enabled an increase in the spread of illegal or harmful content that can threaten the safety of individuals and contribute to radicalization and violence. Disinformation and foreign malign activity is used to sow division and conflict between individuals or groups in society, undermining respect for and protection of human rights and democratic institutions.”

Governments across the globe are on board with the Great Reset, and censoring society’s main medium of connectivity will provide them with the power to dumb down the masses and track the opposition. Countries that openly censor their internet such as Russia and China have not signed this declaration, as they do not care if their censorship is packaged in a nice collaborative declaration with other nations. At least the internet users in those nations are aware that what they read online is censored. The truth will always exist, but it will be harder to find it in the future.

Apr 26 2022

Musk v Gates


Armstrong Economics Blog/Humor Re-Posted Apr 26, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Elon Musk destroyed Bill Gates over the weekend after texts between the two were leaked to the press. This may be the first time someone has put Bill Gates in his place and publicly shamed him for his hypocrisy. Per usual, Gates had his hand out looking to “discuss philanthropy possibilities” with a fellow billionaire. “Cool.” Musk replied. “Do you still have a half billion dollar short position against Tesla?”

Gates said he simply forgot to close his position out, and then mentioned “philanthropy possibilities” again. Musk told him to kick rocks. “Sorry, but I cannot take your philanthropy on climate change seriously when you have a massive, short position against Tesla, the company doing the most to solve climate change.”

Doubling down on his anger toward Gates for a multitude of reasons, Musk began tweeting comedic representations of untouchable Bill. An unapologetic Musk compared an image of the Microsoft founder with the new Apple emoji of a pregnant man. The insult was a subtle nod to the insanity of woke culture that Gates is supporting through funding. From the vaccines to unexplainable meetings with Jeffrey Epstein followed by an immediate divorce, Bill Gates is rapidly losing his good-guy image.

Apr 25 2022

Before Obama’s Neocon War on Russia


Armstrong Economics Blog/Russia Re-Posted Apr 24, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Before Obama started the New Cold War against Russia following Hillary’s failed attempt to take over Russia by interfering in the 2000 election, the world was much safer before all of this Neocon nonsense began when Obama came to power in 2008. Ever since then, Hillary, a staunch Neocon, did everything in her power to destroy the relations between the United States and Russia.