More Censorship


Posted originally on Mar 17, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

Rumble to Build Cloud Service to Fight Censorship


Posted originally on Mar 14, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

Censored

The video-sharing platform Rumble is set to launch a new cloud service, which they deem a service for the “free and open internet.” Global governments are increasingly cracking down on what videos may or may not be viewed by the public. Censorship is a major problem in every nation as our access to information becomes increasingly limited.

YouTube was the first major streaming platform to go bust. They immediately caved to pressures from the government and implemented an entire team dedicated to removing videos deemed offensive. Worse, they interfered in the last US election by adhering to Biden’s commands to remove any “disinformation” regarding Hunter, COVID, and any other relevant topic that did not fit the narrative.

The company was inspired to create an alternative after Amazon Web Services (AWS) removed Parler, a conservative media network, from its platform. That was part of the government’s plot to remove any “disinformation,” which in actuality is information they do not want the public to know, regarding the events on January 6.

Some may recall that Rumble offered Joe Rogan a place for his podcast after he was de-platformed. YouTube permanently removed all of Rogan’s interviews because he was questioning the truth. Spotify gave Rogan a platform which led to backlash from various artists who threatened to pull their music from Spotify (most retracted their threats).

RoganLetterFromRumble

“When we saw that happen, we took it upon ourselves to make sure that could never happen to a platform like Rumble,” CEO Chris Pavlovski said. “After that moment, we realized that it was very important for us to … start owning our infrastructure, and start owning our own servers.” Pavloski said they recognized the crackdown as an “existential threat” to their business and believe it is a large part of America wants something that inherits the same kind of values that they have.”

“The idea is we’re not going to cancel someone based on any political bias whatsoever. Whether they’re a religious university, or whether they’re not, we’re not going to discriminate against any customer based on political pressure or political biases, etc. That’s what I see the Parler situation had. It was due to political pressure and biases at the time,” he said.

I have personally had better luck with Rumble, but I hear from readers in other countries that their governments have prohibited Rumble entirely. Robert F. Kennedy’s team supports Rumble Cloud, citing that it is a good beginning to avoid partisan censorship. Rumble’s core base is not conservative, as 35% identify as Democrats, 29% as independents, and only 22% as Republicans.

There will be a fee, and while I do not know their payment strategy, free journalism will often come at a price. That is why I place the most sensitive information behind the paywall of the Socrates private blog to prevent censorship. It does not turn a profit but the fee is necessary to bypass the forces who would love to silence me.

We will see how this pans out for Rumble and other media-sharing platforms going forward. The demand, and more importantly, the need, is certainly present.

Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission Requires Podcasters and Platform Providers to Register With Government – “Meaningful Content” Will Be Monitored


Posted originally on the CTH on October 2, 2023 | Sundance

Comrades, all your speech are belong to us…

In order to control information that may be averse to the regime in charge, various totalitarian government operations require registration.  The registration process generates a permit that can then be leveraged against any operation that doesn’t conform to the regime fiats.

A few days ago, the North American hub of speech and information control known as Canada, announced that all internet hosting platforms that give voice to podcasters must register with the government.

Additionally, it appears that any podcast who wishes to provide information must also register.  The users and viewers do not need to register, only those providing the content.

Gee, I wonder who the core target is here?

CANADA – Today, the CRTC is advancing its regulatory plan to modernize Canada’s broadcasting framework and ensure online streaming services make meaningful contributions to Canadian and Indigenous content.

On May 12, 2023, the CRTC launched its first public consultations. After thoroughly examining all the evidence on the public record, including over 200 interventions, the CRTC is issuing its first two decisions.

First, the CRTC is setting out which online streaming services need to provide information about their activities in Canada. Online streaming services that operate in Canada, offer broadcasting content, and earn $10 million or more in annual revenues will need to complete a registration form by November 28, 2023. Registration collects basic information, is only required once and can be completed in just a few steps.

Second, the CRTC is setting conditions for online streaming services to operate in Canada. These conditions take effect today and require certain online streaming services to provide the CRTC with information related to their content and subscribership. The decision also requires those services to make content available in a way that is not tied to a specific mobile or Internet service.

A third consultation is ongoing. It considers contributions traditional broadcasters and online streaming services will need to make to support Canadian and Indigenous content. The CRTC will hold a three-week public proceeding starting on November 20, 2023, and will hear from 129 intervenors representing a broad range of interests. (read more)

Note…. Rumble streaming and Video Platform is a Canadian company.

Coincidence?

{Background Here}

The Shadowbanning of the United States Internet


August 16, 2023 | Sundance 

There really is no other phrase that seems to adequately describe the future for online life in the United States than to describe it through the prism of the previously discussed shadow banning that takes place on the X-platform for specifically wrong-thinking users.

It is important to begin with the end in mind.  Perhaps some people are unaware that internet services, meaning the actual experience of using the internet for communication and commerce, are not the same in every nation.  In fact, it is quite a different experience depending on where on the globe you are located.  The differences are driven by internal controls, the intranet of the regional internet per se.

The internet in China is not the same as the internet in Europe, which is not the same as the internet in Australia, which is not the same as the internet in North America, which is not the same -at all- as the internet that now exists within Russia.  Even in some continents, the internet traffic flows are controlled at different levels within each nation. The “world wide web” is a format, but when you get down to the national level, things change.

This baseline helps to understand that internet freedom is defined by access to information and commerce.

To the extent the information or commerce is defined as against the interests of the authority structure, or potentially a threat to the national security interest of the government therein, the internet content is filtered, modified, censored, removed or just simply blocked from view.  This is one layer in the information control system.

Another layer is the flow of commerce that floats atop the flow of information.  This is where advertising, product sales, purchasing and general e-commerce takes place. This layer represents another option for control; therefore, this e-commerce layer should be considered running in parallel to the information, albeit perhaps indirectly attached.

When western government applied economic sanctions against Russia via financial restrictions writ large, the layer of internet commerce control merged with the information and national security control systems of the internet.

Russian citizens were blocked from e-commerce access, specifically from western nations in alignment with the sanctions, and the mechanisms of online purchasing were restricted.  However, the entire world did not participate in the sanctions, and there is a massive amount of e-commerce that takes place, even with the systems of western control financial blocks in place.

Additionally, there is a large black-market system for commerce and financial transactions that started organically in the aftermath of the Russian sanctions.  Crypto currency, as a financial transaction mechanism, was predictable; however, over time people became even more strategic and alternate transfer systems were created.  You can purchase advertising in Russia, but are you really purchasing advertising – or are the purchasers really just transferring funds?  Think about it.

I share that Russia example, because I do not want people to get too disheartened in what is going to happen here in the United States.  There will always be a market for information, regardless of the control systems that are created to stop it.  Additionally, there will always be smart rebellious people who think of ways to subvert the intents of the control mechanisms.  Freedom may be diminished from a raging fire to a small burning flame, but it will never be fully extinguished.  WE just need to learn to adapt.

It took me over two years to assemble The Benghazi Brief, because the background story was so large and complex that it took time, research and retrospection to appropriately contextualize the truth of the issue.  The Benghazi attack was a small, albeit deadly outcome, of a much larger story.  The brief walks through everything in context.

In a similar construct, the Shadowbanning of The United States internet is a big and complex story, and I am only about halfway through the assembly of all the data to put context to it.  However, as time becomes critical, it is important for me to push the information forward – because many of the timelines in the construct are likely to surface before I am complete with the fully assembled story.

I am going to drop some links that will help serve as a flashlight into the rabbit hole.  Each story may seem initially disparate or disconnected.  However, I would encourage you to think big picture with each of the puzzle pieces that are presented.  This is likely to become a series, and I will create a new “Internet” category on the side bar where I will tag any future elements.

Please keep in mind, the issues of e-commerce: ie. information monetization, advertising, deplatforming and debanking, are not disconnected from the issues of information control.  The same larger national security system that has mandated (and will mandate), information blocks, content censorship, content restrictions, content removal and various platform control elements, is all part of one interconnected compliance system.  Electronic Commerce and Electronic Information are all subject to the online control process.  This is a public-private partnership on the internet.

The origin of the public-private partnership goes all the way back to the origin of the tech system in relationship to the DARPA programs and government sponsored research labs.  The outcome of the modern partnership is evident in the Dept of Homeland Security (DHS) collaboration with the various communication platforms or pipes of information. Systems like the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) database, are simply outcomes of the partnership.  There are hundreds more.

There is a rush now to provide context because Artificial Intelligence (AI), or smart data systems, are launching into the United States internet control mechanisms almost daily.  We are close to the time when AI will be triggered to help control the content of the internet under the guise of national security.

The timeline for full deployment of the modern United States internet control system, is likely around late fall and early winter this year, in advance of the 2024 U.S. election cycle.

Everything will change.  Every route of online traffic including Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) to filters and rerouting on Domain Name Systems (DNS), to the Internet Protocol (IP) itself will be subject to change in the form of background shadow banning.  If the DHS partnership is successful, you will not initially notice – much like a shadow banned platform user doesn’t notice their new defined status.  The shift will become more obvious over time.

One odd outcome will be a regional targeting system.  Depending on where you are in the USA, your online experience will be different. There will also be enhancements to your internet travel based on your profile.  Good thinking users will have benefits that enhance the experience of the user and supports the interests of the national security guardians.

♦ Deployment of a Virtual Private Network (VPN) is irrelevant in this construct.  A VPN is like you renting a car without a license plate.  You travel past all the Automatic License Plate Readers, arrive at your destination, leave the keys in the ignition and just abandon the car.  Your personal travel was essentially invisible to the APLR system.  However, when the internet roads are controlled by the national security state, and there is no longer an offramp to the destination, your VPN use is irrelevant – you cannot reach your destination.  That’s part of the shift.

You will notice I use the term “definition” quite often.  That is because the root of every control mechanism is grounded upon defining things.  When you accept the terms ‘disinformation’, ‘misinformation’, and/or ‘malinformation’, you are buying into the process that permits definitions to determine your travel. Those who define both you and your destination, ultimately control your online experience.

Now, before getting to a recent example of this construct as it is being built, it is important to return to the e-commerce aspect and overlay the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) index into the world of online commerce.

♦ Right now, you can physically boycott Bud Light by choosing another brand.  However, for total goods and services the amount of online purchasing is now exceeding the amount of purchasing in real life (brick and mortar shopping).   Overlay the economic control system (think Russian sanctions approach) with the national security requirements for DEI, amid all online commerce, and apply that layer of analysis.  In the e-commerce world, choosing not to buy Bud Light will become a little more difficult; and those who do support the boycott become subject to the previously mentioned “definitions”.

I’m jumping ahead, because today there was a big development. As you read this, do not think small as presented – think bigger.  Think beyond the use of AI moderation on a platform, and think of AI moderation on the U.S. Internet System.  Online moderation conducted by AI:

OPEN AI – […] GPT-4 is also able to interpret rules and nuances in long content policy documentation and adapt instantly to policy updates, resulting in more consistent labeling. We believe this offers a more positive vision of the future of digital platforms, where AI can help moderate online traffic.

[…] Content moderation demands meticulous effort, sensitivity, a profound understanding of context, as well as quick adaptation to new use cases, making it both time consuming and challenging. Traditionally, the burden of this task has fallen on human moderators sifting through large amounts of content to filter out toxic and harmful material, supported by smaller vertical-specific machine learning models. The process is inherently slow and can lead to mental stress on human moderators.

We’re exploring the use of LLMs to address these challenges. Our large language models like GPT-4 can understand and generate natural language, making them applicable to content moderation. The models can make moderation judgments based on policy guidelines provided to them. (read more

Do you remember me telling you about what I noticed in the most recent Google spider crawls?

“The Alpha/Google spiders are not crawling around with their enhanced AI looking for words, phrases or content issues.  Enhanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) has given the spiders the ability to look for context.  The new Alpha/Goog AI spiders are crawling the internet looking for information provided with a detrimental and accurate context.  Those who are applying truthful context are the subversive voices that must be targeted.  Keep this in mind.”

I can get in big trouble for sharing this next graphic, but f**kit… I’m all in.

Google Spider Crawl Result, CTH Subversive Content, July 2023

As we have shared, the crawl is not headlines, the crawl is in content.  Yes, even content in the comment section is now flagging to the control systems.  Why? Because we operate a proprietary constructed private commenting system that doesn’t have a backdoor and protects you, the user.

The Google Spiders are newly enhanced with AI instructions, dispatched looking for content and ‘context’ that is against the interests of the Vanguard, Blackrock, Larry Page (Alpha/Goog owners), and the public-private partnership.

Look at the one I have highlighted above titled “Have you ever noticed this.”  Do you remember it?  [Reminder Here] This content is considered “dangerous or derogatory”. Think about that for a moment.  Discussing the humor of Donald Trump, and the fellowship it creates, is considered “dangerous” to the interests of Google.

Do not get alarmed, get informed.

I share this information with you so that you understand what is being constructed and what is about to be deployed on a large scale throughout the U.S. internet operating system.  The U.S. internet will be different.  The social media restrictions became more prevalent and noticeable in the past several years; now it is time for DHS to expand that process to the entire U.S. internet.

When I wrote about Jack’s Magic Coffee shop, people initially thought I was crazy – but the guys inside the coffee shop didn’t.  Eventually DHS control over Twitter was revealed in the Twitter files.  The same background is true here.  The entire American online apparatus is going to change, quite soon.

More will follow….

[Support CTH Here]

[PRO TIP: Rbmeber, the haumn bairn has the alibtiy to raed wrods taht are eteirlny mpilsseld as lnog as the frsit and lsat letetr are in the crrocet ltcoaitn.]

RESOURCES:

Using AI for Content Moderation

Facebook / META / Tech joining with DHS

Zoom with allow Content Scraping by AI 

AI going into The Cloud

U.S. Govt Going into The Cloud With AI

Pentagon activates 175 Million IP’s

Sunday Talks – Russell Brand Debriefs Matt Taibbi With Some Solid New Intel Surfacing About Larger Internet and Social Media Control Operations


Posted originally on the CTH on April 2, 2023 | Sundance 

U.K. cultural and political pundit Russell Brand sits down for an interview with U.S. Twitter File journalist Matt Taibbi, to discuss Taibbi’s experience with his recent congressional testimony, the advancement of the ‘Restrict Act’, and new revelations still coming from his exploration into the Twitter communication files. {Direct Rumble Link Here]

After some general overview and sense about the issues in/around congress, at 06:45 of the interview Taibbi begins to highlight new information he is discovering about how the Aspen Institute group was organizing, discussing and planning a larger objective about controlling any/all information on the internet.

Mr. Taibbi notes how the network of aligned NGO’s, government agencies and policy advisors from within the Aspen Institute were communicating with Big Tech about the best plans for both European and U.S. government regulation on speech and information on the internet.   As Matt notes, the senate ‘Restrict Act’ and the EU ‘Digital Services Act’ carry commonalities of purpose.  Additionally, as they government overseers trigger Artificial Intelligence (AI) to do the search work within content, the mechanisms within the machines will all deploy similar ideological algorithms. WATCH:

“They Are DANGEROUS People!” Free Speech Is Under THREAT!

Censoring Social Media to Prevent Bank Runs


Armstrong Economics Blog/Censorship Re-Posted Mar 15, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

They censored social media to prevent the public from learning the truth about COVIDvaccines, and accompanying mandates. They censored social media to prevent the public from learning about Hunter Biden’s laptop before his dad could be installed at the POTUS. They censored anyone who questioned the election or Biden’s crime family and deliberately leaked Republican voter information. The extreme censorship on social media by biased fact-checkers expanded beyond the US. So it comes as no surprise that the government would like to censor “misinformation” that could lead to a bank run.

The people within the system know when a bank is failing, as we saw with SVB’s recent collapse.  Senator Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) asked the Federal Reserve, Treasury Department, and Federal Deposit and Insurance Corp (FDIC) if it would be possible to censor information that could lead to future bank runs. Kelly is denying the claims despite people on both sides confirming his question.

The government implements bots on social media to support its agenda. Elon Musk exposed Twitter prior to the takeover. Twitter admitted when filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that around 5% of its 300 million users are in fact fake accounts. Once Musk began to crack down on fake accounts, members of the Democratic Party saw sharp declines in followers.

Twitter quietly began to crack down on bots in April 2022, and some of the most followed accounts saw a significant drop in followers. Former President Obama once held the record for being the most followed man on Twitter with 131.7 million followers. After the algorithm changed, Obama lost 300,000 followers instantly. Pop singer Katy Perry, the third-most-followed account and an outspoken Democrat, lost 200,000 of her 108.8 million followers. Half of President Joe Biden’s 22.2 million followers are fake accounts. Based on the 2020 US Presidential Election, Biden should be the most popular president in history after securing more votes than any other president. “My strong intuitive sense is that having a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive is extremely important to the future of civilization. I don’t care about the economics at all,” Musk said in April of 2022.

So Kelly’s proposal is not merely a method to avoid bank runs. This is infringing on our Constitutional right to the freedom of speech to control the masses via media. Let us not forget that nearly all social media platforms heavily lean left and support the same message.