Twitter Updates Privacy Policy Notifying Users Their Content Will Be Used to Train and Develop Enhanced AI


Posted originally on the CTH on September 1, 2023 | Sundance 

The use of Enhanced Artificial Intelligence to control information and communication is a subject that too few people understand.  This is why I have spent time trying to share information so that people can see into the future of their internet reality.  Everything will change.

As you should know by now, the X platform (Twitter) is designed to produce a different user experience based on “definitions” of the user.  The definitions are applied by the platform, to create unique identifying characteristics of the user.  The result is that each user gets a completely different platform experience, based on their definitions.

“Twitter is a different platform for each user.”  Repeat that phrase as often as needed to understand the evolution of what is coming to the American internet.

You might ask, how is applying all of these granular definitions even possible?  The answer is through the use of AI.  Humans will no longer be assigning the definitions of you; an autonomous system will take on the job of assigning the definitions.  Now, keep referencing the word “definitions,” because that is your identity and gateway pass into the platform content.  If you carry a particular definition, you will be blocked, throttled, shadow-banned or experience friction applied to your user id.

Remember when Elon Musk restricted users and claimed it was because the platform content was being “scraped” by organizations who were using the content to train their Enhanced AI systems?  Remember, Musk saying that, and expressing his concern?   Well, now the platform is telling users in a new X Corp privacy policy, that X corp itself is going to do exactly the thing Musk said he abhorred.

Twitter (X Corp) is going to use the content you provide to train the AI how to apply the definitions.  All of your interactions with the X Corp product are then going to be tailored based on the definitions that are applied to your identity, your account.   Some content will not be available to you; some content will only be available to you; the key and essential point is that YOU are defined.

Once you understand how your experience with the X platform is an outcome of definitions applied by X platform to you, then you can elevate your thinking and start to understand what the new American internet is all about.  Your definitions will determine what paths and/or roadways are available to you.

Enhanced AI will act like an invisible gatekeeping system on the American internet, showing or hiding internet outcomes according to your definitions.  It’s not that the offramp (a specific pathway on the internet) doesn’t exist, it’s an issue of you not being able to see any off ramp.  Your experience online is modified according to the definitions, that are applied to you.   This is why Enhanced AI is needed to (a) monitor and define; then (b) control the pathways of your travel.

Currently, your experience with Twitter is contingent upon your definitions.  Very soon, that same process will apply to the larger internet.

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. {GO DEEP}  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.”

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….

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

NEW ♦Big Names to Attend Political AI Forum

[Chuck Schumer Organizes AI Forum – Details Here]

Musk States X Platform Making Progress on Letting Users See Their Shadow Banning Status


Posted originally on the CTH on August 17, 2023 | Sundance 

Shadow Banning is the term given to social media backroom activity that uses computer algorithms to shrink user account engagement without informing the user.  The process involves putting friction upon the account to block amplification and control engagement.  The user doesn’t see the process, they just notice a severe drop in the engagement by other users on the platform.

Last year, Elon Musk promised to start letting the account holders see what level of friction they were assigned to by letting the users see their shadow ban status.  However, that promise was never fulfilled.  Musk was questioned about why the X platform, formerly known as Twitter, has not followed through on the transparency pledge.

Continuing the process of pretending not to know things, Musk says transparency is hard.

(Washington) –  The long-hated process of shadow-banning on X, formerly Twitter, soon will change, according to owner Elon Musk. 

At the Viva Tech conference this week, the billionaire said he plans to address the issue soon. He said the company is working on a plan that will let people see if their account was affected by the Twitter system. 

“Sorry it’s taking so long,” Mr. Musk posted. “There are so many layers of ‘trust & safety’ software that it often takes us hours to figure out who, how and why an account was suspended or shadow-banned. A ground up rewrite is underway that simplifies the X codebase dramatically.”

Shadow-banning is a practice where users have their accounts partially silenced without their knowledge. If users are shadow-banned, they can still post but they will notice engagement drops significantly. Since there is no way to officially know that a user is shadow-banned, the issue has been politicized. Conservative accounts consistently claimed they were shadow-banned for speaking out against vaccines or the 2020 election.  (read more)

This statement from Musk follows on the heels of X-Corp CEO Linda Yaccarino saying, “If you are going to post something that is illegal or against the law, you’re gone. Zero tolerance. But more importantly, if you are going to post something that is lawful, but it’s awful, you get labeled.  You get labeled, you get deamplified, which means it cannot be shared, and it is certainly demonetized. … So, they [advertisers] are protected from the risk of being next to that content.”…

It doesn’t take a deep thinker to understand why X-Corp (Twitter) would not want users to know the reason for their shadow banning or deamplification.  Once people become aware of the content they generate that assigns them a label, the control units within X-corp then need to justify their labeling.   Transparency runs counter to the intentions of those who control information; that’s why Musk has never followed through.

In the bigger picture, there are legal ramifications when this shadow banning, labeling and definition system is rolled out for the entire North American internet.  This is the conversation taking place now in the closed-door meetings of DHS and the various organizations conscripted to develop the process.

Elon Musk is not John Galt.  Remember that!

Elon Musk has one prism that is at the forefront of his decision making, money.   From my calculations, there are less than eight weeks remaining before Musk and Yaccarino need to go back into the capital markets looking for additional funding.  Watch what happens over the next two months.

Report, Twitter Employees Draft Letter Demanding Assurances Against Discrimination for Their Political Beliefs


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on October 26, 2022 | Sundance

According to a released article in Time Magazine, Twitter employees have drafted a letter containing several ‘demands.’ In addition to demanding they are not fired, they demand assurances against discrimination for their political beliefs.

(TIME) […] TIME reviewed a draft of the open letter circulating among Twitter employees on Monday. “Elon Musk’s plan to lay off 75% of Twitter workers will hurt Twitter’s ability to serve the public conversation,” said the draft of the letter, which has not yet been published. “A threat of this magnitude is reckless, undermines our users’ and customers’ trust in our platform, and is a transparent act of worker intimidation.”

The letter demands that Musk commits to preserving Twitter’s current headcount if his takeover of the company goes through. It also demands he does not discriminate against employees based on their political beliefs and that he commits to “fair” severance policies and more communication about working conditions. “We demand to be treated with dignity, and to not be treated as mere pawns in a game played by billionaires,” the list of demands says. (read letter here)

Twitter Agrees to Pay $150 Million FTC Fine for Using Two Factor Authentication as Ruse to Sell Targeted User Data to Advertisers


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 25, 2022 | Sundance

Two-Factor authentication has always been a platform ruse for gathering data on platform users.  Twitter was just one company amid a large number of on-line platforms who pushed “two factor authentication” as a security measure.  The real motive of TFA was to gain the user cell phone number in order to gain more specific information about the user.

Today multiple media outlets are reporting the FTC and Twitter have agreed to a settlement where Twitter will pay a $150 million settlement for violating user privacy and selling user data.  Twitter collected cell phone and email account information for users under the auspices of user security.  However, Twitter actually planned to use the cell phone and email data to sell a more comprehensive package of user identification to advertisers.

(Reuters) – […] The company will pay $150 million as part of the settlement announced by the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In addition to the monetary settlement, the agreement requires Twitter to improve its compliance practices.

The complaint said that the misrepresentations violated the FTC Act and a 2011 settlement with the agency.

“Specifically, while Twitter represented to users that it collected their telephone numbers and email addresses to secure their accounts, Twitter failed to disclose that it also used user contact information to aid advertisers in reaching their preferred audiences,” the complaint said.

[…]  “Twitter obtained data from users on the pretext of harnessing it for security purposes but then ended up also using the data to target users with ads,” said FTC Chair Lina Khan in a statement. “This practice affected more than 140 million Twitter users, while boosting Twitter’s primary source of revenue.”

The complaint also alleges that Twitter falsely said it complied with the European Union-U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield Frameworks, which bar companies from using data in ways that consumers do not authorize.

Twitter’s settlement follows years of fallout over the privacy practices of tech companies.

Revelations in 2018 that Facebook, the world’s biggest social network, was using phone numbers provided for two-factor authentication to serve ads enraged privacy advocates.

Facebook, now called Meta (FB.O), similarly settled with the FTC over the issue as part of a $5 billion agreement reached in 2019. (read more)

Two Factor Authentication (TfA) and the 5G telecommunications network work hand in glove.

By connecting the registered user id to their cell phone number, advertisers can target platform users with far more granular detail.  3G networks tracked user history to build the user portfolio.  5G networks bridge the space between user identity, cell phone, and geolocation services and apps on cell phones.

Cell phones are registered to people.  The TfA purpose was to identify the actual people behind the registered accounts and then monitor them for enhanced targeting.  The data of the user is monetized and your unique identity is sold to advertisers.

This is one of the reasons CTH does not track anyone, or ask for any data on any user.  We do not monetize users at The Conservative Treehouse, and all of our engagement systems, including the comment system, are built around the principle that user privacy is our number one priority.

Any engagement platform that asks you to enter your cell phone as part of the registration process is going to have the ability to sell your data and user identity to a third party.  It really is that simple.

Elon Musk Puts Twitter Acquisition on Hold Pending Verification of 95 Percent Authentic Users


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 13, 2022 | Sundance

Earlier today Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted, “Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting calculation that spam/fake accounts do indeed represent less than 5% of users.”  He also said, “still committed to acquisition.”

While tech stocks have been collapsing over the past 15 days, from a big picture perspective this approach by Musk looks like a potential negotiation strategy to lower the offer.  The actual number of spam/bot accounts on the platform is unknown.

CNBC – […] Twitter shares fell more than 8% Friday and are down about 23% from Musk’s agreed-upon purchase price of $54.20 per share. Part of the dip is related to an overall slump in technology stocks this month. The Nasdaq has fallen another 11% since the market close on April 25, the day Twitter accepted Musk’s offer.

“This is probably a negotiation tactic on behalf of Elon,” Toni Sacconaghi, Bernstein senior research analyst, said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “The market has come down a lot. He’s probably using the guise of true active users as a negotiation ploy.”

Musk may feel some pressure or obligation to other potential investors in Twitter to lower the price, even if the world’s wealthiest man is more price agnostic.

Musk is in talks with outside investors for both equity and preferred financing to lessen his personal stake in Twitter. If he can get a lower price for Twitter, the returns could be higher for outside investors if and when Twitter returns to public ownership or is resold. (read more)

Suspicious Cat remains, well, suspicious…

DuckDuckGo Search Engine CEO Announces Changes to Internet Search Algorithms to Promote Approved Content


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on April 15, 2022 | Sundance 

The information war continues raging….

On one battlefront, we have Elon Musk trying to push back against quasi-government control mechanisms that constrict information and the flow of discussion and ideas.  On a lesser, albeit similar battlefield, we see this.

DuckDuckGo used to be the preferred search engine for those who wanted privacy on-line and unfiltered, i.e. organic, search engine responses.  Unfortunately, CEO Gabriel Weinberg is now stating he will change the algorithm to remove independent information and media outlets and will replace them with only approved MSM results.

“Like so many others I am sickened by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the gigantic humanitarian crisis it continues to create. #StandWithUkraine️,” Weinberg tweeted on Wednesday. “At DuckDuckGo, we’ve been rolling out search updates that down-rank sites associated with Russian disinformation.”

Riddle me this my friends:  The White House has officially admitted to creating misinformation, disinformation and malinformation as part of their strategic campaign against Russia in Ukraine.  NBC news gleefully embraces the strategy {SEE HERE}.  However, the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has an official agency mission {SEE HERE} to “help the American people understand the scope and scale of Mal, Dis, and Misinformation activities,” and Google/DuckDuckGo/Big Tech have officially aligned with both U.S. government interests, promising to target, remove and penalize any entity engaged in Mal, Dis and Misinformation activities.

Think for yourself while it is still legal to do so.

The justification for the manipulation of information, the creation of dis/mal/and misinformation, and the propaganda campaign writ large, is based on a position that the U.S. is on the virtuous side of the conflict.  Where virtue is determined by the officials creating the lies.

Yes, according to the official position of the Biden administration, lying for the public good is essentially now the admitted narrative.

Putting aside the creation of lies, to advance a strategic geopolitical objective, the bigger admission in the U.S. government statements is that much of the information coming to the American public – from them – is manufactured, false, fabricated and wrong.

Simultaneous to this admission of manufactured lies, the platforms of Big Tech and social media are saying they will target, remove and block any content that contradicts the official government position.

In the case of Google, the dominating search engine for information over the internet, they state it is an infraction against their policy to espouse a claim “that contradicts official government records.”  Yet, the U.S. government is officially admitting the information they are creating for the government records, is self-admittedly false….. and now in comes DuckDuckGo with the assist.

Not wanting to overinflate the CTH position, but this now admitted reality is exactly why we have taken the following position.

…”There is no such thing as “disinformation” or “misinformation”.  There is only information you accept and information you do not accept.  You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.”… 

There are only two elements within the public discussion of information, truth and not truth.

In an era filled with “fact-checkers” and institutional guardians at the gates of Big Tech, let me explain exactly why it is important not to accept the speech rules of the guards.

When you accept the terms “disinformation”, “misinformation” or the newest lingo, “malinformation,” you are beginning to categorize truth and lies in various shades.  You are merging black and white, right and wrong, into various shades of grey.

When your mind works in the grey zone, you are, by direct and factual consequence, saying there is a problem.  You are correct, however, this is where people may make a mistake. That problem is supposed to be there.

It is not a solution to the problem to try and remove the grey simply because it takes too much work to separate the white pixels from the black ones.  You were born with a gift, the greatest gift a loving God could provide.  You were born with a brain and set of natural instincts that are tools to do this pixel separation, use them.

If you define the grey work as a problem you cannot solve on your own, you open the door for others to solve that problem for you.  You begin to abdicate the work, and that’s when trouble can enter.  The sliding scale of Pinocchios is one of the most familiar yet goofy outcomes.

Put more clearly, when you accept the terminology “disinformation”, you accept a problem.  The problem is then the tool by which authorities will step in to make judgements.  Speech, in its most consequential form, is then qualified by others to whom you have sub-contracted your thinking.

When you willingly sub-contract information filters to others, you have lost connection with the raw information.   CTH was founded upon the belief that truth has no agenda, nor does it care about you, your feelings, or your opinion of it.  It just sits there, empirically existing as evidence of information in its most pure form.

The search for truth, in all things, is the mission objective of this assembly.  Often, we don’t like the truth; often, the truth is bitter, cold, challenging and even painful to accept.  However, the truth doesn’t care.  Information in its most raw form is ambivalent to your opinion.  If you struggle to accept these things, that’s when you need grey.  The New York Times is not called the “grey lady” accidentally.

Personally, I am an absorber of information – perhaps on a scale that is unusual.  But I do not discount information from any form until I can put context to it and see if the information makes sense given all the variables present.  When something doesn’t feel right, it’s almost always because it isn’t right.

Often, I find myself struggling in the grey and complex.  It is not unusual to spend days researching, digging, clarifying a situation, only to discover the path to finding the truth is in another direction entirely.   Erasing everything and starting over is frustrating, but it is genuinely the only approach that works; and often finding truth is supposed to be difficult, that’s why it is rewarding.

In the digital information age, we are bombarded with information.  It is easy to be overwhelmed and need to find something or someone who has better skills at separating the black grains from the white ones.  All opinions in this quest should be considered; thus, it is important to allow the free flow of information.

I am not necessarily a speech absolutist.  There is some language that needs to be constrained if we are to participate in a respectful society, with grandma’s rules and knowing the audience.  The CTH has guidelines for comments for this exact reason.  However, those constraints need to be based on a set of inherent values.   When it comes to information it is important to draw a distinction from speech.

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.  Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions, in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used, were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook book to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove speech from the discussion.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

Unfortunately, the collectively aligned group of U.S. Govt, the Intelligence Community and now Big Tech, are saying they will put every roadblock they can muster in your way as you attempt to navigate through the misinformation they control.

With that in mind, I would finish with this.  Be kind to those who cannot see through the misinformation, and do not invest too much time trying to convince them.  Convincing is an endless quest, because it transfers the responsibility of discernment from them to you. They will become dependent on you and that my friends can be a heavy weight.

Remember, “Whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be. And whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul. With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.” ~ Max Ehrmann

.

“Some people are just nuts”…

Can Shareholders Bring Suit Against Dorsey for Securities Fraud?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted Jun 21, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

In July 2015, then CEO Dick Costolo departed Twitter, and Jack Dorsey assumed the role of interim CEO. Twitter was created by Jack Dorsey, Noah Glass, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams in March 2006 and launched in July 2006. By 2012, the platform had more than 100 million users. I am surprised that they have not figured out that Dorsey can be personally sued for securities fraud since he marketed Twitter as being the platform for “freedom of expression,” whereby he has personally taken charge of the company and did exactly the opposite of what was said when they went public.

If I raised money and said we would invest in BioTech, but then after getting the money I invested in real estate, that would be securities fraud. We cannot count on the SEC to defend the people. They get their marching orders and will never cross paths with someone like Dorsey. Worse still, if you take a public corporation and you flip it around for personal use, that too is actionable. Dorsey is obviously incompetent as a CEO.

Founder of Moderna Canceled by Twitter for Confirming Truth


Armstrong Economics Blog/BigTech Re-Posted Jun 4, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

t is time that the people DEMAND the end to censorship. The immunity given to platforms was to prevent them from being sued for posts of others. Not that they are now the Censors of society. They are endangering people’s lives and they should be dragged out of their offices and put on trial for sedition. This is supposed to be a government by and for the people – not World Economic Forum, Bill Gates, and politicians lining their pockets to create concentration camps to reduce CO2 and the population.

The Democrats are protecting this consortium and not the people!

Why BigTech are State Actors & Violate our Civil Rights


Armstrong Economics Blog/BigTech Re-Posted May 27, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

As many know, I lived in London years ago. At the upper end of Hyde Park by Marble Arch, there is Speakers’ Corner. That is where anyone could stand up and talk about anything that they wanted. You were free to listen or just walk away. There would often be a crowd, and that was not an indication that they agreed. It simply meant that the topic was curious, worth listening to or just entertaining crazy talk.

Speakers’ Corner even shows up on Google Maps, showing that this is indeed a landmark. What is important about this is that Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, especially those who claim to be public forums, also claim they have the right to censor what you say or even think. Section 230 only gave them immunity from suit because someone posted something another did not like. In that context, it was a reasonable grant of immunity. It would be like suing the city of London because someone at Speakers’ Corner said something that offended you.

You cannot be a public forum by deleting people and canceling anyone you do not like. Speakers’ Corner in London is what these forums were supposed to be. If someone is a Nazi and hates Jews, so be it. They have a right to say that just as the rest of us have the right to shake our heads and walk away as in Hyde Park. It used to be an easy world. If someone was talking to themselves walking down the street, we just looked at them as being strange. We didn’t run to the police screaming we were offended by what the crazy person said. Today, people are walking down the street and talking perhaps to themselves, but then again, maybe they have an earpiece for a phone. Life has become much more complicated. Now it seems the crazy people are in charge of the forums in BigTech and they are saying we no longer have the right to free speech.

Facebook whistleblowers have leaked documents detailing the effort to censor vax concerns on a global scale secretly. None of this is legal for Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube all have connections to the left side of government and that means that they are acting in violation of the Constitution under the pretense of being private when in fact they are acting as agents of the state. This needs to go to trial and the jury will decide if these people are state actors. If so, then they are violating every principle of the Constitution.

The removal of Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier from the U.S. Space Force this month after he publicly stated his opposition to Marxism and Critical Race Theory is part of a very dangerous new wave of censorship that is transforming the United States into East Germany under the Communists. Speakers’ Corner was the very core of a free society which once stood in contrast to Communism and authoritarian forms of government. This is precisely what these people are resurrecting — the worst of human history.