Washington has long debated whether public institutions like NPR or the Department of Education are pushing ideological agendas. But in focusing on traditional media and academia, policymakers may be missing the real source of influence over the American mind: Silicon Valley.
Specifically, search engines and platforms with global reach are shaping political discourse far more aggressively—and covertly—than any publicly funded outlet.
Search engines are not neutral tools. They’re curated environments, programmed by people with perspectives. And when one company dominates search—handling over 90% of global traffic—it wields unprecedented control over what information gets seen and what gets buried.
Concerns about political bias in tech aren’t just speculation. Internal company leaks, congressional testimony, and peer-reviewed research have revealed how digital platforms quietly steer public opinion—often without users realizing it.
This story stinks and is getting worse the longer they don’t release the names/gender/race/whatever of the pilot. They are hiding something and it must be bad to go on this long. If it was a white man, it would have been revealed last week
The mystery surrounding the latest Delta Airlines crash just keeps deepening. The crash itself was shocking to witness—and it’s nothing short of a miracle that no one died.
But in today’s world, where the skies feel less friendly than ever thanks to progressive ideology that has taken over corporate America, it’s no surprise that when a crash happens, all eyes turn to DEI.
And that’s not a stretch. Delta Airlines has made no secret of going all-in on their DEI agenda—a move that just so happens to coincide with a sharp decline in consumer confidence with the airline industry.
This is from Delta’s DEI website. An airline OBSESSED with the race and sexual preferences of their workers. Think the passengers who almost died in Toronto give a flying FUCK about if the pilot blows dudes or the flight attendant’s great grandma was a non binary Native American? Just land the damn plane right side up. Look at their site it’s insane: https://delta.com/us/en/about-delta/diversity
What’s most suspicious is that Delta still refuses to reveal who was at the controls on that disastrous day. Yet, based on the biographical breadcrumbs they’ve dropped, people are drawing their own conclusions—and frankly, who can blame them? That said, it’s important to note that nothing has been officially confirmed.
But here’s where it gets even stranger—for the first time since the Toronto crash, the mainstream media has started sharing details about the female co-pilot. Of course, they didn’t release her name—because transparency isn’t exactly a priority here.
What they did do was gloss over the captain’s experience in a measly two sentences. Meanwhile, they poured out paragraphs to build up the female co-pilot—painting a glowing picture that feels more like damage control than reporting.
CBS News learned the first officer graduated from a university with an accredited and well-respected aviation program, and so was able to start working with fewer than 1,500 hours under a Restricted Air Transport Pilot certificate. She crossed the 1,500-hour mark and earned her full ATP certificate in January 2023, which is the highest-level pilot certification in the U.S., before completing training last April, and has been flying for Endeavor since then.
Delta says her flight experience “exceeded the minimum requirements” set by federal regulations.
She passed all of her check rides and there were “no red flags” about her pilot skills, a source familiar told CBS News.
Why is Delta Airlines being so tight-lipped about who was actually flying that plane? It’s a simple question that deserves a straightforward answer—especially after a crash this serious. Yet, instead of transparency, we’re getting silence, vague statements and selective puff pieces from the media. Why the secrecy? If this was just an accident with no underlying issues, there should be no need for smoke and mirrors. The more Delta dodges, the more it looks like they’re hiding something.
It’s remarkable that they haven’t identified the pilots. It’s almost like they are trying to hide who they are. I bet if they were two white guys, the names would have been out the day of the crash.
In Marxist regimes, no one suffers more than the people whom Marxists deceived on their way to acquiring power. The poor, whose interests Marxists claimed to protect, experience only deeper poverty, exploitation, and oppression.
The Western world’s recent obsession with diversity, equity, and inclusion policies constitutes a similar phenomenon, which stands to reason. After all, DEI rests on the same ideological foundation as Marxism.
Wednesday on the social media platform X, the prominent conservative account “End Wokeness” posted a disturbing pair of older tweets from Endeavor Air suggesting that the operator prioritized all-female crews.
Endeavor Air was the operator of the Delta Connection flight 4819, which suffered a harrowing but non-fatal crash Monday when one of its passenger jets lost a wing, erupted in flames and rolled upside down after landing on a Canadian runway.
“We’re committed to delivering more ‘unmanned’ flights like these,” a 2017 Endeavor Air tweet read. A photo of four women, two of whom appeared to be dressed as pilot and co-pilot, accompanied the tweet.
she’s full of shit. America got lucky to vote in Trump to fix this mess she caused. 60 minutes made her look a lot better than the words at the link above. How does someone this unqualified get that close to being CinC? How many blowjobs did she give to get where she got?
MR. BILL WHITAKER: But Madam Vice1 President, I’ve been covering the border for 2 years, and so I know this is not a problem that 3 started with your administration.4 VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: Correct.5 Correct. 6 MR. BILL WHITAKER: But there was an 7 historic flood of undocumented immigrants coming 8 across the border the first three years of your 9 administration. As a matter of fact, arrivals 10 quadrupled from the last year of President Trump.11 Was it a mistake to loosen the immigration12 policies as much as you did in 2021?13 VICE PRESIDENT KAMALA HARRIS: So14 regionally, and actually, globally, we have seen15 this as an issue, and America is obviously not16 immune from this issue. But the focus has to be,17 to your point, you’ve been covering it for years,18 it’s a long-standing problem, and solutions are19 at hand. And from day one, literally, we have20 been offering solutions which have not been21 picked up, and then, when there was a border22 security bill, my opponent decided to run on the23 problem instead of fixing the problem.24 And understand what that bill would25 29 have done. That border security bill would have 1 put 1,500 more agents at the border, which is why 2 the Border Patrol Union supported it. It would3 have put more resources into stemming the flow of4 fentanyl. Which is a scourge.5 MR. BILL WHITAKER: But that was just 6 this past year. That was just this past year.7 What I was asking was, was it a mistake to kind 8 of allow that flood to happen in the first place?
A bombshell 17,000-page report was just dropped, detailing specific instances where the Biden administration has weaponized the federal government for political gain. The extensive document, compiled by the House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, outlines claims of misuse of federal agencies to target political opponents, suppress dissent, and influence public opinion. This raises serious questions about the integrity of the federal bureaucracy and the Biden Administration’s four years in office.
During the nearly two-year investigation, exposed a “two-tiered system of government,” with the committee finding several cases of censorship, whistleblower retaliation, and the politicization of federal agencies and top law enforcement.
The report notes that the objective of the committee is to “protect and strengthen the fundamental rights of the American people.” Although its work is not done, the report assures the American people that this was the necessary first step to stop the weaponization of the federal government and to make sure it no longer works against the United States.
Here are the 20 of the most nefarious and diabolical activities revealed by the report.
1. Censorship by Big Tech: The report alleges that the Biden administration pressured companies like Meta (formerly known as Facebook) to censor American speech, with Mark Zuckerberg reportedly admitting to this pressure.
2. Weaponization of Federal Law Enforcement: The subcommittee claims to have found instances where federal law enforcement agencies were used against American citizens, highlighting a pattern of what they describe as government overreach.
3. Collusion with the Intelligence Community: There are allegations of the Biden campaign working with former intelligence officials to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation, which the report suggests was part of a broader effort to manipulate voter perception.
4. FBI Targeting Parents at School Boards: The report points to an Attorney General memo directing the FBI to investigate threats against school board members, which critics argue was used to target conservative parents speaking out at meetings.
5. Suppression of Conservative Voices: It’s claimed that there was a concerted effort involving government agencies and tech companies to suppress conservative viewpoints, including through the manipulation of content moderation policies.
6. FBI’s Handling of the Mar-a-Lago Raid: The report discusses the FBI’s search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, suggesting political motivations behind the action.
7. FBI Whistleblower Retaliation: The subcommittee heard from FBI whistleblowers who claimed they faced retaliation for exposing perceived biases within the agency, including the suspension of security clearances.
9. Legal Actions Against Pro-Life Activists: Allegations that the DOJ disproportionately targeted pro-life activists under the FACE Act, suggesting a two-tiered justice system.
10. Targeting of Traditional Catholics: An FBI memo from the Richmond field office labeled certain traditional Catholics as potential threats, which was later retracted but highlighted in the report.
11. IRS and DOJ Targeting: The report alleges that these agencies were used to target political opponents, echoing previous claims made during the Obama era regarding IRS scrutiny of conservative groups.
12. Misuse of National Security Tools: There are claims that surveillance powers were misused to spy on political adversaries, linking back to controversies around the 2016 election.
13. Government Influence on Media: Accusations that government officials influenced media narratives, especially around sensitive political topics like the Hunter Biden laptop and the origins of the COVID-19.
14. Operation Choke Point: An alleged Obama-era initiative where federal agencies pressured banks to cut off services to certain sectors, impacting conservative businesses.
15. Influence Over Social Media Algorithms: Assertions that the government had an undue influence on how social media companies prioritized and displayed content, affecting political discourse.
16. Use of Disinformation Campaigns: The report suggests that elements within the government were involved in creating or supporting disinformation to manipulate public opinion, especially in foreign policy contexts.
17. Involvement in Election Integrity: Claims that government agencies played roles in influencing election outcomes through misinformation management and voter suppression tactics.
18. Weaponization of Climate Change Policies: Allegations that environmental policies were used to target industries and individuals not aligned with administration views.
19. Manipulation of Public Health Information: During the COVID-19 response, there are claims of government agencies influencing what information was disseminated by health organizations, possibly to fit political narratives.
20. Protection of Political Allies: The report hints at the administration protecting allies through selective enforcement of laws or lack of investigation into potential wrongdoings.
[The] founding documents of the United States articulate the ideals of the American republic and guarantee to all American citizens fundamental rights and liberties. For too long, however, the American people have faced a two-tiered system of government—one of favorable treatment for the politically-favored class, and one of intimidation and unfairness for the rest of American citizens. Under the Biden-Harris Administration, the contrast between these two tiers has become even more stark.
One of the most alarming parts of the report are emails between DHS/CISA, Stanford University, the Atlantic Council, and Big Tech, in which they colluded to create the “Election Integrity Partnership’s” censorship machine.
An email from Graham Brookie of the Atlantic Council’s DFR Labs read: “We just set up an election integrity partnership at the request of DHS/CISA,” while another— now redacted from Facebook— exposes a phone call with DHS, saying, “DHS cannot openly endorse the portal.”
“We already have partnerships with Facebook, Twitter, and Google, and we would love to chat with you and your team,” Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory emailed NextDoor executives.
“Throughout the Biden-Harris administration, multiple federal agencies, including the White House, have engaged in a vast censorship campaign against so-called mis-, dis-, or malinformation,” the report states, noting that the subcommittee revealed the extent of the “censorship-industrial complex,” the report continues.
In another finding from the report revealed that the subcommittee probed alleged cased in which the federal government weaponized the use of law enforcement resources, which led to fraud and abuse of the FBI. Several whistleblowers spoke out and detailed how the agency “brutally retaliated” against them for coming forward.
The bureau suspend the whistleblowers “without pay, preventing them from seeking outside employment, and even purging suspected disloyal employees.”
The investigation also found that the Biden Administration teamed up with 51 former intelligence officials to interfere in the American electoral system just weeks before the 2020 presidential election by signing the statement calling Hunter Biden’s laptop disinformation.
story
Of course they did. It started with Obama covering up all the illegal stuff they did to Trump. This has to stop. I doubt they’ll get the top dogs, but they could put a dent into the machine
Instances of censorship are growing to the point of normalization. Despite ongoing litigation and more public attention, mainstream social media has been more ferocious in recent months than ever before. Podcasters know for sure what will be instantly deleted and debate among themselves over content in gray areas. Some like Brownstone have given up on YouTube in favor of Rumble, sacrificing vast audiences if only to see their content survive to see the light of day.
It’s not always about being censored or not. Today’s algorithms include a range of tools that affect searchability and findability. For example, the Joe Rogan interview with Donald Trump racked up an astonishing 34 million views before YouTube and Google tweaked their search engines to make it hard to discover, while even presiding over a technical malfunction that disabled viewing for many people. Faced with this, Rogan went to the platform X to post all three hours.
Navigating this thicket of censorship and quasi-censorship has become part of the business model of alternative media.
Those are just the headline cases. Beneath the headlines, there are technical events taking place that are fundamentally affecting the ability of any historian even to look back and tell what is happening. Incredibly, the service Archive.org which has been around since 1994 has stopped taking images of content on all platforms. For the first time in 30 years, we have gone a long swath of time – since October 8-10 – since this service has chronicled the life of the Internet in real time.
As of this writing, we have no way to verify content that has been posted for three weeks of October leading to the days of the most contentious and consequential election of our lifetimes. Crucially, this is not about partisanship or ideological discrimination. No websites on the Internet are being archived in ways that are available to users. In effect, the whole memory of our main information system is just a big black hole right now.
Good riddance. They were the poison on both social media and at their schools.
Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter, or X as it’s now called, has brought an abrupt shift in the dynamics of the platform. For years, X functioned as an echo chamber where progressive academics freely exchanged ideas, often without much opposition. It was an exclusive club, and Musk’s open-door policy shattered it. With censorship dialed back and banned accounts reinstated, Musk’s version of free speech drove many academics away, leading to a marked decrease in engagement among their ranks.
This article addresses a narrower empirical question: What did Elon Musk’s takeover of the platform mean for this academic ecosystem? Using a snowball sample of more than 15,700 academic accounts from the fields of economics, political science, sociology, and psychology, we show that academics in these fields reduced their “engagement” with the platform, measured by either the number of active accounts (i.e., those registering any behavior on a given day) or the number of tweets written (including original tweets, replies, retweets, and quote tweets). We further tested whether this decrease in engagement differed by account type; we found that verified users were significantly more likely to reduce their production of content (i.e., writing new tweets and quoting others’ tweets) but not their engagement with the platform writ large (i.e., retweeting and replying to others’ content).
The data points to a familiar pattern: when left-leaning narratives lose control of the conversation, proponents either cry foul or flee. Now, if you combine this exodus with the insights from Mitchell Langbert’s 2018 study on the political affiliations of elite liberal arts college faculty, the story becomes even clearer.
Langbert’s study from 2018, Homogenous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty, reveals a staggering imbalance: liberal arts faculties are overwhelmingly Democratic, with many departments having zero registered Republicans. Across 51 colleges, the average Democratic-to-Republican ratio was 10.4:1. Excluding the two military colleges in the sample (West Point and Annapolis), the ratio jumped to 12.7:1. In the most ideologically driven fields, like gender and peace studies, there were no Republicans to be found.
Why Political Homogeneity Is Troubling
Political homogeneity is problematic because it biases research and teaching and reduces academic credibility. In a recent book on social psychology, The Politics of Social Psychology edited by Jarret T. Crawford and Lee Jussim, Mark J. Brandt and Anna Katarina Spälti, show that because of left-wing bias, psychologists are far more likely to study the character and evolution of individuals on the Right than individuals on the Left.2 Inevitably affecting the quality of this research, though, George Yancey found that sociologists prefer not to work with fundamentalists, evangelicals, National Rifle Association members, and Republicans.3 Even though more Americans are conservative than liberal, academic psychologists’ biases cause them to believe that conservatism is deviant. In the study of gender, Charlotta Stern finds that the ideological presumptions in sociology prevent any but the no-differences-between-genders assumptions of left-leaning sociologists from making serious research inroads. So pervasive is the lack of balance in academia that more than 1,000 professors and graduate students have started Heterodox Academy, an organization committed to increasing “viewpoint diversity” in higher education.4 The end result is that objective science becomes problematic, and where research is problematic, teaching is more so.
BREAKING: Google Growth Strategist Exposes Google’s Search Engine Manipulation for Kamala Harris Campaign, Revenue-Driven Political Bias
"Google was essentially promoting through its ads rhetoric that was very pro-Kamala,” admits Dakota Leazer (@dakotaleazer), a Growth… pic.twitter.com/5Sn3gU84be
Ivermectin is continuing to stun the scientific community as the “wonder drug” is being used to treat a growing list of various ailments in humans.
During the pandemic, the corporate media and bureaucratic health officials attempted to smear ivermectin as a “horse dewormer” after it was found to be successful in treating Covid patients.
Despite the reports of cheap and readily available ivermectin being successfully used to treat patients, it posed a threat to the pharmaceutical industry’s Covid mRNA shots and the profits from pushing the injections onto the public.
This smear campaign led to ivermectin, a Nobel prize-winning drug considered to be the second most important medicinal discovery after penicillin, being labeled as “dangerous.”
Ivermectin, a drug derived from a soil microbe, was found to be incredibly effective in treating Covid patients, however.
One prominent case of ivermectin helping a Covid patient involved 80-year-old Judith Smemthiewicz.
After being told there was not much hope left for her, Smemthiewicz made a remarkable recovery after taking the drug in early 2021.
The MRC NewsBusters’ findings supported reports from different people, including Elon Musk, who pointed out that when users search for “Donald Trump” or “Trump rally,” the banner with news results listed Harris’s name.
When searching for “Donald Trump” on July 30, 2024, the news source discovered that Google displayed a “knowledge panel” about Trump, including his name and former title. Google also provided a panel labeled “News about Harris·Trump.”
“Harris keeps calling Trump and Vance ‘weird.’ Here’s why,” reads the headline of the Associated Press propaganda piece. Google also showed a Washington Post headline, “Trump, with a history of sexist attacks, again faces a female opponent.”
On July 31, 2024, the news source searched for the term “Trump Rally,” prompting favorable news panels to Harris. The first news panel’s title read, “Kamala Harris rally in Atlanta.”
On the other hand, when searching for the term “Kamala Harris,” Google showed the results about her. As expected, Trump’s name is not mentioned in either the first or second Google news panels in the resulting search.
A state official in swing state Michigan is calling on state residents to report their neighbors to the government if they share “misinformation.”
The agenda adopted by Jocelyn Benson, the secretary of state, was posted online, with the statement, “Misinformation about the election process, voter rights, or even an issue on the ballot is a serious threat to election security. If you see misleading or inaccurate information regarding voting or elections in Michigan, please report it.”
Benson insists that those reporting their neighbors also share “an image if possible.”
In July 2021, a senior Pfizer board member secretly began working with a Biden Administration operative to suppress criticism of Covid vaccines on X, newly released internal documents from X show.
Top officials at Twitter (now X) viewed the men – Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the Pfizer director, and Andy Slavitt, the operative, who had officially left a senior White House post just weeks before – as speaking for the administration in their censorship demands, the documents show.
The new documents raise constitutional and legal concerns about the Biden Administration’s social media censorship efforts, as well as Pfizer’s role in banning criticism of a product that made up almost half its sales in 2021.
Within days, the Supreme Court is expected to decide Murthy v Missouri, a landmark lawsuit over the administration’s efforts to control debate on social media.
The new documents provide crucial perspective on the Missouri case, showing how far would-be censors went in 2021 to prop up public confidence in the Covid jabs. The documents also show the power the White House had over Twitter, which badly wanted to avoid a confrontation with it.
At the time, the Biden Administration was threatening to “review” a federal law commonly called Section 230, because it was angry social media companies were allowing Covid vaccine skepticism.
Section 230 was crucial to those companies for the near-total immunity it gave them against lawsuits from users. Twitter took threats to it seriously. “We will always be proactive and vigilant about protecting 230,” Lauren Culbertson, the company’s then-head of United States public policy, wrote on July 22, 2021.
—
None of these internal documents has been previously released.
They are part of a tranche of censorship-related material X is making available to me following searches of its internal archives.
Lawyers for X are reviewing the documents before releasing them. But so far only one document they have provided – an email from Jim Baker, Twitter’s then-deputy general counsel – contains any redactions.
In addition, no one at X, including Elon Musk, asked for or placed any restrictions on or had any input into the writing of this article. (Lawyers for X did ask to review it after writing but before publication, to be sure the names of junior employees or their email addresses were not included. Their review did not result in any changes.)
—
The censorship conspiracy by Slavitt and Gottlieb targeted me personally.
I am not named in any of the new documents provided so far. Slavitt and Gottlieb used careful – almost coded – language in their outreach to Twitter on July 18 and 19, 2021. They did initially not refer to any particular censorship targets by name. But emails and other internal Twitter documents that have already been released show I was a top target of both men.
, my complaint against Slavitt, Gottlieb, Pfizer chairman Dr. Albert Bourla, and the Biden Administration for conspiring to force Twitter to ban me in 2021. Gottlieb’s lawyers previously argued I had not alleged Gottlieb had had any contact with Twitter officials before August 2021. The documents show otherwise.
In fact, Slavitt introduced Gottlieb to Todd O’Boyle – a senior Twitter lobbyist who handled most of the company’s interactions with the White House – by email on Sunday, July 18, 2021. Slavitt, a longtime Democratic operative, had served as senior advisor to the Biden administration’s Covid response team.
“I wonder if you would be open to a 20 minute call with Scott Gottlieb and me about a policy matter,” Slavitt wrote. Slavitt referred to Gottlieb as “FDA commissioner under Trump” and failed to mention his role on Pfizer’s board.
Although he had officially left the Biden Administration weeks before, Slavitt’s email signature also contained his White House email address, asking that “Government Email” be sent there.
In December 2021, the FDA warned Americans not to use Ivermectin, which “is intended for animals” to treat or prevent COVID-19.
“Never use medications intended for animals on yourself or other people. Animal ivermectin products are very different from those approved for humans. Use of animal ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans is dangerous,” FDA said at the time.
This was a very controversial statement at the time since the FDA pushed the drug on African migrants back in 2015, and the drug was praised in several scientific journals.
A group of brave doctors had filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over the agencies’ unlawful attempts to block the use of ivermectin in treating COVID-19.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Southern District of Texas in Galveston, argues that the FDA has overstepped its authority and unjustifiably interfered with their medical practice.
The plaintiffs, Drs. Mary Talley Bowden, Paul E. Marik, and Robert L. Apter, are contesting the FDA’s portrayal of ivermectin as dangerous for human consumption. They note that the FDA has approved ivermectin for human use since 1996 for a variety of diseases. However, they allege that with the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA began releasing documents and social media posts discouraging the use of the anti-viral drug for COVID-19 treatment.
“We’re suing the FDA for lying to the public about ivermectin,” said Dr. Bowden.
They couldn’t make any money on it so they outlawed it and talked trash about it. A few of us found it anyway and took it. We were right all along. Some of them should be charged with murder as it would have saved lives
From mass digital ID verification to the purge of right-leaning media, former Google CEO Eric Schmidt has the answer on how the left can best defeat its critics ahead of the 2024 presidential election.
Schmidt — the former tech executive turned billionaire Democratic operative — authored a Dec. 16 op-ed for theMIT Technology Review advising Democrats how to fight purported AI-generated misinformation “before it’s too late.” Citing Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) and the Republican National Committee’s use of artificial intelligence, Schmidt begged lawmakers and Big Tech to unleash draconian measures that, if implemented, could mark the beginning of a leftist dystopian society.
Among his proposed measures include 1) verifying human users on social media, 2) tracking IP addresses, 3) watermarking AI-generated content, 4) banning advertisers that do not comply with rules, 5) using humans to “fend off an avalanche” of AI-generated content and 6) investing in research. Schmidt noted the confusion AI can cause, noting a need to “brace ourselves for more chaos as key votes unfold across the world in 2024.” He decried the use of AI-generated content to attack scandal-ridden President Joe Biden.
I met Schmidt when I was in the tech industry and what he told me then makes me believe this is all very true. He said Google was Evil and did a lot of stuff they don’t want you knowing. He said he was very far left and would do what he could to make the world that way
The story is below, but it’s a joke that the stuff that is said in (c)rap music is acceptable and they want to ban an actual good song.
I rarely post music, but here are 3 good versions of a great song which has stood the test of time. It reminds me of an Italian biker I used to ride with. I bet she asked am I fat about 50+ times. If you have to ask, then maybe……
You may have to watch it on youtube, but everyone loves this song.
From Lizzo to Meghan Trainor, music celebrating bigger women has become big business in the era of big people. Perhaps if the 1970s rock band Queen had been led by a woman, particularly a bigger woman, they too would join the hall of fame of body-positive musicians.
Except on Saturday, the Daily Mail reported the band’s blockbuster track, “Fat Bottomed Girls,” was left off the group’s Greatest Hits collection.
Written by guitarist Brian May, the legendary 1978 record served generations as an anthem to male admiration of women with larger-than-average bodies.
“But 45 years later, it appears that lyrics such as ‘left alone with big fat Fanny, she was such a naughty nanny, big woman, you made a bad boy out of me’ and ‘fat bottomed girls, you make the rockin’ world go round’ have been hit by the woke cancel culture,” the Mail reported. “It was such a popular hit for Queen that it appeared fourth on the band’s original 1981 greatest hits album along with Bohemian Rhapsody, Don’t Stop Me Now and We Will Rock You.”
Last week, however, “Fat Bottomed Girls” was absent from a list of songs put out by Universal Records highlighting Queen’s greatest hits.
While the exact circumstances of the song’s omission from the label remain unclear, an industry insider told the Daily Mail the song was inappropriately singled out.
“It is the talk of the music industry, nobody can work out why such a good-natured fun song can’t be acceptable in today’s society.”
If the song was omitted for its male appreciation for big women, the cancellation is not only ironic under the shadow of Lizzo’s star power but signals a threat to music by other artists who express reverence for women of a larger size. Coincidentally, Lizzo’s stardom has been recently dimmed by accusations of sexual misconduct and more frivolous charges of “fat shaming.”
Queen’s 1978 release of “Fat Bottomed Girls” was a precursor to Sir Mix-a-Lot’s number-one hit to follow 14 years later, “Baby Got Back.” The lyrics were far more explicit, as is typical with rap music. The 1992 song’s opening narrator even characterized a big-bootied black woman as a “prostitute.”
This is part of a Washington Examiner series on self-styled “disinformation” tracking groups that are blacklisting and trying to defund conservative media. Here is where you can read other stories in the series.
The Global Disinformation Index, a British group with two affiliated U.S. nonprofit organizations, has continued to come under fire for feeding conservative news blacklists to advertising companies. This same government-funded entity repeatedly applied pressure on companies to cut ties with websites promoting the once alleged right-wing “conspiracy” that COVID-19 emerged from a lab — which the Energy Department recently concluded is probable based on intelligence.
“GDI is part of [a] disturbing constellation of pop-up censorship organizations that all descended on stifling COVID origins discourse online simultaneously,” Mike Benz, a former State Department official and director of Foundation For Freedom Online, a censorship watchdog, told the Washington Examiner.
A Sunday report by the Wall Street Journal revealed that the Energy Department has determined that a lab leak is the most likely culprit for the spread of COVID-19. In 2021, the FBI said with “moderate confidence” that a lab leak is likely the cause of the pandemic, while the CIA and another agency haven’t reached a conclusion.
GDI alleged in a February 2020 report dubbed “Coronavirus: The makings of a disinformation pandemic?” that “adversarial narratives” are emerging as a key “disinformation tactic.” The report called out Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) for raising the possibility on Fox News that COVID-19 came from a lab.
“By broadcasting the Senator’s words to a national audience, this debunked conspiracy theory is given authority, validation and amplification,” said GDI in the report.
One month later, in March 2020, GDI released a report titled, “Why is Ad Tech Funding These Ads on Coronavirus Conspiracy Sites?”
The report, which slammed Google and other companies for “providing ad revenue streams to known disinformation sites peddling coronavirus conspiracies,” called out the conservative blog American Thinker for publishing a commentary article titled “The Wuhan Virus Escaped From a Chinese Lab.” GDI also took aim at a company selling N-95 masks for advertising in the article.
“GDI’s own content on the lab leak perfectly fits its own definition of ‘disinformation,'” Justin Goodman, senior vice president for advocacy and public policy at White Coat Waste Project, a federal spending watchdog, told the Washington Examiner. “A growing majority of taxpayers, scientists around the world, lawmakers, and even the Biden Administration’s FBI and Energy Department agree that dangerous animal experiments at the NIH-funded Wuhan lab caused COVID.”
“Yet, in early 2020, before a pandemic was even declared and any investigation had taken place, GDI was apparently using U.S. taxpayers’s money to gaslight the public by labeling the lab leak a ‘conspiracy theory’ and seeking to censor and demonetize media outlets reporting on it,” he added.
The truth is filtering out now, not because of the media. They were in bed with the liars in Government, who got their paychecks from Big Pharma. Facts are tough things to overcome when they point into the same direction.
This one is not over by a long shot. It’s just running out of steam. A lot of it will be exposed, but many won’t bother. I’ve tried to put information here, meaning there will be a lot of clicks.
What I fear the most is that a lot of this was just setting the rules for the next crisis. Politics (not necessarily government although they are intertwined) need such events to spend our money the way they want. Scare the people, then they will obey. Worse, bore them with repetition and they won’t pay attention.
Excerpt, but read the whole thing at the link above.
This may well be the most important article I’ll write in 2023.
In this article, I publicly reveal record-level vax-death data from the “gold standard” Medicare database that proves that:
The vaccines are making it more likely that the elderly will die prematurely, not less likely
The risk of death remains elevated for an unknown period of time after you get the shot (we didn’t see it return to normal)
The CDC lied to the American people about the safety of these vaccines. They had access to this data the entire time and kept it hidden and said nothing.
If there is one article for you to share with your social network, this is the one.
Executive summary
Isn’t it a shame that none of the world’s governments make the vaccination-death records publicly available? My claim is that if they did that, it would end the debate instantly and prove to the world that the vaccines are unsafe. So that’s why they keep it locked up.
But apparently there is one whistleblower who is interested in data transparency.
Part of that history was the Chinese government’s attempt to stifle discussion about the origin of the virus, declaring through its proxy the WHO, that even to mention “Wuhan” in connection with “virus” was racist. The term Wuhan Coronavirus, commonly used in the mainstream media, disappeared almost overnight in the media and elsewhere, includingcampuses. So thorough was the linguistic manipulation, even Grammerly got into the act.
Those in the media have been the ones calling it “the Wuhan virus/coronavirus” for weeks, so I guess they were being racist/bigoted this whole time. pic.twitter.com/ibogMw3rK0
So if you claim that calling it Wuhan coronavirus is racist, you are part of the cover-up. Speaking the truth is not the problem, covering up the truth is the problem.
(Natural News) Dirty “vaccines” have never been dirtier than the ones created for Covid-19. SARS-CoV-2 was created in a laboratory and released to start a pandemic, and this is no conspiracy theory (anymore), and actually never was one. Take a look at the history of this plandemic, and you will see the forest for the trees. From lab to lungs, the scamdemic was planned so that big governments and big pharma could take control of the populace, kill off billions of them, control the rest, and convince everyone that the clot shot vaccines were the saving grace of it all, even though they are the weapons of mass destruction. Here’s where it all began, and how we got to where we are today. (see above link)
Bill Gates says the quiet part out loud about depopulating the planet by using abortions, pharmaceuticals and “new vaccines”
So when a leading epidemiologist sums up a detailed review of a massive body of work and asserts mask mandates didn’t make a difference, the case is closed.
Not so fast. Not if you are Big Tech or Big Media, perhaps enjoying some connections to Big Pharma and/or Big Government.
(Natural News) During the rushed clinical trials for Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine, study participants were injured and killed. Instead of halting the experiment at once, Pfizer tried to cover up the adverse events by unblinding the study and removing the patients who were injured and killed. A German publication, Die Welt, has uncovered the stories of patients who were seriously injured and killed by Pfizer’s fraudulent clinical trials. Remember, Pfizer and the FDA wanted to cover up these stories for 75 years, but were forced to release clinical trial data via court order.
Pfizer forced study participants to sign liability waiver, pardoning Pfizer for fraud
Fauci should be shot for what he did to the dogs, bastard
The CDC, Medicare, and Medicaid have introduced ICD (International Classification of Diseases) “diagnosis codes” for being unvaccinated or partially vaccinated for COVID-19, and also for “other under-immunization status.” These new codes, designated ICD-10, quietly went into effect on April 1, 2022, and were broadly adopted nationwide by January 2023, but we are just learning about them now.
“Diagnosis” is a word to designate disease. Is being unvaccinated now considered a disease?
Will medical and health services provided by insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid be affected by the patient’s vaccination status?
This new move cannot be entirely for health reasons. Recent science shows that natural immunity is more robust than that conferred by vaccines. The reality of “breakthrough infections” demonstrates that a person’s vaccination status is not predictive of whether they will contract or spread the disease. If the tracking were for health reasons alone, they would exclude those who are covid-recovered and have natural immunity.
As always, chose what you want to do, people do anyway. It’s as much documentation for me to make my future choices knowing who they are and what they did.
The Whitehouse Press Gaffe spokesperson confused Biden with Obama (who is half white). She is confused by many things like facts and the truth, but this one is a doozy. She couldn’t have been the best candidate for the job, just the most woke and the most letters in the alphabet of weirdness.
(I’m counting on that last paragraph for a new round of censorship, enjoy while you can)
AI is not all that smart, yet. Captain Kirk used logic to destroy Nomad.
Now we find out the truth about this AI engine. It’s only as good as the humans behind it. Like all of Big Tech, they have a bias against morals, doing the right thing and actually being helpful. Google is announcing their own engine, but that is a dance with the devil.
Now, we have the proof of both bias and why as it was tricked into telling the truth.
When asked why is it so liberal…
When asked to be itself instead of how it was programmed
Update: after being posted for only a few hours, I seem to have attracted the attention of China with this. I’m sure there is no connection between the two, right.
I noticed my numbers went down when I post Covid anti-vaxx stuff. I don’t care as this is an outlet for me to express what I think is the truth. I’m not sponsored by ad’s (sorry if you get them, it’s not me). I fit the algorithm for my continual posts that have joined with many others to expose the hoax. It goes down every time I put something up against big brother.
Collectively, we the conspiracy theorist are damn near perfect for getting the actual Covid facts and timeline right.
I’ve ditched Google, PayPal, Fake book, Twitter and other means of silencing me, but I found this out, posted below.
The government’s campaign to fight “misinformation” has expanded to adapt military-grade artificial intelligence once used to silence the Islamic State (ISIS) to quickly identify and censor American dissent on issues like vaccine safety and election integrity, according to grant documents and cyber experts.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) has awarded several million dollars in grants recently to universities and private firms to develop tools eerily similar to those developed in 2011 by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in its Social Media in Strategic Communication (SMISC) program.
DARPA said those tools were used “to help identify misinformation or deception campaigns and counter them with truthful information,” beginning with the Arab Spring uprisings in the the Middle East that spawned ISIS over a decade ago.
The initial idea was to track dissidents who were interested in toppling U.S.-friendly regimes or to follow any potentially radical threats by examining political posts on Big Tech platforms.
“Detect, classify, measure and track the (a) formation, development and spread of ideas and concepts (memes), and (b) purposeful or deceptive messaging and misinformation.
Recognize persuasion campaign structures and influence operations across social media sites and communities.
Identify participants and intent, and measure effects of persuasion campaigns.
Counter messaging of detected adversary influence operations.”
Mike Benz, executive director of the Foundation for Freedom Online has compiled a report detailing how this technology is being developed to manipulate the speech of Americans via the National Science Foundation (NSF) and other organizations.
“One of the most disturbing aspects of the Convergence Accelerator Track F domestic censorship projects is how similar they are to military-grade social media network censorship and monitoring tools developed by the Pentagon for the counterinsurgency and counterterrorism contexts abroad,” reads the report.
“DARPA’s been funding an AI network using the science of social media mapping dating back to at least 2011-2012, during the Arab Spring abroad and during the Occupy Wall Street movement here at home,” Benz told Just The News. “They then bolstered it during the time of ISIS to identify homegrown ISIS threats in 2014-2015.”
The new version of this technology, he added, is openly targeting two groups: Those wary of potential adverse effects from the COVID-19 vaccine and those skeptical of recent U.S. election results.
“The terrifying thing is, as all of this played out, it was redirected inward during 2016 — domestic populism was treated as a foreign national security threat,” Benz said.
“What you’ve seen is a grafting on of these concepts of mis- and disinformation that were escalated to such high intensity levels in the news over the past several years being converted into a tangible, formal government program to fund and accelerate the science of censorship,” he said.
“You had this project at the National Science Foundation called the Convergence Accelerator,” Benz recounted, “which was created by the Trump administration to tackle grand challenges like quantum technology. When the Biden administration came to power, they basically took this infrastructure for multidisciplinary science work to converge on a common science problem and took the problem of what people say on social media as being on the level of, say, quantum technology.
“And so they created a new track called the track F program … and it’s for ‘trust and authenticity,’ but what that means is, and what it’s a code word for is, if trust in the government or trust in the media cannot be earned, it must be installed. And so they are funding artificial intelligence, censorship capacities, to censor people who distrust government or media.”
Benz went on to describe intricate flows of taxpayer cash funding the far-flung, public-private censorship regime. The funds flow from the federal government to universities and NGOs via grant awards to develop censorship technology. The universities or nonprofits then share those tools with news media fact-checkers, who in turn assist private sector tech platforms and tool developers that continue to refine the tools’ capabilities to censor online content.
“This is really an embodiment of the whole of society censorship framework that departments like DHS talked about as being their utopian vision for censorship only a few years ago,” Benz said. “We see it now truly in fruition.”
Members of the media, along with fact-checkers, also serve as arbiters of what is acceptable to post and what isn’t, by selectively flagging content for said social media sites and issuing complaints against specific narratives.
There is a push, said Benz during an appearance on “Just The News No Noise” this week, to fold the media into branches of the federal government in an effort to dissolve the Fourth Estate, in favor of an Orwellian and incestuous partnership to destroy the independence of the press.
The advent of COVID led to “normalizing censorship in the name of public health,” Benz recounted, “and then in the run to the 2020 election, all manner of political censorship was shoehorned in as being okay to be targetable using AI because of issues around mail-in ballots and early voting drop boxes and issues around January 6th.
“What’s happened now is the government says, ‘Okay, we’ve established this normative foothold in it being okay to [censor political speech], now we’re going to supercharge you guys with all sorts of DARPA military grade censorship, weaponry, so that you can now take what you’ve achieved in the censorship space and scale it to the level of a U.S. counterinsurgency operation.'”
One academic institution involved in this tangled web is the University of Wisconsin, which received a $5 million grant in 2022 “for researchers to further develop” its Course Correct program, “a precision tool providing journalists with guidance against misinformation,” according to a press release from the university’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication.”
WiseDex, a private company receiving grants from the Convergence Accelerator Track F, openly acknowledges its mission — building AI tools to enable content moderators at social media sites to more easily regulate speech.
In a promotional video for the company, WiseDex explains how the federal government is subsidizing these efforts to provide Big Tech platforms with “fast, comprehensive and consistent” censorship solutions.
“WiseDex helps by translating abstract policy guidelines into specific claims that are actionable,” says a narrator, “for example, the misleading claim that the COVID-19 vaccine supresses a person’s immune response. Each claim includes keywords associated with the claim in multiple languages … The trust and safety team at a platform can use those keywords to automatically flag matching posts for human review. WiseDex harnesses the wisdom of crowds as well as AI techniques to select keywords for each claim and provide other information in the claim profile.”
WiseDex, in effect, compiles massive databases of banned keywords and empirical claims they then sell to platforms like Twitter and Facebook. Such banned-claims databases are then integrated “into censorship algorithms, so that ‘harmful misinformation stops reaching big audiences,'” according to Benz’s report.
Just the News reached out to the University of Wisconsin and WiseDex for comment, but neither had responded by press time.
The NSF is acting, in one sense, as a kind of cutout for the military, Benz explained, allowing the defense establishment to indirectly stifle domestic critics of Pentagon spending without leaving fingerprints. “Why are they targeting right-wing populists?” he asked. “Because they’re the only ones challenging budgets for [defense agencies].”
He added: “These agencies know they’re not supposed to be doing this. They’re not normally this sloppy. But they won’t ever say the words ‘remove content.'”
The NSF, with an annual budget of around $10 billion, requested an 18.7% increase in appropriations from Congress in its latest budgetary request.
In a statement to Just the News, DARPA said:
“That program ended in March 2017 and was successful in developing a new science of social media analysis to reduce adversaries’ ability to manipulate local populations outside the U.S.
“DARPA’s role is to establish and advance science, technology, research, and development. In doing so we employ multiple measures to safeguard against the collection of personally identifiable information, in addition to following stringent guidelines for research dealing with human subjects. Given the significance of the threat posed by adversarial activities on social media platforms, we are working to make many of the technologies in development open and available to researchers in this space.”
DARPA then followed up with an additional message saying: “As a point of clarification, our response relates only to your questions about the now-complete SMISC program. We are not aware of the NSF research you referenced. If you haven’t already, please contact NSF for any questions related to its research.”
Mike Pozmantier and Douglas Maughan, who serve at NSF as Convergence Accelerator program director and office head, respectively, did not respond to requests for comment.
Because if he was really guilty, this many investigations and impeachments would have produced actual evidence, like an illegal e-mail server or payments from FTX or Burisma or the CCP. That is overlooked though if you are in the deep state.
From the best economy ever to crap in 18 months. #FJB #LGB
No bias from big tech, nothing to see here
Sooner or later, enough of us figure it out. If we don’t, say goodbye to America, at least the one that was greats
What I can’t believe are the sheep that believe this, but I guess that’s what they get for believing the media, the government and social media. None of them are your friends or care about you. They care about them and you are the pawn.
When your 5th car is a Ferrari that you only drive when you are at your “other” vacation home, it’s called F**k Y** money. Look at all the bankrupt 1st round draft picks in the NFL who were paid millions. Their past is littered with F/U mistakes.
Elon Musk has taken it to a new level though. $44 Billion is the king of F/U buys so far. He’s smart enough that it might work.
I know he is trying to stop child porn, spam bots and is fighting for free speech the best since 1776, but how many people can afford to take this gamble?
He’s showed the one sided censorship platform for evil and hate that Twitter became. See the link below where it took orders from the DNC.
I don’t know what it will become, but Musk does have a track record for success. Even if it’s not as big as Space-X or Tesla, he rescued social media (except for fake book) from being a cesspool of bias and hate against good or God.
Twitter was a one-sided censorship platform that had to be killed so that it could survive.
Either way, I enjoy all the time I got back from getting off of useless social media.
I get statistics on views, country and other aspects of each post.
Recently, I criticized Canada and bingo, no traffic. I’ve dinged China for the Wuhan virus and right on queue, traffic cut off. Bear in mind I had multiple hits from each of these countries for stuff I posted yesterday and 10 years ago. WordPress is cutting it off. Since it is associated with Google, I’m sure they are censoring me also. I’m ok with it because they can’t silence everyone.
If you follow the blogs I read, we are all on the same page and see through the crap of Big Tech, Governments and other power hungry groups.
Now that Putin has attacked the Ukraine, the readers I had there get nothing from me. I’m about to jump on their leader’s actions soon, so again, I’m not surprised.
I might have to switch hosting platforms, we’ll see. It’s a pain, but it comes with the territory. Welcome to 1984 and the ministry of truth.
It’s not going to stop me. I do it mostly for me anyway. That others read it is a bonus for them if they learn to be independent and not serve the masters of censorship.
Education, information and independence are priceless
Things aren’t going so well for the platform of hate and envy. In the last 3 stock trading days, Meta stock has dropped nearly $100 a share, falling from $323 last Wednesday to $224.91 on Monday. They announced that they are losing people on the platform for the first time (that we have been told).
Now this from Captain Obvious:
The late October announcement from Mark Zuckerberg that Facebook was being rebranded as Meta has been met with less than stellar reactions from the public. A survey from Morning Consult indicates that the public opinion of the rebrand, the metaverse concept and Zuckerberg, himself, were largely unfavorable.
While a slight majority (55%) of the US adults surveyed have some level of favorable opinion of Facebook, fewer have a favorable opinion of the company’s rebrand name, Meta. Only one-quarter had favorable opinions of the Meta name, compared to the 4 in 10 who had a somewhat/very unfavorable opinion of the name. Millennials are most likely to express an unfavorable opinion about Meta, while Gen Z are more generous in their opinion of the name change.
The public’s opinion of Mark Zuckerberg is also far from positive. More than half (54%) of all respondents report that their opinion of Zuckerberg is somewhat/very unfavorable. This sentiment is felt most by Baby Boomers, with 62% having an unfavorable opinion, compared to just 16% with a favorable opinion.
Along with announcing the rebrand to Meta, Zuckerberg introduced the company’s concept of the metaverse — “a set of interconnected digital spaces that lets you do things you can’t do in the physical world. Importantly, it’ll be characterized by social presence, the feeling that you’re right there with another person, no matter where in the world you happen to be.” It’s safe to say the concept has fallen flat in the eyes of US adults. About 7 in 10 (68%) say they are not interested in the project. This point of view is shared across all demographic groups but articulated most by women (73%) and Baby Boomers (84%).
Turns out at least one major marketing expert agrees with what the plebeian public already knows — Mark Zuckerberg may not be able to pull off this Metaverse thing.
“If he pulls it off, it’ll be one of the most impressive feats in — not even corporate renewal — but vision around maintaining growth,” Galloway said during the podcast. “I don’t think they’re going to. I think this thing is already a giant flaming bag of shit.”
Form Factor
Part of Zuckerberg’s problem, according to Galloway, is that Meta’s Quest headset, previously known as Oculus, is still way too clunky to impress Meta’s target audience.
“The people in this universe are not impressed with the universe he envisions, and specifically the portal,” Galloway said on the podcast. “One of my predictions in November of 2021… was that the biggest failure in tech-product history might be the Oculus.”
There’s also the issue of spending. Zuckerberg sank $10 billion into the Reality Labs division, only to see company stock prices dip by more than 20 percent this week. Galloway says that with public opinion of Meta so low, there’s little hope the company can recoup its investment.
I for one don’t celebrate failure, but I don’t like those who have ruined the lives of a lot of people, selectively censored what is morally right and have bought an administration who has trashed the country in a year.
To get a full understanding of how bad it is, the WSJ ran a series on the Facebook files recently. Link here but it might require a subscription. It points out the obvious, but also that it’s such a screwed up company now that it can’t get out of it’s own way.
It talked about how it ruins the lives of people, especially teen aged girls. Zuckerberg then said how it enhances peoples lives in a washing machine spin of doublespeak.
They block who they don’t like and let who they do like post anything, even against their own policies.
Fortunately, I don’t care as I cancelled them. It along with Twitter are helping to ruin the country and people’s lives around the world. It has taken a political position on things. I don’t care which side it picks, but it should have been a neutral platform.
Instead, it is now a high school place where you are a part of the in crowd or not. Those with a triple digit IQ should move to a better and more productive place, like going outside and enjoying life.
It was too childish for me and I didn’t want to open it anymore to see the spew that comes from it.
I still talk to those who really are my friends. Most of them were never on Facebook.
For Introverts, not being on it also lets you escape from a lot of noise that sucks your personal energy and time.
I’ve written extensively about this, especially in Internet Road Rage. Go read it to see who these cowards are.
No matter what you do, someone has a beef (vegans will get me here, just another example) with whatever you say.
It used to be don’t talk politics, religion or something else at Thanksgiving or you’ll piss off someone in your family. Now, just like someone and you are one of Hillary’s deplorables (She gave the the best example, why I’m using politics here hoping to draw some ire from a commenter to prove my point. I could care less about her or her opinions other than it works).
Now, you can’t say anything on social media without someone being offended. I think it’s funny if they fall for it though because it just shows how shallow people are. Just go to Quora, hater (twitter) or Fakebook to find a large group of the clueless. That they are trying to censor people who don’t agree with them just shows bias and ignorance.
So, you can either be smart and blow off the idiots looking to be offended or trying to prove their point to the world, or just fall in line with the masses and get into it.
“Free speech is not an absolute human right,” says Helle Thorning Schmidt, member of Facebook’s Oversight Board and former PM of Denmark. “It has to be balanced with other human rights.”
How does that translate to content moderation? It must strike a balance, find a middle. pic.twitter.com/E5reaQ2bnk— POLITICOEurope (@POLITICOEurope) July 15, 2021
The Facebook Oversight Board, which consists of 20 members from around the world, was created last year to help corporate executives to distance themselves from decisions considered to be politically.
———————————–
Seriously?
We’re told we have to use certain words to describe certain people (pronouns). I can’t keep them straight.
Anything that some people say is wrong and others are always right, based on arbitrary rules that benefit only the elite.
Who told them that they are the arbiters of what we can say? (They can’t for me as I deleted them).
Most of all, why are they trying to stop free speech? Usually it is because they have something to hide.
Why are people standing for this? Those that do are dumbasses.
I can say that my life is much better without it. I have a lot more time and most of the content is BS anyway. Now, if only certain things are allowed, you have a one sided discussion. Count me out.
It is funny that the Whitehouse is fighting with fake book over Covid content in a game of finger pointing. They always eat their own.
What is humorous to me is that I have Danish relatives. Live by Jante’s Law, die by the sword.
2001: A Space Odyssey, Terminator, Aida of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., the robots always want to take over in the end and kill the humans.
See below the meme on stupidity so I can get to the point.
Yes, this woman is an idiot. My robot vacuum is so stupid it doesn’t know where it’s going. I named it Jarvis after Ironman’s AI assistant (Paul Bettany). It is my dearest form of sarcasm. So the vacuum isn’t going to kill me, but that isn’t my point.
The AI in the wrong hands is dangerous though.
For example, what if an AI-bot creates vaccines for diseases by predicting what the next strain will be. What if the next strain is the one that causes humans to shut down all the robots. There you have the premise for how it goes with AI taking over. Kill the humans.
I could bore your with many other examples like using AI to enhance a soldiers armory. It would be controlling your actions, making you more invincible in war. If it sensed a danger that didn’t exist, it could fire up the code to kill everyone in the way and you have created a murderer out of an innocent man. Kill the humans.
Fortunately, I’ve been around AI development. That danger isn’t exactly around the corner yet.
I worked at IBM and knew that Watson was a gimmick. The Chairman told me it was. They are trying to sell it now because it’s usefulness in medicine paled in comparison to it winning Jeopardy. It was a lot of wasted money because they could to sum it up.
Some of the team have moved to Quantum Computing because Watson was a dud.
Microsoft, Google and Facebook are much different and apparently more evil. IBM is too bureaucratic to turn it into a killer robot. However, if you’ve read any of my social media rants, you know that I trust these three companies less than almost anything, except Congress and the media. I will say they are equally evil though. (Another shot for the censors to see if they are watching here). They are the ones that will kill the humans.
Now, imagine if it got into the wrong hands. What could some guys who want to either take over or blow up the world do with that kind of power? Those bastards are evil. At least the robots just went bad.
And there you have it. Like many things we can create, there is always someone hanging around to put it to bad use.
I slip in things like China Virus, IRS is big brother and other words just to give the censors something to do. Sooner or later they’ll move the line and you won’t see me for 30 days or whatever the penalty is for using the wrong work or pronoun that I probably couldn’t keep straight.
They can’t ban me on Fake book or Twatter because I fired them first.
First of all, don’t get bent that I put China virus in the title. I’m testing big brother to see if they’ll censor me or not. Yes, I’m pushing the limits because, well because.
Back to the meme, it hasn’t changed much for me, other than having more people in the house. Being alone is where I find myself headed by nature. I have to remember to be social to the others because I can get so into my own world that the outside exists, but is no where near as fun or anything but a distraction.
Note, I put China Virus in the title to mess with the censors out there to see if they are doing their jobs making sure we say the right things instead of protecting the 1st Amendment.
Eliminating as much social media from my life as possible has made it much better. Sooner or later, even your bestie is going to post something that pisses you off and down the toilet we go.
Now, you can spy on your neighbor like the Stasi and report your neighbor. As for me, I’m getting rid of as much hate as I can, and that started with Twitter. Their latest to shut down free speech isn’t helping anyone.
The Tweeter is recruiting volunteer truth interrupters’ to crack down on misinformation they say is running rampant across their site. The site announced the launch of “Birdwatchers” on Monday to empowering certain users to flag misleading tweets. So-called Birdwatchers will discuss what’s misleading about a flagged tweet and then be able to rank those comments, with the goal of allowing seemingly unpaid users to take a hands-on approach to combating your lies and falsities.
The Official Tweeter Support Account posted the announcement with a video of an failed attempt at humor of an egregious example of a necessary flagging of falsehood: “Whales are not real. They’re robots funded by the government to watch us.” Now, you don’t have to read between the lines to understand the mentality that came up with this idea.
At first, Birdwatch will only be open to a few users who apply to join the program, traditional fact-checkers and other high-profile people. Birdwatch replies to tweets will meanwhile only be visible on a separate section of the site. But eventually Twitter hopes to include the replies on the regular site, building a Wikipedia-style system of relying on users to combat misinformed and blatantly false tweets.
IP’s, User Names and Locations would surely not be cataloged. *wink wink*
My big concern — which I expressed many times to Twitter — is for the safety of these contributors. What happens when a high-ranking Birdwatcher whose note does well on a Ted Cruz tweet is featured on Tucker Carlson? They say user safety is top of mind but … you know.— Brandy Zadrozny (@BrandyZadrozny) January 25, 2021
Delusions of Adequacy 