"...There is no better evidence that BigTech is out of control
than that they banned the sitting President of the United States..."
Former President Donald J. Trump
comments on being banned from social media platforms
during the final weeks of his term as President
in the aftermath of the events of January 6th
- Via Newsmax.
I am concerned Jupiterasc is becoming an extremist.
Speaking of a certain world leader who had the third Reich implementing his brutal & insane ideology, you know Trump used the same political hoax as Hitler right? He just swapped the word "Jew" for "Democrat".Matt Gaetz & Josh Hawley both warned us months ago that the suppression of Truth & Facts & Rational Debate would end up with TYRANNICAL gov't in place.
Yep, they are like the old Prophets who saw the future.
Gaetz even filed a criminal refferal against android Zuckerberg to try to stop the Big-Tech oppression. AND Josh Hawley tried to initiate anti-trust legislation to break up the huge monopolies. The Dems just laughed at him because they know the media & the tech companies are on their side.
Zuck reminds me of a certain world leader who had the third reich implementing his brutal & insane ideology.
Matt Gaetz files criminal referral against Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg
1,449 views•Jul 27, 2020
MARICOPA BOMBSHELL:Here is the thing:
If democrats believed Trump cheated
- why didn't they do something about it?
its obvious than an audit on the 2016 election
would have shown that Trump did win, fair and square.
At the same time
why do they oppose the current audits?
it shows Trump won by landslide and democrats cheated.
Judicial Watch Fights For Election Integrity on Capitol Hill
Speaking of "killers", add Trump to the list--13 unnecessary executions in less than a year!
Zuckerberg is so weird!
He doesn’t even resemble a human. He even struggles to move like one.
If you’ve seen him for more than 3 seconds in motion there’s a very bizarre inhuman like quality to him. It gives me the creeps.
Quite.........Twitter, Facebook, Google, all claim to be common carriers under Section 230 of the Communications Act. That means they are NOT publishers or editors, they are basically - the town square, where anybody gets to speak, distasteful as the company may find it.
If they just came out and admitted they're behaving like publishers, they'd lose significant protections they have under the Act.
Sure, if there are threats, like a few that were posted on Parler before the riot on 6 January, they'd be reported to the authorities. Which Parler did, albeit the organising took place on Twitter and Facebook. Funny how government, amazon, Apple, and Google acted in lockstep to shut down Parler when Parler did nothing wrong.
As Jen Psaki said, the White House is telling Facebook, et al, who to ban for disinformation, albeit Facebook, Twitter, and Google were doing the government's work before (maybe? we don't know for certain) the government was involved. But now the government is involved, it even has the postal service (WTF?? but it's true) spying for dissidents on social media, and the big three are helping the government to compile dissident lists.
Dangerous misinformation: I was banned from Twitter for telling (check with Stats Can if you don't believe me) that only about 7000 of our 25,000 covid deaths were people outside of institutions, largely care homes, some people who caught covid in hospital, plus a few prisoners.
Is that in any way dangerous?
I'll also mention that Joe Biden/CDC's suspension of private property rights is both illegal and unconstitutional. So why did they do it?
I'm guessing it's because they've got the guns, and nobody dares to stop them. That's kind of how dictatorships work, and I'm more than a little afraid that's the way the US is heading.
I know things are getting more invasive and intrusive as rights and liberties are being eroded. And I can't agree with it.
Since I am an Old Person (tm), I tend to do computer things on the computer. Also, since I am an Old Person (again) (tm), I know how to read a map when the need arises. Ergo, I carry a flip phone - it doesn't use Apple or Android OS. It calls and texts, and that's it. Good luck to anyone trying to find pictures on it. Of course carriers here may well be surveilling texts and calls for 'covid misinformation' as well as in the US (that's got to be one of their weakest excuses yet), not much I can do about that.
And yes, I use a VPN based outside the Five Eyes when I connect to the internet. That, having a decent indie ISP that's big on privacy rights (rare in Canada), end-to-end encryption for actual private emails (not a lot of those) and keeping sensitive documents offline is about as much as I can do on that front - not perfect, but discourages casual snooping. If you're concerned about cookies, it's pretty easy to block invasive tracking ones, and dump the whole mess after you shut down your browser.
I suppose I write the requisite number of cheques for taxes, insurance, rates and what have you. Seldom use a bank card. Am I the only (Old Person) who was simply - irked - that the bank seems to need to know how much I spend at the grocer, pharmacy, or hardware store? It seems like pointless snooping to me. Yes, they'll easily find out that I subscribe to the 'wrong' news services (conservative), and I occasionally buy a computer part online, but that's about it. Only had the twitter account, to which I might've posted three times in a year and that's gone now. Not a big fan of social media, but I did like twitter for being able to pick up news before the censors got hold of it. Ah, well.
It sort of terrifies me that so many young people I know haven't used cash in so many years they can barely remember what it looks like. But they grew up with this, which is a terrible shame - surveillance is normal to many of them. You and I didn't.
I'm not doing anything nefarious. I simply don't like snoops. And I reckon a lot of us feel the same way.
That's my story.
Okay, what has Apple done? First, they've made a big advert for buying android if you're doing evil things on your phone, no? Why else announce it in advance? Because if you're doing a 'sting' operation (which they shouldn't be anyway, btw), the last thing you want to do is tell people about it. Not that Google's any better.
And we once again hit the problem of fascism - why is it okay for private companies to be doing criminal investigations for the government, and starting out with a presumption of guilt? Do you believe this will be different to any other surveillance programme? Do you honestly think there won't be mission creep here? I don't, not for a minute.
How many child predators you reckon they'll catch with this? One or two, perhaps? I take it you find it worthwhile to surveil everyone who uses Apple in order to do this? It's worth giving up more privacy for? Or are you simply resigned to living in a fish bowl?