Category Archives: Technology

HEADLINES To Heed In Aftermath Of Election 2020. And A Message From 2024 Trump-Tucker Ticket

Democracy, Democrats, Elections, Ethics, Foreign Policy, Liberty, Morality, Politics, Technology, War

FROM REVOLVER NEWS:

REMEMBER GOP: “The Republican party did not carry 71,000,000+ votes … President Trump did…

Matt Gaetz speaks … “Biden may import domestic policy of The Squad and the foreign policy of Dick Cheney”

“Conservatives flock to Parler … #1 downloaded app…” [I’ll be signing up, soon. I’m on Gab.]

“Ken Starr: What Pennsylvania did a ‘lawless act’”

Third world stuff in Michigan…”

Fox News refuses to carry Trump press briefing…

A message to dissident America from Tucker Carlson (of the 2024 Trump-Tucker-ticket):

UPDATE III (11/10): What About Deep Tech’s Infractions Will Change If We Vote Republican?

Business, COVID-19, Donald Trump, Law, Media, Outsourcing, Republicans, Technology

UPDATED (11/1): In their weak case against Deep Tech, conservatives are still defending only some speech on the “merits,” rather than all speech, no matter how meritless. Libertarians: Deep Tech is not private property. It really isn’t, okay?

Richard Spencer makes a good case for a “free-speech zone”: “Instead, by focusing on S230 of the Decency Act—by threatening Twitter that it will be treated like a publisher—Republicans are encouraging Twitter to act more like a publisher: fact checking relevant information, censoring bad opinions, etc.” AND: “Republicans care deeply about free speech when it comes to posting Hunter Biden dick pics—not so much when it involves speech that is anti-Zionist or ‘racist.'”

Or, when Candace Owens’ boilerplate speech is compromised.

UPDATED: OCTOBER 12, 2020: When President Trump talks, one can’t help but be impressed by his unbounded force, energy and excellent command of details, down to a Bill’s public law number. In this case, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act:

Bartiromo … asked Trump about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects social media companies from being legally liable for content on their networks published by users. Trump called it “a disgrace.”

Still, questioned he must be. Voters handed POTUS both legislative Chambers and the presidency for two years. Yet he and the GOP failed to strip Deep Tech of Section 230, …  which, to repeat, “protects social media companies from being legally liable for content on their networks published by users.”

(I use the Deep Tech coinage to better capture the power and reach of the high-tech monopolists in politics.)

What’ll change this time around, if we elect Republicans?

Moreover, small, independent entitles who suffer banning by social media (“MERCER DOMAINS BANNED BY DEEP TECH FACEBOOK“) cannot afford to sue conglomerates whose revenues are greater than “the GDP of four of the G20 nations.”

So what is the remedy for the powerless (check) who’ve been thrown off social media, for no good reason?

Speaking of one of the Five Big crooked Tech companies; Microsoft’s Bill Gates recently told Chris Wallace “that Trump’s travel ban may have worsened the coronavirus pandemic.”

Those who live a lie usually spout, at best, only half-truths. Trump’s travel ban after the unleashing of COVID was indeed worse than useless. Chinese were merely rerouted and their temperatures taken. But that’s because Mr. Gates “seeded the disease here,” by replacing American with Chinese workers and making these Chinese citizens who travel to-and-from Wuhan.

UPDATE II (11/9): Tucker Carlson Calling Out Deep Tech For Protecting Joe Biden

UPDATE III (11/10):

On Tucker Carlson, Allum Bokhari was very clear about the massive failure of the people we had sent to D.C. to prevent the Orwellian nightmare developing. On the line is dissidents’ ability to speak, publish, sell books, transact financially.

Strip Social Media’s Social Engineers Of Their State Grants-Of-Privilege

Argument, Business, Conservatism, Free Speech, Law, libertarianism, Republicans, Technology, The State

As ever, the political caste, in general, and “the party of industry and commerce,” in particular, has shown itself to be arrayed against Middle America.

How so?

An army of Covington Kids ought to have advanced on social media’s loathsome moral crusaders and censors. It can’t, because stripping the tech trolls of their state-grants of privilege has slipped down the order of business.

Depriving social media’s social engineers of their state grants-of-privilege seems more than reasonable.

Nobody conservative is arguing that “government should regulate content moderation of social media,” CATO Institute.

What is being advocated is that social-media censors be deprived of their state-grants of privilege and protections against liability. For social media are collective frauds. While acting as editors and social engineers, they are legally safeguarded as mere platform providers.

Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, tech companies currently enjoy broad immunity from civil lawsuits stemming from what users post because they are treated as “platforms” rather than “publishers”.

Trump’s executive order is designed to pressure regulators, including the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission, to come up with new rules that would curtail that immunity. It is likely to face legal challenges. (The Guardian)

Look, laws exist. Too many of them. It would be great were there fewer of these laws. However, whether intended or not,  the upshot of corporate libertarianism is that laws only ever hamper the little guy and gal, never the multinational shyster and fraudster.

Naturally, conservatives must agree that unfettered speech is just that.  They can’t start carving out pet exceptions.

UPDATE (4/13/021):  The Civil Rights Act route is way better than Section 230 repeal—although that, too, must be tackled.

UPDATED (3/22/022): MERCER DOMAINS BANNED BY DEEP TECH FACEBOOK

Cultural Marxism, Donald Trump, Free Speech, Ilana Mercer, IlanaMercer.com, Liberty, Political Correctness, Technology

“Not everything that’s banned by social media is worth reading. But the time is fast approaching when one can say with confidence that most of what isn’t banned is not worth reading.”—ILANA MERCER.

Or, at least, is unimportant. (Self-serving hyperbole? Maybe a smidgen.)

Facebook has banned both my domains: Even mention of their names is flagged on Facebook.
I’ve mentioned the latest blog post on Facebook by directing readers to Twitter.

Note how I’ve already censored myself, removing a perfectly fine adjective from the blog’s description on Facebook (“Wall Of Moms? More Like Wall Of [Feral] Flesh.”)

In any case, my guru confirms the following: “It looks like Facebook has banned www.barelyablog from posting to Facebook. It looks like they’ve also banned ilanamercer.com. Their reasoning is that you’ve ‘violated their Community Standards.’ What the violation was they will not say.”

Image

Indeed, the “Continue” button leads only to more Kafka:

Image

Disagreeing with Deep Tech gets one nowhere.

“You’re obviously doing something right,” suggested a Twitter friend. First it was, “If you’re not called a racist, you’re doing something wrong.” Now it’s, “If you’ve not been banned by Deep Tech, you’re doing something wrong.”

Another asked, “Why the concerted effort at censorship by big tech right now, do you think?” For me, Arthur Pogonatus, the marginalizing has been ongoing for 20 yrs. First the Republicans when, in 2002, this writer came out against Bush’s Iraq war–and for being independent on most issues. In 2018, I’m told, Wikipedia, the Southern Poverty Law Center of “encyclopedias, banned me. Banishing has been ongoing from one faction or another.

The best description of the New America comes courtesy of my colleague, Fred Reed, writing on the Unz Review, which has also been banned by Facebook and has become a haven for dissidents:

Congress does nothing, one parry neutering the other and all bought and paid for by special interests, by Wall Street and the arms makers and the big corporations. Local governments submit to the rioters or stand aside as the burning goes on. This is not society. It is chaos.

I agree with the Reed paragraph that precedes the one just posted, but, see, I can’t post it, because, this time, people on the Right would evince an allergy to aspects of the objective truth and they’d “blow.”

Fred’s right. “It’s Gonna Blow: Be a Miracle if it Don’t.”

A Washington Post writer compared the “fight against big tech [to] the fight against organized crime.”  I’m not sure this comparison holds. For one, what fight?

Certainly, the author fails to mention the plight of those on the speech spectrum who’ve incurred the wrath of Deep Tech. In particular, those of us on the dissident right who’ve been banned and lack political representation or hefty champions (other than one small woman, whom I call “The Force”: Michelle Malkin).

It’s certainly not Don Trump, Jr. See “Is Political Participation Predicated On Views About Holocaust?”

RELATED:
The Anatomy of A Twitter Blocking — My Own,” Ilana Mercer, June 27, 2019

UPDATE (3/22/022):