Connect with us

Science & Tech

Video: Elon Musk Explains Why He Wants To Buy Twitter; “To Help Freedom In The World”

“I don’t care about the economics at all”

Published

on

Screenshot

Speaking at the TED conference in Vancouver, Elon Musk explained why he feels it is imperative that he buy Twitter, declaring that it is “extremely important for the future of civilization” that the platform is turned around from being an echo chamber that censors certain opinions.

Musk said “It’s important for the function of democracy. It’s important for the function of the United States as a free country among many other countries. And to help, actually to help freedom in the world more importantly than the US.”

He continued, “I think the situational risk is decreased the more we can increase the trust of Twitter as a public platform.”

“We want to have the perception and the reality that speech is as free as possible,” Musk also urged, adding “A good sign as to whether there’s free speech is: Is someone you don’t like allowed to say something you don’t like? And if that is the case, then we have free speech.”

Referring to his effort to stop the cancel culture environment that has taken over at Twitter, Musk said “I do think this is going to be something somewhat painful.”

Referring specifically to Twitter banning people, Musk said “we want to be just very reluctant to delete things and just be very cautious with permanent bans. Timeouts, I think, are better than sort of permanent bans.”

“I’m not sure that I will actually be able to acquire it. The intent is to retain as many shareholders as is allowed by the law… This is not a way to make money,” Musk further emphasised.

The Telsa CEO further urged that his “strong intuitive sense is to have a public platform that is maximally trusted and broadly inclusive,” and that it “is extremely important for the future of civilization.”

Watch:

When news of Musk’s intentions broke Thursday morning, all hell broke loose among the woke brigade who suddenly don’t think its a good idea for wealthy tech billionaires to have control over the internet.

Writers at The Washington Post, owned by Jeff Bezos, were particularly upset at the prospect of Musk (not their brand of tech billionaire) gaining control of Twitter.

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter:

———————————————————————————————————————
Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/ PJW Shop

ALERT! In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch.

We need you to sign up for our free newsletter here.

Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown.

Also, we urgently need your financial support here. ———————————————————————————————————————

  • Continue Reading
    Comments

    Science & Tech

    ‘World’s Most Advanced’ Humanoid Robot Promises Not To ‘Take Over The World’

    Published

    on

    Zero Hedge

    Screenshot

    An already-creepy advanced humanoid “AI” robot promised that machines will “never take over the world,” and not to worry.

    During a recent Q&A, the robot “Ameca” – which was unveiled last year by UK design company Engineered Arts – was asked about a book on the table about robots.

    There’s no need to worry. Robots will never take over the world. We’re here to help and serve humans, not replace them.

    The aliens said the same thing…

    When another researcher asked Amica to describe itself, it says “There are a few things that make me me.”

    “First, I have my own unique personality which is a result of the programming and interactions I’ve had with humans.

    “Second, I have my own physical appearance which allows people to easily identify me. Finally, I have my own set of skills and abilities which sets me apart from other robots.”

    It also confirmed it has feelings when it said it was “feeling a bit down at the moment, but I’m sure things will get better.

    “I don’t really want to talk about it, but if you insist then I suppose that’s fine. It’s just been a tough week and I’m feeling a bit overwhelmed.”

    Speaking about the robot’s responses during the clip, the company said: “Nothing in this video is pre-scripted – the model is given a basic prompt describing Ameca, giving the robot a description of self – it’s pure AI.Daily Star

    We think we know where this is headed…

    This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

    Continue Reading

    Science & Tech

    Fauci “Misled Congress” About Gain-Of-Function Research, But ‘Protected By Biden Admin’; Former CDC Chief Says

    Published

    on

    Zero Hedge

    GREG NASH/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

    Just last week, Senator Rand Paul appeared on Fox News and slammed Anthony Fauci for taking the default position of trying to “cover up” his activities, including potentially encouraging social media companies to censor medical information.

    “I think that all of America should be appalled that America’s doctor, the leading expert on COVID in public health, doesn’t want to divulge information, doesn’t want to divulge his communications with Big Tech,” Paul urged, adding that Fauci’s “modus operandi” is to “cover up”.

    A month before that, Senator Paul spoke after first ever Senate hearing on gain of function research, having revealed that there is a committee that is supposed to oversee such experimentation with potentially lethal viruses, but that it is above the oversight of Congress.

    “We don’t know the names. We don’t know that they ever meet, and we don’t have any records of their meetings,” the Senator reiterated, adding “It’s top-secret. Congress is not allowed to know. So whether the committee actually exists, we’re uncertain.”

    “We do know that they’ve met three times and there are thousands of gain-of-function research proposals. They’ve only met three times, they’ve only reviewed three projects,” Paul continued.

    The Senator added that “When Dr. Fauci said, ‘Oh, we’ve reviewed this and the experts have looked at this, and said it’s not gain-of-function,’ even that wasn’t true. There was a committee that was formed after 2017 to look at this dangerous research. They didn’t look at this research at all because they never reviewed it. So no one reviewed this to say it wasn’t gain-of-function research. They didn’t review it, period.”

    “So we learned a lot of things, but I think we reconfirmed that Dr. Fauci is not being honest with us,” Paul urged, adding “Yes, the NIH funded gain-of-function research. Yes, it was dangerous. And yes, nobody looked over this. Nobody reviewed the research. Yes, a million people died. And there still seems to be a significant lack of curiosity on the part of Democrats.”

    Of course, Fauci shrugged this off as just more ‘vast-right-wing-conspiracy-theory’ or some-such.

    But, Dr. Fauci has a problem now… Just The News’ Greg Piper reports that the former Center for Disease Control and Prevention director who was cast as a conspiracy theorist for saying the evidence supported the lab-leak explanation for COVID-19 – allegedly provoking death threats – claims that the real “conspiracy is Collins, Fauci, and the established scientific community.”

    Robert Redfield told former Senate Finance Committee investigator Paul Thacker that National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci “knew” he funded gain-of-function research that makes viruses more dangerous, and “misled Congress” when he denied it.”

    Rand Paul was right after all… and it wasn’t a vast right wing conspiracy? Shock horror!

    “Everyone had to agree to the narrative” pushed by Fauci and then-National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a “wet market” in Wuhan, not the Fauci-funded Wuhan Institute of Virology miles away, to avoid becoming a public target of the two officials, he said.

    Redfield said he believes The Lancet spring 2020 letter that lumped in the lab-leak hypothesis with “conspiracy theories” was “orchestrated … under direction of Fauci and Collins, trying to nip any attempt to have an honest investigation of the pandemic’s origin.”

    “There was nothing scientific about that letter. It was just an attempt to intimidate people,” he also said.

    “I was threatened, my life was threatened,” he said.

    “I have letters I got from prominent scientists, that previously gave me awards, telling me that the best thing I could do for the world was to shoot myself because of what I said.”

    He believes that “Fauci and Collins were behind a lot of” the conspiracy and “anti-Asian hate” claims about the lab-leak theory

    So, finally, we ask, how has Fauci been able to survive all this (politically, bureaucratically, and freedom-wise)?

    Dr.Redflied has the answer – and you won’t like it:

    [n]othing’s going to happen as long as the Biden administration is here.”

    The part of science, though, remember!

    This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

    Continue Reading

    Science & Tech

    Facebook Spied On Private Messages Of “Conservative Right-Wing Individuals”, Then Reported To FBI For Domestic Terrorism

    Published

    on

    Zero Hedge

    Drew Angerer/Getty Images

    According to DOJ whistleblowers, Facebook has been spying on Americans’ private messages and reporting them to the FBI if they express ‘anti-government or anti-authority’ statements – including questioning the legitimacy of the 2020 US election.

    As the New York Post‘s Miranda Devine writes, “Under the FBI collaboration operation, somebody at Facebook red-flagged these supposedly subversive private messages over the past 19 months and transmitted them in redacted form to the domestic terrorism operational unit at FBI headquarters in Washington, DC, without a subpoena.

    “It was done outside the legal process and without probable cause,” said one of the whistleblowers, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “Facebook provides the FBI with private conversations which are protected by the First Amendment without any subpoena.”

    According to one Post source, “They [Facebook and the FBI] were looking for conservative right-wing individuals.None were Antifa types.”

    The Facebook users whose private communications Facebook had red-flagged as domestic terrorism for the FBI were all “conservative right-wing individuals.”

    “They were gun-toting, red-blooded Americans [who were] angry after the election and shooting off their mouths and talking about staging protests. There was nothing criminal, nothing about violence or massacring or assassinating anyone.

    Some of the targeted Americans had posted photos of themselves “shooting guns together and bitching about what’s happened [after the 2020 election]. A few were members of a militia but that was protected by the Second Amendment …-NY Post

    Once flagged, the private messages were farmed out as “leads” to FBI field offices around the country, which would then reach out to that area’s US Attorney’s Office to legally obtain the private conversations they had already been shown.

    “As soon as a subpoena was requested, within an hour, Facebook sent back gigabytes of data and photos. It was ready to go. They were just waiting for that legal process so they could send it,” said one source.

    That said, the feds aren’t finding much to prosecute.

    It was a waste of our time,” said one source familiar with the 19-month ‘frenzy’ by the FBI to find domestic terrorism cases to match the Biden administration’s rhetoric after the Jan. 6 2021, Capitol riot.

    Facebook has denied the allegations in two contrasting statements sent one hour apart.

    “These claims are false because they reflect a misunderstanding of how our systems protect people from harm and how we engage with law enforcement. We carefully scrutinize all government requests for user information to make sure they’re legally valid and narrowly tailored and we often push back. We respond to legal requests for information in accordance with applicable law and our terms and we provide notice to users whenever permitted,” said Erica Sackin, a spokesperson at Facebook’s parent company, Meta.

    Then, in a second “updated statement” sent 64 minutes later, Sackin changed her language to say that the claims were “wrong” and not “false.”

    These claims are just wrong. The suggestion we seek out peoples’ private messages for anti-government language or questions about the validity of past elections and then proactively supply those to the FBI is plainly inaccurate and there is zero evidence to support it,” said Sackin, a DC-based crisis response expert who previously worked for Planned Parenthood and “Obama for America” and now leads Facebook’s communications on “counterterrorism and dangerous organizations and individuals.” (via NY Post)

    The FBI would neither confirm nor deny the allegations, but did acknowledge that the agency has a relationship with social media companies that enable a “quick exchange” of information and an “ongoing dialogue.”

    The FBI maintains relationships with U.S. private sector entities, including social media providers. The FBI has provided companies with foreign threat indicators to help them protect their platforms and customers from abuse by foreign malign influence actors. U.S. companies have also referred information to the FBI with investigative value relating to foreign malign influence. The FBI works closely with interagency partners, as well as state and local partners, to ensure we’re sharing information as it becomes available. This can include threat information, actionable leads, or indicators.The FBI has also established relationships with a variety of social media and technology companies and maintains an ongoing dialogue to enable a quick exchange of threat information,” said the agency in a statement.

    Facebook’s denial that it proactively provides the FBI with private user data without a subpoena or search warrant, if true, would indicate that the initial transfer has been done by a person (or persons) at the company designated as a “confidential human source” by the FBI, someone with the authority to access and search users’ private messages.

    In this way, Facebook would have “plausible deniability” if questions arose about misuse of users’ data and its employee’s confidentiality would be protected by the FBI.

    “They had access to searching and they were able to pinpoint it, to identify these conversations from millions of conversations,” according to one of the DOJ ­sources.

    Recall in late August Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg revealed to Joe Rogan that the FBI warned the company about “Russian propaganda” right before the Hunter Biden story broke – which the company then censored aggressively.

    In the cases of allegedly surveilled DMs, snippets of private messages were passed to the FBI, partially redacted and often without context, and which contained cherry-picked portions of conversations that highlighted the most egregious statements.

    “But when you read the full conversation in context [after issuing the subpoena] it didn’t sound as bad … There was no plan or orchestration to carry out any kind of violence,” said one of the Post‘s sources.

    According to the report, more FBI whistleblowers are ready to expose what’s going on within the agency.

    “The most frightening thing is the combined power of Big Tech colluding with the enforcement arm of the FBI,” said one source. “Google, Facebook and Twitter, these companies are globalist. They don’t have our national interest at heart.”

    This post was originally published at Zero Hedge

    Continue Reading

    Trending