Gab catches up

Gab now has their own servers:

Today is a tremendous milestone for the Gab community.

After over a year of work Gab has finally migrated to our own in-house servers. We own the hardware, which means no one can ban us from using our own technology to host Gab. If you talk to anyone in the technology industry they will tell you that this is no easy task. Most tech startups have the luxury of using third-part cloud hosting providers like Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure, and others.

Gab does not have this luxury.

Over the past four years we have been banned from multiple cloud hosting providers and were told that if we didn’t like it we should “build our own.”

So, that’s exactly what we did.

Good for them. I’m not being ironic or sarcastic, this is exactly what independent platforms need to do across the West. That being said, both Infogalactic and SocialGalactic have been on their own servers from the start, and Unauthorized has been on its own much more powerful servers since February.

The enemy has Cloud supremacy, but all this does is force us to be stronger and more independent on the ground. And when they go after the payment processors, the banks, and even the entire SWIFT system, as they will, what they will discover is that they will only succeed in creating even more formidable competitors.

The thing they simply don’t seem to grasp is that we’re not their only enemies. The entire world is increasingly turning against them.


The psychopaths of Silicon Valley

The big tech cartel is run by a series of literally psychopathic mediocrities. It’s not only worse than you think, it’s crazier than you would ever imagine:

Like many people during the dot-com boom of the late 1990s, Ina and David Steiner took a hobby and turned it into a business. Ina worked at a publishing company and collected books. David, a video producer, had been going to yard sales since he was a kid. He liked advertising collectibles, antique tools — anything that caught his eye. In 1999, four years after eBay was founded, when the notion of transacting with strangers online was still for the bold, they started a modest website offering advice to buyers.

They called it AuctionBytes, which later morphed into EcommerceBytes. Eventually, by tracking trends and policy updates across the industry, it became a resource for sellers on a number of platforms, from Etsy to Amazon — a kind of trade publication for anyone whose business is auctioning items out of a garage or storage unit. Today, Ina is in her late 50s and does the writing. David is in his early 60s and is the publisher. Neither has spoken to the press since eBay’s alleged plot against them came to light.

EcommerceBytes may not have been well known, but it was required reading at the highest levels of eBay. In early 2019, Ina Steiner shared the news that eBay had hired a new communications chief, Steve Wymer, who would report directly to Wenig.

The two men shared an aggressive streak. Wenig had spent most of his career in East Coast financial media, as a lawyer and executive at Thomson Reuters, and he maintained a certain New York alpha quality. Before working as a technology spokesman, Wymer had spun for three Republican senators in Washington, and he kept up an interest in politics. When Rep. John Lewis tweeted about the civic importance of getting in “good trouble, necessary trouble,” for instance, Wymer replied that he had “another view on how the USA should be governed. My view is equal to your view.”

Publicly, Wenig celebrated eBay’s five community values — among them, “People are basically good” and “We encourage you to treat others the way you want to be treated.” But together, he and Wymer worked to forge a more combative eBay, one that drew less inspiration from the Golden Rule and more from “The Sopranos.” (They did not respond to multiple requests for comment, and eBay would not make any executives available for interviews.)

While neither Wenig nor Wymer have been charged — both have denied involvement in the intimidation campaign — they clearly loathed Ina Steiner. In April 2019, she wrote about the chief executive’s compensation, noting that his haul of $18 million was 152 times what the average worker got, and mildly suggested it was coming at the expense of eBay sellers. After her post was published, Wymer texted a link to Wenig, adding: “We are going to crush this lady.”

Whether Steiner was breaking news about questionable expenditures, such as a pub eBay built on its campus, or marking more innocuous developments, Wenig seemed to find her existence infuriating. On May 31, 2019, she wrote that he had “promised to give sellers greater protection” from fraudulent buyers.

“Shockingly reasonable …” Wymer wrote to Wenig.

“I couldn’t care less what she says,” the CEO responded, adding: “Take her down.”

It’s pretty obvious who are the ticket takers in this story. The two men who were most responsible for the criminal actions are not only not facing criminal charges like their subordinates, they have been parachuted into plum positions elsewhere.

In June, Wenig was reelected to the board of General Motors, a position that pays $317,000 a year. Mary Barra, GM’s chief executive, called the cyberstalking scandal “regrettable” but noted “it didn’t involve any GM business.” Wymer has a new job, as chief executive of the Boys & Girls Clubs of Silicon Valley. The chair of the board said the nonprofit was “aware” of what happened at eBay, but believes Wymer is “a leader with integrity” and was the unanimous choice for the job.


How the puppet is controlled

An explanation on how Creepy Joe is being controlled live on camera in order to reduce his level of incoherence:

Biden always REACHES INTO HIS POCKET before he answers certain questions. See how confused and frightened he looks?

And here’s how he looks AFTER he reaches into his pocket. The reason he usually wears a mask is to hide his confused, frightened face. Watch his free hand.

Into the pocket.

What’s he doing? He’s activating a fully implanted, invisible receiver that uses BONE CONDUCTION to get messages. My guess is the switch also reduces ambient noise so that he can concentrate on the spoken instruction. 

Remember when Biden totally disappeared? He was having something like THIS implanted.

The remarkable Esteem® Hearing Implant is designed to provide qualified candidates with a unique combination of real-world benefits. The Esteem is: An INVISIBLE Solution — You don’t just hear better. You look and feel better. There are no external components. And nothing is in your ear canal.

Bone conduction works extremely well. Sound is just vibrations. This invisible implant has been converted to a receiver that transmits vibrations into Biden’s addled head. He switches it on and off at will. His wristwatch vibrates when they want him to activate the system. 

Conspiracy is nothing more than simply figuring out who and what is causing what you are seeing right in front of you.


The insidious Mark

 CDAN exposes a new marketing strategy for the Prometheans pushing posthuman technology:

This very controversial makeup influencer is probably the only one you will know for this blind. There are several others throughout the world that are also in on the deal, but you would be hard pressed to guess them. The controversial one and the others have signed deals, that when executed could potentially pay them many millions of dollars. The deal is being made by a company based in Sweden that wants to expand their chip implants throughout the world. They are going to pay influencers around the world not only a flat rate, but also bonuses for every thousand people that get implants. They know that young people will be most accepting of the message which is why they have targeted influencers who have shown they can get people to buy and do what they are asked. It is the end of the world.

I can’t imagine it’s very difficult to get attention whores to take the ticket. 


Call their bluff

Facebook threatens to pull out of Europe if it isn’t permit to continue ignoring European data protection and privacy laws:

Facebook has threatened to pack up its toys and go home if European regulators don’t back down and let the social network get its own way.

In a court filing in Dublin, Facebook said that a decision by Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC) would force the company to pull up stakes and leave the 410 million people who use Facebook and photo-sharing service Instagram in the lurch.

If the decision is upheld, “it is not clear to [Facebook] how, in those circumstances, it could continue to provide the Facebook and Instagram services in the EU,” Yvonne Cunnane, who is Facebook Ireland’s head of data protection and associate general counsel, wrote in a sworn affidavit.

The decision Facebook’s referring to is a preliminary order handed down last month to stop the transfer of data about European customers to servers in the U.S., over concerns about U.S. government surveillance of the data.

I’m not exactly what you would call a fan of the European Union, but I would love to see the following sequence:

  1. Call their bluff.
  2. Watch them back down.
  3. Prosecute them for their past violations of GDPR.
  4. Prosecute them for their ongoing violations of GDPR.
Someone has to rein in the lawless Tech Cartel, and to date, neither the Trump administration nor anyone outside the Chinese government has demonstrated the courage required to do so.


Impeccable Timing

As we’ve seen time and time again, SJWs can’t help themselves. Twitter’s most recent attempt to play publisher and manage its trends appears likely to backfire in the near future:

It’s important to note exactly what’s happening here, Twitter is choosing a subject to trend and making a values judgment about why that subject is trending. That’s the very essence of being a publisher. They are publishing their own opinion.

Twitter is saying, “Jason Whitlock opens himself up to criticism after making sexist comments about ESPN hosts.”

I added the bold language because it’s important for all of you to see.

Look at what’s going on here, Twitter is directly deciding what to trend and then making a values judgment about what was said. They are sharing their opinions. You (hopefully) read the columns. Did Whitlock treat anyone in those columns any different than he has countless men, athletes or media figures, he has ripped for decades? In my opinion, of course not.

But maybe you disagree.

That’s fine, that’s your right.

You are entitled to publish your opinion on your website or your social media feeds and be responsible for what you say. And if you do that, you’re being held to a different standard than the platform you write on because you are the content creator. Twitter’s distributing your content to the masses and claiming they aren’t responsible for it, all while monetizing their entire business on opinions. The more people who have opinions all day long, the more money the content platforms make. (Which is why they’re all created to seduce us into caring so much about likes and retweets and attention).

But here’s the deal, Twitter isn’t behaving as a content neutral company in any way when some anonymous person we don’t know who works at Twitter is labeling Whitlock’s opinions sexist. They are directly making a determination about content that they deem objectionable and then featuring it prominently on their website. All in an effort to try and punish the person who has stepped outside the bounds of what they deem to be an acceptable opinion.

Twitter is directly impacting the marketplace of ideas in this country while claiming they aren’t involved at all. They are pretending to be content neutral when in reality they are making a calculated and direct decision to be engaged in editorial content. They are picking sides and claiming to be neutral.

Why does that matter?

Because if you are in the editorial business, you are subject to lawsuits for those opinions you share. If you’re a platform, you aren’t.

So who at Twitter decided Jason Whitlock’s comments were “sexist?” We have no idea. If I had to guess, it was probably someone working in Twitter’s trending topics division but that’s only a guess. In reality, who is that person or persons? What are their biases? Why did they try to slide in their opinion on this topic and hope no one would notice? Why did they decide to make this a trending topic? And most importantly how can Twitter claim to be an unbiased content platform when they make clear editorial decisions such as these?

Those are all fascinating questions.

Which I’m sure Jason Whitlock will be interested in discussing on Thursday of this week.

When he testifies in front of Congress about content discrimination from tech companies.

It’s LONG past time to end the platform/publisher dance these companies have been permitted to play. They must be forced to choose one or the other. If you want to edit beyond the direct requirements of the law, you have to take responsibility. If you don’t want to take responsibility, then you don’t get to edit.

Twitter has taken an official stance that all public criticism of women, no matter how valid, is intrinsically sexist. If you want to  know what a feminist society would look like, now you know.


Patreon needs even MORE money

I told you they were losing money hand-over-fist on a monthly basis. They just raised $60 million from institutional investors last July, and now it’s reported that they’ve raised another $90 million, bringing the total raised to $256 million.

Patreon—the online service that allows podcasters, musicians and others to receive financial support from fans—has raised a $90 million round of funding from fans of its own, The Information has learned. The company recently closed the round at a $1.2 billion pre-money valuation, according to two people familiar with the matter. That is about double the pre-money valuation for the company before a round of funding last year, according to PitchBook, the financial data firm. 

Let’s see. This Series E round is enough to cover the costs of about what, another 3,215 arbitrations….

The membership services company has raised around $256 million to date. New investors include New Enterprise Associates (NEA), Wellington Management and Lone Pine, and existing investors Glade Brook Capital, Thrive Capital, DFJ Growth and Index Ventures also participated in the round.


Ding dong, New York is dead

I’d like to believe that New York City is dead forever, but I don’t know if I dare to hope:

BUT NYC ALWAYS COMES BACK

Yes it does. I lived three blocks from Ground Zero on 9/11. Downtown, where I lived, was destroyed, but it came roaring back within two years. Such sadness and hardship and then quickly that area became the most attractive area in New York.

And in 2008/2009, there was much suffering during the Great Recession, again much hardship, but things came roaring back.

But… this time is different. You’re never supposed to say that but this time it’s true. If you believe this time is no different, that NYC is resilient, I hope you’re right.

I don’t benefit from saying any of this. I love NYC. I was born there. I’ve lived there forever. I STILL live there. I love everything about NYC. I want 2019 back.

But this time is different.

One reason: Bandwidth.

In 2008, average bandwidth speeds were 3 megabits per second. That’s not enough for a Zoom meeting with reliable video quality. Now, it’s over 20 megabits per second. That’s more than enough for high-quality video.

There’s a before and after. BEFORE: No remote work. AFTER: Everyone can work remotely.

The difference: bandwidth got faster. And that’s basically it. People have left New York City and have moved completely into virtual worlds. The Time-Life Building doesn’t need to fill up again. Wall Street can now stretch across every street instead of just being one building in Manhattan.

We are officially AB: After Bandwidth. And for the entire history of NYC (the world) until now, we were BB: Before Bandwidth.

Remote learning, remote meetings, remote offices, remote performance, remote everything.

That’s what is different.

Best pandemic ever. It’s killing the centers of moral and physical filth. Look at all the lamentations for Gotham and the Hellmouth! When I go out, I don’t wear a mask out of fear or submission. I wear one out of pure unadulterated glee.


This is what they really fear

In case you ever wondered why so many tech companies impose individual arbitrations on their users, this class action lawsuit filed against Facebook should suffice to explain their reasoning:

A new class-action lawsuit has accused Facebook of illegally harvesting biometric data on its subsidiary platform Instagram with a photo-tagging tool that allegedly stores facial recognition data. The lawsuit, filed on Monday in state court in Redwood City, California, accuses the company of collecting, storing and profiting from the biometric data of more than 100 million Instagram users, without their knowledge or consent.

Facebook does not impose arbitration, and its lawyers are obviously a little more up on California law than Patreon’s, as they do not impose an illegitimate waiver of class action litigation. So, there shouldn’t be any procedural impediments to this lawsuit, although Facebook’s lawyers will almost certainly invent as many as they need in order to delay discovery. But Facebook has a near-infinite supply of financial and legal resources, so it can afford to lose even a very large class-action lawsuit without its operations being disrupted.

I have no idea if the litigants have a claim or not; I don’t use Facebook or Instagram. But I do note that the company’s objection – “Instagram doesn’t use Face Recognition technology” – does not even contradict the lawsuit’s primary claim that the company was “collecting, storing and profiting from the biometric data of more than 100 million Instagram users, without their knowledge or consent.”

You’ll note that “face recognition technology” is a small subset of “biometric data”. Facebook’s non-denial denial is not unlike a company saying they weren’t collecting, storing, and profiting from your DNA because they don’t use fingerprint technology.

That’s why it is so interesting that Patreon is so Hell-bent on avoiding arbitration of the claims concerning their deceptive practices and violations of California law. They genuinely seem to believe that they’d be better off facing the class action litigation they specifically imposed individual arbitration to avoid. Or, at least, their outside lawyers would be.


The Silicon Curtain

President Trump opens a new offensive in the trade war:

President Donald Trump has issued executive orders effectively banning Chinese video sharing app TikTok and messaging service WeChat in a dramatic escalation of tensions with Beijing that sent stocks tumbling worldwide overnight.

Using national emergency powers, Trump on Thursday night signed the orders, which give TikTok parent ByteDance 45 days to sell the app, and bar WeChat from the U.S. after the same time period.

The orders also banned any U.S. transactions with WeChat owner Tencent, a major Chinese company that owns significant shares in Tesla, Snap Inc, and Reddit. Tencent shares fell as much as 10 percent in Asian markets overnight, and it was not immediately clear whether the company would be forced to divest its U.S. holdings.

Coming days after the United States ordered China to vacate its consulate in Houston, the move looks set to trigger retaliatory action by Beijing, stoking fears that a ‘Silicon Curtain’ is descending between the two superpowers. It raised the possibility that Beijing could retaliate by banning major U.S. tech companies from China, a major market for some of the top American firms.

‘China could block Apple or Microsoft from China. The information sector growingly looks divided into two camps. We could be seeing just the beginning of an information technology war,’ said Nana Otsuki, chief analyst at Monex Securities.

‘Investors in the West would have to hesitate to invest in China, missing growth opportunities there when there are not many investment opportunities except perhaps except for Nasdaq.’

Although this will tend to help the God-Emperor’s enemies in Silicon Valley fend off what would likely be a successful foray into the US market by Chinese technology companies, it’s the right thing to do in the long term. China has successfully defended and developed its technology sector, now it is time for Americans to free the US technology sector from the grip of the bad and mostly foreign actors who presently control it.

But this isn’t even the big news on the trade war front, as the report released yesterday by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets appears likely to drive even more significant changes:

In response to President Trump’s June 4 Memorandum on Protecting United States Investors from Significant Risks from Chinese Companies, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG) today released a report making five recommendations.  These recommendations are designed to address risks to investors in U.S. financial markets posed by the Chinese government’s failure to allow audit firms that are registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to comply with U.S. securities laws and investor protection requirements.

“The PWG examined the risks to investors posed by the Chinese government’s failure to allow access.  The PWG unanimously recommends that the Securities and Exchange Commission take steps to enhance the listing standards on U.S. exchanges for access to audit work papers, among other recommendations,” said Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin, Chairman of the PWG.  “The recommendations outlined in the report will increase investor protection and level the playing field for all companies listed on U.S. exchanges.  The United States is the premier jurisdiction in the world for raising capital, and we will not compromise on the core principles that underpin investor confidence in our capital markets.”

The PWG recommends that the SEC take steps to implement the five recommendations outlined in the report.  In particular, to address companies from jurisdictions, such as China, that do not provide the PCAOB with sufficient access to fulfill its statutory mandate (“Non-Cooperating Jurisdictions,” or “NCJs”), the PWG recommends enhanced listing standards on U.S. exchanges.  This would require, as a condition to initial and continued exchange listing, PCAOB access to work papers of the principal audit firm for the audit of the listed company.

Translation: Chinese companies are not providing the US financial authorities the ability to audit their books.  The US government is now making it clear that any companies using auditors who are not subject to PCAOB oversight will not be permitted the ability to list or remain listed on US exchanges. So, this could lead to a mass exodus of US-listed Chinese companies from the US markets.