Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts

Thursday 7 December 2023

TRUMP - J6 [Jan 6 - Capitol Injustice]





 


Monday 27 November 2023

Once Upon an Ⅹ



A friendly bird flew my way, perched on my shoulder and directed me to download my data from Twitter (X Holdings Corporation).

So I did and on 2023-11-19 at 18-46-20 seconds I got the following message. Screenshot time stamped in Russian format Year, Month, Day and Time.


However, when I attempt to download it. Computer says no every time. Where it says 'OK' I'm not OK so I took note of that.



Not long after the my data request, I was suspended permanently from X Holdings Corporation with no answers, no evidence and no facts provided. My data request was tacitly rejected. Unusually for a permanent suspension my account is still accessible so I can see a few hundred tweets.

Without my data I'm unable to demonstrate a few important statements I made. Some of which pertains to my mothers unlawful killing (he bragged). So if that's the case it is going to court, that's X Corporation Holdings problem not mine. 


It's petty isn't it?


Signature gamma move**


I had no option but to appeal my suspension, a process that provided the pretext used to suspend me as follows.




If the screenshots are too pale I took the precaution of saving a Google Docs as that has a time stamp and revision history that I can't alter. Here's the link.

The bit I liked most for suspension is: Specifically, for:

 

Violating our rules against platform manipulation and spam.You may not use X’s services in a manner intended to artificially amplify or suppress information or engage in behavior that manipulates or disrupts people’s experience on X.


What Musk is saying here, is that everyone's tweets need to be made in a vacuum where nobody reads them and nobody is affected by them through spurious and undefined amplification and suppression techniques. I'd enjoy that in a court of law. He's literally the arch manipulator, breaking his own terms and conditions as the chief amplifier of himself when he's not peddling AI self generated 'heroic' art as outlined in the 'anyone for pudding' post over here.


Some have suggested my last tweets were the red line but as I've repeatedly stated, this is out of my hands. You chose to buy the largest digital platform in history for self aggrandizing purposes and manipulation, and that's not going to save you. The end is not for everyone. You are not a prophet, I am not a prophet etc...



NB - As I've stated publicly I prefer to assume that all the anomalous experiences I had on Twitter since it was purchased by X Holdings Corp, are most likely AI modelling to convey a personal touch, but there's a fair amount of documentation I've both come across and accumulated along the way to enlarge upon the case against that.  Maybe because I engaged with some science on the vacuum in space which is self evidently fraudulent and triggered the suspension or not.





Another tweet that can now no longer be embedded. Good job I'm a compulsive evidence guy. You have to be in my line of work. There's no way to win that game but a few facts and timeline stamps accumulated along the way are the best we've got till we redefine reality. I realised a couple of days ago that the Trivium is dead. It's still good for holding the line but it's inevitable that redefining reality is my most pressing problem and I don't have even one or two bluesky ideas. Nothing is there but it will come. It always does. I'm the tortoise not the hare despite my Nick Land accelerationist credentials until this is over which is now sooner than later if my Q-Comms learnings are improving..





Here are all the tweets I've embedded in posts deleted by X holdings Corp for the time being.

















Tedious, I know, but if it isn't shared now, later claims I may state, might lack credibility.

Que sera sera.




Monday 2 October 2023

X CONTENT

 



Update: There were many powerful and articulate voices in this X Space that I didn't know. The most articulate was a woman called Mia Khalifa. She's a big deal and I had no idea she was famous or indeed why she was famous?

I will write a post about her and link to it from here. This is her X account, this is her Instagram account and her heavily censored and biased Wikipedia entry

Sunday 1 October 2023

Roger, Stella & Yanis Outside Belmarsh





 

Saturday 30 September 2023

One To Watch - Dom_Lucre

 


Thursday 28 September 2023

The Palimpsest

 

 

Monday 18 September 2023

Ukraine's War Declared in 2014 - Kinetic in 2022 - Termination Date TBC


Zelensky Hero



They always blame the victim

Monday 22 May 2023

Conspiracy Realist





The Telegraph's Meredith Walker, wrote an article yestereday corroborating the key points I made in my previous post. They are that when .GOV has an inconvenient human rights obstacle to remove, it cannot manufacture easily ignored mandates such as the lockdown rules broken by Boris Johnson, Matt Hancock, Dominic Cummings, Sir Keir Starmer, Neil Ferguson (subsequently rewarded with an OBE), SNP MP Margaret Ferrier and Sir Gavin Williamson (Knighted for his efforts) among other Members of Parliament.


“The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.” ― Henry Kissinger


Here's the article.

During my two decades in tech I’ve seen governments manufacture public outrage to serve their desire for control more times than I can count. There’s a predictable pattern that starts with a complex social problem receiving widespread attention. Everyone acknowledges the gravity of the issue. There is a rush to “do something”. 


But “something” too often involves magical thinking and specious “solutions”. Frequently, technology is painted as both cause and solution. Problems are presented as existing “online” and thus their solution is framed as technological. This almost always involves some combination of expanding surveillance and curbing the fundamental human right to privacy and free expression. 


The Online Safety Bill is a perfect example. Under the pretext of protecting children, its provisions could lead to the implementation of government-mandated mass surveillance applications on every UK smartphone. These would scan every message you send. 


The opaque databases and error-prone AI technology that would power this surveillance regime could lead to the mass deplatforming of millions of people based on unreliable algorithmic systems. Such a system would also introduce vulnerabilities and flaws that would inevitably be exploited by hostile states and hackers. 


While politicians have denied for months that the Bill will break encryption, the Home Office has been quite clear that it believes end-to-end encryption is enabling child abuse on the internet. 


The cynicism of this argument is made clear when we recognise that the Government has reduced support for measures protecting children that seem more likely to work. Early intervention services spending was slashed by 50 per cent from 2011 to 2021; referrals to children’s social care rose 9 per cent in 2021-22 alone. 


There’s no way to square this with the idea that protecting children is the first priority, rather than a pretext for government-mandated mass surveillance.


As written, experts agree the Bill would nullify end-to-end encryption, which Signal and other apps use to ensure that only you and the people you’re talking to read your messages. 


This encryption is what stands between citizens and the criminals, scammers and (sometimes) regimes that would dearly love to have access to their innermost thoughts.


This would make Britain a global role model for repressive regimes. If the UK declares that it’s fine to surveil all communications, it will set a precedent others will follow. 


It will have written the playbook by which authoritarians around the world could justify similar systems, where phones could automatically report citizens to the government if they write “Hong Kong Democracy”, “Ukraine Invasion”, “LGBTQ resources” or whatever else a government decides to ban. Being the first country to mandate such systems would be a stain on Britain’s legacy. 


Whatever happens, Signal is committed to ensuring people everywhere have the ability to communicate privately. When the Iranian government blocked Signal, we recognized that the activists, journalists and citizens in Iran who needed privacy were not represented by the authoritarian state. We worked to set up proxies and other means to help them access Signal. 


If the Online Safety Bill is passed, we promise that we will do everything in our power to ensure that the British people have access to safe and private communications. But we will not undermine or compromise the commitments we have made to you, no matter what the Government says.


However bleak the prospect, I remain optimistic that it will not come to this. The cynical and unworkable reality of the Bill is becoming clearer, and well informed politicians are moving to remedy its most troubling provisions. 


The Online Safety Bill is part of a pattern. But it’s a pattern we can stop here. There are real measures that the Government can take to protect children and I sincerely hope that Parliament will look to address them, rather than stripping away privacy and other fundamental rights.


Meredith Whittaker is president of the Signal Foundation

Thursday 27 April 2023

Image Provenance



If anyone has any information on these, can you get in touch please?

I've done my own digging and the only facts I have; are they were first published this year. They might be AI generated (the resolution is too high in my opinion) or the last option is they were sequestered and have now been leaked.

Update: I've changed my mind about AI