SUPPORT JOURNALISM. Become a patron athttp://www.patreon.com/TimcastMy Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnewsSeveral incidents over the past year have led me to believe that we are losing the Culture War. What do I mean by this? Massive corporations and the Government are spying on people and stealing data, the US and UK have laws that curtail speech and we are seeing people and platforms recoil due to the potential liability. Count Dankula was actually convicted of being offensive in the UK, Lauren Southern was banned from the country for giving out flyers in Luton. The US and the UK are facing serious repercussions from the curtailing of speech and the passing of laws that seek to diminish our rights to privacy and expression.Make sure to subscribe for more travel, news, opinion, and documentary with Tim Pool everyday.Amazon Prime 30 day free trial - http://amzn.to/2sgiDqRMY GEARGoPro Karma - http://amzn.to/2qw10m4GoPro 6 - http://amzn.to/2CEK0z1DJI Mavic Drone - http://amzn.to/2lX9qgTZagg 12 AMP portable battery - http://amzn.to/2lXB6SxTASCAM Lavalier mic - http://amzn.to/2AwoIhI Canon HD XF 105 Camera - http://amzn.to/2m6v1o3Canon 5D MK III Camera - http://amzn.to/2CvFnnm360 Camera (VR) - http://amzn.to/2AxKu4RFOLLOW MEInstagram - http://instagram.com/TimcastTwitter - http://twitter.com/TimcastMinds - http://Minds.com/TimcastFacebook - http://facebook.com/TimcastnewsBitcoin Wallet: 13ha54MW2hYUS3q1jJhFyWdpNfdfMWtmhZSEND STUFF HERETim Pool330 Washington Street - PMB 517Hoboken, NJ 07030Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Over the past few weeks, there have been a few incidents that have led me to believe things are heading in the wrong direction.
And I know that sounds kind of tame, but I really do feel like we're heading towards a dystopian future.
That all these novels from the past century that we would read and say, we should never allow this to happen, they're happening.
From mass surveillance from the government and from corporations, the curtailing of free speech and free expression, things seem to be getting a whole lot worse.
The story about Facebook and how they collect data that you never agreed to give them is old.
It's from several years ago.
We've heard stories about people being arrested for posting rap lyrics on Facebook years ago, and things seem to be only getting worse.
So dare I say it, it really does seem like we are losing the battle.
Social media networks are selectively enforcing who they ban and who they restrict.
YouTube is demonetizing many channels, and we don't really know why.
Videos are being restricted for having the wrong opinions, but certain groups, certain people, are allowed to post offensive content and get away with it.
A lot of progress was made with the dawn of the internet, but it seems like there is some kind of effort, be it intentional or just emergent, To retract everything that we gained from the internet.
Now before I go on, I need to give a shout out to today's sponsor, all of you guys.
If you haven't already, make sure you hit that subscribe button and click the bell because a lot of people are telling me they're not getting my videos in their feed and that's one way to ensure you do.
But also make sure to go to patreon.com forward slash Timcast and become a patron today.
There are many different tiers to choose from, most notably at tier one you get access to behind the scenes photos and videos and bonus commentary, usually from when I'm out reporting in the field.
So please consider becoming a patron at any level you feel comfortable today to help support my work.
The point of this video is to elaborate on many of the things I talked about over the past few days and just kind of how I'm feeling about it because it really does feel like we're losing this battle.
Whatever the battle is, the right to self-expression, the right to privacy, and many other rights seem to be disappearing.
They're eroding right in front of us.
From Count Dankula in the UK being charged with a hate crime, with being grossly offensive.
He was convicted because he made a joke to a very small group of people that, unfortunately in his case, went viral.
We've learned about the Facebook data breach, where companies are using our data to build psychographic profiles so they can deliver ads and make us vote in a certain direction.
It seems like we are not in control of our future anymore, and that we're losing the right to express our views.
This is from a Gizmodo story from November by Kashmir Hill.
Shadow contact information has been a known feature of Facebook for a few years now, but most users remain unaware of its reach and power because shadow profile connections happen inside Facebook's algorithmic black box.
People can't see how deep the data mining of their lives truly is until an uncanny recommendation pops up.
Facebook doesn't like and doesn't use the term shadow profiles.
It doesn't like the term because it sounds like Facebook creates hidden profiles for people who haven't joined the network, which Facebook says it doesn't do.
The existence of shadow contact information came to light in 2013 after Facebook admitted it had discovered and fixed a bug.
The bug was that when a user downloaded their Facebook file, it included not just their friend's visible contact information, but also their friend's shadow contact information.
And this is part of the point I was making yesterday, that if Facebook is collecting call logs, and text logs, and contact information, that is information on third parties who may not have given Facebook permission to have that information.
Like, if I give you my phone number, and it's in your phone, and then you let Facebook have your contact list, you've given Facebook my phone number without my permission.
In terms of privacy, we can understand why that's a problem.
You shouldn't get access to a person's information unless they agreed to it.
And simply because someone else has my information doesn't mean you have a right to take it.
But what about when we look at hate speech laws and how free speech is being curtailed?
There's a story from 2013 about a teen who was arrested for posting rap lyrics on Facebook.
Now, the grand jury did refuse to indict.
But this is a kid who was 18 who posted rap lyrics to Facebook and was arrested because people thought it was a bomb threat.
What then if the police are allowed to get all of the data on you from Facebook?
What might they find?
Certainly people talk about things that can be deemed illegal out of context.
In this instance, a kid was posting rap lyrics.
Out of context, it sounded like he was making a threat.
He got arrested.
Were the police able to download his entire Facebook history?
Are the police able to get a warrant to download every message you have ever sent, every post, every picture, and The shadow information they're holding about you that you can't even see.
The Daily Dot has a story from a couple years ago about the police getting access to your Facebook data.
In one section, how does Facebook decide whether to hand over user data?
Every time government agents come to Facebook with a subpoena or warrant, the company claims to apply a rigorous approach to scrutinize each request for legal sufficiency.
This is managed through a dedicated portal.
Through this portal, the agents must authenticate themselves and submit the formal legal process documentation, as well as to stipulate the nature of the case.
Facebook operates a prioritization system in handling the requests and uses this detail to classify urgency.
What gives the government the authority to obtain user data?
There are a full range of both domestic and non-domestic legal processes to choose from on the simple submission forms drop-down menu.
The most common in the U.S., however, are a subpoena, court order, search warrant, and national security letter.
They vary in the data that they can provide, but all are relatively in common use, although national security letters are particularly controversial.
So let's look at the story about shadow profiles.
Every message you have ever sent, with or without context, that can be obtained and you probably wouldn't even know.
I'm talking about criminal liability here and the potential for police to dig into your data because of what we're seeing now with new laws being passed in the U.S.
and what recently happened in the U.K.
with Count Dankula.
There's a law called FOSTA.
A bill was just signed.
It hasn't been signed into law yet from reason.
Hours after FOSTA passes, Reddit bans escorts and sugar daddy communities.
Sometime around 2 a.m.
last night, Reddit banned several long-running sex worker forums from the platform.
The move comes just hours after the Senate passed a bill making digital facilitation of prostitution a federal crime.
Under the new law, social media sites and other hubs of user-generated content can be held criminally liable.
Craigslist actually removed their entire personal section because of this and they said US Congress just passed HR 1865 FOSTA seeking to subject websites to criminal and civil liability when third parties users misuse online personals unlawfully.
Any tool or service can be misused.
We can't take such risk without jeopardizing all our other services, so we are regretfully taking Craigslist personals offline.
Hopefully, we can bring them back someday.
To the millions of spouses, partners, and couples who met through Craigslist, we wish you every happiness.
The concern is that if websites can be held criminally accountable for the actions of third parties, then platforms like escort services on Reddit or personals Can potentially facilitate trafficking.
Even if Reddit and Craigslist and whatever website do everything in their power to stop it, people still might use these platforms in ways that are trafficking.
How is someone supposed to know if someone is or is not being forced into sex trafficking or if something is prostitution?
But the problem is actually much worse than just personals.
I'm actually surprised that dating services haven't taken stronger issue with this.
Because certainly anybody can traffic using any word they want.
It doesn't have to be overt.
You don't need to use a personals section to traffic or sell sex.
You can call it whatever you want.
You can use code words.
You can refer to it as furniture.
You can go to the For Sale section on Craigslist, which I'm sure people are probably already doing, and using new code words to traffic insects.
In which case, is Craigslist going to be held criminally responsible because people are using code words to traffic on their site?
Potentially, yes.
That means communities with free, legitimate speech will be shut down out of the fear of this law.
And what happens then?
Well, these websites, posts on Facebook potentially, posts on other social media platforms that are holding massive amounts of your data will hand that over to police should a warrant or subpoena get issued.
The main concern I have is that it seems like we are rebuilding the old school establishment.
that 20 or 30 years ago, there were only a few media companies dictating the opinions to the masses.
And they tried to stay middle of the road to make sure they got the biggest audience.
This kept most people's opinions relatively close to each other.
But with the dawn of the internet, many new opinions, more voices have been able to rise up and speak where they would not have been able to before.
With these threats to free speech, however, things seem to be rolling backwards.
Now let's go back to the Count Dankula story.
For those that aren't familiar, this was a man who posted a video to around 8 or 10 subscribers.
Yes, literally, like, counting on your fingers, that's how many subscribers he had.
Of a prank he was playing on his girlfriend where he made his girlfriend's dog react to him saying, you know, Nazi-ish things or making the dog do a Nazi salute.
He was charged with a crime.
He was convicted of being grossly offensive for this crime.
But here's what I don't understand.
The courts have ruled this to be grossly offensive.
But in this instance, we can see TheMirror.co.uk has published the video in full.
The entire video from Count Dankula up without edit.
But it's not just The Mirror.
Also, TheDailyStar.co.uk also has the entire video up in its original context without edit.
But then we have the Daily Mail, which shows about a 30-second clip of some of the more egregious moments in the video, such as when he says things to his dog to get a reaction, and the dog actually watching a Hitler video.
In the UK, it was deemed a crime.
It was grossly offensive for Dankula to say these things.
But was it really about saying them?
Because if the video was grossly offensive, then why are all these media outlets publishing the video in full?
Over two years later, these videos have not been taken down.
Even after the conviction, where the court said, yes, it is offensive, these videos are still up.
So then my question is, was it Dankula's speech?
His speech in his home, which is deemed offensive, and not the video itself?
In which case, are they actually suggesting that private speech in your own home can be criminal?
And this is when I wrap back to the beginning about Facebook having all of your data.
Is it possible that in the course of an investigation, a warrant, or subpoena, Facebook hands over every message you've ever sent, and then by simply pressing Ctrl-F, Find, and typing in some word, the police can find something you said that is deemed hate speech and then charge you for it?
What about Count Dankula's story is grossly offensive?
Certainly, these news organizations are allowed to publish the video in its entirety, so it can't be the video.
Was it the combination?
That he filmed the video, edited it, and uploaded it?
Was it the reach?
It certainly wasn't the reach.
So maybe it's a combination of all three, and maybe we don't have anything to worry about here.
But it certainly does seem like all of the chess pieces are being put in place, and we are staring down the barrel of a dystopian future that I think most of us wouldn't want to live in.
In response to Dankula's conviction, Jonathan Paya Comedian made a video where he also mocked Nazis.
Someone posted this photo.
where they contacted the Met Contact Center saying that they were grossly offended
by Jonathan Pai's video and the police responded, Hi, it's understandable how this would cause distress.
If you feel personally offended by this, we can arrange to come and see you to take a report
or you can report here. Thanks.
Now that doesn't mean Jonathan Pai is going to be investigated or he's going to be charged with a
crime, but you can see why people are alarmed.
Count Dankula's convictions should send alarm bells to everybody in the West.
Yes, this is the UK.
This is not the US.
The US is different, but we have arrested a teenager for posting rap lyrics in the past, although our courts didn't indict.
Five years later in the UK, someone was actually convicted for posting something silly on the internet.
Now this next story may or may not be officially confirmed, but from CSO, they said, Microsoft to ban offensive language from Skype, Xbox, Office, and other services.
Microsoft will ban offensive language and inappropriate content from Skype, Xbox, Office, and other services on May 1st, claiming it has the right to go through your private data to investigate.
If you go to Microsoft's new service agreement section, you can see that yes, they have a section that says, don't publicly display or use the services to share inappropriate content or material involving, for example, nudity, bestiality, pornography, offensive language, graphic violence, or criminal activity.
Now this is the Microsoft Services Agreement.
Whether or not it applies to every program under the Microsoft umbrella, I'm not entirely sure.
So take this with a grain of salt.
It doesn't necessarily mean you can't send nudes or make lewd conversation on Skype.
But many people believe that to be the case because this is Microsoft's service agreement.
According to the story, some folks believe the change in Microsoft terms may be related to Congress passing the Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, which was combined with the Stop Enabling Sex Trafficking Act.
FOSTA-SESTA would hold platforms responsible for user speech, illegally shared content, and anything that might be construed as trafficking.
It has been called the death of the open internet.
And who called it that?
The Cato Institute.
In their article titled, The Death of the Open Internet, where they make reference to the passing of SESTA and FOSTA, and how this could actually remove our protections and, well, be the death of the open internet.
People have been arrested for posting silly things.
Online.
Facebook is storing every conversation you've ever had on the platform.
They're even collecting when people call you, when people text you.
And those people who are texting you never agreed to that.
The police are able to obtain this data.
The police have arrested people for posting videos to YouTube channels with around 10 subscribers.
At what point will our private conversations be sent To the police, or obtained by the police, or obtained by the public in such a way that people accuse you of a hate crime or of posting things that are grossly offensive.
At what point does Skype or some other Microsoft service go into your messages and say, you know what, that's offensive language and we're banning you from the platform?
At what point will you say something in a video game over Xbox and they determine that it's grossly offensive or violent and they can remove you?
It seems like we are really losing this fight.
And as much as I don't want to be an alarmist, when I look back to these stories of the dystopian future, 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Brave New World, there's a little bit of all of it being mixed in.
Certain opinions are no longer allowed to be shared on platforms.
Speech is under attack.
Yes, it really is.
A lot of people might claim that free speech isn't being threatened, but it is.
That doesn't mean that free speech is over.
But it certainly means there is a threat to free speech in our society, and that includes North America and Europe.
To me, it just looks like the dominoes are falling over.
I don't think there's a secret cabal of individuals who are planning on taking over the world by stripping away our rights.
I think it's just the people who are pushing forward, the people who are winning, who are going unopposed, are those that would take a little bit more power.
Why is it that someone was charged over hate speech or being grossly offensive?
Because we've reached that point and not enough people are speaking out and standing up against it.
There's not a whole lot that I am very active about.
When it comes to policy and politics, for the most part, like the gun debate, left versus right, I don't know if I'm smart enough to say what should or should not be in terms of passing new laws.
But when it comes to our right to speak, our right to privacy, That's fairly obvious to most people.
Whether you're on the left or the right, I think we can all agree we have a right to privacy and we have a right to express ourselves.
Albeit many people on the left, and I think this is more of a fringe faction, disagree with the right to free speech, I certainly think most reasonable people would agree we should have a right to privacy, we should have a right to freely express ourselves, and it feels like those rights are slowly eroding.
But let me know what you think in the comments below.
I hate to be super alarmist, but I felt like it needed to be said.
With everything that's happened in the past few weeks, in the past few months, the past year, we've come to this point where I said, look, these pieces are lining up.
The pieces are in place on the chessboard, and the move is ready to be made.
But what's going to change to stop it?
Is this just a trend?
Will we see this flip back around?
Maybe it's just a phase that we're in.
Maybe things really will get better, and maybe it's not as bad as we think it is.
Let me know what you think in the comments below.
We'll keep the conversation going.
Thank you all so much for hanging out and watching.
