Bill Gates Laments First Amendment Strength on “Misinformation,” Advocates For Digital ID

Microsoft Founder Bill Gates has voiced concerns about the intersection between technology and speech, particularly criticizing the limitations he perceives the First Amendment’s free speech protections impose on combating online “misinformation.”

Gates erroneously cited the example that shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is an exception to free speech protections, a misrepresentation that has been clarified legally over time to be more nuanced in its application.

The technology magnate is grappling with what he believes to be the threats of misinformation and the technological phenomena of deepfakes.

In his discussions, particularly highlighted in an upcoming Netflix series and through dialogue with Stanford experts, Gates advocates for digital IDs to verify online identities to help curb this “misinformation.”

The Gates Foundation has donated money to digital ID projects in the past, using parts of Africa as a testing ground.

Gates’ proposed approach ostensibly aims to curb the spread of fake content and ensure that only verified individuals can publish information which means that online content can be matched to real-life identities.

However, this raises significant concerns about privacy and the potential for excessive surveillance and control over digital spaces, something Gates has never been too keen to defend.

“The US is a tough one because we have the notion of the First Amendment and what are the exceptions like yelling ‘fire’ in a theater,” Gates explained, as reported by CNET.

Gates’ commentary on the First Amendment, using the flawed “fire in a theater” analogy suggests a readiness to dilute foundational free speech principles to implement digital solutions.

Keep reading

Bill Gates’ “Unsolvable Problem” Is Free Speech

Bill Gates recently said that the biggest “unsolvable” problem facing young people is free speech. Of course, he complains that it’s “misinformation” online, but we all know by now that nomenclature is used to rail against speech the ruling class doesn’t like.

Misinformation is the buzzword the ruling class uses to lament that the slaves use free speech, and won’t stay in line parroting their official narrative. It is becoming more common, according to NBC News. Apparently,  technological advances like artificial general intelligence chatbots make it easier to generate and spread falsehoods quickly and the rulers really don’t like that information is going against their control scheme.

In fact, hilariously, “AI-generated misinformation” was named as the top global risk of the next two years in a World Economic Forum survey in January. Fifty-five percent of Americans said the U.S. government and tech companies should act to restrict false information online, in a 2023 survey by the Pew Research Center. That means there are still a lot of people who believe a master should control the speech of his slaves so he can stay in power for longer.

Bill Gates claims he hates free speech because his daughter was bullied online. “Hearing my daughter talk about how she’d been harassed online, and how her friends experienced that quite a bit, brought that into focus in a way that I hadn’t thought about before,” said Gates.

Bill Gates Helps Create A Vaccine That Will Help Prevent Polio Caused By Vaccines

Last year, Phoebe Gates spoke out against free speech saying that “the misconceptions and conspiracy theories” about her family and her own relationships were reasons to not allow the slave class to speak freely, in an interview with The Information.

Keep reading

Lockheed Martin Develops System to Identify and Counter Online “Disinformation,” Prototyped by DARPA

Various military units around the world (notably in the UK during the pandemic) have been getting involved in what are ultimately, due to the goal (censorship) and participants (military) destined to become controversial, if not unlawful efforts.

But there doesn’t seem to be a lot of desire to learn from others’ mistakes. The temptation to bring the defense system into the political “war on disinformation” arena seems to be too strong to resist.

Right now in the US, Lockheed Martin is close to completing a prototype that will analyze media to “detect and defeat disinformation.”

And by media, those commissioning the tool – called the Semantic Forensics (SemaFor) program – mean everything: news, the internet, and even entertainment media. Text, audio, images, and video that are part of what’s considered “large-scale automated disinformation attacks” are supposed to be detected and labeled as false by the tool.

The development process is almost over, and the prototype is used by the US Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

Keep reading

Why the Telegram Prosecution May Move the Overton Window on Free Speech

Earlier this month, French authorities arrested Pavel Durov, the founder of Telegram, a chat app widely used around the world by nearly 1 billion people, including by political dissidents and terrorist groups. Some of the criminal charges, which are peculiar to French law, stem from allegations of clearly illegal and harmful material spread on the platform. But other charges, which relate to the mere use of encrypted technology, have set off wider concerns about a crackdown on free speech. To some extent, this has been led by the right, with Elon Musk pushing #freepavel on his X platform. But these worries have also been shared by journalists and civil-liberties groups worried about the encroachment of law enforcement on the way that people around the world communicate.,

To get a clearer sense of what is going on, I spoke with Daphne Keller, the director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center. Keller, who was previously an associate general counsel for Google on free-expression issues, has written that the charges are more likely to be focused on how illegal material is handled by big tech but could represent a broader threat to how we people communicate online.

Keep reading

The Struggle for and Promise of Free Speech

Censorship – the regulation, suppression, and criminalization of disfavored speech – has mounted a comeback. Government officials, social media content moderators and moguls, journalists, and professors have aligned to thwart dissemination of misinformation, disinformation, malinformation, hate speech, and harmful or offensive remarks. They applaud themselves as brave activists blazing a new path to the achievement of a truly diverse, equitable, and inclusive democracy.

Yet they are throwbacks, as Jonathan Turley shows in “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.” A distinguished George Washington University Law School professor, Turley is also an eminent columnist, television analyst, and litigator. His book provides a bracing “history of the struggle for free speech in America” and an incisive account of “the promise of free speech” in the United States and wherever basic rights and fundamental freedoms are protected. Through his winning combination of historical reconstruction, legal analysis, and philosophical exposition, Turley reveals that the arguments for regulating speech that the contemporary censorship industrial complex touts as original have a long and disreputable lineage.

In the West, which developed exemplary principles of free speech, that lineage of censorship stretches back to democratic Athens, which put Socrates to death for teaching the young to ask hard questions about virtue and justice, human nature, and the cosmos. It encompasses the early modern Star Chamber which in 16th– and 17th-century England prosecuted the crime of seditious libel – speaking ill of public officials, the laws, or the government – and the great 18th century English jurist William Blackstone who insisted on seditious libel’s criminality. And despite America’s founding promise and constitutional imperatives, government silencing of criticism of government extends throughout the nation’s history. Those who today undertake to expand the authorities’ power to determine what is and what is not fit for the public to think, say, and hear give fashionable expression to the authoritarian impulses, aims, and actions that not only have beset the West, but which also have marked most political societies throughout most of history.

American constitutional government sought to break authoritarianism’s grip. The Declaration of Independence stated that government’s primary task was to secure unalienable rights, starting with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In the original Constitution, the sovereign people protected speech by declining to delegate to Congress the power to regulate it. The First Amendment, ratified two years after the Constitution went into effect, explicitly denied Congress the power to abridge free speech. This reinforced the fundamental freedom – as stated in “Cato’s Letters,” widely read in 18th-century America – to “think what you would and speak what you thought.”

Free speech, Turley emphasizes, has two major justifications. The first is functional: Free speech undergirds the liberal education and robust public discussion that produce the informed citizenry on which a rights-protecting democracy depends. The second justification, grounded in natural rights teachings, affirms that speaking freely is inseparable from our humanity.

While both justifications are crucial to constitutional government in America, Turley stresses that the tendency to rely exclusively on the functional argument alone has proved calamitous. Protecting free speech solely because it is good for democracy invites the curtailment of this utterance or that publication on the grounds that it undermines democracy.

Free speech fortifies the other four First Amendment freedoms. Religious freedom includes the right to profess one’s faith, as well as the right not to profess other faiths or any faith at all. A free press keeps citizens knowledgeable about the news and circulates opinions and ideas. The freedoms of assembly and petition enable citizens to communicate among themselves and express their concerns to the government.

Keep reading

Switzerland: The End of Free Speech

Most people in the world view Switzerland as a safe, sensible, fair and free nation. The reality is that behind its pristine veneer, it is as corrupt – if not more – than any other nation, and is becoming increasingly repressive at an alarming rate.

As many of you know, I am Swiss (from my mother’s side) and live in my home country. This has given me a certain vantage point to report on globalism, with Switzerland having been selected to host these dark institutions on our soil back in the 19th century.

Today, I wanted to draw your attention to more local news and the bleak state of free speech here.

While all eyes are on the U.K. at the moment due to their Orwellian crack down on freedom of expression — to the point of jailing people for memes and stickers — and on France as we await more information on Pavel Durov’s arrest, free speech is under unprecedented attack in Switzerland as well.

A friend of mine, who goes by the pseudonym “Barbouille” on X, has just been fined the hefty amount of CHF 4’800, approx $ 5’700 — for a tweet.

His crime? Calling out the indoctrination of children being taught what LGBTQI… stands for in a classroom, under a video posted by another account on March 24, 2023.

Keep reading

German Court Forces Podcasters To Delete Episode Where They Referred To Balding Trans-Identified Male As “He/Him”

A podcast episode of Hoss and Hopf had to be deleted by court order because the moderators called a trans-identified man “a man” and used male pronouns to refer to him. The podcasters may be facing potential prison time or a fine of up to €250,000.

In the controversial podcast episode, the hosts discussed the case of Laura Holstein, formerly known as Nicolas. Holstein, a balding male who now identifies as a “woman,” has made multiple headlines over the past few months related to him demanding access to female spaces. Most recently, Holstein, with the support of the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, has been pursuing legal action against a female-only gym in Bavaria.

But the Frankfurt am Main Regional Court has now stopped in to order the censorship of the Hoss and Hopf episode related to Holstein. The hosts, Kiarash Hossainpour and Philip Hopf, have also been prohibited from referring to Holstein as a man and using male pronouns for him. 

Keep reading

SHOCKING: Over 50,000 British Citizens Have Been Charged For Using “Illegal Words Or Writing”

Over the last month, the United Kingdom has been hit hard by a wave of protests following the gruesome stabbing murder of three little girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport, England on July 29, 2024.

 Axel Rudakubana, a 17-year-old male and the son of Rwandan nationals, murdered these young girls in cold blood. Protests immediately popped off the next day in Southport and spread across the UK. 

The frustration expressed by protesters represents a general hostility towards the overwhelming wave of non-white immigration that has landed on Albion’s shores in the last 70 years. 

As a result of these protests, the regime of Prime Minister Keir Starmer has started to arrest people for making posts on social media that explain uncomfortable truths about the troubling demographic situation in the UK and the harsh realities of non-white crime.

Before the Southport protests kicked off, X user ~~datahazard~~ noted on March 5, that “3300 people [were] arrested in Britain last year for saying naughty words online.” 

X owner Elon Musk was surprised by these revelations which he responded to in a tweet in disbelief saying, “3300?”

~~datahazard~~ then responded with an even more revealing analysis of these prosecutions, by posting a bar chart noting that “Over 50,000 Brits in the past decade have been charged with Illegal Words or Writing (Race/Religion subset)”

Keep reading

Freedom of speech is dying in the UK, Norwegian author warns

Bjorn Andreas Bull-Hansen, a Norwegian novelist and YouTuber, posted a short video on Sunday about UK authorities arresting people for social media posts. Bull-Hansen has been to England and Scotland many times.  “I love England and Scotland,” he said. “And it saddens to me to see what’s been going on there, especially in England.”

“I honestly don’t know what it takes, I honestly don’t know what is allowed to say over there anymore. It’s a mess and we’re going to talk a little bit about it and the problems in the UK here in this video,” he said.

“I believe in free speech,” he said. “I believe that without free speech there can be no freedom, there can be no democracy.  And free speech is, you know, it’s kind of the trademark of a good and civilised society. We must be allowed to disagree.  We must be allowed to criticise the authorities.  We must be allowed to criticise ideologies, religions and so on.”

“England, I would say, has been destroyed by immigration.  I think that’s very obvious. And we need to be able to say that,” he added.

Keep reading

Media Claims Elon Musk Is A Threat To Democracy – But Is “Democracy” Even Worth Saving?

There is perhaps nothing more tiresome and embarrassing as the theatrical pearl clutching of leftist media propaganda. For three years the public had to deal with the incessant drone of media fear mongering over the covid pandemic, an event which turned out to be a nothing-burger that 99.8% of the population on average would easily survive. After the 2020 elections we have been inundated with narratives about how conservatives are a “threat to democracy” – A democracy which progressives don’t even believe in as the recent DNC coup against Joe Biden proves.

The latest evolution of the democracy narrative is that free speech (and probably Russia) is the root evil behind civil unrest in western countries. The notion of thought crime is making its way to the forefront of the establishment tool box and this suggests we are entering the next stage of authoritarianism – Open criminalization of speech.

The Guardian in the UK is fully onboard with this development. The media outlet is on the warpath against Elon Musk and X (formerly known as Twitter) after Musk defied European and UK officials and their demands for censorship. In an article titled ‘Inciting Rioters In Britain Was A Test Run For Elon Musk. Just See What He Plans For America’, the platform launches into a tirade of delusional progressive talking points, a word salad designed to distract from the reality that what they are actually calling for is the death of free speech.

The Guardian argues:

“…Back in the golden days of 2020, tech platforms, still reeling from a public backlash, had at least to look as if they gave a shit. Twitter employed 4,000-plus people in “trust and safety”, tasked with getting dangerous content off its platform and sniffing out foreign influence operations.”

“In Britain, the canary has sung. This summer we have witnessed something new and unprecedented. The billionaire owner of a tech platform publicly confronting an elected leader and using his platform to undermine his authority and incite violence. Britain’s 2024 summer riots were Elon Musk’s trial balloon…”

“The presidential election is three months away. What if the billionaire contests the result? What if he decides democracy is overrated…?”

“…What Musk – the new self-appointed Lord of Misrule – has done is to rip off the mask. He’s shown that you don’t even have to pretend to care. In Musk’s world, trust is mistrust and safety is censorship. His goal is chaos. And it’s coming.”

Keep reading