Tag: social media

Trump Blamed for Killing 1300 Frenchmen?

Audrey Pulvar, deputy mayor of Paris for international relations, on social media.

Blames Trump for the 1300 deaths in France from the Heat Wave

She wrote:

“Dear American journalists and social media ‘influencers’: for days, some of you have been criticising and making fun of Paris because the city does not have A/C in every room…OMG, this is so rich!”

“As the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions in the world, you bear a significant amount of responsibility for global warming and the consequences we, in France, are experiencing. Your cities, which are 90 per cent air conditioned, are not unrelated to this.”

No wonder Macron wants WWIII. Perhaps Russia will nuke all the air conditioning in the US to save France

Keep reading

Meta Restricts Engineers’ Use of Claude Code And Codex Over Model ‘Distillation’ Concerns

Meta Platforms has instructed engineers in its Applied AI division to limit or restrict their use of Anthropic’s Claude Code and OpenAI’s Codex coding and agent tools, according to internal documents reviewed by The Information. The policy, driven by concerns over inadvertent model distillation, aims to prevent outputs from rival AI systems from contaminating Meta’s own training data and model development processes for its Llama family of models (which, quite frankly, could only help).

The move reflects the increasingly zero-sum nature of frontier AI development, where companies aggressively protect the provenance and purity of their training data while seeking to reduce reliance on competitor tools. Internal guidelines referencing the restrictions date back to at least May, with the policy actively in effect as of late June. Meta has not publicly confirmed or commented on the directive.

According to the internal documents, strict limits have been placed on how engineers in the applied AI division can use the rival tools. The stated goal is to block “inadvertent distillation” of competitor model outputs into Meta’s AI development pipeline. The scope is targeted: it focuses on engineers working directly on model building and applied AI initiatives rather than the entire engineering organization.

Claude Code from Anthropic and Codex from OpenAI are basically the industry standard now for professional developers engaged in agentic coding workflows. These desktop and app-based interfaces can plan, write, debug, and iterate on complex codebases, offering powerful assistance at relatively low individual subscription costs. That accessibility, however, has increased the potential surface area for the risks Meta is now seeking to contain.

Keep reading

‘Citizen Vigilante’ broadcast on X to combat censorship

The controversial new film “Citizen Vigilante” received a free-to-stream debut on X in the wake of reports that some European nations would not approve the action flick for distribution.

German Director Uwe Boll spoke about the film’s journey in an interview with The Telegraph, noting that “Citizen Vigilante” was banned by his home country due to its violence and “anti-migrant” content, which displays the struggles of current culture clashes between peaceful European natives and the violence brought through mass migration from incompatible cultures like Islam.

He detailed how distribution rights have been delayed in Britain, blocking a film release there as well. Boll explained that the film was based on a true case of migrant violence, which entailed the gang-rape and murder of a fourteen-year-old girl by migrants in Hamburg ten years ago, and flips the script, where a vigilante punishes the perpetrators, after the legal system allowed them to walk free (as it did in real life).

“It’s as if we’re living in a completely insane and absurd political environment, especially in Europe, where people have completely lost track,” Boll stated during his interview. “There is a huge difference between so-called ‘hate speech’ and stabbing people in the neck. But facts don’t matter any more.”

Keep reading

Government’s latest attempt to censor online discourse is grave threat to free speech

The government’s latest censorship Bill C-34 is framed as legislation necessary to protect children. However, it incorporates some of the worst elements of Bill C-63 – the government’s previous “Online Harms Act” that failed to pass – and adds new censorship powers.

The bill proposes regulating social media, online services, and AI chatbots through the creation of a Digital Safety Commission. The Commission will have broad discretionary power to force compliance from online services and compel the removal of any harmful or “hateful” material.

Controversially, the bill weakens the legal definition of hatred presently used by the courts, reducing the requirement from both vilification and detestation to only one of either vilification OR detestation. The result will be increased censorship and a substantial chill on controversial speech.

Importantly, existing laws capture almost all of the conduct outlined in the bill. This includes cyberbullying and non-consensual distribution of intimate images, terroristic or violent threats, hate speech under the Criminal Code, counselling self-harm (Criminal Code s.241), and possession and distribution of CSAM material.

The bill requires online service providers to create an age verification system. Though the bill doesn’t specify age verification methods, it will undoubtedly require service providers to collect biometric and/or behavioural information from both adults and children, engaging privacy rights and raising fears of security breaches. The effect will be to create a database of personal identifying information and to destroy online anonymity 

Digital services that fail to comply with directives of the Digital Safety Commission will face substantial fines based on a percentage of global revenue.

“Laws protecting children from online harm and abuse are vital. However, for the most part, they already exist. All digital services like YouTube, X, Facebook, and TikTok have reporting and takedown policies and mechanisms for illegal or egregiously harmful material. Criminal charges for hateful or threatening posts are already commonplace. Of course, laws should be enacted to address any gaps, but online age verification for children will require age verification for everyone. So while the government frames the bill as a law to protect children, its effect will be to control digital access, comprehensively surveil and punish adults for online dissent. Together with Bill C-22, it establishes an online surveillance architecture that will negatively impact every Canadian’s right to free expression. Parliament should pursue targeted child-protection measures without undermining privacy, anonymity, and freedom of expression.”

Keep reading

How Facebook Has Censored My Account Over Criticism of Israel

Over the past few weeks, META’s censorship of my account has reduced my Reel Views by 68%, regular views by 27%, followers by 52%, and engagement by 21%.

I am by no means the greatest victim of META censorship, but I am in a position to document how and why they are censoring/limiting my reach on META platforms, all because of my objections to Israeli policies. This is a key reason as to why I am transitioning my work and output to Substack.This Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is what happened.

A few weeks ago, I was notified by META that my account would be limited going forward. My account will still be visible – at least for now – but “people will have to scroll longer,” and it won’t be “suggested” to people who aren’t my friends.

According to META, this censorship is because they claim my profile’s “content is unoriginal” and that it “has some issues.” (?!)

Anyone who follows me on META knows that my content is either me posting my own interviews with various outlets (by definition, that is original), my own opeds and commentary (also original), or pictures of my Samoyeds (admittedly, credit here goes to my dogs).

META’s “rules” define “unoriginal” as content that already exists on Facebook if you had no meaningful role in creating it,” “compiling and posting videos from multiple pages,” or “posting videos that you didn’t film or produce.”

Again, my postings really don’t violate these rules. My analysis is original, and most of the videos I post are my own interviews.

But I think we are getting closer to the real problem. I think META’s problem is not the posting of my own interviews (which constitute the majority of my posts), but rather the videos I post from Gaza. The problem, of course, is not that these videos are not my original content – META couldn’t care less about that.

It’s because it is videos documenting Israeli war crimes. Videos that have prompted Israel’s standing among Americans to plummet. Videos that are causing pro-Israeli lawmakers to lose their primary elections. Videos that have been censored from mainstream media and now TikTok, but that have still circulated on social media, partly thanks to accounts like mine.

Indeed, when I dug deeper, the only justification META provided for their censorship was that they had removed two videos of graphic violence I had posted on July 16 and July 30, 2025. That is, a year ago. At the height of the Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people.

Keep reading

The KIDS Act: A Bipartisan Mass Surveillance Megabill

Just weeks after Americans criticized the United Kingdom for imposing intrusive and heavy-handed social media rules, Congress is now advancing legislation that raises strikingly similar concerns about government overreach, privacy erosion, and the expansion of online surveillance.

A bipartisan agreement on children’s online safety legislation unveiled by House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders would impose new obligations on social media platforms, while creating powerful incentives for companies to end online anonymity.

The proposal is part of the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act), an omnibus package that bundles together multiple bills, including the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), the SCREEN Act, the SAFE BOTs Act, COPPA 2.0, the SPY Kids Act, and more, as well as data broker provisions and research and education initiatives.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie and ranking Democrat Frank Pallone announced Monday that they had reached agreement on the legislation, which would require social media companies to provide additional safeguards and parental tools for minors. The lawmakers said it would “hold Big Tech accountable.”

“We worked across the aisle for many months and have now found common ground on policies to significantly improve the digital environment for kids,” Guthrie and Pallone said in a joint statement.

As always, under that framing lies a familiar and deeply controversial approach: imposing broad obligations on platforms that hinge on whether companies know a user is a minor, without clearly defining how that knowledge is supposed to be obtained.

Congress has tried for years to set national rules for social media and youth safety. Those efforts have repeatedly stalled, in part because of unresolved tensions between child protection goals and fundamental privacy rights. In the absence of federal action, states have moved ahead with their own laws, often pushing even more aggressive requirements.

One of the main disputes appears to have been resolved in favor of House Republicans. According to a committee spokesperson, the agreement does not include a “duty of care” provision, a requirement backed by many child-safety advocates and several Senate lawmakers.

The bill text states that nothing in it may be construed to “impose a duty of care on a provider of a covered platform.”

Keep reading

NYC Democrat Socialist Candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier Wants to ABOLISH Prisons and OPEN America’s Borders — Deletes Thousands of Radical Tweets Before Tuesday’s Primary

The far-left challenger backed by NYC’s Communist Mayor Zohran Mamdani tried to scrub her record, but the receipts are devastating.

New York’s 13th Congressional District heads to the polls tomorrow in a Democratic primary that could hand a radical open-borders, abolish-prisons extremist a major platform in Congress.

Darializa Avila Chevalier, a 32-year-old democratic socialist and Justice Democrats-backed organizer, is challenging longtime Rep. Adriano Espaillat.

She’s been endorsed by far-left NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani and has positioned herself as the future of the Democrat Party in Upper Manhattan and the Bronx.

But newly uncovered deleted tweets from her old account (@darializabonet) — over 3,600 posts and reposts from 2018 to 2022 — reveal exactly who she really is.

In September 2021, she reposted this gem:

“A world without borders—just like a world without prisons or police—is possible, necessary, and the only moral way forward.”

She also amplified calls to “literally, abolish the border” and declared that “all deportation is wrong.”

She pushed for zero deportations and full open borders while the rest of the country was already suffering under Biden-era chaos.

During the 2020 riots, she doubled down on abolishing police entirely:

“F**k you. We’re gonna defund and abolish. You don’t get to water down our movements.”

And:

“No. It means ending policing full stop. Period. No more police at all ever.”

Other deleted posts praised seizing private property from landlords, nationalizing industries, and openly flirted with communism.

When confronted, Chevalier claimed the posts “did not reflect who she is today.” Too late. The mask is off.

Keep reading

Federal Appeals Court Allows Ohio to Enforce Social Media Law Requiring Parental Consent for Minors

A federal appeals court has ruled that Ohio can enforce legislation requiring children under 16 to obtain parental consent before using social media platforms, marking a significant development in state-level efforts to regulate minors’ online activity.

TechSpot reports that the Cincinnati-based 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 decision overturning a lower court ruling that had previously blocked Ohio’s Social Media Parental Notification Act from taking effect. The law mandates that websites reasonably likely to be accessed by children under 16 must verify users’ ages and secure parental approval before allowing minors to create or use accounts.

The legislation was originally passed in 2023 and took effect in January 2024. However, it faced an immediate legal challenge from NetChoice, a technology industry advocacy group representing major platforms including Meta, TikTok, YouTube, Snap, and X. A federal judge initially found the law unconstitutional and blocked its implementation, but the appeals court has now reversed that decision and sent the case back with instructions to lift the block.

In the majority opinion, Judge Eric Clay acknowledged that the law does impose some burden on speech but argued it is narrowly tailored to address what Ohio identified as a compelling state interest. According to Clay, the legislation aims to protect children from online harms and prevent them from agreeing to platform terms of service without proper supervision.

“At bottom, the Act imposes a parental consent requirement,” Clay wrote. “That requirement constitutes a marginal burden that precisely targets the multi-faceted problem that Ohio has identified: Children’s unsupervised assent to terms and conditions for use of platforms that take advantage of and harm them.”

The decision represents a rare victory for state efforts to restrict minors’ access to social media platforms, as similar laws in other jurisdictions have been blocked on free speech grounds. Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson praised the ruling as a win for families, stating it provides parents with necessary tools to monitor and control what their children view online.

Keep reading

Florida Sues TikTok Over Age Verification Failures as Digital ID Mandate Takes Effect

Florida wants every social media user in the state to prove how old they are. The method is up to the platforms and the options include government ID uploads, biometric face scans, payment credentials, and behavioral profiling. Now the state is suing TikTok for not doing it fast enough.

Attorney General James Uthmeier filed a 66-page complaint Monday in St. Lucie County Circuit Court, accusing TikTok of letting children under 14 create accounts, skipping parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds, and lying to parents about what their kids actually see on the app.

The lawsuit names TikTok Inc., its parent company ByteDance and several related entities. It’s the first enforcement action under House Bill 3, Florida’s Online Protections for Minors Act, which took effect January 1, 2025 after spending two years tangled in court challenges.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here. 

HB 3 bans social media platforms with addictive design features from contracting with children 13 and younger and requires parental consent before 14- and 15-year-olds can open accounts.

Violations carry fines of $50,000 each. But to block minors, platforms first have to figure out who is and isn’t a minor, which means age-checking every user, adults included.

Florida is building an identity verification regime for the internet under the banner of protecting kids and the surveillance costs of that project land on millions of people who have done nothing wrong.

Keep reading

Why Meta Suddenly Loves the Kids Online Safety Act

For years, Meta cast itself as the reluctant holdout against the Kids Online Safety Act, the one company that just could not bring itself to endorse a bill that was, at least on the face of it, written to protect children, but has an ulterior motive.

That resistance lasted right up until the Senate sweetened the pot. Once lawmakers bundled KOSA with a federal block on state AI laws and a national digital ID push, two measures Meta has spent millions lobbying to win, the company located its conscience and decided the bill was tolerable after all.

POLITICO reported that the conversion arrived the moment the Senate paired KOSA with the App Store Accountability Act, a digital ID bill aimed squarely at app stores. Meta now sits beside Microsoft, Apple, X, Snap, and Pinterest, all of them cheering for the legislation. It makes for an awkward look; a law sold to the public as a leash on the biggest platforms, when most of the biggest platforms turn out to be holding the leash.

As we’ve said many times before, and it seems we’re having to now say on a daily basis, verifying how old you are means proving who you are. The systems that estimate your age want a government ID, a face scan, or enough surveillance of your behavior to make an educated guess. None of them confirm your age and nothing else; they confirm your identity and keep a copy, so the platform that once let you be a username now wants your legal name on file.

So why would a company that lives off your data fight to make you surrender more of it? The App Store Accountability Act would order Apple and Google to verify ages at the store, which would load the cost and the legal risk onto the two companies that run the stores. Its own apps pick up no new obligation at all. Meta collects the identity-checked internet it has wanted for years and gets to look like a bystander while Apple and Google play the heavy.

The deeper payoff is older than this bill. Meta has dreamed of a real-name internet since Facebook’s early days, back when it enforced an authentic-identity rule until the public revolt made the policy too expensive to keep.

“Age verification” revives that dream by statute and applies it to everyone, with the invoice mailed to somebody else. A network of confirmed, identity-linked humans is also a network where the bots that annoy advertisers thin out, and ad space attached to real people fetches a premium. Protecting children is the version for the cameras; the version that moves the company sits on the balance sheet.

The less advertised half of the package lives in the preemption language. A handful of states have started writing their own AI rules, some governing how companies grab biometric data and let algorithms make decisions about residents. A federal block would bulldoze those efforts and erase one of the few places ordinary people can still object to how these systems treat their information.

Meta strolls away with a single, gentler national standard while residents lose the local protections they had started to build and the whole trade gets filed under everyone wins, as long as “everyone” means Meta.

The bundle also tucks in the NO FAKES Act and this is where the child-safety wrapping paper comes off completely. The bill would let anyone sue over an “unauthorized digital replica” and would hit platforms with heavy penalties for failing to obey its demands, among them fast removal of flagged content and policies to cut off repeat offenders.

A company staring down those fines for guessing wrong on a hard case will pull lawful speech first and worry about the details later. What the bill builds is a takedown machine, with the lever handed to whoever complains the loudest.

The actors’ union SAG-AFTRA has been pushing the bill hard from the other side, gathering more than 16,000 signatures on an open letter that frames it as a shield against deepfakes used in scams, fake endorsements, and the replacement of human performers. “Unchecked AI can ruin lives,” union president Sean Astin said and on that narrow point, he has a fair case. The trouble is what the rest of the bill does and how it curbs satire and parody.

The latest version came back last month from a bipartisan group that includes Senators Marsha Blackburn, Chris Coons, Thom Tillis, and Amy Klobuchar, with OpenAI, YouTube, and IBM applauding from the wings. The Senate Judiciary Committee takes it up Thursday.

Keep reading