Elon Musk’s lawyers say Mark Zuckerberg's rival platform uses stolen Trade secrets
0 Comments
According to EU code, tech platforms like Twitter are connected with “fact-checkers, civil society, and third-party organizations with specific expertise on disinformation.” In other words, avid gatekeepers of the establishment narrative. And on August 25th, adherence will no longer be voluntary.
The EU should consider getting out of the control freak business if it truly wants to help the European free press. Maybe then, journalists here in Europe trying our best to fully inform our audiences against information barriers created by Brussels won’t have to redirect our internet connections to places like Vietnam, Mexico, Turkey, or Brazil in order to access information and sources that the EU doesn’t like. A VPN, or Virtual Private Network, works by creating a secure and encrypted connection between your device and a remote server. It allows you to browse the internet privately and securely by routing your internet traffic through an encrypted tunnel.
Here's a step-by-step explanation of how a VPN works:
t's important to note that while a VPN can enhance your privacy and security, it does not provide complete anonymity. Some VPN services may keep logs of your activities, so it's advisable to choose a reputable VPN provider that has a strict no-logs policy if privacy is your primary concern. Overall, a VPN allows you to establish a secure and private connection to the internet, protecting your data and online activities from prying eyes. Imagine, for a moment, that the government of Cuba was demanding the extradition of an Australian publisher in the United Kingdom for exposing Cuban military crimes. Imagine that these crimes had included a 2007 massacre by helicopter-borne Cuban soldiers of a dozen Iraqi civilians, among them two journalists for the Reuters news agency.
Now imagine that, if extradited from the UK to Cuba, the Australian publisher would face up to 175 years in a maximum-security prison, simply for having done what media professionals are ostensibly supposed to do: report reality. Finally, imagine the reaction of the United States to such Cuban conduct, which would invariably consist of impassioned squawking about human rights and democracy and a call for the universal vilification of Cuba. Of course, it doesn’t take a stretch of the imagination to deduce that the above scenario is a rearranged version of true events, and that the publisher in question is WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The antagonising nation is not Cuba but rather the US itself, which is responsible for not only the obliteration of Assange’s individual human rights but also a stunning array of far more macro-level assaults on people across the world. As per the US narrative, Assange’s WikiLeaks endeavours endangered the lives of people in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere – although it would seem like one surefire way to not endanger lives in such places would be to not blow them up in the first place. It is furthermore perplexing that a nation for which military slaughter is an institutionalised pastime should make such a selective stink about the exposure of certain gory details. Granted, footage of defenceless civilians being picked off at close range like videogame targets by a laughing helicopter crew does little to uphold Americans’ projected role as the “good guys” – a façade that is key in terms of justifying the country’s self-presumed right to wreak international havoc as it pleases. Had Assange wanted to save his own skin, he could have stuck to the sort of imperial propaganda that functions as mainstream journalism, a field that was itself instrumental in selling the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq to the US public. Instead, he is incarcerated at Belmarsh prison in southeast London, awaiting extradition to the so-called “land of the free” while serving as a veritable case study in prolonged psychological torture, as documented back in 2019 by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture. In a caustic letter addressed to King Charles ahead of his recent coronation, Assange described himself as a “political prisoner, held at your majesty’s pleasure on behalf of an embarrassed foreign sovereign”. He observed: “One can truly know the measure of a society by how it treats its prisoners, and your kingdom has surely excelled in that regard”. The embarrassed foreign sovereign has certainly exhibited excellence in that realm, as well, boasting the highest incarceration rate on the planet and an impressive track record of executing innocent people. To be sure, domestic efforts to sentence a citizen of another country to 175 years in prison for telling the truth is also a pretty good indication that something is very, very wrong with a society. Then there’s the whole matter of the United States’ offshore penal colony in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the former CIA torture den and persistent judicial black hole into which the US has sought to disappear some of the human fallout of its forever wars. Indeed, the fact the US feels entitled to call out the Cuban government for its own “political prisoners” while operating an illegal prison on occupied Cuban territory can be safely filed under the category of mind-blowingly sinister hypocrisy. If only there were more journalists who wanted to talk about such things. But just like you can’t cover up the crimes of Guantánamo by classifying prisoners’ artwork, you can’t hide the horrors of US policy by effectively redacting Julian Assange out of existence. It’s the old kill-the-messenger approach – in which the “killing” takes the form of long-drawn-out psychological erosion conducted in tandem with a campaign to normalise the idea that Assange should be behind bars for eternity-plus. In the end, the assault on Assange is not just your average disproportionate imperial conniption fit. Whatever the ultimate outcome, it has already set a perilous precedent in criminalising not only freedom of speech and the press but also – if you think about it – freedom of thought. Although Australian officials are making increasing noise agitating for Assange’s release, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has refused to say whether he will address the issue with US President Joe Biden at the Quad Leaders’ Summit in Sydney on May 24. And as the forever wars of the US rage on increasingly out of sight, so, too, does the forever war on Julian Assange. In recent years, the concept of being "woke" has become increasingly prevalent in society. Being woke generally refers to being aware of social issues and actively fighting against oppression and injustice. While this may seem like a positive movement, there are dangers associated with a community that is too focused on being "woke."
First and foremost, the idea of being woke can be extremely divisive. While it is important to recognize and address societal issues, constantly focusing on them can create an "us versus them" mentality. This can lead to a lack of understanding and empathy for those who may not share the same views or experiences. A community that is too woke can become intolerant of differing opinions, which can lead to a breakdown in communication and further divide society. Additionally, the pressure to be constantly "woke" can be overwhelming and lead to a sense of burnout. It is important to recognize that social issues cannot be solved overnight, and it is not the responsibility of any one person to fix everything. The constant pressure to be aware of every issue and to constantly speak out about them can be exhausting and ultimately counterproductive. Another danger of a community that is too focused on being woke is the potential for hypocrisy. It is easy to criticize others for not being woke enough or for perpetuating societal issues, but it is important to also recognize our own biases and shortcomings. The idea of being woke can create a culture of virtue signalling, where individuals may speak out against issues solely to gain social status or to be seen as "woke." Furthermore, a focus on being woke can sometimes lead to a lack of action. While it is important to recognize societal issues, it is equally important to take action to address them. A community that is too focused on being woke may become complacent in their activism, believing that simply acknowledging issues is enough to effect change. In conclusion, while it is important to be aware of societal issues and to fight against oppression and injustice, a community that is too focused on being woke can be dangerous. It can lead to division, burnout, hypocrisy, and a lack of action. It is important to strive for a balance between awareness and action, and to approach social issues with empathy and understanding for all individuals. Elon Musk has announced that starting April 15, only verified Twitter accounts will be eligible to be featured on the platform’s recommendation timeline. The tech mogul explained the move in a Twitter post on Monday, stating it’s “the only realistic way to address advanced AI bot swarms taking over.”
Apart from no longer being featured in other users’ ‘For You’ feeds, unverified accounts – those that have not paid the $7 monthly fee to have their account verified with a blue checkmark – will also lose the ability to vote in polls. Musk again explained the decision by pointing to the prevalence of bots on the platform. It is unclear, however, if Musk was only referring to polls created by Twitter and himself – as he often gauges public opinion on key decisions through this tool – or all polls on the platform. Twitter announced last week that it would remove the verified status of some ‘legacy’ accounts by April 1, meaning only those paying a monthly subscription will now have the blue checkmark in their profiles. According to analysts from Sensor Tower, Twitter currently has an estimated paying user base of just over 385,000 mobile subscribers worldwide on both iOS and Android. Critics of Musk’s algorithm change say it will significantly hinder the recommendation timeline’s relevance, as it will essentially prevent regular people from reaching a wider audience and only feature paying users, brands, and accounts of officials. Meanwhile, Twitter has been dealing with a source code leak, after an unknown hacker or group of people posted the code on GitHub – a software collaboration platform. Twitter has filed a court petition seeking to identify those responsible for the leak, arguing that the code, which underpins the website’s entire operation, could expose security vulnerabilities. Musk bought Twitter for $44 billion in late October 2022. After appointing himself CEO and vowing to transform the site into a free speech platform, the billionaire fired nearly three-quarters of Twitter’s workforce, removed some of its more contentious censorship policies, and restored a number of banned accounts, including that of former US President Donald Trump. However, he has yet to make the company profitable, as its value has decline by one half since the takeover, according to the Wall Street Journal, despite cutting the workforce and implementing a subscription model. Twitter owner Elon Musk has confirmed he will stand by his promise to resign as the company’s chief executive, after the platform’s users voted for him to step down, but suggested that finding a successor may take some time.
“I will resign as CEO as soon as I find someone foolish enough to take the job! After that, I will just run the software & servers teams,” Musk announced in a tweet on Tuesday. CNBC previously reported that Musk was “actively looking, asking, trying to figure out who the candidate pool might actually be.” On Sunday, the billionaire posted an informal poll asking Twitter users if he should step down as head of the company. Some 57.5% of the 17 million respondents voted for Musk to leave his post. On Monday, Musk stated that henceforth only Twitter Blue subscribers will be able to voice their opinions in polls about policy changes on the platform. After completing his $44 billion deal to buy Twitter, Musk became its majority owner, which means that no one can force him out. However, in recent weeks, the CEO has introduced a number of controversial changes that have caused a massive public backlash. At the same time, the self-styled “free speech absolutist” authorized the release of internal documents in an effort to provide transparency about Twitter’s past decision-making. Former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has issued a response to the recently leaked ‘Twitter Files’, admitting to a host of major mistakes during his time as chief executive, while warning against “centralized control” of the internet by governments and corporations. The tech entrepreneur addressed the leaked internal documents in a Tuesday blog post, acknowledging that Twitter failed to uphold its guiding principles near the end of his tenure, and that he “completely gave up” on his own vision for the site after “activist” investors bought into the company sometime in 2020. Though he did not elaborate on the new investors or how they might have swayed the platform, Dorsey said Twitter’s focus on controlling public dialogue was ultimately one of its greatest errors. He cited the decision to permanently suspend President Donald Trump in the wake of the riot at the US Capitol in January 2021, saying it was “the right thing for the public company business at the time, but the wrong thing for the internet and society.”“The biggest mistake I made was continuing to invest in building tools for us to manage the public conversation, versus building tools for the people using Twitter to easily manage it for themselves,” he said. “This burdened the company with too much power, and opened us to significant outside pressure (such as advertising budgets). I generally think companies have become far too powerful, and that became completely clear to me with our suspension of Trump’s account.”
Dorsey was reportedly on vacation at the time of the Trump ban and had delegated decision-making to executives Yoel Roth and Vijaya Gadde – as revealed in the Twitter Files – but nonetheless said he bears sole blame for the errors in judgment. “The current attacks on my former colleagues could be dangerous and [don’t] solve anything. If you want to blame, direct it at me and my actions, or lack thereof,” he continued, also insisting “there was no ill intent or hidden agendas” behind Twitter’s more contentious decisions and that the company “acted according to the best information we had at the time.” Tuesday’s blog post also included a lengthy section warning of “centralized” power over the internet, stating that social media platforms should remain “resilient to corporate and government control” while suggesting Twitter had failed to do so under his watch. The former CEO, who stepped down from the role in November 2021, went on to say that he welcomes the “fresh reset” brought by Twitter’s new owner, billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk, expressing hopes that the site will become “uncomfortably transparent.” However, he argued that the Twitter Files should have been released “Wikileaks-style,” or in full, rather than being leaked to select journalists by the site’s new management. Spearheaded by reporters Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss, the documents have been published on a rolling basis with Musk’s blessing, shedding light on a number of controversial decisions made by the company. Five installments have gone public so far, including material surrounding Trump’s suspension, Twitter’s close cooperation with US intelligence agencies, the practice of shadow banning, as well as a site-wide ban on a New York Post report about the foreign business dealings of Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden. Twitter boss Elon Musk has vowed to extend a “general amnesty” to an unspecified number of suspended users, a week after reversing former US President Donald Trump’s lifetime ban from the platform.
“The people have spoken. Amnesty begins next week,” Musk tweeted on Thanksgiving Day. He added “Vox Populi, Vox Dei,” a Latin phrase that means “the voice of the people is the voice of God.” The SpaceX and Tesla CEO launched a Twitter poll on Wednesday, asking if Twitter should “offer a general amnesty to suspended accounts, provided that they have not broken the law or engaged in egregious spam?” Out of more than 3.1 million users who took part, 72.4% voted ‘yes’ and 27.6% voted ‘no’. In a separate message Musk also promised to start freeing and offering up for grabs “vast numbers of handles” that had previously been “consumed” by bots and trolls. Since acquiring Twitter for $44 billion last month, Musk has faced growing criticism for laying off hundreds of employees and reversing the permanent suspensions of multiple notable accounts, including former US President Donald Trump following a similar public vote. While critics claimed that Musk’s actions fuel hate speech, harassment and misinformation, he has rejected accusations he was some kind of “right-wing bogeyman” and insisted that Twitter under his ownership has not banned any leftists, not even for “utter lies.” It remains to be seen how many users would be eligible for amnesty. This week the platform already reinstated Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, whose personal Twitter account had been permanently banned since early January 2022 for posting “misinformation” about the Covid-19 pandemic. Musk, however, drew the line at Alex Jones, saying he had “no mercy” for someone who used children’s deaths for clout. Musk had vowed to transform the platform and turn it into a bastion of free speech, saying it was “important to the future of civilization” to have a digital town square where a wide range of beliefs could be discussed. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, began firing staff on Wednesday, Bloomberg reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The company announced that it would sack up to 11,000 staff. The reductions come as part of the first major effort to cut costs since the founding of Facebook in 2004. The drastic measure follows a sharp slowdown in digital advertising revenue and disappointing earnings for the company.
The unnamed sources told the media that Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg had admitted his responsibility for the problems, telling executives on Tuesday that the issues the group faces “are on me.” According to a separate report by Insider, the reductions will affect about 10% of the company, which employed over 87,000 people as of September 30. In September, Zuckerberg warned employees that Meta intended to reduce its expenses and restructure its teams. “This is obviously a different mode than we’re used to operating in,” Zuckerberg said in a Q&A session with employees at the time. “For the first 18 years of the company, we basically grew quickly basically every year, and then more recently our revenue has been flat to slightly down for the first time. So we have to adjust.” The layoffs come amid similar steps taken by tech rivals. Snap is scaling back as well, saying in August that it would eliminate 20% of its workforce, while Twitter fired around 50% of its employees following the sale of the company to Elon Musk. A user on the gaming website GTAForums has posted nearly 100 clips of test footage from the upcoming Grand Theft Auto 6, marking one of the largest leaks in video game industry history. The leak was confirmed by GTA’s developer, Rockstar Games. The user who released the footage over the weekend goes by the handle ‘teapotuberhacker’ and claims to have also been behind last week’s Uber hack, which took down several of the service’s internal systems. In his post on GTAForums, the hacker shared a link to a 3GB file containing 90 clips of GTA 6 test footage and claimed they are considering leaking more data “soon.” Rockstar Games wrote in a Twitter post that the company “suffered a network intrusion in which an unauthorized third party illegally accessed and downloaded confidential information from our systems including early development footage for the next Grand Theft Auto.”
The developer expressed disappointment that details about the game were revealed, but stressed it would not disrupt the development process, which will “continue as planned.” The released test footage appears to match early reports about the game. It includes the series’ first playable female character and is set in the Miami-esque Vice City which featured in previous titles. Bloomberg reporter Jason Schreier, who was one of the first to confirm the leaks were genuine, described it as “one of the biggest leaks in video game history and a nightmare for Rockstar Games.” The videos have already garnered millions of views after spreading on social media, showing very early in-game footage full of unfinished textures and models, placeholder text, and debug code playing out in real-time. Some of the more complete videos show full scenes from the game, including one where playable characters rob a diner and hold up patrons at gunpoint. The hacker said the leak had gone “unexpectedly viral” and updated his forum post to include details on how Rockstar or Take2 employees can reach him, as he is “looking to negotiate a deal”, apparently regarding other potential disclosures. While the game is believed to have been in development since 2014, it’s unclear how old the footage is. Some video game outlets suggest that most of the clips can’t be older than two years as they appear to be running on the latest graphics cards from Nvidia. Grand Theft Auto 6 is reportedly at least two years away from an official release. Researchers from the University of Adelaide have found bots have had a major online presence during the war between Russia and Ukraine. The researchers analysed 5,203,764 tweets, retweets, quote tweets and replies posted to Twitter between 23 February 2022, and 8 March 2022, containing the hashtags #(I)StandWithPutin, #(I)StandWithRussia, #(I)SupportRussia, #(I)StandWithUkraine, #(I)StandWithZelenskyy and #(I)SupportUkraine. “We found that between 60 and 80 per cent of tweets using the hashtags we studied came from bot accounts during the first two weeks of the war,” said co-lead researcher Joshua Watt, an MPhil candidate in Applied Mathematics and Statistics from the University of Adelaide’s School of Mathematical Sciences. “This drove more angst in the online discourse and even impacted discussions surrounding people’s decision to flee or stay in Ukraine. “We observed increases in words such as ‘shame’, ‘terrorist’, ‘threat’, and ‘panic’. “Pro-Russian human accounts were having the largest influence on discussions of the war – particularly on accounts which were pro-Ukraine. “To our knowledge, this is the first body of published work which addresses online influence operations in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. “In the past, wars have been primarily fought physically, with armies, air force and navy operations being the primary forms of combat. “However, social media has created a new environment where public opinion can be manipulated at a very large scale. As a result, these environments can be used to manipulate discussion, as well as cause disruption and overall public distrust.” “In the past, wars have been primarily fought physically, with armies, air force and navy operations being the primary forms of combat. However, social media has created a new environment where public opinion can be manipulated at a very large scale." Fellow co-lead researcher, Bridget Smart, a Masters student in Applied Mathematics and Statistics, added: “Our research identifies that this is happening during the Russia-Ukraine war and provides a statistical framework which quantifies the extent to which this is happening. “This work extends and combines existing techniques to quantify how bots are influencing people in the online conversation around the Russia-Ukraine invasion.
“It opens up avenues for researchers to understand quantitatively how these malicious campaigns operate, and what makes them impactful. This research has identified that social media organisations may need to be better equipped for detecting and handling the use of bots on their networks. “It has identified that governments may need to have stricter policies on social media organisations, and that social media can be a vital tool during conflict.” The paper titled “#IStandWithPutin versus #IStandWithUkraine: The interaction of bots and humans in discussion of the Russia/Ukraine war” has been published in arXiv and will be presented at The International Conference on Social Informatics in Glasgow from 19-21 October. Google employees protesting the company’s Project Nimbus contract with Amazon Web Services and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have gone public with a week of protest actions set to culminate in a multi-city demonstration headlined No Tech for Apartheid.
A multiethnic, multireligious group of Googlers calling themselves Jewish Diaspora in Tech hopes to pressure the corporate giant into dropping the mammoth $1.2 billion contract on moral grounds, arguing that by allowing Israel access to its most sophisticated machine learning and AI technology, Google is enabling crimes against the occupied Palestinian population. Google marketing manager and leading anti-Nimbus advocate Ariel Koren announced her resignation on Tuesday after what she described as a pattern of hostility and retaliation from management. After seven years with the company, Koren said she was presented with an ultimatum – move from San Francisco to Google’s Brazil office or quit – over her efforts lobbying against the project. “Google is aggressively pursuing military contracts and stripping away the voices of its employees through a pattern of silencing and retaliation towards me and many others,” Koren wrote in her resignation letter published on Medium. The secretive effort to provide an “all-encompassing cloud solution” powered by the company’s most advanced technology has seen Google abandon its prized transparency so much that employees have no idea what the tech they’re selling the IDF will really be used for, she claimed. Elon Musk has said he is terminating a $44bn deal to buy Twitter, saying the social media company did not provide information about fake or spam accounts on the platform. In a filing to the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) on Friday, Musk’s lawyers said Twitter had failed or refused to respond to multiple requests for information on those accounts, which is fundamental to the company’s business performance.
“Sometimes Twitter has ignored Mr. Musk’s requests, sometimes it has rejected them for reasons that appear to be unjustified, and sometimes it has claimed to comply while giving Mr. Musk incomplete or unusable information,” the filing reads. “Twitter is in material breach of multiple provisions of that Agreement, appears to have made false and misleading representations upon which Mr. Musk relied when entering into the Merger Agreement,” it also said. Twitter did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Associated Press and Reuters news agencies. The company’s chairman, Bret Taylor, tweeted on Friday evening that, “the Twitter Board is committed to closing the transaction on the price and terms agreed upon with Mr. Musk and plans to pursue legal action to enforce the merger agreement”. The terms of the deal require Musk, the CEO of Tesla, to pay a $1bn break-up fee if he does not complete the transaction. Podcaster Matt Walsh can be abrasive on Twitter, where he’s known for skewering liberals and their causes mercilessly. But when he began posing a four-word question to strangers a year ago, Walsh was polite and nonconfrontational; it was the question itself — and his insistence that there is a correct answer — that got under people’s skin.
The question was “What is a woman?” and it’s both the title and subject of a film released last week by Walsh and The Daily Wire, the conservative media company founded by Jeremy Boreing and Ben Shapiro. In the film, Walsh, a 35-year-old father of four who lives in Nashville, travels around the world asking the question of strangers, from women on the streets of U.S. cities to men in Africa. He also interviews specialists, including a gender-affirming marriage and family therapist in Nashville and author and psychologist Jordan Peterson. The Daily Wire bills the film as a documentary, although it’s not quite a documentary in the vein of those produced by National Geographic; it’s too cheeky for that. But neither is Walsh a conservative Borat making an outlandish “mockumentary” like those produced by Sacha Baron Cohen. He’s just a funny guy asking a serious question, one that he believes “brings down the house of cards” of gender ideology. “Most of the people we talked to either didn’t want to talk about it, or they appeared to be confused about something as simple as what a woman is,” he told me. The wafflers included the Nashville therapist who said, “I’m not a woman so I can’t really answer that,” to a group of women who laughed and said, “That’s a stumper,” to a man on the street who said, “I honestly don’t know.” Dr. Marci Bowers, a gynaecologist and surgeon, said womanhood is “a combination of your physical attributes and what you’re showing to the world and the gender clues you give.” Patrick Grzanka, an associate professor at the University of Tennessee, said a woman is “a person who identifies as a woman” and angrily pushed back at Walsh, asking why he would even ask the question. It’s a question, of course, that’s not only being asked by a podcaster on the street but also in the halls of Congress. Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee asked Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to define a woman during Jackson’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings in March. Jackson replied that she couldn’t, “not in this context. I’m not a biologist.” There is method in what Walsh’s critics see as his madness. He believes that extremists in gender ideology have dealt conservatives a winning hand in the culture war by trying to vaporize ideas about sex and gender that were unquestioned for most of human history. Walsh points out that he’s being called an “extremist” and a “dinosaur” for saying things that were widely considered biological facts two decades ago. “This is a fight we can actually win,” he told me. “When I say ‘we,’ I mean rational, sane people. "You don’t have to be a conservative to realize that men are men and women are women.” He added, “The other side can be brought to its knees by one question, ‘What is a woman?’ There’s a real weakness there, and we can win this fight, and then it becomes like kicking blocks out of the Jenga tower. You win this one, and then you move on to the other cultural battles.” Beyond that, Walsh hopes to bring the issue to the attention of people beyond the “conservative bubble of people who listen to my podcast” and reach people who are not politically engaged and may be unaware of what’s being taught on the frontlines of gender ideology. Some of the people Walsh interviews in the film say that gender cannot and should not be assigned by doctors at birth and that children should be encouraged to explore different forms of gender expression without being influenced by their parents or society. At the centre of this discussion is the issue of transgender rights, which Americans are still divided on, largely along party lines. According to a February report from Pew Research Center, 38% of Americans said that greater acceptance of transgender people is generally good for society, 32% said it is bad and 29% said neither good nor bad. Although a growing share of Americans say they know someone who is transgender or uses gender-neutral pronouns (they/theirs instead of she/hers and he/him) they remain sharply divided on the subject of pronouns. Last year, half of respondents said they are comfortable using alternative pronouns when asked, while 48% said they are not. These percentages are “virtually unchanged” since 2018, Pew said. Walsh, who calls progressive gender ideology a cult, uses the divide over pronouns as a tidy insult, often responding to negative tweets about him by simply saying of his critics “pronouns in bio.” |
Thank you for choosing to make a difference through your donation. We appreciate your support.
This website uses marketing and tracking technologies. Opting out of this will opt you out of all cookies, except for those needed to run the website. Note that some products may not work as well without tracking cookies. Opt Out of CookiesCategories
All
Archives
April 2024
|