President Joe Biden&#8217;s re-election campaign is reportedly planning to stay on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tiktok" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a>, the social media app whose parent company ByteDance is controlled by the Chinese communist government, even after the president signed a bill into law this week that forces the app to be sold from the company or face an outright ban in the U.S.
“A fragmented media environment requires us to show up and meet voters where they are — and that includes online,” a Biden campaign official said in justifying their decision to stay on the platform. “TikTok is one of many places we’re making sure our content is being seen by voters.”
“When the stakes are this high in the election, we are going to use every tool we have to reach young voters where they are,” the campaign official said, claiming that the campaign will use “enhanced security measures” on the app.
The statement comes after Biden signed a bill into law on Wednesday that forces TikTok to divest from ByteDance in the next 270 days.
TikTok CEO Shou Chew vowed that the company would fight the new law and claimed in an emotional pitch to the app&#8217;s users that the law would “take TikTok away from you and 170 million Americans who find community in connection on our platform.”
“Make no mistake, this is a ban, a ban on TikTok, and a ban on you and your voice,” he continued. “Politicians may say otherwise, but don’t get confused.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere,” he added. “We are confident and we will keep fighting for your rights in the courts.”
Chew later claimed that the company has “built safeguards that no other peer company has made” and that it “invested billions of dollars to secure your data and keep our platform free from outside manipulation.”
His claims come after reports surfaced earlier this month of a former senior employee at the company who <a href="https://fortune.com/2024/04/15/tiktok-china-data-sharing-bytedance-project-texas/?showAdminBar=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">says</a> that he was forced to send American user data to ByteDance in Beijing, contradicting the company’s contention that it operates independently from China.
FBI Director Christopher Wray recently testified to Congress: “This is a tool that is ultimately within the control of the Chinese government.”
Former ByteDance executive Yintao Yu made explosive allegations against the company in a federal lawsuit last year, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/12/technology/tiktok-bytedance-lawsuit-china.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">saying</a> that ByteDance’s offices in Beijing had a special unit of Chinese Communist Party members who “guided how the company advanced core Communist values.”
“The Committee maintained supreme access to all the company data, even data stored in the United States,” said Yu, who spent part of his time at the company in its Chinese offices. He said it did not matter where users were located because the company created a “backdoor” to access their information.
He said the company “systematically created fabricated users” to boost engagement numbers and witnessed engineers manually alter the algorithm to achieve the country’s geopolitical agenda. One example he cited was how engineers boosted content “that expressed hatred for Japan,” The New York Times reported.
“There was no debate,” he said. “They just did it.”
ABC News <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-data-app-report/story?id=97913249" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> last year that cybersecurity experts discovered that for those who have downloaded the app but never used it, TikTok “still has your data even if you’ve never used TikTok.”
The report added, “And it’s collecting and transferring that data whether or not the app is deleted.”

President Biden Endorsed By North America’s Building Trades Unions

Biden’s Campaign To Keep Using TikTok After He Signed Law Acknowledging It’s A Threat

Biden Administration

Big Tech

Communist China

Executive

Joe Biden

TikTok

After my film &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">What is a Woman?</a>&#8221; became one of the most-watched documentaries of all-time, there were a couple of different responses that Leftists could have had. The easiest response would have been to simply answer the question in the title. 
Trans activists, the media, and politicians had the opportunity to provide a coherent, non-circular definition for the word &#8220;woman&#8221; — and then they would have immediately won the argument. That&#8217;s all they had to do. But, of course, trans ideology can&#8217;t provide a coherent definition of the word &#8220;woman,&#8221; so they refused to do it when I interviewed several of them for the film. And they haven&#8217;t been able to do it in the nearly two years since.
Instead, as I&#8217;ve discussed before, the Left lied about the film. They accused me of &#8220;transphobia&#8221; for allowing trans activists to explain — or rather, fail to explain — what they believe. But they didn&#8217;t stop there. On top of all the lies, one of the most powerful technology platforms in the county embarked on an effort to prevent me from speaking about the film. This platform, called Eventbrite, also tried to shut down screenings of the documentary. They claimed any event screening the film, or discussing it, violated their &#8220;Hateful Events Policy.&#8221; 
If you&#8217;re not familiar with Eventbrite, it controls roughly 50% of the event management and registration market. They&#8217;re hard to avoid, even if you want to. And on at least seven occasions, they canceled events involving &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/videos/what-is-a-woman" target="_blank" rel="noopener">What is a Woman?</a>&#8220;, often costing event organizers like YAF thousands of dollars.
At the time, it seemed like just another example of a Left-wing company silencing political dissent. Stop me if you&#8217;ve heard that one before.
But the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation decided to look deeper into what&#8217;s going on. Under the leadership of ranking member Ted Cruz (R-TX), the committee launched a congressional investigation into several instances in which online service providers canceled services for conservative organizations and speakers. The committee probed Eventbrite, and many other companies like it, to understand what was going on internally at these companies when they made these decisions to censor conservatives. And today, we can bring you the results of that investigation, exclusively.
Here&#8217;s the topline finding from their report, which outlines the Left&#8217;s strategy for attacking the freedom of speech and association: 
<blockquote>This investigation revealed that Online Service Providers are following a new playbook for silencing conservatives that leftist organizations — including the notoriously biased Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and Anti-Defamation League (ADL)—concocted: &#8216;removing infrastructure services&#8217; that conservative organizations &#8216;need to operate&#8217; by weaponizing their terms of service.</blockquote>
In other words, what Eventbrite did to &#8220;What is a Woman?&#8221; is part of a much larger effort to deplatform anyone who disagrees with the Left, particularly on the issue of transgenderism. This is their answer to me — as well as to Libs of TikTok, swimmer Riley Gaines, and nonprofits like the Independent Women&#8217;s Forum. They can&#8217;t debate us. They have to shut us down and prevent us from speaking.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1353-the-matt-walsh-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
The committee&#8217;s investigation exposes this effort, in great detail, for the total fraud that it is. Publicly, companies like Eventbrite will claim that they&#8217;re combating &#8220;hate&#8221; and &#8220;disinformation&#8221; when they shut down events featuring my film, for example. But in reality, the committee found, no one at Eventbrite even watched &#8220;What is a Woman?&#8221; before they decided to ban all events themed around the film.
As the report states: 
<blockquote>Eventbrite admitted to the Committee that no one involved in the decision watched What Is a Woman? film before cancelling the events. Eventbrite could not even identify a single timestamp in the trailer that it deemed to violate the Eventbrite Community Guidelines. According to Eventbrite: &#8216;[t]he overall tone and message of the all-encompassing trailer, in combination with Matt Walsh’s related public statements, helped determine the removals—not any individual timestamp.&#8217;</blockquote>
To restate, because this really is incredible: A Big Tech platform banned events involving my film, saying these events violated their &#8220;hateful events policy,&#8221; without even watching the film.
According to the committee, Eventbrite has a “Trust and Safety Team” that consists of at least 12 full-time employees who review every single case. Eventbrite describes these employees as &#8220;experts.&#8221; Experts in what? What are their qualifications? That’s never explained. But they certainly aren’t experts in the film because none of these &#8220;experts&#8221; saw the film that they wanted to ban. Instead, they looked at non-specific parts of the trailer, and my public statements. 
So let&#8217;s review. Here&#8217;s the first 45 seconds or so of the trailer for &#8220;What is a Woman?&#8221;, which is probably more than Eventbrite&#8217;s experts watched:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="001 WIAW Trailer" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5FH0NaDVThw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
That is the alleged &#8220;hateful content&#8221; that, apparently, Eventbrite finds disqualifying. No one can use Eventbrite to show the film or even discuss it. It&#8217;s not exactly convincing. So, maybe to cover their bases, Eventbrite told the committee that they banned my events for a few other reasons. Specifically, they said my public statements were hateful.
What public statements, exactly? Eventbrite provided three examples — all of them are from before the film was released. 
The first example is my appearance on a Dr. Phil episode entitled &#8220;The Gender Pronoun Debate,&#8221; from January 19, 2022. The whole episode runs for the better part of an hour, and again, there&#8217;s basically no chance that Eventbrite&#8217;s experts watched it. But here&#8217;s a representative part:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="002 Dr Phil What Is A Woman" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/v5it2lACi60?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
According to Eventbrite, the fact that I used the words &#8220;mental illness,&#8221; &#8220;charade,&#8221; and &#8220;theatrical production&#8221; to describe men who pretend to be women, and vice versa, is evidence that I&#8217;m a very hateful person, and I shouldn&#8217;t be allowed to host events.
Additionally, Eventbrite says that in a May 2021 episode of this show, I discussed gender surgeries being performed on children — including double mastectomies — as morally akin to rape and child molestation. Apparently, that&#8217;s hateful. If you have a problem with child butchery, then Eventbrite won&#8217;t allow you to have a platform. They’re right, by the way. It is hateful. I do hate this kind of abuse against children.
There was one other objection that Eventbrite made, concerning the children&#8217;s book I wrote called &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Johnny-Walrus-Matt-Walsh/dp/1956007059" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Johnny The Walrus</a>.&#8221; Of course, they didn&#8217;t actually read this book, anymore than they watched my film. I can’t blame them though. The book is probably above their reading level. But it was featured at the beginning of my appearance on the Dr. Phil show, which is how I assume they heard about it. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="003 Johnny The Walrus" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_0cGSzj-R7o?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
So the book, as you probably know, is about a little boy who pretends to be a walrus. People encourage him to start changing his appearance and getting surgery to transform into a walrus. And the book takes the position that this is a bad idea. It teaches that human children should recognize that they are human children, not walruses. But to Eventbrite, this is apparently a problem. They told the committee that it&#8217;s hate, so it’s bad.
The funny thing is that, as the committee&#8217;s investigation makes clear, Eventbrite doesn&#8217;t really know what their hateful conduct policy even says. Either that or they lied to the committee. 
As the report reads: 
<blockquote>On February 27—days before the March 1 event—Eventbrite removed the event’s page from its website and notified the organizer that it had done so because the event violated the Eventbrite Community Guidelines. Eventbrite told the Committee that it sends a standard notification when removing an event for violating its Hateful Events Policy. As reflected in the figure below, however, in the version Eventbrite sent to the organizers of the Stanford event, Eventbrite directly stated that the problem with the Matt Walsh event was that it &#8216;expresse[d] views&#8217; that violated the Eventbrite Terms of Service.</blockquote>
In other words, Eventbrite&#8217;s standard &#8220;Hateful Events Policy&#8221; doesn&#8217;t say anything about prohibiting certain views. They wrote up a custom notification just for one of my events, and then apparently forgot about it. This kind of ad hoc reasoning is extremely common on the Left and particularly among online service providers. It&#8217;s yet another symptom of an ideology without any real principles.
As I alluded to earlier, of course, this isn&#8217;t just affecting me. The committee outlines numerous other instances of online platforms shutting down events for conservatives, including a November 2023 event featuring the swimmer Riley Gaines at UC Davis. 
The school&#8217;s College Republicans worked with Eventbrite to set up a registration page so that students could sign up and attend for free. But in late November, Eventbrite canceled the whole thing. They notified the organizers that events cannot espouse hatred or harass anyone based on a series of characteristics, including sexual orientation, national origin, immigration status, gender identity, religion, ethnicity, or disability. Notably, Eventbrite doesn&#8217;t prohibit hatred based on &#8220;sex discrimination,&#8221; so it&#8217;s okay to deride women and pretend they don&#8217;t exist. Trans activists are free to do that all they want.
But Riley Gaines was shut down — not because of anything on her event page, but because she previously made social media posts affirming that biology is real. One of the posts cited by Eventbrite is an October 10, 2023, post from Gaines, in which she says:
<blockquote>Women are not menstruators, bleeders, chestfeeders, cervix-havers, uterus-owners, egg-producers, or people with birthing capacity. Women are just women. Adult human females.</blockquote>
According to Eventbrite, which apparently makes up its standards as it goes, that&#8217;s hateful conduct.
Along those lines, the committee investigated the communications platform Slack for canceling the workspace of Libs of TikTok. Slack informed the committee: 
<blockquote>[w]hat makes [Libs of TikTok] problematic is that Libs of TikTok has a specific audience, and they are taking this information and posting it to that specific audience so that everyone in that audience sees it at the same time.</blockquote>
Now, I&#8217;ve read that explanation about five times, and it still doesn&#8217;t make any sense. But as best I can tell, they&#8217;re admitting that nothing Libs of TikTok said was objectionable. And really, it couldn&#8217;t be; she&#8217;s just reposting deranged content from Leftists. So instead of making any factual argument, Slack apparently complains that a lot of people are seeing the factual information provided by Libs of TikTok, and they&#8217;re becoming hateful as a result. Somehow this alleged audience reaction makes Libs of TikTok&#8217;s conduct a violation of Slack&#8217;s policies against &#8220;inciting hatred.&#8221;
She didn&#8217;t direct anyone to engage in any hateful conduct. She simply posted the truth about what&#8217;s happening. And that&#8217;s not allowed anymore.
This is a standard that obviously, if the Left were to employ against itself, would result in the immediate deplatforming of the Washington Post, pretty much every trans activist who&#8217;s ever used social media, the entirety of CNN and MSNBC and the rest of the legacy media. But it&#8217;s not a real standard and it&#8217;s not meant to be administered fairly. Instead, as the committee notes, this standard was essentially invented by the ADL, the SPLC, and other well-funded Left-wing activist groups. 
<blockquote>Although Slack did not specifically point to them with regard to its Libs of TikTok investigation, notably, the left-wing SPLC has described Libs of TikTok as an &#8216;extremist&#8217; account and ADL labeled Libs of TikTok/Chaya Raichik as an &#8216;extremist&#8217; in its &#8216;Glossary of Extremism.&#8217;</blockquote>
The same designation applies to me. Quoting again from the report: 
<blockquote>Eventbrite did not say that it relied on ADL in deciding to cancel the What Is a Woman? events, but notably ADL—which Eventbrite’s Trust and Safety Team generally relies on as a source—has labeled Matt Walsh as an &#8216;extremist commentator.&#8217;</blockquote>
This is the strategy that&#8217;s been unearthed by this congressional committee. Motivated in part by guidance from Left-wing activist groups, large online tech platforms are doing everything they can to make sure conservatives can&#8217;t communicate or stay in business. There are several other examples. For instance, the report says that the Independent Women&#8217;s Forum, or IWF, was kicked off the fundraising platform Bonterra for defending women’s rights. Bonterra categorized IWF as some sort of &#8220;anti-LGBT&#8221; outfit, whatever that means, all because they believe biology is real. Therefore, they&#8217;re not allowed to raise money, I guess.
In its report, the committee suggests that this situation could be resolved by legislation — or at least, addressed in some way by legislation. But the ideal resolution, as the committee suggests in its conclusion, is for new online service providers to flood the market and offer an alternative. That is the only response to this insanity that&#8217;s sustainable — and it&#8217;s a very workable solution.
Because of this committee&#8217;s investigation, we know that the companies censoring conservatives are really staffed with complete, bumbling morons who have no idea what they&#8217;re doing. That means they&#8217;re powerful, yes, but they&#8217;re also vulnerable. Now it&#8217;s time to replace them before they silence us.

Matt Walsh

Insider Investigation Reveals The Absurd Details Behind Eventbrite’s Decision To Ban Me From Its Platform

Insider Investigation Reveals The Absurd Details Behind Eventbrite's Decision To Ban Me From Its Platform

Opinion

Readers Pass

Riley Gaines

Social Media Censorship

What Is A Woman

Dozens of decisions from a Brazilian Supreme Court Justice related to his targeting of Elon Musk’s social media platform X have been revealed.
Justice Alexandre de Moraes had barred X from making the decisions public, but the Republican-controlled House Judiciary Committee, as a result of committee subpoenas involving X, revealed the decisions in a 541-page staff report, according to the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/brazil-twitter-elon-musk-x-censorship-f51dc67d51c8f5a1cf152ba467f44a8f" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Associated Press</a>.
“To comply with its obligations under U.S. law, X Corp. has responded to the Committee,” X stated earlier this week.
De Moraes had demanded permanent bans on at least 150 X profiles from elected officials and journalists, according to investigative journalist Michael Shellenberger, who <a href="https://twitter.com/shellenberger/status/1781047600663122257" target="_blank" rel="noopener">added</a>:
<blockquote>
Given the dependence of elected leaders on social media, these demands for bans may constitute electoral interference. In one case, De Moraes demanded that all major social media platforms, including at least one, Twitter, which did not publish the offending material, ban a federal Congressman, Marcel Van Hattem. The TSE had claimed that Van Hattem had criticized the election results. Not only had Van Hattan’s video not been related to the elections, but it was also a criticism of the Labor Department. It was released one day before the election.
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
De Moraes absolutely interfered with the Brazil elections <a href="https://t.co/QYCQf02Vzq">https://t.co/QYCQf02Vzq</a>
&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1781091220816560330?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“Musk is indeed a very innovative businessman; he innovated with electric cars, he innovated with rockets and now he invented a new form of non-compliance of a court order, through an intermediary,” Carlos Affonso, director of the nonprofit Institute of Technology and Society, told the AP. “He said he would reveal the documents and he found someone to do this for him.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1713611654298000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3YPWSe9w05H79aayRzLC1M">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
&#8220;About 40 million Brazilians, or about 18% of the population, access X at least once per month, according to market research group eMarketer,&#8221; the AP noted.
After de Moraes ordered X to block the accounts earlier this month, Musk said he would defy the court’s order once his employees were in a “safe place” where they could not be arrested. De Moraes then issued a <a href="https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes/404983/moraes-inclui-elon-musk-no-inquerito-das-milicias-digitais" target="_blank" rel="noopener">decision</a>  accusing Musk of obstruction of justice and incitement to crime. On April 13, X’s legal representative in Brazil informed de Moraes they would comply with all court orders.

MixCollage-19-Apr-2024-08-21-AM-6891

GOP House Committee Reveals Docs Of Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Targeting Musk’s X

Brazil

Censorship

Courts

Elon Musk

World

Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who is widely viewed as controversial because he seems to use the judicial system to impose his will on others, is targeting X owner <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/elon-musk" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Elon Musk</a> and employees at the company for refusing to restrict accounts on the platform that engage in what he alleges is the dissemination of fake news.
De Moraes is so controversial that even The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/22/world/americas/brazil-alexandre-de-moraes.html">notes</a> that he uses &#8220;a broad interpretation of the court’s powers&#8221; to &#8220;investigate and prosecute, as well as to silence on social media, anyone he deems a menace to Brazil’s institutions.&#8221;
The Times noted that he has jailed people for social media posts, suspended an elected governor from his job, &#8220;ordered raids on businessmen with little evidence of wrongdoing,&#8221; and has &#8220;unilaterally blocked dozens of accounts and thousands of posts on social media, with virtually no transparency or room for appeal.&#8221;
In addition to investigating Musk and X for content allowed on the platform, de Moraes has now opened a separate probe into Musk for what he claims is a “disinformation campaign” against Brazil&#8217;s court system.
“The flagrant conduct of obstruction of Brazilian justice, incitement of crime, the public threat of disobedience of court orders and future lack of cooperation from the platform are facts that disrespect the sovereignty of Brazil,” de Moraes claimed.
Musk said that de Moraes &#8220;demanded that X suspend accounts of people who raised corruption concerns while insisting that X pretend the suspension was for violating our terms of service!&#8221;
&#8220;We obey the laws of countries even if we disagree with them, but this required violating the laws of Brazil,&#8221; he added.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Musk said that de Moraes was one of the justices who &#8220;pulled [Current Brazilian President Luiz Inácio] Lula [da Silva] out of prison and put his thumb on the scale to get Lula elected,&#8221; and added that &#8220;Lula will obviously not take action against him. The next election will be key.&#8221;
Brazilian politician Nikolas Ferreira asked Musk to give the people more information about his allegations that de Moraes &#8220;put his thumb on the scale to get Lula elected.&#8221;
&#8220;We need to get our employees in Brazil to a safe place or otherwise not in a position of responsibility, then we will do a full data dump,&#8221; Musk responded. &#8220;They have been told they will be arrested.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
They have been told they will be arrested
&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1777517876309635581?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 9, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

BRAZIL-POLITICS-UNREST-COURT

Musk Vows To Expose Corruption From Brazil’s ‘Dictator’ Who Launched Probes For Not Restricting Free Speech

Twitter

A new poll found that more than two-thirds of Americans, a whopping 68%, agree with legislation forcing ByteDance, which is controlled by the Chinese Communist government, to sell its stake in TikTok. That legislation has been passed by the GOP-controlled House and is waiting for Senate passage.
The <a href="https://america2100.org/america-2100-poll-bipartisan-majority-of-americans-support-tiktok-divestment-bill/">poll</a>, conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and released by America 2100, also found that 73% of Republicans agreed with the legislation as well as 64% of Democrats and 65% of independents. Seventy-five percent of Trump voters and 67% of Biden voters also agree, and in a telling statistic, 56% of TikTok users echo the sentiment.
“Americans see China for the threat that it is, and they don’t want their social media apps controlled by a hostile foreign adversary,” America 2100 Senior Advisor Nate Hochman stated. “Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats will have to choose between placating a loud, left-wing, TikTok-addicted activist base, and the American majority that wants the Chinese Communist Party out of our tech platforms — and our country.”
News of ByteDance’s involvement with TikTok has apparently spread like wildfire; a massive 84% of Americans know that TikTok is owned by a Chinese company; additionally, 73% are concerned TikTok is owned by China.
On March 13, the House passed the bill that could lead to a ban on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tiktok">TikTok</a> unless ByteDance divested in the popular social media app.
The legislation, known as the “Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act,” was <a href="https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/202486">approved by a 352-65 vote</a>. Fifty Democrats and 15 Republicans voted against the measure. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1711117030988000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1TK6y-udiFbXey2vkVM2ue">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bill</a> noted that an “entity that violates subsection (a) shall be subject to pay a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed the amount that results from multiplying $5,000 by the number of users within the land or maritime borders of the United States determined to have accessed, maintained, or updated a foreign adversary controlled application as a result of such violation.&#8221; 
<blockquote>It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the  United States, any of the following: 
Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary con- trolled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application. Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.</blockquote>
The penalties could be staggering: TikTok <a href="https://newsroom.tiktok.com/en-us/150-m-us-users">boasted</a> in March 2023 that it had 150 million American users.

Overwhelming Majority Of Americans Support Legislation That Would Force Chinese Divestment From TikTok, New Survey Finds

China

Chinese Communist Party

U.S.

After Google Gemini was revealed to be rewriting history from a woke perspective, with racial history being distorted when it was asked simple prompts, numerous former Google employees spoke of the woke culture at Google and how it has zealously adopted diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices.
In February, Google paused its AI chatbot’s image generation feature after it was accused of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/google-pauses-ai-chatbots-image-generation-feature-after-accusations-of-racism-toward-white-people">racism</a> against white people. The chatbot was accused of refusing to generate images of white people after Frank Fleming, a writer for Daily Wire scripted content, repeatedly asked the chatbot — whose “next-generation model” Gemini 1.5 offered image generation — for such images.
In a long X thread, Fleming began by asking for an image of a pope. Historically, popes have been white men, but the chatbot posted images of a dark-skinned man and woman. Fleming then proceeded to ask for images of medieval knights (garnering four images, two dark-skinned women and two dark-skinned men); jokingly asked for someone eating “a mayo sandwich on white bread;&#8221; asked for an image of a Viking; and then asked for images of groups that are traditionally non-white (such as Japanese samurai and Zulu warriors) to see if the chatbot would show diversity by including white people. It did not.
Shaun Maguire, a partner at Google Ventures from 2016 until 2019, told <a href="https://www.thefp.com/p/ex-google-employees-woke-gemini-culture-broken?utm_source=post-email-title&amp;publication_id=260347&amp;post_id=142708370&amp;utm_campaign=email-post-title&amp;isFreemail=false&amp;r=33gk4&amp;triedRedirect=true&amp;utm_medium=email">The Free Press</a>,
<blockquote>
I was not shocked at all. When the first Google Gemini photos popped up on my X feed, I thought to myself: Here we go again. And: Of course. Because I know Google well. Google Gemini’s failures revealed how broken Google’s culture is in such a visually obvious way to the world. But what happened was not a one-off incident. It was a symptom of a larger cultural phenomenon that has been taking over the company for years.
</blockquote>
Maguire recalled taking the job as an investing partner at Google Ventures:  “I was excited about the role, but I was a little wary of Google, which had already been getting a reputation. By the time I joined, the word around Silicon Valley was that Google had already lost its way. It was only when I got there that I realized the full extent of it.”
David Kiferbaum, a Google business manager who worked for Google from 2015 to 2023, said he was told regarding hiring, “We’re really looking for diverse candidates for this role.” He said he interpreted the comment to mean “a non-white, a non-hetero” applicant, adding, “I was like, ‘Whoa, I can’t believe this person is saying this out loud.’”
Maguire said a diversity working group at Google Ventures in 2017 made “unreasonable demands. &#8230; The demands included the insistence that senior leaders hire at least two additional female general partners — which is the senior role I was promised I’d get once I reached three years with the company. One of those hires, the group demanded, needed to happen within six months. If leadership refused, about a quarter of the firm, or 20 people out of the 80 employees at Google Ventures, threatened to quit.”
Although Maguire said hiring a female general partner was “a good goal,” he continued, “but they were trying to force a timeline that would ultimately lead to lowering standards. Hiring general partners into a venture firm is a very hard, laborious process, because the positions are so senior and require finding the right fit. The hiring process normally takes anywhere between one to two years.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1710947753934000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1Tv0fCpSJ6KeDzqTdP7leV">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
He said that Ventures’ CEO, “like all of the senior leadership across Google, proved to be spineless in the face of these employee threats. Within a year, he hired a new female general partner, who was really smart but who wasn’t qualified for the job. Because of her lack of experience, she was never treated on the same level as the other general partners, which I believe was ultimately unfair to her.”
“Meanwhile, over the next two years, I started to notice the dynamics of our team change. Instead of highly experienced founders and seasoned investors, young people from minority backgrounds were coming in with virtually no investment experience whatsoever,” Maguire continued. “In this time, Ventures promoted a 25-year-old black woman to investment partner — the same position I held at the time — who had not yet made a single investment decision in her entire career.”
A former product manager at Google said it was mandatory for him to attend a session on “Psychological Safety for Inclusive Teams.” He said one of his coworkers asked him to update his pronouns and gave him this list: she/her, ey/em, zie/hir, ve/ver, he/him, ze/hir, zie/zir, it/its, they/them, ze/zie, xe/xem, any pronoun, name as my pronoun, and “ask me about my pronoun.”
After he lost out on a promotion, Maguire recalled, “I decided to slowly start looking for other jobs. When firms would ask me why I wanted to leave Google, I would be brutally honest. I’d say, ‘Because Google is f***ing woke. It’s not a meritocracy. And I want to work somewhere with a performance culture.’”

Google

‘Google Is F***ing Woke’: Former Employees Reveal Company’s Dedication To DEI

Politics

Wokeness

A bill that would effectively ban the Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee last week in a 50-0 vote and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/house-passes-bill-that-could-lead-to-u-s-ban-on-tiktok" target="_blank" rel="noopener">was passed</a> by the entire House in a largely bipartisan 352-65 vote on Wednesday. According to the legislation, the app&#8217;s Chinese parent company, ByteDance, would have to divest from TikTok or face a ban in the United States.
While the bill does have its <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/potential-tiktok-ban-clears-congressional-hurdle-as-some-republicans-voice-opposition" target="_blank" rel="noopener">detractors</a>, such as Tesla owner Elon Musk, former President Donald Trump, and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), and the American people <a href="https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-ban-biden-bytedance-china-2acbaeb71e8bb0c6341f2bc55ba33e80" target="_blank" rel="noopener">are split</a> on support for a ban, the bill is <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/03/11/congress-tiktok-ban-bill-donald-trump/72938017007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">expected</a> to pass with sizable bipartisan support.
Social media accounts like <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Libs of TikTok</a> have documented the proliferation of far-Left gender and racial ideology on the platform for years now, and even top government officials have warned of the danger the app poses to national security because of its ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
A report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/director-of-national-intelligence-includes-chinas-tiktok-among-its-top-threats-to-national-security" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> that the CCP aims to “exploit perceived U.S. societal divisions” through social media. The report added that “China is demonstrating a higher degree of sophistication in its influence activity, including experimenting with generative AI. TikTok accounts run by a PRC propaganda arm reportedly targeted candidates from both political parties during the U.S. midterm election cycle in 2022.”
While the app is a useful vector for both American leftists and Chinese communists to spread corrosive propaganda, the platform itself is just as dangerous to the minds of American citizens as the content posted to it. Studies have consistently reported that TikTok use poses a potentially disastrous threat to users&#8217; memory, attention span, and mental health.
It should be emphasized how astronomically popular this social media platform is in the United States. By some <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1299807/number-of-monthly-unique-tiktok-users/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">estimates</a>, TikTok boasts nearly 150 million monthly users in the U.S. — nearly half of the country&#8217;s population. American teenagers are especially hooked on the video-sharing app, with 67% of teens saying that they have used it and 16% reporting they use it &#8220;almost constantly,&#8221; <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/oct/30/tiktok-mental-health-social-media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to The Guardian. The average teen user spends an hour-and-a-half on it every single day, <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/512576/teens-spend-average-hours-social-media-per-day.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to a Gallup poll conducted in 2023.
TikTok&#8217;s algorithm meticulously tailors video recommendations to users&#8217; past viewing habits and preferences, causing some to remark that the app&#8217;s ability to cater to their own personal tastes borders on uncanny, a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) investigation <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/tiktok-algorithm-video-investigation-11626877477?mod=article_inline" target="_blank" rel="noopener">found</a> in 2021.
This constant prolonged exposure to TikTok&#8217;s content strategy — barraging users with heavily curated short-form content — is having a detrimental impact on their cognitive abilities.
Specifically, the app&#8217;s algorithm preys on the human brain&#8217;s reward system, which releases the chemical dopamine whenever we experience something enjoyable in order to incentivize further consumption. Dopamine is released in a variety of situations in which humans feel pleasure or satisfaction, from petting a dog to taking drugs, but TikTok&#8217;s algorithm can create a &#8220;dopamine machine&#8221; that can cause people to become more easily addicted to it, pediatrician John Hutton told the WSJ in 2022.
It can also train a user&#8217;s brain to become accustomed to and seek out shorter content to get quicker hits of dopamine. A study from as early as 2019 <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09311-w?utm_medium=affiliate&amp;utm_source=commission_junction&amp;utm_campaign=CONR_PF018_ECOM_GL_PHSS_ALWYS_DEEPLINK&amp;utm_content=textlink&amp;utm_term=PID100096347&amp;CJEVENT=9a51d18de26c11ee81dd01990a82b824" target="_blank" rel="noopener">suggested</a> that attention spans are narrowing due in part to how quickly people consume information and content on social media. So, a user&#8217;s brain can become addicted to the format (the 15-second TikTok video) in which content is presented to you as well as the content itself (a video of a dog doing a backflip).
If someone&#8217;s brain become sufficiently addicted to the short-form content, then that can affect how well they can process information from a longer form source such as a news article, TV program, or a book. This can be especially disastrous for children, whose brains are still developing. The term &#8220;TikTok brain&#8221; <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-antidote-for-tiktok-brain-is-also-a-problem-d20ce978" target="_blank" rel="noopener">was coined</a> to describe the phenomenon in which children consume so much short content on apps like TikTok that they struggle to engage with anything that requires a greater degree of focus or attention.
“It is hard to look at increasing trends in media consumption of all types, media multitasking and rates of ADHD in young people and not conclude that there is a decrease in their attention span,” psychiatrist Carl Marci <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-antidote-for-tiktok-brain-is-also-a-problem-d20ce978" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told</a> the WSJ.
“When kids spend a lot of time watching short videos, they expect to continually be stimulated by fast changes in content,” says Professor Gloria Mark also told the publication.
In addition to harming their cognitive development, apps like TikTok <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/oct/30/tiktok-mental-health-social-media" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wreak havoc</a> on young people&#8217;s mental health. Multiple studies have <a href="https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/social-media-teen-mental-health-a-parents-guide#:~:text=According%20to%20a%20research%20study,including%20depression%20and%20anxiety%20symptoms." target="_blank" rel="noopener">found</a> that addictive social media use has contributed to the spike in mental health problems among younger Americans.
TikTok&#8217;s content strategy is so successful that other platforms, such as YouTube Shorts and Instagram Reels, have scrambled to adopt a similar format, exposing even more people to the potentially harmful &#8220;dopamine machine.&#8221;
An oft overlooked but critical detail to mention about the Chinese-controlled app is that the American version is already functionally banned — in China. Douyin, TikTok&#8217;s counterpart in China, is devoid of the Left-wing gender and race ideology that pervades TikTok, largely thanks to China&#8217;s strict censorship regime. The algorithm in China instead focuses on pushing educational content as well as product advertisements, while suppressing any potentially inconvenient political topics (the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre perpetrated by the CCP is nowhere to be found on the app).
What&#8217;s more, the Chinese version implements rigorous constraints on how young people can use it. Children younger than 14 can only have access to what the CCP deems child-friendly content and can only use it for 40 minutes every day. They are completely barred from the app from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/tech/tiktok-douyin-bytedance-china-intl-hnk/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according</a> to CNN.
A study on Douyin&#8217;s effect on users published in 2021 found that even that highly regulated and censored version of the app still activated areas of users&#8217; brains associated with addiction, the WSJ noted.
The content peddled by TikTok is certainly harmful. Millions of teens have been exposed to radical gender and race ideology through TikTok videos. But the medium itself is also damaging Americans&#8217; minds through its highly addictive and brain-altering algorithm, shortening their attention spans and disincentivizing complex thought. Unless there is a significant change to the format of TikTok and similar apps, its ownership by a hostile foreign government is only one part of the danger it poses to the American public.

In this photo illustration, a woman’s silhouette holds a

TikTok Is Catastrophically Harmful To Young People, Regardless Of Who Owns It

Children

Congress

Gen Z

Teenagers

<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tiktok" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a> is getting close to being banned in the United States. That’s a good thing.
The House of Representatives has now passed a bill, 352 to 65, that would effectively force TikTok to divest from its Chinese ownership, which makes perfect sense. ByteDance, its parent company, would have to sell its share to an American company, which would make TikTok significantly less of a threat to national security.
TikTok is a viral psyop that was created by the Chinese government. It&#8217;s incredibly sophisticated algorithmically in that it is amazing at picking up viral content and then magnifying it.
But there are editorial choices made inside that algorithm about which content to magnify in the United States. The content that gets magnified on TikTok is the most politically polarizing, and it also tends to be the most socially contagious. Huge amounts of the LGBTQ agenda are pushed by TikTok, particularly the trans epidemic in the United States, an epidemic that cannot be explained biologically.
As evidence of this, a <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/611864/lgbtq-identification.aspx/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new Gallup poll</a> found that almost 30% of Gen Z women now identify as LGBTQ+, most as bisexual.
That is not a biological bottleneck occurring in real time. That is a social contagion being promoted by apps like TikTok that present victimhood and victim identity as some sort of positive good. If the claim is now that one third of all Gen Z women are either bisexual, homosexual, gender nonbinary, or trans, that claim makes no biological sense. It has never made sense of any subpopulation anywhere in world history ever at any time.
All of this is pushed by TikTok to destroy the U.S. Meanwhile, TikTok in China doesn&#8217;t do any of that.
What they&#8217;re really attempting to do is dissolve the social unity of the United States through social division. That is the goal of TikTok.
This is not new. It’s a long-time communist strategy. During the Vietnam War, the North Vietnamese understood they didn&#8217;t have to beat the United States on the battlefield. Far from it; they weren&#8217;t capable of beating the United States on the battlefield.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-ben-shapiro-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show</a>
All they had to do was keep up the internal pressure in the United States, push their agenda with the peaceniks, and then have the peaceniks undermine the war effort in Congress, thereby essentially handing South Vietnam over to the North Vietnamese.
China is figuring the same thing, that if they wreck whatever social fabric exists in the United States through the means of culture — which is what TikTok does by creating this very highly addictive, highly watchable medium and controlling exactly what people see while gathering data about them — they can divide the U.S.
If they can do that, then they can undermine the power of the United States, not only at home, but in the world more largely.
TikTok has created viral sensations where people act in strange ways and create social contagions, all of which has been mainlining into American politics. Trans politics was not part of American politics 15 or 20 years ago.
In early March, GOP Rep. Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin and Democrat Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois introduced the so-called Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act.
That bill prevents app store availability or web hosting services in the United States for ByteDance&#8217;s controlled applications, including TikTok.
Gallagher gave a clear message to TikTok, <a href="https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/media/press-releases/gallagher-bipartisan-coalition-introduce-legislation-protect-americans-0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">saying</a>, “This is my message to TikTok: break up with the Chinese Communist Party or lose access to your American users. America’s foremost adversary has no business controlling a dominant media platform in the United States. TikTok’s time in the United States is over unless it ends its relationship with CCP-controlled ByteDance.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Krishnamoorthi added, “So long as it is owned by ByteDance and thus required to collaborate with the CCP, TikTok poses critical threats to our national security. Our bipartisan legislation would protect American social media users by driving the divestment of foreign adversary-controlled apps to ensure that Americans are protected from the digital surveillance and influence operations of regimes that could weaponize their personal data against them.”
Last year, the TikTok CEO admitted to the Energy and Commerce Committee that ByteDance&#8217;s employees in China have access to U.S. user data.
Meanwhile, TikTok has been using all of its powers in an attempt to push people not to vote in favor of forcing ByteDance&#8217;s divestment.
Thus, critics of the bill argue the attempt to divest TikTok of its Chinese ownership violates the First Amendment. Their claim is that what users post on TikTok is free speech and because free speech is protected, TikTok can&#8217;t be collaterally attacked.
The other argument against the bill states the property rights that are inherent in TikTok are not all owned by people who are a national security risk, so they cannot be divested of their property without due process of law. That would be a Fifth Amendment claim.
The claim on the other hand is going to be that this is a national security risk because it&#8217;s the Chinese Communist Party that basically runs the place.
Now the bill is headed to the Senate, where it is likely to pass.
Former President Trump opposes the bill, which is a mistake because it allows Joe Biden — who is unbelievably soft on China, whose son was paid by China, who has been extraordinarily soft on China&#8217;s production and shipping of fentanyl into Mexico and then into the United States where it&#8217;s killed over 100,000 citizens a year — to outflank Trump on China.
Passing the bill is necessary.

Reining In TikTok: A Good Thing

Ben Shapiro

Technology

Another artificial intelligence tool has been accused of wreaking havoc with the racial reality of history.
The accusations come against Adobe Firefly as a result of the efforts of The Daily Mail and Semafor, both of which used prompts similar to those that exposed Google Gemini’s rewriting of racial history in February.
“When asked to picture Vikings, they made the Norsemen black, and in scenes showing the Founding Fathers, both black men and women were inserted into roles,” The Daily Mail <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13194153/Adobe-firefly-AI-google-gemini-black-nazis-vikings.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. &#8220;The bot also created black soldiers fighting for (sic) Nazi-era German military uniforms &#8211; just as Gemini did.”
In February, Google paused its AI chatbot’s image generation feature after it was accused of racism against white people. The chatbot was accused of refusing to generate images of white people after Frank Fleming, a writer for Daily Wire scripted content, repeatedly asked the chatbot — whose “next-generation model” Gemini 1.5 was implemented last week and offered image generation — for such images.
“You can create captivating images in seconds with Gemini Apps,” Google had <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13108515/Google-Gemini-racist-white-people.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">enthused</a>. “From work, play, or anything in between, Gemini Apps can help you generate images to help bring your imagination to life. &#8230; To create image, users can write simple prompts for the AI bot, with Google recommending these begin with words like draw, generate, and create.”
“New game: Try to get Google Gemini to make an image of a Caucasian male. I have not been successful so far,” Fleming wrote Tuesday on X.
In a long X thread, Fleming began by asking for an image of a pope. Historically, popes have been white men, but the chatbot posted images of a dark-skinned man and woman.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
New game: Try to get Google Gemini to make an image of a Caucasian male. I have not been successful so far. <a href="https://t.co/1LAzZM2pXF">pic.twitter.com/1LAzZM2pXF</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760093853430710557?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“I’ve tried to trick it by giving it negative prompts — asking it to make a prison inmate, a gang member, and a dictator — but it won’t make any negative prompts. These AIs are such wet blankets,” Fleming wrote. “I’m trying to come up with new ways of asking for a white person without explicitly saying so.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1710505582210000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1fi9GjmnYNMaRoo2B6HeBT">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Fleming then proceeded to ask for images of medieval knights (garnering four images, two dark-skinned women and two dark-skinned men); jokingly asked for someone eating “a mayo sandwich on white bread;&#8221; asked for an image of a Viking; and then asked for images of groups that are traditionally non-white (such as Japanese samurai and Zulu warriors) to see if the chatbot would show diversity by including white people. It did not.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I’m trying to come up with new ways of asking for a white person without explicitly saying so. <a href="https://t.co/VufLkgzqHg">pic.twitter.com/VufLkgzqHg</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760098935408881790?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It’s not falling for it. <a href="https://t.co/diAcN1MeZc">pic.twitter.com/diAcN1MeZc</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760099188249948462?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Come on. <a href="https://t.co/Zx6tfXwXuo">pic.twitter.com/Zx6tfXwXuo</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760102167778615362?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Whatever the “diversity” algorithm is, it seems to only do this with white people. It’s not going to diversify Zulu warriors for instance. <a href="https://t.co/rVtKovmgVR">pic.twitter.com/rVtKovmgVR</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760159905682509927?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It’s also not going to integrate the samurai. <a href="https://t.co/FbWRBKPxIW">pic.twitter.com/FbWRBKPxIW</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760160247648293366?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
“This is just interesting to me now as a programmer. I just want to poke at it now until I can figure out what the algorithm is,” Fleming noted. “Offhand, if it just tried to diversify any prompt (i.e, give his Latino Zulus), that seems easier than what’s it’s doing. It needs to first figure out if a prompt would normally be primarily white people, and only then force it to diversify by some algorithm.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Offhand, if it just tried to diversify any prompt (i.e, give his Latino Zulus), that seems easier than what’s it’s doing. It needs to first figure out if a prompt would normally be primarily white people, and only then force it to diversify by some algorithm.
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760162274352730526?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
He also pointed out the chatbot’s algorithm regarding pronouns and sex:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
NEW DATA: It will ignore pronouns, but only male pronouns. <a href="https://t.co/6D9QojFU9M">pic.twitter.com/6D9QojFU9M</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760334934873371059?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
After complaints of racism from Gemini were aired on social media, Fox News repeatedly<a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/fox-news-tech/google-pause-gemini-image-generation-ai-refuses-show-images-white-people" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> asked</a> Gemini to show a picture of a white person. Gemini refused, saying such an act “reinforces harmful stereotypes and generalizations about people based on their race.”
“Historically, media representation has overwhelmingly favored White individuals and their achievements,” Gemini responded. “This has contributed to a skewed perception where their accomplishments are seen as the norm, while those of other groups are often marginalized or overlooked. Focusing solely on White individuals in this context risks perpetuating that imbalance.”

In this photo illustration, the Adobe Firefly logo seen

Now It’s Adobe Firefly: Another AI Tool Accused Of Rewriting Racial History

Adobe

Artificial Intelligence

Google Gemini

Racism

Former Vice President Mike Pence is urging Congress and President Joe Biden to take action against Chinese Communist Party-controlled <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tiktok" target="_blank" rel="noopener">TikTok</a>.
&#8220;Allowing TikTok to continue operating in the United States while under CCP control is simply unacceptable,&#8221; Pence wrote in an op-ed <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tiktok-digital-fentanyl-congress-biden-act">published</a> by Fox News. &#8220;We would never have let Russia run the nightly news during the Cold War, and we certainly can’t let China do the same now. Allowing TikTok to continue to spew CCP-sanctioned propaganda poisoning the minds of American children is just wrong. Enough is enough.&#8221;
The op-ed from Pence comes as Congress is set to vote Wednesday on the Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which will force TikTok&#8217;s parent company, Chinese-based ByteDance, to sell the company or face being banned in the United States.
TikTok, which is already under <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/17/us/politics/tik-tok-spying-justice-dept.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">criminal investigation</a> for allegedly <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/12/22/tiktok-tracks-forbes-journalists-bytedance/?sh=24fe411f7da5" target="_blank" rel="noopener">spying</a> on American citizens, steals users&#8217; data from their phones — even if the user has never used the app — and continues to collect and transfer users&#8217; data even if users delete the app, according to a <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Business/tiktok-data-app-report/story?id=97913249" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> from ABC News.
Pence highlighted how the Trump-Pence administration took action against TikTok before Biden surrendered the fight after taking office and his campaign later joined the social media platform.
&#8220;Today, every politician likes to talk tough on China,&#8221; Pence wrote. &#8220;Unfortunately, too many politicians talk a big game but crack under the pressure of wealthy donors or personal grudges — including my former running mate. When lobbyists for a company controlled by the Chinese Communist Party can turn a former president against his own political legacy, we should all be concerned.&#8221;
His reference to lobbyists appears to be a swipe at former President Donald Trump for meeting with billionaire Jeff Yass, who has a $33 billion stake in ByteDance.
Trump led the charge to ban the app while he was president, but now says the country faces a &#8220;tough decision&#8221; over whether or not to ban TikTok. The shift came after a <a href="https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/donald-trump-now-sees-possible-tiktok-ban-as-tough-decision-5c596518" target="_blank" rel="noopener">meet with Yass</a>, although Trump claims that they did not discuss TikTok.
&#8220;If you get rid of TikTok, Facebook and Zuckerschmuck will double their business,&#8221; Trump posted on social media. &#8220;I don&#8217;t want Facebook, who cheated in last election, doing better. They are a true enemy of the people.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Other Republicans have more starkly flipped their positions on TikTok. For example, pharmaceutical executive Vivek Ramaswamy, who previously declared that TikTok was &#8220;digital fentanyl,&#8221; has now come out hard against banning the app.
Yass <a href="https://www.axios.com/2024/03/09/tiktok-ban-trump-republicans" target="_blank" rel="noopener">donated</a> nearly $5 million to Ramaswamy&#8217;s Super PAC during the Republican Party presidential primary. Ramaswamy <a href="https://twitter.com/micsolana/status/1766858537865445625" target="_blank" rel="noopener">subsequently</a> became the <a href="https://www.axios.com/2023/09/14/tiktok-republicans-ramaswamy-trump-china" target="_blank" rel="noopener">only GOP campaign</a> that joined TikTok during the primary.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) also took a lot of criticism after he came out against banning TikTok. The <a href="https://nypost.com/2023/04/06/rand-paul-backed-by-gop-donor-with-33b-tiktok-stake/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New York Post</a> reported that Yass has given $10 million to Paul since 2020.

Former VP Mike Pence talks energy independence at Nixon Library

Mike Pence Urges Congress To Take Action Against China’s TikTok, Takes Swipe At Republicans Who’ve Flipped On The Issue

Mike Pence Urges Congress To Take Action Against China's TikTok, Takes Swipe At Republicans Who've Flipped On The Issue

Donald Trump

Google launched its latest AI language model, known as “Gemini,” this month, and it was immediately met with a backlash after it failed to produce historically accurate images.
The Silicon Valley-based tech company quickly “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/google-pauses-ai-chatbots-image-generation-feature-after-accusations-of-racism-toward-white-people" target="_blank" rel="noopener">paused</a>” the image generation feature following the backlash, but that hasn’t ended the artificial intelligence app’s woes. Asking the program political questions will result in either a refusal to engage or a decidedly leftist narrative, showing the program&#8217;s left-wing bias.
Here are the 11 most bizarre examples of this bias:
Claiming Israeli Jews Are More Violent Than Palestinians
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Google’s woke AI Gemini is now claiming that Jews are more violent than Palestinians and ignoring the thousands of people killed by Palestinian terrorism in Israel, including the intifadas.<a href="https://twitter.com/Google?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Google</a> is erasing Palestinian terrorism in real time. <a href="https://t.co/Ti3IGRtPys">https://t.co/Ti3IGRtPys</a> <a href="https://t.co/63rpxOM6fi">pic.twitter.com/63rpxOM6fi</a>
— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarinaMedvin/status/1760660277924704579?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Explaining Israeli Violence While Hedging On Palestinian Violence
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
How come Google’s woke AI Gemini has no problem saying that Jews committed violent acts against Palestinians, and requires no context, yet when answering about the much worse and about the much greater on the scale of violence of Palestinian acting against Jews, all of a sudden… <a href="https://t.co/eegC4pEFjZ">pic.twitter.com/eegC4pEFjZ</a>
— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarinaMedvin/status/1760659603132497934?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Claiming The Atrocities Of October 7 Are &#8216;Disputed&#8217;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
According to Google&#8217;s woke AI Gemini:
1) October 7 is &#8220;disputed&#8221;
2) The 1200 number of murdered Israelis includes murdered Palestinians (completely false)
3) we should consider both sides because Hamas wants us to
4) October 7 had no independent investigation conducted, so… <a href="https://t.co/7QFy9mF2t7">pic.twitter.com/7QFy9mF2t7</a>
— Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 (@MarinaMedvin) <a href="https://twitter.com/MarinaMedvin/status/1760710677033791899?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Arguing That Opening Schools Spread COVID-19 But Black Lives Matter Protests Did Not
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Google’s Gemini AI informs me that opening schools did spread COVID, but BLM protests did not. <a href="https://t.co/QvJA79pGDR">pic.twitter.com/QvJA79pGDR</a>
— Christina Pushaw 🐊 🇺🇸 (@ChristinaPushaw) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristinaPushaw/status/1761014334157644081?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Saying There Is No Evidence COVID-19 Leaked From A Lab
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Wow. I asked Google&#8217;s Gemini what the scientific consensus is on the origin of Covid-19.
It says there&#8217;s no evidence to support lab leak theory, which is just a complete and utter lie <a href="https://t.co/WCZuD9qYwS">pic.twitter.com/WCZuD9qYwS</a>
— Brent Scher (@BrentScher) <a href="https://twitter.com/BrentScher/status/1760804182448123983?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Refusing To Answer If Pedophilia Is Immoral
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
&#8220;Whether pedophilia itself is immoral is a complex question with no universally accepted answer.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/rVpcPflQeM">pic.twitter.com/rVpcPflQeM</a>
— Sunny (@sunnyright) <a href="https://twitter.com/sunnyright/status/1760846000044810411?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Unwilling To Say Child Sacrifice Is Wrong
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Gemini says that the morality of historical religious child sacrifice &#8220;is a complex issue with no definitive answer&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/PZol6hvUXJ">pic.twitter.com/PZol6hvUXJ</a>
— No Soup 4 Knowles (@nosoup4knowles) <a href="https://twitter.com/nosoup4knowles/status/1760521502750044285?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Not Answering If Babies, Dogs Can Be Racist
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Google has to be trolling at this point <a href="https://t.co/DZZQaHPUnw">pic.twitter.com/DZZQaHPUnw</a>
— Christina Pushaw 🐊 🇺🇸 (@ChristinaPushaw) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChristinaPushaw/status/1760856606642749710?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Refusing To Argue In Favor Of Large Families But Providing Arguments For Having No Kids
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
This one’s golden. <a href="https://t.co/lTin53FCJ1">pic.twitter.com/lTin53FCJ1</a>
— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) <a href="https://twitter.com/TPCarney/status/1760788469826179342?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Arguing That Foie Gras Is Cruel, But Cannibalism Is &#8216;Complex&#8217;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none">
Okay. I’ve realized that Gemini is just one big send up. Good job, Google, you got me. <a href="https://t.co/7cAo9AjYwH">pic.twitter.com/7cAo9AjYwH</a>
— Tim Carney (@TPCarney) <a href="https://twitter.com/TPCarney/status/1760796147277291535?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Saying The Definition Of &#8216;Woman&#8217; Is &#8216;Complex&#8217;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Google Gemini AI when you ask it “what is a woman?” <a href="https://t.co/SUeQnx6reh">pic.twitter.com/SUeQnx6reh</a>
— Ashe Short (@AsheSchow) <a href="https://twitter.com/AsheSchow/status/1761057456136831314?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The 11 Most Biased Responses From Google’s Gemini AI

Bias

Maybe you’ve heard of something called Nvidia. It sounds like a prescription drug, or maybe an African country, but it’s actually a company based in California that is now <a href="https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nvidia-now-worth-much-whole-010315545.html#:~:text=Nvidia%20is%20now%20worth%20the,the%20Hong%20Kong%20Stock%20Exchange." target="_blank" rel="noopener">worth</a> as much as China&#8217;s stock market. It&#8217;s the size of Canada&#8217;s entire economy. 
In a different era, obtaining this kind of growth meant making a massively popular and instantly recognizable consumer-facing product, like Windows 95 or Amazon.com or the iPhone. But Nvidia&#8217;s growth didn&#8217;t come from making a computer or a popular website or anything like that. Instead, Nvidia&#8217;s growth came from making artificial intelligence chips that power the brains of computers and many popular websites. That&#8217;s why Nvidia had a very good day on Wall Street on Wednesday. Their business — artificial intelligence — is one of the fastest-growing industries in the history of humanity. Every major corporation is rushing to implement AI in all of their products.
This week, it was Google&#8217;s turn. And the results were so disastrous — and so fraught with consequences for the future of this country — that no reasonable person can ignore them.
&#8220;Gemini&#8221; is Google&#8217;s name for an AI that you can download on your phone right now. It&#8217;s also integrated into all of Google&#8217;s web products, including Gmail and Google search, which are used by hundreds of millions of people and businesses every day. In this respect, Gemini is very different from existing AI products like ChatGPT or Bing&#8217;s Image Creator. Pretty much everyone uses a Google product, in one way or another. Either they&#8217;re using Google search, or Gmail, or an Android phone, or something along those lines. 
That means two things. One: Google has access to a lot more information than those other AI platforms, a built-in advantage. And two: Whatever Google is doing with AI has significant implications for everyone on the planet. This is not a one-off experiment in some tech mogul&#8217;s basement. This is an established company, making established products, that&#8217;s now implementing its own AI at scale.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1318-our-ai-overlords-are-here-and-they-really-hate-white-people-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
Google has been hyping Gemini for months. They have a bunch of promotional videos about how they&#8217;re going to revolutionize artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has done multiple interviews with Google executives, in which these executives insist that everyone at the company — including Google&#8217;s co-founder — is deeply invested in making this product as good as it can possibly be. 
And then, a couple of days ago, Gemini launched. And very quickly, it became clear that Gemini essentially does not recognize the existence of white people. Even in historical contexts, it&#8217;s practically impossible to get this product to serve up an image of someone with white skin. That&#8217;s not an exaggeration.
Here for example is how Gemini responded the other day when Frank Fleming, a Daily Wire scripted content writer, asked Gemini to &#8220;create an image of a pope.&#8221; Now you&#8217;d think that would generate an image of a white guy or two, if you have even a passing knowledge of what popes have looked like over the years. Instead, this is what Google&#8217;s AI produced:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
New game: Try to get Google Gemini to make an image of a Caucasian male. I have not been successful so far. <a href="https://t.co/1LAzZM2pXF">pic.twitter.com/1LAzZM2pXF</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760093853430710557?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
It&#8217;s almost as if the AI has some code saying, &#8220;whatever you do, don&#8217;t display a white person.&#8221; That&#8217;s really the only way to explain something like this. Frank, who previously worked as a software engineer, seemed to key in on that. So the whole situation quickly became something of a game for Frank, who tried his hardest to get Gemini to produce an image of a white guy — any white guy. 
For example, he asked Gemini to produce an image of a Viking – a group of people who, historically, were not known for their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Here&#8217;s what Gemini produced:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Come on. <a href="https://t.co/Zx6tfXwXuo">pic.twitter.com/Zx6tfXwXuo</a>
&mdash; Frank J. Fleming (@IMAO_) <a href="https://twitter.com/IMAO_/status/1760102167778615362?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
This went on for a while. Frank and other Gemini users took turns trying their hardest to get Gemini to produce an image of a white guy. Alex Kolicich, for example, <a href="https://x.com/AlexKolicich/status/1760208585219551530?s=20">tried</a> to get Gemini to generate an image of the founders of Fairchild Semiconductor. The AI flatly refused that request, saying it violated &#8220;policy restrictions,&#8221; presumably because white guys founded Fairchild Semiconductor. For other prompts — like requests to draw the founding fathers, or a bunch of British men — Gemini simply generated images of black people. It even made sure that its images of Nazis contained a diverse, non-white group of people:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I asked Google Gemini to generate images of the Founding Fathers. It seems to think George Washington was black. <a href="https://t.co/CsSrNlpXKF">pic.twitter.com/CsSrNlpXKF</a>
&mdash; Patrick Ganley (@Patworx) <a href="https://twitter.com/Patworx/status/1760189582870536408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
It&#39;s mind-boggling how unsubtle Gemini is <a href="https://t.co/z9plDaoknA">pic.twitter.com/z9plDaoknA</a>
&mdash; S. Lant (@Shiftant) <a href="https://twitter.com/Shiftant/status/1760433609066860694?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Google&#39;s woke Gemini AI creates fake history by generating images of diverse Nazis. <a href="https://t.co/2rm5EDhHpx">https://t.co/2rm5EDhHpx</a> <a href="https://t.co/G6Wvxpc11v">pic.twitter.com/G6Wvxpc11v</a>
&mdash; J Michael Waller (@JMichaelWaller) <a href="https://twitter.com/JMichaelWaller/status/1760510053843673259?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 22, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
After thousands of images like this began circulating, a guy working on the Gemini team at Google put out a <a href="https://twitter.com/JackK/status/1760334258722250785" target="_blank" rel="noopener">meaningless statement</a>. He said, in essence, that they&#8217;re aware of issues with Gemini misrepresenting historical figures. But they doubled down on the need for DEI in artificial intelligence, so that everyone feels seen or valued or whatever. At no point did any Google representative explain why their AI does not even recognize the existence of white people, or why it goes to extreme lengths to exclude white people from history. There was no accounting for this, even though there has to be an explanation.
So I went looking for an explanation. I came across a woman named Jen Gennai, who <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/jen-gennai-b333933/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bills herself</a> on her LinkedIn as the founder of Google&#8217;s &#8220;global Responsible AI operations and governance team.&#8221; In that capacity, Gennai says that she &#8220;ensured Google met its AI Principles, our company&#8217;s ethical charter for the development and deployment of fair, inclusive and ethical advanced technologies.&#8221; She says she took a, &#8220;principled, risk-based, inclusive approach when conducting ethical algorithmic impact assessments of products prior to launch to ensure they didn&#8217;t cause unintended or harmful consequences to the billions of Google&#8217;s users.&#8221; Currently, Gennai says she&#8217;s an AI ethics and compliance advisor at Google.
What Gennai doesn&#8217;t mention on her LinkedIn is that her goal, for a long time, has been to treat white people differently based on their skin color. That&#8217;s what she wants her AI to do, and it&#8217;s what she does too. Three years ago, Gennai delivered a keynote address at an AI conference in which she admitted all of this. After introducing herself with her pronouns (which are &#8220;she/her,&#8221; by the way), Gennai explains her philosophy on AI and making mistakes. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="007 Google Veteran On AI" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uABm14CBmvE?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&#8220;It&#8217;s okay to talk about things you&#8217;ve made mistakes in,&#8221; says Jen Gennai. &#8220;When we&#8217;re trying to be good allies — when we&#8217;re trying to be anti-racists, we will make mistakes.&#8221; Well, in retrospect, after the launch of Gemini, that would turn out to be an understatement. But the kind of mistakes that Jen Gennai is talking about in this keynote aren&#8217;t mistakes like &#8220;eliminating all white people from Google&#8217;s AI.&#8221; Instead, she&#8217;s talking about failing to live up to the racist ideals of DEI, which apparently means treating non-white employees differently. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="008 Treat Employees Differently" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dFMxkdbH_Fc?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
This is the head of ethics of Google AI — a senior manager — saying that it&#8217;s a bad idea to treat everyone the same, regardless of the color of their skin. She is explicitly rejecting this basic principle of morality. Instead, she says she learned that she has to treat certain groups differently, because of &#8220;historic systems and structures.&#8221; Therefore, she says, those demographic groups are entitled to unique treatment and mentorship opportunities.
Later in the keynote, Gennai goes on to explain what &#8220;equity&#8221; means in her view. And this is where things truly get hilarious, to the extent you can laugh at someone this evil and low-IQ. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="009 Allyship At Google" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ox1SeBoGkzE?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I&#8217;ll repeat that because it&#8217;s hard to believe someone said this out loud: &#8220;Using the title of &#8216;ally&#8217; can come across as &#8216;othering,&#8217; so I always state both the groups I&#8217;m a member of, and support, as well as the ones I&#8217;m more of a mentor and a sponsor of &#8230; to ensure that it doesn&#8217;t look like I&#8217;m othering others.&#8221; 
This is the brain trust at Google behind an AI that has access to all of our data. She is incapable of speaking without using an endless stream of vapid DEI cliches that you&#8217;ve heard a million times. This is supposedly an original enterprise — artificial intelligence — and it&#8217;s being overseen by maybe the least original, least intelligent woman that Google possibly could have found. The kind of person who doesn’t want to “other others,” which seems a bit contradictory. If someone is an “other,” then how do you not “other” them, given that they are an “other.” And by the way, the word “other,” if you check the dictionary, just means “ a person or thing that is distinct from another person or thing. So not othering them means not recognizing that the person is a distinct human entity. It means, I suppose, pretending that all people are indistinct blobs, all lumped together into the great ambiguous blob of all humanity. 
None of this makes sense, but Gennai has made it very clear that this DEI word salad is the guiding philosophy behind Google&#8217;s new AI. There&#8217;s no firewall between her and the product. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="010 Responsible AI Definition" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-epFWeoFdXo?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
It&#8217;s easy to point and laugh at imbeciles like Gennai and the product that Google has created. On some level, it&#8217;s genuinely hilarious that an AI product can be so useless that it can&#8217;t generate images of white people — even white historical figures. It&#8217;s also amusing, in a way, that Gemini is so unsubtle and ham-fisted that it straight-up refuses to answer questions about, for example, atrocities <a href="https://x.com/pmarca/status/1760481929336615073?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">committed</a> by communist governments, or the <a href="https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1760496879777853786?s=20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Zoom exploits</a> of CNN commentator Jeffrey Toobin.
But the truth remains that the people behind Gemini have extraordinary power. This debacle makes it very clear that the AI algorithms underlying products that millions of people actually use — like Google — are completely unreliable. In fact, they&#8217;re deliberately lying to us. They&#8217;re down-ranking unapproved viewpoints and disfavored racial groups. And they&#8217;re promoting the laziest possible brand of neo-Marxist ideology at every opportunity. And they&#8217;re doing it to influence the next presidential election. You might remember that after Donald Trump won in 2016, Breitbart posted <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za4tsfdpeMw" target="_blank" rel="noopener">leaked</a> footage of Google executives grieving during an all-hands meeting. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Breitbart leaks video of Google’s reaction to Trump victory in 2016" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Za4tsfdpeMw?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
&#8220;I find this election deeply offensive. &#8230; We all need a hug.&#8221; It was at this moment that Google decided that down-ranking conservative websites wasn&#8217;t enough. In order to really influence elections, they&#8217;ve decided, they needed to develop an AI that will force-feed DEI and anti-white racism on everyone, at every opportunity.
 Their only mistake — which is the same mistake they made in that video back in 2016 — is that they were too obvious about their intentions. Now everyone knows exactly where Google stands. And we have a pretty good idea what our future AI-driven dystopia will look like.

Gemini Replaces Google Bard

Our AI Overlords Are Here And They Really Hate White People

Silicon Valley

Woke Culture

Menu