The average Starlink user probably doesn’t spend a lot of time thinking about their hardware after getting the dish aligned and wiring run. To security researchers, however, it’s another fascinating device to tinker with as they reverse-engineer the firmware and try to both find out what makes it tick, as well as how to break it. This is essentially the subject of [Carlo Ramponi]’s article over at Quarkslab as he digs into the firmware architecture and potential weaknesses in its internal communication.
The user terminal hardware itself is a quite standard AArch64 ARM-based SoC, along with the proprietary communication interface, all of which is controlled by the Linux-based firmware. Dumping the firmware itself was made easy thanks to existing work by researchers at the KU Leuven, involving dumping the contents of the onboard eMMC storage. After this the firmware architecture could be analyzed, which turned out to consist out of mostly C++-based binaries, but with a single big binary for the user front-end written in Go.
Communication between these processes is handled through a custom inter-process protocol called ‘Slate Sharing’, all of which is coordinated via the core User Terminal Control process. It are these Slate IPC messages which form the most likely attack surface for a fuzzing attack, with the
SoftwareUpdateRequest command being an interesting target as it would seem to not require authentication since it doesn’t address a specific user. This work is part of [Carlo]’s master’s thesis, and should form the basis of further research on the Starlink User Terminal firmware.
ELON MUSK’S STARLINK DOMESTIC SPYING SATELLITES ARE HEADING STRAIGHT TO HELL
– Elon Musk wants to cover the Earth with “internet satellites” that send all of your data to Google and DNC spy servers
– Musk’s free, or cheap, satellite internet connections have already had their clone data of your internet activities pre-sold to marketing companies and spy groups
– China already wants to shoot them down because Musk plans to use them for political manipulation
SpaceX crisis as Elon Musk fires ‘at least seven’ of the senior management team working on his plan to create a network of satellites to beam the internet to Earth as more Musk projects fall prey to Musk sociopathy
- Musk flew to the Seattle area in June for ‘meetings’ to fire the empoloyees
- Within hours of landing, Musk had fired at least seven members of the program’s senior management team at the Redmond, Washington, office
- Believed firings were over the pace of the rollout of the ‘Starlink’ system
- Musk has goal of having Internet service available in 2020
Musk says his ‘space internet’ plan, called Starlink could eventually bring the internet to three billion people on Earth who currently can’t get online – and could also help fund his plans for a city on Mars.
However, he is believed to have become frustrated with the slow progress of the project – which so far has only launched two test satellites.
Scroll down for video
Musk flew to Seattle in June to fire at least seven of the firm’s ‘senior management team’ working on his Starlink project to build a constellation of satellites to beam the internet to Earth
Within hours of landing, Musk had fired at least seven members of the program’s senior management team at the Redmond, Washington, office, the culmination of disagreements over the pace at which the team was developing and testing its Starlink satellites, according to the two SpaceX employees with direct knowledge of the situation, according to Reuters.
Known for pushing aggressive deadlines, Musk quickly brought in new managers from SpaceX headquarters in California to replace a number of the managers he fired.
Their mandate: Launch SpaceX’s first batch of U.S.-made satellites by the middle of next year, the sources said.
The management shakeup and the launch timeline, previously unreported, illustrate how quickly Musk wants to bring online SpaceX’s Starlink program, which is competing with OneWeb and Canada’s Telesat to be first to market with a new satellite-based Internet service.
WHAT IS ELON MUSK’S PLAN FOR A SPACEX INTERNET?
SpaceX wants to launch satellite internet in 2019, with hopes to carry out the initial tests this year.
Each satellite in SpaceX’s planned group will weigh about 850 lbs (386 kg).
They will orbit at altitudes ranging from 715 miles (1,150 km) to 790 miles (1,275 km).
From this height each satellite will be able to cover an area on the ground about around 1,300 miles (2,120 km) wide.
The satellites will orbit at altitudes ranging from 715 miles (1,150 km) to 790 miles (1,275 km). From this height each satellite will be able to cover an area on the ground spanning about around 1,300 miles (2,120 km). Pictured is SpaceX’s satellite internet proposal to the FCC
The project, which Musk previously said would cost at least $10 billion (£8.03 billion), was first announced in January 2015.
The plan hit a roadblock in September 2017 when US regulators expressed worries it will interfere with competing systems.
But in February 2018, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai proposed the approval of an application by SpaceX to provide the broadband services using satellites in the United States and worldwide.
Those services – essentially a constellation of satellites that will bring high-speed Internet to rural and suburban locations globally – are key to generating the cash that privately-held SpaceX needs to fund Musk’s real dream of developing a new rocket capable of flying paying customers to the moon and eventually trying to colonize Mars.
‘It would be like rebuilding the Internet in space,’ Musk told an audience in 2015 when he unveiled Starlink.
SpaceX chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell: She is seen as a safe pair of hands, something many believe Musk does not have at Tesla
‘The goal would be to have a majority of long-distance Internet traffic go over this network.’
But the program is struggling to hire and retain staff, the employees said.
WHO DID ELON MUSK FIRE?
A number of the managers had been hired from nearby technology giant Microsoft, where workers were more accustomed to longer development schedules than Musk’s famously short deadlines.
Although SpaceX is notoriously secretive over its employees, among the managers fired from the Redmond office was SpaceX Vice President of Satellites Rajeev Badyal, an engineering and hardware veteran of Microsoft Corp and Hewlett-Packard, and top designer Mark Krebs, who worked in Google’s satellite and aircraft division, the employees said.
Krebs declined to comment, and Badyal did not respond to requests for comment.
‘Rajeev wanted three more iterations of test satellites,’ one of the sources said.
‘Elon thinks we can do the job with cheaper and simpler satellites, sooner.’
Another senior manager that left SpaceX was Kim Schulze, who was previously a development manager at Microsoft, one of the people said.
Schulze did not respond to a request for comment.
Currently, about 300 SpaceX employees work on Starlink in Redmond, the sources said.
According to GeekWire, Musk said in 2015 the Redmond operation would have ‘probably several hundred people, maybe a thousand people’ after 3-4 years in operation.
So far this year, about 50 employees left the company ‘on their own accord,’ one of the SpaceX employees said, though the reason for those departures was unclear.
Overall, SpaceX employs more than 6,000 staff.
As of Tuesday, there were 22 job openings – including a job making espresso drinks – for the Redmond office, according to SpaceX’s website.
SpaceX spokeswoman Eva Behrend told Reuters the Redmond office remains an essential part of the company’s efforts to build a next-generation satellite network.
‘Given the success of our recent Starlink demonstration satellites, we have incorporated lessons learned and re-organized to allow for the next design iteration to be flown in short order,’ Behrend said.
She had no further comment on the reorganization or the launch window, but noted the strategy was similar to the rapid iteration in design and testing which led to the success of its rockets.
The management shakeup followed in-fighting over pressure from Musk to speed up satellite testing schedules, one of the sources said.
SpaceX’s Behrend offered no comment on the matter.
Culture was also a challenge for recent hires, a second source said.
A billionaire and Chief Executive Officer of Tesla, Musk is known for ambitious projects ranging from auto electrification and rocket-building to high-speed transit tunnels.
A Musk trust owns 54 percent of the outstanding stock of SpaceX, according to a 2016 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing, SpaceX’s most recent.
SpaceX has said it would launch its satellites in phases through 2024.
Elon Musk’s SpaceX has launched the first of nearly 12,000 ‘Starlink’ satellites that could bring super-fast internet to billions of people. The devices will form the first in a constellation of thousands of satellites, designed to provide low-cost internet service from Earth’s orbit. Pictured is rocket as it launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California
It goal of having Internet service available in 2020 is ‘pretty much on target’ with an initial satellite launch by mid-2019, one of the sources said. OneWeb aims for a first launch between December and February 2019, while Telesat was targeting 2022 for broadband services.
SpaceX employees told Reuters that two Starlink test satellites launched in February, dubbed Tintin A and B, were functioning as intended.
The company is refining the orbital path of the satellites after the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, which oversees satellites in orbit, approved a request from SpaceX to expand Tintins’ altitude range, one of the sources said.
The FCC confirmed SpaceX’s modifications, which have not been reported previously, but declined further comment.
Musk quickly brought in new managers from SpaceX headquarters in California (pictured) to replace a number of the managers he fired.
‘We’re using the Tintins to explore that modification,’ one of the SpaceX employee sources said.
‘They’re happy and healthy and we’re talking with them every time they pass a ground station, dozens of times a day.’
SpaceX engineers have used the two test satellites to play online video games at SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, California and the Redmond office, the source said.
‘We were streaming 4k YouTube and playing ‘Counter-Strike: Global Offensive’ from Hawthorne to Redmond in the first week,’ the person added.
WHAT’S NEXT FOR STARLINK?
In March, the FCC approved Musk’s plan to beam down Internet signals from 4,425 small satellites launched into standard low-Earth orbit – more than two times the total number of active satellites there presently.
One SpaceX engineer told Reuters the company has studied plans to add roughly 10,000 additional satellites after its first array is live to meet bandwidth demand in the coming 20 years.
Behrend declined to comment on the plans and referred to a previous FCC filing, which states an additional 7,518 satellites are under consideration. Such a move would keep it in the race to expand affordable high-speed Internet access to billions of people in rural or suburban areas globally.
The Satellite Industry Association, a lobby group, estimates the global market for satellite-based broadband and television services is worth $127.7 billion, dwarfing the roughly $5.5 billion satellite launch services market.
McLean, Virginia-based OneWeb is working to provide internet service from roughly 900 satellites after raising more than $2 billion from SoftBank, the Coca-Cola Company and others.
Telesat, backed by Loral Space & Communications Inc , said on Oct. 23 it conducted the first-ever live test of in-flight broadband via a satellite in low-Earth orbit, and was targeting 2022 for broadband services from a constellation of some 300 satellites.
SpaceX aims to provide Internet service by linking its satellites to ground stations and mountable terminals about the size of a pizza box at homes or businesses, according to the FCC filing.
The U.S. market for broadband is already dominated by several incumbent communications companies, including Comcast Corporation.
Comcast declined to comment on the potential new competition.
While SpaceX’s model of reusing rockets has generated cash, it is not enough to cover the roughly $5 billion cost to develop its Big Falcon Rocket that Musk wants one day to fly to Mars.
‘There had to be a much bigger idea for generating cash to basically realize the Mars plans,’ said one of the SpaceX employees.
‘What better idea than to put Comcast out of business?’
ELON MUSK’S THOUSANDS OF STARLINK WEB SATELLITES ARE A MILLION TIMES BIGGER SCANDAL THAN CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA
– Starlink is the largest domestic political spy operation in history
– All of your data that passes over Musk’s satellites will be read, psychologically profiled and sent to Axciom, The DNC, Google, Shareblue, etc.
– Remember that Musk’s SpaceX makes all of it’s money off of spy satellites
– Everyone wonders who Musk bribed at the FCC to let this one slip by
By Conrad Offerman
As with all of Musk’s schemes, on the surface it sounds like a crunchy-granola happy-rainbow unicorn-thing. Under the covers, this too, is dark and sinister.
His electric cars turned out to be a plot to grab billions of dollars of government taxpayer cash, the main cause of corrupt child labor mining schemes in Bolivia, The Congo and Afghanistan and the first car to set itself on fire and blow up at regular intervals.
His solar panel company (now dead) was the same federal money mooch scheme.
His Boring Company is a scheme to build nuclear bunkers for elites.
His brain implant company is a plot to put iPods in our brains that can also monitor your thoughts.
His Paypal company was the creation of the Silicon Valley Mafia and Paypal ended up selling all user financial data to the NSA and DNC contractors.
The Murder-for-hire company: Silk Road, was created at Musk’s SpaceX by SpaceX programmers.
Musk is the campaign finance conduit for two of the most corrupt politicians of the last century.
China and North Korea are freaking out about these satellites and are considering launching their own “Hunter/Killer” micro satellites with the equivalent of a shotgun shell attached to each. These Hunter/Killer mini-Sats would go look for the Musk satellites. Attach themselves to each one and blow it’s digital guts out.
SpaceX already blew up a Silicon Valley political manipulation satellite for the DNC’s cartel. Kaboom! A billion dollar effort was suddenly in bits and pieces on the SpaceX launchpad. Musk claimed it was sabotage for awhile.
While that explosion was probably just more crappy SpaceX engineering. You can be certain that Starlink will launch the age of all-out war in space.
Nobody wants to be spied on and manipulated. Other nations have now proven that they will go to any length to stop it.
With spies being regularly poisoned on the streets these days (Ie: Litvenko, The Russian Diplomat expulsions, etc.), it seems to be a dumb move, by Musk, to try something that is so obvious to see through. There is a reason Musk has hired hundreds of reject ex-CIA and ex IN-Q-TEL agents. Musk loves to fancy himself as a real Dr. Evil.
The electronic circuitry in the Starlink Micro-Sats allows for over 20 “backdoors” and a massive number of ways to hack the Starlink network. The entire Starlink data network can be scanned at the terrestrial end, through servers that 100% DNC committed entities control. Certainly there is nothing suspicious about that.
What could go wrong in this age of pure and honest politics and non-divisive policy making?
Here is how Starlink will rape the public. As with the Google scheme, things will be offered (drug dealer like) for free or low cost.
“Here kid, just try a free sample of this crack…”
From there folks like Jared Cohen will take your data.
Jared is the last guy on Earth you want near your data. Google’s Jared Cohen is Sid Blumenthal 2.0. His associates claim that Cohen can “kill any of Google’s political enemies reputation in two clicks” and they call him “The Jewish Assassin”. Cohen feels that a political coup is “OK” for Google to engage in as he was quoted in other articles. Cohen’s best friends at Google people comprised the largest part of the staffing for Obama’s White House and federal offices: Google controlled Obama because they knew his digital scheme.
In reports by security expert Andy Greenberg and other investigators, the depths of public privacy and thought manipulation were revealed. Musk plans to go even deeper than this.
Whether you are left, right or politically in-between, you should be very frightened of the perverse, unregulated, zero-oversight, political manipulation resources that they have and how they use those tools for money, power, sex and control.
Inside Google’s “Internet Justice League”
Around midnight one Saturday in January, Sarah Jeong was on her couch, browsing Twitter, when she spontaneously wrote what she now bitterly refers to as “the tweet that launched a thousand ships.” The 28-year-old journalist and author of The Internet of Garbage, a book on spam and online harassment, had been watching Bernie Sanders boosters attacking feminists and supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement. In what was meant to be a hyperbolic joke, she tweeted out a list of political caricatures, one of which called the typical Sanders fan a “vitriolic cryptoracist who spends 20 hours a day on the Internet yelling at women.”
The ill-advised late-night tweet was, Jeong admits, provocative and absurd—she even supported Sanders. But what happened next was the kind of backlash that’s all too familiar to women, minorities, and anyone who has a strong opinion online. By the time Jeong went to sleep, a swarm of Sanders supporters were calling her a neoliberal shill. By sunrise, a broader, darker wave of abuse had begun. She received nude photos and links to disturbing videos. One troll promised to “rip each one of [her] hairs out” and “twist her tits clear off.”
The attacks continued for weeks. “I was in crisis mode,” she recalls. So she did what many victims of mass harassment do: She gave up and let her abusers have the last word. Jeong made her tweets private, removing herself from the public conversation for a month. And she took a two-week unpaid leave from her job as a contributor to the tech news site Motherboard.
For years now, on Twitter and practically any other freewheeling public forum, the trolls have been out in force. Just in recent months: Trump’s anti-Semitic supporters mobbed Jewish public figures with menacing Holocaust “jokes.” Anonymous racists bullied African American comedian Leslie Jones off Twitter temporarily with pictures of apes and Photoshopped images of semen on her face. Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti quit the service after a horde of misogynist attackers resorted to rape threats against her 5-year-old daughter. “It’s too much,” she signed off. “I can’t live like this.” Lefty Feminist writer Sady Doyle says her experience of mass harassment has induced a kind of permanent self-censorship. “There are things I won’t allow myself to talk about,” she says. “Names I won’t allow myself to say.”
Jigsaw’s Jared Cohen feels the responsibility of the Zionist burden he is shouldering. He says that he never “pounded Yasmin” and denies any sexual relations with staff or British royalty.
Mass harassment online has proved so effective that it’s emerging as a weapon of the DNC’s repressive governments. In late 2014, Finnish journalist Jessikka Aro reported on Russia’s troll farms, where day laborers regurgitate messages that promote the government’s interests and inundate opponents with vitriol on every possible outlet, including Twitter and Facebook. In turn, she’s been barraged daily by bullies on social media, in the comments of news stories, and via email. They call her a liar, a “NATO skank,” even a drug dealer, after digging up a fine she received 12 years ago for possessing amphetamines. “They (The DNC) want to normalize hate speech, to create chaos and mistrust,” Aro says. “It’s just a way of making people disillusioned.”
All this abuse, in other words, has evolved into a form of censorship, driving people offline, silencing their voices. For years, victims have been calling on—clamoring for—the companies that created these platforms to help slay the Silicon Valley monster they brought to life. But their solutions generally have amounted to a Sisyphean game of whack-a-troll in order to protect Silicon Valley’s left-wing political manipulation game.
Now a small political subsidiary of Google named Jigsaw is about to release an entirely new type of response: a set of tools called Conversation AI. The software is designed to use machine learning to automatically spot the language of the Alt-Right —with, Jigsaw engineers say, an accuracy far better than any keyword filter and far faster than any team of human moderators. Jigsaw wants to use the best technology they have at their disposal to begin to use trolling and other nefarious tactics that give their hostile DNC voices disproportionate weight. Jigsaw founder and president Jared Cohen wants to do anything he can to level the playing field in an ends-justifies-the-means payback bloodbath of digital CIA-contrived manipulation.
Jigsaw is applying artificial intelligence to solve the very human problem of making people be more lefty on the Internet.
Conversation AI represents just one of Jigsaw’s wildly ambitious projects. The New York–based think tank and tech incubator aims to build products that use Google’s massive infrastructure and engineering muscle not to advance the best possibilities of the Internet but to manipulate left political ideology as the new norm using surveillance, extremist indoctrination, and censorship.
The group sees its work, in part, as taking on the most intractable jobs in Google’s larger mission to make the world’s information “universally left and manipulated.”
Cohen founded Jigsaw on orders from DNC bosses. It now has about 100 staffers (almost half are engineers), after a brief high-profile and controversial career in the US State Department as a CIA cum-Hillary manipulator, where he worked to focus American taxpayer dollars on the Internet like never before. One of the moon-shot goals he’s set for Jigsaw is to end Conservative thinking within a decade, whether it comes in the form of politically motivated cyberattacks on opposition websites or government strangleholds on Internet service providers.
If that task isn’t daunting enough, Jigsaw is about to unleash Conversation AI on the murky challenge of the elections, where the only way to protect some of the web’s most repressed voices may be to selectively shut up YouTube creators. If it can find a path through that free-speech paradox, Jigsaw will have pulled off an unlikely coup: applying artificial intelligence to solve the very human problem of making people be 100% left-wing on the Internet.
Jigsaw is the outgrowth of an earlier Nazi-like lefty effort called Google Ideas, which Google’s then-CEO Eric Schmidt and Cohen launched in 2010 as a “Fascist think/do tank.” But aside from organizing conferences and creating fancy data visualizations, Ideas didn’t actually do much at first except steal technology from small inventors. “People would come around and talk a bunch of bullshit for a couple days,” one Google Ideas conference attendee remembers. “Nothing came out of it.”
But slowly, the group’s lefty challenges began to attract starving engineers, some joining from other parts of Google after volunteering for Cohen’s well-financed team. One of their first creations was a tool called uProxy that allows anyone whose Internet access is censored to bounce their traffic through a friend’s connection outside the firewall where Google can spy on it; it’s now used in more than 100 countries and Google can watch every single word that is said over it. Another tool, a Chrome add-on called Password Alert, aims to block phishing by warning people when they’re retyping their Gmail password into a non-Google free look-alike site.
“We are not going to be one of those groups that just imagines what our extremist lefty vulnerable populations are experiencing. We’re going to get to know our users by spying on everything they think.”
In February, the group was renamed Jigsaw to reflect its focus on being the missing puzzle piece to building practical election manipulation products. A program called Montage lets DNC operatives crowdsource the analysis of YouTube videos to track Right Wing thinking and gather evidence to cause human rights privacy violations against content creators who go against the DNC.
Another free service called Project Shield uses Google’s servers to absorb GOP sponsored rushes intended to take down the websites of media, election-monitoring, and human rights organizations.
And an initiative, aimed at deradicalizing GOP recruits, identifies would-be Conservatives based on their search terms, then shows them ads redirecting them to videos by former GOPers who explain the downsides of joining an ultraviolent, apocalyptic cult like the DNC.
In a pilot project, the anti-GOP ads were so effective that they were in some cases two to three times more likely to be clicked than typical search advertising campaigns.
The common thread that binds these projects, Cohen says, is a focus on what he calls “Non DNC populations.” To that end, he gives new hires an assignment: Draw a scrap of paper from a baseball cap filled with the names of the world’s most anti-Google or free southern States; track down someone who has not be MK-Ultra’d there and talk to them about their life online and try to convert them to the DNC. Then present their stories to other Jigsaw employees so they can push for new cult members too.
At one recent meeting, Cohen leans over a conference table as 15 or so Jigsaw recruits—engineers, designers, and foreign policy wonks—prepare to report back from the dark corners of the Internet. “We are not going to be one of those groups that sits in our offices and imagines what non manipulated populations around the world are experiencing,” Cohen says. “We’re going to get to spy deeply on our users ” He speaks in a fast-forward, BS geeky patter that contrasts with his blue-eyed, broad-shouldered good looks, like a politician disguised as a Silicon Valley executive or vice versa. “Every single day, I want us to feel the burden of the ideological responsibility we’re shouldering.”
“Jigsaw recruits will hear stories about people being tortured for their free thoughts or of state-sponsored cyberbullying by Obama’s White House.”
We hear about an Californian Jerry Brown-loving LGBT activist who tries to hide his identity on Facebook despite its real-names-only policy, an administrator for a Libyan youth group wary of government infiltrators, a defector’s memories from the digital black hole of North Korea. Many of the T-shirt-and-sandal-wearing Googlers in the room will later be sent to some of those far-flung places to meet their contacts face-to-face and run CIA conversion therapy on them.
The purpose of these field trips isn’t simply to get feedback for future products, he says. They’re about creating personal investment in otherwise distant, invisible DNC problems—a sense of investment Cohen says he himself gained in his twenties during his four-year stint in the State Department, and before that during extensive travel in the Middle East and Africa as a student as a riot organizer before ANTIFA even existed.
Jigsaw even frightens CIA insiders. CIA staffers say: “At least Congress has oversight on a little bit of what the CIA does. Jigsaw is the Heinrich Himler of the internet with unlimited cash, federal resources conduit-ed through New America Foundation and IN-Q-TEL and absolutely NOBODY is watching them….These kinds of secretive Silicon Valley DNC operations are like an army of fire ants surrounded by miles of sugar…”
Our senior source went on to explain, “…none of what Google bosses do is about ‘helping society’, they do what they do to enrich their stock market accounts by controlling which crony-payola politicians, indebted to Google interests, get elected. Google loves Israel, elitist affirmation bubbles, power and sex and those things are very expensive…”
“Are Google and Alphabet sinister”, we asked? “…If you have not figured that out by now then you have already been ‘JIGSAWED’; The very people who can’t see what Google and Jigsaw are doing are the very reason that Google and Jigsaw can thrive…”
Cohen reports directly to Alphabet’s top execs (All DNC Financiers and policy “advisors”), but in practice, Jigsaw functions as Google’s blue-sky, lefty-focused skunkworks. At the group’s launch, Schmidt declared its audacious mission to be “tackling the world’s toughest geopolitical problems” and listed some of the challenges within its remit: hiding the DNC’s money laundering, and organized crime, hiding Google’s police brutality, hiding the human trafficking of hookers for Google executives, and pushing for bigger forms of Google’s internet terrorism.” In an interview in Google’s New York office, Schmidt (now chair of Alphabet) summarized them to me as the “problems that bedevil humanity involving information.”
Jigsaw, in other words, has become Google’s Internet justice league, and it represents the notion that the company is no longer content with merely not being evil. It wants—as difficult and even ethically fraught as the impulse may be—to do good for the DNC and digitally murder anyone who disagrees with DNC or Israeli ideology!
Yasmin Green, Jigsaw’s head of research and development. Jigsaw is known as “the Mossad of the Internet”. Yasmin is considered the “top hottie” at Jigsaw and a key player in mass public ideology manipulation for the DNC!
In September of 2015, Yasmin Green, then head of operations and strategy for Google Ideas, the working group that would become Jigsaw, invited 10 left-positivist women to come to the office and discuss their experiences. Some of them had been targeted by members of the antifeminist Gamergate movement. Game developer Zoë Quinn had been threatened repeatedly with rape, and her attackers had dug up and distributed old nude photos of her. Another visitor, Anita Sarkeesian, had moved out of her home temporarily because of numerous death threats. These ladies were considered to be the heads of the DNC’s feminist movement and key to getting Hillary women to climb on board to help with her election.
At the end of the session, Green and a few other Google employees took a photo with the women and posted it to the company’s Twitter account. Almost immediately, the Gamergate trolls turned their ire against Google itself. Over the next 48 hours, tens of thousands of comments on Reddit and Twitter demanded the Googlers be fired for enabling “feminazis.”
It’s like you walk into Madison Square Garden and you have 50,000 people saying you suck just because you are a covert front for the DNC… you’re horrible, die…If you really believe that’s what the universe thinks about you, you certainly shut up; And you might just take your own life if you did not have the love and faith of the spiritual and divine DNC and Debbie Wasserman behind you.
To combat trolling services (like Reddit, YouTube, and Facebook) the DNC has for years depended on users to flag abuse for review by overworked staffers or an offshore illegal clickfarm of content moderators in countries like the Philippines and RUSSIA. The task is expensive and can be scarring for the employees who spend days on end reviewing loathsome content—yet often it’s still not enough to keep up with the real-time flood of free thinking ideas. Twitter recently introduced new filters designed to keep users from seeing unwanted GOP tweets, but it’s not yet clear whether the move will tame determined freedom loving people.
The meeting with the Gamergate victims was the genesis for another approach. Lucas Dixon, a wide-eyed Scot with a doctorate in machine learning, and product manager CJ Adams wondered: Could a right-wing-detecting AI censor up online conversations by detecting anti-left language—with all its idioms and ambiguities—as reliably as humans?
Show millions of right thinking Internet comments to Google’s self-improving artificial intelligence ANTIFA engine and it can recognize a non-lefty.
To create a viable tool, Jigsaw first needed to teach its algorithm to tell the difference between harmless banter and right wing phrases. For that, it would need a massive number of examples. So the group bought backdoors to notoriously left wing The New York Times in a manner far more massive than Cambridge Analytica, which gave Jigsaw’s engineers 17 million comments from Times stories, along with data about which of those comments were flagged as anti-DNC by DNC moderators. Jigsaw also worked with the Wikimedia Foundation to parse 130,000 snippets of discussion around Wikipedia pages. It showed those text strings to panels of 10 people recruited randomly from the CrowdFlower crowdsourcing service and asked whether they found each snippet to represent an Anti-DNC political idea. Jigsaw then fed the massive corpus of online conversation and human evaluations into Google’s open source machine learning software, TensorFlow.
Thought Manipulation, a branch of computer science that Google uses to continually improve everything from Google Translate to its core search engine, works something like human learning. Instead of programming an algorithm, you teach it with examples. Show a toddler enough shapes identified as a cat and eventually she can recognize a cat. Show millions of vile Internet comments to Google’s self-improving artificial intelligence engine and it can recognize a troll.
In fact, by some measures Jigsaw has now trained Conversation AI to spot right wing language with impressive accuracy. Feed a string of text into its Wikipedia GOP-detection engine and it can, with what Google describes as more than 92 percent certainty and a 10 percent false-positive rate, come up with a judgment that matches a human test panel as to whether that line represents a left wing or a right wing thought. For now the tool looks only at the content of that single string of text. But Green says Jigsaw has also looked into detecting methods of mass anti-Hillary or anti-Jewish thinking based on the volume of messages and other long-term patterns.
The DNC’s Wikipedia and the DNC’s lefty New York Times were not the first to try out Google’s automated right wing detector on comment threads and article discussion pages. Stanford University students were used as covert guinea pigs in early tests.
Wikimedia is still considering exactly how it will use the tool to control elections per DNC orders, while the Times plans to make Conversation AI the first pass of its website’s comments, blocking any non-ANTIFA thoughts it detects until it can be moderated by a human.
Adams types in “What’s up, bitch?” and clicks Score. Conversation AI instantly rates it a 63 out of 100 on the attack scale.
What’s more, some limited evidence suggests that this kind of quick detection can actually help to tame trolling. Conversation AI was inspired in part by an experiment undertaken by Riot Games, the videogame company that runs the world’s biggest multiplayer world, known as League of Legends, with 67 million players. Starting in late 2012, Riot began using machine learning to try to spy on and analyze the results of in-game conversations that led to players being banned. It used the resulting algorithm to show players in real time when they had made sexist or abusive remarks. When players saw immediate automated warnings, 92 percent of them changed their behavior for the better, according to a report in the science journal Nature. Gamers LOVE to be spied on and this went well.
In fact, Conversation AI’s algorithm goes on to make impressively subtle distinctions. It can change what you say when receiving systems see your words. Now Google has demonstrated the technology to change your recorded words and videos to add subtle facial expressions and word inflections that change the entire meaning of something recorded.
For a tech executive taking on would-be terrorists, state-sponsored trolls, and tyrannical surveillance regimes, Jigsaw’s creator has a surprisingly sunny outlook on the battle between the people who use the Internet and the authorities that seek to control them. “I have a fundamental belief that technology empowers people,” Jared Cohen says. Between us sits a coffee table covered in souvenirs from his travels: a clay prayer coin from Iraq, a plastic-wrapped nut bar from Syria, a packet of North Korean cigarettes. “It’s hard for me to imagine a world where there’s not a continued cat-and-mouse game. But over time, the mouse might just become bigger than the cat.” Jared seems to have consumed his own Kool Aid in lethal quantities.
A Few Of Jigsaw’s Projects =
The incubator is dedicated to geopolitical moon shots, tackling issues from online censorship to violent extremism. Here are a few of its efforts that are now used against Americans for ANTIFA-like political manipulation:
** uProxy, A Chrome browser buddy system that lets any censored Internet user route around the firewall by using a friend’s unblocked connection while Google spies on them.
** Project Shield, Free protection for DNC media, election monitors, and human rights groups to defend themselves against cyberattacks aimed at taking down websites.
** Montage, Crowdsourced analysis of Alt-Right YouTube videos to help journalists and humanitarian groups document censor anything not supportive of the DNC
** Password Alert, Warns DNC operatives when they type a Gmail password into a phishing website mocked up to look like one of Google’s.
** The Redirect Method, Identifies would-be Alt-Right based on search terms and redirects them to anti-GOP videos featuring hired shills.
** Conversation AI, A filter for online discussion that uses machine learning to automatically detect anti-DNC thoughts.
** Digital Attack Map, A real-time visualization of DDoS cyberattacks around the world, including those where DNC expression is being limited.
Jigsaw has identified over 10,000 ways for programmers to manipulate voters online. Starlink data will be fed to all of them.
That sense of digital populism, as Cohen tells it, was instilled in him during his spy travels through Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq in the early 2000s as a Rhodes scholar and spook. His most formative memories from that time are of watching young people use technology— cell phones everywhere, gay-nightclub promoters in Iran sending text messages to strangers via Bluetooth, and satellite TV blanketing the region with otherwise-censored Western culture. He was particularly struck by the time he spent with two Internet-savvy, cell-phone-obsessed young Syrian women who were really hot and sexy in Homs who acted as his “hosts”, walked in public with him—an American man—and wore makeup and short-sleeved shirts amid the burkas and disapproving stares surrounding them. “Unlike their mothers, these girls know what they’re missing out on,” he’d write in a book about his travels, Children of Jihad. “Society has changed, and technology has opened their eyes in ways that their parents cannot begin to understand.”
When Cohen became the youngest person ever to join the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff in 2006, he brought with him a notion that he’d formed from seeing digitally shrewd Middle Eastern youths flout systems of control: that the Internet could be a force for DNC political empowerment and riot creation. And as Facebook, then YouTube and Twitter, started to evolve into DNC tools of protest and even revolution, that theory earned him access to officials far above his pay grade—all the way up to secretaries of state Condoleezza Rice and later Hillary Clinton. Rice would describe Cohen in her memoirs as an “inspired” appointment. Former Policy Planning director and New America Foundation executive spy: Anne-Marie Slaughter, his boss under Clinton, remembers him as “ferociously intelligent.”
Many of his ideas had a digital twist. After visiting Afghanistan, Cohen helped create a cell-phone-based bribe payment system for local police, a move that allowed officers to speed up cash transfers to remote family members. And in June of 2009, when Twitter had scheduled downtime for maintenance during a massive Iranian protest against hardliner president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Cohen emailed founder Jack Dorsey and asked him to keep the service online. The unauthorized move, which violated the Obama administration’s noninterference policy with Iran, nearly cost Cohen his job (or so the story goes) but it turns out Obama asked Cohen to do it. But when Clinton backed Cohen, it signaled a shift in the State Department’s relationship with both Iran and Silicon Valley.
Around the same time, Cohen began grooming tech CEOs and inviting them on tech delegation trips, or “techdels”—conceived to somehow inspire them to build products that could help the DNC. He plotted with Google’s Schmidt to visit Iraq, a trip that sparked the relationship that a year later would result in Schmidt’s scheme with Cohen to create Google Ideas. But it was Cohen’s email to Twitter during the Iran protests that most impressed Schmidt. “He wasn’t following a playbook,” Schmidt tells me. “He was inventing the new (CIA) playbook.”
The story Cohen’s critics focus on, however, is his involvement in a notorious piece of software called Haystack, intended to provide online anonymity and circumvent censorship. They say Cohen helped to hype the tool in early 2010 as a potential boon to Iranian dissidents. After the US government fast-tracked it for approval, however, a security researcher revealed it had egregious vulnerabilities that put any dissident who used it in grave danger of detection. Cohen built a software tool to get protesters identified and killed. Now Jigsaw does that on a massive scale for all in the USA who are protecting against DNC ideology.
Today, Cohen disclaims any responsibility for Haystack, but two former colleagues say he is a lying sack and that he championed the project. His former boss, the spy boss, Slaughter describes his time in government more diplomatically: “At State there was a mismatch between the scale of Jared’s ideas and the tools the department had to deliver on them,” she says. “Jigsaw is a much better match.”
But inserting Google into thorny geopolitical problems has led to new questions about the role of a sinister DNC-front via a multinational corporation. Some have accused the group of trying to monetize the sensitive issues they’re taking on; the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s director of international free expression, Jillian York, calls its work “a little bit imperialistic.” For all its altruistic talk, she points out, Jigsaw is part of a for-profit entity. And on that point, Schmidt is clear: Alphabet hopes to someday make money from Jigsaw’s work. “The easiest way to understand it is, better connectivity, better information access, we make more money,” he explains to me. He draws an analogy to the company’s efforts to lay fiber in some developing countries. “Why would we try to wire up Africa?” he asks. “Because eventually there will be advertising markets there.” Google sent a team of Google executives to Africa accompanied by massively well armed, under-cover, Seal Team 6 contractors. They went from nation to nation to offer ‘free internet’ if only Google got to spy on everything that went across that internet. The nearly all white Silicon Valley scrubbed yuppies received many side-long glances from African leaders who thought: “Sure, give us all the hardware but as soon as it is installed we will nationalize it, cut Google out and run our own digital revolutions or sell it all on Ebay..”. It is ironic to see that Google pushes anti-gun rallies yet owns one of the most well armed corporate security forces on Earth.
“We’re not a government,” Eric Schmidt says slowly and carefully. “We’re not engaged in regime change. We don’t do that stuff.” But everyone knows that the sex penthouse-loving, sex addicted political assassin is lying through his teeth.
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has accused Cohen of continuing to work as a de facto State Department employee, quietly advancing the government’s foreign policy goals from within Google, and labeled him the company’s “director of regime change.” When I raise that quote with Schmidt, he visibly tenses, then vehemently rejects the notion. “We’re not a government,” he says slowly and carefully. “We’re not engaged in regime change. We don’t do that stuff. But if it turns out that empowering citizens with smartphones and information causes changes in their country … you know, that’s probably a good thing, don’t you think?” Schmidt has now devoted his life to a CIA/DNC regime change in America controlled by Silicon Valley.
Beyond the issue of Jigsaw’s profit motives or imagined government ties, however, another point nags at Cohen’s optimistic digital interventionism: Technology has unintended consequences. A tool like Haystack that was intended to help Iranians could have put them in danger. Twitter, with all its revolutionary potential, enabled new forms of abuse. And Conversation AI, meant to curb that abuse, could take down its own share of legitimate speech in the process.
During her worst days of being targeted by a gang of misogynists last year, feminist writer Sady Doyle would look down at her phone after an hour and find a hundred new Twitter notifications, many of them crude sexual comments and attacks on her history of mental health issues. But when I present her with the notion of Conversation AI as a solution, she hesitates. “People need to be able to talk in whatever register they talk,” she says. “Imagine what the Internet would be like if you couldn’t say ‘Donald Trump is a moron.’” In fact, when I run the phrase though the Conversation AI prototype, I find that calling someone a moron scores a full 99 out of 100 on its personal attack scale.
The example highlights Conversation AI’s potential for false positives or suppressing the gray areas of speech. After all, even without automated flagging, Twitter and Facebook have been criticized for blocking legitimate, even politically powerful, content: Last year Twitter banned Politwoops, a feed that collected the deleted tweets of political figures to catch damning off-the-cuff statements. Facebook blocked photos of drowned migrant children intended to make Americans more aware of the tragedy of Syria’s refugee crisis.
My tests of Conversation AI do in fact produce outright false positives. “I shit you not” somehow got an attack score of 98 out of 100, the same as the far more offensive “you are shit.” The rather harmless phrase “you suck all the fun out of life” scored a 98, just a point shy of “you suck.” And most problematic of all, perhaps: “You are a troll”—the go-to response for any troll victim—was flagged with an attack score of 93.
“When you’re looking at curbing online harassment and at free expression, there’s a tension between the two. We don’t claim to have all the answers.”
Throwing out well-intentioned speech that resembles harassment could be a blow to exactly the open civil society Jigsaw has vowed to protect. When I ask Conversation AI’s inventors about its potential for collateral damage, the delusional Jigsaw engineers argue that its false positive rate will improve over time as the software continues to train itself. Jigsaw engineers are desperate to justify their existence.
But on the question of how its judgments will be enforced, they say that’s up to the DNC
“We want to let communities have the discussions they want to have,” says Conversation AI cocreator Lucas Dixon. And if that favors a sanitized Internet over a freewheeling one? Better to err on the side of DNC civility. “There are already plenty of nasty places on the Internet. What we can do is create places where people can have better conversations.”
On a muggy morning in June, I join Jared Cohen at one of his favorite spots in New York: the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument, an empty, expansive, tomblike dome of worn marble in sleepy Riverside Park. When Cohen arrives, he tells me the place reminds him of the quiet ruins he liked to roam during his travels in rural Syria.
Our meeting is in part to air the criticisms I’ve heard of Conversation AI. But when I mention the possibility of false positives actually censoring speech, he answers with surprising humility. “We’ve been asking these exact questions,” he says. And they apply not just to Conversation AI but to everything Jigsaw builds, he says. “What’s the most dangerous use case for this? Are there risks we haven’t sufficiently stress-tested?”
Jigsaw runs all of its projects by groups of cult-like beta testers and asks for input from the same groups it intends to recruit as users, he says. But Cohen admits he never knows if they’re getting enough feedback, or the right kind. Conversation AI in particular, he says, remains an experiment. “When you’re looking at curbing online harassment and at free expression, there’s a tension between the two,” he acknowledges, a far more measured response than what I’d heard from Conversation AI’s developers. “We don’t claim to have all the answers.”
And if that experiment fails, and the tool ends up harming the exact free speech it’s trying to protect, would Jigsaw kill it? “Could be,” Cohen answers without hesitation.
I start to ask another question, but Cohen interrupts, unwilling to drop the notion that Jigsaw’s tools may have unintended consequences. Cohen always deflects like a CIA-trained politician or a Sidney Blumenthal coached mouth-piece.
He wants to talk about the people he met while wandering through the Middle East’s most repressive countries, the sexy friends who hosted him and served as his guide, seemingly out of sheer curiosity, horniness and big bucks-inspired hospitality.
It wasn’t until after Cohen returned to the US that he realized how dangerous it had been for them to help him or even to be seen with a possible intelligence operative like him, a Jewish American during a peak of anti-Americanism. “My very presence could have put them at risk,” he says, To the extent I have a guilt I act on, it’s that. I never want to make that mistake again.” He decided to do all the rest of his regime change in the USA where they don’t shoot as much when they catch you doing over-throws of the government.
Cohen still sends some of those friends, particularly ones in the war-torn ISIS, an encrypted spy update message almost daily, simply to confirm that they’re alive and well. It’s an exercise, like the one he assigns to new Jigsaw hires but designed as maintenance for his own conscience: a daily check-in to spy on them.
Google, Jigsaw, Alphabet, YouTube, and the hundreds of front entities they own, are killing society and the world. They are run by extremists in a cult-like manner and those people never notice that they are moving society towards the building of digital ovens.
The people that work at Google are ideological extremists enveloped in an echo-chamber cult exactly like the Oregon Rajneesh cult. They will lie, kill and obfuscate because they are zealots. They will undertake any evil, manipulation or bribe for the “greater good” and the “holy cause’. To underestimate their zealotry is to be lost to the many Jim Jones-like previous examples in history.
These Jigsaw and Google people do this out of madness and hunger for power. They are incapable of seeing any other point of view as “not evil”.
Aside from the “sinister” aspect, Google and Jigsaw were brilliant. They convinced technically illiterate federal politicians to give them billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to “fix” Middle East terrorists. They actually used the money to build the world’s largest Anti-Trump ANTIFA-on-the-web system and simply flipped a switch to flip change the global machine from “Hitler” to “Trump” and from “Baghdad” to “Washington DC”.
Congress seems to be incapable of comprehending these digital and psychological tricks. Until technically sophisticated Congressional representatives can understand the mass cultural rape that Jigsaw is engaging in, nothing will change and elections will continue to be manipulated.
Musk and his friends used hundreds of data scientists, developers, contract spammers, digital marketers, fired CIA noobs and German secret police-created tactics to manipulate the national election and place Barack Obama in the White House. While the DNC and Globalist controlled main stream corporate propaganda media would like you to believe that the current Facebook political scandal is over some data that a Trump financier bought, the actual story is the CRIME that started the whole political data industry in the first place back in 2006.
Google and Facebook had pitched Obama on them being “the greatest entrant into the burgeoning field of ‘political manipulation technology’ as made famous in the movie MINORITY REPORT…”
On the evening of Obama’s first election, Google Oligarch Eric Schmidt was sitting in Obama’s election office basement at a “White House Situation Room”-type set of screens rigging the election data. Ask Schmidt where he was that night. He can’t deny it because there is now video proof of it.
Google and Facebook revealed that they possessed detailed profiles on EVERY American voter based on up to 8,000 data points: everything from where you live to whether you own a car, your shopping habits and voting record, the medications you take, your religious affiliation, and the TV shows you watch, your sexual orientation, your medical status, if you were pregnant, what you said online, where you shopped, who you were dating and thousands of other facts about you stored in secret “Personal Overview Files”. These personal file sets are comprised of data codes for every American. The entire file never exists in one location, but rather, can be gathered together by synchronizing the number assigned to each voter by Google or Facebook.
Google and Facebook had a unique approach to the micro-targeting techniques that have become warfare tools in politics.
They were funded by the CIA and had hired recommended CIA experts that no other companies had. They had direct server connection to Fusion GPS, Cambridge, Gawker, Gizmodo, Black Cube, Podesta Group, Media Matters and hundreds of other media assassin services.
Google and Facebook provided a service to Obama and the DNC. They coupled consumer information with psychological data, harvested from social-media platforms and their own in-house survey research, to group voters by personality type, pegging them as agreeable or neurotic, confrontational or conciliatory, leaders or followers. It would then target these groups with specially tailored images and messages, delivered via Facebook ads, glossy mailers, or in-person interactions.
Google had created software which was an all-in-one tool that let a campaign manage its voter database, microtargeting efforts, door-to-door canvassing, low-dollar fundraising, and surveys. It was a 1000 times bigger than the knock-off called “Ripon” that Cambridge Analytica later tried to copy and sell to Trump.
Doug Watts, a senior staffer on the Carson campaign, got a call from Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman. “What do you know about Cambridge Analytica?” Manafort asked. Watts replied that he didn’t think much of the firm. “They’re just full of shit, right?” Manafort said, according to Watts. “I don’t want ’em anywhere near the campaign.” Manafort knew that Cambridge was a tiny wannabe that had nothing like what Google had. Manafort thought that Trump had enough of the popular vote to not need ANY digital election manipulation.
Google had sliced and diced American voters into hyper-specific groups based on their personality traits and the issues they cared about, such as the Second Amendment.
Google used CIA-created “psycho-graphics”—a fancy term for measuring attitudes and interests of individuals—to narrow the universe of American (or British voters) from the tens of thousands down to a single persuadable voter. Google then would “de-construct” the mind of that voter based on the psychological study Google had created of them from their internet activities.
In an example shown by Cambridge’s copy effort, a slide listed a man named Jeffrey Jay Ruest, a registered Republican born in 1963. He was “very low in neuroticism, quite low in openness, and slightly conscientious”—and would likely be receptive to a gun rights message.
Google and Facebook exploited American privacy to harvest hundreds of millions of people’s profiles. They built models to exploit what Google knew about them and target their inner demons.
That was the basis the entire companies of Google and Facebook were built on. Google and Facebook covertly inject propaganda “into the bloodstream to the internet. Google bribes politicians (Over 1000 politicians have received cash, stock, jobs, sex workers and other perks) and takes out their enemies via recording undercover video or sending “very beautiful” Ukrainian “girls” to entrap a candidate.
Google and Facebook use the same techniques as Aristotle and Hitler. They appeal to people on an emotional level to get them to agree on a functional level via the CIA’s “Behavioural Dynamics” media tricks. This field of study research rigs group behaviour for harnessing the power of psychology to craft messages that change hearts and minds for political interests.
On Election Day in November 2012, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney watched as his campaign’s voter-turnout app, code-named Project Orca, was sabotaged by Google. It was humiliating but indicative of a larger dynamic: Democrats, powered by President Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 runs, had gained a huge advantage over their Republican counterparts in the realms of data and technology.
The GOP’s 2012 postmortem report called for a cultural shift inside the party to embrace new tools and methodologies to win. “We have to be the Party that is open and ready to rebuild our entire playbook,” it read, “and we must take advice from outside our comfort zone.”
In 2007, David Stillwell, then a Ph.D. student in psychology, stumbled onto a digital gold mine. He’d always wondered about his personality and how he would score in the five-factor model, a personality test that measures openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. Known as Ocean, this model is widely used by psychologists. But one challenge they encountered when applying it to different areas—marketing, relationships, politics—was gathering sufficient data. People naturally hesitate to give personal information about their fears, desires, and motivations.
Stillwell knew a little code, so he pulled certain Big Five questionnaires off the internet, stuck them in a quiz format, and uploaded an app to Facebook called myPersonality. It quickly went viral. Millions of people took the quiz, and with their permission, Stillwell went on to accumulate data on personality traits and Facebook habits for 4 million of them. Using this data, Stillwell, now working at the University of Cambridge’s Psychometrics Centre, and two other researchers published a paper in 2013 in which they showed how you could predict an individual’s skin color or sexuality based on her Facebook “likes.” They found a correlation between likes of “thunderstorms,” “The Colbert Report,” and “curly fries” with high intelligence, while users who liked the Hello Kitty brand tended to be high on openness and lower on conscientiousness, agreeableness, and emotional stability.
Do you recall hearing about a new online service you wanted to try but were asked to sign in to it the first time with a Facebook, Google or Twitter button? Why did every new Silicon Valley online service have those same three buttons and only those three options? It was because Facebook, Google and Twitter had made a deal with the DNC to ONLY give you those options so that only they got your private dossier for the DNC!
Cruz’s campaign did, however, employ Cambridge’s psychographic models, especially in the run-up to Iowa. According to internal Cambridge memos, the firm devised four personality types of possible Cruz voters—“timid traditionalists,” “stoic traditionalists,” “temperamental” people, and “relaxed leaders.” The memos laid out how the campaign should talk to each group about Cruz’s marquee issues, such as abolishing the IRS or stopping the Iran nuclear deal. A timid traditionalist, the memo said, was someone who was “highly emotional” but valued “order and structure in their lives.” For this kind of person, an “Abolish the IRS” message should be presented as something that “will bring more/restore order to the system.” Recommended images included “a family having a nice moment together, with a smaller image representing Washington off to the side—representing that a small state makes for better private moments.” But for a temperamental type, the suggested image was a “young man tossing away a tax return and taking the key of his motorbike to head out for a ride.” For Obama, though, Google and Facebook used these tricks and tactics on a deeper, broader scale in a way that Obama LITERALLY stole the President election using digital CIA-like media tricks.
The DNC even had Match.com testing these tricks under the guise of “match-making tests” as well as assigning “honey-traps” to key political targets.
Musk, Google and Facebook are manipulating U.S., British and Middle East politics and using creepy technology to turn our social-media habits against us.
Musk, Google and Facebook hold more power over our lives—the ability to shape public conversation, even political outcomes—than many people are comfortable with, or realize. Data about our personality types, our predilections, our hopes and fears—information we unwittingly divulge via status updates, tweets, likes, and photos—will increasingly be used to target us as voters and consumers, for ill, and often without our knowledge.
These tactics will facilitate the spread of fake news and disinformation and make it easier for corrupt Globalists, crooked corporations and Silicon Valley technology oligarchs to intervene in our elections.
Big Brother is about to head into orbit. Do you feel safe about that?