Former Facebook and Google employees warn social media giants are harming children

Infowars.com reports: As part of their first campaign, titled The Truth About Tech, the group will target 55,000 U.S. public schools in an effort to warn students, teachers and parents about, among other things, tech addiction.

 Tristan Harris, a former esthetic at Google and head of the new group, told the New York Times that both Google and Facebook are essentially aiming their computing power at vulnerable children.

“We were on the inside. We know what the companies measure. We know how they talk, and we know how the engineering works,” Harris said. “The largest supercomputers in the world are inside of two companies — Google and Facebook — and where are we pointing them? We’re pointing them at people’s brains, at children.”

 Apart from its initial campaign, the new Center for Humane Technology also hopes to develop a Ledger of Harms – a site to inform tech engineers who may be worried about what they are building – and begin lobbying for laws that would rein in tech giants.

 Roger McNamee, an early Facebook investor, says he joined the group in an attempt to undo any harm he may have caused.

“Facebook appeals to your lizard brain — primarily fear and anger. And with smartphones, they’ve got you for every waking moment,” McNamee said. “This is an opportunity for me to correct a wrong.”

 News of the Center for Humane Technology’s intentions comes only days after child health experts asked Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to delete a new messenger app intended for children as young as six.

“Younger children are simply not ready to have social media accounts. They are not old enough to navigate the complexities of online relationships, which often lead to misunderstandings and conflicts even among more mature users,” a letter to Zuckerberg said. “They also do not have a fully developed understanding of privacy, including what’s appropriate to share with others and who has access to their conversations, pictures, and videos.”

 Numerous studies have linked excessive technology use among children to depression and developmental issues.

 Even as the public appears to be increasingly consumed by technology, major tech figures seem to be moving in the opposite direction.

 Apple co-founder Steve Jobs said prior to his passing that he strictly limited his children’s screen time when asked what his children thought of the first iPad.

“They haven’t used it,” Jobs said at the time. “We limit how much technology our kids use at home.”

 Chris Anderson, co-founder of drone manufacturer 3D Robotics and a former editor of Wired Magazine, has also made similar statements in regards to his children.

“That’s because we have seen the dangers of technology firsthand,” Anderson said. “I’ve seen it in myself, I don’t want to see that happen to my kids.”

 Although currently without children, Apple CEO Tim Cook has stated his desire to safeguard any future kids of his own from the dangers of social media.

“I don’t have a kid, but I have a nephew that I put some boundaries on,” Cook recently said. “There are some things that I won’t allow; I don’t want them on a social network.”

 Facebook’s first president, Sean Parker, argued last year that his former company’s products preyed on the mentally vulnerable.

“God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains,” Parker said.

Around the same time, former Facebook employee Chamath Palihapitiya also accused the social media giant of “ripping apart the social fabric of how society works.”

Facebook, Google Employees Warn Social Media Is Harming Children

Views: 29

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Media ignores Super Bowl slaughter
of NFL linebacker by illegal alien

A drunk-driving illegal immigrant from Guatemala hit and killed two men Sunday night, one of whom was identified as Indianapolis Colts linebacker Edwin Jackson.

Manuel Orrego-Savala, 37, was driving around 4 a.m. when he veered onto the emergency shoulder of Highway I-70 just outside Indianapolis, Indiana, and struck Jackson and his Uber driver Jeffrey Monroe, who were both standing outside of Monroe’s vehicle.

Indiana State Police Sgt. John Perrine said Savala gave them the alias Alex Cabrera Gonsales after the crash, but later detectives learned his real name and that he “is in the United States illegally and has previously been deported on two occasions, in 2007 and again in 2009.”

Republican Congressman Todd Rokita tweeted, “This news should make all Americans angry. We must do more to get these dangerous illegal immigrant criminals off our streets, build a wall & put an end to illegal immigration.”

This news should make all Americans angry. A twice-deported illegal immigrant is suspected of killing 2 Hoosiers, including Colts LB Edwin Jackson. We must do more to get these dangerous illegal immigrant criminals off our streets, build a wall & put an end to illegal immigration https://twitter.com/mattsmith_news/status/960535371078651904 

The media also continues to use his alias, rather than his real name.

Most headlines call him a “suspected drunk driver,” and one article says, “Alex Cabrera Gonsales, 37, of Indianapolis,” not Guatemala.

Some articles omit his illegal status completely, instead saying he “was intoxicated and driving without a license.”

Below is a small example of misleading MSM headlines.

MSN
 

Washington Post

Fox News

ESPN

NFL.com

Facebook which has all so Attacked President Trump, and I agree, all the media was over the NFL, but when Facebook attacks Trump, where is the fall out over this?

good question. Slander is just fine, apparently, standing in apostacy to truth and justice.

Damn girl that scares me, you agreed.

 I will have a beer on this. Thanks.......

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service