Transcription
All right, guys. So, we got to talk about this because Donald Trump is coming to absolutely nuke online freedom and Democrats might just let him get away with it and in fact work with him on exactly that.
So, Politico here says Meta Drops opposition to kids online safety bill if it overwrites state AI laws. The company's objections helped kill the kids safety bill nearly 2 years ago. Okay.
So, a controversial deal in the US could fundamentally rewrite internet freedom as we know it. The congressional deal would trade the deregulation of artificial intelligence for unprecedented federal censorship powers. Stick with me here.
A high-stakes compromise is quietly brewing in Washington as the White House negotiates with congressional leaders to fundamentally reshape the digital landscape under the proposed deal, uh, reported by Axios. The federal government would strip states of their authority to regulate artificial intelligence. Let me just pause on that real quick. We're all looking at the federal government bought and owned by the AI tech oligarch demons. Okay, they're giving these AI companies anything and everything they want, letting them run rough shod. But now what they're saying is even if states want to step in where the federal government is lacking, if states want to step in to say you can't do this, you can't do that, you can't use all this water, you can't do the noise pollution, you can't do X, Y, and Z. They say nope, we want to block you from being able to regulate at the state level, effectively halting progressive state-level efforts to hold tech companies accountable and restrict energy-heavy, uh, AI data centers.
In exchange, lawmakers would push through three major federal censorship bills: the Kids Online Safety Act, the No Fakes Act, and a federal online age verification mandate. While framed as common sense protections for minors, civil liberties advocates warn these measures represent an unprecedented expansion of federal control over online speech. Let me pause to point out they first started with these things when it came to, uh, porn websites where they said we need age verification for these online porn websites. Well, what does that actually mean in practice? It means if you want to jack off to online pornography, you need to submit your driver's license to a government database. Yeah, I don't know about you, that seems to me like mass surveillance. That seems to me like the government having way too much information on what your personal kink is, what you're into. You have to submit your driver's license to jerk off. What the [ __ ] are we talking about? What in the 1984 hellscape is this? So, that's how it starts. It always starts with something that they feel like they got the strongest case for. Oh, yeah. Yeah. No, it's just age verification to make sure the kids aren't tainted by pornography. But in reality, it's we have a mass database on everybody who's [ __ ] jacking off and what they're jacking off to. Massive invasion of privacy.
All right, let's continue. The backlash to this legislative trade-off cuts across typical political lines. Even conservative-backed organizations like the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, FIRE, have issued stark warnings, declaring that the package would dismantle the internet as we know it by empowering the Federal Trade Commission to dictate acceptable online speech. That's crazy, bro. So, this would literally kill the the internet as we know it, where it's no longer like, you know, freedom. Say what you want, do what you want, have anonymity. This would be like, you know, the golden era is gone. The internet would no longer be the wild west. It would be tamed. It would be only, uh, a government-approved speech allowed, which obviously that would be a [ __ ] catastrophe. I MEAN, LOOK WHO RUNS THE [ __ ] GOVERNMENT, RIGHT? You want them making the decisions. Oh my god.
Opponents argue that enforcing these rules would effectively eliminate online anonymity while giving the administration an incredibly powerful tool to censor dissenting political views and control what users see on major platforms like Instagram. Jesus. As the White House maneuvers to secure congressional backing, Americans are left facing a troubling dilemma. The long sought-after regulation of big tech NI may come at the direct cost of their fundamental constitutional rights to free expression. So that's crazy.
So, they are literally coming to end the First Amendment as we know it. We also know they're trying to get rid of Section 230. Section 230 makes it so that, you know, like YouTube, if I say something crazy that's potentially defamatory, YouTube can't get sued over that because they didn't say it. They just have the platform where I said the thing, right? That's what Section 230 does is it makes it so that it's like limited liability for these, uh, big platforms where they can't be held directly accountable for something people say on there because obviously there's like billions of people on there now and how could they be responsible for what billions of people say? It would make it unworkable. Nobody could run a company like that. A company like that couldn't exist if they get can get sued over every little thing somebody says. That's Section 230. But they want to repeal Section 230, which would make it so there would be a torrent of lawsuits, which would make it so YouTube would immediately crack down on any speech that's even remotely controversial to try to make sure there's no lawsuits or slapsuits in an attempt to basically shut them down. So, it would be hell on earth. Hell on earth if we go down that path.
So, this is terrible, bro. And by the way, there's no trade-off here. It's like a lose-lose. Both of the things that people want in this are [ __ ] stupid and dumb and terrible and wrong. No regulation of AI even at the state level and a slate of like pro-censorship bills. I mean, it's just out of this world. What are we talking about? Um, I'm disgusted. And not a single Democratic politician should support this in any way, shape, or form. Uh, if they do, we need to call their [ __ ] offices and tell them not in a million [ __ ] years, uh, should you strip away people's free speech rights like this online. Uh, we're going to have to fight a big battle here to save the modern internet as we know it. I think I think that battle is on the horizon.
Hey y'all, do me a favor and like and subscribe. It helps out big time in the algorithm. Click the bell as well for notifications when videos drop and watch that video on screen right now. You know you want to.