Podcasts about Anonymity

Jamie tells Don and Sam that learning to accept his anxiety was enough to begin to step away from it. Jamie talks about helping newcomers work the first three Steps, and he discusses the power of the Third Step Prayer. Julia calls in to the Listener Feedback line.You're Invited to the 2025 International Convention of Alcoholics Anonymous. Please visit aa.org/international-convention for information. Come visit the AA Grapevine Podcast at the convention.While we provide the podcast at no charge, we do have expenses. Grapevine is the only AA entity that does not accept direct contributions, so to support the AA Grapevine Podcast, please subscribe to Grapevine Magazine in print, online, or on the Grapevine app. You can also provide a subscription to someone in need through our "Carry the Message" program or purchase books or other items at aagrapevine.org/storeYou can email us at podcast@aagrapevine.org. To record an Ask-It-Basket question or a recovery-related joke, call 212-870-3418 or email a voice recording to podcast@aagrapevine.org

Recent judicial decisions denying anonymity to plaintiffs in sexual assault lawsuits against Sean "Diddy" Combs could significantly influence other pending and future cases against him. In October 2024, U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ruled that a woman accusing Combs of rape in 2004 must reveal her identity to proceed with her lawsuit. The judge emphasized the public's interest in open judicial proceedings and Combs' right to investigate the accuser's background and credibility. This decision sets a precedent that may compel other plaintiffs to disclose their identities, potentially deterring some from pursuing legal action due to fears of public exposure and retaliation. The implications of this ruling extend beyond individual cases, potentially affecting the broader landscape of sexual assault litigation involving high-profile figures. Legal experts suggest that requiring plaintiffs to identify themselves could discourage victims from coming forward, especially when the accused holds significant power and influence. This development may lead to a chilling effect on the filing of similar lawsuits, as potential plaintiffs weigh the personal risks of public identification against seeking justice. Consequently, the balance between a defendant's right to a fair trial and a plaintiff's right to privacy remains a contentious issue in the legal system.Let's dive in!(commercial at 8:46)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Sean ‘Diddy' Combs case: What the Jane Doe ruling could mean for the other already-filed cases | CNN

Anonymous scouts critique this year's NBA draft class! What would we see about each lottery prospect (anonymously)! One surprise stat prediction for our favorite cbb teams! The Sleepers Podcast is now available daily with new episodes every Monday-Friday!

Alan Niven discusses his experiences as a manager and producer, particularly with Guns N' Roses and Great White. He highlights the challenges of managing Axel Rose's erratic behavior and the impact of losing key members like Izzy Stradlin. Niven emphasizes the importance of maintaining anonymity and the emotional toll of fame. He reflects on the band's decision to release two single albums instead of a double album, citing economic and creative reasons. Niven also touches on the band's struggles with substance abuse and the significance of maintaining a cohesive band dynamic.0:00:00 - Intro0:00:21 - Night Train & Drinking 0:00:58 - Alan's Many Roles in the Music Industry 0:04:15 - Guns 'N Roses, Axl, Songwriting & Emotion 0:09:00 - GnR, Izzy, Axl, Fame, Anonymity & Happiness 0:19:55 - When Axl Didn't Want to Perform 0:26:07 - If Alan Stayed On, Izzy Leaving & Axl's Grudges 0:34:35 - Izzy's Whereabouts and Slash's 50s0:38:30 - Original GnR United, Axl Psychology & Beta 0:43:40 - Sweet Child O' Mine Video & Erin Everly 0:45:20 - Transitioning into the 90s with GnR 0:47:52 - Pressure from David Geffen 0:51:05 - Use Your Illusion Albums & Songs 0:57:15 - Memories, Memorabilia, Happiness & Success1:00:10 - Sound 'n Fury & Wrapping Up 1:02:02 - Outro Sound N Fury book for sale:https://www.amazon.com/Sound-Fury-Rock-Roll-Stories/dp/1770419942Chuck Shute link tree:https://linktr.ee/chuck_shuteSupport the showThanks for Listening & Shute for the Moon!

Chelsea Lovelace alleges in her civil suit that during her relationship with Sean "Diddy" Combs, he subjected her to repeated acts of coercion, abuse, and sexual assault. According to the complaint, Combs lured her into traveling to see him, administered drugs to her without her consent, and physically assaulted her—including slapping her during violent encounters. Lovelace further claims that she became pregnant during this period and that Combs pressured her into having an abortion; she ultimately suffered a miscarriage. She also alleges that Combs systematically isolated her from friends and family, manipulated her emotionally, and used financial control to keep her dependent—providing an allowance while discouraging her from seeking employment.The suit contends that Combs maintained this coercive dynamic through a pattern of drugging, physical violence, emotional abuse, and economic manipulation, leaving Lovelace trapped in a situation where she was unable to freely make decisions about her own life or body. She claims that Combs employed his staff and associates to further control and monitor her, ensuring compliance with his demands. Lovelace is seeking damages on multiple grounds, including sexual assault, battery, and negligent infliction of emotional distress, asserting that the experience left her with lasting psychological and emotional harm.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy accuser reveals her identity in shocking lawsuit detailing her 'bitten feet' and freak-off fears | Daily Mail Online

Chelsea Lovelace alleges in her civil suit that during her relationship with Sean "Diddy" Combs, he subjected her to repeated acts of coercion, abuse, and sexual assault. According to the complaint, Combs lured her into traveling to see him, administered drugs to her without her consent, and physically assaulted her—including slapping her during violent encounters. Lovelace further claims that she became pregnant during this period and that Combs pressured her into having an abortion; she ultimately suffered a miscarriage. She also alleges that Combs systematically isolated her from friends and family, manipulated her emotionally, and used financial control to keep her dependent—providing an allowance while discouraging her from seeking employment.The suit contends that Combs maintained this coercive dynamic through a pattern of drugging, physical violence, emotional abuse, and economic manipulation, leaving Lovelace trapped in a situation where she was unable to freely make decisions about her own life or body. She claims that Combs employed his staff and associates to further control and monitor her, ensuring compliance with his demands. Lovelace is seeking damages on multiple grounds, including sexual assault, battery, and negligent infliction of emotional distress, asserting that the experience left her with lasting psychological and emotional harm.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy accuser reveals her identity in shocking lawsuit detailing her 'bitten feet' and freak-off fears | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Chelsea Lovelace alleges in her civil suit that during her relationship with Sean "Diddy" Combs, he subjected her to repeated acts of coercion, abuse, and sexual assault. According to the complaint, Combs lured her into traveling to see him, administered drugs to her without her consent, and physically assaulted her—including slapping her during violent encounters. Lovelace further claims that she became pregnant during this period and that Combs pressured her into having an abortion; she ultimately suffered a miscarriage. She also alleges that Combs systematically isolated her from friends and family, manipulated her emotionally, and used financial control to keep her dependent—providing an allowance while discouraging her from seeking employment.The suit contends that Combs maintained this coercive dynamic through a pattern of drugging, physical violence, emotional abuse, and economic manipulation, leaving Lovelace trapped in a situation where she was unable to freely make decisions about her own life or body. She claims that Combs employed his staff and associates to further control and monitor her, ensuring compliance with his demands. Lovelace is seeking damages on multiple grounds, including sexual assault, battery, and negligent infliction of emotional distress, asserting that the experience left her with lasting psychological and emotional harm.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy accuser reveals her identity in shocking lawsuit detailing her 'bitten feet' and freak-off fears | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Allowing an accuser to proceed anonymously in civil lawsuits or criminal proceedings offers several advantages. It protects the individual's privacy, especially in cases involving sensitive matters like sexual assault, thereby reducing potential public scrutiny and emotional distress. Anonymity can also shield the accuser from possible retaliation or harassment, encouraging victims to come forward without fear of personal repercussions. This protection is particularly vital when the accused holds significant power or influence, as it helps balance the scales of justice.However, anonymity in legal proceedings presents notable challenges. It may hinder the defendant's ability to fully investigate the accuser's background and credibility, potentially impacting the fairness of the trial. The public's right to open judicial proceedings is also compromised, as transparency is a cornerstone of the legal system. Moreover, anonymity could inadvertently suggest that the allegations are more severe, potentially biasing jurors or the public against the defendant. Courts must carefully weigh these factors, often requiring compelling reasons to grant anonymity to ensure that justice is served equitably for all parties involved.The debate over anonymity for Sean "Diddy" Combs' accusers centers on balancing the accusers' privacy and safety with the defendant's right to a fair trial and the public's interest in transparent legal proceedings. Some accusers have sought to proceed under pseudonyms to protect themselves from potential harassment and public scrutiny. However, courts have ruled that allegations alone do not justify anonymity, emphasizing the importance of openness in judicial processes and the defendant's ability to investigate the accusers' credibility. This tension highlights the complexities of handling sensitive allegations against high-profile individuals.Let's dive in!(commercial at 9:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Most of Sean ‘Diddy' Combs's Accusers Are Unnamed. Can They Stay That Way? - The New York Times

Allowing an accuser to proceed anonymously in civil lawsuits or criminal proceedings offers several advantages. It protects the individual's privacy, especially in cases involving sensitive matters like sexual assault, thereby reducing potential public scrutiny and emotional distress. Anonymity can also shield the accuser from possible retaliation or harassment, encouraging victims to come forward without fear of personal repercussions. This protection is particularly vital when the accused holds significant power or influence, as it helps balance the scales of justice.However, anonymity in legal proceedings presents notable challenges. It may hinder the defendant's ability to fully investigate the accuser's background and credibility, potentially impacting the fairness of the trial. The public's right to open judicial proceedings is also compromised, as transparency is a cornerstone of the legal system. Moreover, anonymity could inadvertently suggest that the allegations are more severe, potentially biasing jurors or the public against the defendant. Courts must carefully weigh these factors, often requiring compelling reasons to grant anonymity to ensure that justice is served equitably for all parties involved.The debate over anonymity for Sean "Diddy" Combs' accusers centers on balancing the accusers' privacy and safety with the defendant's right to a fair trial and the public's interest in transparent legal proceedings. Some accusers have sought to proceed under pseudonyms to protect themselves from potential harassment and public scrutiny. However, courts have ruled that allegations alone do not justify anonymity, emphasizing the importance of openness in judicial processes and the defendant's ability to investigate the accusers' credibility. This tension highlights the complexities of handling sensitive allegations against high-profile individuals.Let's dive in!(commercial at 9:13)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Most of Sean ‘Diddy' Combs's Accusers Are Unnamed. Can They Stay That Way? - The New York Times

Want to reach out to us? Want to leave a comment or review? Want to give us a suggestion or berate Anthony? Send us a text by clicking this link!Our digital personas often reveal more about us than we intend, especially when the veil of anonymity gets pulled back. In this provocative episode, we navigate the murky waters of online identity after a Catholic Twitter personality's troubling past came to light through digital detective work.Where do we draw the ethical line between legitimate privacy concerns and accountability for our words and actions? As we examine this case study, we confront an uncomfortable truth: the mask of anonymity may hide our face from others, but not from God. "Being nameless doesn't make you bodiless," as one of our hosts pointedly observes. "It just makes your sins feel separate from you, but it's still you at the end of the day."The conversation expands into broader theological territory as we dissect a controversial video of a deaf priest consecrating the Eucharist through sign language. This unprecedented situation raises profound questions about sacramental validity that traditional Catholic theology never had to address. We also take Apple TV to task for a shockingly blasphemous scene depicting characters treating consecrated hosts as snacks – highlighting the entertainment industry's troubling comfort with disrespecting Catholic traditions.Later, we transition to relationships and marriage, offering a counterpoint to popular Catholic dating advice that often misses the mark. Our candid discussion covers the dynamics of authority in marriage, the importance of masculine leadership, and why maintaining attraction matters in long-term relationships. Whether you're navigating online Catholic spaces or seeking to build a faith-centered relationship, this episode offers both spiritual wisdom and practical guidance for living authentically in a digital age where appearances often overshadow substance.Sponsored by Recusant Cellars, an unapologetically Catholic and pro-life winery from Washington state. Use code BASED at checkout for 10% off! https://recusantcellars.com/Support the showSponsored by Recusant Cellars, an unapologetically Catholic and pro-life winery from Washington state. Use code BASED at checkout for 10% off! https://recusantcellars.com/********************************************************Please subscribe! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKsxnv80ByFV4OGvt_kImjQ?sub_confirmation=1https://www.avoidingbabylon.comLocals Community: https://avoidingbabylon.locals.comRSS Feed for Podcast Apps: https://feeds.buzzsprout.com/1987412.rssRumble: https://rumble.com/c/AvoidingBabylon

Take a trip back in time this week with the boys of Trudge Report. We go back to March of 2020 when the covid pandemic hit. Each of us talk about what we were doing in our lives, our families, where we were living, and working etc. We discuss the impact that covid had on our families, ourselves, as well as the recovery community around us. How the presence of online recovery group meetings was both beneficial and detrimental. What the recovery community scene looks like today in our areas as a result of how things splintered from covid. How online influence, social media, and electronics have infiltrated the recovery world and how each of us look upon this current trend. We look at both the positive and negative sides of this and the potential lasting impacts on a broader scale. “The same God who painted the skies, is still crafting your story.” -Unknown Don't forget to like, share, rate, and download the podcast on all of your listening platforms. Check out and subscribe to our YouTube channel, @trudgrereportpod, for other content surrounding sports and trending topics. Trudge on good people. Contact the Guys:Instagram: @trudgereportpodFacebook: Trudge ReportTikTok: trudgereportpodYouTube: @trudgereportpod

I, Stewart Alsop, am thrilled to welcome Xathil of Poliebotics to this episode of Crazy Wisdom, for what is actually our second take, this time with a visual surprise involving a fascinating 3D-printed Bauta mask. Xathil is doing some truly groundbreaking work at the intersection of physical reality, cryptography, and AI, which we dive deep into, exploring everything from the philosophical implications of anonymity to the technical wizardry behind his "Truth Beam."Check out this GPT we trained on the conversationTimestamps01:35 Xathil explains the 3D-printed Bauta Mask, its Venetian origins, and its role in enabling truth through anonymity via his project, Poliepals.04:50 The crucial distinction between public identity and "real" identity, and how pseudonyms can foster truth-telling rather than just conceal.10:15 Addressing the serious risks faced by crypto influencers due to public displays of wealth and the broader implications for online identity.15:05 Xathil details the core Poliebotics technology: the "Truth Beam," a projector-camera system for cryptographically timestamping physical reality.18:50 Clarifying the concept of "proof of aliveness"—verifying a person is currently live in a video call—versus the more complex "proof of liveness."21:45 How the speed of light provides a fundamental advantage for Poliebotics in outmaneuvering AI-generated deepfakes.32:10 The concern of an "inversion," where machine learning systems could become dominant over physical reality by using humans as their actuators.45:00 Xathil's ambitious project to use Poliebotics for creating cryptographically verifiable records of biodiversity, beginning with an enhanced Meles trap.Key InsightsAnonymity as a Truth Catalyst: Drawing from Oscar Wilde, the Bauta mask symbolizes how anonymity or pseudonyms can empower individuals to reveal deeper, more authentic truths. This challenges the notion that masks only serve to hide, suggesting they can be tools for genuine self-expression.The Bifurcation of Identity: In our digital age, distinguishing between one's core "real" identity and various public-facing personas is increasingly vital. This separation isn't merely about concealment but offers a space for truthful expression while navigating public life.The Truth Beam: Anchoring Reality: Poliebotics' "Truth Beam" technology employs a projector-camera system to cast cryptographic hashes onto physical scenes, recording them and anchoring them to a blockchain. This aims to create immutable, verifiable records of reality to combat the rise of sophisticated deepfakes.Harnessing Light Speed Against Deepfakes: The fundamental defense Poliebotics offers against AI-generated fakes is the speed of light. Real-world light reflection for capturing projected hashes is virtually instantaneous, whereas an AI must simulate this complex process, a task too slow to keep up with real-time verification.The Specter of Humans as AI Actuators: A significant future concern is the "inversion," where AI systems might utilize humans as unwitting agents to achieve their objectives in the physical world. By manipulating incentives, AIs could effectively direct human actions, raising profound questions about agency.Towards AI Symbiosis: The ideal future isn't a human-AI war or complete technological asceticism, but a cooperative coexistence between nature, humanity, and artificial systems. This involves developing AI responsibly, instilling human values, and creating systems that are non-threatening and beneficial.Contact Information*   Polybotics' GitHub*   Poliepals*   Xathil: Xathil@ProtonMail.com

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging that Combs sexually assaulted her at a charity event he co-sponsored in 1991. The plaintiff sought to proceed anonymously, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and potential harm if her identity were disclosed. Initially, the court granted a temporary order allowing her to proceed under a pseudonym, pending further review.Upon subsequent evaluation, the court applied the ten-factor balancing test from Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant to determine whether the plaintiff could continue anonymously. The court found that while the case involved sensitive personal matters, other factors—such as the significant public interest in the proceedings, potential prejudice to the defendants, and the plaintiff's ability to present her case without anonymity—outweighed the arguments for anonymity. Consequently, the court denied the plaintiff's motion to proceed under a pseudonym, emphasizing the importance of transparency and public access in judicial proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.633975.44.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Support the show!! - https://www.patreon.com/chasedavisFarmer Bill Provisions - https://farmerbillsprovisions.com/ - code FULLPROOF 20%Legacy Profits Club - https://www.skool.com/legacyprofitsclub/about?ref=1b0c2acb5f0d4781be13ed56801c8fbbGo to ionlayer.com and use code FPT to get $100 off your first kit. Lomez on X - https://x.com/L0m3zPassage Press - https://passage.press/SummaryIn this episode, Chase Davis interviews Jonathan Keeperman, formerly known as Lomez, discussing the complexities of online anonymity, the impact of doxxing, and the cultural implications of the 'longhouse' concept. They explore the feminization of public spaces, the role of Christianity in cultural renewal, and the future of right-wing aesthetics. The conversation highlights the need for a reimagined cultural space that embraces traditional values while addressing contemporary challenges.Support the showSign up for the Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/chasedavisFollow Full Proof Theology on Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/fullprooftheology/Follow Full Proof Theology on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/fullprooftheology/

Kelsey and Julie both talk to Don and Sam about their recovery from alcoholism and then all four discuss the Hot Topic of Anonymity.You're Invited to the 2025 International Convention of Alcoholics Anonymous. Please visit aa.org/international-convention for information.While we provide the podcast at no charge, we do have expenses. Grapevine is the only AA entity that does not accept contributions, so to support the AA Grapevine Podcast, please subscribe to Grapevine Magazine in print, online, or on the Grapevine app. You can also provide a subscription to someone in need through our "Carry the Message" program or purchase books or other items at aagrapevine.org/storeYou can email us at podcast@aagrapevine.org. To record an Ask-It-Basket question or a recovery-related joke, call 212-870-3418 or email a voice recording to podcast@aagrapevine.org

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging that Combs sexually assaulted her at a charity event he co-sponsored in 1991. The plaintiff sought to proceed anonymously, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and potential harm if her identity were disclosed. Initially, the court granted a temporary order allowing her to proceed under a pseudonym, pending further review.Upon subsequent evaluation, the court applied the ten-factor balancing test from Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant to determine whether the plaintiff could continue anonymously. The court found that while the case involved sensitive personal matters, other factors—such as the significant public interest in the proceedings, potential prejudice to the defendants, and the plaintiff's ability to present her case without anonymity—outweighed the arguments for anonymity. Consequently, the court denied the plaintiff's motion to proceed under a pseudonym, emphasizing the importance of transparency and public access in judicial proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.633975.44.0.pdf

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging that Combs sexually assaulted her at a charity event he co-sponsored in 1991. The plaintiff sought to proceed anonymously, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and potential harm if her identity were disclosed. Initially, the court granted a temporary order allowing her to proceed under a pseudonym, pending further review.Upon subsequent evaluation, the court applied the ten-factor balancing test from Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant to determine whether the plaintiff could continue anonymously. The court found that while the case involved sensitive personal matters, other factors—such as the significant public interest in the proceedings, potential prejudice to the defendants, and the plaintiff's ability to present her case without anonymity—outweighed the arguments for anonymity. Consequently, the court denied the plaintiff's motion to proceed under a pseudonym, emphasizing the importance of transparency and public access in judicial proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.633975.44.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

It's never been easier to tear someone down from behind a screen. But what does that mean for Christians called to speak truth in love—not just in person, but online too?In Episode 99 of the Eyes on Jesus Podcast, Tim and Drew tackle the increasingly urgent topic of social media anonymity and its spiritual implications. In a time when online platforms reward outrage, controversy, and clicks over truth, many believers are losing sight of how to engage with others in a way that reflects the heart of Christ. This episode was sparked by the recent and sobering situation involving ministry leader Josh Buice, who was revealed to have operated multiple anonymous accounts used to slander fellow Christians. His fall serves as a sobering example of how hidden sin can flourish behind the veil of digital anonymity—and how integrity, accountability, and love must remain non-negotiables in our online lives.Anonymity Breeds Temptation:Operating behind a nameless handle makes it easier to say things that would never be said face-to-face—and often, those words cause real damage.Social Media Has Rewired Human Interaction:We are more connected than ever but often more isolated, harsh, and reactive. The lack of real-life interaction leads many to forget there's a person on the other side of the screen.Christian Truth Without Love Becomes Harmful:Even if what's said is “right,” if it's not said with grace, it becomes another clanging symbol in an already noisy world. As Christians, we are called to season our speech and reflect the love of Jesus, even online.Controversy Gets the Clicks:Algorithms promote what is outrageous, not what is edifying. Without intentional boundaries, believers can find themselves more focused on stirring division than sowing peace.Integrity Still Matters—Even When No One Sees:Just because it's anonymous doesn't mean it's harmless. Hidden activity online eventually leads to consequences, personally and publicly.We're Talking to Real People:Bots aside, most of our interactions online are with actual human souls. We're not debating avatars—we're influencing lives, for better or worse.Check Your Motives:Ask yourself: Why am I on social media? Is it to spread hope and truth, or to gain validation and vent frustration?It Might Be Time to Log Off:If your time online leads to more bitterness than growth, it may be time to unplug, regroup, and invite God to reset your heart.We're celebrating a major milestone next week as Tim and Drew are joined by their wives for a personal and heartfelt conversation about life, faith, and family. It's one you won't want to miss!

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdf

In this episode, join my conversation originally aired on Read Between The Signs podcast.We delve into the misconceptions around porn addiction, its subtle yet profound impacts on relationships, intimacy, mental clarity, and physical health. I share my personal journey of overcoming a problematic relationship with porn and emphasizes the importance of community, mindfulness, and vulnerability in the recovery process. We also discuss the societal normalization of porn, the three A's of porn addiction (Affordability, Accessibility, Anonymity), and the role of shame in keeping people stuck in unhealthy habits. Tune in for an eye-opening conversation with valuable insights and practical advice on breaking free from addiction and living a healthier, more fulfilling life.

The post When Pastors Fall: Accountability, Anonymity, and the Dangers of Online Influence appeared first on Straight Truth Podcast.

This episode addresses the recent fall of a prominent pastor and the cancellation of the G3 Conference, using it as a sobering example of the dangers of online anonymity, slander, and spiritual ambition. Dr. Richard Caldwell emphasizes the need for accountability, self-examination, and pastoral integrity. With humility and clarity, he challenges both leaders and believers to guard their hearts and speech, reminding us that faithfulness to Christ requires holiness in both public and private life.

This episode addresses the recent fall of a prominent pastor and the cancellation of the G3 Conference, using it as a sobering example of the dangers of online anonymity, slander, and spiritual ambition. Dr. Richard Caldwell emphasizes the need for accountability, self-examination, and pastoral integrity. With humility and clarity, he challenges both leaders and believers to guard their hearts and speech, reminding us that faithfulness to Christ requires holiness in both public and private life.

A new MP3 sermon from Founders Baptist Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: When Pastors Fall: Accountability, Anonymity, and the Dangers of Online Influence Subtitle: 01 Straight Truth Podcast Speaker: Richard Caldwell Jr. Broadcaster: Founders Baptist Church Event: Podcast Date: 5/16/2025 Bible: 1 Timothy 4:6; Psalm 19:14 Length: 22 min.

This podcast is a short daily audio provided by the online recovery group Transitions Daily. The daily distribution consists of different recovery quotes from various resources, including; Twenty-Four Hours a Day, A.A. Thought for the Day, Daily Reflections, Big Book Quote, Just for Today, As Bill Sees It, plus more! Transitions Daily also distributes this same content in a daily email with a secret Facebook group for discussion. Go to www.DailyAAEmails.com for more information.   Do you want to stop drinking? Have you ever listened to sobriety podcasts? Does alcoholism or addiction run in your family? Have you tried Alcoholics Anonymous or the 12 Steps of A.A.? Are you considering how to get sober? Are you seriously thinking about sobriety for the first time? Is alcohol controlling your life as never before? If so, you will definitely want to check out this recovery podcast.

THE IMPORTANCE OF A HOMEGROUP. The Montyman and co-host Roger McDiarmid discuss the significance of home groups in recovery, and emphasize the importance of community support in maintaining sobriety. Roger and The Montyman explore the dynamics of recovery meetings, emphasizing the importance of positivity, community, and deeper relationships within home groups. Closing Song: The Ya-But Habit by Michael Purington. #higherpower #aa #na #alcoholicsanonymous #recovery #recovered #alcoholic #twelvesteps #wedorecover #narcoticsanonymous #addiction #bigbook

THE 12 TRADITIONS. (Are They Necessary?) In this episode of the Came to Believe Recovery Podcast, the hosts delve into the significance of traditions in recovery, particularly focusing on the Twelve Traditions of Alcoholics Anonymous. They discuss listener insights, the importance of maintaining a balance between tradition and flexibility, and the role of these traditions in fostering a supportive recovery community. The conversation emphasizes the need for accountability and the potential for revising traditions to better serve the needs of individuals in recovery. Closing Song: I Turn to You by Randy Stonehill. #higherpower #aa #na #alcoholicsanonymous #recovery #recovered #alcoholic #twelvesteps #wedorecover #narcoticsanonymous #addiction #bigbook

Pathfinder Church | April 27, 2025 | AJ MasticWe all crave to be fully known, but it's so hard to find and maintain truly deep, intimate relationships. It's hard to risk vulnerability, and without vulnerability, how can we ever be fully known?Website | https://pathfinderstl.orgOnline Giving | https://pathfinderstl.org/givePodcasts | https://pathfinderstl.org/podcastsFacebook | https://facebook.com/pathfinderstlInstagram | https://instagram.com/pathfinderstlSt. John School | https://stjls.orgContact Us | churchinfo@pathfinderstl.org

URSULA'S TOP STORIES: The Pope passes // SPD officers appeal to SCOTUS for anonymity // Gunfire near Whidbey Island rally // Seattle Success in the War on Tent Encampments // WE NEED TO TALK. . . WA retirement plans allow pension padding

In 2014, Daniel Krawisz was one of the most prolific Bitcoin writers: he published some excellent articles with the Nakamoto Institute, and most of them are still relevant. Today, he prefers BSV and believes that Craig Wright is Satoshi. What changed? Time stamps: Time stamps: 00:00:50 - Introducing Daniel Krawisz 00:02:40 - Bitcoin Takeover 00:05:30 - Scaling Bitcoin 00:09:30 - Soft Forks vs. Hard Forks 00:14:10 - Running a Bitcoin Node and Privacy 00:18:10 - Verifying Transactions 00:20:00 - Miner Centralization 00:24:40 - Bitcoin Core Ideology 00:29:00 - Fungibility 00:30:30 - Ross Ulbricht 00:38:55 - Bitcoin's Competitive Advantage 00:44:00 - Bitcoin and Legality 00:48:50 - Sound Money and Friendship 00:50:40 - Satoshi Nakamoto's Identity 00:57:20 - Craig Wright's Teachings 01:00:40 - Leaving the Nakamoto Institute 01:03:40 - Investors vs. Entrepreneurs 01:06:00 - The Nature of Bitcoin 01:12:15 - Bitcoin's Value 01:14:40 - Market Efficiency 01:16:20 - Bitcoin vs. Gold 01:21:15 - BSV Adoption 01:24:00 - BSV's Success Metrics 01:28:20 - Hash Rate and Miner Incentives 01:30:30 - Market Efficiency and Truth 01:33:55 - BSV's Future 01:37:00 - BSV vs. BCH 01:40:10 - Mempool 01:42:40 - BSV Mining and Jurisdictions 01:46:45 - BSV vs. CBDC 01:52:35 - Privacy and Mixing in BSV 02:00:03 - Security and Probabilistic Thinking 02:01:21 - Capitalism, Monopoly, and BSV 02:05:01 - Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and BSV 02:07:28 - BSV's Role and Traceability 02:08:14 - Traceable vs. Non-Traceable Money 02:08:54 - Anarcho-Capitalism and Private Services 02:15:07 - Cypherpunk Literature and Privacy vs. Compliance 02:18:12 - Anonymity, Privacy, and Traceability in BSV 02:24:49 - Layer 2 Solutions and Scalability 02:32:35 - Narcissism 02:42:46 - Narcissism and Financial Scammers 02:48:14 - Avoiding Cults and Narcissistic Relationships 02:52:23 - Benefiting from Narcissistic Relationships 02:53:13 - Narcissists in Bitcoin/Crypto 02:54:37 - Relationship with Nakamoto Institute 03:00:14 - Appreciation and Book Recommendations 03:00:48 - Hayao Miyazaki and Narcissism 03:04:40 - Current Reading List 03:39:20 - Stance on 2017 Block Size Wars 03:40:45 - Book Project Idea 03:47:04 - Plato, Socrates, and Propaganda 03:53:07 - Diogenes and Libertarianism 03:55:15 - Final Book Recommendations 04:00:01 - Narcissism and Self-Awareness 04:00:40 - Denouncement of Litecoin, Dogecoin, and Ethereum 04:01:17 - Competition Between Monies 04:02:55 - Changes in the Bitcoin Space 04:04:40 - New Altcoins and Tokens 04:04:54 - Bitcoin Year One Manga 04:05:29 - Podcast Invitation and Appreciation 04:09:08 - Sponsors

Titus Kevalny, VP of Go-to-Market Strategy at Civic, discussed his role in promoting Civic's products, which protect apps from Sybil attacks and ensure KYC compliance. He explained the evolution of Civic from Ethereum to Solana, Civic Pass, a verification tool with over a million passes, and Civic Auth, a simpler authentication method for developers. Kevalny emphasized the importance of multiple authentication methods to combat AI bots and deep fakes.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdf

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdf

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the defendants have submitted a memorandum opposing the plaintiff's motion to proceed anonymously. They argue that the plaintiff has not sufficiently demonstrated the need for anonymity, as required by the factors established in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. The defendants contend that the plaintiff's claims, while sensitive, do not involve matters that typically warrant anonymity, such as challenging governmental actions or involving minors.They also assert that there is no substantial risk of physical retaliation or mental harm to the plaintiff if her identity is disclosed. Furthermore, they highlight that the plaintiff's identity has not been kept confidential, pointing to prior public disclosures related to the case. The defendants emphasize that allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous would prejudice their ability to defend themselves, as it hampers the investigation and gathering of evidence. They also argue that the public has a legitimate interest in open judicial proceedings, which includes knowing the identities of the parties involved. In conclusion, the defendants request that the court deny the plaintiff's motion for anonymity, asserting that the balance of factors weighs against permitting her to proceed under a pseudonym.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630375.54.0.pdf

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdf

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdf

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this case, plaintiff John Doe alleged that Sean Combs sexually assaulted him in 1998 at the age of sixteen and sought to proceed anonymously due to the sensitive nature of his allegations. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon evaluated Doe's request to use a pseudonym according to the balancing factors outlined by the Second Circuit in Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant. After careful consideration, the court acknowledged the sensitivity of the allegations but found that Doe had not sufficiently demonstrated a substantial risk of harm or retaliation that would justify withholding his identity.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629911.64.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Secure encryption and online anonymity are now at risk in Switzerland by Nick Espinosa, Chief Security Fanatic

Ever felt like everyone in the room hates you, but you're not sure why? Or been told you're “too much” (or not enough)? Today, we're unpacking the cultural obsession with dialing women down, the perception gap, and why your biggest personality might be your biggest asset.

Keith Coleman, the VP of product at Twitter/X, and Jay Baxter, the founding ML engineer, are the minds behind Community Notes. Here they reveal how a small, scrappy team built the most trusted crowdsourced information system on the internet—one that's changing the way we understand truth online. What you'll learn:1. How Community Notes actually works—a deep dive into the groundbreaking algorithm that rewards “bridging agreement” instead of majority rule2. The seemingly crazy yet brilliant way this idea survived multiple CEO changes—from Jack to Parag to Elon3. How this project started with a dumpster fire GIF (literally)—the untold backstory of its early launch4. The secret to running ultra-fast, high-impact product teams—no OKRs, no Jira; just one Google Doc5. What Meta's adoption of Community Notes means for the future of online (mis)information—why this open source system is becoming the industry standard—Brought to you by:• WorkOS—Modern identity platform for B2B SaaS, free up to 1 million MAUs• Productboard—Make products that matter• Wix Studio—The web creation platform built for agencies—Find the transcript at: https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/how-x-built-the-best-fact-checking-system-on-the-internet—Where to find Keith Coleman:• X: https://x.com/kcoleman• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/keith-coleman-19b12b46/—Where to find Jay Baxter:• X: https://x.com/_jaybaxter_• LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaybaxter/• Website: http://jaybaxter.net/—In this episode, we cover:(00:00) Introduction to Community Notes(06:56) How the “bridging-based” algorithm works(13:33) The impact and scale of Community Notes(17:24) Understanding the note publishing threshold(21:32) Challenges and philosophies(26:26) The effect of notes on re-sharing content(29:41) Origin story(35:46) Embracing small teams for big impact(40:23) The thermal project approach(47:47) Algorithm development and internal competitions(50:34) An inside look at how the team operates(58:56) Working with Elon(01:05:30) Launching Birdwatch(01:10:48) The core principles behind Community Notes(01:26:15) Anonymity and pseudonymity in contributions(01:32:17) Sustaining the project through leadership changes(01:37:57) Future directions for Community Notes(01:42:12) Final thoughts and optimism for the future—Referenced:• Community Notes on X: https://x.com/CommunityNotes• Sign up to be a Community Notes contributor: https://communitynotes.x.com/guide/en/contributing/signing-up• The Making of Community Notes: https://asteriskmag.com/issues/08/the-making-of-community-notes• “Readers added a Community Note to this Tweet”: https://x.com/HelpfulNotes/status/1718103364792205704• Note-ranking algorithm: https://communitynotes.x.com/guide/en/under-the-hood/ranking-notes#matrix-factorization• Study: Community Notes on X could be key to curbing misinformation: https://giesbusiness.illinois.edu/news/2024/11/18/study--community-notes-on-x-could-be-key-to-curbing-misinformation• Study Finds X's (Formerly Twitter's) Community Notes Provide Accurate, Credible Answers to Vaccine Misinformation: https://qi.ucsd.edu/study-finds-xs-formerly-twitters-community-notes-provide-accurate-credible-answers-to-vaccine-misinformation/• Did the Roll-Out of Community Notes Reduce Engagement with Misinformation on X/Twitter?: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686967• Kayvon Beykpour on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kayvz/• Jack Dorsey on X: https://x.com/jack• “Birdwatch gives me the creeps” tweet: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1589454464611540992• Blake Scholl on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/blakescholl/• Creating Truthtelling Incentives with the Bayesian Truth Serum: https://www.eecs.harvard.edu/cs286r/courses/fall12/papers/DW08.pdf• Asana: https://asana.com/• Spaces: https://blog.x.com/en_us/topics/product/2021/spaces-is-here• Amazon MTurk: https://www.mturk.com/• Community notes on GitHub: https://github.com/twitter/communitynotes• What do I think about Community Notes?: https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2023/08/16/communitynotes.html• X's community-led approach: tackling inaccurate and misleading information: https://blog.x.com/en_us/topics/company/2023/xs-community-led-approach-tackling-inaccurate-and-misleading-information• Linda Yaccarino on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lindayaccarino/• Messi-Ronaldo rivalry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messi%E2%80%93Ronaldo_rivalry• Supernotes paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2411.06116v1—Production and marketing by https://penname.co/. For inquiries about sponsoring the podcast, email podcast@lennyrachitsky.com.—Lenny may be an investor in the companies discussed. Get full access to Lenny's Newsletter at www.lennysnewsletter.com/subscribe