POPULARITY
3 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
3 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
2 episodes with Eli Pariser
318: AI for Nonprofit Leaders – Beyond the Hype (Andrew Gossen & Stamie Despo)SUMMARYSpecial thanks to TowneBank for bringing these conversations to life. Learn more at TowneBank.com/NonprofitBanking.How can nonprofit leaders cut through the noise and start using AI to strengthen relationships, increase efficiency, and stay mission-driven? AI is reshaping how nonprofits engage donors, manage data, and build relationships. In episode #318 of Your Path to Nonprofit Leadership, nonprofit marketing and fundraising experts Andrew Gossen and Stamie Despo share why nonprofit leaders can't afford to ignore AI.ABOUT ANDREWAndrew is executive director for communications, marketing, and participation at Cornell University's Division of Alumni Affairs and Development. Since joining Cornell in 2010, he has integrated emerging digital technologies, including social media and crowdfunding, into the division's strategy. Previously, he spent eight years in various roles at the Alumni Association of Princeton University. Gossen focuses on using digital tools to build audiences and mobilize support for causes and organizations. A frequent speaker to domestic and international audiences, he has served on the CASE Commission on Alumni Relations, co-chaired the CASE Joint Commission Task Force on Social Media, and received a CASE Crystal Apple Award for Teaching Excellence in 2018. He holds a bachelor's degree from Princeton and a doctorate in social anthropology from Harvard.ABOUT STAMIEStamie brings over 20 years of experience in philanthropy to Cornell University. Previously she served as the Executive Director of Susan G. Komen for the greater Charlotte, NC, area. Stamie was a 2019 honoree for the Charlotte Athena Leadership Award for Service. Her focus in philanthropy is engaging donors in a meaningful and authentic way, creating a culture of philanthropy, building relationships and providing strategic leadership. She holds a Bachelor's degree in economics, Cum Laude, from Smith College, a Masters in Teaching degree, Summa Cum Laude, from Monmouth University, a Non-Profit Management Certificate from Duke University, and an Event Planning Certificate from UNC Charlotte.EPISODE TOPICS & RESOURCESYour Path to Nonprofit Leadership is FeedSpot's #1 podcast in Philanthropy!The Filter Bubble by Eli Pariser and AI for Good by Gaius ChinanuDon't miss our weekly Thursday Leadership LensWant to chat leadership 24/7? Go to delphi.ai/pattonmcdowell
La bulle de filtre c'est un terme qui désigne les différents filtrages des informations avant d'arriver à un utilisateur sur internet. Les algorithmes sélectionneraient les données visibles pour chaque utilisateur en se basant sur les données collectées sur lui. Donc selon vos opinions politiques, par exemple, vous n'aurez pas les mêmes résultats de recherches. C'est une théorie développée par le militant internet Eli Pariser dans son livre The Filter Bubble : What is the internet hiding from you. En français : La Bulle de Filtre : ce qu'internet vous cache. Quel est le problème avec la bulle de filtre ? La bulle de filtre existe-t-elle vraiment ? Qu'est-ce qu'une chambre d'écho ? Écoutez la suite de cet épisode de Maintenant vous savez ! Un podcast Bababam Originals, écrit et réalisé par Hugo de l'Estrac. À écouter ensuite : Sexisme : comment internet creuse-t-il les inégalités hommes femmes ? “Femme”, “équité”, ”climat” : quels sont ces mots interdits par Donald Trump ? Combien de CO2 émet une recherche sur Chat GPT ? Retrouvez tous les épisodes de "Maintenant vous savez".Suivez Bababam sur Instagram. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this second bonus episode, featuring a conversation recorded in Ottawa in October at the Public Broadcasters International conference, we explore the Public Spaces Incubator. The Incubator was originally founded as a partnership between four public broadcasters – CBC/Radio-Canada, RTBF, SRG SSR and ZDF – and one tech company, called New_Public. It released its first prototypes earlier this year, and has now welcomed ABC and ARD onboard as well. How did the Incubator start? What problems is it trying to solve? And when co-productions of this nature are so hard to get off the ground, what's the secret behind the success of the Incubator? Presenter: Harry Lock. Producer: Jamie Tahana. Guests: Catherine Tait, CBC/Radio-Canada & Eli Pariser, New_Public. Music: Lucas Thompson, Rachel Still & Tom Brazier. For more information on the Public Spaces Incubator: https://newpublic.org/psi.
Neste episódio (que ficou longo, desculpe
Natalie (Talia, as she goes by) Stroud has for years been studying the ways that our lives online show up in and shape our lives together. Her scholarship as her life are unexampled guides to the tumult, the challenges, and the opportunity presented by the advent and evolution of digital media. Origins Podcast WebsiteFlourishing Commons NewsletterShow Notes:Federal Communications Committee "Information Needs of Communities" (08:10)Kathleen Hall Jamieson (08:50)Center for Media Engagement (11:00)Niche News (12:00)Governing the Commonsby Elinor Ostrom (17:00)Understanding Knowledge As a Commonsby Hess and Ostrom (17:30)Nexus: A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI by Yuval Noah Harari (17:40)'crisis discipline' (e.g., Michael Soulé) (18:00)Danielle Allen on relationality (20:00)New_ Public (22:20)Civic Signals (23:50 & 32:00)Talia's research with Meta around 2020 presidential election (26:00)Eli Pariser (34:00)Great Asking episode of Origins (35:00)the four building blocks of a healthy or flourishing digital community (37:30)what does it mean to flourish? (39:00)Umberto Eco and lists (42:20)trust (43:00)Martha Nussbaum (46:20)public imagination (51:00)Healing the Heart of Democracyby Parker Palmer (55:20)Lightning Round (55:40)Book: The Nature and Origins of Public Opinions by John Zaller Passion: business and marketing 'beach read' booksHeart Sing: election integrityScrewed up: reducing polarization in ways practical and scalableFind Talia online:UT Austin'Five-Cut Fridays' five-song music playlist series Talia's playlistLogo artwork by Cristina GonzalezMusic by swelo on all streaming platforms or @swelomusic on social media
Thinking past the US 2024 Presidential Election, In part three of the series, Rick Howard, N2K CyberWire's Chief Analyst and Senior Fellow, discusses reducing the impact of propaganda in the future elections with Perry Carpenter, Chief Human Risk Management Strategist at KnowBe4 and host of the 8th Layer Insights Podcast, Nina Jankowicz, Co-Founder and CEO of the The American Sunlight Project, and Scott Small, Director of Cyber Threat Intelligence at Tidal Cyber. Check out Part 1 & 2! Part 1: Election Propaganda Part 1: How Does Election Propaganda Work? In this episode, Rick Howard, N2K CyberWire's Chief Analyst and Senior Fellow, discusses personal defensive measures that every citizen can take—regardless of political philosophy—to resist the influence of propaganda. This foundational episode is essential for understanding how to navigate the complex landscape of election messaging. Part 2: Election Propaganda: Part 2: Modern propaganda efforts. In preparation for the US 2024 Presidential Election, Rick Howard, N2K CyberWire's Chief Analyst and Senior Fellow, discusses recent international propaganda efforts in the form of nation state interference and influence operations as well as domestic campaigns designed to split the target country into opposing camps. Guests include Nina Jankowicz, Co-Founder and CEO of the The American Sunlight Project and Scott Small, Director of Cyber Threat Intelligence at Tidal Cyber. References: Rick Howard, 2024. Election Propaganda Part 1: How does election propaganda work? [3 Part Podcast Series]. The CyberWire. Rick Howard, 2024. Election Propaganda: Part 2: Modern propaganda efforts. [3 Part Podcast Series]. The CyberWire. Christopher Chabris, Daniel Simons, 2010. The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us [Book]. Goodreads. Chris Palmer, 2010. TFL Viral - Awareness Test (Moonwalking Bear) [Explainer]. YouTube. David Ehl, 2024. Why Meta is now banning Russian propaganda [News]. Deutsche Welle. Eli Pariser, 2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding From You [Book]. Goodreads. Kara Swisher, Julia Davis, Alex Stamos, Brandy Zadrozny, 2024. Useful Idiots? How Right-Wing Influencers Got $ to Spread Russian Propaganda [Podcast]. On with Kara Swisher. Nate Silver, 2024. What's behind Trump's surge in prediction markets? [Analysis]. Silver Bulletin. Niha Masih, 2024. Meta bans Russian state media outlet RT for acts of ‘foreign interference' [News]. The Washington Post. Nilay Patel, 2024. The AI election deepfakes have arrived [Podcast]. Decoder. Nina Jankowicz, 2020. How to Lose the Information War: Russia, Fake News and the Future of Conflict [Book]. Goodreads. Perry Carpenter, 2024. FAIK: A Practical Guide to Living in a World of Deepfakes, Disinformation, and AI-Generated Deceptions [Book]. Goodreads. Perry Carpenter, 2021. Meatloaf Recipes Cookbook: Easy Recipes For Preparing Tasty Meals For Weight Loss And Healthy Lifestyle All Year Round [Book]. Goodreads. Perry Carpenter, n.d. 8th Layer Insights [Podcast]. N2K CyberWire. Renee DiResta, 2024. Invisible Rulers: The People Who Turn Lies into Reality [Book]. Goodreads. Robin Stern, Marc Brackett, 2024. 5 Ways to Recognize and Avoid Political Gaslighting [Explainer]. The Washington Post. Sarah Ellison, Amy Gardner, Clara Ence Morse, 2024. Elon Musk's misleading election claims reach millions and alarm election officials [News]. The Washington Post. Scott Small, 2024. Election Cyber Interference Threats & Defenses: A Data-Driven Study [White Paper]. Tidal Cyber. Staff, n.d. Overview: Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity [Website]. C2PA. Staff, 2021. Foreign Threats to the 2020 US Federal Elections [Intelligence Community Assessment]. DNI. Staff, n.d. Project Origin [Website]. OriginProject. URL https://www.originproject.info/ Stuart A. Thompson, Tiffany Hsu, 2024. Left-Wing Misinformation Is Having a Moment [Analysis] The New York Times. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Thinking past the US 2024 Presidential Election, In part three of the series, Rick Howard, N2K CyberWire's Chief Analyst and Senior Fellow, discusses reducing the impact of propaganda in the future elections with Perry Carpenter, Chief Human Risk Management Strategist at KnowBe4 and host of the 8th Layer Insights Podcast, Nina Jankowicz, Co-Founder and CEO of the The American Sunlight Project, and Scott Small, Director of Cyber Threat Intelligence at Tidal Cyber. Check out Part 1 & 2! Part 1: Election Propaganda Part 1: How Does Election Propaganda Work? In this episode, Rick Howard, N2K CyberWire's Chief Analyst and Senior Fellow, discusses personal defensive measures that every citizen can take—regardless of political philosophy—to resist the influence of propaganda. This foundational episode is essential for understanding how to navigate the complex landscape of election messaging. Part 2: Election Propaganda: Part 2: Modern propaganda efforts. In preparation for the US 2024 Presidential Election, Rick Howard, N2K CyberWire's Chief Analyst and Senior Fellow, discusses recent international propaganda efforts in the form of nation state interference and influence operations as well as domestic campaigns designed to split the target country into opposing camps. Guests include Nina Jankowicz, Co-Founder and CEO of the The American Sunlight Project and Scott Small, Director of Cyber Threat Intelligence at Tidal Cyber. References: Rick Howard, 2024. Election Propaganda Part 1: How does election propaganda work? [3 Part Podcast Series]. The CyberWire. Rick Howard, 2024. Election Propaganda: Part 2: Modern propaganda efforts. [3 Part Podcast Series]. The CyberWire. Christopher Chabris, Daniel Simons, 2010. The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us [Book]. Goodreads. Chris Palmer, 2010. TFL Viral - Awareness Test (Moonwalking Bear) [Explainer]. YouTube. David Ehl, 2024. Why Meta is now banning Russian propaganda [News]. Deutsche Welle. Eli Pariser, 2011. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding From You [Book]. Goodreads. Kara Swisher, Julia Davis, Alex Stamos, Brandy Zadrozny, 2024. Useful Idiots? How Right-Wing Influencers Got $ to Spread Russian Propaganda [Podcast]. On with Kara Swisher. Nate Silver, 2024. What's behind Trump's surge in prediction markets? [Analysis]. Silver Bulletin. Niha Masih, 2024. Meta bans Russian state media outlet RT for acts of ‘foreign interference' [News]. The Washington Post. Nilay Patel, 2024. The AI election deepfakes have arrived [Podcast]. Decoder. Nina Jankowicz, 2020. How to Lose the Information War: Russia, Fake News and the Future of Conflict [Book]. Goodreads. Perry Carpenter, 2024. FAIK: A Practical Guide to Living in a World of Deepfakes, Disinformation, and AI-Generated Deceptions [Book]. Goodreads. Perry Carpenter, 2021. Meatloaf Recipes Cookbook: Easy Recipes For Preparing Tasty Meals For Weight Loss And Healthy Lifestyle All Year Round [Book]. Goodreads. Perry Carpenter, n.d. 8th Layer Insights [Podcast]. N2K CyberWire. Renee DiResta, 2024. Invisible Rulers: The People Who Turn Lies into Reality [Book]. Goodreads. Robin Stern, Marc Brackett, 2024. 5 Ways to Recognize and Avoid Political Gaslighting [Explainer]. The Washington Post. Sarah Ellison, Amy Gardner, Clara Ence Morse, 2024. Elon Musk's misleading election claims reach millions and alarm election officials [News]. The Washington Post. Scott Small, 2024. Election Cyber Interference Threats & Defenses: A Data-Driven Study [White Paper]. Tidal Cyber. Staff, n.d. Overview: Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity [Website]. C2PA. Staff, 2021. Foreign Threats to the 2020 US Federal Elections [Intelligence Community Assessment]. DNI. Staff, n.d. Project Origin [Website]. OriginProject. URL https://www.originproject.info/ Stuart A. Thompson, Tiffany Hsu, 2024. Left-Wing Misinformation Is Having a Moment [Analysis] The New York Times.
Though the current popular narrative about social media seems to be that it is harmful and has little or no redeeming value, the truth (which a lot of people know) is that it also has a lot of value, and the potential to be even better. A recent research report from New_Public finds some ideas on how to pursue that potential by looking at a niche, local social media site that moves a lot slower than the big networks, and this week we're joined by New_Public co-director Eli Pariser to discuss what useful lessons there might be to learn from "slow social media". Read the report (pdf): https://newpublic.org/uploads/2024/07/Front-Porch-Forum-report-2.pdf
Online democracy advocate Eli Pariser explains the details surrounding the August 2024 arrest of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov by French authorities — and what it means for the future of tech oversight and free speech. (Recorded live on Wednesday, September 4, 2024)
Online democracy advocate Eli Pariser explains the details surrounding the August 2024 arrest of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov by French authorities — and what it means for the future of tech oversight and free speech. (Recorded live on Wednesday, September 4, 2024)
Online democracy advocate Eli Pariser explains the details surrounding the August 2024 arrest of Telegram CEO Pavel Durov by French authorities — and what it means for the future of tech oversight and free speech. (Recorded live on Wednesday, September 4, 2024)
Original broadcast date: July 23, 2021. How can we create public places that feel welcoming and safe for everyone? This hour, TED speakers examine our physical and digital spaces—how they run, who they serve, and how to make them better. Guests include community organizer Shari Davis, researcher Eli Pariser, Wikipedia Library founder Jake Orlowitz, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, and artist Matthew Mazzotta.TED Radio Hour+ subscribers now get access to bonus episodes, with more ideas from TED speakers and a behind the scenes look with our producers. A Plus subscription also lets you listen to regular episodes (like this one!) without sponsors. Sign-up at plus.npr.org/ted.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy
Larry Huynh is a Partner and founder of Trilogy Interactive, a trailblazing digital political firm. His path to politics is anything but typical...his family coming to the U.S. as refugees after the Vietnam War, his academic background in biochemistry, and early career in the finance sector. In this conversation, Larry talks his unconventional route to working in politics, the 2004 campaign that changed his trajectory, early days of the political internet, plus some of his favorite case studies, best practices, and thoughts on digital trends that have the potential to change politics. IN THIS EPISODEHow Larry's family had to flee Vietnam after the fall of Saigon...Growing up a Texan in a low-income family in Houston...Larry talks his pre-political interest in biochemistry and work in the financial sector...The 2004 movement to Draft General Wes Clark into the presidential race pulls Larry into politics...Memories of meeting General Clark the first time and the 2004 Clark campaign...What contributed to the massive spike of online fundraising in the 2004 presidential campaign...Larry starts one of the first digital political firms after the 2004 elections...How Barbara Boxer's approach to Senate hearings blazed a path for effective use of digital political tools...Larry on current trends in digital politics...Larry talks studies his firm has done to better utilize AI...Larry's perspective on the right type of people who should pursue a career in digital politics...Larry talks his role as President of the AAPC and smart ways to utilize the organization...AND alchemy, Bank of America, Stacey Bashara, best laid plans, Brent Blackaby, Blackrock, Doug Boxer, Howard Dean, Fort Chaffee, genetically-modified seeds, hard science, Jeff Hauser, jacked-up arms, Paul Johnson, Rose Kapolczynski, John Kerry, kill lists, Blanche Lincoln, Terry McAuliffe, John McCain, Jason McIntosh, Katie Merrill, Monsanto, MoveOn, Eli Pariser, Condaleeza Rice, Diana Rogal, Josh Ross, Randy Stearns, vice principals, windowless rooms....& more!
Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn at 23, and founder of UpWorthy, talks to me about creating healthy online spaces, and democratic activism that builds up democracy rather than tearing it down.
We've reported here on TMI on Eli Pariser's "Filter Bubble" concept since its debut in 2010 at his Ted talk: the idea that Google was selectively feeding results back to the user that the user agreed with, making it so that one person's search results were often vastly different than another's. Mr Pariser pointed out that by putting us all in these Filter Bubbles, we couldn't agree on what was even factual. A new article published in the PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) journal, however, says that is all wrong when applied to social media giants like Facebook, where they aim to increase your focus and time spent there by enhancing the chance of you getting made angry by what you see. We examine these competing concepts. Then, we go over how the media is gleefully playing up any and all minutiae of Trump's intentions for his second term except for one key part: how the Project 2025 plan that he's assimilated is catastrophic for any chance we have to keep the environment from completely collapsing. Finally, we present an update to a story we went over a few weeks back, putting a spotlight on how the EV infrastructure promised by Biden's funding in 2021 is FINALLY starting to come to fruition. All this and more on TMI for Friday, December 15, 2023 - listen in for YOUR Cure for the Common Media!
Back near the beginning of TMI with Aldous Tyler in 2010, we reported on Eli Pariser's Ted Talk that introduced the world to the "Filter Bubble". This phenomenon, he said, was caused by Google's search algorithms, which would selectively feed you results similar to ones you had interacted with before. That would cause your Google searches to no longer match anyone else's, and would feed you ideas you agreed with far more than those that would challenge your beliefs. Fast forward to today, and his predictions that this "echo chamber" effect could negatively impact society seem far too mild. We discuss how TikTok, Spotify, YouTube, Meta's platforms and many others have stanched the flow of ideas and how to fight back. Then, as I was preparing to tell you about the latest report from scientists on the climate, noting that we may very well have gone past several tipping points, Hurricane Otis became a demonstration of how we are in unknown territory by unprecedently ramping up from a weak tropical storm to a 165 MPH monster Category 5 hurricane in roughly 24 hours, slamming into the Acapulco area with no warning to evacuate the million-plus people there. We discuss how this alarming development might become the new normal. All that and more on TMI for Friday, October 27, 2023 - get YOUR Cure for the Common Media!
This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/68-academic-words-reference-from-eli-pariser-beware-online-filter-bubbles-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/Ne4p8sPCYZc (All Words) https://youtu.be/ZZVl-xWePDY (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/D2KpHRjxPaE (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)
This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_what_obligation_do_social_media_platforms_have_to_the_greater_good ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/161-academic-words-reference-from-eli-pariser-what-obligation-do-social-media-platforms-have-to-the-greater-good--ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/m59YIRrgaJA (All Words) https://youtu.be/tcx0JoV-25k (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/qiXLjuPIOic (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)
In today's episode, Deepti Doshi, Co-Director of New_ Public (and leader in the intersection of social media, community organizing, and leadership development) speaks with Matt Prewitt on how to create online spaces that foster interconnection, mutual dependency, and democratic outcomes. Together, they explore the need for socio-technical expertise and community stewards to work together to design a healthier and more equitable digital ecosystem. They give consideration to the role of technology and tools in creating democratic spaces, and the potential impact of generative AI on social spaces and democracy. They share a hopeful and exciting outlook for building a more democratic political economy online.References:Marshall Ganz (American scholar for grassroots organizing)2012 Nirbhaya Case (TW: Sexual Assault) Arab SpringLola Omolola (Nigerian journalist who founded the Female IN (FIN) group on Facebook - formerly “Female In Nigeria”)John Dewey (American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer (1859–1952)Transcript: Ezra Klein Interviews Danielle Allen - The New York TimesNew_ PublicCommunity by Design | New_ PublicBios:Deepti Doshi co-leads New_Public with Eli Pariser and Talia Stroud. New_Public is a product studio for healthy digital public spaces; spaces where people can connect with one another, build understanding across differences, and work towards shared goals, and that are built to maximize plurality, equity, and cohesion - not financial returns. Her work has focused on the intersection of social media, community organizing, and leadership development. Deepti was a Director at Meta, where she helped set up Meta's New Product Experimentation team, created the Community Partnerships team to build products (namely, Groups), programs, and partnerships that support community leaders, and led Internet.org across Asia. Prior to Meta she founded Haiyya, India's largest community organizing platform, Escuela Nueva India, an education company that serves the urban poor, and the Fellows Program at Acumen Fund to build leaders for the social enterprise sector. Deepti is a graduate of the Harvard Kennedy School and the Wharton Business School, and holds a bachelors degree in Psychology. She is a TED Fellow, an Aspen Institute First Movers Fellow and Ideas Scholar, and her work has been featured in multiple publications. She lives in Berkeley with her husband, Adrien, and two boys, Aiden and Luca. When not working, you can find her playing tennis, cooking, meditating, or planning the next block party. Deepti's Social Links: @deeptidoshi | TwitterDeepti Doshi | InstagramDeepti Doshi | LinkedInConnect with New_ Public:New_ Public - Website@WeAreNew_Public | TwitterNew_ Public | InstagramNew_ Public | LinkedInNew_ Public | Substack Newsletter Matt Prewitt (he/him) is a lawyer, technologist, and writer. He is the President of the RadicalxChange Foundation.Matt's Social Links:@m_t_prewitt | TwitterMatt's Substack: Matt's WritingsConnect with RadicalxChange Foundation:@RadxChange | TwitterRadicalxChange WebsiteRxC | YouTubeRxC | InstagramRxC | LinkedInJoin the conversation on Discord.Credits:Produced by G. Angela Corpus.Co-Produced, Edited, Narrated and Audio Engineered by Aaron Benavides.Executive Produced by G. Angela Corpus and Matt Prewitt.Intro/Outro music by MagnusMoone, “Wind in the Willows,” is licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)
http://bit.ly/GeniusHollins00:01:06 Charlie Munger once said he thought that if Darwin attended Harvard in 1986, he probably would have graduated around the middle of the pack.00:04:28 “Strong opinions but held lightly."00:06:59 Internet activist Eli Pariser 00:11:03 Though Darwin was not considered particularly brilliant intellectually, it didn't matter.00:11:52 Like Socrates, he was unwilling to let bias and assumption derail or contaminate his efforts, and so made a concerted effort to weed out errors of thinking.• Darwin's genius traits included hard work and discipline, intellectual honesty, and non-conventionality.• Darwin was a prolific naturalist whose works on natural selection, the descent of species and evolution profoundly changed the scientific landscape, and set the stage for our current biological paradigm. • Darwin was said to be a methodical, slow and exceedingly patient person who worked diligently on his efforts throughout his life. We can see the traits of hard work, self-discipline, consistency and resilience in his contributions to science. Though he was considered not to be a genius by many, he still managed to achieve enormous success that changed the world permanently.• Darwin demonstrated a commitment to intellectual honesty, curiosity and humility by practicing what he called the golden rule. He would deliberately pay attention to material that countered his cherished beliefs, assumptions and expectations, knowing that his natural bias would be to ignore this information. • Like Darwin, by courting alternative opinions and genuinely engaging with those that disagree with us, we weaken the hold of bias over our learning and gain deeper insight. • Darwin's incredible life achievements would not have been possible were it not for his willingness to think outside the box, and to entertain ideas that were unconventional at the time. • Darwin teaches us to be intellectually honest, and to follow the evidence, logic and facts wherever they take us, even if we have to abandon previously held beliefs, admit that we were mistaken, or come to conclusions that make us unpopular. • To follow Darwin, we can work hard to get out of our own “filter bubbles” and deliberately seek out information that contradicts with our pet beliefs. Switch your search engine or actively engage with people you ordinarily would avoid. Get into the habit of asking yourself, “What am I not seeing here?”#BiologistEOWilson #ConfirmationBias #Darwin #EliPariser #IntellectualHonesty #NaturalBias #NaturalIntelligence #Pariser #PersonalBias #PetBeliefs #Darwin'SGoldenRule #RussellNewton #NewtonMG #PeterHollins #TheScienceofSelf #ThinkLikeaGenius
Imagine if the members of your group chat shared more than memes but also shared a bank account, or if the early users of a social media app helped decide how that app grew, made money, and moderated content. How does the group make decisions and make sure everyone is heard? Who decides how the money is spent? These are some of the questions Friends with Benefits (FWB), a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) has had to answer. Baratunde talks with FWB Mayor Alex Zhang about DAOs, online community-building, and Web3 to find out if the way we citizen online can positively affect how we citizen IRL. SHOW ACTIONS Internally Reflect - How we shape the spaces we inhabit Take a moment and think about your relationship to the digital spaces you spend time in. This could be social media, gaming, or a group chat. Where do you feel like an active participant, where you set the terms and tone of the environment? Where do you feel passive, like someone else is in charge? How might you change that relationship? Become more informed - Web3, squads, and digital public spaces We can create a healthier culture of democracy through web3 beyond starting and joining DAOs. If you're new to this world, the New York Times' has a great primer on Web3. Once you've read that, take a deep dive into the history of “Squads”— a form of social and economic organizing that is shifting power and social dynamics away from an individualistic society. If our conversation with Alex made you curious, check out our episode with Eli Pariser from New_Public. We go deep on how to better design digital public spaces. Publicly participate - Sharing power and setting culture in groups You're likely a part of a group, a tenants or homeowners association, a parent group, a committee at work. The next time you're at one of your meetings, take note of how the group makes decisions. Who speaks? Who is silent? What areas are open to input? What is considered off-the-table? Is there even an agenda!? Over time see if you can identify the kind of culture the group has: chaotic? Deferential? Can you find any opportunities for the group to make that culture more small-d democratic, by rotating speaking or leadership roles, or openly acknowledging how decisions are made and how that might shift? We don't need to find new groups and spaces to practice this democracy thing—let's start where we are. SHOW NOTES Check out our episode with Taiwan's Digital Minister, Audrey Tang for more on quadratic voting, and our episode with Pia Mancini, cofounder of Open Collective, a platform empowering collectives and mutual aid groups with new transparent, decentralized financial tools. Read Debt: The First 5,000 Years by David Graeber. Find How To Citizen on Instagram or visit howtocitizen.com to join our mailing list and find ways to citizen besides listening to this podcast! Please show your support for the show by reviewing and rating. It makes a huge difference with the algorithmic overlords and helps others like you find the show! How To Citizen is hosted by Baratunde Thurston. He's also host and executive producer of the PBS series, America Outdoors as well as a founding partner and writer at Puck. You can find him all over the internet. CREDITS How To Citizen with Baratunde is a production of iHeartRadio Podcasts and Rowhome Productions. Our Executive Producers are Baratunde Thurston and Elizabeth Stewart. Allie Graham is our Lead Producer and Danya AbdelHameid is our Associate Producer. Alex Lewis is our Managing Producer. John Myers is our Executive Editor. Original Music by Andrew Eapen and Blue Dot Sessions. Our Audience Engagement Fellows are Jasmine Lewis and Gabby Rodriguez. Special thanks to Joelle Smith from iHeartRadio and Layla Bina. Special thanks to our citizen voices Tania F., Ned K., Sara H., and Janine D.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Get ready for those 'fun' holiday dinner conversations with friends and family. You know the ones... In the spirit of the holidays, I thought we'd revisit Season 1, Episode 2. This is an episode about the battle for truth. As disinformation, misinformation, malinformation, and conspiracy theories seem to be hitting epidemic levels, how can we help each other determine what is real and what is fake? How can we help people who are falling down conspiracy rabbit holes? And what roles do technology companies, governments, and ordinary citizens play? Perry Carpenter speaks with acclaimed cybersecurity expert, Bruce Schneier, disinformation experts, Samantha North and Allie Wong, and conspiracy theory researcher, Mick West. In this episode, we also hear from Peter Leyden from Reinvent and Eli Periser, author of The Filter Bubble. Learn more about our guests here: Bruce Schneier - Internationally renowned security technologist, author, and speaker. You can find Bruce's website here. Allie Wong - VP of Mis/dis/mal-information, Response and Resiliency, Limbik; Consultant, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. (LinkedIn) Samantha North - Disinformation researcher and consultant. (LinkedIn) Co-Founder: North Cyber Research (website) Mick West - Skeptical investigator and retired video game programmer. Creator of the websites Contrail Science (website) and Metabunk (website). Author of Escaping the Rabbit Hole: How to Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect (link). Personal website (link). Special thanks to Reinvent for allowing use of audio. References: http://reinvent.net/events/event/how-we-can-pop-the-filter-bubble-with-eli-pariser/ https://reboot-foundation.org/study-social-media-poor-judgment/ https://reboot-foundation.org/is-there-a-fake-news-generation/ Recommended Books: Escaping the Rabbit Hole: How to Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect by Mick West. Click Here to Kill Everybody: Security and Survival in a Hyper-connected World by Bruce Schneier. The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think by Eli Pariser. Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. Why Are We Yelling?: The Art of Productive Disagreement by Buster Benson. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt. Perry's Books Transformational Security Awareness: What Neuroscientists, Storytellers, and Marketers Can Teach Us About Driving Secure Behaviors, by Perry Carpenter The Security Culture Playbook: An Executive Guide To Reducing Risk and Developing Your Human Defense Layer by Perry Carpenter & Kai Roer Production Credits: Music and Sound Effects by Blue Dot Sessions, Envato Elements, & Storyblocks. Artwork by Chris Machowski @ https://www.RansomWear.net/ and Mia Rune @ https://www.MiaRune.com. 8th Layer Insights theme music composed and performed by Marcos Moscat @ https://www.GameMusicTown.com/ Want to get in touch with Perry? Here's how: LinkedIn Twitter Instagram Email: perry [at] 8thLayerMedia [dot] com
Original broadcast date: July 23, 2021. How can we create public places that feel welcoming and safe for everyone? This hour, TED speakers examine our physical and digital spaces—how they run, who they serve, and how to make them better. Guests include community organizer Shari Davis, researcher Eli Pariser, Wikipedia Library founder Jake Orlowitz, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, and artist Matthew Mazzotta.
以往的我们根据生活方式养成自己的生活习性，成为了“我”。数字时代的我们通过使用各类应用软件和数字平台，留下我们的数字化脚印，像3D打印技术一样向对方展现数字打造的“类我”。 类我是否可以代表部分或者完全的我们？数字化时代下的我们是否也像机器般留存下各种分析数据和生成评估报告？类我的个性化特质反而会让我们陷入更深的信息井而无法自救吗？从“类我”反观现在的自己，也从“我”去比较数字化下的信息漏洞。即使数据为人类服务而生，我们仍需警惕被数字化作生活的模式和答案，适时冲破透明的信息壁墙。 本期主播：Sanyi、毛头、阿骨 Shownotes： 《必然》 凯文•凯利 | https://book.douban.com/subject/26658379/ 《信息乌托邦》凯斯•R•桑斯坦 | https://book.douban.com/subject/3338726/ 尼葛洛庞帝预言 "The Daily Me" (我的日报) | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Me 《The Filter Bubble（过滤泡）》 Eli Pariser | https://book.douban.com/subject/5994771/ 《娱乐至死》尼尔•波兹曼 | https://book.douban.com/subject/26319730/ 《我们为何膜拜青春》罗伯特·波格·哈里森：https://book.douban.com/subject/30152811/ 生活流 Lifestream 计算机科学家大卫•格勒恩特（David Gelernter）| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lifestreaming
Ein Gespräch von Prof. Dr. Udo Thiedeke mit Dr. Sascha Dickel, Professor für Mediensoziologie und Gesellschaftstheorie an der Universität Mainz, über das Verhältnis von wissenschaftlichem Wissen und seiner Veröffentlichung. 00:02:17 Zum Gespräch mit Christian Drosten im Deutschlandfunk 16.11.2020 https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/coronavirus-und-medien-christian-drosten-bei-formate-100.html 00:09:51 Siehe Friedhelm Neidhardt, 1994: Öffentlichkeit und Öffentlichkeitsprobleme der Wissenschaft, in: Wolfgang Zapf, Meinolf Dierks (Hrsg.): Institutionenvergleich und Institutionendynamik. Berlin. S. 39-56. 00:11:33 Siehe Jürgen Habermas, 1962: Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Frankfurt/M. 00:12:00 Luhmann begreift Öffentlichkeit allgemeiner als: "(...) gesellschaftsinterne Umwelt der gesellschaftlichen Teilsysteme (...)“ (1996: S. 184/185) und innergesellschaftliches Reflexionsmedium (a.a.O.: 187). Niklas Luhmann, 1996: Realität der Massenmedien. 2., erweiterte Auflage. Opladen. 00:13:56 Hinweis darauf, dass die Wissenschaft ihr eigenes Publikum ist: Vgl. Niklas Luhmann, 1998: Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. 3. Aufl. Frankfurt/M. S. 625f. 00:21:24 "Filterblasen" im Internet meint abgegrenzte Interessenspären, die den Insassen das vorführen, was sie ohnehin schon interessiert (vgl. Eli Pariser, 2012). Eli Pariser, 2012: Filter bubble: Wie wir im Internet entmündigt werden. Berlin. Eine "Echokammer" meint hingegen eine soziale Sphäre der fortwährenden Bestätigung der eignen Meinung (vgl. Brady et al., 2021). William J. Brady, Killian McLoughlin, Tuan N. Doan, Molly J. Crockett, 2021: How social learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks. Science Advances, 7. Doi:10.1126/sciadv.abe5641. 00:24:34 Emprisch zeigt sich, dass die Nutzenden des Internets auch Interessen und Meinungen außerhalb der eigegen Präferenzen wahrnehmen (vgl. z.B. Flaxman et al., 2016); selbst Mitglieder meinungshomogener Gruppen im Internet tendieren dazu, ihre Meinungen sinnvoll zu korrigieren (Vgl. Becker et al., 2019). Seth Flaxman, Sharad Goel, Justin M. Rao, 2016: Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption. In: Public Opinion Quarterly, 80. S. 298–320. Joshua Becker, Ethan Porter, Damon Centola, 2019: The wisdom of partisan crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 10717-10722. 00:26:02 Mit dem Begriff der "Verschwörungstheorien" sind meist "Verschwörungsbehauptungen" oder gar "Verschwörungsideolgien", d.h. konstruierte Zusammenhänge, die sich nicht durch unabhängig prüfbare Beweise falsifizieren lassen gemeint. Siehe auch Popper, 1992: S. 119. Karl R. Popper, 1992: Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde. Band II. 7. Auflage. Tübingen. 00:27:14 Hinweis zur Kritik am "Arena-Modell" von Öffentlichkeit. Armin Nassehi, 2006: Der soziologische Diskurs der Moderne. Frankfurt/Main. 00:34:25 Hinweis zu "Postnormal-Science". Silvio 0. Funtowicz, Jerome R. Ravetz, 1993: Science for the Post-Normal Age. In: Futures 25 (7), S. 739–755. 00:43:26 "Exemplarischen Personen" meint typisierte Darstellungen von Personen in den Massenmedien (vgl. Thiedeke, 2012: 339f.; 347f.). Udo Thiedeke, 2012: Soziologie der Kommunikationsmedien. Medien - Formen - Erwartungen. Wiesbaden. 00:56:02 Hinweis zum DFG-Forschungsprojekt "De- und Restabilisierung von Evidenz in der Coronakrise“. https://mediensoziologie.soziologie.uni-mainz.de/forschung/ Episode direkt herunterladen (mp3 45MB) Folge direkt herunterladen
In this episode of In Reality, co-hosts Eric Schurenberg and Joan Donovan are joined by Eli Pariser, co-director of New Public and former president of MoveOn.org. Pariser is a long-time advocate for creating healthy communities online, and he now advocates for reimagining the Internet as a trustworthy public space analogous to local parks or public libraries.It's an appealing analogy. Pariser notes that public spaces are critical for holding democratic societies together, spaces where people come together and work through conflict, raise concerns and demands, and share experiences. A key element of physical public spaces is that they are local in scale. Some digital spaces share some of that “local” flavor. Reddit, for example, fosters local discussions and debates through multiple domains and communities that have their own moderation. That stands in contrast to platforms like Facebook and Twitter, where there is no visible moderation and information is global in nature, making it hard to develop a sense of community. Moderation alone isn't quite enough, though. Another key element of healthy public spaces is self-governance because it depends on collaboration. Wikipedia is an example of a digital space that offers contributors power checked by governing principles and steered by collaborative norms. Digital “parks” and “libraries” are a distant cry from the barely controlled chaos that has characterized digital spaces to date. But as our civic lives increasingly move online, the need for them is clear.
When we think about social media platforms and online interactions, it might seem like we are merely experiencing feeds of information that are curated for us by algorithms. The scale by which companies like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram now operate […]
El audio que está escuchando es solamente el fragmento. Para escuchar audiolibro completo visita nuestro sitio web GenioTeka https://genioteka.store
After news broke that Elon Musk is likely to purchase Twitter later this year, the billionaire began sharing a controversial vision for the app. On this week's On the Media, hear why Musk's plan to turn Twitter into a so-called free speech platform could spiral out of control and how urban planning can make safer digital spaces. Plus, how science fiction inspired some of Silicon Valley's most powerful men. 1. Anand Giridharadas [@AnandWrites], author of Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World, Erika D. Smith [@Erika_D_Smith], LA Times columnist, and Natalie Wynn [@ContraPoints], YouTuber and political commentator, on the implications and possible outcomes of Elon Musk's potential purchase of Twitter. Listen. 2. Eli Pariser [@elipariser], co-director of Civic Signals, on how urban planning can manage the problems of social programing to create digital spaces that don't exploit us. Listen. 3. Jill Lepore, Harvard historian and staff writer at the New Yorker, Annalee Newitz [@Annaleen], former Editor-in-Chief of Gizmodo and science fiction author, and Gene Seymour [@GeneSeymour], longtime cultural critic, on tech moguls' obsession with science fiction. Listen.
Why did Elon Musk buy Twitter? What does he plan to do with it? Is this the end of big social or a chance to reinvent it? This week, we're interrupting our regularly scheduled programming to answer those questions with two of the smartest internet commentators we know: Eli Pariser, co-founder of Upworthy and author of “The Filter Bubble”; and Steven Johnson, writer, podcaster, TV host, and Twitter user since 2007. RECOMMENDED: Subscribe to Steven's newsletter, Adjacent Possible: adjacentpossible.substack.com Follow Eli on Twitter: @elipariser Listen to our interview with Jill Lepore about Elon Musk's sci-fi fantasies. GET IN TOUCH: What did you think of this episode? Send us your thoughts: podcast@nextbigideaclub.com NEXT BIG IDEA APP: You know what's better than mindlessly scrolling through Twitter? Reading an entire book in just 12 minutes. Impossible, you say? Well, clearly you haven't downloaded the Next Big Idea app, the only place in the world where you can hear book summaries read by leading authors themselves. Download it today: nextbigideaclub.com/app
Algorithms are buzzing all around us, but exactly what and where are they – and how will they continue to impact each of us – for good or not so good? The Buzz 1: “Algorithm: Word used by programmers when they don't want to explain what they did.” (Book title on amazon.com) The Buzz 2: “The algorithms that orchestrate our ads are starting to orchestrate our lives.” (Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org) The Buzz 3: An algorithm is a set of step-by-step procedures, or a set of rules to follow, for completing a specific task or solving a particular problem. The word ‘algorithm' was first coined in the 9th century by a Persian mathematician whose latinized name was 'Algoritmi'. Today…algorithms determine the people we meet on Tinder, recognize your face to open the keyless door or fire you from your job when your productivity drops.” (towardsdatascience.com) The Buzz 4: “Human-sourced bias inevitably creeps into AI models, and as a result, algorithms reinforce human prejudices…Google Images search for 'CEO' produced 11 percent women, even though 27 percent of United States chief executives are women. We'll ask Jim Sterne, Drew Ianni, Jason Shepherd and Eric Simone for their take on “The Future of Algorithms: Whose Bias Is It Anyway?” Thank you to today's sponsor: www.nordvpn.com/TechRev
Algorithms are buzzing all around us, but exactly what and where are they – and how will they continue to impact each of us – for good or not so good? The Buzz 1: “Algorithm: Word used by programmers when they don't want to explain what they did.” (Book title on amazon.com) The Buzz 2: “The algorithms that orchestrate our ads are starting to orchestrate our lives.” (Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org) The Buzz 3: An algorithm is a set of step-by-step procedures, or a set of rules to follow, for completing a specific task or solving a particular problem. The word ‘algorithm' was first coined in the 9th century by a Persian mathematician whose latinized name was 'Algoritmi'. Today…algorithms determine the people we meet on Tinder, recognize your face to open the keyless door or fire you from your job when your productivity drops.” (towardsdatascience.com) The Buzz 4: “Human-sourced bias inevitably creeps into AI models, and as a result, algorithms reinforce human prejudices…Google Images search for 'CEO' produced 11 percent women, even though 27 percent of United States chief executives are women. We'll ask Jim Sterne, Drew Ianni, Jason Shepherd and Eric Simone for their take on “The Future of Algorithms: Whose Bias Is It Anyway?” Thank you to today's sponsor: www.nordvpn.com/TechRev
Algorithms are buzzing all around us, but exactly what and where are they – and how will they continue to impact each of us – for good or not so good? The Buzz 1: “Algorithm: Word used by programmers when they don't want to explain what they did.” (Book title on amazon.com) The Buzz 2: “The algorithms that orchestrate our ads are starting to orchestrate our lives.” (Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org) The Buzz 3: An algorithm is a set of step-by-step procedures, or a set of rules to follow, for completing a specific task or solving a particular problem. The word ‘algorithm' was first coined in the 9th century by a Persian mathematician whose latinized name was 'Algoritmi'. Today…algorithms determine the people we meet on Tinder, recognize your face to open the keyless door or fire you from your job when your productivity drops.” (towardsdatascience.com) The Buzz 4: “Human-sourced bias inevitably creeps into AI models, and as a result, algorithms reinforce human prejudices…Google Images search for 'CEO' produced 11 percent women, even though 27 percent of United States chief executives are women. We'll ask Jim Sterne, Drew Ianni, Jason Shepherd and Eric Simone for their take on “The Future of Algorithms: Whose Bias Is It Anyway?”
每日英語跟讀 Ep.K280: We Should All Know Less About Each Other In 2017, after the shock of Brexit and then Donald Trump's election, Christopher Bail, a professor of sociology and public policy at Duke University, set out to study what would happen if you forced people out of their social media echo chambers. 2017年，經歷過英國脫離歐盟與川普當選美國總統的震撼之後，美國杜克大學社會學與公共政策教授貝爾開始研究，逼迫人們脫離社群媒體同溫層會發生什麼事。 Bail is the director of The Polarization Lab, a team of social scientists, computer scientists and statisticians who study how technology amplifies political divisions. He and his colleagues recruited 1,220 Twitter users who identified as either Democrats or Republicans, offering to pay them $11 to follow a particular Twitter account for a month. Although the participants didn't know it, the Democrats were assigned to follow a bot account that retweeted messages from prominent Republican politicians and thinkers. The Republicans, in turn, followed a bot account that retweeted Democrats. 貝爾是「兩極化實驗室」主任，這個實驗室是社會科學家、電腦科學家和統計學家組成的團隊，研究科技如何擴大政治分歧。他和同事招募1220名自認是民主黨人或共和黨人的推特網友，要求每人關注一個特定推特帳號一個月，並各發11美元酬勞。受試者並不知道規則，但實際上，民主黨人會被指派關注一個轉發知名共和黨政治人物和意見領袖推文的機器人帳號，共和黨人則關注轉發民主黨意見領袖推文的機器人帳號。 At the time, a lot of concern about the internet's role in political polarization revolved around what digital activist Eli Pariser once called filter bubbles, a term for the way an increasingly personalized internet traps people in self-reinforcing information silos. 當時關於網路激化政治對立的作用，關注焦點集中在數位社會活動家帕里瑟曾說的「過濾泡泡」，這個詞描述日益個人化的網路內容會把人困在不斷自我增強的資訊孤島。 “The echo chamber idea was reaching its kind of apex in terms of its public influence,” Bail told me. “It nicely explained how Trump had won, how Brexit had happened.” Bail's team wanted to see if getting people to engage with ideas they wouldn't otherwise encounter might moderate their views. 貝爾告訴我：「同溫層這個概念對公眾的影響力已達頂峰，能很好地解釋為何川普當選，為何英國脫歐。」貝爾團隊想探究，讓人們接觸平常不會接觸的觀念，能否使他們的觀念變得溫和。 The opposite happened. “Nobody became more moderate,” Bail said. “Republicans in particular became much more conservative when they followed the Democratic bot, and Democrats became a little bit more liberal.” 結果適得其反。貝爾說：「沒有人變溫和，尤其是共和黨人，關注民主黨機器人帳號後變得保守許多，民主黨人則變得有點更偏向自由派。」 Social media platforms have long justified themselves with the idea that connecting people would make the world more open and humane. In offline life, after all, meeting lots of different kinds of people tends to broaden the mind, turning caricatures into complicated individuals. It's understandable that many once believed the same would be true on the internet. 社群媒體平台一直為自己辯護，他們的說法是連結人們能讓世界變得更開放仁慈。畢竟在離線世界，與形形色色的人相遇通常會讓心胸更開闊，會使原本心目中的荒謬人物變成複雜的個體。可以理解，許多人一度以為在線上也一樣。 But it turns out there's nothing intrinsically good about connection, especially online. 但結果是，連結本質上沒什麼好的，尤其在線上。 On the internet, exposure to people unlike us often makes us hate them, and that hatred increasingly structures our politics. 在網上，接觸不像我們的人往往會使我們恨他們，而這種恨意日益成為我們政治的結構。 The social corrosion caused by Facebook and other platforms isn't a side effect of bad management and design decisions. It's baked into social media itself. 臉書等平台引發的社會團結被侵蝕現象，並非管理不當和設計決策失誤引起的出乎意料後果，而是與社群媒體本身密不可分。Source article: https://udn.com/news/story/6904/5919797
Eli Pariser has had a long and distinguished career in tech entrepreneurship and is currently running the organisation New Public, which is trying to help thinkers, designers and technologists build the digital public spaces of the future. He helped set up MoveOn and Avaaz, which were pioneers in the digital organising space in the early days of the internet. He coined the term 'filter bubble', and wrote the New York Times best-selling book of the same name. In this episode Eli speaks about some of the trends that have led to our current situation in terms of division, his sacred value of curiosity, his love for democracy, and why we need to build shared public digital spaces in the same way that we have public parks. Read the full transcript here: https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2021/12/22/eli-pariser-on-curiosity-the-value-of-democracy-and-why-we-need-public-digital-spaces We are taking a break next week for Christmas but our next episode will be released on Wednesday 5th January.
There are two segments in this week's show: First- Ifeoma Ozoma is the Founder and Principal of Earthseed, a consulting firm advising individuals, organizations, and companies on tech accountability, public policy and health misinformation. A tech policy expert, Ifeoma is a co-sponsor of the Silenced No More Act. The legislation, authored by CA State Senator Connie Leyva and recently signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, allows everyone in California to share information about discrimination or harassment they have faced on the job, even after signing an NDA. Ifeoma led an initiative to provide tech whistleblowers with needed resources called the Tech Worker Handbook, and is now leading a project to scale the protections in the Silenced No More Act to more companies and workers via shareholder activism. Second- this week, the Filter Bubble Transparency Act was unveiled in the House of Representatives. The proposed legislation would require “require that internet platforms give users the option to engage with a platform without being manipulated by algorithms driven by user-specific data.” To explore the ideas behind the proposed legislation, I spoke to two people: Anil Dash, CEO of Glitch and an entrepreneur and writer; and Eli Pariser, Co-Director of New Public, an activist, an entrepreneur and author of the 2011 bestseller The Filter Bubble.
Talia Stroud from the University of Texas joins us to talk about her project Civic Signals, a project reimagining the Internet as a public space. She walks us through what's wrong with the type of speech currently rewarded by Facebook and Twitter, and what it might look like to promote civic speech instead. Recorded August, 2020. Visit our episode web page for links to Civic Signals' website and newsletter, and Eli Pariser's TED Talk.
Right now we interact with the public more online than offline. But these digital spaces are not designed with our collective wellbeing in mind. Baratunde speaks with Eli Pariser, Co-founder of New_Public, about how we are missing intentionally designed digital public spaces, like libraries and park spaces online, and they discuss New_Public's NEW! design playbook for creating platforms that bring us together instead of tear us apart. Guest: Eli Pariser Bio: Author, Activist, and Entrepreneur, Co-Founder of New_Public Online: New_Public website; @elipariser on Twitter; Eli's website Go to howtocitizen.com for transcripts, our email newsletter, and your citizen practice. ACTIONS - PERSONALLY REFLECT Public Interactions Reflect on some recent online interactions you've had with total strangers on social media. Now think about some interactions you've had with strangers offline, maybe in a public park or library. How did each experience make you feel? Did you prefer one over the other? Why? - BECOME INFORMED Check out New_Public's work Check out New_Public's new design playbook for building digital public spaces of the future. It was built from two years of global research and feedback. Also, read Eli's thought-provoking article in the Atlantic about envisioning a future online that serves the public good and supports a culture of democracy. - PUBLICLY PARTICIPATE Join a niche, online community forum. Consider joining or starting your own online community where you can practice some of the 14 signals using a platform like Hylo or MightyNetworks. Most of the signals don't require code as much as thoughtful governance, culture, and norm-setting to create a different kind of online space that helps us citizen. Said another way, try finding or creating an online community in a space that isn't a giant shopping mall. MORE WAYS TO CONNECT & SUPPORT Leave a review and rating. It makes a huge difference with the algorithmic overlords! Find us at @howtocitizen on Instagram and tag us in your actions. Visit our non-Bezos bookshop. Subscribe to Baratunde's weekly Recommentunde Newsletter, his column on Puck, or you can even text him right now at 202-894-8844 Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
Hear it Here - https://bit.ly/GeniusHollins Charles Darwin, the naturalist whose theories on evolution and the development of species had wide-ranging effects on scientific study that persist today, was not a genius. Darwin was, however, relentless about learning. He believed that to have any authority on a topic one needed to develop deep expertise on it, and expertise doesn't happen overnight (or in a month, or in a year). The point is that Darwin is regarded as one of the ultimate examples of the importance of hard work and diligence in surpassing natural intelligence. Darwin's method was so all-encompassing that he even gave deep attention to information that countered or challenged his own theories. This approach forms the backbone of his golden rule as he expressed it in his autobiography. Darwin knew that his own instinctual thinking could be a hindrance to finding the truth as much as it could help, and he established a way to ensure he wasn't missing out on any information. He didn't filter out information that didn't support his beliefs; he was utterly immune to confirmation bias. As you can imagine, it takes quite a bit of self-discipline to constantly double-check yourself. Internet activist Eli Pariser noticed how online search algorithms encourage our human tendency to grab hold of everything that confirms the beliefs we already hold, while quietly discounting or ignoring information that doesn't align with those beliefs. The results are disastrous: a complete erosion of civic discourse, intellectual isolation, narcissism and self-centeredness, and a lack of everyday empathy, as well as the real distortion that comes with believing that the little world we create for ourselves is the world. We need to constantly be on guard for any stubbornness and rigidity in ourselves, or any narrow, unchallenged convictions that shut us out of gaining a deeper, wider, and more nuanced vision of the great big world around us. Are we willing to risk pursuing an unpopular avenue of thought, or suspend the judgment of others in favor of coming to our own conclusions. It's easier said than done. If we are to piece together ideas that are sound and worth something, we often have to do so one step at a time, with many corrections along the way, and with as much stamina as we can manage. Hear it Here - http://bit.ly/GeniusHollins #AnalyzeDeeply #CreativelySolveProblems #Darwin #Darwinian #EOWilson #GoldenRule #Hollins #MentalModels #PeterHollins #CharlesDarwin #ThinkLikeaGenius #TheScienceofSelf #RussellNewton #NewtonMG
Not too long ago, the Internet was seen as humanity's great hope. Today it feels more like our undoing. We see social media amplifying negative voices and harassment and producing political partisanship and interpersonal dysfunction, and it seems like no one knows to fix it—except maybe these two. Today we're joined by Danielle Keats Citron, a leading expert on information privacy, free speech, and civil rights, and Eli Pariser, co-founder of Upworthy and the author of "The Filter Bubble," who now leads the New_ Public project. Together they share their views on the Internet's current trajectory and how we might course correct. What Could Go Right? is produced by The Progress Network and The Podglomerate.
Congress has conducted at least eleven bipartisan hearings to investigate the security failures that permitted a mob of American citizens to riot inside the Capitol Building and successfully disrupt Congress while they certified the 2020 election results on January 6, 2021. In this episode, hear key highlights pulled from over 30 hours of testimony to understand exactly what happened that day. Executive Producer: Forrest Pttman Please Support Congressional Dish – Quick Links Click here to contribute monthly or a lump sum via PayPal Click here to support Congressional Dish for each episode via Patreon Send Zelle payments to: Donation@congressionaldish.com Send Venmo payments to: @Jennifer-Briney Send Cash App payments to: $CongressionalDish or Donation@congressionaldish.com Use your bank's online bill pay function to mail contributions to: 5753 Hwy 85 North, Number 4576, Crestview, FL 32536 Please make checks payable to Congressional Dish Thank you for supporting truly independent media! Recommended Congressional Dish Episodes Q: Into the Storm, HBO CD226: Lame Duck Bills H.R.1090 - District of Columbia National Guard Home Rule Act S.964 - Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021 H.R.4192 - Confronting the Threat of Domestic Terrorism Act S.2043 - Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act H.R.4187 - Domestic Terrorism Penalties Act of 2019 Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act U.S. Department of the Treasury Articles/Documents Article: 587 people have been charged in the Capitol insurrection so far. This searchable table shows them all. by Madison Hall, Skye Gould, Rebecca Harrington, Jacob Shamsian, Azmi Haroun, Taylor Ardrey, and Erin Snodgrass, Insider, July 23, 2021 Article: Tampa man, 20, admits intending to block Congress with Oath Keepers in new Capitol riot guilty plea by The Washington Post, July 20, 2021 Article: Tampa man, 20, admits intending to block Congress with Oath Keepers in new Capitol riot guilty plea by The Washington Post, July 19, 2021 Article: What were the Capitol rioters thinking on Jan. 6? by The Washington Post, July 19, 2021 Article: “You're Gonna Have a Fucking War”: Mark Milley's Fight to Stop Trump from Striking Iran by Susan B. Glasser, The New Yorker, July 15, 2021 Article: To Trump's hard-core supporters, his rallies weren't politics. They were life. by The Washington Post, July 15, 2021 Article: Michael Flynn posts video featuring QAnon slogans By Marshall Cohen, CNN, July 7, 2021 Article: Latest alleged Oath Keeper arrested in Capitol riot turned over body armor and firearm by The Washington Post, July 2, 2021 Article: ‘Zip Tie Guy' and His Mother Plead Not Guilty to New Charges in U.S. Capitol Siege by Aaron Keller, Law & Crime, June 23, 2021 Article: Man charged with bringing molotov cocktails to Capitol on Jan. 6 has Texas militia ties, contacted Ted Cruz's office, court papers allege by The Washington Post, May 24, 2021 Article: Maryland man, indicted for bringing gun to Capitol riot, could face decades in prison by Jordan Fischer, Eric Flack, Stephanie Wilson, WUSA9, May 18, 2021 Article: DC medical examiner confirms causes of death of 4 who died in Jan. 6 Capitol riot By Kelli Dugan, Cox Media Group National Content Desk, 11NEWS, April 7, 2021 Article: The lawyer for the 'QAnon Shaman' wants to use Trump's speech before the insurrection as part of his defense by Jacob Shamsian, Insider, March 1, 2021 Two Members of the Proud Boys Indicted for Conspiracy, Other Charges Related to the Jan. 6 Riots By United States Department of Justice, January 29, 2021 Article: Former Army captain arrested after live-streaming Capitol riot By Kyle Rempfer, AirForceTimes, January 22, 2021 Article: 'Trump said I could': One possible legal defense for accused rioters. By Teri Kanefield and Mark Reichel, The Washington Post, January 11, 2021 Article: Did 5 People Die During Jan. 6 Capitol Riot? by Alex Kasprak, Snopes, January 7, 2021 Article: FBI focuses on whether some Capitol rioters intended to harm lawmakers or take hostages by The Washington Post, January 7, 2021 Article: Trump's supporters think they're being patriotic. And that's the problem. by Christine Adams, The Washington Post, January 7, 2021 Article: Capitol riot: Army vet who tended bar accused by FBI of conspiring in insurrection by AMSNBS, 2021 Article: All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory by The Washington Post, January 3, 2021 Article: 'I just want to find 11,780 votes': In extraordinary hour-long call, Trump pressures Georgia secretary of state to recalculate the vote in his favor by The Washington Post, January 3, 2021 Article: Capitol riots by The Washington Post, 2021 Article: Another MAGA Rally To Take Place In D.C. On The Day Congress Declares Election Results by Matt Blitz, WAMU 88.5, November 27, 2020 Article: Trump's Election Attack Ends December 14—Whether He Knows It or Not by Lily Hay Newman, Wired, November 27, 2020 Additional Resources U.S.A. v. Mark Grods U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, June 28, 2021 Defense Timeline for January 6th Examining the U.S. Capitol Attack: A Review of the Security, Planning and Response Failures on January 6 Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Committee on Rules and Administration U.S.A. v. Christopher Alberts U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, January 27, 2021 U.S.A. v. Lonnie Leroy Coffman U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, January 11, 2021 U.S.A. v. Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl and Charles Donohue U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, January 8, 2021 Video: Seeking Information: Pipe Bombs in Washington, D.C. F.B.I., January 5, 2021 Sound Clip Sources Hearing: USCP OVERSIGHT FOLLOWING JANUARY 6 ATTACK, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, June 16, 2021 Watch on C-SPAN Witnesses: Michael Bolton Inspector General of the US Capitol Police Transcript: 36:40 Michael Bolton: To me the biggest failure is that because we have allowed certain elements within the Capitol Police to be autonomous, they conduct their own training, okay? That's the issue. Whereas you if you have a Training Services Bureau and let's call it an office of training that is fully incorporated, they handle all the training they conducted. They make sure you get the training, they hold your officials accountable, your people doing your training, guess what, we're sending a letter to the chief and they can no longer work until they get required or what have you. Hearing: The Capitol Insurrection: Unexplained Delays and Unanswered Questions (Part II), House Committee on Oversight and Reform, June 15, 2021 Watch on Youtube Witnesses: Lt. General Walter Piatt Director of the Army Staff General Charles Flynn Commanding General of the US Army Pacific Chris Wray FBI Director Transcript: 30:41 Lt. General Walter Piatt: My involvement with our response to this emergency began shortly after entering the Secretary of the Army's office at 2:20pm to provide a report of a suspicious package. While I was there, a panic call came in reporting several explosions in the city. To understand the situation, to indentify, what was needed from the army Secretary McCarthy convened a conference call. During this call DC and Capitol authorities frantically requested urgent and immediate support to the Capitol. We all immediately understood the gravity of the situation. Secretary McCarthy went down the hall to seek approval from the Acting Secretary of Defense. Before departing, she directed me to have the staff prepare a response. I communicated this on the conference call. But those are more and more convinced that I was denying their request, which I did not have the authority to do. Despite clearly stating three times that we are not denying your request, we need to prepare a plan for when the Secretary of the Army gains approval. 1:46:02 General Charles Flynn: There's four things in planning that we could have done. And we should have done. The first one there should have been clearly a lead federal agency designated. The second one is we should have had an integrated security plan. The third one is and much of this has been talked about already is information and intelligence sharing on criminal activities before the sixth of January. And then the fourth one would have been, we should have pre-federalized certain National Guard forces so that they could have immediately been moved to the Capitol and had those authorities in place before this happened. 2:09:30 Rep. Kweisi Mfume (MD): So that's what we are trying to do, keep our republic and to keep it from those who tried to overthrow this government who wanted to kill members of Congress, who wanted to hang Mike Pence. 2:43:37 Rep. Michael Cloud (TX): You mentioned domestic terrorism that this would qualify as that, would the riots that we saw across the cities for nights and nights and weeks and weeks on even months on end, qualify as domestic terrorism as well? Chris Wray: We've been treating both as domestic terrorism and investigating both through our Joint Terrorism Task Force. 2:51:19 Chris Wray: Among the things that we've taken away from this experience are a few. One, as you heard me say in response to an earlier question, we need to develop better human sources, right, because if we can get better human sources, then we can better separate the wheat from the chaff in social media. Two, we need better data analytics. The volume, as you said, the volume of this stuff is, is just massive, and the ability to have the right tools to get through it and sift through it in a way that is, again, separating the wheat from the chaff is key. And then the third point that I would make is we are rapidly having to contend with the issue of encryption. So what I mean by that is, yes, there might be chatter on social media. But then what we have found and this is true in relation to January 6th, in spades, but it was also true over the summer in some of the violence that occurred there. Individuals will switch over to encrypted platforms for the really significant, really revealing communications. And so we've got to figure out a way to get into those communications or we're going to be constantly playing catch up in our effort to separate as I said, the wheat from the chaff on social media. 3:01:00 Chris Wray: We consider the attack on capital on January 6 to be a form of domestic terrorism. 3:16:00 Chris Wray: As for social media, I think there's, there's it's understandable that there's a lot of confusion on this subject we do not we have very specific policies that Ben at the Department for a long time that govern our ability to use social media and when we have an authorized purpose and proper predication, there's a lot of things we can do on social media. And we do do and we aggressively do but what we can't do, what we can't do on social media is without proper predication, and an authorized purpose, just monitor, just in case on social media. Now, if the policies should be changed to reflect that, that might be one of the important lessons learned coming out of this whole experience. But that's not something that that currently the FBI has the either the authority or certainly the resources frankly, to do. 4:06:00 Rep. Pat Fallon (TX): Has anyone been charged with inciting an insurrection? Chris Wray: I think I responded to an earlier question. I don't believe that that has been one of the charges us so far. But again, with that many cases, I want to build a little room for the fact that I might not know all the cases. Rep. Pat Fallon (TX): So right as of right now, the answer would be no, fair to say? Chris Wray: That's my understanding. Rep. Pat Fallon (TX): Okay. Has anybody been charged with sedition to your knowledge? Chris Wray: Same answer. Rep. Pat Fallon (TX): Okay. No, again, Has anybody been charged with treason? Chris Wray: I don't believe so. Rep. Pat Fallon (TX): Okay, has anyone been charged with illegal possession of a firearm inside the Capitol? On that day? Chris Wray: I believe there has been at least one instance of someone arrested with a firearm in the Capitol. And there have been a number of arrests of individuals either en route to the Capitol or near the Capitol for the for the siege. 4:11:00 Rep. James Comer (KY): On December 31, Mayor browser requested DC National Guard assistance with the planned protest for January fifth and sixth, correct? Lt. General Walter Piatt: Correct, sir. Rep. James Comer (KY):And was that request for assistant ultimately approved by the Secretary of Army? Lt. General Walter Piatt: It was approved by the Acting Secretary of Defense as well. Rep. James Comer (KY):Were restrictions placed on that authority upon the request of Mayor browser and if so, what were those restrictions? Lt. General Walter Piatt: She had requested that they be unarmed and it did not take a place in any law enforcement activities. Hearing: The Capitol Insurrection: Unexplained Delays and Unanswered Questions, Committee on Oversight and Reform, May 12, 2021 Watch on Youtube Witnesses: Chris Miller Former Acting Secretary of Defense Robert Contee Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department Transcript: 00:22 Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY): Today the committee will examine one of the darkest days in our nation's history. The January 6th insurrection at the United States Capitol. On that day, a violent mob incited by shameless lies told by a defeated president launched the worst attack on our republic since the Civil War. 00:42 Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY): We watched as the temple of our democracy, a building whereas familiar with as our own homes, was overrun by a mob bent on murdering the Vice President and members of Congress. 21:21 Chris Miller: I want to remind you and the American public that during that time, there was irresponsible commentary by the media about a possible military coup or that advisors the president were advocating the declaration of martial law. I was also very cognizant of the fears and concerns about the prior use of the military in June 2020 response to protests in the White House. And just before the electoral college certification 10 former Secretaries of Defense signed an op-ed published in The Washington Post warning of the dangers of politicizing inappropriately using the military. No such thing was going to occur and my watch, but these concerns and hysteria about them nonetheless factored into my decisions regarding the appropriate and limited use of our armed forces to support civilian law enforcement during the electoral college certification. My obligation to the nation was to prevent a constitutional crisis. Historically, military responses to domestic protests have resulted in violations of American civil rights and even in the case the Kent State protests of the Vietnam War, tragic deaths. In short, I fervently believe the military should not be utilized in such scenarios, other than as a last resort, and only when all other assets had been expended. 26:02 Chris Miller: I stand by every decision I made on January 6th and the following days. I want to emphasize that our nation's armed forces are to be deployed for domestic law enforcement only when all civilian assets are expended and only as the absolute last resort. To use them for domestic law enforcement in any other manner is contrary to the constitution and a threat to the Republic. I ask you this consider what the response in Congress in the media had been if I had unilaterally deployed 1000s of troops into Washington DC that morning against the Express wishes of the Mayor and the Capitol Police who indicated they were prepared. 40:52 Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY): Mr. Miller, you were the Acting Secretary of Defense on January 6th, did President Trump as the commander in chief of the US Armed Forces call you during the January 6 attack to ensure the capital was being secured? Mr. Miller? Chris Miller: No, I had all the authority I needed from the president to fulfill my constitutional duties. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY): Did you speak with President Trump at all as the attack was unfolding? Chris Miller: On January 6th? yes. Chris Miller: No, I did not. I didn't need to I had all the authority I needed and knew what had to happen. I knew what had to happen. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY): Did you speak with Vice President Pence during the attack? Yes or no? Chris Miller: Yes. Rep. Carolyn Maloney (NY): According to a defense department timeline, it was Vice President Pence and not President Trump, who called during the siege to say the Capitol was not secure. And to give you the direction to quote, 'clear the Capitol.' What specifically did Vice President Pence say to you that day? Chris Miller: Vice President's not in the chain of command, he did not direct me to clear the capital. I discussed very briefly with him the situation. He provided insights based on his presence there, and I notified him or I informed him that by that point, the District of Columbia National Guard was being fully mobilized and was in coordination with local and federal law enforcement to assist in clearing the Capitol. 1:05:28 Chris Miller: I think I'd like to modify my original assessment. Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): Why am I not surprised about that? Chris Miller: Based on as Chief Contee said, we are getting more information by the day by the minute about what happened and the highlight some other observations that were made. It's clear now that there were organized... Although we're going to find out through the Department of Justice process in the law, and the legal system, it seems clear that there was some sort of conspiracy where there were organized assault elements that intended to assault the Capitol that day. Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): Reclaiming my time, I'm just asking you the same question you've answered before. Did did the President's remarks incite members to march, the people in the crowd to march on the Capitol, or did they not? Chris Miller: Well, he clearly said offered that they should march on the Capitol. So it goes without saying that his statement resulted in that... Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): Reclaiming my time. Let me just share with the committee what you have said before. This is your quote. This is your quote. What anyone? Would anybody have marched on the Capitol and tried to overrun the Capitol without the president speech? I think it's pretty much definitive. That would not have happened. Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): I think now, I would say that this is not the unitary factor at all. What's that? Chris Miller: I would like to offer I have reassessed. It was not the unitary factor at all. There was no...it's seems clear there was an organized conspiracy with assault elements. Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): In your testimony for today. Reclaiming my time again, for your written testimony for today. For today, this morning, you stated the following about the President's quote, I personally believe his comments encouraged the protesters that day. So this is that this is that there's a very recent reversal of your of your testimony. Chris Miller: Absolutely not. That's ridiculous. Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): You're ridiculous. Chris Miller: Thank you for your, your thoughts. I also want to highlight... Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA): No wait a minute, reclaiming my time, reclaiming my time. 2:06:30 Rep. Glenn Grothman (WI): Has there been any progress made it all on on? Who would have put these bombs there? Robert Contee: No arrests have been made no suspects identified, working without partners on the federal side. There's been surveillance videos that have been released publicly showing that individual placing the pipe bombs, but no arrests have been made at this point. 3:01:05 Rep. Andrew Clyde (GA): Watching the TV footage of those who entered the Capitol and walked through Statuary Hall showed people in an orderly fashion staying between the stanchions and ropes, taking videos and pictures. You know, if you didn't know the TV footage was a video from January the sixth, you would actually think it was a normal tourist visit. 3:12:18 Sen. Hank Johnson (GA): Were you ordered to delay deployment of troops? Chris Miller: 110% Absolutely not. No, that is not the case. 4:41:42 Chris Miller: If we had a valid request and a necessary requests from your body, I guarantee you that the Department of Defense would have been there in strength as required. Rep. Mike Quigley (IL): So when you would acknowledge we lost the battle we lost for the first time since 1814... Chris Miller: Horrifying. Rep. Mike Quigley (IL): And it was everybody else's fault but DoD. Chris Miller: I absolutely disagree with the statement that it was... Rep. Mike Quigley (IL) I'm paraphrasing you the only way that makes sense when you say 'you wouldn't do anything differently, you wouldn't do anything differently.' Okay, that implies what I'm saying that it was everybody else's fault in your mind, because it was a catastrophic failure. Chris Miller: And I just had an obligation to protect and defend the Constitution and guarantee that the armed forces were used appropriately, and not in a manner that would be seen as extraconstitutional. Rep. Mike Quigley (IL) Look, the Constitution is not a treaty of surrender. It affords you the opportunity to do what's necessary to defend the people in the democracy of the United States. I mean, if looked upon the destruction afterwards, looking back, you say, 'well, at least I defended the Constitution' is another perverse way of looking at this. Nothing was DoDs fault. And at least you did, in your own mind, defend what you thought was right for the Constitution. Never mind how many people got hurt and how much damage was done to our government in the meantime. Chris Miller: I will absolutely take that on and take that as a compliment. Because the armed forces of the United States was completely prepared and ready to respond to any valid request from any department or agency or local or federal law enforcement office. Rep. Mike Quigley (IL) You lost and you don't have the Intellectual fortitude to own up to your part of the responsibility. And I get it, a lot of people screwed up, you're one of them. I yield scaled back. Madam Chairman. Chris Miller: I respectfully disagree in that. Rep. Mike Quigley (IL) I was in the room, you weren't. Hearing: State and Local Responses to Domestic Terrorism: The Attack on the U.S. Capitol and Beyond, House Committee on Homeland Security: Subcommittee on Intelligence and Counterterrorism, March 24, 2021 Watch on Youtube Witnesses: Dana Nessel Attorney General, Michigan Aaron Ford Attorney General, Nevada John Chisholm District Attorney, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. Transcript: 07:19 Rep. Elissa Slotkin (MI): The post 9/11 era of security where the threats come from abroad is over. In the 20 years of the post 9/11 era, they came to an end on January 6th, the new reality is that we have to come to terms with is that it's our extremists here at home, seeking to explain internal divisions that pose the greatest threat. Hearing: JANUARY 6 ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and Committee on Rules and Administration, March 3, 2021 Day 2 (March 3, 2021) Day 2, Part 2 (March 3, 2021) Witnesses: Robert Salesses Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Assistant Secretary for Homeland Defense and Global Security at the U.S. Department of Defense Major General William Walker Commanding General of the DC National Guard Jill Sanborn Assistant Director, Counterterrorism Division Federal Bureau of Investigation U.S. Department of Justice Transcript: 06:42 Sen. Gary Peters (MI): But the January 6 attack must mark a turning point. There can be no question that the domestic terrorist threat and cluding violence driven by white supremacy and anti government groups is the gravest terrorist threat to our homeland security. Moving forward, the FBI, which is tasked with leading our counterterrorism efforts, and the Department of Homeland Security, which ensures that state and local law enforcement understands the threats that American communities face must address this deadly threat with the same focus and resources and analytical rigor that they apply to foreign threats such as ISIS and Al Qaeda. 30:19 Robert Salesses: Over the weekend of January 2nd and third, my staff contacted the Secret Service, the Park Police, the marshal service, the FBI, the Capitol Police to determine if they planned to request DoD assistance. None of these law enforcement agencies indicated a need for DoD or DC National Guard Support. 30:45 Robert Salesses: After consultation with the Department of Justice, the Acting Secretary of Defense approved the DC government request for National Guard personnel to support 30 traffic control points and six metro stations from January 5th to the sixth. The Acting Secretary also authorized a 40 person quick reaction force to be readied at Joint Base Andrews. 31:17 Robert Salesses: On January 5, the Acting Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army received a letter from the mayor of DC, stating MPD is prepared and coordinated with its federal partners, namely the Park Police, the Capitol Police and the Secret Service. Based on these communications with federal and local civilian authorities DoD determined that no additional military support was required on January 5th, and 6th. 32:20 Robert Salesses: At approximately 2:30pm, the Secretary of the Army met with the Acting Secretary of Defense and other senior leaders of the Defense Department. After this meeting, the Acting Secretary of Defense determined that all available forces of the DC National Guard were required to reinforce the DC Metropolitan Police and the US Capitol Police and ordered the full mobilization of the DC National Guard at 3:04pm. 33:08 Robert Salesses: After reviewing the DC National Guard's missions, equipping and responsibilities to be performed at the Capitol Complex and supported the Metropolitan Police and Capitol Police, and conferring with the DC Metropolitan Police at their headquarters, at 4:10pm, the Secretary of the Army received the Acting Secretary of Defense's approval at 4:32 and ordered the DC National Guard forces to depart the armory for the Capitol Complex 49:59 Major General William Walker: The District of Columbia National Guard provides support to the Metropolitan Police Department, the United States Park Police, the United States Secret Service, and other federal and district law enforcement agencies in response to planned rallies, marches, protest, and other large scale first amendment activity on a routine basis. The standard component of such support is the stand up of a off site quick reaction for us, an element of guardsmen held in reserve with civil disturbance response equipment, helmets, shields, battons, etc. They are postured to quickly respond to an urgent and immediate need for assistance by civil authorities. The Secretary of the Army's January 5th letter to me withheld that authority for me to employ a quick reaction force. Additionally, the Secretary of the Army's memorandum to me required that a concept of operation be submitted to him before the employment of a quick reaction force. I found that requirement to be unusual, as was the requirement to seek approval to move guardsmen supporting the Metropolitan Police Department to move from one traffic control point to another. 54:50 Major General William Walker: So the memo was unusual in that it required me to seek authorization from the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of Defense, to essentially even protect my guardsmen. So no civil disturbance equipment could be authorized, unless it was came from the Secretary of Defense, now the Secretary of the Army, to his credit, did tell me that I could have force protection equipment with the guardsmen. So we do have helmets. shin guards, vest, we did have that with us. But that came from the Secretary of the Army. The Secretary of Defense told me I needed his permission to to escalate to have that kind of protection. 55:50 Major General William Walker: What it says, without my personal authorization, the District of Columbia National Guard has not authorized the following to be issued weapons, ammunition bayonets, batons or ballistic protection equipment such as helmets and body armor. Now, again, to be clear, the Secretary of the Army told me to go ahead and issue that equipment. So we never were going to have weapons or ammunition and we no longer have bayonets. But we do have ballistic protection equipment, helmets body armor, and so I did have that with each guardsmen. 57:02 Major General William Walker: And at that time, Chief Conte and Chief Soon passionately pleaded for District of Columbia National Guard to get to the Capitol with all deliberate speed. So the Army senior leaders did not think that it'd look good. It would be a good optic, they further stated that it could incite the crowd. So their best military advice would be to the Secretary of the Army who could not get on the call. So we wanted the Secretary of the Army to join the call, but he was not available. We were told that he was with the Secretary of Defense and not available. But the Army Senior leadership, expressed to Chief Conte, Chief Sohn, Dr. Mitchell, the deputy mayor and others on the call, that it would not be their best military advice to have uniform guardsmen on the Capitol. 58:26 Sen. Gary Peters (MI): General Walker was the issue of optics ever brought up by army leadership when the DC National Guard was deployed during the summer of 2020. Was that discussed? Major General William Walker: It was never discussed. The week of June it was never discussed July 4, when we were supporting the city was never discussed August 28th when we supported the city. Sen. Gary Peters (MI): Did you think that was unusual? Major General William Walker: I did. 1:00:32 Major General William Walker: So I had them ready to go shortly after the phone call. So I brought, at 1500, I directed that the quick reaction for us that was based at Andrews Air Force Base, leave the base, get to the armory at all deliberate speed. I had a police escort bring them to the armory. They returned to the Armory in about 20 minutes. So we had them sitting there waiting. And then, in anticipation of a green light, a go, we put guardsmen on buses, we brought them inside the armory, so nobody would see them putting on the equipment and getting on the buses, and then we just waited to get the approval. And that's why we were able to get to the Capitol in about 18 minutes. Sen. Gary Peters (MI): What time were they on the buses Ready to go? Do you recall? Major General William Walker: By five o'clock, but at five o'clock, I decided, hey, you know, there's got to be an approval coming. So get on the buses, get the equipment on, get on the buses and just wait. And then a few minutes after that we did get the approval. I was on a secure video conference when the army leadership conveyed to me that the Secretary of Defense had authorized the employment of the National Guard at the Capitol. So my timeline has 1708, 5:08pm is when is when we wrote down that we had approval and read was about eight people in the office with me when I got that. Sen. Gary Peters (MI): How many guardsmen were ready. You said write a video earlier and they have gotten 155. So you could have sent 155 much, much earlier, what would have been the impact of sending those 155 right around that two o'clock timeframe? Major General William Walker: Well, based on my experience with the summer and I have 19 years, I have 39 years in the National Guard, and I was in the Florida guard Hurricane Andrew I've been involved in civil disturbances. So I believe that number could have made a difference. We could have helped extend the perimeter and help push back the crowd. 1:13:49 Robert Salesses: The only decision makers on the sixth of January were the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy. There was a chain of command from the Secretary of Defense, to Secretary McCarthy to General Walker. That was the chain of command. 1:15:39 Sen. Rob Portman (OH): This morning, you have testified that you received this letter from our secretary McCarthy on January 5, so just the day before the attack on the Capitol. In that letter, did Secretary McCarthy prohibit you from employing the National Guard's quick reaction force without his authorization? Major General William Walker: So I have the letter in front of me, and his letter does not but it is the Secretary of Defense says that I have to use it as a last resort. But the Secretary of the Army told me and it's, I have the letter that I couldn't not use the quick reaction force. It would it would he with I'll just read it. Yeah, 'I withhold authority to approve employment of the District of Columbia National Guard quick reaction force, and will do so only as a last resort, in response to a request from an appropriate civil authority. I will require a concept of operation prior to authorizing employment of a civil- of a quick reaction for it. 1:16:05 *Major General William Walker:** Now a quick reaction force normally is a command was tool to go help either a civilian agency, but more typically to help the National Guardsmen who are out there in need, need assistance. 1:16:58 Major General William Walker: Just to be clear, the Secretary of Defense said I could use it as a last resort, right. But the Secretary of the Army says that I could only use it after he gave me permission. And only then after a concept of operation. Sen. Rob Portman (OH): Right, and we talked about the chain of command earlier, so your chain of command is both of these gentlemen. In other words, you you didn't have the authority to deploy that quick reaction force based on either the letter or the earlier memo that went from the Secretary of Defense, Acting Secretary defense to the Secretary of the Army. Is that correct? Major General William Walker: Yes, sir. 1:17:23 Sen. Rob Portman (OH): Yeah, I also thought it was odd and I think you said was unusual and very prescriptive that the January 5th letter required the Secretary of the Army to approve the movement of deployed guardsmen from one traffic control point to another. Did you find that unusual? Major General William Walker: In 19 years I never had that before happened. So on that day, the Metropolitan Police as they would any other day requested that a traffic control point move one block, one block over. No traffic was where they were. So they wanted the traffic control point to move one block. I had to get permission. I told him, I'll get back to you. I contacted Lieutenant General Piatt, who contacted Secretary of the Army, I had to explain where that contractor control point was in relationship to the Capitol. And only then did I get permission to move the three national guardsmen supporting the Metropolitan... Sen. Rob Portman (OH): These are three unarmed National Guardsmen who are helping with traffic control in parts of that Metropolitan Police can do other things. And they were not permitted to move a block away without getting permission from the Secretary of the Army. Is that true? Major General William Walker: That's correct. Yeah. 1:18:52 Sen. Rob Portman (OH): That January 4th memorandum from Acting Secretary Miller to the Army Secretary required the personal approval of the Secretary of Defense for the National Guard to be issued riot gear. Is that correct? Major General William Walker: That's correct. But but the secretary army told me to go ahead and put it into vehicles. So I give him credit for that. 1:19:08 Major General William Walker: Normally for a safety and force protection matter, a commander would would be able to authorize his guardsmen to protect themselves with helmet and protective equipment. 1:25:57 Sen. Roy Blunt (MO): General Walker if the restrictions on your authorities hadn't been put in place by DoD, what would you have done when Chief Sund called you at 1:49 on January 6, with an urgent request for National Guards assistance? Major General William Walker: I would have immediately pulled all the guardsmen that were supporting the Metropolitan Police Department. They had the gear in the vehicles, I would have had them assemble in the armory, and then get on buses and go straight to the armory and report to the most ranking Capitol Police Officer they saw and take direction. And just let me add this, so one of my Lieutenant Colonel's on his own initiative, went to the Capitol, anticipating that we were going to be called, so he would have been there and he met with Deputy Chief Carroll of the Metropolitan Police Department who asked them, where is the National Guard? How come they're not here? And this Colonel said, Well, I'm sure they're coming. And I'm here to scout out where they're going to be when they get here. So that was the plan. I would have sent them there immediately. As soon as I hung up, my next call would have been to my subordinate commanders, get every single guardsman in this building, and everybody that's helping the Metropolitan Police. We mission them to the Capitol without delay. 1:32:11 Robert Salesses: That's when the Secretary of Defense made the decision at 4:32. As general Walker has pointed out, because I've seen all the timelines, he was not told that till 5:08 that's what Sen. Roy Blunt (MO): How's that possible? Mr. Salesses, do you think that the decision in the moment we were in was made at 4:32 and the person that had to be told, wasn't told for more than half an hour after the decision was made? Robert Salesses: Senator, I think that's that's an issue. 1:37:13 Sen. Maggie Hassann (NH): Looking back now, what might have made a difference in being able to move against some of those individuals sooner? Jill Sanborn: Yeah, I think that's great question. I think it's twofold. So it's the complexity of trying to gather the right intelligence that helps us predict indicators and warnings. And I spoke earlier about while there's a volume out there of rhetoric, trying to figure out that intent is very challenging for us in the intel community because it happens on private comms and encryption. So that's one aspect. And then the other aspect is of the people that we were investigating. So predicated investigations, we don't necessarily have the ability to mitigate the threat they might pose by travel if we don't have a charge. And so I think you're tracking that we were aware of some of our subjects that intended to come here. We took over action by going and talking them and trying to get them to not come and that worked in the majority of our already predicated cases. 1:49:46 To review the timeline at 1:49 Chief Sund contacted you. At 2:15 the capital was breached. I think in your testimony you said you had available 340 DC National Guard troops Is that correct? Major General William Walker: Sir, it was actually half of that. So, so half were on the streets helping the Metropolitan Police Department. The other half would have came in to relieve them, but we would have called them in to come in. 1:50:33 Sen. Ron Johnson (WI): How quickly could have you gotten? How many people to the Capitol? Major General William Walker: 20 minutes? Sen. Ron Johnson (WI): How many people? Major General William Walker: 150 1:56:47 Jill Sanborn: We're seeing people that got caught up in the moment got caught up in the sort of the energy etc. and made their way into the captain on those are probably the ones that you're seeing the charges simply of trespassing and then we're definitely seeing that portion that you're pointing out which is small groups and cells now being charged with conspiracy that coalesced either on site or even days or weeks prior and had sort of an intent that day and they to probably caught people up in the energy. PART 2 23:00 Jill Sanborn: The piece of information we received, again, was a non attributable posting to a message board. And so very raw, very unvetted, we actually didn't receive that information until late, very late in the afternoon on the fifth and almost into the evening. And because of our emphasis on we need any intelligence, even though it was raw and attributed, and unvetted, the Norfolk office quickly wrote that up specifically in a document following our processes to disseminate that. So a situation information report is for the intentional purpose of sharing that with state and local partners. Not only did they write that up, because they knew how important that was to get that information out into the hands of folks that might need it, our state and local partners, within 40 minutes, they sent an email to the Washington field office with that information and Washington Field Office also then followed up with an email to all Task Force officers. And so several different mechanisms were happened here. And you know, we'd like to use the phrase 'belt and suspenders' we didn't want to make sure that one method of communication failed. So we wrote it up in the document for dissemination. We sent it in an email to all taskforce officers in the National Capitol Region, and that does include Washington Metro as well as Capitol. But again, not wanting to rely on those two mechanisms only it was then briefed verbally in a command post and interagency command post that we were doing briefings every couple of hours, though, that every agency in that command post have what we call a common operating picture. Knowing what all of us knew at any given time, it was briefed at 8pm on the evening of the fifth, and then taking it one step further, because we didn't want to limit our aperture to just the National Capital Region, because there's collection opportunity out there for all state and local partners and federal partners to help us, we loaded that suspicious information report into what we call the Leap Portal. And that is accessible by all state and local partners. So we really tried in various ways to make sure that we did not rely on one communication mechanism and really tried to rely on several so that the information would get to the right people. 34:46 Sen. Rand Paul (KY): We can talk all we want about January sixth, but really it's the decision making leading up to that. Someone made a bad judgment call and we need to be better prepared. If we're gonna fix this in the future, it isn't about calling the National Guard out quicker. It's about having 1000 people standing there before the riot happens to the riot doesn't happen. Hearing: U.S. Capitol Police and House Sergeant at Arms, Security Failures on January 6, House Committee on Appropriations: Subcommittee on Legislative Branch, February 25, 2021 Watch on YouTube Witnesses: Timothy Blodgett Acting Sergeant at Arms; U.S. House of Representatives Yogananda D. Pittman, Acting Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol Police. Transcript: 09:11 ** Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (CA):** The United States Capitol Police Force is not meant to be an army, expecting 1600 officers to hold back an unruly mob of eight to 10,000 people, many of whom were armed and had their own homemade explosive devices or had came with or weaponized, everyday items. It's not a position we should ever have to be in. 20:51 Yogananda D. Pittman: There's evidence that some of those who stormed the Capitol were organized. But there's also evidence that a large number were everyday Americans who took on a mob mentality because they were angry and desperate. It is the conduct of this latter group that the department was not prepared for. Hearing: Dollars Against Democracy: Domestic Terrorist Financing in the Aftermath of Insurrection, Committee on Financial Services, February 25, 2021 Watch on YouTube Witnesses Iman Boukadoum Senior Manager, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Lecia Brooks Executive Director of the Southern Poverty Law Center Daniel Glaser Global Head Jurisdictional Services and Head of Washington, DC Office at K2 Integrity Senior Advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies Board member at the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority Former Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing and Financial Crimes, U.S. Department of the Treasury Daniel Rogers Co-Founder and Chief Technical Officer at Global Disinformation Index Daveed Gertenstein-Ross CEO of Valens Global Transcript: 03:28 Rep. Jim Himes (CT): In the wake of the attacks of September 11th, we recast the entire federal government and worked feverishly to defund terrorist streams. To effectively disrupt domestic extremist groups, we need to better understand their financing. 03:54 Rep. Jim Himes (CT): Unlike ISIS, for example, these organizations are not pyramid shaped where funding comes from a handful of easily disruptable areas. An online fundraising drive for a legitimate charity, and one that helps support an extremist group can look very similar. 04:57 Rep. Jim Himes (CT): We need to conscientiously be mindful of the civil liberties concerns at play here. Unlike international extremist groups, law enforcement is constrained by the Constitution when dealing with domestic extremists, balancing the desire to give law enforcement the tools necessary to disrupt these groups with the need to respect the rights of all Americans and the Constitution to which we have all pledged an oath is essential. 05:36 Rep. Jim Himes (CT): While we all live through a brutal event on January 6th, undertaken by right wing extremists, no location on the political spectrum has a monopoly on extremism or violence. 10:08 Rep. Maxine Waters (CA): We're here against the backdrop of the January 6th insurrection. A deplorable yet predictable display of white supremacists such as the Proud Boys, the oathkeepers QAnon and others and nationalist violence incited by President Trump against the members of this body and against democracy itself. 12:51 Iman Boukadoum: Last month violent insurrection heavily fueled by white supremacy and white nationalism shocked the world. 13:52 Iman Boukadoum: We know, however, that even well intentioned national security laws are invariably weaponized against black, brown and Muslim communities. And that white nationalist violence is not prioritized making that policy failure the fundamental reason for what transpired on January 6th, not lack of legal authority. For this reason we oppose any legislation that would create new charges for domestic terrorism or any enhanced or additional criminal penalties. The federal government, including the Treasury Department, has many tools at its disposal to investigate. And also the FBI and DOJ have 50 statutes, at least 50 statutes and over a dozen criminal statutes, 50 terrorism related statutes, excuse me and over a dozen criminal statutes that they can use. They just need to use them to target white nationalist violence. 19:33 Lecia Brooks: Today, some white nationalist groups and personalities are raising funds through the distribution of propaganda itself. In November SPLC researchers reported that dozens of extremist groups were earning 1000s of dollars per month on a popular live streaming platform called D-Live. 20:21 Lecia Brooks: Crowdfunding is also being exploited by hate groups to earn money in this new decentralized landscape. Crowdfunding sites played a critical role in the capital insurrection, providing monetary support that allowed people to travel to Washington DC. They've also played a crucial role in raising hundreds of 1000s of dollars in legal fees for extremists. 20:43 Lecia Brooks: The violent insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6 should serve as a wake up call for Congress, the Biden administration, Internet companies, law enforcement and public officials at every level. 23:11 Daniel Glaser: Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to talk about how the US government can employ similar tools and strategies against white nationalists and other domestic terrorist groups as it has employed against global jihadist groups over the past two decades. 23:33 Daniel Glaser: During my time at the Treasury Department, I fought to cut off funding to terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, the Islamic State and Hezbollah, as a Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bush Administration, and eventually as the Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing in the Obama Administration. My primary responsibility was to lead the design and implementation of strategies to attack the financial networks of these groups and other threats to our country's national security. And while we should never let down our guard with respect to those still potent terrorist organizations, it has become tragically clear that there are domestic extremist groups that in some ways present an even greater threat to our ideals and our democracy. We have the responsibility to target those groups with the same determination, creativity and sense of purpose that we displayed in the years following 9/11. 27:42 Daniel Glaser: Potential measures in Treasury's toolbox include the issuance of guidance to financial institutions on financial type policies, methodologies and red flags, the establishment of public private partnerships the use of information sharing authorities and the use of geographic targeting orders. Taken together these measures will strengthen the ability of financial institutions to identify, report and impede the financial activity of domestic extremist groups and will ensure that the US financial system is a hostile environment for these groups. 30:10 Daniel Rogers: These groups leverage the Internet as a primary means of disseminating their toxic ideologies and soliciting funds. One only needs to search Amazon or Etsy for the term q anon to uncover shirts, hats, mugs, books and other paraphernalia that both monetize and further popular popularized the domestic violent extremist threat. Images from that fateful day last month are rife with sweatshirts that say, Camp outfits that until recently were for sale on websites like Teespring and cafe press. As we speak at least 24 individuals indicted for their role in the January 6 insurrection, including eight members of the proud boys have used crowdfunding site gifts and go to raise nearly a quarter million dollars in donations. And it's not just about the money. This merchandise acts as a sort of team jersey that helps these groups recruit new members and form further hatred towards their targets. We analyze the digital footprints of 73 groups across 60 websites, and 225 social media accounts and their use of 54 different online fundraising mechanisms, including 47 payment platforms and five different cryptocurrencies, ultimately finding 191 instances of hate groups using online fundraising services to support their activities. The funding mechanisms including included both primary platforms like Amazon, intermediary platforms, such as Stripe or Shopify crowdfunding sites like GoFundMe, payments facilitators like PayPal, monetized content streaming services, such as YouTube, super chats, and cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin. All of these payment mechanisms were linked to websites or social media accounts on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, telegram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, gab, picshoot and others. The sheer number of companies I just mentioned, is the first clue to the scale and the scope of the problem. 31:40 Daniel Rogers: We also found that a large fraction of the groups we studied have a tax exempt status with the IRS, a full 100% of anti muslim groups. 75% of anti-immigrant groups, and 70% of anti LGBTQ groups have 501-C-3 or 501-C-4 status. Over 1/3 of the militia groups that we identified, including the oathkeepers, whose leadership was recently indicted on charges related to January 6, have tax exempt status. This status gives them access to a whole spectrum of charity fundraising tools, from Facebook donations to amazon smile, to the point where most of the most common fundraising platform we identified across all of our data was Charity Navigator. 32:30 Daniel Glaser: I think it's important to remember that if you want to be able to use a cryptocurrency in the real economy, to any scale, it at some point doesn't need to be converted into actual fiat currency into dollars. That's the place where the Treasury Department does regulate cryptocurrencies. 42:10 Daniel Glaser: Cryptocurrency exchanges are regarded as money service businesses. They have full customer due diligence requirements. They have full money laundering program requirements, they have reporting requirements. The US Treasury Department just last month, issued a proposed rule relating to unhosted wallets of cryptocurrencies. And that's out for notice and comment. Right now. It addresses the particular issue of, of wallets that are not hosted on a particular exchange. And I think it's an important rule that's out there and I do encourage people to take a look at it, the comment period closes in May, and then hopefully, Treasury will be able to take regulatory action to close that particular vulnerability. 42:46 Rep. Jim Himes (CT): Mr. Glaser, you you, though suggested something new that I'd like to give you a maybe 30 seconds, 42 seconds I have left to elaborate on you said you were taught you were hopeful for sanctions like authorities against domestic actors. You did not to constitutional civil liberties concerns. But give us another 30 seconds on exactly what you mean. And perhaps most importantly, what sort of fourth amendment overlay should accompany such authority? Daniel Glaser: Well, thank you, thank you for the question. The fact is, the Treasury Department really does not have a lot of authority to go after purely domestic groups in the way that it goes after global terrorist organizations that simply doesn't have that authority. You could imagine an authority that does allow for the designation of domestic organizations, it would have to take into account that, the constitutional restrictions. When you look when you read the a lot of the court decisions, there's concerns could be addressed in the statute, there's concerns. A lot of the scrutiny is heightened because sanctions are usually accompanied with acid freezes. But you could imagine sanctions that don't involve asset freezes that involve transaction bounds that involve regulatory type of requirements that you see in Section 311 of the Patriot Act. So there's a variety of ways that both the due process standards could be raised from what we see in the global context. 44:37 Daniel Rogers: The days leading up to the insurrection, the oathkeepers founder Stuart Rhodes appeared on a podcast and solicited charitable donations to the oathkeepers Educational Fund. It can only be presumed that these funds which listeners were notably able to deduct from their federal taxes, went to transporting and lodging members of the group slated to participate in the ensuing riots. 46:06 Rep. French Hill (AZ): Daveed Gertenstein-Ross: In looking at the draft legislation that the majority noticed with this hearing, one bill stuck out to me and I think it's a good follow up for your from your most recent exchange. It seeks to amend title 31 to require the Secretary of the Treasury to establish a program to allow designated employees of financial institutions to access classified information related to terrorism, sedition, and insurrection. Now, over the past three congresses, we've talked about the concept of a fusion center, not unlike we do in monitoring cyber risk and cyber crimes for this terror finance arena. We've never been able to come ashore on it legislatively. So I found that interesting. However, I'm concerned that when you deputize bank employees without any oversight, as to how the information would be protected or if there's really even a need for that. 46:53 Rep. French Hill (AZ): Could you describe how banks share information with law enforcement today and how they provide feedback on how we might change these protocols or if they're if that protocol change is necessary. Daveed Gertenstein-Ross: Thank you ranking member, there are four primary ways that banks share information now. The first is suspicious activity reports or the SAR. Financial institutions have to file these documents with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network or FinCEN. When there's a suspected case of money laundering or fraud, the star is designed to monitor activity and finance related industries that are out of the ordinary are a precursor to illegal activity, or can threaten public safety. Second, there's law enforcement's 314 a power under the Patriot Act, in which obtains potential lead information from financial institutions via fincen. Third, law enforcement can use its subpoena power, if a court issues a subpoena pursuant to an investigation, or to an administrative proceeding and forth where there are blocked assets pursuant to OFAC authorities, sanctions or otherwise, banks are required to report block assets back to OFAC. The information sharing in my view is currently quite effective. Treasury in particular has a very strong relationship with the US financial institutions. 48:24 Rep. French Hill (AZ): On 314 in the Patriot Act, is that a place where we could, in a protected appropriate way make a change that relates to this domestic issue? Or is that, in your view, too challenging? Daveed Gertenstein-Ross: No, I think it's a place where you could definitely make a change. The 314-A process allows an investigator to canvass financial institutions for potential lead information that might otherwise never be uncovered. It's designed to allow disparate pieces of information to be identified, centralized and evaluated. So when law enforcement submits a request to Finicen, to get information from financial institutions, it has to submit a written certification that each individual or entity about which the information is sought is engaged in or reasonably suspected of engaging in terrorist activity or money laundering. I think that in some cases 314-A, may already be usable, but I think it's worth looking at the 314-A process to see if in this particular context, when you're looking at domestic violent extremism, as opposed to foreign terrorist organizations, there are some tweaks that would provide ability to get leads in this manner. 1:15:15 Iman Boukadoum: What we submit is that the material support for terrorism statute, as we know, there are two of them. There's one with an international Nexus that is required. And there's one that allows for investigating material support for terrorism, domestic terrorism, in particular, as defined in the patriot act with underlying statutes that allows for any crimes that take place within the United States that have no international nexus. And we believe that that second piece of material support for terrorism statute has been neglected and can be nicely used with the domestic terrorism definition as laid out in the Patriot Act. And we hope that statutory framework will be used to actually go after violent white nationalists and others. 1:50:25 Daniel Rogers: I think there are a number of regulatory fronts that all kind of go to the general problem of disinformation as a whole. And I don't know that we have the time to get into all of them here, but I think they, they certainly fall into three three big categories, with the one most relevant to today's discussion being this idea of platform government and platform liability, that, you know, our data is showing how what a key role, these sorts of platforms play in facilitating the activities of these groups. And the fact that the liability is so nebulous or non existent through things like Section 230 and whatnot, which what we found is that there's there's already policies in place against all of these hate and extremist groups, but they're just simply not enforced. And so updating that kind of platform liability to help drive enforcement I think is one of the key areas that that that we can focus on. Hearing: JANUARY 6 ATTACK ON THE CAPITOL, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and Committee on Rules and Administration, February 23, 2021 Day 1 C-SPAN Witnesses Captain Carneysha Mendoza Field Commander of the United States Capitol Police Special Operations Division Robert Contee Acting Chief of Police for the Metropolitan Police Department Paul Irving Former Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives Michael Stenger Former Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate Transcript: 27:11 Captain Carneysha Mendoza: On January 6th, we anticipated an event similar to the million MAGA March that took place on November 14th, where we would likely face groups fighting among one another. 39:21 Robert Contee: MPD is prohibited by federal law from entering the Capitol or its grounds to patrol, make arrests or served warrants without the consent request of the Capitol Police board. 39:32 Robert Contee: The President of the United States not the Mayor of the District of Columbia controls the DC National Guard. 39:57 Robert Contee: Since Mayor Bowser declared a public health emergency last March, the district has not issued permits for any large gatherings. Although the district and MPD take pride in facilitating the exercise of first amendment rights by all groups, regardless of their beliefs. None of the public gatherings on January 5th and sixth were issued permits by the city. 47:13 Steven Sund: The intelligence that we based our planning on indicated that the January six protests were expected to be similar to the previous MAGA rallies in 2020, which drew 10s of 1000s of participants. 55:33 Paul Irving: We began planning for the protests of January 6th in December 2020. The planning relied on what we understood to be credible intelligence provided by various state and federal agencies, including a special event assessment issued by the Capitol Police on January 3rd. The January 3rd assessment forecast at the pros tests were ‘expected to be similar to the previous million MAGA March rallies that had taken place in November and December 2020.' Every Capitol Police daily intelligence report between January 4 and January 6, including on January 6th forecast the chance of civil disobedience or arrest during the protests as remote to improbable. 56:29 Paul Irving: The Chiefs plan took on an all hands on deck approach whereby every available sworn Capitol Police employee with police powers was assigned to work on January 6th. That meant approximately 1200 Capitol Police officers were on site, including civil disturbance units and other tactical teams. I also understood that 125 National Guard troops were on notice to be standing by for a quick response. The Metropolitan Police Department was also on 12 hour shifts, with no officers on day off or leave. And they staged officers just north of the Capitol to provide immediate assistance if required. The plan was brief to multiple law enforcement partners. Based on the intelligence we all believed that the plan met the threat. 1:00:57 Steven Sund: I actually just in the last 24 hours, was informed by the department that they actually had received that report. It was received by what we call, it's one of our sworn members that's assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force, which is a task force with the FBI. They received it the evening of the fifth, reviewed it and then forwarded over to an official at the Intelligence Division over at the US Capitol Police Headquarters. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN): And so you hadn't seen it yourself? Steven Sund: No, ma'am. It did not go any further than that. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN): Okay. And then was it sent to the House and Senate Sergeant in Arms? I don't believe that went any farther than from over to the sergeant at the intelligence. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN): And Mr. Irving. Mr. Stanger, Do you did you get that report beforehand? Mr. Stanger, Did you get the report? Michael Stenger: No. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN): Okay, Mr. Irving? Paul Irving: I did not Sen. Amy Klobuchar (MN): Okay. 1:05:36 Sen. Klobuchar: Mr. Sund, you stated in your written testimony that you first made a request for the Capitol Police board to declare an emergency and authorized National Guard support on Monday January 4th, and that request was not granted. Steven Sund: That is correct, ma'am. 1:05:47 Sen. Klobuchar: Your testimony makes clear that the current structure of the Capitol Police corps resulted in delays in bringing in assistance from the National Guard. Would you agree with that? That's one of the things we want to look at. Steven Sund: Yes, ma'am. 1:06:02 Sen. Klobuchar: Do you think that changes are needed to make clear that the Capitol Police Chief has the authority to call in the National Guard? Steven Sund: I certainly do. I think in an exigent circumstances, there needs to be a streamlined process for the Capitol Chief of Police for the Capitol Police to have authority. 1:07:23 Sen. Klobuchar: Mr. Sund your written testimony states that you had no authority to request t
How can we create public places that feel welcoming and safe for everyone? This hour, TED speakers examine our physical and digital spaces—how they run, who they serve, and how to make them better. Guests include community organizer Shari Davis, researcher Eli Pariser, Wikipedia Library founder Jake Orlowitz, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, and artist Matthew Mazzotta.
This is an episode about the battle for truth. As disinformation, misinformation, malinformation, and conspiracy theories seem to be hitting epidemic levels, how can we help each other determine what is real and what is fake? How can we help people who are falling down conspiracy rabbit holes? And what roles do technology companies, governments, and ordinary citizens play? Perry Carpenter speaks with acclaimed cybersecurity expert, Bruce Schneier, disinformation experts, Samantha North and Allie Wong, and conspiracy theory researcher, Mick West. In this episode, we also hear from Peter Leyden from Reinvent and Eli Periser, author of The Filter Bubble. Learn more about our guests here: Bruce Schneier - Internationally renowned security technologist, author, and speaker. You can find Bruce's website here. Allie Wong - VP of Mis/dis/mal-information, Response and Resiliency, Limbik; Consultant, United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. (LinkedIn) Samantha North - Disinformation researcher and consultant. (LinkedIn) Co-Founder: North Cyber Research (website) Mick West - Skeptical investigator and retired video game programmer. Creator of the websites Contrail Science (website) and Metabunk (website). Author of Escaping the Rabbit Hole: How to Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect (link). Personal website (link). Special thanks to Reinvent for allowing use of audio. References: http://reinvent.net/events/event/how-we-can-pop-the-filter-bubble-with-eli-pariser/ https://reboot-foundation.org/study-social-media-poor-judgment/ https://reboot-foundation.org/is-there-a-fake-news-generation/ Recommended Books (Amazon affiliate links): Escaping the Rabbit Hole: How to Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect by Mick West. Click Here to Kill Everybody: Security and Survival in a Hyper-connected World by Bruce Schneier. The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think by Eli Pariser. Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman. Why Are We Yelling?: The Art of Productive Disagreement by Buster Benson. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt. Transformational Security Awareness: What Neuroscientists, Storytellers, and Marketers Can Teach Us About Driving Secure Behaviors by Perry Carpenter. Music and Sound Effects by Blue Dot Sessions & Storyblocks. Artwork by Chris Machowski.
Elle France et la baroudeuse chicLe 12 Avril Elle sortait une nouvelle « série mode » autour de la thématique Baroudeuse chic et mode eco responsable.En couverture, on y voir une jeune femme en robe fendue, laissant voir qu’elle ne porte pas de sous vêtements, portant sur le dos un sac à dos vintage, une bonne vieille couverture qui gratte roulée sur le dessus et 3 gourdes qui pendent.Un cliché un peu raté qui n’a pas plu a la communauté des randonneurs et qui a beaucoup fait rire les passionnés de mème.Certains parlent même d’une nouvelle illustration du boboSi le tweet a été supprimé, il reste bien le post Instagram qui nous offre quelques jolis commentaires :«La randonneuse de 2021 n'a pas de culotte, mais elle a 3 gourdes « «Sérieusement vous avez déjà fait une randonnée ? Soyez un peu réaliste, ça frise le ridicule »Pour les fans de mèmes, les amis de @memesdecentralisesEn 2021, on se s’attaque pas au look du baroudeur randonneur à ça non !Facebook teste la publicité dans ReelsSourceSi les reels sont sous les projecteurs depuis 6 mois, il y a une tare qui les suit… ils ne sont pas médiatisables.Et bien il va y avoir quelques petits changements de ce côté là.On le sait chez Instagram ce n’est pas le premier format à en souffrir puis que c’est déjà le cas pour les formats longs IGTV. Et d’ailleurs, le format reels tout droit venu de la planète TikTok est médiatisante sur cette dernière.La fonctionnalité semble déjà en cours de développement puis Matt Navara l’expert social a publié quelques captures sur son twitterLes pubs sur Reels sont similaires aux Reels organiques, elles peuvent durer jusqu’à 30 secondes, et les utilisateurs ont la possibilité de les liker, les commenter, les enregistrer et même de les partager comme pour un reels organique.Le petit plus :un tag sponsorisé pour plus de transparenceun CTA « shop now »Les tests commencent dans un premier temps en Inde, au Brésil, en Allemagne et en Australie.En espérant que Markito prévoie aussi la possibilité de booster un reels natif et là ça serait le pompon.Théorie des bulles de filtressourceJe suis tombé sur un article de presse-citron intitulé « Réseaux sociaux : enfin une piste pour lutter contre les bulles de filtre ?« Et j’avoue que je n’ai pas saisi tout de suite.La théorie des bulles de filtres a été inventée par l’écrivain Eli Pariser. Elle est basée sur le fait que les algorithmes des réseaux sociaux ne nous proposent que des contenus liés à ce que nous aimons.Sur le plan politique et démocratique, cela lui poserait un vrai problème en enfermant les citoyens dans une zone de confort idéologique, une bulle virtuelle.Toujours selon sa théorie, dès lors que les internautes ne se comprennent plus et les discussions s’enflamment, sans la moindre possibilité d’arriver à un compromis.Des chercheurs du MIT se sont penchés dans une étude en rassemblant une liste d’utilisateurs qui avaient retweeté des publications de MSNBC et Fox News. Une liste de 842 profils a ainsi été établie et prend en compte équitablement les démocrates et les républicains.Les chercheurs ont, dans le même temps, créé un réseau de huit bots très engagés qui ressemblent à des profils progressistes ou conservateurs. Ces derniers ont ensuite suivi de manière aléatoire les 842 comptes préalablement sélectionnés. L’idée était de voir quel serait leur comportement.Dans l’ensemble, 15 % des vrais utilisateurs ont choisi de suivre les profils de bots qui partageaient les mêmes opinions qu’eux. Seulement 5% d’entre eux ont décidé de faire de même pour les bots qui avaient des positions différentes.Pour conclure l’étude, Davi David Rand, l’un des auteurs annonce que :« Si vous voulez favoriser les relations sociales entre partisans, vous n’avez pas seulement besoin que l’algorithme de suggestion d’amis soit neutre. Vous auriez besoin que ces derniers soient conçus pour contrer activement ces prédispositions psychologiques des individus. ». . .Le Super Daily est le podcast quotidien sur les réseaux sociaux. Il est fabriqué avec une pluie d'amour par les équipes de Supernatifs.Nous sommes une agence social media basée à Lyon : https://supernatifs.com/. Nous aidons les entreprises à créer des relations durables et rentables avec leurs audiences. Nous inventons, produisons et diffusons des contenus qui engagent vos collaborateurs, vos prospects et vos consommateurs.
Podem conhecê-la como Urbanista, mas é também a voz da Maria a Granel, professora universitária, podcaster, mãe...e agora mãe de mais um livro. Neste episódio, falamos de “Vida Instagramável”, o novo livro de Paula Cordeiro, e de mais uns quantos livros. Passamos os olhos pelo “The Filter Bubble - What The Internet Is Hiding From You”, de Eli Pariser; voltamos a encontrar-nos com “Silêncio na Era do Ruído”, de Erling Kagge; surpreendemo-nos com “A Natureza Cura”, da jornalista Florence Williams; percebemos quem é, finalmente, Elena Ferrante (estou a brincar, é segredo), mas falamos do livro “A amiga Genial” e terminamos com o primeiro volume de diários de Rita Ferro, “Veneza pode Esperar”. Ler e assinar a newsletter do podcast: https://www.getrevue.co/profile/magdacruz Considera contribuir no Patreon: patreon.com/pontofinalparagrafo Segue o Ponto Final, Parágrafo nas redes sociais: Instagram, Twitter e Facebook Produção, apresentação e edição: Magda Cruz Design: Ana Lopes Genérico: Nuno Viegas
Influence: Exploring The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly Of Advertising
On today's episode, Damian talks to Eli Pariser, author of The Filter Bubble and co-founder of New Public, about designing digital public spaces for the future. Using examples from across the globe, Eli imagines how online communities can work on bringing people closer together instead of driving us further apart.Influence is a production of WeTransfer, produced in association with Reasonable Volume. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
This week, a pleasantly unexpected list of media recommendations comes from guests of our latest episode, Talia Stroud and Eli Pariser of Civic Signals, an organization dedicated to reimagine digital environments to be better public spaces, much like how humanity has strived to build healthy, flourishing civic spaces in the real world for millennia!
Bir filtre balonu - internet aktivisti Eli Pariser tarafından icat edilen bir terim - bir web sitesi algoritması, bir kullanıcının kullanıcı hakkındaki bilgilere dayanarak hangi bilgileri görmek istediğini seçici olarak tahmin ettiğinde kişiselleştirilmiş aramalardan kaynaklanabilecek bir entelektüel izolasyon durumudur . konum, geçmiş tıklama davranışı ve arama geçmişi olarak. Sonuç olarak, kullanıcılar kendi bakış açılarıyla çelişen bilgilerden ayrılır ve onları kendi kültürel veya ideolojik balonlarında etkili bir şekilde izole eder. Bu algoritmalar tarafından yapılan seçimler şeffaf değildir. Temel örnekler şunları içerir:Google Kişiselleştirilmiş Arama sonuçları ve Facebook 'ın kişiselleştirilmiş haber akışı . Pariser'e göre balon etkisinin sivil söylem üzerinde olumsuz etkileri olabilir , ancak karşıt görüşler etkiyi minimal ve ele alınabilir olarak görüyor . 2016'daki ABD başkanlık seçimlerinin sonuçları Twitter ve Facebook gibi sosyal medya platformlarının etkisiyle ilişkilendirildi ,ve sonuç olarak "filtre balonunun" etkileri sorgulanmaya başladı. kullanıcıların sahte haberlere ve yankı odalarına maruz kalmasına ilişkin fenomen , terime yeni bir ilgi uyandıran [ birçokları fenomenin yanlış bilgilerin etkilerini daha da kötüleştirerek demokrasiye ve refaha zarar verebileceğinden endişe duyuyor. İnstagram: Ortamdasatılacakbilgi Mail: ortamdasatilacakbilgi@gmail.com
Google products have faced intense criticism in the last few years and their search engine has not been spared. Among the criticisms, the most troubling ones are invasion of privacy and creating a "filter bubble." With a 87.35% market share of global searches, it's not easy to compete with Google and there are very few companies that are currently competing with Google in the search engine space. So you may be thinking, "What's the alternative to Google?" That's the question I'll attempt to answer in this episode by revealing the 3 best search alternatives to Google. And don't worry, my list won't feature Bing. I know it's ludicrous to suggest replacing Google as the default search engine, like a few top SEOs have done, but you can use any of these 3 alternative search engines as a secondary tool to browse the web. Tune in to learn about the 3 best search engine alternatives to Google. -=-=-=-=- Tools and resources discussed in this episode: 3 best alternatives to Google Startpage - https://www.startpage.com/ DuckDuckGo - https://duckduckgo.com/ Ecosia - https://www.ecosia.org/ Eli Pariser's TED Talk on "Filter Bubbles" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8ofWFx525s Book recommendation: Traction by Gabriel Weinberg and Justin Mares -=-=-=-=- BONUS RESOURCES + FREE DOWNLOADS If you're a fan of the podcast, here are some FREE online marketing resources from my blog, 99signals, to help you level up your marketing skills: The Ultimate Blogging Toolkit (https://resources.99signals.com/blogging-tools-ebook) - This eBook features 75+ marketing tools to help you blog better and boost your traffic! The Ultimate Guide to Link Building (https://resources.99signals.com/link-building-ebook) - Learn 25 powerful strategies to build high quality backlinks, improve search engine rankings, and drive targeted traffic to your site. The Essential Guide to Link Building with Infographics (https://resources.99signals.com/infographic-backlinks-pdf) - Did you know you could build high-quality, authoritative backlinks with well-designed infographics? This PDF guide will show you how you can easily design an infographic and quickly build high-quality backlinks to supercharge your SEO. Top-rated articles at 99signals (https://www.99signals.com/best/) - This page contains a list of all the top-rated articles on my blog. It's a great place to get started if you're visiting 99signals for the first time. -=-=-=-=- Visit https://www.99signals.com for more insights on SEO, blogging, and marketing. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/sandeep-mallya/message
Although the term "fake news” didn't garner Word of the Year status until 2016, this dubious journalistic practice has been with us a long time. But our digital ecosystem seems to have evolved into a near-perfect environment for the flourishing of fake news, even as the digital news trend has decimated the force of the traditional, objectively minded, independent press. What to do now? In this month's Library U series, four different lecturers will be exploring topics around fake news. This podcast captures the first of those presentations, which was delivered Saturday, September 23rd, by T. Andrew Wahl, journalism professor at Everett Community College. After an introductory video -- a Ted Talk by internet activist Eli Pariser on the Filter Bubble -- Wahl goes on to discuss such subjects as the history of fake news, the origins of the filter bubble, the growing political divide, some classic examples of fake news, the challenges of responsible journalism, and how smartphones are changing our awareness of the world around us. We apologize for the sound quality of this talk; it was held in the library's brand new public meeting space, and we had some difficulties connecting with the new sound system. But we feel certain you'll find Wahl's talk intriguing. Credits: BCB audio tech: Chris Walker; audio editor and social media publisher, Diane Walker.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
