What are your thoughts on the Covid-19 Stimulus Relief Bill? (1 Viewer)

[whoknew]

You can sue if you get censored. They would have to stop you from posting/close account. As much as they probably dont like Trump, they would want him for the clicks he generates.  More likely they would let it go unmoderated, would be my guess. 

How could you sue if you got censored? What would be your cause of action against the social media platform?

And they can't let it go unmoderated. Because they could get sued for things other people write. So, for example, if 230 is repealed and Trump tweets that Mitt Romney rapes children, Romney could sue not only Trump but also Twitter. As a result, Twitter is going to have no choice but to be super hyper vigilant in what it censors. It can't let anything remotely objectionable remain for fear of getting sued.

 

[GordonGekko]

Why do you assume this is a win/win? 

1. Section 230: What is the problem being addressed, other than satisfying a whiny POTUS? ...

Congress GRILLS Twitter CEO: How to battle lies and fake news

270,983 views •Oct 28, 2020

The CEO of Twitter explains the company's content moderation practices, including how it handles tweets from world leaders.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-TOV9u3msM

https://www.timesofisrael.com/twitter-ceo-suggests-holocaust-denial-not-banned-on-platform-in-senate-grilling/

"Twitter CEO suggests Holocaust denial not banned, in Senate grilling

Spokesperson later says Twitter bars ‘attempts to deny or diminish such events,’ after Jack Dorsey questioned by Republicans about why some posts removed while others remain

By Jacob Magid, Agencies and JTA 28 October 2020, 11:03 pm

NEW YORK — Twitter’s CEO told Senate Republicans Wednesday that tweets denying the Holocaust were not forbidden...

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey Wednesday was grilled for several hours in the Senate over his platform’s policies regarding hate speech and misinformation, including posts from Iran’s supreme leader that have questioned the genocide in addition to calling for Israel annihilation. Aggressively questioning Dorsey during a hearing of the Senate Commerce Committee, Colorado Senator Cory Gardner demanded the Twitter CEO explain why the site had been flagging or deleting tweets from US President Donald Trump while leaving Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s posts untouched.

Gardner specifically asked Dorsey: “If somebody denied the Holocaust happened, it’s not misinformation?”

“It’s misleading information,” Dorsey responded. “But we don’t have a policy against that type of misleading information.”

“We have a policy against misinformation in three categories, which are manipulated media, public health, specifically COVID, and civic integrity, election interference and voter suppression. We do not have a policy or enforcement for any other types of misleading information that you’re mentioning,” Dorsey added.

Dorsey’s answer appeared to contradict an announcement earlier this month that Twitter would ban content that denies the Holocaust — miming a decision made days earlier by Facebook.....

“Our Hateful Conduct Policy prohibits a wide range of behavior, including making references to violent events or types of violence where protected categories were the primary victims, or attempts to deny or diminish such events,” the statement continued. “We also have a robust Glorification of Violence Policy in place and take action against content that glorifies or praises historical acts of violence and genocide, including the Holocaust.”

While the spokesperson declined to comment further, the statement appeared to suggest that while Twitter does not include Holocaust denial in its misinformation policy, such posts would have grounds for removal under its “hateful conduct” and “glorification of violence” policies.

Dissatisfied with the answers given by Dorsey, Gardner said at the hearing, “it’s strange to me that you’ve flagged the tweets from the President but haven’t hidden the Ayatollah’s tweets on Holocaust denial or calls to wipe Israel off the map.”

He then cited tweets from the supreme leader, which questioned the Holocaust and asked why those weren’t grounds for being flagged or removed by Twitter. Gardner later pointed to a 2014 post from Khamenei in which the latter wrote, “#Holocaust is an event whose reality is uncertain and if it has happened, it’s uncertain how it has happened.” The tweet remains up on the site.

Gardner didn’t need to dig so far into the past. While the hearing was still unfolding, Khamenei again referenced Holocaust denial while protesting France’s defense of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad. “Why is it a crime to raise doubts about the Holocaust? Why should anyone who writes about such doubts be imprisoned while insulting the Prophet (pbuh) is allowed?” Khamenei asked....

“We believe it’s important for everyone to hear from global leaders, and we have policies around world leaders,” he (Dorsey) added. “We want to make sure we are respecting their right to speak and to publish what they need.”

 

[GordonGekko]

Increased stimulus checks to the public being held up for some new law about being able to sue Facebook. Hmm.

Thats a tough sell.

Republican Senator GRILLS Zuckerberg on Facebook, Google, and Twitter collaboration

2,121,618 views  •Nov 17, 2020

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg gets grilled by Sen. Josh Hawley about whether his company collaborates on content moderation policy with Google and Twitter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOdrPruSnrw

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mark-zuckerberg-jack-dorsey-testimony-transcript-senate-tech-hearing-november-17

Mark Zuckerberg & Jack Dorsey Testimony Transcript Senate Tech Hearing November 17

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on November 17. They were questioned on speech moderation policies.

Josh Hawley: (02:45:56)
.... Your companies are the most powerful companies in the world and I want to talk about how you’re coordinating together to control information. In recent days, my office was contacted by a Facebook whistleblower, a former employee of the company, with direct knowledge of the company’s content moderation practices. And I want to start by talking about an internal platform called Tasks that Facebook uses to coordinate projects, including censorship. The Tasks platform allows Facebook employees to communicate about projects they’re working on together. That includes Facebook’s censorship teams, including the so-called community "Well Being" team, the integrity team, and the hate speech engineering team, who all use the task platform to discuss which individuals or hashtags or websites to ban. Now, Mr. Zuckerberg, you’re familiar with the test platform, aren’t you?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:47:11)
Senator, we use the Task system for, I think it’s, as you say, for people coordinating all kinds of work across the company, although I’m not sure if I’d agree with the characterization specifically around content moderation that you gave.

Josh Hawley: (02:47:28)
.... So as I understand it, Facebook censorship teams communicate with their counterparts at Twitter and Google, and then enter those companies suggestions for censorship onto the task platform so that Facebook can then follow up with them and effectively coordinate their censorship efforts. Mr. Zuckerberg, let me just ask you directly under oath now, does Facebook coordinate its content moderation policies or efforts in any way with Google or Twitter?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:48:32)
Senator, let me be clear about this. We do coordinate on and share signals on security related topics. So for example, if there is signal around a terrorist attack or around child exploitation imagery or around a foreign government creating an influence operation, that is an area where the companies do share signals about what they see. But I think it’s important to be very clear that that is distinct from the content and moderation policies that we or the other companies have, where once we share intelligence or signals between the companies, each company makes its own assessment of the right way to address and deal with that information.

Josh Hawley: (02:49:21)
Well, I’m talking about content moderation, I’m talking about individuals, websites, hashtags, phrases to ban. Is it your testimony that you do not communicate with Twitter or Google about content moderation, about individuals, websites, phrases, hashtags to ban? Just yes or no? Do you communicate with Twitter or Google about coordinating your policies in this way?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:49:46)
Senator, we do not coordinate our policies.

********

 

[GordonGekko]

Josh Hawley: (02:49:49)
Do your Facebook content moderation teams communicate with their counterparts at Twitter or Google?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:49:56)
Senator, I’m not aware of anything specific, but I think it would be probably pretty normal for people to talk to their peers and colleagues in the industry. [crosstalk 02:50:05]

Josh Hawley: (02:50:04)
It would be normal, but you don’t do it?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:50:07)
No, I’m saying that I’m not aware of any particular conversation, but I would expect that some level of communication probably happens. It’s different from coordinating what our policies are or our responses in specific instances.....

Josh Hawley: (02:50:39)
Yes or no? I’m sure you can follow up with the list, but why don’t you commit while I’ve got you here under oath, it’s so much better to do this under oath. Will you commit now to providing a list from the tasks platform of every mention of Google or Twitter?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:50:55)
Senator, respectfully, without having looked into this, I’m not aware of any sensitivity that might exist around that. So I don’t think it would be wise for me to commit to that right now. So I would have to follow-

Josh Hawley: (02:51:08)
That’s a no. How many items on the task platform reflect that Facebook, Twitter, and Google are sharing information about websites or hashtags or platforms that they want to suppress?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:51:20)
Senator, I do not know.

Josh Hawley: (02:51:23)
Will you provide a list of every website and hashtag that Facebook content moderation teams have discussed banning on the task platform?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:51:33)
Senator again, I would be happy to follow up with you or your team to discuss further how we might move forward on that, but [crosstalk 02:51:42].

Josh Hawley: (02:51:41)
Will you commit to it here? Senator Cruz and Senator Lee both asked you for lists of individuals, websites, entities that have been subject to content moderation. You expressed doubt about whether any such information exists, but you’ve also now said that the task website… You’ve acknowledged the test platform exists, that it is searchable. So will you commit to providing the information you have logged on the task website about content moderation that your company has undertaken? Yes or no?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:52:09)
Senator, I think it would be better to follow up once I’ve had a chance to discuss with my team what any sensitivity around that would be that might prevent the kind of sharing that you’re talking about. But once I’ve done that, I would be happy to follow up.

**********

 

[GordonGekko]

Josh Hawley: (02:52:25)
All right. So you won’t commit to do it here. We could of course subpoena this information, but I’d much rather get it from you voluntarily. But I think, let everybody take note, that Mr. Zuckerberg has now repeatedly refused to provide information that he knows that he has and has now acknowledged that he has, that Tasks has [inaudible 02:52:42] Let me switch to a different topic. Mr. Zuckerberg, tell me about Sentra. What is the Facebook internal tool called Sentra?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:52:51)
Senator, I’m not aware of any tool with that name.

Josh Hawley: (02:52:55)
Well, let me see if this refreshes your memory. There’s a demonstrative now over my shoulder. Sentra is a tool that Facebook uses to track its users not just on Facebook, but across the entire internet. Sentra tracks different profiles that a user visits, their message recipients, they’re linked accounts, the pages they visit around the web that have Facebook buttons. Sentra also uses behavioral data to monitor users accounts even if those accounts are registered under a different name. And you can see a shot here, a screenshot provided to us of the central platform. We blocked out the user’s name in the interest of privacy, although you can see this individual’s birth date and age, when they first started using Facebook, their last login, as well as all manner of trackings. How many different devices have they used to access Facebook? How many different accounts are associated with their name? What accounts have they visited? What photos have they tagged? And on and on and on. Mr. Zuckerberg, how many accounts in the United States have been subject to review and shut down through Sentra?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:53:52)
Senator, I do not know because I’m not actually familiar with the name of that tool. I’m sure that we have tools that help us with our platform and community integrity work, but I am not familiar with that name.

Josh Hawley: (02:54:06)
Do you have a tool that does exactly what I’ve described and that you can see here over my shoulder? Or are you saying that that doesn’t exist?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:54:15)

Senator, I’m saying that I’m not familiar with it and that I’d be happy to follow up and get you and your team the information that you would like on this. But I’m limited in what I’m familiar with and can share today.

Josh Hawley: (02:54:32)
Always amazing to me, Mr. Chairman, how many people before this committee suddenly develop amnesia. Maybe it is something about the air in the room. Let me ask you this, when a Facebook employee accesses a user’s private information like their private messages or their personally identifiable data, is a record made of that, Mr. Zuckerberg?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:54:53)
Sorry Senator, could you repeat that?
 

********

 

[GordonGekko]

Josh Hawley: (02:54:54)
Record made of any time a Facebook employee accesses a user’s private information, personal identifiable information?

Josh Hawley: (02:55:03)
… private information, personal identifiable information. For example, messages. Is a record made anytime a Facebook employee does that?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:55:09)
Senator, I believe so.

Josh Hawley: (02:55:10)
Does it trigger an audit?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:55:14)
Senator, I think sometimes it may.

Josh Hawley: (02:55:18)
How many audits have been conducted?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:55:21)
Senator, I do not know the exact number of audits off the top of-

Josh Hawley: (02:55:23)
Can you get me a list?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:55:26)
Senator, we can follow up on that to see what would be useful here.

Josh Hawley: (02:55:31)
I’m almost finished, Mr. Chairman. Will you commit to giving us a list of the number of times Facebook employees have accessed users’ personal account information without their knowledge? Yes or no?

Mr. Zuckerberg: (02:55:45)
Senator, we should follow up on what would be useful here. It is, of course, in the operations of the company, if someone reports something, sometimes necessary for people at the company to go review and understand the context around what is happening when someone reports something. So this is fairly frequent and is a matter of course. We do have security systems that can detect anomalous patterns to flag, but we should follow up in more detail on what you’re interested in.

Josh Hawley: (02:56:19)
Mr. Chairman, I’ll just say in closing that what we have here is clear evidence of coordination between Twitter, Google, and Facebook. Mr. Zuckerberg knows he has the tools to track this, but he either doesn’t remember or won’t commit to letting us see it. We have evidence of Facebook tracking its own users all across the web. Mr. Zuckerberg won’t answer questions about it, can’t remember the name, isn’t sure if the tool is deployed in this way, and won’t commit to giving us basic information. I submit to you that this is both totally unacceptable...."

 

[GordonGekko]

Section 230 can be addressed at any point. Write the legislation, have the debates, make amendments, etc. Separately. 

Its beyond reprehensible to me that the GOP would now hold up aid to hurting Americans because of it. Help Americans with no strings attached.

"WHY DO YOU CENSOR US?" Ted Cruz SLAMS Twitter And Facebook During Election Suppression Hearing

1,546,357 views •Nov 17, 2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NhYTm2auyw

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mark-zuckerberg-jack-dorsey-testimony-transcript-senate-tech-hearing-november-17

"Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:03:24)

.... Mr. Dorsey, I want to focus primarily on Twitter and ask you initially, is Twitter a publisher?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:05:20)
No, we are not, we distribute information.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:05:29)
So what is a publisher?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:05:29)
An entity that is publishing under editorial guidelines and decisions.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:05:35)
Well, your answer happens to be contrary to the text of federal statute, particular Section 230, which defines an information content provider as, “Any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the internet or any other interactive computer service.” Let me ask you, was Twitter being a publisher when it censored the New York Post?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:06:05)
No. We have very clear policies on the conduct we enable on the platform and if there’s a violation, we take enforcement action. And people choose to commit to those policies and to those terms of service.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:06:23)
Except your policies are applied in a partisan and selective matter. You claim it was hacked materials and yet you didn’t block the distribution of the New York Times story that alleged to talk about President Trump’s tax returns, even though a federal statute makes it a crime to distribute someone’s tax returns without their consent. You didn’t block any of that discussion, did you?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:06:42)
Our policy was focused on distribution of the actual hack materials and the New York Times-

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:06:47)
Did you block the discussion of the President’s tax return material?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:06:51)
And in the New York Times case, we interpreted as reporting about the hacked materials, not distribution of [inaudible 02:06:58].

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:06:57)
Did you block Edward Snowden when he illegally released material?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:07:04)
I don’t have the answer to that.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:07:06)
The answer is no. You having used this in a selective matter, let me ask you were you being a publisher when you forced Politico, another journalistic outlet, to take down their tweets on a topic that you had deemed impermissible?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:07:23)
No. We were enforcing our policy and our terms of service.

 

[GordonGekko]

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:07:27)
So on October 15th, Jake Sherman, a reporter at Politico, tweeted the following, “I tweeted a link to the New York post story right after it dropped yesterday morning, I immediately reached out to the Biden campaign to see if they had any answer. I wish I’d given the story a closer read before tweeting it, Twitter suspended me.” So you actually have a reporter reporting on a story, asking the other side for comment. And Twitter says, “Hi Jake Sherman, your account @JakeSherman has been locked for violating Twitter rules.” Now, what did the Politico reporter do? Immediately tweets after that, “My goal was not to spread information.” Well, that’s a little worrisome just in and of itself, “My goal was to raise questions about the story.”

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:08:08)
“Oh, my overlords in Silicon Valley, I was attacking the New York Post. You don’t understand, I was attacking them, as I did in subsequent tweets, and see how the Biden campaign was going to respond.” They later did respond and then, not long after, Jake Sherman comes back with, “My account is clearly no longer suspended, I deleted the tweet.” When Twitter is editing and censoring and silencing the New York Post, the newspaper with the fourth highest circulation in the country, and Politico, one of the leading newspapers in the country, is Twitter behaving as a publisher when it’s deciding what stories reporters are allowed to write and publish and what stories they’re not?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:08:51)
No. And that account is not suspended, it fell afoul of the hacked materials policy, we realized that there was an error in that policy and the enforcement and we corrected that within 24 hours.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:09:00)
Hold on, I’m literally looking at the tweet from Twitter that says, “Your account has been locked.” You’re you’re telling me that this is not an accurate…

Mr. Dorsey: (02:09:10)
That’s a lock and can be unlocked when you delete the offending tweet.

 

[GordonGekko]

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:09:13)
I understand that you have the star chamber power, your answer is always, “Well, once we silence you, we can choose to allow you to speak,” But you are engaged in publishing decisions. Let me shift to a different topic, Mr. Dorsey, does voter fraud exist?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:09:32)
I don’t know for certain.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:09:34)
Are you an expert in voter fraud?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:09:36)
No, I’m not.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:09:38)
Well, why then is Twitter right now putting purported warnings on virtually any statement about voter fraud?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:09:48)
We’re simply linking to a broader conversation so that people have more information.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:09:52)
No, you’re not. You put up a page that says, “Voter fraud of any kind is exceedingly rare in the United States.” That’s not linking to a broader conversation, that’s taking a disputed policy position. And you’re a publisher when you’re doing that, you’re entitled to take a policy position, but you don’t get to pretend you’re not a publisher and get a special benefit under section 230 as a result.

Mr. Dorsey: (02:10:14)
That link is pointing to a broader conversation with tweets from publishers and people all around the country.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:10:22)
Mr. Dorsey, would the following statement violate Twitter’s policies, “Absentee ballots remained the largest source of potential voter fraud.”?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:10:31)
I imagine that we would label it so that people can have more context and read through.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:10:36)
Okay. How about this quote, “Voter fraud is particularly possible where third-party organizations, candidates, and political party activists are involved in handling absentee ballots,” would you flag that as potentially misleading?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:10:56)
I don’t know the specifics of how we might enforce that, but I imagine a lot of these would have a label pointing people to a bigger conversation, a broader conversation.

Sen. Ted Cruz: (02:11:06)
Well, you’re right, you would label them because you’ve taken the political position right now that voter fraud doesn’t exist. I would note both of those quotes come from the Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform. That is Democratic President, Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker and Twitter’s position is essentially voter fraud does not exist. Are you aware that just two weeks ago in the State of Texas, a woman was charged with 134 counts of election fraud? Are you aware of that?

Mr. Dorsey: (02:11:37)
I’m not aware of that.

 

[GordonGekko]

Why is getting rid of Section 230 a win?

Twitter's Dorsey defends leaving up CCP's anti-US military tweets, anti-Jewish tweets from Ayatollah

8,803 views  •Oct 28, 2020

Sen. Roger Wicker pressed Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey on why he allows his platform to allow foreign dictators to post anti-US military and bigoted messages freely while fact-checking the President of the United States.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pngSdRsCH6w

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/tech-ceos-senate-testimony-transcript-october-28

Chairman Wicker: (37:19)
Mr. Dorsey, your platform allows foreign dictators to post propaganda, typically without restriction. Yet you routinely restrict the President of the United States. And here’s an example. In March, a spokesman for the Chinese Communist Party falsely accused the U.S. military of causing the coronavirus epidemic. He tweeted, “CDC was caught on the spot. When did patient zero begin in the U.S.? How many people are infected? What are the names of the hospitals? It might be the U.S. Army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan and on and on.” After this tweet was up for some two months, Twitter added a fact check label to this tweet, after being up for two months. However, when President Trump tweeted about how mail-in ballots are vulnerable to fraud, a statement that I subscribe to and agree with, and a statement that is in fact true, Twitter immediately imposed fact check label on that tweet.

Chairman Wicker: (38:35)
Mr. Dorsey, how does a claim by Chinese Communists that the U.S. military is to blame for COVID remain up for two months without a fact check, and the President’s tweet about security mail-in ballots get labeled instantly?

Jack Dorsey: (38:53)
Well, first and foremost, we, as you mentioned, we did label that tweet. As we think about enforcement, we consider severity of potential offline harm, and we act as quickly as we can. We have taken action against tweets from world leaders all around the world, including the President, and we did take action on that tweet because we saw it, we saw the confusion it might encourage, and we labeled it accordingly, and the goal with our labeling....

Jack Dorsey: (39:33)
The goal of our labeling is to provide more context to connect the dots so that people can have more information so they can make decisions for themselves. We’ve created these policies recently. We are enforcing them. There are certainly things that we can do much faster, but generally we believe that the policy was enforced in a timely manner and in the right regard.

Chairman Wicker: (40:03)
And yet you seem to have no objection to a tweet by the Chinese Communist Party saying the U.S. Army brought the epidemic to Wuhan.

Jack Dorsey: (40:16)
Well, we did, and we labeled that tweet providing more information.

Chairman Wicker: (40:20)
It took you two months to do so, is that correct?

Jack Dorsey: (40:23)
I’m not sure of the exact timeframe, but we can get back to you on that.

**************

 

[GordonGekko]

Chairman Wicker: (40:26)
So you’re going to get back to us as to how a tweet from the Chinese Communist Party falsely accusing the U.S. military of causing the coronavirus epidemic was left up for two months with no comment from Twitter, while the President of the United States making a statement about being careful about ballot security with the mail was labeled immediately.

Chairman Wicker: (40:59)
I have a tweet here from Mr. Ajit Pai. Mr. Ajit Pai is the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. And he recounts some four tweets by the Iranian dictator, Ayatollah Ali Khomeini, which Twitter did not place a public label on. All four of them glorified violence. The first tweet says this, and I quote each time, “The Zionist regime is a deadly cancerous growth and a detriment to the region. It will undoubtedly be uprooted and destroyed.” That’s the first tweet. The second tweet, “The only remedy until the removal of the Zionist regime is firm armed resistance.” Again, left up without comment by Twitter. The third, “The struggle to free Palestine is Jihad in the way of God.” I quote that in part for the sake of time. And number four, “We will support and assist any nation or any group anywhere who opposes and fights the Zionist regime.”

Chairman Wicker: (42:24)
I would simply point out that these tweets are still up, Mr. Dorsey, and how is it that they are acceptable to be there? I’ll ask unanimous consent to enter this tweet from Ajit Pai in the record at this point. That’ll be done without objection. How, Mr. Dorsey, is that acceptable based on your policies at Twitter?

Jack Dorsey: (42:55)
We believe it’s important for everyone to hear from global leaders, and we have policies around world leaders. We want to make sure that we are respecting their right to speak and to publish what they need. But if there’s a violation of our terms of service, we want to label it and-

Chairman Wicker: (43:18)
They’re still up. Do they violate your terms of service, Mr. Dorsey?

Jack Dorsey: (43:21)
We did not find those to violate our terms of service because we considered them saber rattling, which is part of the speech of world leaders in concert with other countries. Speech against our own people or countries on citizens, we believe is different and can cause more immediate harm...."

 

[Biff84]

Congratulations! If you’ve made it this far you have your ignore settings properly set. 

 

[GordonGekko]

I really don't understand the repeal of 230 and why Trump is pushing for this. It's just going to result in him and many of his supporters losing their Twitter accounts if people can sue Twitter based on what users post. They are going to over- censor everything. Does Trump just not understand the law or am I missing something?

Joe Rogan - Is YouTube Demonitization Censorship?

106,808 views  •Mar 20, 2018

Joe Rogan on YouTube demonetization and whether or not that is censorship.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJzfy0g7Y3E

Joe Rogan - YouTube & Facebook's Responsibility w/Ben Shapiro

238,110 views  •Apr 3, 2019

Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1276 w/Ben Shapiro

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDP0Z_IFNgw

Tim Pool Tells Twitter Exec They Have a Liberal Bias | JRE Twitter Special

3,261,677 views •Mar 5, 2019

Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1258 w/Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde, and Tim Pool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbTXqrS9l5E

 

[GordonGekko]

... 230 will never be repealed, no one wants to to happen.  Some people have to pretend to support its repeal.....

Tim Pool Asks Twitter Execs About Election Meddling & US Law | JRE Twitter Special

900,818 views •Mar 5, 2019

Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1258 w/Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde, and Tim Pool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we2ouS_JF7U

Tim Pool Details Controversial Twitter Bannings to Joe Rogan

399,320 views •Feb 8, 2019

Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1242 w/Tim Pool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p1Q04pmZoI

Was Twitter Biased During the Covington Kids Outrage? | Twitter Podcast Special

1,096,255 views •Mar 5, 2019

Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1258 w/Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde, and Tim Pool

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lp5DVEOYN4

https://reason.com/2020/01/21/covington-catholic-media-nick-sandmann-lincoln-memorial/

On the weekend of January 18, 2019, a short video appeared on Twitter that purported to show a group of Catholic high school boys—one young man, Nicholas Sandmann, in particular—harassing a Native American elder named Nathan Phillips on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. One year later, the media's reckless mishandling of the story stands as an important warning against the kind of agenda-driven, outrage-mongering clickbait that unfortunately thrives in the world of online journalism.

In hindsight, the slanted nature of the coverage is almost comical. The Detroit Free Press described the video as depicting "Phillips peacefully drumming and singing, while surrounded by a hostile crowd" and suggested that this "illustrates the nation's political and racial tensions." The Daily Beast's story was filed under "AWFUL" and described the video as "disturbing." Its first several paragraphs quote directly from Phillips. NPR asserted that the boys had mocked the Native American man. In story after story, news outlets claimed the Covington kids had shouted "build the wall." Again, the sole source of this claim was Phillips.

The news stories, at least, were edited; Twitter is not. Thus the reaction on social media was even more unhinged. Reza Aslan, a scholar and television pundit on CNN, tweeted that Sandmann had a "punchable" face. His CNN colleague Bakari Sellers agreed. BuzzFeed's Anne Petersen tweeted that Sandmann's face reminded her of Brett Kavanaugh's—and this wasn't intended as a compliment.Vulture writer Erik Abriss tweeted that he wanted the kids and their parents to die. Kathy Griffin said (tweeted) the high schoolers ought to be doxxed. As a USA Today retrospective noted, "comedian Patton Oswalt called the students in the video 'bland, frightened, forgettable kids who'll grow up to be bland, frightened, forgotten adult wastes.'…Writer Michael Green, referring to Sandmann's apparent smirking at the Native American man, wrote: 'A face like that never changes. This image will define his life. No one need ever forgive him.'…Huffington Post reporter Christopher Mathias explicitly compared the students to violent segregationists."

Within 48 hours, the truth had emerged. A longer video, which showed the Covington boys' prior harassment at the hands of the Black Hebrew Israelites, made it clear that the kids had not directed racist invectives at Phillips' crowd—they were cheering in order to drown out the Black Hebrew Israelites. Phillips then entered the teens' midst, drumming and chanting at them. Some thought he was joining their cheer, a small few made inappropriate tomahawk gestures, while others seemed confused or even wary—correctly wary, since Phillips and his entourage had not come in good faith."

 

[Bogeys]

Congratulations! If you’ve made it this far you have your ignore settings properly set. 

Only the second user account in 20 years that I have ignored.

 

[The Commish]

Congratulations! If you’ve made it this far you have your ignore settings properly set. 

Seriously....at least the "recipes" replies were, on occasion, helpful....we have a really good cheesy potato "go to" recipe as a result of that approach.  This is just embarrassingly bad and I'm kind of shocked it's been allowed this long.  

 

[Amused to Death]

Seriously....at least the "recipes" replies were, on occasion, helpful....we have a really good cheesy potato "go to" recipe as a result of that approach.  This is just embarrassingly bad and I'm kind of shocked it's been allowed this long.  

Ohhh, that sounds good! Can you reply to one of the GG posts with this recipe? I wonder how it would be on the smoker topped with some panko bread crumbs?

I kid, sorta....

 

[The Commish]

Ohhh, that sounds good! Can you reply to one of the GG posts with this recipe? I wonder how it would be on the smoker topped with some panko bread crumbs?

I kid, sorta....

Mine goes on my pellet grill, so "some" smoke but not a ton...fantastic!  I like crusting mine with more cheese, but a coating of bread crumbs or crackers works too.

 

[GordonGekko]

Only the second user account in 20 years that I have ignored.

Do you know can't be ignored? The clearly Anti-Semetic tolerance associated with Twitter. And not just the Holocaust denial and the call to purge Jews above that was left unchecked and Jack Dorsey said did not violate Twitter's own Hateful Conduct Policy, when it actually did. And this is all protected by Section 230 of the Community Decency Act. Let's look deeper, shall we....

https://letter.ly/how-many-people-get-their-news-from-social-media/

The Pew Research Social Media 2018 study shows that 68% of American adults get their news from social media....Facebook takes the trophy when it comes to social media news sources. In a 2018 Pew Research Center survey, the platform took up almost half (43%) of overall social media usage for news and has retained the same share since 2017....Adults between 18 and 34 years mostly get their news from online sources, i.e., from apps, social media, or websites.....For instance, 71% of Twitter users get their news from the site, compared to 73% of Reddit users and 67% of Facebook users.....To find out the percentage of people using social media for news, the Knight Foundation conducted a survey and found out the following: 88% of Millennials access news online at least once a week ( and) 53% of them access news daily. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/27/twitter-walkout-wileys-anti-semitic-tweets.html

Twitter faces 'walkout' over its handling of British grime star's anti-Semitic tweets

Published Mon, Jul 27 2020 7:41 AM

Twitter is facing a "walkout" over its handling of a string of anti-Semitic tweets that appeared on the account of British rapper Wiley on Friday and Saturday... He is also being investigated by the police under hate crime and malicious communications legislation. ...Several posts were deleted by the San Francisco-headquartered social media firm for violating Twitter's "hateful conduct policy" but others have been left up. Some of those that were deleted remained on the platform for nearly 12 hours, resulting in a public backlash against the artist and Twitter.

Tweets from Wiley's account asserted that Jews have systematically exploited Black musicians. In one tweet, which has now been deleted, he compared Jews to the Ku Klux Klan.

U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel questioned why the U.S. social media giants took so long to remove the posts. 

"The antisemitic posts from Wiley are abhorrent," she wrote on Twitter Sunday. "They should not have been able to remain on Twitter and Instagram for so long and I have asked them for a full explanation. Social media companies must act much faster to remove such appalling hatred from their platforms." Toni Vitale, partner and head of data protection at JMW Solicitors, said Twitter and Instagram have no liability themselves in the U.K.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/28/iranian-leader-asks-what-problem-is-with-anti-semitic-tweets/

Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei asks why anyone took issue with anti-Semitic tweets

By Ebony Bowden October 28, 2020 | 6:01pm

Earlier Wednesday, Twitter chief Jack Dorsey was grilled by senators over his platform’s refusal to remove tweets from Iran’s Supreme Leader calling for the extermination of the Jewish people — while at the same time censoring The Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s overseas business dealings.

“The next question to ask is: why is it a crime to raise doubts about the Holocaust? Why should anyone who writes about such doubts be imprisoned while insulting the Prophet (pbuh) is allowed?” the leader of the rogue regime asked in a tweet. The 81-year-old dictator is a prominent user of Twitter, frequently spreading Jew-hate on the platform to his 836,000 followers — including calling Israel a “cancerous growth” to be “uprooted and destroyed” — without any retribution.

In July, The Post revealed that the Silicon Valley giant rebuffed a request from the Israeli government to remove Khamenei’s tweets, claiming they qualified as “comments on current affairs.”

***********

 

[GordonGekko]

https://www.foxnews.com/tech/louis-farrakhan-wont-be-suspended-by-twitter-despite-antisemitic-tweet

Louis Farrakhan won't be suspended by Twitter despite anti-Semitic tweet

By Elizabeth Zwirz | Fox News

Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader who in a recent tweet said he was not prejudiced against Jewish people but was simply “anti-Termite,” will be allowed to continue to use the social media platform. Farrakhan took to the site on Tuesday by posting a video of himself speaking at an event in Detroit, during which he addressed “the members of the Jewish community that don’t like me.” In a caption to the video, he wrote: “I’m not an anti-Semite. I’m anti-Termite.”

A Twitter spokesperson told BuzzFeed News that Farrakhan’s account on the platform would not be suspended because his message was not adverse to any policies currently in effect.

However, the outlet noted in their Wednesday report that Farrakhan’s tweet infringed on the company’s proposed “dehumanization policy."
 

https://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/jns/petition-to-remove-farrakhan-from-twitter-gains-1-400-signatures-and-counting/article_8c626aef-3be8-5c7c-a394-616aae9422c6.html

Petition to remove Farrakhan from Twitter gains 1,400 signatures and counting

Shiryn Ghermezian Posted Aug 7, 2020 at 1: 07 PM

Nearly 1,400 people have so far signed a petition launched on Aug. 2 to have the account of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan removed from Twitter. Farrakhan has an estimated 350,000 followers on Twitter. Sabina said allowing him to remain on the platform “is negligent in times when hate crimes against Jews are on the rise.”

The Nation of Islam leader has a history of making anti-Semitic remarks, previously describing Adolf Hitler as “a great man,” and calling Jews “termites” and “Satan.”

More recently, in his Fourth of July sermon that was broadcast on television, he promoted an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory and said Jews should have their brains knocked out ....

https://www.firstpost.com/tech/news-analysis/jack-dorsey-twitter-ceo-apologises-over-white-supremacist-ad-3692485.html

tech2 News StaffNov 18, 2016 09:05:25 IST

Twitter's Chief Executive Jack Dorsey apologized on Thursday after the microblogging service let through an ad promoting a white supremacist group. "We made a mistake here and we apologize. Our automated system allowed an ad promoting hate. Against our policy. We did a retro and fixed," Dorsey tweeted. The ad titled "'New Article: The United States Was Founded as a White People's Republic' on NEW ORDER website" showed eight white children in a field. It was tweeted from an account with the handle "@NEW_ORDER_1488".

https://www.indiewire.com/2018/07/seth-rogen-slams-twitter-ceo-jack-verifying-white-supremacists-1201980813/

Jack Dorsey, Twitter co-founder and chief executive officer, is being called out by Rogen on social media.

Zack Sharf Jul 3, 2018 1:06 pm

Seth Rogen used his own Twitter page to criticize Twitter co-founder and CEO Jack Dorsey for verifying white supremacists on the platform. According to the company, the blue verified badge users see next to certain account names “lets people know that an account of public interest is authentic.” Twitter has been under fire over the last several months for verifying extremist voices. Rogen himself tweeted to Ron Paul on July 2 and called out the Republican for posting a racist anti-Semitic meme.

“I’ve been DMing with [Jack Dorsey] about his bizarre need to verify white supremacists on his platform for the last 8 months or so,” Rogen said to his over 7 million Twitter followers. “After all the exchanges, I’ve reached a conclusion: the dude simply does not seem to give a ####.”

Rogen, who is a vocal opponent of Donald Trump on social media....

****************

 

[GordonGekko]

https://www.mediaite.com/online/twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-on-alt-righter-who-posted-anti-semitic-tweets-hes-got-interesting-points/

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was pressed about his contacts with an alt-right figure during an interview with HuffPost, which he responded to by saying the fringe pundit has “interesting points.” The topic was brought up during Dorsey’s lengthy interview with HuffPost’s Ashley Feinberg, who interrogated the big tech executive on Twitter’s myriad of controversies.

Dorsey’s relationship with Ali Akbar, who has a long history of obsessing over which media figures and outlets are “Jewish,” began last summer as Twitter faced criticism for allowing Alex Jones to stay on their platform. The Twitter head eventually gave in to calls to ban Jones, but he maintains that Akbar — who has guest hosted Jones’s conspiracy network Infowars — is worth listening to.

“During that time, I reached out to a bunch of people,” Dorsey said after Feinberg asked about Akbar. “You want to get as many thoughts as possible.”

After being asked specifically about Akbar’s anti-semitism, Dorsey said doesn’t “act on all of his comments.”

Feinberg then asked Dorsey about Akbar’s specific tweets:  Well, Ali Akbar’s had a series of tweets, I’m just going to read a couple excerpts for you. “Anti-white comments from Jewish anti-Trump commentator Bill Kristol.” “Jake Tapper who is a Jewish left-leaning journalist.” “The conservative Jewish publication The Daily Wire.” He has a whole series of these, and he seems like a very specific kind of figure to reach out to. Were you aware of his past comments and his tendency to identify which members of the media are Jews?

Dorsey replied: I don’t act on all of his comments. I listen, and I think that’s the most important thing. I was introduced to him by a friend, and you know, he’s got interesting points. I don’t obviously agree with most. But, I think the perspective is interesting.

https://mashable.com/article/jack-dorsey-twitter-account-hacked/

Jack Dorsey's Twitter account hacked to spread pro-Hitler message

By Jack MorseAug 30, 2019

Twitter has a Nazi problem. Or, more specifically, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey's account has a Nazi problem.  On Friday afternoon, Dorsey's account was hacked to spread a pro-Hitler message along with anti-Semitism associated with the Holocaust.

" jack @ jack

Hitler is innocent go follow XXXXXX if you want every Jew gassed"

The tweet was quickly deleted, but was screenshot in all its horribleness.   

https://twitter.com/danielnazer/status/1167529027722194944

https://i2.wp.com/media.boingboing.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Screen-Shot-2019-08-30-at-1.51.42-PM.png?resize=539%2C427&ssl=1

https://akm-img-a-in.tosshub.com/indiatoday/images/bodyeditor/201908/10DD3788-292B-4073-BF92-A6E4C1-x1406.jpeg?rxbckEtfWrgqi9oKtnn5EEpQWc9mf0CG

"Yes, Jack's account was compromised," tweeted Twitter vice president of global communications Brandon Borrman. "We're working on it and investigating what happened." Dorsey's account also tweeted racial epithets, along with a string of profane nonsense.  The official Twitter account confirmed the hack as well. That Twitter's CEO is unable to keep his account, followed by 4.2 million on the platform, free from this sort of garbage doesn't bode well for the security of the service. 

UPDATE: Aug. 30, 2019, 2:27 p.m. PDT: Twitter issued the following statement: "The account is now secure, and there is no indication that Twitter's systems have been compromised."

*******

Let's see if we can get this straight. You can ban the NY Post for a "violation" that Jack Dorsey admits later, under oath, that doesn't exist and required an overhaul of Twitter's actual policies, for 16 full days in the critical weeks before Election Day, on the issue the Hunter Biden laptop, covering potential payoffs for political influence from the office of the Vice President, that Twitter's fact checkers ( 72 separate organizations under Twitter's payroll) can't deny but then won't delete denial of the Holocaust which violates Twitter's own TOS under it's Hateful Conduct Policy. Nor a call to violence against Jews. The discussion of comparing Jews to insects. Talk about how Israel should be destroyed without retribution. And messaging that relates Jewish people to the Ku Klux Klan. From a CEO who is friends with a pundit known for Anti-Semetic inciting rhetoric and calls that inflaming talk "interesting", allows ads from white supremacists and who has Anti-Semetic tweets flowing from his own personal account but claims it was hacked ( Yes, we've never heard about the "hacked" situation before...)

 

[GordonGekko]

This is just embarrassingly bad and I'm kind of shocked it's been allowed this long.  

Five different people in this thread questioned Section 230 of the Community Decency Act. I addressed each claim and each person specifically.

What are you shocked by? Diversity of thought? Diversity of opinion? Someone willing to actual put forward reference material, links, video, transcripts, quotes, etc to show their position on a subject?  Are you shocked that something as complex as public policy and questions on the limits of free speech cannot be covered and given context in bite sized Twitter nuggets?

I find it shocking that Jack Dorsey and Twitter violate their own TOS and Hateful Conduct Policy to allow inciting Anti-Semetic rhetoric. You find long posts shocking but not the public rallying of violence towards and against Jews and Israel? Which is shamefully protected by Section 230.

How many subscribers on FBG are Jewish? ( No one needs to answer that in public) How many staff members and paid analysts are Jewish? Anyone here marry into a Jewish family? Anyone here as a child helped by a teacher who happened to be Jewish? A sports coach? A religious member of the community? A neighbor? A coworker? A former classmate? A fellow service member? Someone who helped them get a job? An opportunity?

Six million people were slaughtered, while most of the entire world at the time stood in shameful silence. And now radicals want to pretend it never happened and continue to demand more of them are wiped from the face of the Earth. They want to scream it out in public to the nearly 70 percent of all Americans who get all their news from social media. Where it impacts every community, even the FBG community.  I present this to you, but the only thing you are shocked by is how long I post and how frequent I post because I'd like to live in a world where the children and grandchildren of the people here inherit something better than to tolerate all of this?

You've reduced genocide into a sound bite for a joke about posting recipes. You were saying something about behavior that's "embarrassing"?

 

[36Kevon]

How could you sue if you got censored? What would be your cause of action against the social media platform?

And they can't let it go unmoderated. Because they could get sued for things other people write. So, for example, if 230 is repealed and Trump tweets that Mitt Romney rapes children, Romney could sue not only Trump but also Twitter. As a result, Twitter is going to have no choice but to be super hyper vigilant in what it censors. It can't let anything remotely objectionable remain for fear of getting sued.

A constitutional thing, often referred to as free speech.  

 

[36Kevon]

I am not sure this quote supports your argument unless you ignore the first half of it.

Kosseff also tweeted "As I've said in four interviews in the past few hours: increasing the liability for user content will cause platforms to restrict more controversial user content. Regardless of whether you want that outcome (and many legitimately do), it's what will happen."

I don't think that anyone knows exactly what would happen if section 230 is repealed. This interview with Kosseff covers the issue pretty well: https://www.aei.org/multimedia/jeff-kosseff-setting-the-record-straight-on-section-230/

You're interchanging "restrict" and "moderate". They are distinctly different.  

 

[Amused to Death]

You're interchanging "restrict" and "moderate". They are distinctly different.  

Repealing/revising section 230 may be a legitimate concern. Forming an election fraud committee may be a good thing. But there are 3 days left in the 116th Congress. Not nearly enough time to debate, modify, and vote on those issues. Or he can just bring the stand-alone bill to the floor for a vote.

Besides, has McConnell even brought his bill to the floor? Or sent it back to the House? I believe McConnell still needs to act before anything can happen.

 

[tymarsas]

You're interchanging "restrict" and "moderate". They are distinctly different.  

I am not sure I agree. He made a distinction between "restrict" and "eliminate" in the quote you posted. What do you think "restrict" means if not moderation?

One of his points in the interview that I posted is that Big Tech will be fine if Section 230 is eliminated. They can still use the First Amendment to fight lawsuits and they have the resources to do that. Section 230 reduces frivolous lawsuits. It will make it very difficult for smaller organizations because they don't have the resources to fight lawsuits. Many of the smaller organizations would likely just eliminate user content all together.

 

[yak651]

Only the second user account in 20 years that I have ignored.

The first for me, guy was totally unreadable 

 

[whoknew]

A constitutional thing, often referred to as free speech.  

Which, as I am sure you know, applies to the government - not private entities. 

 

[CR69]

Which, as I am sure you know, applies to the government - not private entities. 

It's amazing how many people don't know this 

 

[Mister CIA]

Congratulations! If you’ve made it this far you have your ignore settings properly set. 

My Link:  https://imgur.com/cPBkz8u

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Congratulations! If you’ve made it this far you have your ignore settings properly set. 

Only the second user account in 20 years that I have ignored.

Who was the first? If it was me please don't respond.

 

[Bogeys]

Who was the first? If it was me please don't respond.

LOL...no wasn't you.

Won't be popular, but it was SWC.  The humor wasn't appealing to me so it was just gibberish. 

 

[dgreen]

A bunch of amateurs here. My ignore list is over 30 now. I’m considering wiping it all out soon and giving everyone a fresh start. 

 

[36Kevon]

Which, as I am sure you know, applies to the government - not private entities. 

Sure, thus the terms of service. Does your TOS say no politcal posts, no conservative posts, no Trump posts?  You've effectively banned Trump then. If not, and they then censor posts that dont violate the TOS they would be open to being sued. 

What do you think Section 230 does if you think a private entity could do anything they want?

 

[36Kevon]

I am not sure I agree. He made a distinction between "restrict" and "eliminate" in the quote you posted. What do you think "restrict" means if not moderation?

Keep from posting, deny service.   Not allow posts then moderate them.  

 

[whoknew]

Sure, thus the terms of service. Does your TOS say no politcal posts, no conservative posts, no Trump posts?  You've effectively banned Trump then. If not, and they then censor posts that dont violate the TOS they would be open to being sued. 

What do you think Section 230 does if you think a private entity could do anything they want?

Section 230 states that websites cannot be sued for what third parties write on their website.

Going back to your first paragraph - what would the cause of action be agains the website? What would you sue them for?

 

[36Kevon]

Section 230 states that websites cannot be sued for what third parties write on their website.

Going back to your first paragraph - what would the cause of action be agains the website? What would you sue them for?

That's not all it says. It says they can moderate/remove content in in good faith, without being held legally responsible, “whether or not the content is constitutionally protected”.   You should read it. It's not very long. 

 

[whoknew]

That's not all it says. It says they can moderate in in good faith, without being held legally responsible, “whether or not the content is constitutionally protected”.   You should read it. It's not very long. 

What, in your opinion, does that phrase add?

 

[Cjw_55106]

Sounds like payments have started coming in

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Sounds like payments have started coming in

My account has a pending January 4th $600 deposit showing.

 

[sho nuff]

Sounds like payments have started coming in

Got a text this morning from my bank of a deposit from the Treasury.  At least they seem faster delivering this than they were getting it passed.

 

[the moops]

@FBG Moderator

Can you tell this gecko dude to knock it off? Thanks

 

[JAA]

My Link:  https://imgur.com/cPBkz8u

How did you get the black look?

 

[Sinn Fein]

How did you get the black look?

Theme at bottom of page

once you go black, you won’t go back. 

 

[Courtjester]

Where this stimulus makes no sense is the cutoff is 16 years old. So if you have a HS senior or a kid in college, too bad.  

 

[FairWarning]

My account has a pending January 4th $600 deposit showing.

Same here.

 

[JAA]

Theme at bottom of page

once you go black, you won’t go back. 

 

[CR69]

Theme at bottom of page

once you go black, you won’t go back. 

Omg how did I not know this existed. Will take a little bit to get used to it but so much better. Thanks

 

[jrt103]

Now that the Dems control the House, Senate and Pres, we should see that $2000 stimulus right?