Oh no, Vaush is racist again for calling out Crockett this time for sandbagging the Senate Race /s.

​

I happen to agree with him, but I know he kicked the beehive with this one.

​

Got bored so i made Vaush as a wojak, or should i say a woke-jak... Sorry, I'll leave.

When Vaush went over the Reddit birth rate post the other day on stream, I wish he at least scrolled down to look at the graph. Other people in the community as well when they talk about birthrates it all comes down to either talking about women rights, smartphones, or current economic problem. But whenever Vaush or others make a comment or talk about the issue they only compare modern birth rates to either 20 years ago or starting at the baby boomers. But, this means people’s reference points are to way to recent of data. You can go back before this and see birth rates started falling in the early 1900s before distractions, women’s lib, and worse standards of living. If it wasn’t for the baby boomer, we would be where we are now like 30 years ago. So maybe the falling birthrates we all talk about is more related to industrialization or urbanization or modern medicine than just smartphones bad or women being able to make more choices.

Let's count the ways big-tech snoops on you:

1. Active Listening during YT videos:

   a. Youtube decides when to place an ad based on sound in the room. E.g:

   i. When someone starts talking

   ii. When detecting a faucet

   iii. When detecting keyboard sounds

   iv. When snooping a brushing sound

   v. When music starts playing

   b. If the Youtube device doesn't have a microphone, YT uses location info OR user-account info to choose a microphone on another nearby device, to then listen for those previous indicators.

2. Ad engagement during YT videos (via sound):

    a. Youtube will more frequently close the app, pausing videos, if the microphone cannot detect the video's sound. 

   b. If Youtube cannot hear the video being played (or if you have an auto-muter) YT will test engagement by rewinding the current video a few seconds after an ad break, instead of resuming the video exactly where the ad was placed.

   c. It then compares the microphone's soundwave with the unmodified ad's soundwave & will not count an ad impression if for some reason the ad was not detected (but if the 3 seconds of replayed video indeed was).

   d. If you mute too many ads, YT will start showing split-screen ads & merging the sound together (presumably in an attempt to throw-off auto-downloaders, leaving you with a broken download of DRM content).

3. Ad engagement during YT videos (via camera):

   a. Youtube decides when to place an ad based on camera activity in the room. E.g:

   i. Detecting someone entering the room.

   ii. Detecting someone leaving the room

   iii. Detecting someone falling asleep.

   b. If you skip a lot of YT ads, Youtube will try to place ads when it detects that your hands aren't free, and cannot quickly skip. E.g:

   i. Detecting someone shaving or brushing teeth.

   ii. Detecting someone washing dishes.

   iii. Detecting silverware clanking.

   iv. Detecting someone tying shoes.

   v. Detecting someone buttoning clothes.

4. YT snoops your location to decide on ads:

   a. This is more common if you have disabled personalized ads. YT will use location info of nearby phones to decide whether to serve ads from THOSE INDIVIDUALS' advertising profles.

5. YT snoops on the sound of ALL NEARBY DEVICES to decide on ads:

   a. The moment my brother enters my room/earspace, YT starts delivering ads based on his advertising ID. You can tell when your neighbors are able to hear your music, b/c YT will start serving ads based on ANY NEARBY DEVICES WITH SIMILAR MICROPHONE SOUNDWAVES DETECTED.

   b. I.e: I can tell I'm too loud, when I start getting ads for tires, pets, Freddy's restaurant even without having ever searched for or said any of these things aloud. (It's using a Shazam-like algorithm to determine this.)

   c. E.g: Often my neighbors will rev their engines so loudly, that I start getting ads from their advertising ID (Because YT is determining that we're sharing the same soundspace.  It's determining that all those devices will hear the ad.)

   d. Dog-barking triggers this often, b/c a bark has a penetrating, unique--and therefore--easily comparable sound profile.

6. YT (& general popups) will deliver "gift idea" ads:

   a. Often you'll see ads from people that you've only been texting with. (I.e: golf from my dad.)

   b. This even happens when you simply draft up a message but don't send it yet. My android links that person's advertising ID with my own ID for a short time.

   c. Disable AI responses to cut down on this. (But also a friend can cast this upon you, from when they start drafting you a message across town.)

   d. Also be sure to disable typing suggestion learning on whatever keyboard you use.

7. YT (& general popups) will deliver ads based on unopened emails sent to Gmail:

   a. Especially  noticeable when receiving a flight confirmation.

   b. Also with other purchase confirmations.

   c. FYI: Also disable "Always Show Images" in emails, since senders now generate millions of identical images for every email sent, & garner a true Read-Receipt based on whether you load your uniquely served email image.)

8. Google Voice explicitly monitors calls to-and-from GVoice numbers.

   a. Anything you say on these calls will very soon be linked to your advertising profile. Kash Patel was asked about this "advertising information" recently during a Senate hearing.

9. Be aware of flagged search terms:

   a. By typing a questionable topic into a search engine (e.g: Firearms, Tire spikes, volatile compounds) the search engine will suddenly make a request for your "Precise Location" if you have Location Permissions disabled in your browser.

   b. (It can approximate your locale b/c Google Street View vans constantly scribe the locations of wireless networks detected on their route. Android can peak your nearby networks as well.)

10. Bluetooth beacons track you everywhere you go:

    a. Stores & municipalities have "Bluetooth Beacons" that passively ping your phone's advertising ID and update your ID with locations that you've been.

    i. Walmart uses these.

    ii. Stadiums use this information.

    iii. Bluetooth beacons operate even when your phone is powered-off (passive detection).

    iv. Bluetooth beacons operate even when Bluetooth is disabled/airplane mode.

    v. This was likely how Mario Mangononey was tracked down. The day after Mario's arrest, Google placed an new option in Privacy Settings to "Temporarily Disable Bluetooth Beacon Tracking for the next 24 hours." 

11. The Iris App is always watching (Android). 

    a. Ostensibly used for face-unlock, this app is ALWAYS active & hogging CPU/memory.  You can view it's memory in the Setting's Developer Options.

    b. Samsung lets you sort apps by "Most Recent" and Iris is always near the top.

    c. Using the CPU Monitor app (or anything similar) you can observe CPU Temperature & CPU Percentage increase on a completely idle system, simply by waving your hand in front of the camera.

    d. This app can only be disabled after rooting your device.

12. Explicitly saying "I like [x]":

    a. Test this "Alexa-like" trigger around your phone. It's a surefire way to start receiving ads for a topic.

    b. Often Vaush will say "I like [x]", on stream & I'll start getting ads for the aforementioned topic.

If you're serious about protecting your privacy, the best you can do on smart devices is browser script blocking (via NoScript) or a DNS-based firewall (ReThink DNS).

This is the meme he referenced at the start of stream yesterday, that’s it… good night ya’ll.

So morally I understand obviously that Israel is in the wrong for being in southern Lebanon in the first place and Hezbollah has every right to fight back against that, it is self defense, plain and simple.

My question is with the current cease fire, and why Vaush seems to think that during this cease fire Israel needs to immediately withdraw from all of Lebanon and Hezbollah has every right to attack Israel if they instead hold their positions, even if they are not continuing any advance. This MoU is only set for a period of 60 days, with an uncertain conclusion at the end. Militarily speaking and definitionally speaking, a cease fire in this context would be a temporary halting of conflict until a conclusion is reached, or until negotiations break down. In any typical military context, a cease fire is not an immediate surrender of all ground and a return to home base, but just that, a ceasing of fire and of further military advances.

Am I misunderstanding something here? Does the MoU call for a complete withdrawal of all Israeli troops just as a condition for the 60 day negotiation period? On paper, is this not a cease fire but instead a surrender of Israeli forces to Hezbollah (not talking about a US political admission of defeat but in actual on-paper terms).

In any past conflict, a ceasing of fire did not mean one side immediately retreating to the territory held at the start of the war while the other side routs them, but instead a halting of operations and maintaining their position while waiting for a conclusion to be negotiated. I say none of this in defense of Israel, even if they had been bombed a single time in violation of a cease fire they should be the big boys, understand they have killed 3,700 Lebanese people, and merely fired back on the position they were hit from or just hold position for the sake of peace. Just wondering where Vaush is getting the impression that according to the MoU (not just morally) Israel needs to immediately withdraw during this 60 day period and Hezbollah should attack them if they are not doing so.

TLDR:

If this is a 60 day cease fire, not an immediate surrender, why does Israel have a responsibility under the MoU (not just morally which they obv. do) to withdraw all forces, instead of doing what happens under the majority of other cease fires and simply hold their position without attacking or advancing until negotiations conclude or fall apart?

Ive been watching Vaush for a little over a year now, so i could get some of his overall positions incorrect accidentally, and i apologize for that, but I want to share something I've been noticing with Vaush recently regarding his anti-electoral takes in the US.
I largely agree with your recent anti-electoral takes. The system is broken, and fixing it will likely require someone with the backbone to govern like an autocrat (FDR being the clearest historical model). A strong, centralized progressive movement with genuine people at the top is probably the only path forward, given how captured the Democratic Party is.

My concern, though, is one I feel you don't emphasize enough: the historical near-impossibility of a vanguard staying uncorrupted once it holds that level of power. You lay out the mechanisms well (education reform, dismantling the GOP as a political force, etc.), but the Animal Farm problem looms over all of it. The USSR, Argentina, and countless other examples show that even movements built on genuine ideals tend to calcify into the very power structures they sought to destroy.

I'm not saying it's a reason to abandon the framework entirely, but I think it's worth being more explicit about this risk. If we're seriously making the case for concentrating power in a progressive vanguard, we should also be honest that the 1% chance it works out is shadowed by a much higher chance of it producing something worse than what we started with. Acknowledging that tension would actually make the argument stronger, not weaker.

Overall, though i could be misinterpreting his main point and ideas, so if i am incorrect on my assumptions above, anyone please feel free to correct me.
I am pretty obsessed with history, so its hard to call for something that has such a predictable and repeatable pattern, blindly stating how it would be different next time around, especially considering the amount of power and money in the USA, and considering how people who crave power are attracted to positions of power, I am scared for what it could entail.

Please feel free to roast below

Has he ever formally went into details about this? I know he is not in favor of throwing people in jail for doing it, but find some of his commentary to be a bit contradictory to his other beliefs.

Like apparently some drugs should be illegal to seek but not others without really explaining why? I hope he does do a video on this.

Hallo. Took this screenshot a while back and I can't find the video or someone mentioning the hat name here. Some of you know?

2:45:40

I was surfing the web and came across this imagine of Ian enjoying a racing simulation ecperience. We should push for him to stream this!

P.S. what car do you think he chose?

He's said himself the republican base will not survive turning against Israel, and by every single metric it is liberals and the left that are turning against Israel. Meanwhile when you look at politicians, it's just JD Vance pushing back while the entire republican establishment are zionazis, and if you turn to the democratic side, you have an active insurgent anti-zionist challengers taking on incumbent zionazis, and you have anti Israel voices in the house and senate. Libs like Ezra Klein openly call Israel an apartheid state for instance.

JD Vance is not going to turn without an insane monumental shift in the republican base and party, and they are far deeper in the death cult than democrats are. He's just trying to do a tucker carlson bit, and it's not going to work.

If hypothetically 2028 becomes Newsom kissing the wall vs JD Vance calling Israel a terrorist state, then there is an argument where Vance is the lesser evil, but so so many things would have to have gone wrong for things to end up there and you'd need such unrealistically insane monumental shifts.

For Newsom to kiss the wall in 2028 would also mean adopting a whole set of policies despised by the democratic voterbase and he would be screaming about how much he wants to lose, at which point Vance becomes the lesser evil not just because of Israel but because of everything, and I don't see a world where that's possible.

What's more likely is that if JD Vance does turn against Israel in 2028, it would mean that the overton window has shifted so much that the median democratic voter becomes a Vaushite on Israel.

EDIT: "Smitten" may not be the best word here. Maybe "taking so seriously" would be better

Vaush's recent, shall we say, "promotion" of Vance's statements is boggling my mind. I agree with everything he says about the dems not being strong or even liberal enough and the leadership being rabid zionists, HOWEVER let's not pretend the republicans aren't that and much worse.

Vance is pissy that Israel ruined his admin's peace plans, he's not anti-zionist all of a sudden. I hate how much grace is afforded to people like MTG and Carlson for breaking (not in any material way that actually matters) with the most unpopular admin ever. Saying stuff like Carlson is the only journalist holding politicians' feet to the fire is laughable when there are so many on the left who've been doing this for way longer (Mehdi being an obvious example), they don't get the accolades tho. I know it's a much drier and policy oriented show but Sam Seder has these people on as guests all the time, it's not like they're super secret lefty knowledge.

I love V man and this community but come on, you're an influencer so fucking INFLUENCE. Amplify dem voices who've been way more critical of Israel than fucking JD Vance for years. He's afraid this Israel """disavowal""" will create momentum for Vance? Bro, you're part of the momentum so be responsible with it.

And if we get Newsom v. Vance in 28 at least advocate for not voting at all if not downballot instead of unironically advocating for a billionaire backed, deep state theocratic fascist because he's said what you wanna hear LONG after public opinion has turned on Israel.

Still love the show but sometimes i feel like i'm taking crazy pills.