Connect with us


Leaked Video Reveals Google Exec Admitting to Search Engine Manipulation



Google is facing renewed scrutiny following the release of a video featuring Marissa Mayer, a former Google Vice President of Search Products, discussing how the company prioritizes its own products in search results. The video, shared by Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski, has sparked significant debate and criticism, particularly concerning allegations of antitrust violations and unfair competition practices.

In the video, Mayer candidly explains that Google products are always shown at the top of search results, regardless of other metrics such as popularity or relevance. She describes how the introduction of Google Finance changed the way stock quotes were displayed, pushing Google’s own links to the forefront. Mayer contrasts this approach with the previous practice of ranking finance sites based on published metrics like Comscore, which would typically feature the most popular sites at the top.

Mayer’s remarks highlight a broader pattern within Google, where similar preferential treatment extends to other services like Google Maps. According to Mayer, after Google links, other results are ranked by popularity, but Google’s services consistently receive top billing.

This revelation has significant implications for Google’s ongoing legal battles, particularly with Rumble, a video-sharing platform that has accused Google of self-preferencing and violating antitrust laws. Rumble’s lawsuit, filed in January 2021, alleges that Google manipulates its algorithms to disadvantage competitors, including Rumble itself.

Pavlovski has indicated that Mayer’s video will play a crucial role in their legal arguments, serving as a key piece of evidence in their case against Google. He hopes that the video will demonstrate Google’s deliberate and systematic practice of prioritizing its own products, which could be seen as an abuse of its dominant market position.

The controversy raises important questions about the fairness and integrity of Google’s search engine practices. Critics argue that by prioritizing its own services, Google is not acting in the best interest of users or the competitive market. Instead, it is leveraging its vast influence to stifle competition and maintain its market dominance.

The issue of search engine manipulation is not new for Google. The company has faced multiple antitrust investigations and fines from regulators around the world. However, the detailed insights provided by a former high-ranking executive like Mayer could add weight to the arguments of those advocating for stricter regulations and greater accountability for tech giants.

As the legal proceedings unfold, the tech industry and consumers alike will be watching closely to see how the courts address these allegations. The outcome could have significant repercussions for Google and set important precedents for how tech companies manage their platforms and compete in the digital marketplace.


Florida Prepares to Ban Bill Gates’ Lab-Grown ‘Meat’



Florida lawmakers are making strides to prohibit the sale of lab-grown “meat” products within the state, driven by mounting safety apprehensions surrounding synthetic meat alternatives. Spearheaded by Bill HB 1071, these legislative efforts aim to define and restrict the distribution of “cultivated meat,” which encompasses any meat or food product derived from cultured animal cells.

Under the proposed legislation, individuals found manufacturing, selling, or distributing cultivated meat would face misdemeanor charges, with food establishments risking disciplinary actions and potential license suspensions for non-compliance.

The impetus for the ban comes amidst heightened scrutiny over the safety and viability of lab-grown meat, particularly as Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates champions significant investments into its development. While proponents of synthetic meat tout its potential as a sustainable and ethical alternative to traditional agriculture, concerns regarding its safety profile and long-term health implications have prompted Florida legislators to take decisive action.

The bills, including the Senate counterpart SB 1084, have garnered support from conventional agricultural sectors while encountering opposition from researchers and investors invested in lab-grown meat technology. Critics contend that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has already sanctioned the consumption of lab-grown meat, pointing to approvals granted to California-based companies like Upside Foods (formerly Memphis Meats) and Good Meat. Nevertheless, the Florida Cattlemen’s Association stands firmly behind the proposed ban, reflecting broader industry sentiments aligned with safeguarding traditional agricultural practices.

Despite assertions from supporters that lab-grown meat offers a pragmatic solution to escalating concerns surrounding food safety and dwindling farmland, dissenting voices caution against its potential risks. Notably, concerns persist regarding the genetic engineering of cells and the emergence of cancer-promoting properties within lab-grown meat, as highlighted by the Center for Food Safety. Furthermore, uncertainties persist regarding the sterility of lab-grown meat production processes and the absence of adequate pathogenic control mechanisms, raising apprehensions about potential health hazards associated with consumption.

The legislative developments in Florida resonate with broader efforts across the United States to address the proliferation of lab-grown meat products. Recently, the Alabama Senate passed legislation prohibiting the sale and manufacture of lab-grown meat, underscoring a growing trend towards regulatory intervention in the realm of alternative protein sources. Additionally, federal initiatives, such as the proposed “School Lunch Integrity Act,” seek to preemptively ban lab-grown meat from government-sponsored meal programs, citing concerns over nutritional quality and allergen research.

As Florida lawmakers navigate the complexities surrounding lab-grown meat regulation, the debate underscores broader societal tensions surrounding food production, consumer safety, and the ethical considerations inherent in technological advancements. While the fate of lab-grown meat remains uncertain within Florida and beyond, the discourse surrounding its regulation underscores the need for informed policymaking and continued dialogue among stakeholders invested in shaping the future of food production and consumption.

Continue Reading


Texas Attor­ney Gen­er­al Ken Pax­ton Wins $700 Mil­lion Set­tle­ment with Google for Anti­com­pet­i­tive Practices



Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, together with attorneys general from every state and many territories, have reached a $700 million settlement with Google for their anticompetitive behavior related to the Google Play Store.

Google has been ordered to pay $630 million in reparations to customers who purchased on the Google Play Store between August 2016 and September 2023 who were injured by Google’s anticompetitive actions. In addition, the internet behemoth will pay the states an extra $70 million in fines. The deal also compels Google to improve its business operations in order to reduce its unfair market advantage over other firms and consumers.

In 2021, a group of state attorneys general sued Google for illegally monopolizing the market for Android app distribution and in-app payment processing. Google, in particular, entered into anticompetitive arrangements to prohibit other app shops from being installed on Android devices, bribed important app developers not to launch items on competitor app stores, and erected technical obstacles to discourage users from directly downloading apps to their devices.

“Texas has led the nation in the fight to hold giant tech companies accountable for monopolistic activity,” said Attorney General Paxton. “I am proud that this settlement brought together so many states who recognized the importance of protecting free markets.”

To read the settlement, click here.

Continue Reading


PIZZAGATE: Ex-Meta workers confirm encrypted tech let ‘millions of pedophiles target kids’



Earlier this month, Meta introduced encryption for direct communications on Facebook and Instagram in order to preserve users’ privacy.

Encrypted communications are used to prevent anybody other than the sender and recipient from reading the communication’s contents.

The unveiling occurred four years after the project was first revealed — and it had been a significant source of conflict inside the firm. Former Meta engineering director David Erb left in 2019 in protest of the project, he just told the Wall Street Journal.

While at Meta, Erb expressed his concern to superiors that encrypting direct messages on Facebook would shield predators who preyed upon children, but they didn’t listen.

Critics fear that would-be pedophiles can track down children through Facebook’s “People You May Know” feature, which offers suggestions of possible friends who can be added through an online social circle.

“It was a hundred times worse than any of us expected,” Erb told the Journal. “There were millions of pedophiles targeting tens of millions of children.”

In May 2020, Karl Quitter, a Chicago-area man, used an alias, “Mathew Jones,” to solicit sexually explicit photos and videos of at least nine teenage girls based in the Philippines via Facebook. Quitter preyed on the victims’ financial difficulties, using money transfers to the victims’ families to entice the girls to take the sexually explicit images. In a message to one 16-year-old victim in 2020, Quitter promised to send money to her family for medicine and food if she complied with his demands. Facebook investigators flagged Quitter’s messages and turned them over to authorities, according to the Journal. Quitter, 58, pleaded guilty in federal court to sexually exploiting children and was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison.

A Department of Homeland Security investigator who was involved in the Quitter case told the Journal that Facebook’s “trust and safety team’s ability to access messages was instrumental” in bringing about an arrest. Brian Fitzgerald, the head of the Homeland Security’s Chicago office, told the Journal that a random stranger shouldn’t be able to go to encrypted communications with a minor.

Meta, parent company to WhatsApp, has sought to minimize the risks posed by end-to-end encryption technology. The company has spent years developing robust safety measures on Facebook and Instagram to prevent and combat abuse or unlawful activity. Meta also offers many encryption-resilient tools to help keep teens safe, such as reporting suspicious instances to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Meta is parent company to WhatsApp, the world’s most popular encrypted messaging app. However, WhatsApp users communicate with people they know — unlike Facebook and Instagram, which allow strangers to find each other. Meta’s top competitor on social media, TikTok, does not offer encrypted messaging services because the company said it “place[s] a premium on ensuring that our younger users have a safe experience.” YouTube, owned by Google’s parent company, Alphabet Inc., disabled private messaging in 2019 because it wanted to focus on improving public conversations.


Continue Reading