Naomi Wolf - Vaccine Passports and the Social Credit System (video)

Naomi Wolf - Vaccine Passports and the Social Credit System

Naomi R. Wolf is an American liberal feminist author, journalist.
Following her first book The Beauty Myth, she became a leading spokeswoman of what has been described as the third wave of the feminist movement.
ETA:
She is speaking as a technician/ CEO to explain the technology of this Vax passport being proposed recently.
This proposed Vax Passport platform is the same platform being used to enslave over a billion people in China now

It includes:
- a rigorous -Social Credit System,
- it will be one that rewards the discrediting of others
- with severe penalties for attempting to discredit the wrong people
- millions of 360 degree surveillance cameras outside and inside homes
- It can find any dissonant in minutes
- It can collate groups of dissonants, shut and lock down anyone's ability to buy/sell/move
-This can open or close opportunities to a person and any part of their future, in a microsecond.
- to restrict development edits
- to constrain payment provisions from bank card credits and PayPal, or Apple-Pay etc..
- to keep people in “continually locked CV status” based on their own secret algorithms
- their pursuit to indulge in tyrannically imposed public, mass behavior modifications
- the restriction of any type of discussion within any place, including your own personal space like at home
- the restriction of any type of communications technology through text, or even alleged walking by one.
- it is already tied to Apple pay and Google wallets
- there would be no opt-out options
She’s been deplatformed 5 times since beginning to share this information
This is the most dangerous technology she has ever seen.
There’s no such thing as coming back from this.
If this succeeds, there would be no such thing as refusing to opt-in
From then on, there would be
No more Capitalism
No more Free assembly
No more Privacy
No more personal preferences nor even referencing any better choices without credit penalties.
There would be no escape without substantial nuke's-EPS, or solar CME's wiping out everything else, too.
* It completely violates The American Disability Act
* It violently violates our 1st and 4th Amendments
And yet, She is a Democrat? This is far beyond her partisanship with them..
It is advised to listen to her recommendations for further education on this topic.
Search: Naomi Wolf this was originally posted on her personal page.
FORBES published an article 4/6/21 saying there will not be a Federal Sponsored V.psprt. This occurs carefully worded. Be aware and watching for industry & corporations take on implementation of any/various kinds.

more...

Linux - The absurdity of choice

In the world of personal computers, what is a computer used for? I would argue that its purpose is to 'get shit done', whether it be watching BitChute videos or compiling the Linux kernel. Whatever the case, it ought to just work. It ought to be stable, polished and intuitive, however in the world of Linux-based operating systems, finding one that meets all three requirements is somewhere between impossible and improbable. Such an animal simply doesn't exist, at least this is what my experience has led me to believe.

I've been through a bunch of Linux distros over the years including Red Hat, Mandrake, SUSE, Mint, Debian, Manjaro, Artix, and probably a few more i forgot about, and in every case there were bugs, big and small, that never should have been present in a "stable" release. Now to be fair, i haven't messed with some of these distros in roughly two decades, but i have recently used both Linux Mint and Manjaro Linux for more than a year each. OK, we can argue that Manjaro, which is based on Arch, which is a cutting edge OS, shouldn't necessarily be considered when stability is crucial. Grant so. But either are any of the others and i have some thoughts on why that is.

Choice!

Linux is all about choice we are told. Not only are there a truck load of Linux-based distributions to choose from, which is far more than confusing enough for users wanting to make the switch, but then they have to choose a 'desktop environment'. And as the new user learns more, assuming they make it that far before giving up, the number of choices only increases. A rolling or point release? Which file system? Which package manager? Which package repository? Flatpak or Snaps? Which theme? Which window manager? GTK or Qt apps? Which terminal emulator? PulseAudio or PipeWire? Systemd or a traditional init system? Open source or proprietary drivers? Which kernel? And on and on and on and on.

The problems with all these choices are obvious and many. Software often has to be configured or modified to work on each system the developer wants to market to. Now you find a bug in the software and the developer can't reproduce it, so he/she asks which Linux distro you're running and whether you compiled it from source or downloaded it from some repository and, if so, whether it was the Qt or GTK version, or whether you installed the Flatpak or Snap package, etc.. You can see what a nightmare all these choices can create for software developers and end users alike and this is only the beginning of the 'choices' problem.

Stand-alone packages like Flatpak packages are an attempt to combat the non-uniformity and dependency issues that all these crazy choices naturally lead to, but this seems like a band-aid approach in my opinion. For example, you have multiple pieces of software that all use a library for which a serious vulnerability is found. Now, instead of pushing a single shared library out at the OS level, each software developer has to update their package which may or may not happen in a timely manner, or at all. Then there's the efficiency thing that's kicked out the window because every Flatpak/Snap/etc. package which uses the same library has included in it... the same library. If portability is a priority, stand-alone packages may be great, but for the average desktop/laptop user it can be a colossal waste of storage space.

Don't get me wrong, i am pro-choice, however i am also anti-stupidity and anti-inefficiency and thus i find it patently stupid and inefficient that all these choices exist. The waste in infrastructure alone to support all the software repositories for all the distributions must be overwhelming. And in my opinion, from my perspective, it is all these choices that are partly responsible for exactly none of the mainstream Linux distributions being stable or coherent. I think it's absolutely dumb and counter-intuitive that, even though the user selects a "global" window theme, a window designed with Qt looks and acts different than one designed with GTK, or that your mouse cursor theme is obeyed by one window and ignored by another, or that the KDE desktop may be more buggy in one distro than another, etc. Users expect uniformity, so when they run into these kinds of problems, to them it's a bug when, in fact, it's the almighty god of 'choice' rearing it's ugly head exactly as intended by the plethora of developers who ignore what many end users actually want and need.

Why in the world do we need multiple window managers? Why do developers need multiple widget tool-kits? Why in the hell does nearly every mainstream distribution need its own software repository... with allot of the same software as in the next software repository and so on?

Sure, Linux-based OS's are all about choice. Unlike Windows or Mac or whatever, it is very easy, even for a new user, to configure a system that is unlike any other, and therefore harder to troubleshoot when something explodes. On the other hand these choices come at a potentially huge cost. If one uses 'x' distro with 'y' desktop environment, they're essentially railroaded into whatever software repository is provided by that distro which means software they may want or need isn't easily available to them. Uniformity is lost and bugs abound.

Why people choose Linux

Why in the world would the average PC user want to use a Linux-based operating system in the face of all these problems (and *many* more which i haven't mentioned)? I'm not in a position to answer the question from any viewpoint other than my own and that of people with similar values. We value privacy. For users like myself, the thought of using proprietary software made by massive corporations who have zero concern for the inherent rights of human beings, especially with regard to privacy, is completely intolerable. Furthermore, i like some of the choices one realizes with Linux-based OS's. I want to be able choose a desktop theme. I want to not have to worry too much about whether my software contains malware, plus it's extremely convenient to be able to find what i want in a central location.

Choice is fine, but dammit to hell man, in moderation! Sacrificing stability for excess choice is a shortsighted mistake in my opinion and this is one of my greatest gripes with the Linux desktops where an out of hand number of choices has led to a fracturing of the Linux community which, in turn, causes nothing but headaches for many end users, the vast majority of which would probably happily sacrifice many of the trivial choices they are forced to deal with.

So, you're the Windows user who *was* considering a Linux OS right up until you read my rant. My advice is to not throw in the towel. If you care at all about your privacy and software ethics, you have no choice but to abandon Windows. If stability is more important to you, i would suggest trying Linux Mint with the Cinnamon desktop. Mint, based on Debian and Ubuntu, is pretty stable and user friendly. If you're wanting something a little more cutting edge with newer software on the other hand, i might suggest Manjaro Linux. Manjaro, based on Arch, is a rolling release which means, in theory, you can just keep updating it without ever having to reinstall it. Personally i prefer the KDE/Plasma desktop, but the choice is yours :)

Also see my accompanying article, A personal perspective: From Windows to Linux to Windows to Linux to....

New content: VPN Provider Review: AzireVPN

A VPN provider that owns their own hardware? And runs the system in RAM only? And physically plugs external ports to prevent tampering?

Although no VPN provider can be trusted 100% due to the nature of the service, if AzireVPN's claims are true, and there is some evidence they are, then this is a company worth considering.

Read: VPN Provider Review: AzireVPN

VPN Provider Review: AzireVPN

AzireVPN, operated by Netbouncer in Sweden, was recommended to me by one of those geeky, super knowledgeable hacker types who detailed some really interesting differences between Azire and other VPN providers. And what are those differences you ask, mouth watering in anticipation?

Well, first let's get something straight regarding VPN providers: there isn't a damn one that can be fully trusted, at least none i know of. They can tell you whatever they want about their security and no-log policies (many of them are flat out lying when they state this), but unless there's an information leak, or you discover a security or privacy issue yourself, or you personally know the people running the company, your confidence in their service will always be blind. Tor advocates like to use this ammo to suggest that Tor is far better in this regard because it's open source and uses multiple nodes and multiple layers of encryption, yada yada yada, but i find their claims of security to be less than concrete. For example a bad actor, such as your ISP, can apparently run an entire Tor network on a single machine using something like The Shadow Simulator.

Tor has other problems as well, some of them detailed in my article Tor versus a VPN - Which is right for you?. Understand that i'm not suggesting that a VPN is necessarily superior to Tor in every case, but i think that what path is best chosen depends on what you're trying to achieve and i think that for the average user who's downloading ... things ... or wants to circumvent YouTube's idiotic geo-restrictions, a VPN may be the better option, though unlike Tor, VPNs are not free and any provider that claims this is a good one to run the hell away from at maximum velocity.

Back to Azire...

AzireVPN claims to do things very differently. For one, they claim to physically own, install and maintain all their servers. Unlike every other (or mostly every other) VPN business where one can sit behind a keyboard, provisioning as many servers around the world as they please, Azire tells us they have to purchase, configure, secure and install each server they operate (if you search the images on their domain you can find some evidence that supports this).

From a security/privacy viewpoint i see this as a huge advantage over other mega-VPNs like NordVPN, ExpressVPN, etc., who are potentially more open to hacking and government snooping. Azire makes the following claims...

  • They own and maintain the hardware.
  • All hard drives are removed.
  • Nothing is stored physically on the servers - the entire system runs only in RAM (more here).
  • All USB, VGA and serial ports are plugged to prevent tampering (more here).
  • They support WireGuard which is apparently faster, better, easier and less bloated than the more traditional OpenVPN protocol.
  • No logging.

AzireVPN was featured in TorrentFreak's article, Which VPN Providers Really Take Privacy Seriously in 2021?.

Sounds like the berries, right? There is one downside to managing your own hardware though in that they can't provision equipment as quickly as the fast-food VPNs and so Azire doesn't have a heck of a lot of servers, but the ones they do have are located in quite a few countries and they seem to be slowly expanding (see their blog for more). Azire does offer SOCKS5 proxies, however you must be connected to one of their VPN servers to use them and there is no encryption at the proxy level. Still, their SOCKS5 servers make it easy to change your location/IP in order to circumvent geo-restrictions. For those like myself who run their VPN client on their router this is a plus because, while it isn't as straight forward to swap locations, there are plenty off web browser extensions available that provide the ability to quickly switch between SOCKS proxies.

I started with AirVPN several years ago then moved to NordVPN, but being with a huge company like Nord, who seems to be less than transparent, has always bothered me and i'm glad to have found an alternative which i think is better all around. Although it wasn't an issue when i first signed up, Nord's servers have become blacklisted by quite a few sites and it started to get annoying.

Getting AzireVPN set up on my router was a bit of a pain in the ass. At first i was using the DD-WRT firmware and even after contacting Azire support i could not get OpenVPN or WireGuard working. Truth be told, their setup guides are out of date and, although they say they support OpenVPN, i'm not convinced they do, at least for some configurations which they claim to support. Azire seems to be moving away from OpenVPN in favor of WireGuard, but this is all pretty new stuff and so there can be hitches in setting up WireGuard as well. I finally got the tunnel working with WireGuard only after i switched to the OpenWRT firmware and a lot of fiddling around plus still more help from Azire support. Azire definitely loses points here though their support has been mostly OK (i'll get more into that in a bit). If you decide to use their app however, you can likely avoid the hassle i had and they have a healthy selection of apps for different platforms/devices.

Another big plus with AzireVPN is that you don't have to give them any personal information to open an account and you can pay with cryptocurrency, so acquiring their service can be totally anonymous if you want, especially if you use another VPN or Tor to sign up. There aren't allot of other VPN providers that go this far to protect your privacy.

As far as the tunnel itself, all ports are open and bandwidth is unlimited. I've only been using their service a short time, but speed seems really good in tests, though this may have a lot to do with the WireGuard protocol since it has less overhead. Also i haven't yet had much trouble accessing sites which had blocked Nord's IPs. P2P traffic is of course allowed.

Now, back to that support thing...

Because i couldn't get DD-WRT working with the OpenVPN protocol, a configuration which Azire claims to support, i was offered some free time without having to ask for it. I appreciated the offer and viewed it as the right thing to do, especially for a smaller company which is apparently interested in growing. Problem is, they didn't follow through and so i inquired again about their offer. Crickets. In the end i inquired four times before i got a response, and their response was to renege on the offer because i didn't help them figure out how to get DD-WRT/OpenVPN working on their tunnels, a condition which was absolutely never stated nor implied. Here's what they said, emphasis added:

We thought that our offer was pretty clear while saying the following statement:

"Whether you manage to find a solution to your issue, we will be glad to give you free time and eventually we will make a quick update to our guide."

In other words, if you were able to find a solution which we could integrate into our guide to update it, we would give you free time. I think our sentence was poorly written, but that is what we meant.

Their offer was unconditional. It did not hinge upon anything. Needless to say, their blatant twisting of their own words pissed me off and so i fired back a reply calling out their shady tactic to renege on the offer. Shortly after receiving my mail they extended my service time by one month, so in the end they did what was proper and ethical, but what they should have done was not ignore three mails regarding their offer of free time and just gave me the time they promised.

All in all i think AzireVPN offers some uniquely attractive and important features and they manage to do it at a very competitive price, though i do have an issue with their ethics regarding my support issue. At any rate, if you decide to go with Azire please consider using this referral link which helps me out a little bit.

Social media - Tracking, profiling, censorship and privacy respecting alternatives

the problem

All of the mainstream social media platforms are actively engaged in coordinated censorship of user content when such content contradicts establishment narratives. Facebook, YouTube, Google, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit and others have all been caught punishing their users through shadow-banning, de-listing, deletion and de-platforming, even when such content clearly does not violate their convoluted and arbitrary terms of service agreements.

Censorship has long been a problem within the social platforms of 'big tech', however it has reached a whole new level since the 9/11 terrorist attacks where even respected career professionals in fields such as healthcare are not permitted to have a voice when that voice challenges the government mouthpieces in the mainstream media.

As i see it, the primary issue here is not that the fat corporate clowns are cutting their own throats by censoring users, but rather that people with important and often vital information that is in the public interest, continue to rely on platforms like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter and then complain when their content, or the people they subscribe to are removed. True, alternatives such as BitChute, Mastodon and others don't offer the amount of exposure that the 'big tech' platforms do, assuming they allow you any exposure at all, however that will only change when more people start using alternative platforms. I mean really, has 'big tech' left us with any other choice? And that's not an entirely bad thing either, especially when many of the alternative platforms have a far greater respect for freedom of speech and our privacy.

the solution

mainstream alternatives
Facebook
Google+
Instagram
Reddit
Skype
Twitter
YouTube

the resources

Got something to contribute? Leave a comment!