Accounts are closed! Why? Because YOU DEPEND ON A CENTRAL SERVER. And you don't OWN the server! Don't depend on adversary weapons! Claim your digital weapons in the info-war >> https://t.co/TBTjRB93pO - FULL THREAD 🔻🔻

Facebook -- having taken out full-page ads in the NYT, Washington Post, and WSJ -- is generally seen as the primary victim of the new app privacy controls coming in iOS14. But Google is perhaps even more vulnerable to ATT. Why has Google remained silent? (1/X)

2/ First, background: here's a high-level overview of how ATT / IDFA deprecation impacts advertisers and ad networks, and why this whole ordeal has put advertisers and ad networks into a state of panic:

3/ Google is equally as susceptible to harm from ATT as Facebook. Google's UAC product -- esp its tROAS and tCPA campaign objectives -- relies as much on IDFA-indexed monetization and engagement data as FB's mobile product does. But Google has one big weakness wrt ATT: YouTube

4/ Broadly, view-through attribution accounts for a disproportionate % of conversions from YouTube app install impressions. This means: user sees the YT ad, doesnt click, downloads app later, & Google is able to claim it by reconciling IDFA seen at impression to IDFA seen in app

5/ View-through attribution is nonexistent in the ATT paradigm as it relies on the IDFA; some significant portion of YT's attributed conversions will evaporate. So why isnt Google vocally opposing ATT? Two reasons: consumer optics and its duality as ad network / mobile platform

Transgenderism resembles a mass psychogenic illness that has spread thanks to the internet. If there were no Tumblr identity fluidity nonsense, and if Reddit and YouTube had never existed, most “trans” people would not have landed on “gender” as the source of their ills.
1.

It is handed to them in the same way religion is handed to children. Thoughts and ideas are set before them, and they have brought these thoughts and ideas to live in themselves. Without the Internet, their feelings of dis-ease would have found a different explanation.
2.

These ideas became a framework for self-understanding, a map that instructs their actions, a vocabulary that programs their tongue. The pursuit of identity was the task, the online bubble its surrogate. They were commanded by it, and it gave their lives purpose and meaning.
3.

It had benefits. It catered to vanity. Social adulation arrived with each new step. This is why they so fiercely cling to it, since any conceptual breakdown would shatter the world they’ve built, which has been buttressed and fortified through these concepts – these errors.
4.

Its appeal first came as an escapist fantasy for the dysmorphic and disenchanted. Unbound from the meanings thrust upon them by others, they could instead become self-creators. They imbibed the dogma that suggested only two paths lay before them: – transition or suicide.
5.

Prepping for today's thread, the story of the CURRENT CYBERWAR is clearly overwhelming. J.E. Dyer @OptimisticCon links us to this story. Just one quote to

Explanation of differences between corvettes, frigates, destroyers and cruisers (as recorded from a Quora discussion):

Minesweeper: it's job to to find and remove mines to clear a harbor or other restricted waters for maritime access and egress. There can also be minelayers which do the opposite.

Corvettes: They were smaller sailing vessels used for coastal commerce and and defense. They were fast and maneuverable. Today some navies use these in a similar way but they are not sail powered. The US Navy has similar vessels called Littoral Combat Ships.

Now to Frigates, Destroyers and Cruisers. These range from smallest to largest in the same order. Cruisers tend to be picket ships specializing in air defense. They also have Tomahawk missiles that can be launched against land or sea targets.

Destoyers are smaller than Cruisers and used to be more for submarine warfare and then became a smaller version of a cruisers with much the same mission. Frigates were the smallest. They were primarlily anti-submarine platforms.

Let's be clear about what @Google, @Apple & @amazon instantly destroying #Parler's ability to be the free-speech version of Twitter is. At its core, this is about the ability to freely communicate one’s thoughts to others — once considered a hallmark of "The American Way." 1/13

What Big Tech is doing is as if Ma Bell in 1973 (ask grandpa) decided what you're saying to a friend on a landline phone was “dangerous." So they cut off the line in the middle of the talk and then sent someone over to physically cut your phone line. That's Stasi shit. 2/13

I realize that a personal conversation is not the same as a public tweet, but the principle is the same. The company that "owns the wires" for your speec — and has special govt rules protecting them due to their position — cuts off your call due to what you are saying. 3/13

If this analogy doesn't work for you, imagine someone tackling and punching you for speaking on a soap box in a public park and then setting your soap box on fire. And the govt being OK with that in a country that has a First Amendment. Moving on ... 4/13

Big Tech shadow banned people for years to just do it "halfway." That way, they could continue to paint an increasingly thin patina on their original govt-protected pledge to promote the free exchange of thought. #freespeech 5/13