World Economic Forum – Are They for Real?

According to the World Economic Forum (WEF), to successfully create a digital ecosystem, organizations need to adopt three core principles: becoming open, interoperable, and decentralized. Now, why would they claim this? What is their reasoning?

Before we can even begin answering that question –

  1. Why do you need to listen to the World Economic Forum?
  2. What is a Global Risks Report?
  3. Is it that important? Do I have to read it?
  4. Can it help me in my business and life?
  5. Are they making all these big moves based on data compiled from surveys or reports from some “experts” as they claim on their website www .weforum .org? That’s Davos Agenda.
  6. Why do you need to listen to the World Economic Forum?

On YouTube, Russell Brand made the point, a few days ago, that you weren’t invited, was you? He was illustrating that the conference doesn’t have your interests at heart, even though your leader in the world may have been there herself. Don’t you and everyone else pay state tax revenue?

Russell Brand works hard of assembling the 10,000-foot view.



BBC
Russell Brand: Society is collapsing – BBC News
  1. What is a Global Risks Report? The World Economic Forum (WEF) released its Global Risks Report 2022 recently. For seventeen years running, each year the Global Risks Report series tracks how risk experts and world leaders in business, government, and civil society perceive global risk.

The world’s best risk experts examine risk in five categories: economic, environmental, geopolitical, societal, and technological. I can remember learning about risk management in economics 101 in college, and my brother Josh once was heard to joke around about its significance. He’s also told me not to joke.

An example of an economic risk might be a nation’s gross national product losing value. About environmental risk, we’ve heard a lot, but it is how endangered species, for example, literally die off and no longer exist, which is not something everybody likes to acknowledge. All of us are men and women, and none of us are gods.

Those animals that cease to exist do matter. Everybody should understand that. Next, geopolitical risk has a clear example, right, in how Russia decided that Ukraine belongs to it.

You know it’s a nightmare. Societal risk, the next risk, is like Covid-19 killing people. Technological risk is like ByteDance giving teenage girls Tourette’s Syndrome, by addicting them to scrolling through TikTok.

Examples like these could be, I am guessing, in the WEF Global Risks Report. If I had more time, I would read it, other than looking over this year’s preface this week, but I’ve heard about it from a few thinkers. It could change the lives of everybody.

  1. Is it that important? Do I have to read it?

I don’t think you want to read that any more than you want to read the Terms and Conditions of Instagram or TikTok. My sister, Kaitlyn, I’ve heard make a point like that clear, but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t think about it. You probably want to know that there is a powerful alliance around the world, with an interest in the new world order.

Did my sister and her husband know that? I don’t think they did.

  1. Can it help me in my business and life?

Not really. It means that the new world order is structured something like Dark Ages fealty. If you are a street vendor, you might make more money, because you’re potentially given additional authority to provide shoppers with distinct and necessary goods that they want.



Medievalists.net

I am not trying to worry people, but the writing’s on the wall. If you don’t want to work, you might accept universal basic income, free money to spend on renting commodities that you want or need. Merchants will have a role under this structure where they control people’s buying habits.

A problem is that they will be reporting everything you buy, compromising your freedom. Rather than involving you in the decision-making process, state assessments will be defining and predict what is going to happen. That is one way it resembles the Dark Ages.

Until the Renaissance, scholars sought to periodize history and influence how future generations would remember them, I have read. I’ve heard talk about the situation that has got me feeling like I should be a little concerned.

  1. Are they making all these big moves based on data compiled from surveys or reports from some “experts” as they claim on their website www .weforum .org? That’s Davos Agenda.

It’s countries surveying what is happening all over the planet and making expectations. It would put the government better in control. Russell Brand has, lately, again reminded his viewership that we’re supposed to be democratic.

Politicians should take their cues from citizens, Brand helps point out, not this potential for a new world order where everybody is dealing with undue government measures. I guess it should be clear that Brand is a successful comedian on YouTube whose channel might get us out of a mess.

In any case, Brand’s point isn’t exclusively to go against Davos, which he has been accomplishing for a long time.

I think Brand’s thing is that ordinary people can make intelligent decisions the same as people working in government (for example, politicians), and Brand doesn’t want a world bereft of qualities that lend themselves to being a decent place to live. Like if we let art stop, music and theatre come to an end, and we begin to live in a fealty-oriented Dark Age, it would not be a great civilization to be a part of. It would mean things like literature getting pointless, as nobody would be in a position to add to it, and media becoming state propaganda, instead of the assistance that digital media provides to things like democracy, human rights, and journalism.

I don’t think it would be a good idea. We would have the industry beneath Big Tech, and we wouldn’t be able to use it, even though it’s cheap to run, and as powerful as astronauts at NASA taking a shuttle to the moon. In 1969, contrasted with what even our youths naturally grasp, everyone with a cell phone and Internet access can explore enormous data momentarily.

You don’t grasp what Russell Brand is saying or talking about when you think of him as a comedian and (probably) a sex symbol. That’s fine, but it’s worth taking an interest in what he does, as Brand is dismissive of the World Economic Forum and critical of many discussions that indicate corruption or unfairness for the poor, or advantages that Big Tech and Big Pharma exploit to control people. He is on YouTube, and his videos are monetized, so that’s his career these days, but as a populist voice, he’s funny, and he’s good.

Brand’s interest in knowledge kind of grows, but it’s always going in the same direction, and his perspective, which he might deny he is giving you with his channel, is always in favour of a social change in a direction completely different than the Davos Agenda. From the fact that he has only one YouTube channel, you can infer that he has to distance himself from being the leader of a social movement. He will not be let off the hook unless he keeps mostly within the rules of the YouTube community.

I’ve never heard him say that a video of his was taken down, and I don’t think YouTube would want to do that to him, since he and his team are only a few people doing YouTube. He’s a virtuoso. Wouldn’t you say?

Thanks, Mr. Brand.

I started with the subject of this story, about associations zeroed in on being open, interoperable, and decentralized. I arrived at this question with the help of AI. Open means authentic, transparent, and inclusive.

These are good principles to follow. However, I am not sure that the WEF is sincere in saying that. I’ve provided above an idea of what Russell Brand says the agenda of the WEF looks like.

It’s open like thieves hiding in plain sight. Interoperability is conceivably a legend. Do you know who made that point loud and clear?

Mutahar, the YouTuber behind someordinarygamers, alluding to Meta’s metaverse, said in a recent video about whether Meta will prevail that it is basically not going to be interoperable with rival metaverses. A comparison was made between the interoperability of video games between rival systems. The metaverse is being discussed more and more every day, and I think there are two general realities in the metaverse that are relevant.

One is Meta’s metaverse, which is probably at least a couple of years away before its potential is realized, and the other is, I think, sort of Web 3.0. The basics of Web 3.0 is that it’s the Internet of Things. Neither of these accounts of the metaverse is comprehensive, but I suspect since I’m learning a little about the metaverse every day, which is just a drop in the bucket, that the best way to anticipate the heyday of the metaverse is to consider both Meta and Crypto.

I am not just not sure that there won’t be an endgame for either foundation of Big Tech. Decentralized is a buzzword that applied to bitcoin. I don’t think cryptocurrency is going to wind up decentralized, but nice try.



Encyclopedia Britannica

Jack Dorsey’s exit from Twitter illustrates how innovators in the cryptocurrency space will likely succumb to frustration and exhaustion, as he possibly did. The long and short is that the WEF is lying. They are borrowing from the best of the technology industries and laying waste to its potential.

That’s really what Russell Brand has picked up on and is critical of. Those kinds of lies could do a lot of harm to people who are lucky enough to live in the free world.

Free Speech and Hate Speech #WordPrompt

I had a pleasant Easter. By the way, a great thing is that the WordPress blogger Beauty Beyond Bones announced on Twitter her engagement to her man. You can find her blog here:

https://beautybeyondbones.com/

Now, for a blog post, I thought this up with StoryLab.ai, an AI service that can assist with a blog story post…

Having the right to free speech is not a privilege. There will always be repercussions when people express their opinions. The truth is that watching in silence while others voice their opinions will also have repercussions.

The effectiveness of Twitter as the town square is that, although everyone with an Internet connection can contribute, Twitter, while I enjoy participating, tends to highlight the voices of only a few. The collective voices on Twitter tend to belong to those on the left.


ThoughtCo
Who Invented Twitter?

These voices often belong to writers, politicians, actors, artists, and musicians, but they can also be anyone imaginable. Years ago, I felt I was doing great having a modest Twitter account, and I’ve seldom felt like giving it up.

Good information flies on Twitter. However, Twitter is criticized for its lax approach, disturbing content that litters some users’ accounts, and for its algorithm’s ability to bury tweets that would be favourable for the right. The situation is complicated, but here are some thoughts about it.

  1. The Debate

Elon Musk, who founded Tesla and SpaceX, believes that, for the future, Twitter needs to be a town square where all speech should be permitted. Twitter needs a lot of change before that can happen, according to Musk. At present, Twitter has a reputation for favouring tweets from leftist-leaning microbloggers, amplifying those voices, while restricting voices who are right-leaning.

This is probably because many Twitter employees are liberal-leaning. There is a suspicion that Twitter has a bias towards tweets from a leftist perspective built into its algorithm. The best example is that Twitter was the first social media platform to issue a permanent ban against Trump, who was formerly an advocate for Twitter, before the charge of insurrection came up following the riot at Capitol Hill when Trump added fuel to the fire.


The Sun
What is Capitol Hill and where is it?

Elon Musk, one of the biggest shareholders now at Twitter, wants to make changes to help free speech flourish on Twitter. In reality, he may hurt the value of the Twitter stock if he decides to take the position that Twitter is a poor investment, and he goes on to sell his majority share. In other words, he is pressuring Twitter to buy it.

  1. Hate Speech

Many people charge Twitter with being nasty. Hateful messages are often started on Twitter, before being carried over to rival social media platforms, such as Gettr and Parler. Using computers, people can tweet a liturgy of extreme positions that can include attacks on people who are different from them, as well as criticism and a culture that seeks to convince people that a particular view is correct.

The idea of tweets like these makes them hard to direct because there are lots of them, and the guidelines for discourse ought to, in an optimal world, be material in all cases, not only for tweets calling for savagery and other outrageous positions.

  1. Free Speech

Free speech refers to the right to form opinions and express ideas without interference. Remember George Orwell’s famous book, 1984, looking at a communist society where free speech has been abolished. Even in 2022, there are a tremendous number of controls leveled at speakers on social media, because the twenty-first century is the first time in history that we have had social media.


Amazon.ca

We are still seeing social’s power over people, and some seek some common ground to keep it fair, but you are not prevented from speaking your mind. Sounds great, right? It is muddled, be that as it may.

Elon Musk believes free speech is for the best, but some thinkers believe that out-of-control social media poses a threat to democracy, rather than lending it insight. For example, widespread lies about a specific subject could weigh a majority down, giving them disinformation they believe to be accurate. Disinformation is a problem where opinions that have little or no merit seem normal and commonplace.

According to those who accuse social media platforms of disinformation, there are “correct” perspectives to take, which cannot be associated with disinformation. I don’t think this is so, as people have a right to support falsehoods if those are significant to them. On Twitter people argue back and forth.

As long as a substantial number of people believe in a lie, it is good to treat it as a potential truth. That is why people debate. While most people accept, for example, that the Earth is round, there are to this day flat-earthers.

We have seen Earth from the vantage point of space; we know it is round. To flat-earthers, those space voyages are fake, and the Earth is as flat as it was believed to be in ancient times. That said, perhaps there are unrecognized realities where a flat Earth exists that we are unaware of.

There is the possibility that the Earth may at times be flat from other perspectives; why shouldn’t this be conceived of as a possibility?

There is no doubt that there is disinformation on social media, including on Twitter. How much damage can disinformation potentially do?

  1. Hate speech is harmful and must be fought against

If we let hate run wild on social media, hate will not take much for its flames to fan. I am begging the question, but if you give the haters an inch, they are going to take a mile. A herd mentality is in evidence in social media, which means that there could soon be additional subsets of the world population with hate in their head.

In 2022, on Twitter, as hate speech became more and more part of ordinary life, there have been attempts to stem the tide, like banning hatemongers, and reducing visibility, via the algorithm, of tweets that have the flavour of hate. When I was young, I was all about free speech until I got confused in college. Suddenly, I didn’t feel so smart.

I didn’t know as much as I thought I knew. A responsibility to the truth is difficult. There are so many bad people in a world that many would like to view as “good.”

We should not be separated by hateful ideologies when everyone should be able to live a decent life regardless of race, gender, income, etc. Hate has, at times, been such a horror that it is difficult to relate to it in any capacity. Victims of hate, like people who are bullied on the Internet in a way that erodes their mental health, need protections that a decision like opening Twitter to additional free speech may not afford them.

The Internet, as it’s understood, as on Twitter, will continue to be a jungle, a dangerous place. The right to free speech is a good idea, but the way the issue will be handled concerns me.

  1. Why Free Speech is Sexy

Pinterest
Sexy Tech

Tech changes so fast that there is a perception that we are making change by aligning ourselves with like-minded people on social media. Users without the same level of a network, watch out. According to these beliefs, we similarly interpret our reality.

We often fight to keep our values at the forefront of many conversations. Twitter debates are often dominated by one side. The perception of Twitter is often that it is a town square.

It appears that the voices we hear on social media, as I have read on the weekend on Big Think, usually belong to only ten percent of users overall.

10% of people are dominating social media. What if the other 90% spoke up? – Big Think

https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=https://bigthink.com/series/collective-illusions/social-media/&ct=ga&cd=CAEYByoUMTQzMTk0MDY4NDMzMDk5NTY0MTYyGTNkZTBlOWUyZmQwYjYyMzc6Y2E6ZW46Q0E&usg=AOvVaw3mTmIeYPCmBTzB6KgrjhQJ

This is an echo chamber. Those ten percent are the loudest, and deafen opposing points of view. In disputes between the right and the left, the Twitter algorithm favours the standpoint of the left.


VOX – Pol

That sounds like one smart algorithm, but it is sophisticated enough to understand the idea of the topic. Twitter may act differently if Musk purchases it, and rebrands Twitter in possibly undecided ways. That is why the drama with Musk and Twitter is so compelling.

With Twitter, they gave us something that we could access we didn’t have previously. This month’s word prompt is the word green. I started the year 2022 doing a daily blogging exercise called bloganuary, where, for as many days as I could in the month of January, I posted according to bloganuary prompts.

Presently, posts from the WordPress Tavern blog incorporate a month-to-month word brief. By the way, my Twitter handle is https://twitter.com/findingenvirons

Privacy is not explicitly spelled out in the Constitution as freedom of speech is in the First Amendment. Larry Flynt

Read more at https://www.brainyquote.com/topics/freedom-of-speech-quotes

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/findingenvirons