Beijing Offers Sex Dolls for Rent

The girls look almost real. And almost underage. In fact, can you get an truly underage doll on the black market?

And how about boy models for our sodomite pedophile friends?

If the Chinese expect to enter the American market with these beauties, they’d also better get politically correct and bring on the models for pedophiles and sodomites.

Excerpt from Zerohedge

It’s official: China’s sharing economy has reached its peak.

After shared workout pods, stools [4] luxury cars [5], and, of course, bicycles [6], Shanghaist reports that a Beijing-based startup now has come up with a “mesmerizingly grotesque” idea: what if people could rent sex dolls through an app and return them after a period of time so that other silicone slammers could take advantage of the very same product?

And no, sadly this is not a joke.

The Chinese app, which is called Ta Qu, or “Touch” in English, was launched in 2015 as a platform for discussing issues about sex and sexuality. Over the past two years, it has pivoted or “(d)evolved” into a sex doll sharing app [7], which is now being tested in Beijing. The Global Times reports [8] that daily rentals cost 298 yuan, or less than $50, while users of the app can rent dolls for a week for the price of 1,298 yuan, after making an 8,000 yuan deposit.

The dolls then get delivered right to the user’s doorstep.

According to the Chinese outlet, there are currently five models to choose from: “Greek bikini model,” “US Wonder Woman,” “Korean housewife,” “Russian teenager” and “Hong Kong car race cheerleader.” Users can customize the dolls to their liking by picking out hair and eye color, as well as their outfits.

Here is what $50 per day rents you:

For those asking the obvious question, the company states that it also has hygiene on its mind, as explained by their official policy.

“The dolls’ lower parts are changed for every customer,” reads the app. “Please remove the lower parts before returning. After the lower parts are cleaned, the doll can be used repeatedly.”

Some interesting comments followed the story at Zerohedge. Here are a few of them.

In my travels there I would say no gender imbalance. The problem is the cost of living is so high relative to income and families won’t let their daughters get involved with a guy that can’t support her as they dream fitting. So the guys are kind of cut off from women and have developed a whole subculture of entertaining themselves without women: heavy drinking, gambling, karoke, video games, porn, etc.

This also leads to older western guys having a strong in with young gorgeous asian women.

Maybe this is the end of times.

I think someone could make money selling Pelosi and Waters dolls at a gun range.

Am I the only one who noticed the dolls all have round eyes?

Apparently chinese men prefer the look of white women. This should make real chinese women behave as better wives and GFs. Of if you like hookers their price should come way down.

So, when do you think they’ll be coming out with a Hillary Clinton doll?

Those Chinks. I’ll bet they did this in response to Trump’s threats of trade wars and such.

“Jew Haters” Trending on Twitter as Facebook Exposed for Running Ads Aimed at People Who Hate Jews

Fools or trolls are actually calling Jew Mark Zuckerberg a Nazi for wanting to make a few sheckels by selling ads to people who have some distaste for our Jewish friends.

When I put this post together about 8 P.M Central time U.S. “Jew Haters” was trending on Twitter. And Mark Zuckerberg was getting hammered.

Huffington Post

Want to market Nazi memorabilia, or recruit marchers for a far-right rally? Facebook’s self-service ad-buying platform had the right audience for you.

Until this week, when we asked Facebook about it, the world’s largest social network enabled advertisers to direct their pitches to the news feeds of almost 2,300 people who expressed interest in the topics of “Jew hater,” “How to burn jews,” or, “History of ‘why jews ruin the world.’”

To test if these ad categories were real, we paid $30 to target those groups with three “promoted posts” — in which a ProPublica article or post was displayed in their news feeds. Facebook approved all three ads within 15 minutes.

After we contacted Facebook, it removed the anti-Semitic categories — which were created by an algorithm rather than by people — and said it would explore ways to fix the problem, such as limiting the number of categories available or scrutinizing them before they are displayed to buyers.

“There are times where content is surfaced on our platform that violates our standards,” said Rob Leathern, product management director at Facebook. “In this case, we’ve removed the associated targeting fields in question. We know we have more work to do, so we’re also building new guardrails in our product and review processes to prevent other issues like this from happening in the future.”

Facebook’s advertising has become a focus of national attention since it disclosed last week that it had discovered $100,000 worth of ads placed during the 2016 presidential election season by “inauthentic” accounts that appeared to be affiliated with Russia.

Like many tech companies, Facebook has long taken a hands off approach to its advertising business. Unlike traditional media companies that select the audiences they offer advertisers, Facebook generates its ad categories automatically based both on what users explicitly share with Facebook and what they implicitly convey through their online activity.

Traditionally, tech companies have contended that it’s not their role to censor the Internet or to discourage legitimate political expression. In the wake of the violent protests in Charlottesville by right-wing groups that included self-described Nazis, Facebook and other tech companies vowed to strengthen their monitoring of hate speech.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wrote at the time that “there is no place for hate in our community,” and pledged to keep a closer eye on hateful posts and threats of violence on Facebook. “It’s a disgrace that we still need to say that neo-Nazis and white supremacists are wrong — as if this is somehow not obvious,” he wrote.

But Facebook apparently did not intensify its scrutiny of its ad buying platform. In all likelihood, the ad categories that we spotted were automatically generated because people had listed those anti-Semitic themes on their Facebook profiles as an interest, an employer or a “field of study.” Facebook’s algorithm automatically transforms people’s declared interests into advertising categories.

Artificial intelligence hasn’t been taught political correctness yet. It’s antisemitic. But it doesn’t know it’s antisemitic.

Twitter is overreacting to this minor incident which harmed no one.

Cord Cutting Explodes as 56 Million Americans Do Without Pay TV

While Americans are pulling the plug on cable TV, there’s never any analysis of why, so let me speculate.

I know a woman who is totally disgusted by her soap operas that she’s watched for decades. Seeing a naked white male in bed with a naked Negro male, the two of them kissing, isn’t her cup of tea. It’s soured her on the whole TV viewing experience. There’s way too much diversity for her.

For similar reasons, I stopped watching TV, other than the news, documentaries, and old movies, around 1992 or even earlier. So-called entertainment was anything but entertaining.

Millions are feeling the vibe that TV is not a necessity. I’ll bet most of them are white.

Excerpt from Techcrunch

Bad news for traditional pay TV: cord cutting is accelerating at a pace faster than previously estimated. According to a new industry report from eMarketer, there will be 22.2 million cord cutters ages 18 and older this year – a figure that’s up 33.2 percent over 2016. The firm said it’s had to revise its forecast as the pace of cord cutting has increased. Previously, it believed there would only be 15.4 million cord cutters in the U.S.

In addition, the so-called “cord-nevers” – meaning those consumers who never choose to subscribe to traditional cable or satellite TV in the first place – is growing, too. While the pace of that growth is slower – a more modest 5.8 percent this year – the total number of cord-nevers is higher. eMarketer says there will be 34.4 million U.S. adult cord-nevers in 2017.

When you combine the cord cutters and cord-nevers, there will be 56.6 million U.S. non-pay TV viewers this year.

By 2021, eMarketer says the number of cord cutters will nearly equal the number of cord-nevers with 40.1 million for the former, and 41 million for the latter.

The firm attributes its revised forecast, in part, to the growing list of live streaming and over-the-top platforms that are now available.

In addition to existing players like Sling TV and PlayStation Vue, in under a year’s time we’ve seen new entrants in the live TV streaming space like AT&T’s DirecTV Now, which arrived late last year; YouTube TV, which launched in April; and Hulu Live TV, which arrived in May. There’s also a growing number of sports streaming services, including fuboTV and Stadium. Meanwhile, major companies have announced similar plans to enter the live streaming space, including CBS Sports and ESPN.

And that’s just live streaming TV.

The on-demand market, which includes Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, HBO, and others, is growing, too. Even Disney is prepping its own Netflix competitor.

“Younger audiences continue to switch to either exclusively watching [over-the-top] video or watching them in combination with free TV options,: noted Chris Bendtsen, eMarketer’s senior forecasting analyst.

“Last year, even the Olympics and presidential elections could not prevent younger audiences from abandoning pay TV,” Bendtsen added.

Another factor accounting for the decline in pay TV viewership has to do with the way we’re now watching video content. U.S. adults simply aren’t watching TV as much as they used to, says eMarketer. The average time spent watching TV, excluding digital, will drop 3.1 percent to 3 hours, 58 minutes – that’s the first time it’s fallen below 4 hours per day, eMarketer notes.

Digital video viewing, meanwhile, has jumped up 9.3 percent over 2016 to reach 1 hour, 17 minutes.

New Artificial Intelligence Computer Algorithm Can Tell Whether You’re a Sodomite from a Photograph

Today, we don’t need our human built-in gaydar or artificial intelligence to tell us who’s a sodomite and who isn’t.

They get in your face and do everything possible to make it obvious, including telling you unwanted stories of anal sex.

The Guardian

Artificial intelligence can accurately guess whether people are gay or straight based on photos of their faces, according to new research that suggests machines can have significantly better “gaydar” than humans.

The study from Stanford University – which found that a computer algorithm could correctly distinguish between gay and straight men 81% of the time, and 74% for women – has raised questions about the biological origins of sexual orientation, the ethics of facial-detection technology, and the potential for this kind of software to violate people’s privacy or be abused for anti-LGBT purposes.

The machine intelligence tested in the research, which was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and first reported in the Economist, was based on a sample of more than 35,000 facial images that men and women publicly posted on a US dating website. The researchers, Michal Kosinski and Yilun Wang, extracted features from the images using “deep neural networks”, meaning a sophisticated mathematical system that learns to analyze visuals based on a large dataset.

The research found that gay men and women tended to have “gender-atypical” features, expressions and “grooming styles”, essentially meaning gay men appeared more feminine and vice versa. The data also identified certain trends, including that gay men had narrower jaws, longer noses and larger foreheads than straight men, and that gay women had larger jaws and smaller foreheads compared to straight women.

Human judges performed much worse than the algorithm, accurately identifying orientation only 61% of the time for men and 54% for women. When the software reviewed five images per person, it was even more successful – 91% of the time with men and 83% with women. Broadly, that means “faces contain much more information about sexual orientation than can be perceived and interpreted by the human brain”, the authors wrote.

Wait for it. Here comes the political agenda in 3 … 2 … 1 …

The paper suggested that the findings provide “strong support” for the theory that sexual orientation stems from exposure to certain hormones before birth, meaning people are born gay and being queer is not a choice. The machine’s lower success rate for women also could support the notion that female sexual orientation is more fluid.

The rest of the article goes on to bring up the ethical issue involved with exposing queers who may not want to be exposed by AI.

For decades there was an uneasy truce. Don’t ask, don’t tell was basically how society operated. Most of us are willing to let fags do whatever they wish in private, but they now insist on making it public.

This new AI needs to be weaponized in order to be able to exclude the genetic dead ends that call themselves “gay” from our future.

THEY’RE SODOMITES? I’M SHOCKED!

“Collusion network” Facebook flaw leads to millions of fake “likes”

It’s entirely possible that Fakebook … er … Facebook was designed to allow criminal racketeering that puts shekels in the pocket of Mark Zuckerberg.

The press wants you to believe that fake Facebook accounts and fake likes are just accidents. I doubt it. Not when likes and accounts can be used to enrich the Zuck via advertising dollars and the sale of fake data to the suckers who fall for Zucks’ scams.

Excerpt from CBS News

Researchers say a security loophole has allowed at least a million Facebook accounts, both real and fake, to generate at least 100 million “likes” and comments as part of “a thriving ecosystem of large-scale reputation manipulation.”

The researchers, from the University of Iowa and Lahore University of Management Science in Pakistan, found dozens of sites that operate so-called collusion networks, which rapidly generate users’ likes for free.

Facebook posts that rapidly receive a lot of likes are more likely to be placed higher in other people’s feeds, meaning users buoyed by fake likes can ultimately generate significantly more real attention and influence.

In order to participate, users have to grant the networks wide-ranging access to their accounts, so that those accounts can be harnessed to like others.

The networks exploit code known as OAuth, which allows third-party applications such as Spotify, iMovie and the Playstation Network to access users’ Facebook accounts from anywhere between a few hours to even months at a time.

Researchers warn the exploit can be used for darker purposes than just gathering extra likes.

“In addition to reputation manipulation, attackers can launch other serious attacks using leaked access tokens. For example, attackers can steal personal information of collusion network members as well as exploit their social graph to propagate malware,” they write in their forthcoming paper.

In an interview with CBS News, the researchers said they tracked the collusion networks in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, but couldn’t say whether the networks were used to boost posts to benefit or hurt candidates. They said their research was just scratching the surface.

“We do want to examine the Russia question,” said co-author Zubair Shafiq, who added that while they only looked at the top 50 networks, many more exist. “These collusion networks are quite possibly involved in orders of magnitude much larger than what we observed.”

Facebook acknowledged Wednesday that hundreds of phony accounts that appear to have originated in Russia bought $100,000 in advertisements during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and in the months following the election. It is not clear if the ads, or other false stories shared during the election, were boosted through influence networks.

The researchers revealed their findings to Facebook in May 2016, ultimately working with Facebook to implement countermeasures to combat the networks.

Facebook said in a statement to CBS News that the collusion networks have now been blocked.

Mashable: Why Mark Zuckerberg is the Kind of Dad America Needs Now

This is an older piece, written in January, 2016. It’s a real propaganda piece of the kind we can expect to see more of as Zuck runs for president or otherwise tries to steer the electoral process in the coming years.

Excerpt from Mashable

Mark Zuckerberg, to most people, is a hoodie-wearing Harvard dropout who created the most successful social networking platform in the world.

But here’s another way to imagine the Facebook CEO: as a devoted father who has redefined what it means to be a working parent in a culture that values, above all else, the bottom line.

Zuckerberg, 31, returned to work Monday after two months of parental leave. When he announced his leave shortly before the birth of his daughter Max in November, he became the first and only male CEO of his stature in Silicon Valley to make that choice.

Once Max arrived he began sharing with his 48 million followers simple yet emotional photos and dispatches from the front lines of parenthood. He gazed at his daughter’s newborn face and wrote, “Full of joy with little Max.” When he posted an image of himself smiling while changing her diaper he added, “One more down, thousands to go.”

Never before has the public been given such intimate glimpses into the early moments of fatherhood as lived by a powerful businessman, who might have once been convinced by tradition to take a supporting role in his family’s life.

Zuckerberg hasn’t acknowledged the influence of his leadership as a CEO and father, but it has the potential to shift our collective notions about work and family in profound ways. (He wasn’t available to comment for this story.)

“Zuckerberg could do what he wants, but he’s choosing to send a message,” says Scott Behson, professor of management at Fairleigh Dickinson University and author of The Working Dad’s Survival Guide: How to Succeed at Work and at Home.

That message, adds Behson, might best reach men wary of embracing fatherhood openly and executives intimidated by the challenge of modeling what it means to be an involved parent and highly effective business person.

After all, there is no more convincing of an example than the one set by the CEO.

In his recent Facebook posts, Zuckerberg has been vulnerable with and devoted to Max, but also clearly in tune with the needs of his company and users, commenting on events like a WhatsApp outage in Brazil and the activation of the “safety check” feature following an earthquake in India.

There’s no doubt that Zuckerberg’s immense wealth — and Facebook’s steady growth and stability — give him a special privilege to find that balance.

Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer, for example, gave birth to twins in December and planned a brief leave. That may have been her personal preference, but the longstanding debate over whether or not Yahoo will survive as a business likely left Mayer with few options.

Doyin Richards, a prominent “daddy” blogger and staff writer for Upworthy, says obsessing over Zuckerberg’s privilege misses the point.

“He’s a man who is embracing fatherhood and showing it to his millions of followers,” Richards says. “He’s able to do a lot of good to say, ‘Even a billionaire CEO can change diapers, and everyday dads can still get down and dirty and handle a blowout.’ That’s a beautiful thing we should all embrace.”

Blah, blah, blah. I’m guessing there’s a certain type of liberal woman who falls for this sort of drivel.

What are we men supposed to do next? Climb up on a rooftop and scream to the world, “I am Mark Zuckerberg!”

We all know that Facebook and (((Zuck))) are part of the Deep State. He’s no role model.

Alt-Right Tech People Working to Create a Free Speech Internet

After going through a discussion of banned “hate” sites, this article describes the efforts by Gab to create an alternative Internet that would allow so-called “hate speech” to be expressed free of worry.

Gab is looking for venture capitalists to fund the new Internet.

Excerpt from Slate

Utsav Sanduja, the chief operating officer of Gab, described the “Free Speech Tech Alliance” to me as “a group of 100 engineers plus from Silicon Valley who are working with us behind the scenes to create an alternative infrastructure.” The movement’s goal is to own its own servers and run its own web hosting, domain registrar, DDoS protection software, cloud storage services, and encryption technology, not to mention social networks like Gab and other “free-speech”–centric alternatives, like a YouTube replacement called PewTube. Sanduja claims Gab has received “hundreds of applications” to join the alliance, which he says is purposefully being kept small in order to protect the identities of its members who fear losing their jobs at Silicon Valley companies. Though it’s unclear where exactly they work, at least a handful are on Google’s campus, Sanduja claims.

Gab is building off the work of a number of existing alternative web services hailing from the far right. Pax Dickinson, the former chief technology officer of Business Insider who left the company after Gawker revealed his racist- and rape joke–filled Twitter account, has started his own alt-right crowdfunding platform called Counter.Fund. There’s also Hatreon, a free speech–centric Patreon alternative, which states in its guidelines that “Hate speech is protected speech.” There’s an alt-right-friendly version of Wikipedia called Metapedia. There’s even a small alt-right dating website, Wasp.love, with the tagline, “Preserve your heritage! Be fruitful and multiply! Join WASP.love today!” Though these services are platforms for people who traffic in hate speech, they’re different from the message boards and forums of Stormfront and Gab, where white supremacist and anti-Semitic ideas are discussed and incubated, and where perpetrators of hate crimes like Dylann Roof and Anders Breivik find encouragement and become indoctrinated.

Dickinson is trying to appeal to investors, though he doesn’t seem hopeful. “Leftist VCs leap at the chance to signal their Leftism, regardless of how stupid the project is,” Dickinson lamented last week on Gab. (He declined to be interviewed for this piece.) Still, alt-tech adherents are convinced that there is a market for their services. “I expect the earliest adopters will be those with the most fringe and radical views who have already been kicked off of YouTube and other platforms,” said Anthony Mayfield, creator of PewTube. “But as the definition of someone who is a bad person who isn’t allowed to say things online begins to grow, I think the users of my platform and others like it will continue to become more and more mainstream.”

In the past two weeks, a handful of far-right video bloggers have jumped onboard to promote the nascent movement, including Styxhexenhammer666, a popular libertarian video blogger, whose two videos about the effort have notched almost 70,000 views. Others have posted “call to action” videos, rallying technologists to join the movement to build “new ‘free speech’ platforms,” which have also attracted thousands of viewers. While these might not read as huge numbers, they suggest a movement with a groundswell of grassroots support.

Here’s one Styx video mentioned by Slate:

Here’s the second Styx video calling for a new Internet:

Here’s a call to action: