Elon Musk claims to champion free speech on X, but the evidence tells a different story. When the Center for Countering Digital Hate reported 300 posts promoting neo-Nazism, antisemitism, and racism, X failed to remove 86% of them—while researchers documenting this content faced legal threats, account suppression, and data access cutoffs. Studies from USC, Harvard, and Brookings confirm the pattern: X’s algorithm systematically amplifies right-wing content while suppressing left-leaning and anti-extremism voices. Meanwhile, neo-Nazi groups celebrate that X finally lets “extreme right messaging flourish.” This isn’t free speech. It’s right-wing extremist platform capture—and the evidence is damning.
For the Hundredth Time, It’s Not About Engagement
The problem with my account isn’t that my content sucks and people aren’t interested in it or me. The problem is the algorithm is actively PREVENTING my content from being shown to my audience AT ALL (even WITH Premium). A post with 20%+ engagement only hitting 1/170 of my followers’ eyeballs over the span of its first hour isn’t “people don’t like you.” It’s not the time of day I posted it. It’s not if it had a fucking image (it did). That’s not just “the algorithm didn’t favor this post”—it’s functionally impossible and mathematically absurd under normal distribution. It’s “@X has nuked your account and salted the earth with its ashes.” Furthermore, many followers have reported they don’t see my posts organically in their feed and even my replies get hidden from conversations. Even with strong engagement I’m not just buried in the For You algorithm. I’m not even there to begin with. Sometimes my posts don’t even show up in my own damn timeline. The particularly fucked part is there’s no meaningful appeal process to @XEng for whatever chicanery got me shadowbanned and @premium support is worse than useless. They deny it’s happening, won’t tell me why I’m suppressed, gaslight me me about my engagement rates (hello, I have the analytics RIGHT FUCKING HERE), and won’t explain what would fix it. So no, I’m not whining about low engagement. I’m pissed about algorithmic suppression applied to the point that this account, which I’m paying for, is functionally dead. It’s not just algorithmic chicanery. It’s fraud.
Trump Supporters Have Already Given Gun Control Advocates Everything They Need for 2029
Trump supporters celebrating executive power expansions in 2025 built machinery they assumed only cuts one direction. But every precedent Trump established—IEEPA emergency declarations for tariffs, military deployments to American cities, targeting political opponents through DOJ investigations, Supreme Court restrictions on nationwide injunctions—becomes available to the next president. This article maps how a Democratic administration could use Trump’s 2025 precedents to systematically restrict Second Amendment rights without passing a single law. Emergency gun violence declarations. ATF enforcement through executive authority. Military deployment to enforce restrictions. Legal challenges limited to named plaintiffs under Trump v. CASA. This isn’t speculation. It’s documentation. Every claim is verified with specific dates, court cases, and executive orders from 2025. The infrastructure is already operational. The precedents already exist. Executive power has no partisan alignment—only temporal alignment with whoever holds office next.
Nine Lies Used to Defend Trump’s Illegal Invasion of Venezuela
On January 3, 2026, the Trump administration launched airstrikes across Venezuela, captured President Nicolás Maduro, and announced the U.S. would ‘run’ the country—all without congressional authorization. Since then, the administration has offered nine distinct legal justifications: law enforcement action, self-defense against drug trafficking, the Panama precedent, treaty obligations, and more. Some contradict each other. Some contradict the administration’s own prior statements. This analysis examines each claim against actual law and expert consensus. Nine justifications. Nine problems.
What’s the Exchange Rate on Genocide When Extinction Is the Alternative?
James Cameron’s Avatar franchise has already made several billion dollars across three films, built stunning worlds at unprecedented scale, and delivered emotionally resonant stories about family, loss, and cultural identity. The character work—Neytiri’s feral grief, Varang’s traumatic rejection of spiritual dogma, Jake navigating life as a cultural traitor—demonstrates genuine moral complexity. Meanwhile, the meta-conflict underpinning the entire franchise remains stubbornly, frustratingly shallow. Three films deep, Cameron still isn’t asking the hard question his own setup demands.
Aliens is Absolutely a Christmas Movie
Every December like clockwork, some genius on the internet gets on Reddit to argue that Die Hard is a Christmas movie, as if they’re the first person to ever think of that. It’s such a tedious argument. Die Hard takes place at Christmas for crying out loud—the film explicitly features Christmas parties, Christmas music, and family reunification as its emotional core. Arguing that Die Hard belongs in the Christmas canon requires exactly zero imagination. And no serious person is debating it doesn’t anyway. Aliens, on the other hand, is notably overlooked. There’s no snow, no carols, no presents, no mistletoe. The film is set on a xenomorph-infested colony moon called LV-426, where the concept of seasonal holidays is meaningless and everyone is trying very hard not to get facehugged. And yet James Cameron’s 1986 masterpiece belongs in the Christmas canon more legitimately than half the Hallmark movies clogging your streaming queue.
X Premium Support is a Gaslighting Kafkaesque Parody of Itself
I have a magical rented blue checkmark that’s advertised to grant “enhanced visibility.” In mid-October, my reach on Twitter dropped 75% overnight and never recovered. My engagement rate? Running an order of magnitude over platform average—exceptional by any measure. When I contacted Premium support with comprehensive data, charts, and systematic elimination of alternative explanations, they ignored everything I’d said and replied with a list of canned social media network tips. When pressed, they regretted to inform me users just don’t find my demonstrably engaging content all that “interesting.” Then deflected to completely unrelated revenue sharing calculations I’d never asked for. Then closed my ticket and handed me off to Grok, who helpfully suggested I use more hashtags. Someday I’ll look back on this and have a good laugh.
Could Amazon Use Your Books to Train AI?
Traditional publishers are negotiating AI training deals worth hundreds of millions and establishing consent-based licensing standards. Meanwhile, Amazon has made no public statement about whether it can—or will—use the millions of books on Kindle Direct Publishing for the same purpose. The silence matters because every indie author using KDP has granted Amazon irrevocable rights under terms that predate AI technology. Unlike traditionally published authors who can negotiate or decline licensing deals, indie authors have already agreed to terms they can’t modify, can’t escape, and which Amazon has never clarified regarding AI training.
Will AI Marketing Materials Kill Your Sales?
Stanford tracked 3.2 million images across a major marketplace and found sales increased 39% after AI art was introduced—consumers actively chose AI-generated images. Christie’s AI art auction exceeded estimates by $128,000 despite 6,500 petition signatures opposing it. Consumer detection accuracy has collapsed to 52%—essentially coin-flip territory. Every backlash case that makes headlines represents PR retreat in response to vocal criticism, not consumer boycotts. Not one shows measurable sales decline. Sentiment plummets in social listening reports while quarterly revenue remains unaffected. 91% of U.S. advertising agencies use or explore AI despite the discourse. Meta reported over 1 million advertisers creating 15 million AI-generated ads in August 2024. Major publishers license their catalogs for AI training while issuing statements opposing it. The gap between what consumers say in surveys and what they actually buy is massive. For indie authors making practical marketing decisions, here’s what the data shows.
SFWA’s AI Ban: Technical Illiteracy Meets Moral Panic
On Friday, the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association announced new Nebula Awards rules allowing some AI-assisted works to compete. By evening—after member outrage and two emergency board votes—they’d reversed course entirely, banning any LLM use whatsoever. The result? Policy written by people who think large language models are “assemblers of stolen work,” creating bright-line rules where boundaries fundamentally don’t exist, protecting the genre’s most prestigious award from a threat that doesn’t actually exist. This is what happens when technical illiteracy meets moral panic.
The Annex 