Sidebar with Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski - Special Guest Emily D. Baker - Viva & Barnes (2:08:17) ~ Viva Frei [ IMPORTANT A++ about alt-media + social media + lawfare ]

submitted by JasonCarswell from youtube.com

all 13 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I meant to share this a week or two ago and have a robust conversation about it.

This is one of the most important videos Viva has done IMO and worth watching every second for all of the insights about social media platforms and going public, among other things. Barnes mentions how Rumble will be beholden to the investors more than a typical platform because they're establishing a certain level of expectations that aren't declared for other corporations, and while Viva passes by it he makes a bigger deal about this in a later video pointing out how very important this all is.

[–]fschmidt 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yup, modern scum. All modern scum hate free speech.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Ping
/u/d3rr
/u/Drewski
/u/Robin

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Ping
/u/fschmidt
/u/LarrySwinger2
/u/magnora7

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

skip to 24 minutes, FML

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

FML why? Anti-Semitism slippery slope mass flagging?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Because the first 24 minutes were boring as hell. I'm enjoying seeing this guy getting grilled about free speech.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Lightly toasted.

I like the stuff Barnes says about investors legally holding them to an expected higher standard.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

For example the shitbags at Purism, at least they are a registered Social Purpose Company. That offers some actual legal framework for being held accountable to one particular mission.

edit land:

Maybe im dead wrong though IANAL.

Viva is doing good with many direct questions. I can't say the same about the answers.

The Rumble empire is a right wing ADL friendly empire, as opposed to the left wing ADL friendly YouTube empire.

He admitted they are raising money/going public to capture YouTube content creators. 1. This is just YouTube2. 2. The platform isn't naturally good enough to attract them?

1:07:00 Q: So what guarantees do we have? A: I'm really committed to blah blah.

I HATE RUMBLE AND THIS BARNES LAWYER GUY FOR SHILLING FOR THEM

Everyone on this video is calling a platform that bans "racism" a "free speech" platform. this is clown world nonsense. i respect the capitalism of Chris, that's it.

"we provide cloud services for Trump"

"understanding how I think is important"

FINAL VERDICT: I HATE RUMBLE AKA YOU2TUBE

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

The Rumble empire is a right wing ADL friendly empire, as opposed to the left wing ADL friendly YouTube empire. [...] This is just YouTube2.

This wouldn't surprise me.

That's why we need to cultivate, develop, and foster the DeCoPE (decentralized counter pseudo-empire).

The platform isn't naturally good enough to attract them?

You could argue that time is of the essence - in business, in general, since the rising tyranny took its mask off, etc. - and that you need capital to do tech bigly. Ultimately they're aiming to join Big Tech, and that's their biggest sin besides not being FLOSS and decentralized.

Maybe Barnes is shilling for them. He's been very wise to some deep conspiracies, yet he's been wrong before ignoring the rigged system and Zionism so I know he's a limited hangout. Maybe he's telling the truth. He had me going along with the idea that investors could sue if they fail to meet the higher standards, but failed to mention that with enough investors who don't give a fuck that concept is moot.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yes, and as a lawyer, we deserve a very precise legal explanation. But we didn't get one.

ANYONE CAN SUE ANYONE FOR ANYTHING ANYTIME, at least here in the US, it is essentially a meaningless statement.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Winning is part of it, and that may take many forms.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I like the stuff Barnes says about investors legally holding them to an expected higher standard.

I think this is fluff and fake. A public company being immune to shareholder demands aka public pressure is crazy. Some people in the comments say Rumble still will own 85% of themselves, but I say meh meh meh. This is not free speech and this is centralization.

The only positive thing I have to say about Rumble so far is that I'm glad someone is successfully challenging YouTube. Breaking the YT monopoly is a very good thing.