Frogan Lost

Added: 2026-05-24

[00:00:00]Apparently, Froggen just didn't respond to the complaint. This can't be real, right? Usually, you put in a um what are what is it called? Kofka, like denials.

[00:00:08]Like, you plead. It's not not guilty. In a civil case, you you put a pleading in for your your your response. I guess you're I don't know. Well, you wouldn't respond with no contest because then you would be guilty of everything, right? Or I guess maybe you just go to arguing damages, maybe. I don't know. I I don't know how that would work. Look at how nice this is, guys. June 19th, 2025.

[00:00:26]Court case is one year old. How many do entries? 16.

[00:00:33]Wow. Feels amazing, man. Meanwhile, what are we up to? Do you think we'll hit 300 by the end? No way. Right. 264. Oh, by the way, they've posted the [ __ ] name of the child sex trafficking victim in the last filings they did cuz they didn't redact her name. But you better believe they redacted Pixie's [ __ ] name from every [ __ ] filing they had to make sure they got that real correct.

[00:00:52]While they posted my address as well, which I know she'd love doing. I know it's intentional. Isn't one of these a maximize button? Am I crazy? It appearing from the records in the above entitle action that summons has been served upon the defendant's name below because you have to um you have to be able to serve them with paperwork to put them on notice that there's a lawsuit.

[00:01:10]That's required. and it furthering it further appearing from the affidavit of counsel for plaintiff and other evidence as required by the federal rules of civil procedure 55A that each of the below defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defend in said action as directed in said summons and as provided in the federal rules of civil procedure.

[00:01:28]So my guess is this has to do with how you're supposed to respond to a complaint or this is to the rules for entering a default judgment. Entering a default. When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party's default. Plead means she didn't. That's like the first stage.

[00:01:47]So, they really didn't even reply to the initial complaint. Can anything negative happen from do to do from this? As long as you have money. I mean, hopefully there's a counter sue available and hopefully I can block her from ever taking the bar. Um, that each of the below defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defendants said action is directed blah blah blah. Now therefore, on request of counsel, the default of each of the following named defendants is hereby entered. What did she do with all the money she raised? This just means that how do you decide how much the default judgment is? Since it's given by a statutory amount here, would it just be in the matter of $100,000? I don't remember what that is it $150,000.

[00:02:22]Is it automatically the max judgment or did they file anything? Hold on. Okay, so the complaint is filed by plaintiff.

[00:02:29]That's Ethan Klein. Um there was a similar naming mistake/ error in the latest filing by Brett. They had the name at the bottom of email. But it to it was for a person we're calling Abby MC, but we can't use the full name, which is like four more letters. [ __ ] stupid. The stupid, but whatever. That's the cover name. Okay. Um, civil cover sheet filed by plaintiff. Uh, request for clerk to issue summons on complaint filed by plaintiff. Interesting. I don't know what that what is a summons here.

[00:02:55]Is this a way of asking the court to serve the defense? Maybe. What is a summon here? Technically, summons resource and west law provides. Okay. A particular note providing detailed guidance on the service of a defendant summons under the criminal procedure rules. I'm guessing they issued the certificate of interested parties filed by plaintiff. Report on the filing of an action regarding a copyright filed by Ted Entertainment. Notice of lodging filed by plaintiff Ted Entertainment.

[00:03:19]Notice of assignment to a district judge. Um this is just these are the people who are going to be judging the case. Register of copyrights. What was this? Court on filing of copyright action. Oh, stuff for the record, I guess, to show what they're suing over or something, maybe. Notice to council.

[00:03:34]Reconent proceed before a US magistrate judge. 21-day summon issued.

[00:03:39]Recomplaint. So, this is the summons issued. Wait, are you allowed to ask the court to issue a summon or can you do it yourself or does it depend or you you request a court to issue a summon? Okay, so you don't usually issue it on your own. Standing order by Judge John F.

[00:03:54]Walter. Read this order carefully. It controls the case and differs in some respects from the local rules. Oh, because this was filed in federal court, I guess. Okay. This is all like on the second day right after the filing. Okay.

[00:04:04]A month later, proof of service executed by plaintiff Ted Entertainment upon defendant Morgan whatever. Oh, this is uh Frogan served on 714. So July 14th uh service was executed upon Jane Doe, member of household in compliance with federal civil procedure by substitute service at home address. Do you think she was hiding from the service? Is that why it took so long or do you think it just takes a long time for the court to get these out? Stipulation for extension of time to file an answer to October 3rd, 2025 complaint. Um, this was filed by Did you see that Chlo Logic should got reported and it got a Discord twitch ban? I haven't I haven't over this latest [ __ ] I thought about going the full like scorched earth report route.

[00:04:43]People have been spam reporting my discord by the way. Um, but I just I don't I didn't bother. It would if I would have though, it would have been against Queen because I'm pretty sure he was like hurling multiple racial slurs at me in that convo. I just didn't even notice it. I tune out like the Twink voice. It just disappears in my mind.

[00:04:56]Okay. On August 1st, um, Council for Vogue conduct at Council for TEI by email to contest the validity of service. Oh, so they were trying to say, "Oh, your service didn't count. You didn't actually serve us."

[00:05:07]>> So, they're playing games. Okay. Whereas in the same email, council for Froen offered to resolve the issue and avoid unnecessary motion practice by one having TEI withdraw the July 18th, 2025 proof of service or two having Frogan execute a waiver of service and receive an additional 60 days to respond to the complaint. Whereas on the same day, council for TEI responded to council for Frogan without the way this is this is more ordinary practice where it's the defendants that are usually trying to push everything down the road more and more and more and more and more. But this has been the opposite in my case where we I've wanted to get things over with as quickly as possible and it's the plaintiff that is kicking the can down the road on everything. But uh in the same email council TI offer to streamline the resolution of the issue by granting Fergen an additional 60 days to respond to the complaint. Ooh that's a good counter. So they might say well wait you know let's do 60-day extension to you know provide service but Ethan's lawyers are like well hold on you [ __ ] are already saying that you're going to fight over this service.

[00:05:59]How about we just say you've been served but we'll give you an additional 60 days. We can file a joint thing. We agreed to give you additional 60 days to respond.

[00:06:08]Whereas council for Fergen agreed to this arrangement so long as Fogen preserved her right to file any responsive pleading pursuant to federal supered rule 12 with the exception of contesting service under FRCP rules 12B45 and console for DI agreed. Okay, so they did agree on this whereas good cause exists for the stipulation because one it resolves the party's issue therefore is there by stipulated buying between the parties. Oh, okay. So they did agree to this give her additional 60 days to respond stipulation for extensions of time.

[00:06:34]Okay.

[00:06:36]And then the judge um probably just signed the proposed order. You basically write up the order for the judge like listen and as long as like both parties are agreeing, right? Listen, we we've both agreed on the [ __ ] This is not like a response reply scenario. Like here judge, can you just like sign this order that we both agreed to? So the judge probably just signed this order.

[00:06:52]And seems like the judge did. That was in August 5th, 2025. What is this? Eight months later, May 19th. And they just didn't rep. They didn't respond. There was no You have the complaint is filed.

[00:07:05]you're pleading. So, Ethan is saying, "I'm suing you." And then the defense here needs to either enter their response, which might be a denial of the majority or all of the claims. It could be a motion to dismiss, but it sounds like they just filed nothing. So, so then it'll just be the default judgment, which I don't know how they determine if that's just going to be the full amount that um Ethan was initially seeking in the complaint here. TIB awarded defendants in each of their profits plus TEI's losses attributable to the defendants infringement of the nuke the exact sum to be proven at the time of trial or if elected statutory damages in the amount of 150k awarded reasonable attorney's fees awarded prejudgment interest is allowed by law and awarded any further relief as the court deems proper. So it'll probably be I don't know if they'll get attorneys fees but it sounds like they just get the full 150k. What did um what how much did she fund raise for this at Destiny? There's a rumor going around that this may be part of Denim's strategy. The theory is that she is effectively paying Frogan not to file anything yet so that they can wait and see how the judge rules, allowing her legal team to prepare for whatever decision is made. There are also rumors that Frogan has left the country, so collecting any money for could be Well, what do you mean the judge is going to give them the default?

[00:08:14]No. What do you mean? No. She fundraised $38,000.

[00:08:18]Question mark. That's [ __ ] Well, that might not be [ __ ] because I'm I'm reading through their prayer for relief down here and it sounds like they're implicating the H3 snark people um in some of this lawsuit. And if that is the case, it's possible that Frogan participating in this lawsuit could get more information to Ethan that could help him in the lawsuit against against Denims. So if that were the case, it might make sense for Denims to pay Frogan or for Frogan to just [ __ ] off completely so that they're not fighting the same legal battle on two fronts and then Denims through her lawsuit can fight everything and Froen could just take a default judgment, leave the country and say whatever. Maybe I don't know if she's left the country, but I also don't know if you could garnish uh wages from somebody who gets like 1099 income. It's not like she's a W2 earner or something, but you can. Is she broke? Well, something is strategic happening here, right?

[00:09:10]Because why would you not even respond at all to the lawsuit? Like you could just say like you could just enter a default pleading of like, you know, I didn't what what is your default pleading called in a civil case? It's not not guilty, but you would refuse or you would deny each of the claims stated in the um in the complaint and then you would just go through the process, I guess. Destiny, also this judgment can follow her to other countries if he think goes to the expense. Yeah, but don't you have to go to every single local court and like file the judgment there? I don't know how how annoying that would be, but Destiny, I don't get civil court. Can I just sue anyone? And they have to pay a lawyer and get discovery and get their messages and all their info. Yep. Read page four. It's actually funny to see how much he tried to avoid service. Destiny, new attack on Democrat without googling. What happened? Attacks on Spanberger for vetoing a bill, but probably not a law they could win on in court and instead taking executive action. Is this about data centers? I don't [ __ ] know. I don't I don't care. Okay. We're on Ethan Klein drama right now. Okay. Okay. At the time of service, I was at least 18 and not completed on this date. They were mailed. Okay.

[00:10:11]This is a five-story business style apartment building that is secured by a locked door in intercom. Our subject name is not listed on the intercom list.

[00:10:18]No one was seen on the inside. I could not gain access. I decided to wait outside the front of the building until I was able to gain access by someone letting me in while they're um while they're leaving or arriving. Holy [ __ ] he's taken. Oh my god. At 3:15 a.m. Is that right? 3:15 a.m. This guy is taken.

[00:10:36]What the [ __ ] At 3:15 a.m. I was able to gain access by following an following something after resident or guest was in the building. I located where unit number 403 is. I can stand down the hallway and be able to stay out of view and be able to watch the unit without being too stay out of view. Oh, I bet he's using a voice to uh text translate right now. I can stand down the hallway and be able to stay out of view and be able to watch the unit without being too inconspicuous.

[00:11:04]At 4:30 a.m. At this time, nobody left or under the unit. I stepped away and left the location without being noticed.

[00:11:10]No activity. Left at 4:30 a.m. Jesus Christ. He waited in there for an hour.

[00:11:16]And then here at 2:30 a.m. Oh, holy [ __ ] Wait, how many times did they have to try to do service here? Upon arrival was time to get access. The door to the property were locked. Approach elevator took the fourth floor. um maintained my position down the hall from 3:15 a.m.

[00:11:31]until 6:30 a.m. During this time, there were no changes. No one was seen entering or exiting the building. The door remained closed. I quietly walked up to the door and listened closely for any movement. I did hear movement on the inside. I did not knock on the door.

[00:11:43]Instead, I just took note of my findings. 2:00 a.m. Upon arrival, I was not able to gain access. The doors of property were locked. I maintained my position outside of the main entrance, sitting on a large planter. At the 7:00 a.m., I was able to gain access. A resident was exiting the building. I proceeded to the elevator where blah blah blah blah blah. Okay, that and then at 7:14, a week later. Upon arrival, I could not gain access. The entrance to the building was locked. I positioned myself in front of the building, waiting for someone to enter or exit the property so I could gain access. At 2:12 p.m., I was able to gain access. I entered in after a resident was leaving with his dog. I proceeded to the fourth floor. I approached unit 403 and I could hear a female voice talking. I could not tell what was being said, but it sounded like someone was giving their point of view. I stepped away and positioned myself in the hallway, far enough away as to not be seen by anyone within the unit, looking out of the peepphole.

[00:12:33]Throughout my time waiting, I could hear constant talking with brief moments of silence. At 6:12 p.m., I heard the door knob of unit 403 make noise, and the door quickly opened. Stepping out was a darker female, possibly African-American or Middle Eastern, in her 40s, 56, 155 lbs, dark long curly hair with dark eyes. I asked her if she is Morgan Majed. Is that Frogan's name? And she said why? I said I have legal documents for you. And she said she is not Morgan.

[00:12:59]I asked her if Morgan lived there and she said no that she has lived there for 6 years and there's no Morgan. I asked her if she would show her ID showing that she's not Morgan and she refused. I told her that since she won't show her ID that I will be serving her. She refused to take the documents. So I placed them in front of her door. The female saw me place them there. She said, "I'm not Morgan. You can speak to their management." Sheesh. Well, [ __ ] I didn't watch this yet. Oh, he made a short form of it. Is this intentional? I feel like he's framed Ethan here with the sun in the background. It kind of looks angelic.

[00:13:29]>> American millionaire podcaster is suing.

[00:13:33]What the [ __ ] An Israeli American millionaire podcaster. I wanted to take Sam's side on this um or Samson, sorry, no, Samson's side on this because I did feel like we were getting into territory where it's like, are we um suing people for political opinions we disagree with?

[00:13:51]Like your perspective on whether or not Ethan Klein is pro genocide or not. I feel like that is a legitimate political opinion um that that can be debated. I don't know if I would want that litigated in court, but then I feel like if you kept watching, there were just so many claims that Noah Samson was making where it's like, bro, you are just [ __ ] yourself. so hard like they became stronger statements of fact and not just political opinions. So I I think I I wanted to defend him so I could have the contrary take but yeah I don't know is suing me for defamation.

[00:14:18]Hi I'm Noah Samson. I'm a YouTuber. I make videos about how Israel sucks. Last year I uploaded this video. The YouTubers who backed a genocide and in response Ethan Klene, host of the H3 podcast filed a defamation lawsuit. Here it is. Here's the lawsuit. It's 31 pages. He's alleging that I defamed him by falsely painting him as a supporter of the genocide of Palestinians. I believe that Klein's claims are meritless and I intend to defend against them. But to do this, I need your help.

[00:14:43]Defamation lawsuits can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and I don't have that kind of money. So, I started a GoFundMe. Klein v. Samson. I set the goal for $200,000, which will be used for lawyers fees and legal expenses.

[00:14:55]However, any funds raised above this goal donated directly to Palestinian aid. And any funds that go unused or are recuperated proceedings conclude will also be donated. I'll be doing a fundraising marathon stream on Friday, May 22nd, starting at 10:00 a.m. Pacific time. Guests include FD Signifier.

[00:15:13]>> Not legit. Ethan was never pro genocide.

[00:15:15]I I mean, I'm just saying you can have that as a political perspective. Like if you say like you support Israel, so you're pro genocide, like I would say that's not a justable claim. that's like a that's a political opinion that doesn't belong in court. Um obviously I wouldn't consider myself pro genocide, but like if somebody said I was pro genocide, I don't know if that's like an actual claim. I I I just don't feel that. I would be really uncomfortable saying that. But um I'm pretty sure the examples that Ethan gave, Noah Samson went way further than that and was like making absolute statements of fact about things that Ethan just didn't say. So I don't know. [ __ ] him there. Boy, Denims, Idubbbz, Big Joel, Frogan, Chris Kunsler, Overzealots, and more and a bunch more. Donation goals include chug a gallon of milk, pie in the face, hot chip challenge, shoe on head cosplay, why not? Run a marathon and more. And if we make it to $500,000, I will ride a bicycle. This case is baseless. If it goes through, it's a scary president of online creators. Bucks. Well, like I I thought there were statements of fact in here. I would have to go back and reread this complaint that that were pretty bad about things that Noah kept saying over and over again. I don't know. Why does he pretend that he doesn't make enough money to defend himself? I mean, it's not like he posts a ton of YouTube videos, right? So, he might not make that much money for this to be able to just throw a couple hundredk at like a core case. I don't know.

[00:16:27]>> Okay. What is this? Does it mean that was linked a while ago?

[00:16:29]>> The different ones.

[00:16:30]>> I think it means you can talk to Twitch streams again. That would have never worked that way. That's like that's that's like thinking that like, oh, I found a sick loophole. No, they would just say you're not allowed to talk to people who have been banned and deleted accounts or something. I think that would be it.

[00:16:40]>> Okay, a bit of a different one today.

[00:16:41]And don't worry, it's just going to be a one-off, but I am going to have a go at trying to be sincere and making a good point. So, wish me luck. Taylor Loren is a very controversial figure to many, and I believe for a good reason. It seems strangely memoryholed in some parts of the internet nowadays that she actively supported Keeles and the Drop Kiwi Farms campaign. That's how I found out about her anyway. This weird person always wearing her mask, seemingly trying to make the internet worse for people for social justice brownie points for a couple years now, it seems. She's been posting regularly on YouTube, and I recently have had the dis. Do you genuinely care at all about being unbanned from Twitch? I mean, yeah, it's a big platform that's like super insulated, so it's hard to reach viewers on there if you're outside of the platform. Uh, plus I don't like the fact that it's just like it's serving right now as a massive radicalization pipeline for people to be either shuffled very far to the right into the Trump camp with Asminagold or to be shuffled very far into the left into the weird authoritarian Marxist Leninist camp with uh Hassan. And I feel like not having like a good counterbalance to that kind of drives me crazy. But >> Twitch is unironically a pretty much a whole different audience like genuinely >> yeah pleasure of finding out how difficult it is to watch her content.

[00:17:39]There is one thing that she's been talking about a lot there recently and it's very funny that it's been coming from her. This is upholding section 230 and she has a unique slant to talking about it for lefties. At least I guess I think that's who's watching this and this may be a hard pill to swallow. I'm not saying anything about the cont.

[00:17:51]>> I am not understanding JST clap back at you. Okay, thank you. Good clarity >> of her character, but that doesn't change the fact that I think her messaging around section 230 is correct.

[00:18:01]Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is an American law that protects social media websites from legal liability for hosting.

[00:18:07]>> You do not have to amplify a person's messaging because it's correct. if every other thing they say is [ __ ] [ __ ] or wrong. Not only do you not have to amplify their messaging, you don't have to um it damages the thing that you're trying to message about. Like imagine if I thought that government direction to private companies can be really important when our nation nation is in crisis. And I say over and over and over again, this is a thing that Hitler got right. We have to be able to control our corporations for the betterment of the country. Hitler was right on this, guys.

[00:18:39]Hitler was absolutely right when he was talking about like it's so [ __ ] [ __ ] It's such an obviously [ __ ] [ __ ] point. Taylor the Ren is a deeply unserious brain broken foreign paid by her own admission and and by stuff that we don't know, right? Uh journalist slap journalist that engages in [ __ ] hit piece and in the most crank [ __ ] arguments ever and she doesn't know [ __ ] all about technology or the law. If you think that section 230 protections are important, which they are, arguably the entire internet is built on the concept of section 230 protections. very important, then you absolutely should not be saying things like, "Well, we should listen to Taylor L here." Under no circumstances should you ever listen to Taylor Large. He's a [ __ ] [ __ ] especially if you care about this topic. Jesus Brown section 230 is correct. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is an American law that protects social media websites from legal liability for hosting userenerated content. Simply, when a user of a social media website posts on there, it is the user, not the website, that is legally responsible for that content. This is a vital law for maintaining a free and open internet.

[00:19:35]Currently, a bill called the Sunset Section 230 Act is being pushed. If it passes, section 230 will be revoked after 2 years. It's uncertain what this would look like, but it's a near enough certainty that this would lead to a more moderated and regulated internet. Think no anonymity online and all content needing to be manually reviewed. It sounds crazy and impossible to me, but there are genuinely very powerful people trying to push for this stuff. And I should add on that the corn ban in the UK sounded crazy and impossible to us and then that went through and it affected a lot more than just that. So, this should not be a partisan issue.

[00:20:00]When it comes to people in government, both sides want this. So, there should be no team sports being played when it comes to people opposing it. And I have to say, Taylor Loren has found a niche in talking about this topic to lefties.

[00:20:09]I'm pretty sure Taylor Loren opposes like all forms of anything having to do with tech censorship. Is there anything she supports relating to tech moderation or censorship? Does anybody know? She must support some of it and I just haven't seen it. But like I like she came out against like banning cell phone usage for kids in school. Like she didn't like the fact that they were withholding cell phones in school. She got ass paintain earlier saying that um [ __ ] we I didn't even participate.

[00:20:30]>> You think kids shouldn't have should have cell phones in school?

[00:20:33]>> Yes.

[00:20:33]>> She's she was like super mad on on um on uh Twitter like about the phones being withheld from kids that it was like a [ __ ] civil rights issue or some [ __ ] Um yeah, I feel like she's against literally all forms of anything having to do with any kind of textorship or anything at all ever.

[00:20:49]Mr. Moot, no. That's bad faith [ __ ] Taylor Loren's kids, cell phones, school.

[00:20:59]I agree with Taylor Loren's. This is August 21st, 2025. This is a year ago.

[00:21:03]It's not the one I just saw most recently, but that the phone/ teens debate is far more nuanced and complicated than just phones bad.

[00:21:07]There's a full-on moral panic. Proposed legislation that compromises everyone's privacy, and many different actors with their own agendas as social media companies are supporting KOSA. You might guess some intentions. There are a lot of people with profit motives going way blah blah blah blah blah. Okay. Yes. And there are plenty of ways to restrict kids phones use at school without laws that have significant civil liberties consequences, harmful effects, etc. That's their prerogative. Nuance is lost because the convo is being dominated by moral panic people. So maybe this is okay. Okay. But does she ever suggest any alternative ever? And also somebody linked me her recent tweets on this. Um cuz I know that she made stronger tweets about this recently. Agree. And there are plenty of ways to have kids put their phones away during class without sloppy universal laws. A big factor here is also the parents who want 24/7 text access to their kids at school. usually citing fear of school shootings. I'm writing a longer piece on this. This I'm sorry. This is [ __ ] [ __ ] Plenty of kids survived way before you had 24/7 access to them with a [ __ ] cell phone. Okay. Jesus Christ.

[00:22:01]>> Yeah. No, this is this is a [ __ ] >> But this is also this is a year ago. I know she made more extreme statements on this recently. Find me something more.

[00:22:07]>> Damon said like I don't know if this is true, so I'm asking you kind of.

[00:22:10]Apparently Taylor Ren got paid by some smartphone company that makes phones for kids. Is this true?

[00:22:15]>> Yes. Uh well I well I don't know if it was for kids but it she it was a sponsor for some She does take tech sponsors which I feel like is kind of weird if you're like a tech investigative journalist.

[00:22:25]>> Yeah. Uh a guy who got who apparently work worked at one of the big data centers wants to know if you want to ask him any questions etc. He's in stream disagreements. He apparently doesn't email me in maybe tomorrow because I don't watch. Okay. Yep.

[00:22:40]>> She's also weirdly pro AI. I think she's always been super pro um AI. I don't think she's ever been anti- AI anywhere.

[00:22:48]I I don't I don't know if she's ever been in favor of any tech restriction or any tech regulation ever.

[00:22:54]>> She welcomes our tech overlords.

[00:22:56]Unironically, >> but if somebody has something to link to me out, you know, I'm welcome to be incorrect about that.

[00:23:01]>> Would you say like is she like a technocrat or whatever?

[00:23:04]>> I don't know what she's very weird. I don't know what I don't know what's going on with her, but I mean like she's paid by that Omidar place for journalistic stuff and I don't know who else pays her money for stuff. So, who knows? Also, who is she to talk about moral? Who is she? Yeah, she to talk about um moral panic over her like trying to destroy um [ __ ] chorus and everything else over dark money [ __ ] Oh, and she also pulls out this thing a lot too. Like gay people were basically executed everywhere on the planet before uh cell phones came out. Uh so this is 9 months ago.

[00:23:37]>> Cell phones have to do with that.

[00:23:38]>> Oh, let me tell you. The bans also harm the most marginalized kids. Rich kids still have laptops and computers in schools. For many underprivileged kids, their phones are their only word processor, etc. I'm going to be writing more on all of this, but TLDDR, this is not to help kids.

[00:23:54][ __ ] I know there was something within like the last couple weeks, I think, or or maybe it was even within the last few days. I feel like there's a big a big meme. Oh, yeah. I find myself having to use Grock more and more because of the ridiculous content restrictions and other AI models like Gemini. They have um they have all these needless guard rails that won't let you do basic tasks like sharpening an image of Ben Shapiro for a YouTube thumbnail. She's like pro like she's like on AI tech everything. I don't think I've >> Yeah.

[00:24:19]>> Yeah.

[00:24:20]>> Girl, how do I make a nuclear bomb?

[00:24:22]He'll tell you too.

[00:24:24]>> This reactionary narrative that social media/theones are rotting our brains is being pushed by an extremely wellunded lobbying effort with the ultimate goal of passing some of the most draconian online speech and censorship laws of our lifetime. And the mainstream media is happy to feed it. The purpose of school is to prepare children for the real world. Oh, wait. Hold on. What is this?

[00:24:46]Um, oh, this is the discourse. Is it April 27th? Oh, no. This is a month ago, maybe. Banning cell phones in schools might turn out to be the best thing we've done for kids, our generation. For the first day of school to March 31st, 2026, it just reported an increase of more than 200,000 additional books checked out compared to the previous year. Look at library checkouts. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Oh, whoa, you mean teacher blah blah blah. Oh, whoa. Uh oh. Every time you tweet about Taylor, she finds it, too. Even if it's got like 20 likes. Try it yourself.

[00:25:12]Whoa. You mean the teachers know more than Taylor Lens? Whoa. Whoa. Yes, girl.

[00:25:15]You're so right. Mass AI surveillance systems and stop and frisking underprivileged teenagers because they might have a cell phone for shift work is great. Stop and frisk.

[00:25:29][ __ ] those kids. And their right to privacy. Wow. Oh, 12-year-olds have a right to privacy. Now, first of all, the post you're quote tweeting is totally circumstantial speculation. My issue with smartphone bans is related to civil liberties.

[00:25:45]These bans are being packaged with AI surveillance systems and enforced by cops, leading to black students getting suspended at higher rates. What? If you ban phones, then black students get suspended.

[00:25:58]Just out of curiosity, do you oppose cell phone bans that aren't enforced in draconian ways? Like, I don't know, those pocket things that some schools use. Those yonder pouches are costing school districts millions. Money that underfunded schools desperately need for other purposes, especially when these bans have such serious downsides and have not been proven to improve any of the metrics proponents claim. The purpose of school is to prepare children for the real world, where cell phones exist. I'm all for teachers having kids put their phones in a bucket during class or instituting classroom or even schoolwide rules. I Okay. Um, but I am against bans that cops enforce or that cost millions for no benefit and simply feed a moral panic. I don't know this thing over here is I don't I don't think I've ever seen her ever be in favor of any tech restriction at all. I don't know. Who knows? Maybe somewhere she is and I just haven't seen it yet because no one else is going to do it. And even if you see these people as an enemy or just you don't like them, it is good to get people impassioned about this topic.

[00:26:48]And that's where my problem comes in, which is the enemies of Taylor Loren.

[00:26:51]Now these aren't Kiwi Farms users or you people that might follow libs of Tik Tok. people that would have genuine reasons to truly hate Taylor Loren. They are the liberal [ __ ] the pro liberal establishment scum of this platform. We've got Hutch. Here's the >> she how is this? Okay, never mind.

[00:27:06]Sorry, can't see enemies everywhere.

[00:27:07]Don't know why I would, but >> finding characteristic is his hardcore appealing to and cheerleading of the authority of the American Democratic Party. He is hugely under the thumb of the H3 and DGG communities. Hutch has nothing of value to offer, so he spends his time spinning plates to try and keep both of these communities happy. And one way to do that is epically dunk on Taylor Loren. Now, don't get your hopes up. But we are going to have to lock in because when Hutch gets going, always hard to keep up. Here he is defending Contra Points and attempting to >> GG, Chad.

[00:27:31]>> Doesn't matter. He's He hasn't disavowed me enough, and I think he talked to me once or twice in the past couple months.

[00:27:35]This guy is one trillion% part of these communities. Guaranteed. One trillion%.

[00:27:40]>> So stupid, >> Taylor.

[00:27:41]>> What about repealing section 230 for platforms that have algorithmic recommendation?

[00:27:45]>> Every single platform since the dawn of the internet has algorithmic recommendation. Prodigy and CompuServe had algorithmic recommendation. There is no distinction between algorithmic content. Literally in section 230, if you read the text of the law, it just talks about any interactive computer service. So what are you talking about with platforms with algorithmic content?

[00:27:58]The law was written about platforms with algorithmic content. You guys are acting. Do you guys think that algorithms were invented in in 2022?

[00:28:04]That's like literally how they talk about this stuff.

[00:28:06]>> Um I assume that the algorithms have become a lot more sophisticated.

[00:28:11]Uh how have um how how are we describing it?

[00:28:16]Algoythmic.

[00:28:18]Um >> so this is pretty high level stuff. It took me a while to get my head around.

[00:28:21]Hutch is asking Grock if search algorithms have changed since the 1990s.

[00:28:26]>> Search engines changed from >> That's a fair question.

[00:28:34]>> Was um was QQ the mod I think was a mod in that Snark server that was like okay with doxing um Wick remember?

[00:28:45]>> I don't know how much it was your [ __ ] >> I don't remember. I was watching, but I I >> Do you recognize the Let me see.

[00:28:51]>> This guy's name is one of my um >> No, I haven't I haven't seen any of this. I I have no idea.

[00:28:59]>> But this is a >> Oh, it's that person.

[00:29:02]>> Yep. And then >> Oh, yeah. I know that name.

[00:29:07]>> So, this is Yeah, it is. He is part of that group, but whatever.

[00:29:12]Oh, >> um earlier uh I guess browsers like CompServe is that what she said like CompuServe Facebook.

[00:29:22]>> Wait, so the question who linked me this video to watch it only has 7,200 views.

[00:29:25]I don't know why the [ __ ] I was linked this >> invented algorithm.

[00:29:29]>> Gto kept talking about how he had a new video last night. Oh, this is just them trying to promote this video. Why the [ __ ] am I even looking at this?

[00:29:36]>> I don't know if you saw this.

[00:29:37]Apparently, there's a new [ __ ] >> new meme.

[00:29:42]Is that true? That can't be true. She's doing the thing where you misunderstood what's being said. What exactly did he say again? Hang on.

[00:29:46]>> A well, Hutch is trying his best. And this highle analysis gets brought up due to the doomscroll discussion around the Algorithm accountability act. This is in the early stages of the legislative process. And if this is passed, online platforms that use automated systems to rank and organize content.

[00:30:00]Okay. So then this guy is not somebody who dislikes Taylor Loren. He's part of the community that super [ __ ] stands and simps like crazy for her. And then is Yeah. Okay. All right. Remember to hit that like and subscribe and don't forget the notification bell so that my videos show up right in your feed.