reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says Meta's AI also linked him to extremist groups, advised against hiring him or advertising on his show, and suggested authorities should consider removing his parental rights due to his views on DEI and transgenderism. Starbuck claims this began in August 2024 after a Harley Davidson dealership posted a screenshot of Meta's AI falsely accusing him of being at the Capitol and linked to QAnon. He says Meta's AI also falsely stated he was arrested, is a white nationalist supporter, supports Nick Fuentes, and denies the Holocaust. Starbuck says Meta's AI admitted that these lies could be considered malicious. After he contacted Meta, they blacklisted his name on their AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly used in the initial query. He believes Meta's actions have led to increased threats against him and his family, including a recent arrest of a man who wanted to kill him.

Host: You mentioned at one point that CDC management actually prevented you from interviewing Conservative leader Pierre Pauli on your show. Can you describe what happened there? Guest: Well we I mean I basically wasn't allowed to pick the phone and and talk to conservatives. I have some g chats here which I just want to you know read you part of this. I'm talking to my senior producer I'm saying okay, you know this is an editorial discussion. Can we get a Conservative perspective on this is essentially what I'm saying. It is a no to the Conservatives I'm told. We can't chase anyone from the entire party. The chase is with P and P. So if power and politics is not able to secure a conservative, or, you know, somebody that presents an alternate perspective, then we are not allowed to. I'm told at one point we're sure that there's a myriad of other types of interesting guests that you can chase outside of the Conservatives. Can I be included on conversations with power and politics? That's not how we work. I say to management by playing petty office politics we feed into Conservative narratives that we have a bias against them. Canada tonight is a melting pot of news of the day and politics and decisions, from it largely impact Canadians. So we need flexibility to to respond to emerging stories. So yes, I wasn't even allowed to pick up the phone and call to request Pierre Pauliev. Host: Look at what happened when I had Melissa Lanceman on my show, right? That I was threatened to be pulled off the air which CBC then said in a news statement they didn't threaten to do that. There are recordings of them trying to do this. Why Guest: I mean there's an effort to essentially, protect those in Ottawa in in terms of their perspectives on these things, in terms of who they want on the show. It should be about you know, we did an interview with Karen Johnson, my cohost on the new podcast I'm doing. She's another former CBC employee that is talking about the toxic culture. She said that she alleges that she was called a brown Barbie, a bimbo, but she says that it's it's a very high school culture. And these are things that this is fine if you if you have hosts doing that it's not fine but it okay but management you are responsible for dealing with that and so if management is not going to do anything, if the President of the CBC is going to come here and expect a tongue lashing and then be able to go back to the CBC and continue to get funding without accountability, these practices will continue. So shame is clearly not enough to get the CBC to a place where they will hold themselves accountable so it's incumbent upon this committee to do that.

The records Joe Gebbia was trying to digitize were stored at Iron Mountain, about an hour north of Pittsburgh, in Boyers, Pennsylvania, where there is a limestone mine 220 feet underground. Since 1960, the federal government has used the mine as a retirement office. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) keeps about 450 employees working down there full-time alongside 26,000 file cabinets holding over 400 million paper records. The site processes about 10,000 federal retirements every month by hand. A key point discussed is that the issue is not that technology has failed to digitize the records. Every administration since Reagan has tried to digitize the records, and the attempts failed for multiple reasons. The transcript says that doing it correctly, lawfully and with the Federal Office of Personnel’s required legal protections, is very expensive and politically contentious. It also claims that physical paperwork in a mine has a different level of protection than digitized paperwork. The transcript then describes a strategy attributed to Joe Gebbia and his team at Doge: they began moving the records onto the digital infrastructure controlled by the White House. Rather than digitizing under legal guardrails, the transcript says they worked around the legal guardrails and “called it a day.” The speaker describes an investigation into what Gebbia was doing with National Design Studio, saying they ran into roadblocks when trying to follow the money. The transcript states that the work appears to be done “off the books,” with no contracts on USAspending, the office not registered on SAM.gov as a federal procurement entity, and National Design Studio not technically existing. When the speaker could not follow money, they say they followed the data instead, arguing that data leaves residual traces. The transcript then connects this approach to what Larry Ellison’s company was doing over the prior decade. It describes Oracle running a network of tracking tools embedded across the internet to build “digital dossiers,” files containing very sensitive information about people, including where they lived, where they banked, what they bought, and political views, race, and other information. It says Ellison publicly claimed in 2015 that Oracle had dossiers on roughly 5 billion people. The transcript adds that Oracle was sued in federal court in 2022 for building those files without consent, and that in July 2024 Oracle settled for $115 million and shut the entire operation down. The transcript concludes by stating that five months after Oracle’s dossier operation ended, Joe Gebbia joined Doge in the White House.

We just wrapped up a four-hour legal battle suing David Lemenyi, Trudeau's former Justice Minister, for illegally deleting his Twitter account after he was found to have invoked the Emergencies Act unconstitutionally. The government is trying to argue that it's a private account and they have no control over it, but we believe it's a public record. The Chief Justice presided over the hearing, which was surprising, and it lasted four hours, covering various acts and charter submissions. We argued that Lametti broke the law and the government is trying to let him off easy with just a "pinky swear" not to do it again. Despite contradictory arguments from their counsel, we feel our arguments were consistent. Even if we don't win the injunction, we've already moved from deleted records to promises of preservation. We're concerned about deleted direct messages that could reveal more about Lametti's conduct as a minister. This legal fight is costly, but we're committed to holding the government accountable.

I'm in a taxi heading to the federal court of appeal in Toronto for a hearing regarding my book, "The Libranos," published during the 2019 election. Elections Canada has been prosecuting me for five years, spending over $1 million on this case, while ignoring serious foreign interference in our elections. My book, critical of Justin Trudeau, is the only one among 24 published that has faced legal scrutiny. I'll be live tweeting the proceedings, and I'm likely to be alone in court without support from civil liberties or journalism groups. If you believe in defending free speech, please consider helping with legal costs at thelibranos.com. I'm fighting against Trudeau's government, and I appreciate any support. I'll update you soon on Twitter.

The speaker says this is the second update and refers to a “five million dollar challenge” being overturned last summer, adding that “they said Mike was right,” framing the focus as “voting machine evidence.” They state that, according to an article from Law and Crime “yesterday,” Dominion dropped the lawsuit against Mike Lindell and My Pillow. The speaker says this does not mean they will stop fighting voting machine companies, and that they are “all in to get ’em get rid of ’em, get to paper ballots, hand counted.” They announce that within the next half hour they will post an “eight hundred page historical drop of the voting machine evidence” on Lyndale TV, describing it as previously unseen material compiled over the last five years. They claim it will be accompanied by a press release and call it “a historical library” with “five hundred and some” articles, stating it contains “hundred percent evidence to back each thing up.” They also say it was “part of this given to the president” and that it was “re-uh, he re-truthed it.” The speaker characterizes Dominion dropping the lawsuit as relief, saying My Pillow “never did anything,” but that when Dominion sued My Pillow for “one point three billion dollars” with employees concerned due to the CEO’s “free speech,” the situation was stressful. They say they are appealing, noting an appeal “just went out” that will be filed “today,” referring to a Colorado case where My Pillow “won a year ago,” and describing this appeal as “the last piece of that.” They claim voting machine companies are “falling like dominoes.” They reference Smartmatic in Minneapolis, described as “like a parked car,” and say a judge made a ruling before trial that the speaker defamed the judge. They then say that a week later, it “came out that Smartmatic is in fact committing crimes” with its voting machines against other countries, and they say more will “be coming out too.” They use an analogy comparing the situation to a case being dismissed in light of new evidence, but they say that, according to their lawyers, it does not work that way, and that judges can “sit on it” indefinitely or throw it out without a trial. The speaker concludes by saying it is not a conspiracy that judges are corrupt, asserting instead that judges may be in fear of going against voting machines.

Speaker 0 discusses “Bill Gates on trial,” asserting disbelief at the reality of the situation unless present in the courtroom, and notes that two connected legal cases are taking place in the Netherlands involving Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO Albert Baller, former Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte, who is described as the current secretary general of NATO, and other senior government officials. Speaker 1 claims they can prove “without any doubt” that the official narrative of COVID-19 is fake, and notes the rapid developments in the case. They also reference the Epstein files, stating that there is a “very evil elite” led by bankers, described as harmful to the world and its people. Speaker 0 relays remarks from lawyer Peter Stassen in court, who purportedly said on the Global Elite Network that there exists a globally organized malicious elite at the top of which are some families who own central banks worldwide. He asserts Epstein “plays an important role in this network” and that Epstein is “the bankers’ agent.” According to these remarks, Epstein is shaping a transhuman agenda driven largely by the desire to eradicate much of the world’s population. Speaker 0 further describes a “satanic system,” in which bankers, secret services, media, Hollywood figures, government officials, universities, and many scientists are corruptly connected to this network and serve a transhuman, described as satanic, mind-bending system. On COVID and genocide, the statement is that “we are witnessing the largest genocide of the world’s population ever.” Speaker 1 adds emphasis with the word “This,” underscoring the claim that the narrative and events described are connected to the broader allegations. Speaker 0 concludes that the trial is “beyond the courtroom,” defining it as a test for the judiciary and posing the question of whether justice will reveal what it can still become.

Speaker 0 describes his previous online behavior and now presents it on video. He has been trolling T-Mobile CEO Mike Sievert and John Ledger, the CEO prior to the merger, for over a month to ensure they knew his name and who he was. He claims they lied to him and America about the T-Mobile merger. He states that the promises made in front of Congress—to lower prices and add jobs—were lies. He asserts that T-Mobile raised the prices of rate plans and has completed multiple layoffs since the merger went live in 2020. He notes that last week, T-Mobile told customers on certain plans that they would automatically transition to a more expensive plan if they did not call into customer service and opt out. He mentions that Mike Sievert launched Price Lock last year, which was him promising to never raise the price on customers. He criticizes CNN for naming Mike Sievert “CEO of the Year” for 2022, saying that liars support liars. He asserts that T-Mobile and the parent company Deutsche Telekom are not who people think they are, and that T-Mobile US should be thought of as the German government and the World Economic Forum. He states he is cool with gay and trans people, but argues that T-Mobile is on a different level, distinguishing between being cool with gay and trans versus shoving it down society’s throat and forcing people to believe in it. He claims T-Mobile doesn’t care about gay or trans people and argues the company used the agenda to divide people. He questions a discrepancy in corporate spending, asking why the company would pay $25 for gender reassignment but only $12 for in vitro fertilization, concluding that the company “thinks gender assignments are twice as cool.”

Michael Koury raised a question about Ravi Javi's IP patent related to the domain name system and restricted channels, noting a significant change in the filing attorney to Perkins Coie after the 2016 election. This prompted a discussion about Rodney Joffe, who billed Perkins Coie over $1 million in 2016 and 2017 for his work with NuStar Technologies. There is interest in understanding the nature of that work and the reasons behind Joffe's termination from the FBI. However, the technical details of the patent remain unclear.

In this video, the speakers discuss an IP patent by Inter Ravi Jaffi related to the domain name system and operating using restricted channels. They find it interesting that after the 2016 election, the filing attorney changed to Perkins Coie. They also mention that during a testimony, it was revealed that Rodney Joffe billed Perkins Coie over $3 million for work done by his firm, NuStar Technologies. They express curiosity about the nature of that work and how the money was spent. Additionally, they mention that Joffe was terminated from the FBI, but they don't provide any details about why.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says the AI also linked him to extremism, advised against hiring him or advertising on his show, and suggested authorities remove his parental rights due to his views on DEI and transgenderism. Starbuck claims Meta's AI has been defaming him since August 2024, after a Harley Davidson dealership posted a screenshot of the AI's false claims. He says the AI falsely stated he was arrested, is a white nationalist supporter, supports Nick Fuentes, and is a holocaust denier. Starbuck says Meta's AI admitted its statements could be seen as malicious. After he contacted Meta, Starbuck says the company blacklisted his name on its AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly mentioned. He believes Meta's actions have led to physical threats against him and his family, including an arrest in Oregon of a man who wanted to kill him. He is asking for an apology and for Meta to fix the biased training of its AI.

On February 5th, a board member asked me to come to his house. He told me that I had nothing to do with the Pfizer story. I showed him a video of me confronting a Pfizer executive, which had 11 million views on YouTube. He said that the video was made after the undercover video had already been done.

Breaking: FBI has delivered my phone back after three years of nonsense. They took my livelihood, the phone, the stuff in there. I had pictures of my grandkids when my dad passed away. I’ll do a show when I get back to Minnesota; it’s right there in the box like it never left back in the day. I brought it all the way up to the supreme court, the supreme court in one week. No. We're not gonna look at that. In Minnesota, the eighth circuit there. And those judges even asked the FBI and the government, why why don't you just make a copy of his phone? Why do you need the physical doubt the physical phone? And they also asked him, well, what do if you're looking for evidence, you're looking for stuff in there, where's the attorney client privilege? And they go, well, we're looking at that. So what do you look at it and say, uh-oh. We shouldn't have seen that. It's like being in a being in a courtroom and going, strike that, your honor. The jury already heard it. It’ll be interesting, but it’s interesting enough getting that back. We’re bringing Dennis Montgomery back to recount my original evidence; they suppress him and suppressing I think we're gonna get him on my show. Did Mike Lindell ever get his phone back? Nope. So now we can tell him, yes, he did. It's not so much it's Vanessa. It's more of how they took it and what they were really planning.

A journalist ("iTV") confronts another journalist about an upcoming court case. The journalist ("iTV") is being taken to court for allegedly harassing a couple of Germans after they endangered his family by photographing them. He questions why the reporter hasn't watched his documentary, which had 67 million views and details his seven months in solitary confinement. He accuses the reporter of being a "propaganda machine" who will publish a pre-written, biased article implying he caused fear of violence. He asks if he should be allowed to contact journalists and ask them questions on camera, and criticizes the Daily Mail for endangering his family. He believes he is facing ten years in jail for wanting to ask a question on camera. He claims he is being targeted with "lawfare" because he is an "uncontrollable journalist" who is ahead of the population on important issues.

Silicon Valley is trying to destroy evidence of their misdeeds related to election fraud. Tech billionaires are claiming there was no fraud, despite allegedly perpetuating it. Harmeet Dillon suggests big tech companies like Google have been using algorithms for years to treat different content differently, citing leaked evidence from YouTube programmers. For example, anti-Semitic videos are treated differently than anti-Muslim videos. These companies have allegedly allowed false information regarding the 2016 election to flourish for years.

Mike Lindell claims Fox News was presented with evidence of 2020 election fraud, including information from Dennis Montgomery, but shut it down. He questions who paid Fox's $787 million settlement with Dominion, speculating about China, BlackRock, or the Murdochs' involvement. Lindell alleges that the timing of his $5 million loss in court was suspicious, coinciding with the Fox/Dominion settlement, and that this was used to discredit his election fraud evidence. Lindell insists he possesses extensive evidence, including voter rolls and cast vote records, available on lindelltv.com. He believes Tucker Carlson was "benched" by Fox because Carlson began to believe in the voting machine fraud claims and advocated for eliminating electronic voting machines. Lindell is appealing the $5 million arbitration loss, despite being told it's unlikely to be overturned, and is taking it to federal court.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says the AI claimed he was linked to extremism, anti-Semitism, and Holocaust denial, advising against hiring or advertising on his show. Starbuck says the AI's false claims began in August 2024 after a Harley Davidson dealership posted a screenshot of Meta's AI accusing him of being at the Capitol and linked to QAnon. He says Meta's AI also falsely stated he was arrested, is a white nationalist supporter, and has been sued for defamation. Starbuck claims Meta's AI admitted its statements could be considered malicious. Starbuck says Meta blacklisted his name on its AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly mentioned. He says the AI suggested authorities should consider removing his parental rights. Starbuck says a Meta official asked him to promote Meta's ending of fact-checking. He believes biased AI is a weapon that threatens reputations and elections.

Robbie Starbuck is suing Meta for multi-millions, alleging its AI falsely claimed he pled guilty to disorderly conduct and was at the January 6th Capitol riot, which he denies. He says the AI falsely linked him to extremism, advised against hiring him or advertising on his show, and suggested authorities should consider removing his parental rights due to his views on DEI and transgenderism. Starbuck claims Meta's AI stated he filmed inside the Capitol on January 6th and that his footage was used by the House Select Committee, which he also denies. He says Meta's AI admitted that spreading such lies could be seen as evidence of actual malice. Starbuck alleges that after he reported the issue, Meta blacklisted his name on its AI, but it still defames him if his name isn't directly used in the initial query. He also claims a Meta official asked him to promote their ending of fact-checking. Starbuck believes biased AI is a weapon that threatens reputations and could manipulate elections.

The speaker claims to have been publicly criticizing T-Mobile, CEO Mike Sievert, and former CEO John Legere for over a month. They allege that Sievert and Legere lied to Congress and the American public about the T-Mobile merger, specifically regarding promises to lower prices and add jobs. The speaker states that T-Mobile has raised prices, conducted layoffs since April 2020, and is automatically switching customers to more expensive plans unless they opt out. The speaker further accuses T-Mobile and its parent company, Deutsche Telekom, of being aligned with the German government and the World Economic Forum. They also claim that T-Mobile uses LGBTQ+ agendas to divide people, suggesting the company's priorities are misaligned by citing the disparity in coverage for gender reassignment versus in vitro fertilization.

The transcript presents a wide-ranging, critical portrait of Bill Gates, intertwining biographical claims with controversial allegations about Microsoft and the Gates Foundation, as well as broader conspiracy-like scenarios. Key biographical and career points: - The narrative asserts Gates did not rise from a garage origin but was born into wealth and privilege; both his grandfather and great-grandfather were banking moguls, and his father, William Gates Sr., was a Seattle-based lawyer and political lobbyist who taught him about law, politics, and manipulation of governing power. - Gates is introduced as chairman of Microsoft. He dropped out of college to start Microsoft and is credited with inventing the Windows operating system, though the transcript states he “played no part in the invention of Windows,” instead purchasing an existing operating system from Seattle Computer Products, having it modified, and licensing it to IBM, while taking credit. - Paul Allen is described as co-founder who, while battling cancer, was targeted by Gates in an attempt to dilute Allen’s share of the company. - Gates’s business strategies are said to have been challenged by a 1998 U.S. Department of Justice antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft; a lengthy deposition is summarized with questions about non-Microsoft browsers and Gates’s responses. - A deposition clip emphasizes tensions over Gates’s concerns about competition. Philanthropy and public image: - To counter negative press, Gates invested $100 million to establish the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, allegedly transforming his image from monopolistic tycoon to generous philanthropist; the rebranding allegedly led to Gates being crowned the richest man in the world as his net worth doubled. - The Foundation is described as a massive vertically integrated entity spanning a supply chain from Seattle to Africa and Asia; Gates is depicted as a top donor to WHO and the CDC, wielding immense influence over global health and medical policy. - The Foundation’s vaccine initiatives are highlighted: Gates allegedly invested billions in vaccines, with a Wall Street Journal essay claiming vaccines are “the best investment I’ve ever made” and noting a reported over 20-to-1 return on investment. Controversies and criticisms: - The Foundation is accused of causing harm through “experimental vaccine programs,” with claims that it has investments in numerous polluting companies and that some portfolio companies have been accused of evictions, child labor, patient neglect, or fraud; details are not provided. - Specific vaccine-related controversies include controversial HPV vaccination campaigns in India (2009), where tribal girls purportedly received vaccines without proper informed consent, resulting in injuries and deaths; Parliament and authorities allegedly investigated and removed the Gates Foundation from involvement. - Allegations are raised about the ethics and safety of vaccines, including claims of paralysis from the oral polio vaccine and criticism of media and political manipulation surrounding vaccination campaigns. - The transcript mentions a broader pattern of distrust: “the Gates Foundation denied that it had been clinical trials,” and it describes media manipulation and political power associated with vaccination campaigns. Other asserted initiatives and associations: - Alleged participation in controversial projects such as the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (to block sunlight) and Earth Now’s global surveillance program; claims of a vaccine certificate system with MIT to implant quantum dot tattoos for digital immunity proof. - The EPA’s approval of an Oxitec project to release genetically modified mosquitoes to combat malaria is mentioned, with NIH noting plans for immunization via mosquito bites. - The transcript also references a New York Times report about Gates’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein, including meetings and flights on Epstein’s plane, and a debate over why a charitable trust would partner with Epstein. Overall, the transcript compiles a narrative that casts Gates as dual: a powerful, influential benefactor and a controversial figure implicated in ethical, health, and geopolitical criticisms, culminating in questions about his motives and the breadth of his influence.

During my time in the Senate's oversight committee, we examined Dominion. The proceedings were recorded and are available online. The president of Dominion and his software engineer testified, primarily addressing whether their machines had Internet access. The president claimed there was no Internet access, which I believe was false.

The episode revisits and expands a prior claim that a reset occurred around three hundred years ago, followed by a surge of major inventions in the 18th and 19th centuries. The speaker argues that these inventions were supposedly produced by “random people” living difficult lives, not by massive corporations, and contrasts that with the modern era, where they say technology has largely stopped producing “hundreds of brand new inventions,” with only upgrades to existing technologies. They list a wide range of technologies attributed to the 1800s era, including phones, planes, trains, microwaves, electricity, cars, TVs, refrigerators, speakers, radio, computers, internet, batteries, elevators, jet engines, helicopters, Wi-Fi, cellular networks, GPS, artificial intelligence, robotics, washing machines, vacuum cleaners, air conditioning, dishwashers, cameras, and more. A key example is the TV. The speaker says the official narrative claims a 21-year-old built the TV idea in 1927, inspired by rows in a farm field, while noting rural electrification in the United States—claiming 90% of farms had no electricity before the Rural Electrification Act in 1936. They question how the TV inventor in that account could have lived in a place where electricity was likely unavailable. They also argue that mainstream history depicts invention as a sudden “miracle,” with little regard for real-world constraints. The speaker then turns to RCA, presented as a radio company formed in 1919, and asserts that RCA funded Vladimir Zwerkin’s work and that Zwerkin filed early electronic TV patents in 1923, preceding a timeline that they claim is attributed to Philo Farnsworth “imagining TVs in the field.” They describe a dispute over TV patents, asserting that RCA fought over who created the first TV and later lost to Farnsworth in 1935, after which Farnsworth was “forever pinned to the TV.” The speaker concludes that a group possessing the technology selected which individuals were credited with inventions. They extend the pattern to aircraft. They claim the Wright brothers, described as bicycle mechanics without formal engineering degrees, produced the first powered, controlled, heavier-than-air flight in 1903 using no government lab, research program, or facilities, and that it only took them four years and a budget of 1 to $2,000. The speaker argues this timeline is implausible and claims invention continued “forever” afterward. They also mention a story about “donkeys” and flying between towns, described as a mythical help to builders. Further digging is said to involve a person named Charlie Taylor, described as building the plane’s engine under the Wright brothers’ direction. The speaker claims Charlie Taylor had no formal engineering education and no prior aircraft engine experience, and they present this as another point making the traditional account inconsistent. The speaker argues that the 18th and 19th centuries produced major “hardest inventions” quickly and without institutional support, while modern times—despite electricity, communication, AI assistance, corporations, and universities—have produced mainly refinements rather than new technological categories. They outline two alternative explanations they consider: that people in that earlier period were “born smarter” with superpowers, or that progress randomly stopped (which they say is illogical). They then argue the “unavoidable conclusion” is that those groups may have finished giving back old-world technology or are withholding it, and they say the surge has “recently stopped.” They invite viewers to comment for part four and add a final example: they say radio was invented in the 1890s by a man without formal degrees, labs, or funding, who achieved successful wireless transmission and that the system quickly moved into government and military use.

Sam Altman, Elon Musk, and Jeff Bezos did not build AI, according to the speaker. In 1956, scientists at Dartmouth College—math professor John McCarthy, Marvin Minsky, Nathaniel Rochester, and Claude Shannon—coined the term “artificial intelligence” and received a $7,500 private grant to study whether machines could think. The speaker says subsequent AI research funding came for decades from DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), which the speaker describes as using American taxpayers’ money; the speaker claims AI was “born” in classrooms and government labs rather than a Silicon Valley garage. The speaker then contrasts this with Altman, Bezos, and Musk, saying they “scraped” vast amounts of existing human work—“every book ever written,” “every photo ever taken,” “every song,” “every story,” and “every medical record”—“without asking, without paying, without telling you,” and then built a subscription model around users’ history. The speaker describes this as theft rather than innovation. The speaker also references DARPA’s role in inventing the internet in the 1960s using tax dollars, and says Google later built a search engine on top of it while keeping access free and funding itself through ads, resulting in a data exchange. The speaker claims the courts are “catching up,” citing “half of a million authors” suing Anthropic (backed by Jeff Bezos) for downloading millions of “pirated books” to train AI, and says a settlement totaled $1.5 billion. The speaker adds that Bezos did not write those books but funded a company that stole them. The speaker shifts to Andrew Carnegie, described as the richest man in the world who arrived in America with nothing, built a steel empire, and gave away 90% of his fortune. The speaker says Carnegie built a partnership in which communities provided land, books, and staff while Carnegie provided the building, leading to 2,509 free public libraries. The speaker quotes Carnegie: “The man who dies rich, dies in disgrace,” and says his foundation still gives millions to libraries a century after his death. The speaker contrasts Carnegie’s giving with a claim that Jeff Bezos said on national television that doubling his taxes “isn’t going to help that teacher in Queens.” The speaker concludes by saying AI systems are using accumulated human knowledge to replace the humans who process it, characterizing this as a takeover built on what society created without permission or payment, and ends by asking what Carnegie would say if he saw what the speaker describes as today’s actions.