The AI industry just had one of its biggest controversies ever.

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz      

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co      

A massive conflict between the Pentagon and leading AI companies like Anthropic and OpenAI has triggered a nationwide debate about how artificial intelligence should be used in warfare and surveillance. What started as a $200 million government contract fight quickly spiraled into a Silicon Valley crisis involving autonomous weapons, mass surveillance, and the future of AI regulation.

In this episode of Free Speech Friday, I sit down with The Atlantic's Ross Anderson to uncover the dark truth behind the Pentagon’s push for fully autonomous weapons and mass domestic surveillance. We discuss whether AI models like Claude and ChatGPT should be used for military operations, drone targeting, and intelligence analysis. The controversy intensified when Anthropic reportedly pushed back against certain Pentagon requests while OpenAI later reached a separate agreement with the Department of Defense.

We break down exactly how negotiations between Anthropic and the Department of War broke down over using AI to analyze the commercial data of American citizens. From Pete Hegseth going "nuclear" and labeling Anthropic a "supply chain risk", to OpenAI and Sam Altman swooping in at the last minute to claim the government deal, this is the AI drama that broke tech Twitter. Plus, we discuss why Claude experienced a massive subscriber spike while ChatGPT took the military contract.

Topics covered in this video include:

• The Pentagon AI contract controversy 

• OpenAI vs Anthropic drama explained 

• Autonomous weapons and AI warfare 

• AI surveillance concerns 

• Silicon Valley reactions to the deal 

• The future of AI in national security

How Jeffrey Epstein Shaped the Modern Internet: From 4chan to Facebook 

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz     

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co     

Since the release of the Epstein files, we've learned a ton about Epstein's role in the early web. From 4chan to World of Warcraft, to Facebook, and online movements like gamergate and #MeToo, Epstein seems to have played a role in it all. 

So how much of our modern internet was shaped by Epstein? I sat down with Ryan Broderick, author of the Garbage Day newsletter and host of the Panic World podcast,  to uncover how Jeffrey Epstein quietly warped our modern tech landscape.

From his early days scrubbing his SEO to his mysterious networking with Silicon Valley elites, Epstein's rise was intertwined with modern platforms, from MySpace to crypto. 

We discuss: 

How Epstein paid thousands of dollars a month for SEO services and "hacked" Wikipedia to hide his criminal record after his 2008 arrest.

A multi-year editor war over whether Epstein should be included in the notable offender widget on Wikipedia.

He actively explored in-game currencies in World of Warcraft and discussed loot boxes.

Epstein met with 4chan founder "Moot" the day before the infamous /pol/ board was created.

Epstein and Steve Bannon attempted to build a cryptocurrency-funded far-right movement.

The political plot motivated by Epstein's extreme fear of the MeToo movement.

How Epstein infiltrated Silicon Valley, meeting with billionaires like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Mark Zuckerberg.

Epstein's role in Palantir and his bizarre eugenics ideology, hoping to breed young women and create a race of super babies.

How Epstein and his elite peers viewed islands and bunkers as a way to outlast climate change without submitting to government regulation. 

Follow Ryan:

https://garbageday.email 

https://www.youtube.com/@panicworldpod 

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz     

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co     

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz

How Section 230 Became a Reproductive Rights Issue

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz    

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co    

In this episode of my Section 230 mini series, I break down how anti abortion groups are targeting the internet itself. From the 1873 Comstock Act to modern day efforts to repeal Section 230, there is a long history of using censorship laws to suppress reproductive health information.

The fight for reproductive justice and bodily autonomy has always been deeply connected to free speech and open access to information online. I sat down with Sarah Phillips from Fight for the Future to uncover the real, hidden agenda behind the push to repeal Section 230.

While politicians constantly frame weakening Section 230 as a way to "hold Big Tech accountable," these efforts actually undermine our right to access vital information related to reproductive justice and abortion online. We dive deep into the history of speech law, and talk about where the fight stands today. 

Here is what we cover in this episode:

• How early internet censorship efforts were disguised as protecting kids from indecent material.

• The devastating impact of SESTA/FOSTA and how it led to mass content takedowns of sex education and LGBTQ+ resources.

• How the narrative of "tech addiction" is being weaponized to pass restrictive internet laws.

• How anti-abortion extremists are targeting Section 230 to take down abortion funds and restrict out-of-state travel for care.

• Why protecting Section 230 is vital for shielding secure messaging apps like Signal and Telegram.

Speaking out against Big Tech and challenging institutional power is not lucrative, and these videos are entirely self-funded. If you value this content, please support my work so I can continue making this series!!!

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz    

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co    

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 

The Trump admin publicly bragged about demanding that Apple and Facebook remove ICE watch apps and Facebook groups documenting ICE activity, and Big Tech is complying.

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz   

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co   

[FREE SPEECH FRIDAY]

Since last year, Meta, Apple, and other big tech platforms have been mass removing content related to ICE. From deleting Facebook groups who criticize ICE agents to removing apps from the app store that allow citizens to report ICE in their neighborhood, it's becoming harder to criticize ICE online. 

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), is suing the government in order to get these Facebook groups and apps restored. Colin McDonnell, an attorney at FIRE joins me to break down these seminal lawsuits, how they're taking on the government, and why it's so crucial to protect free expression online. 

We discuss how DOJ and DHS officials, including Pam Bondi and Kristi Noem, successfully pressured Apple and Facebook to remove an ICE-tracking app and a Chicago-based Facebook group with nearly 100,000 members. Colin breaks down why FIRE is suing the government , whether recording law enforcement in public is protected speech or dangerous "doxing" , and the chilling rumors of a secret ICE protester database

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz     

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0    

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social 

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz

Would you pay $65,000 to have ChatGPT teach your kids?

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz   

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co   

404 Media reporter Emmanuel Maiberg joins to discuss the disturbing truth behind Alpha School, an AI-powered private school that has been getting massive hype from mainstream media. While Alpha School promises parents that kids can complete their core education in just two hours a day, leaked internal documents reveal the very chaotic reality behind tech industry buzzwords.

Alpha School charges up to $65,000 a year while openly aiming for a "no human in the loop" model to entirely eliminate human teachers. We discuss how their generative AI systems constantly hallucinate, creating illogical lesson plans and tests that treat kids like tech guinea pigs.

Even more alarming is the massive data harvesting and surveillance. Alpha School utilizes software that monitors students' screens, web cameras, microphones, and mouse movements, acting essentially as boss-ware for children. 

We also expose how video recordings of students have been left unsecured in open Google Drive links and how the school's AI scrapes educational material from platforms like IXL and Albert.io, leading to disabled accounts and terms of service violations. 

Read the 404 Media article: https://www.404media.co/students-are-being-treated-like-guinea-pigs-inside-an-ai-powered-private-school/ 

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 

FOSTA/SESTA shows what happens when you "reform" and chip away at Section 230.

Welcome back to my Section 230 mini-series, where I break down the most important and misunderstood law about the internet!!

Support my independent journalism:

🙏 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz   

🗞️ Substack: https://www.usermag.co    

FOSTA-SESTA was the first major amendment and carve-out to Section 230. While the law claimed to be about "cracking down on big tech" and making the internet "safer for children," the result was the mass deplatforming of sex workers and marginalized people online.

Activist and adult industry content creator Siri Dahl joins me to discuss how FOSTA-SESTA forced sex workers into incredibly unsafe environments and increased censorship across the board. We dive into the shutdown of Backpage, Tumblr banning all adult content, and how organizations like Morality in Media are pushing a moral panic that lawmakers (and the left!!) have bought into. We also cover how Big Tech has backed these Section 230 "reform" efforts. 

If we don't understand the devastating effects of FOSTA-SESTA, we are doomed to repeat them with new bills like the Sunset Section 230 Act or Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). We must protect Section 230 at all costs! 

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 

Democrats just handed ICE exactly what ICE asked for.

[FREE SPEECH FRIDAY]

If you value my reporting, please, please support my work 👇👇👇

Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz      

Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co   

Body cameras were supposed to hold police accountable. So why is police violence still rising? Why are cops almost never convicted using body cam footage? And why are Democrats (the same politicians who just tripled the ICE budget) now demanding that ICE agents wear body cameras?

In this episode of Free Speech Friday, I sit down with Alec Karakatsanis, lawyer and author of the fantastic book Copaganda, to uncover the hidden history of police body cameras. While body cams are presented as a technological fix to deeply rooted institutional problems, they actually have the opposite effect.

We talk about how the multi-billion dollar police surveillance industry originally struggled to get funding for these cameras, how Steven Spielberg donated money to put cameras on cops, how the narrative completely shifted, and how Big Tech is cashing in.

Big Tech interest groups and reactionary non-profits are spending millions to push mass surveillance and censorship laws. My work is 100% self-funded. This series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. 

If you value my reporting, please, please support my work 👇👇👇

Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz      

Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co   

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz         

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0        

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz  

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social    

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 

We break down:

• How the police surveillance industry lobbied for body cameras for years before Ferguson, and why they desperately wanted them

• The brilliant marketing switch that rebranded body cams from a police surveillance tool into an "accountability and transparency" reform

• Why body camera footage is used every single day to prosecute poor people in courtrooms across America, but almost never used against the police

• How Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and the Democratic Party helped sell this surveillance expansion to liberals

• Why the DOJ's own research shows body cameras do NOT reduce police misconduct or violence

• How ICE agents who killed Alex Preti and René Good were already filming themselves and were celebrated by their bosses

• The AI, facial recognition, and predictive policing data being harvested from body cam footage right now

• Why demanding body cams on ICE is a distraction from real accountability and actually gives ICE more money and power

• How Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and Kristi Noem all ended up on the same side of this debate

• The parallel between body cam propaganda and Democrat-backed internet surveillance laws

Are dumb phones actually the solution to our anxieties, or are they a $400 scam built on a moral panic?

~~~~~~~~~~

My work is 100% self-funded and this series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. If you value my reporting, please, please support my channel: 

Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz     

Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co  

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Over the past few years, a massive industry has emerged around dumb phones and the concept of logging off. From $400 minimalist dumb phones to influencers selling digital detox courses, logging off has become big business. Schools are banning phones. Politicians are blaming screen time. Media outlets are calling Gen Z “addicted.”But is ditching your smartphone actually the answer? In this video, I sat down with WIRED journalist Elana Klein to unpack the rise of the logging-off movement. We discuss how reasonable concerns over screen time have metastasized into a consumer movement selling $400 minimalist dumb phones for millions in profit. We also dive deep into the anti-smartphone moral panic , which is heavily pushed by reactionary politicians and legacy media. We explore the history of our relationship with the internet, from the tech optimism of the early 2010s and the algorithmic shift in 2016 , to the dangerous reality of school phone bans that are leading to AI surveillance and increased police interactions for students.We also talk about the concept of "smartphone addiction," what it really means, and why your issues with technology are often manifestations of much larger societal problems.

Elana's piece: https://www.wired.com/story/dumbphone-owners-have-literally-lost-their-minds

MORE READING:

https://www.wired.com/story/the-wired-guide-to-protecting-yourself-from-government-surveillance

https://www.wired.com/story/guide-protect-data-from-hackers-corporations

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz        

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0       

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz   

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social   

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz   

We cover:

The history of smartphones and how our relationship to them changed

Why dumb phones are being marketed as luxury wellness products

The moral panic around teen mental health and smartphones (and why the data is messier than you think)

How figures like Tristan Harris and Jonathan Haidt shaped the anti-tech, pro-surveillance narrative

Why "phone addiction" isn't a real clinical concept, and what you're actually feeling

Practical ways to improve your relationship with technology without throwing your phone in a river

Why the anti-smartphone movement is anti-privacy and pro-surveillance

How to think about your phone as a tool instead of an enemy

Sen. Ron Wyden speaks about Section 230, internet freedom, free speech, and how Trump is pushing big tech's policies. 

Big Tech interest groups and reactionary non-profits are spending millions to try to get Section 230 revoked. My work is 100% self-funded. This series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. If you value this reporting, please, please support the channel: 

Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz    

Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co 

Section 230 is one of the most important, and most misunderstood, laws in the history of the internet. In this episode of my Section 230 mini series, I sit down with Senator Ron Wyden, one of the original co authors of Section 230, to break down what the law actually does, why it exists, and what would happen if it were repealed. 

Section 230 protects user generated content and ensures platforms are not treated as the speaker of everything posted online. Without it, social media platforms, forums, comment sections, Wikipedia, Reddit, and any website that hosted user generated content could be sued out of existence.

There is growing political pressure to "reform" aka dismantle Section 230 entirely. If you care about online privacy, free speech, data surveillance, algorithm accountability, Big Tech regulation, or the future of the internet, I hope you'll watch!

This is part two of my Section 230 deep dive series taking place every Monday. 

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz       

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0      

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz  

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social  

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz  

We cover:

• What Section 230 really says

• Why both the left and right are attacking it

• Whether repealing 230 would protect kids

• The truth about Big Tech and liability

• Identity verification and online privacy

• Surveillance advertising and algorithm regulation

• What free speech online actually means

• Why generative AI is not covered by Section 230

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is pushing a bill that would END free speech on the internet, and he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

[FREE SPEECH FRIDAY]

• Join the Patreon: ⁠https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz⁠  

• Subscribe to my Substack:  ⁠https://www.usermag.co⁠  

Section 230 is one of the most important laws in the history of the internet. It is often called “the law that created the internet” because it protects websites, forums, blogs, comment sections, Wikipedia, and every platform that hosts user-generated content.

But for some reason, actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt wants it gone. Yesterday, he released a video following backlash from his talk last week in congress, where he called on Senators to repeal Section 230.

Almost every single thing he said in his response video was factually wrong.

For this week's Free Speech Friday episode, I'm debunking Gordon-Levitt's crusade against Section 230 and unpacking how repealing Section 230 would actually mass-censor the internet, wipe out indie platforms, destroy LGBTQ and marginalized online spaces, and hand total monopoly power over to Meta, Google, and powerful billionaires. 

I also break down the far-right groups like Morality in Media and The Heritage Foundation, which has made Section 230 repeal core to their Project 2025 tech policy agenda. If Section 230 is repealed, the cost of defending user speech could jump from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars per lawsuit. It would wipe out small communities overnight and leave only Big Tech corporations with buildings full of lawyers.

Mike Masnick’s brilliant takedown of JGL’s claims on TechDirt: https://www.techdirt.com/2026/02/12/joseph-gordon-levitt-goes-to-washington-dc-gets-section-230-completely-backwards/ 

Support independent tech journalism!

Big Tech interest groups and reactionary non-profits are spending millions to try to get Section 230 revoked. My work is 100% self-funded. This series is not backed by any advertisers or tech giants. If you value this reporting, please, please support the channel: 

• Join the Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/cw/taylorlorenz   

• Subscribe to my Substack:  https://www.usermag.co    

Follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz      

https://www.instagram.com/taylorlorenz3.0     

https://www.tiktok.com/@taylorlorenz 

https://bsky.app/profile/taylorlorenz.bsky.social 

https://twitter.com/taylorlorenz 

In this video I cover:

• What Section 230 actually says

• The publisher vs platform myth

• Why Section 230 was created after Stratton Oakmont v Prodigy

• How FOSTA SESTA changed Section 230

• Why repeal would increase censorship

• How lawsuits would silence speech

• Why big tech companies can survive without 230 but small platforms cannot

• The real way to regulate big tech through antitrust and data privacy