Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

XR Animator release (v0.19.6) ・💡Fix forearm twisting at extreme angles ・Support changing pose order via drag and drop ・Fix prop display issue when motion tracking is lost #XRAnimator #VTuber Details below👇🧵

butz_yung's profile picture

Butz Yung

5,103 subscribers

30,211 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren •via X (Twitter)

#XRAnimator#VTuber
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

XR Animator release (v0.15.0) ・💡Add shoulder and shrug tracking🤷 ・Adjust emotion tracking sensitivity ・Fix mocap data filter and reduce jitters ・Add tooltips for mocap options #XRAnimator #VTuber Details below👇🧵
1:47

XR Animator release (v0.15.0) ・💡Add shoulder and shrug tracking🤷 ・Adjust emotion tracking sensitivity ・Fix mocap data filter and reduce jitters ・Add tooltips for mocap options #XRAnimator #VTuber Details below👇🧵

Butz Yung

22,584 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

XR Animator EARLY ACCESS release (v0.22.0) ・💡Support VRM model swapping ・💡Support QuickMagic motion FBX ・Update electron (v30.0.1) ・Various updates and bug fixes #XRAnimator #VTuber Details below👇🧵
2:19

XR Animator EARLY ACCESS release (v0.22.0) ・💡Support VRM model swapping ・💡Support QuickMagic motion FBX ・Update electron (v30.0.1) ・Various updates and bug fixes #XRAnimator #VTuber Details below👇🧵

Butz Yung

16,270 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

XR Animator EARLY ACCESS release (v0.37.2) ・💡Save/load different 3D camera📸 ・Improve processing speed of lip-sync ・Fix bug which broke pose switching ・Fix hotkey issues ・Update wLipSync (v1.3.0) #XRAnimator Details below🧵
2:01

XR Animator EARLY ACCESS release (v0.37.2) ・💡Save/load different 3D camera📸 ・Improve processing speed of lip-sync ・Fix bug which broke pose switching ・Fix hotkey issues ・Update wLipSync (v1.3.0) #XRAnimator Details below🧵

Butz Yung

33,675 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Guitarist and violinist VTubers, assemble!🎻🎸 XR Animator release (v0.17.0) ・💡Support mocap for guitar and violin ・💡Support hand gesture control for props ・Support VMC camera for #Warudo ・Various updates and fixes #XRAnimator #VTuber Details👇🧵
2:15

Guitarist and violinist VTubers, assemble!🎻🎸 XR Animator release (v0.17.0) ・💡Support mocap for guitar and violin ・💡Support hand gesture control for props ・Support VMC camera for #Warudo ・Various updates and fixes #XRAnimator #VTuber Details👇🧵

Butz Yung

165,542 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

XR Animator EARLY ACCESS release (v0.35.0) ・💡Mobile app for Android📱 ・💡New "Hand camera" supporting motion sensor ・💡Local web app on any OS ・VMC protocol via WebSocket ・"Shoulder angle offset" setting added ・Other updates and fixes #XRAnimator Details below🧵
2:18

XR Animator EARLY ACCESS release (v0.35.0) ・💡Mobile app for Android📱 ・💡New "Hand camera" supporting motion sensor ・💡Local web app on any OS ・VMC protocol via WebSocket ・"Shoulder angle offset" setting added ・Other updates and fixes #XRAnimator Details below🧵

Butz Yung

18,053 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

JUST IN: Biden revives Trump executive order on illegal immigration into the United States, says, "Today, I am moving past Republican obstruction and utilizing the executive authorities available to me as President to address the border issue. Ideally, I would have preferred to tackle this through bipartisan legislation, as that's the only sustainable way to fix our broken system, hire more border patrol agents, asylum officers, and judges. However, Republicans have left me with no choice. "I am announcing actions to bar migrants who cross our southern border unlawfully from receiving asylum. Migrants will be restricted from receiving asylum at our southern border unless they seek it through an established lawful process. For those who come to the United States legally, for example, by making an appointment and arriving at a port of entry, asylum will still be available. "However, if an individual chooses not to use our legal pathways and comes without permission, against the law, they will be restricted from receiving asylum and staying in the United States. This action will help us gain control of our border and restore order to the process. "This ban will remain in place until the number of people trying to enter illegally is reduced to a manageable level for our system. We will carry out this order consistent with all our responsibilities under international law." EARLIER, I WROTE: President Biden has just issued a new executive order that prevents migrants from seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border when daily crossings exceed 2,500. The order allows for the quick return of migrants and will only reopen the border to asylum seekers when crossings drop below 1,500 daily for a week, plus an additional two-week wait. This move addresses voter concerns and mirrors a blocked 2018 policy by President Trump.
1:31

JUST IN: Biden revives Trump executive order on illegal immigration into the United States, says, "Today, I am moving past Republican obstruction and utilizing the executive authorities available to me as President to address the border issue. Ideally, I would have preferred to tackle this through bipartisan legislation, as that's the only sustainable way to fix our broken system, hire more border patrol agents, asylum officers, and judges. However, Republicans have left me with no choice. "I am announcing actions to bar migrants who cross our southern border unlawfully from receiving asylum. Migrants will be restricted from receiving asylum at our southern border unless they seek it through an established lawful process. For those who come to the United States legally, for example, by making an appointment and arriving at a port of entry, asylum will still be available. "However, if an individual chooses not to use our legal pathways and comes without permission, against the law, they will be restricted from receiving asylum and staying in the United States. This action will help us gain control of our border and restore order to the process. "This ban will remain in place until the number of people trying to enter illegally is reduced to a manageable level for our system. We will carry out this order consistent with all our responsibilities under international law." EARLIER, I WROTE: President Biden has just issued a new executive order that prevents migrants from seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border when daily crossings exceed 2,500. The order allows for the quick return of migrants and will only reopen the border to asylum seekers when crossings drop below 1,500 daily for a week, plus an additional two-week wait. This move addresses voter concerns and mirrors a blocked 2018 policy by President Trump.

Simon Ateba

2,531,418 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Life is a lot like a well-worn pair of boots. Six steps. Six foundations you walk on every single day. Faith — the sole that keeps you grounded when the road gets rocky. Family — the support that holds you steady through every mile. Marriage — the fit that carries you through the long hauls. Purpose — the direction that keeps you moving forward. Friendship — the traction that helps you climb the tough hills. You — the leather that protects everything underneath. But here’s the part most folks miss: “Don’t wait until the soles are worn through and the seams are splitting to take care of them. Oil the leather while it’s still strong. Mend the stitches before they tear. Break them in with intention, not desperation.” Most people only reach for what matters when life starts blistering their feet. They wait for the breakdown, the heartbreak, the crisis—then suddenly want to fix what they’ve neglected for years. Real wisdom? Maintain what carries you while you’re still walking tall. Strengthen your foundations in the good seasons so they can hold you when the storms come. Because the road doesn’t get easier—you just get better at walking it when your boots are already taken care of. What’s one “foundation” you’re committing to tune up while life is still good? Drop it below. 👇
1:37

Life is a lot like a well-worn pair of boots. Six steps. Six foundations you walk on every single day. Faith — the sole that keeps you grounded when the road gets rocky. Family — the support that holds you steady through every mile. Marriage — the fit that carries you through the long hauls. Purpose — the direction that keeps you moving forward. Friendship — the traction that helps you climb the tough hills. You — the leather that protects everything underneath. But here’s the part most folks miss: “Don’t wait until the soles are worn through and the seams are splitting to take care of them. Oil the leather while it’s still strong. Mend the stitches before they tear. Break them in with intention, not desperation.” Most people only reach for what matters when life starts blistering their feet. They wait for the breakdown, the heartbreak, the crisis—then suddenly want to fix what they’ve neglected for years. Real wisdom? Maintain what carries you while you’re still walking tall. Strengthen your foundations in the good seasons so they can hold you when the storms come. Because the road doesn’t get easier—you just get better at walking it when your boots are already taken care of. What’s one “foundation” you’re committing to tune up while life is still good? Drop it below. 👇

NancyH

24,860 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Just finished a 30-second cinematic delivery story using Seedance 2.5, now available on Pollo AI The realistic scooter action, dynamic city shots, smooth camera movement, and consistent character really stood out. And right now, you can get Seedance 2.5 on Pollo AI for 50% OFF for a limited time. Prompt : Create an ultra-realistic cinematic delivery-rider story with a strong orange brand identity. She wears a professional orange delivery jacket, orange helmet, dark fitted cargo pants, practical sneakers, and an orange delivery backpack. Her scooter/motorbike is also orange with subtle matching details. Keep the same outfit, bike, helmet, and backpack consistent in every scene. The video opens with her relaxing at home when her phone suddenly receives a new food-delivery order. She checks the notification, quickly grabs her orange helmet and delivery bag, and heads outside with a focused but energetic expression. She starts her orange scooter, pulls onto a busy city street, and navigates through realistic traffic. Use dynamic tracking shots, helmet-mounted POV, low-angle wheel shots, side tracking shots, and close-ups of her focused face and hands controlling the bike. She checks her watch while stopped safely at a traffic signal, realizes she needs to move quickly, and continues through the city. Show her arriving at the restaurant, parking the scooter, rushing inside, and receiving a freshly packed food order from the staff. She secures the package inside her orange delivery bag and immediately rides toward the customer's location. Show fast-paced but safe city movement, changing streets, traffic, sunlight reflections, and realistic urban atmosphere. She arrives at the destination, quickly removes her helmet, grabs the delivery bag, and walks toward the customer. She hands over the food with a warm smile, checks her phone showing the completed delivery, and looks relieved and proud. Finish with a cinematic hero shot of her getting back onto the orange scooter and riding away through the glowing city street as the camera follows from behind. Style: Premium cinematic commercial, realistic delivery-rider lifestyle, energetic storytelling, strong orange-and-black visual identity, natural expressions, realistic traffic, authentic urban environments, dynamic handheld and gimbal camera movement, dramatic low angles, POV shots, shallow depth of field, realistic motion blur, physically accurate lighting, detailed fabric and vehicle textures, photorealistic 4K HDR, polished brand-film quality.
0:30

Just finished a 30-second cinematic delivery story using Seedance 2.5, now available on Pollo AI The realistic scooter action, dynamic city shots, smooth camera movement, and consistent character really stood out. And right now, you can get Seedance 2.5 on Pollo AI for 50% OFF for a limited time. Prompt : Create an ultra-realistic cinematic delivery-rider story with a strong orange brand identity. She wears a professional orange delivery jacket, orange helmet, dark fitted cargo pants, practical sneakers, and an orange delivery backpack. Her scooter/motorbike is also orange with subtle matching details. Keep the same outfit, bike, helmet, and backpack consistent in every scene. The video opens with her relaxing at home when her phone suddenly receives a new food-delivery order. She checks the notification, quickly grabs her orange helmet and delivery bag, and heads outside with a focused but energetic expression. She starts her orange scooter, pulls onto a busy city street, and navigates through realistic traffic. Use dynamic tracking shots, helmet-mounted POV, low-angle wheel shots, side tracking shots, and close-ups of her focused face and hands controlling the bike. She checks her watch while stopped safely at a traffic signal, realizes she needs to move quickly, and continues through the city. Show her arriving at the restaurant, parking the scooter, rushing inside, and receiving a freshly packed food order from the staff. She secures the package inside her orange delivery bag and immediately rides toward the customer's location. Show fast-paced but safe city movement, changing streets, traffic, sunlight reflections, and realistic urban atmosphere. She arrives at the destination, quickly removes her helmet, grabs the delivery bag, and walks toward the customer. She hands over the food with a warm smile, checks her phone showing the completed delivery, and looks relieved and proud. Finish with a cinematic hero shot of her getting back onto the orange scooter and riding away through the glowing city street as the camera follows from behind. Style: Premium cinematic commercial, realistic delivery-rider lifestyle, energetic storytelling, strong orange-and-black visual identity, natural expressions, realistic traffic, authentic urban environments, dynamic handheld and gimbal camera movement, dramatic low angles, POV shots, shallow depth of field, realistic motion blur, physically accurate lighting, detailed fabric and vehicle textures, photorealistic 4K HDR, polished brand-film quality.

Synthia

15,622 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

= Kemo Passion Studio = I can't believe it's already been 5 months since the release of Ver2.0. Now we have essentially achieved most of the features envisioned for the initial stages of the project, except for the rest armor and new voice. The development of this mod costs a lot of energy and time, we didn't expect to achieve this far. Thanks to everyone for your support. This is not the last version of this mod, we will continue working on remaining armor adaptations and voice packs. And I'm thrilled to see more and more like-minded individuals spontaneously getting involved in the development of the mod and its derivatives. Your participation has given the pupper endless possibilities. Thank you all guys! Meanwhile, a new plan has been initiated. in TotK, we still have more things want to do. please stay tuned for our future announcements. Here's the details of the update, enjoy!😋 [ New Features ] You can be natural You can choose the type of the pupper's buttock (twink / cake) You can force the unadopted clipping armor invisible You can swtich the color of beans Wolflink but BokobLink You can turn off the buff of cold resistance and running speed [ Additional Adopted Armor Set ] Archaic Warm Greaves Snow Boots Hylia Zonanium (Helm adaption is wip) Barbarian (Helm appearance is optional) Phyantom Ganon [ Improvement ] Wagging tail Enhanced expressiveness of facial expressions Now he has finger beans Improved details on legs and paws Added belt to adopted trousers Make barefoot walking sound while wearing armor [ Bug Fix ] Fixed some clipping issues with certain adapted armor (Hylia Rito Gerudo Charged) Fixed the issue of losing eyes expression when wearing the Ancient Hero's Aspect armor Corrected unnatural lighting on the waist and head Fixed hair curling and deformation issues Fixed incorrect display of the right arm in the ending scene Restored the damage bonus of bone weapons to standard values
3:16

= Kemo Passion Studio = I can't believe it's already been 5 months since the release of Ver2.0. Now we have essentially achieved most of the features envisioned for the initial stages of the project, except for the rest armor and new voice. The development of this mod costs a lot of energy and time, we didn't expect to achieve this far. Thanks to everyone for your support. This is not the last version of this mod, we will continue working on remaining armor adaptations and voice packs. And I'm thrilled to see more and more like-minded individuals spontaneously getting involved in the development of the mod and its derivatives. Your participation has given the pupper endless possibilities. Thank you all guys! Meanwhile, a new plan has been initiated. in TotK, we still have more things want to do. please stay tuned for our future announcements. Here's the details of the update, enjoy!😋 [ New Features ] You can be natural You can choose the type of the pupper's buttock (twink / cake) You can force the unadopted clipping armor invisible You can swtich the color of beans Wolflink but BokobLink You can turn off the buff of cold resistance and running speed [ Additional Adopted Armor Set ] Archaic Warm Greaves Snow Boots Hylia Zonanium (Helm adaption is wip) Barbarian (Helm appearance is optional) Phyantom Ganon [ Improvement ] Wagging tail Enhanced expressiveness of facial expressions Now he has finger beans Improved details on legs and paws Added belt to adopted trousers Make barefoot walking sound while wearing armor [ Bug Fix ] Fixed some clipping issues with certain adapted armor (Hylia Rito Gerudo Charged) Fixed the issue of losing eyes expression when wearing the Ancient Hero's Aspect armor Corrected unnatural lighting on the waist and head Fixed hair curling and deformation issues Fixed incorrect display of the right arm in the ending scene Restored the damage bonus of bone weapons to standard values

KEPA | Cain

85,343 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

On July 8th YouTube gave me a content warning for the clip below. Where I react to a vtuber clip. In which I made a double entendre joke about filling her hole. Made in context of a game where she was filling dirt hole. I appealed this and was denied, and then denied via email again when my team contacted YouTube support. This is absurd, so many people have made much more explicit sexual jokes on YouTube and not been hit with strikes or warnings. Nor should they have been. TeamYouTube the fact that this video was removed completely and not even just set to being 18 plus suggest that in YouTube’s view, this joke is not even suitable for adults. That it went far beyond the pale. And the idea that an adult would fine this harmless double entendre, in context with a literal hole, offensive is absurd. Additionally as this was a joke it is allowed under the content guidelines. “Usage of sexual jokes and innuendos (such as mimicking sex acts in a humorous way) that does not use vulgar or obscene terms (such as music lyrics referencing sexual tension).” My only theories as to why this was flagged was the word “hole” despite the context of a video where a literal dirt hole was being filled, is considered a vulgar or obscene term not fit for YouTube. Or that because the video was zoomed in on me when I said the word “hole” and there was no hole on screen for half a second meant that some ai assumed there was no context in the video and no one checking this video afterwards watched half a second before the zoom to check for context. YouTube I am asking you to remove the warning on my account, and even if full monetization cannot be restored on the video, at least it should be republished and restricted to 18 plus viewers. There is no way that any reasonable human could watch this clip, and see it as overly sexual. Nor do I believe you want to make creators afraid to say the word hole in fear it could be taken as a sexual joke by some ai. This is not even about making people worried about using explicit terms or making direct sexual jokes. This is a double entendre. Nothing more intense than something would say “that’s what she said” in reply to. Please YouTube, correct your mistake. YouTubeCreators (not sure which accounts I should @ so that last one is just incase) —————————- To all those reading this, please help push this, help my voice be heard. Make them fix their mistake. Also I specifically did not name the vtuber in the clip, even though she is well known. Because she did not ask to be a part of this, and I ask that you respect her by not harassing or pinging her about this. This is my own issue, don’t make it hers. Thank you, LuminusRed.
0:43

On July 8th YouTube gave me a content warning for the clip below. Where I react to a vtuber clip. In which I made a double entendre joke about filling her hole. Made in context of a game where she was filling dirt hole. I appealed this and was denied, and then denied via email again when my team contacted YouTube support. This is absurd, so many people have made much more explicit sexual jokes on YouTube and not been hit with strikes or warnings. Nor should they have been. TeamYouTube the fact that this video was removed completely and not even just set to being 18 plus suggest that in YouTube’s view, this joke is not even suitable for adults. That it went far beyond the pale. And the idea that an adult would fine this harmless double entendre, in context with a literal hole, offensive is absurd. Additionally as this was a joke it is allowed under the content guidelines. “Usage of sexual jokes and innuendos (such as mimicking sex acts in a humorous way) that does not use vulgar or obscene terms (such as music lyrics referencing sexual tension).” My only theories as to why this was flagged was the word “hole” despite the context of a video where a literal dirt hole was being filled, is considered a vulgar or obscene term not fit for YouTube. Or that because the video was zoomed in on me when I said the word “hole” and there was no hole on screen for half a second meant that some ai assumed there was no context in the video and no one checking this video afterwards watched half a second before the zoom to check for context. YouTube I am asking you to remove the warning on my account, and even if full monetization cannot be restored on the video, at least it should be republished and restricted to 18 plus viewers. There is no way that any reasonable human could watch this clip, and see it as overly sexual. Nor do I believe you want to make creators afraid to say the word hole in fear it could be taken as a sexual joke by some ai. This is not even about making people worried about using explicit terms or making direct sexual jokes. This is a double entendre. Nothing more intense than something would say “that’s what she said” in reply to. Please YouTube, correct your mistake. YouTubeCreators (not sure which accounts I should @ so that last one is just incase) —————————- To all those reading this, please help push this, help my voice be heard. Make them fix their mistake. Also I specifically did not name the vtuber in the clip, even though she is well known. Because she did not ask to be a part of this, and I ask that you respect her by not harassing or pinging her about this. This is my own issue, don’t make it hers. Thank you, LuminusRed.

LuminusRed ✂️🍒

36,197 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen

Tonight it was reported that the NZ govt has had its email system hacked. Just a reminder that digital systems bring risk, heck airline systems have been hacked. Everything is hackable. In fact in recent years literally millions of cars have been affected by hacked systems. What National hasn’t explained to the public is that GPS tracking technology is infinitely hackable. Multi billion dollar Japanese company Subaru has just this year found 800k of their vehicles have been hacked and surveilled, allowing cars to be started remotely and stolen. Story here : In 2022 Bloomberg reported that all GPS trackers can be hacked - with no known fix. Criminals could access real-time location data, enabling stalking, harassment, or vehicle theft. Tracking devices were also linked to crimes like domestic violence and attempted murder, indicating misuse by bad actors. Bishop claims the devices will only record distance travelled - bullshit. The devices will know whether you are using the vehicle on a public or a private road - how does it know that? It tracks you in real time like all these systems do. The weakness of this technology is inherent : Any GPS reliant technology is vulnerable, especially if it is A)low cost B) works with an API (application process interface) C) made in China The CEO of EROAD, the NZ company believed to get the contract spoke to ZB about how it would work. New cars will have a SIM card entered and an API used (see B) old cars will need hardware installed “we will make sure we use the cheapest technology possible” yikes! (See A) When asked how secure it is - his response “pretty robust” “fairly robust” “can’t really be tampered with” - doesn’t sound reassuring does it ? Made in China- well chances are the transponders will be made there won’t they ? (See C) I mean imagine invading a country - wouldn’t it be an awesome just to turn off everyone’s cars via a compromised GPS tracking system ? Listen below for the interview with EROAD’s CEO. Here are just a few GPS networks that have been compromised . 🔴MiCODUS MV720 GPS Trackers: 2022 This Chinese-made GPS tracker, used in approximately 1.5 million vehicles across 169 countries was accessed by hackers to remotely control the car, cut off fuel, disable vehicles, and surveil movements. Hackers could track vehicle locations, manipulate data, or immobilise vehicles, posing risks to individual consumers, government agencies, and corporations (e.g., Fortune 50 firms, military, and law enforcement). The vulnerabilities were deemed critical, with govt agencies jointly involved to secure the corrupted technology. 🔴ProTrack and iTrack GPS Trackers: In 2019, a hacker gained remote access to nearly 30,000 accounts of ProTrack and iTrack GPS trackers, both were Chinese-made. The hacker could track vehicles, access location histories, and even stop or accelerate the cars. The breach affected 27,000 accounts worldwide, allowing unauthorised tracking and control of vehicles. This vulnerability highlighted the risks of poor security practices in low-cost GPS trackers. 🔴Tracki GPS Tracker In 2024, a researcher found major security flaws in Tracki GPS trackers, sold by Trackimo and its subsidiaries. Hardcoded usernames and passwords in the web portal, customer support tools exposed location data, affecting up to 12 million users globally. The devices were marketed for vehicle tracking. 🔴Malwarebytes, August 2022. The report noted that Trackimo’s helpdesk assisted with nonconsensual tracking, and the data breach made it possible for criminals to monitor vehicles without consent. 🔴Thinkrace GPS Trackers In 2019, researchers found consistent API vulnerabilities in Thinkrace GPS trackers, used in vehicles, pet collars, and children’s watches. Most API calls lacked authentication, with devices allowing hackers to track users, change user emails, and force firmware updates at least 370 devices across 80 domains were vulnerable.
3:26

Tonight it was reported that the NZ govt has had its email system hacked. Just a reminder that digital systems bring risk, heck airline systems have been hacked. Everything is hackable. In fact in recent years literally millions of cars have been affected by hacked systems. What National hasn’t explained to the public is that GPS tracking technology is infinitely hackable. Multi billion dollar Japanese company Subaru has just this year found 800k of their vehicles have been hacked and surveilled, allowing cars to be started remotely and stolen. Story here : In 2022 Bloomberg reported that all GPS trackers can be hacked - with no known fix. Criminals could access real-time location data, enabling stalking, harassment, or vehicle theft. Tracking devices were also linked to crimes like domestic violence and attempted murder, indicating misuse by bad actors. Bishop claims the devices will only record distance travelled - bullshit. The devices will know whether you are using the vehicle on a public or a private road - how does it know that? It tracks you in real time like all these systems do. The weakness of this technology is inherent : Any GPS reliant technology is vulnerable, especially if it is A)low cost B) works with an API (application process interface) C) made in China The CEO of EROAD, the NZ company believed to get the contract spoke to ZB about how it would work. New cars will have a SIM card entered and an API used (see B) old cars will need hardware installed “we will make sure we use the cheapest technology possible” yikes! (See A) When asked how secure it is - his response “pretty robust” “fairly robust” “can’t really be tampered with” - doesn’t sound reassuring does it ? Made in China- well chances are the transponders will be made there won’t they ? (See C) I mean imagine invading a country - wouldn’t it be an awesome just to turn off everyone’s cars via a compromised GPS tracking system ? Listen below for the interview with EROAD’s CEO. Here are just a few GPS networks that have been compromised . 🔴MiCODUS MV720 GPS Trackers: 2022 This Chinese-made GPS tracker, used in approximately 1.5 million vehicles across 169 countries was accessed by hackers to remotely control the car, cut off fuel, disable vehicles, and surveil movements. Hackers could track vehicle locations, manipulate data, or immobilise vehicles, posing risks to individual consumers, government agencies, and corporations (e.g., Fortune 50 firms, military, and law enforcement). The vulnerabilities were deemed critical, with govt agencies jointly involved to secure the corrupted technology. 🔴ProTrack and iTrack GPS Trackers: In 2019, a hacker gained remote access to nearly 30,000 accounts of ProTrack and iTrack GPS trackers, both were Chinese-made. The hacker could track vehicles, access location histories, and even stop or accelerate the cars. The breach affected 27,000 accounts worldwide, allowing unauthorised tracking and control of vehicles. This vulnerability highlighted the risks of poor security practices in low-cost GPS trackers. 🔴Tracki GPS Tracker In 2024, a researcher found major security flaws in Tracki GPS trackers, sold by Trackimo and its subsidiaries. Hardcoded usernames and passwords in the web portal, customer support tools exposed location data, affecting up to 12 million users globally. The devices were marketed for vehicle tracking. 🔴Malwarebytes, August 2022. The report noted that Trackimo’s helpdesk assisted with nonconsensual tracking, and the data breach made it possible for criminals to monitor vehicles without consent. 🔴Thinkrace GPS Trackers In 2019, researchers found consistent API vulnerabilities in Thinkrace GPS trackers, used in vehicles, pet collars, and children’s watches. Most API calls lacked authentication, with devices allowing hackers to track users, change user emails, and force firmware updates at least 370 devices across 80 domains were vulnerable.

Holyhekatuiteka

10,835 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

So I am experimenting with a new way to launch. Right now there are a million launch pads and no one wants to launch stuff, I think the reason for this is many fold but the key points are : 1. handling all the messaging/setting up TG, being the single point of harassment. I think this is the biggest thing people hate with launching coins, everyone blames you for everything regardless of good or bad, you get a lot of hate when it goes down, and not that much praise when it goes up, everyone watches you and you get constantly harassed even if you control a little amount of supply. You saw this with Bags coins, it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. So my solution to this is, the TG, the community and everything is built in and launched via a bot so its easy 1-click, and helps the coin build a more decentralized community 2. Market Makers/Managing liq. So this is a bit more subtle and most degens dont know how this works, but pretty much every coin that get past a certain point ( like 4M market cap), generally needs a market maker to come in and make sure to smooth out volatility. Most times the team will try and do this themselfs, with supply control + Vol Bot + manual sell/buys + off chain $. The issue here is its super exhausting, confusing, and also puts you personally on the hook, and if people "find out" they go nuts regardless of if it was malicious or not. This is the proverbial "Crime" coin. 3. Snipers/distribution This is basically some one else controlling the coin that doesn't have the best interest of the chart in mind. In all the best non crime coins, they have really good distribution with no one player owning more than 2-5%. So in order to attempt to fix all the above, I made launch boy. 0. Gamble curve to get into the coin early. So no snipers. More luck based/fun. 1. Built in whale TG at coin launch. Filters jeets. 2. Large % of sol that is lost by people gambling to get in, goes to a market maker so they have stake in the coin, and can help it go to larger MC and smooth out the volatility. (ideally). 3. Pre-sale, so you can manage who gets in to help distribution/stop snipers/ people you don't want to have your coin. more tweaks need to happen like a crowd-funded vol bot as well, so people can donate $$ to a volume bot to make the coin trend and such. The big boys (cabal) does this stuff anyways so I want to even the playing field for smaller dedicated communities.
0:37

So I am experimenting with a new way to launch. Right now there are a million launch pads and no one wants to launch stuff, I think the reason for this is many fold but the key points are : 1. handling all the messaging/setting up TG, being the single point of harassment. I think this is the biggest thing people hate with launching coins, everyone blames you for everything regardless of good or bad, you get a lot of hate when it goes down, and not that much praise when it goes up, everyone watches you and you get constantly harassed even if you control a little amount of supply. You saw this with Bags coins, it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. So my solution to this is, the TG, the community and everything is built in and launched via a bot so its easy 1-click, and helps the coin build a more decentralized community 2. Market Makers/Managing liq. So this is a bit more subtle and most degens dont know how this works, but pretty much every coin that get past a certain point ( like 4M market cap), generally needs a market maker to come in and make sure to smooth out volatility. Most times the team will try and do this themselfs, with supply control + Vol Bot + manual sell/buys + off chain $. The issue here is its super exhausting, confusing, and also puts you personally on the hook, and if people "find out" they go nuts regardless of if it was malicious or not. This is the proverbial "Crime" coin. 3. Snipers/distribution This is basically some one else controlling the coin that doesn't have the best interest of the chart in mind. In all the best non crime coins, they have really good distribution with no one player owning more than 2-5%. So in order to attempt to fix all the above, I made launch boy. 0. Gamble curve to get into the coin early. So no snipers. More luck based/fun. 1. Built in whale TG at coin launch. Filters jeets. 2. Large % of sol that is lost by people gambling to get in, goes to a market maker so they have stake in the coin, and can help it go to larger MC and smooth out the volatility. (ideally). 3. Pre-sale, so you can manage who gets in to help distribution/stop snipers/ people you don't want to have your coin. more tweaks need to happen like a crowd-funded vol bot as well, so people can donate $$ to a volume bot to make the coin trend and such. The big boys (cabal) does this stuff anyways so I want to even the playing field for smaller dedicated communities.

Skely

12,877 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Uzenenye!📝 Possession with purpose: You have a very competitive team here. You just have to fix the goalscoring problem. ■ We haven't lost our ability to create chances, which is important. They just come from clear repeated attacking patterns and control than just kicking the ball forward. ■ We are able to progress both wide and central. We still need to work on looking for that "better option" when we have the ball around the opposition box. ■ We create chances through good movement and passing. ■ There are moments of patience on the ball, and there are moments of continued direct attacks. We put pressure on the opposition defense persistently. The ideas are not dominant as yet, but they are clear. We are quick once we find those pockets to progress. We have those small triangles in wide areas. ■ In Central midfield, they will improve with time and a few other clear factors we need to solve. ■ We need to improve the balance in some key areas. Work on our rushed passes. Even in quick transitional moments, we sometimes rush a pass that kills the attacking momentum. You still need well-timed passes and a good selection of passes in key areas to create better scoring chances. So decision-making will forever be at the center of everything we want to achieve in the field of play. ■ Sometimes, your teammate hasn't really completed a run for you to release a pass, but we make that pass anyway. Small details. ■ Once our match sharpness and overall team chemistry improve, we will increase the quality of key actions across the field. If you don't abandon your principles to dominate and control games, you will create chances, and it won't be by luck, but it will be by design. ■ The team will find rhythm, and when results come, they will be consistent. ■ We have worked on the spaces between players to some degree, and you can see how quickly we win the ball back. There is little space for the opponent to breathe after winning the ball. Even in the Netherlands, we never sat deep, we always pressed every angle on the pitch. ■ We are aggressive, and the close proximity relationships we are building are helping us in regaining possession quickly. ■ They are not yet perfect, but we have made some progress from how tactically confused we often looked last season. We are patient this side. There is good progress in the team. I believe in teams that grow, and growth doesn't move from zero to ten. You need to be patient and build each step at a time. Protagonist Tiki-taka in motion!❤️✌🏾
4:44

Uzenenye!📝 Possession with purpose: You have a very competitive team here. You just have to fix the goalscoring problem. ■ We haven't lost our ability to create chances, which is important. They just come from clear repeated attacking patterns and control than just kicking the ball forward. ■ We are able to progress both wide and central. We still need to work on looking for that "better option" when we have the ball around the opposition box. ■ We create chances through good movement and passing. ■ There are moments of patience on the ball, and there are moments of continued direct attacks. We put pressure on the opposition defense persistently. The ideas are not dominant as yet, but they are clear. We are quick once we find those pockets to progress. We have those small triangles in wide areas. ■ In Central midfield, they will improve with time and a few other clear factors we need to solve. ■ We need to improve the balance in some key areas. Work on our rushed passes. Even in quick transitional moments, we sometimes rush a pass that kills the attacking momentum. You still need well-timed passes and a good selection of passes in key areas to create better scoring chances. So decision-making will forever be at the center of everything we want to achieve in the field of play. ■ Sometimes, your teammate hasn't really completed a run for you to release a pass, but we make that pass anyway. Small details. ■ Once our match sharpness and overall team chemistry improve, we will increase the quality of key actions across the field. If you don't abandon your principles to dominate and control games, you will create chances, and it won't be by luck, but it will be by design. ■ The team will find rhythm, and when results come, they will be consistent. ■ We have worked on the spaces between players to some degree, and you can see how quickly we win the ball back. There is little space for the opponent to breathe after winning the ball. Even in the Netherlands, we never sat deep, we always pressed every angle on the pitch. ■ We are aggressive, and the close proximity relationships we are building are helping us in regaining possession quickly. ■ They are not yet perfect, but we have made some progress from how tactically confused we often looked last season. We are patient this side. There is good progress in the team. I believe in teams that grow, and growth doesn't move from zero to ten. You need to be patient and build each step at a time. Protagonist Tiki-taka in motion!❤️✌🏾

El Capitano⚪

16,338 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

BREAKING NEWS🚨🚨🚨: Michael Proctor will be forced to appear for his deposition with Alan Jackson and Karen Read, however Judge Gildea will delay his final ruling until 4pm ET today in order to supplement Proctor's "insufficient" arguments to the court regarding a protective order to delay that deposition. Another hearing will happen today at 4:15PM et TODAY (Monday, June 8th, 2026, via Zoom). Proctor's deposition, for now, is stayed for 24 hours. "For this case to proceed efficiently, and for our system of justice to work, certain basic things need to happen," Judge Gildea began during his ruling. "A subpoena needs to mean something, a lawyer's agreement needs to have some meaning, lawyers need to communicate with their clients, clients need to keep their attorneys informed, and when given an opportunity to provide support for a party's request, that party needs to avail themselves of the opportunity," Judge continued (scolding Proctor's counsel for failing to provide a sufficient record to justify a delay in Proctor's deposition, despite an order by the court on Friday for such information to be filed). Based on the record before me, there is insufficient information to support a delay in the deposition going forward, however, given the claims made in the filings over the weekend, I will delay making a final decision on the motion until 4PM today, to give Mr. Proctor's counsel to supplement the record before me," Judge Gildea concluded. The Michael Proctor and Sean Goode "Proctorgate" files have caused serious damage, and Karen Read stands tall. Read more about those shocking, and abhorrent, messages here (also discussed by Judge Gildea during today's hearing) wherein Proctor (a former State Trooper who investigated Karen Read for the death of John O'Keefe) and former Canton cop Sean Goode talked about everything from how Anne Frank was a "liar" to how Proctor felt Goode should "let them die" after Proctor noticed a car accident victim was, in Proctor's words, a "ni**er". Proctor also discussed "planting cocaine" on someone and, shockingly, said "America sucks" because the country stopped the Third Reich during World War II (while, at the same time, saying "Jews in Sharon" should be "put in a concentration camp") at this link: To this day, the death of John O'Keefe remains unsolved. Proctor is just one of multiple witnesses involving in the twice-failed prosecution of Karen for John's death who Read's lawyers have told Judge Gildea are attempting to avoid or delay depositions (including Colin Albert, Jennifer McCabe, Brian Higgins, Matt McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert). Last week, on Wednesday, I reported: In a shocking hearing before Judge Mark Gildea on Wednesday, Karen Read's lawyers announced that they have been forced to file a motion to compel a deposition of Colin Albert. Further, Karen's lawyers will be filing motions to compel depositions of Jennifer McCabe, Brian Higgins, Matt McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert, as those parties are seeking to delay their depositions until late July, or early August, of 2026. "Colin Albert refused to appear or produce documents...his attorney said he is unavailable and then, suddenly, said Colin would only be available for seven more days and, then, [Colin] would be gone for the entire discovery period," Karen's Lawyer, Aaron Rosenberg, told Judge Gildea during Wednesday's hearing. In that regard, here is the full recording of today's John O'Keefe and Karen Read hearing in Plymouth Superior Court. This case is one of three ongoing civil lawsuits (one in federal court and two in Plymouth District Court in front of Judge Gildea) that stem from the, yet-unsolved, murder of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. To this day, it is unclear if anyone has found the Mystery Man who is suspected of being at the center of potential upcoming investigations by state and federal authorities as to John's death. Read more about that Mystery Man here - Judge Gildea began Wednesday's hearing by asking counsel for all parties how many depositions have been conducted in the case. "I am hoping at least four have been taken," said Judge Gildea. The O'Keefe lawyer told Judge Gildea that only three depositions have taken place. Judge then asked the O'Keefe lawyer what depositions need to still take place for the plaintiffs. "There are 12," the O'Keefe lawyer responded, including Paul Markowski. The O'Keefe lawyers also need to change Karen's deposition until June 24th. The O'Keefe lawyers changed Karen's deposition from July to June 19th, but multiple lawyer's will not be working on that day as that day is a federal holiday. Judge was not pleased that so few depositions have taken place, but Judge understood that June 19th is a federal holiday and, in turn, Karen's deposition will be held on June 24th, 2026. Karen's lawyers had proposed four other dates and Mr. Diller (the O'Keefe lawyer) picked a federal holiday, instead. "It is beyond belief to me the number of experienced lawyers involved in this case, the length the case has been pending...for however long it has been pending for all parties...that there are so few depositions that have taken place...I don't need to hear all the details, and the nitpicking, what I need to hear is, going forward, how you all are going to get the discovery done," Judge Gildea said to all lawyers. Things, at that point, got quite intense, as Karen's lawyers then noted to Judge Gildea that they have six depositions currently scheduled for the following six witnesses; Brian and Nicole Albert, Matthew McCabe, Allie McCabe, Jennifer McCabe and Brian Higgins. However, the law firm for all of those people got back to Karen's lawyers last night, on June 2nd, 2026, at 9:45PM and said NONE of those witnesses could appear on the dates scheduled for their depositions and, for some reason, none of those witnesses are able to appear for depositions until late July of 2026 at the earliest. Stunningly, no reason was given for why those witnesses refused to appear for their depositions on the dates originally proposed by Karen's lawyers, Attorney Rosenberg told Judge Gildea. Those notices of depositions went out on May 5th, 2026, said Karen's lawyers, when Judge Gildea asked about that date (indicating Judge Gildea, already displeased with discovery and deposition delays in the years-old case, was not pleased to hear about witnesses, on their own accord, attempting to delay depositions by two more months). Karen's lawyers, picking up on Judge Gildea's frustration, then noted that they intend to file motions to compel those witnesses to appear for depositions as a result of the proposed delays. Also, during the hearing, it was announced that former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor will be deposed by Karen Read's lawyers on Monday, June 8th, 2026, per a statement from Karen's lawyers in court on Wednesday. The O'Keefe lawyer, for their part, noted they intend to depose Aidan Kearney, Karen Read, Kaitlin Boudreau Read (Nathan Read's wife), Janet Read, Nathan Read, William Read, multiple witnesses from the bars (C.F. McCarthy's and The Waterfall), and an outstanding deposition that Karen's team needed to move last week. Judge Gildea then asked what, if anything, he could do to help the parties (other than moving quickly on motions before the court when submitted). Both parties said they will involve the court, in motion practice, as needed going forward. Judge then wanted to know what motions have been sent out under Rule 9(a). It was at that point that Karen's lawyers announced that she will be filing a motion to compel production of documents and the deposition of Colin Albert. "Colin Albert refused to appear or produce documents...his attorney said he is unavailable and then, suddenly, said Colin would only be available for seven more days and then [Colin] would be gone for the entire discovery period," Karen's Lawyer, Aaron Rosenberg, told Judge Mark Gildea during the hearing. Earlier, Karen also announced that she intends to file similar motions for Brian Higgins, Matt McCabe, Jen McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert, as those witnesses are attempting to avoid their depositions until late July or early August of 2026. The O'Keefe lawyer, for their part, told Judge Gildea they intend to serve a motion to compel regarding Aidan Kearney as a keeper of record (and, for some reason, Diller wants documents from Aidan's ongoing case in Norfolk Superior Court). "File a motion and we'll put it on for an expedited hearing," Judge Gildea said regarding that issue, and any other motions to compel the parties may want to file (including the motion regarding Colin Albert that has already been served, and should be in the docket in the next few weeks). When a motion is served under Rule 9(a), it is first given to the opposing party who then responds. Then, the moving party (the "movant") is able to file a sur-reply. Only at that point does the entire motion to compel get compiled as a so-called "Rule 9 (a) package" and, in turn, appear on the docket (with all filings related to a given motion showing up at the same time). It is unclear when the motions to compel the depositions of Brian Higgins, Jen McCabe, Matt McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert will be served and, eventually, docketed with the court. Penalties for third-parties who avoid discovery, or document production requests, can include court sanctions, compelled deposition dates, and adverse evidentiary rulings if a motion to compel is granted, yet further delays then occur. Judge Gildea told all of the lawyers present that he expects to dive deep into the issue of who was issued deposition notices in this case, who avoided those depositions, who delayed depositions and, in turn, what remedies the court will impose. "We served it Monday," the O'Keefe lawyer then said, as the hearing ended (indicating a number of motions to compel discovery, or depositions, may be heard over the coming weeks under the sweltering heat of Judge Gildea's virtual courtroom stare). More as I know it.
16:51

BREAKING NEWS🚨🚨🚨: Michael Proctor will be forced to appear for his deposition with Alan Jackson and Karen Read, however Judge Gildea will delay his final ruling until 4pm ET today in order to supplement Proctor's "insufficient" arguments to the court regarding a protective order to delay that deposition. Another hearing will happen today at 4:15PM et TODAY (Monday, June 8th, 2026, via Zoom). Proctor's deposition, for now, is stayed for 24 hours. "For this case to proceed efficiently, and for our system of justice to work, certain basic things need to happen," Judge Gildea began during his ruling. "A subpoena needs to mean something, a lawyer's agreement needs to have some meaning, lawyers need to communicate with their clients, clients need to keep their attorneys informed, and when given an opportunity to provide support for a party's request, that party needs to avail themselves of the opportunity," Judge continued (scolding Proctor's counsel for failing to provide a sufficient record to justify a delay in Proctor's deposition, despite an order by the court on Friday for such information to be filed). Based on the record before me, there is insufficient information to support a delay in the deposition going forward, however, given the claims made in the filings over the weekend, I will delay making a final decision on the motion until 4PM today, to give Mr. Proctor's counsel to supplement the record before me," Judge Gildea concluded. The Michael Proctor and Sean Goode "Proctorgate" files have caused serious damage, and Karen Read stands tall. Read more about those shocking, and abhorrent, messages here (also discussed by Judge Gildea during today's hearing) wherein Proctor (a former State Trooper who investigated Karen Read for the death of John O'Keefe) and former Canton cop Sean Goode talked about everything from how Anne Frank was a "liar" to how Proctor felt Goode should "let them die" after Proctor noticed a car accident victim was, in Proctor's words, a "ni**er". Proctor also discussed "planting cocaine" on someone and, shockingly, said "America sucks" because the country stopped the Third Reich during World War II (while, at the same time, saying "Jews in Sharon" should be "put in a concentration camp") at this link: To this day, the death of John O'Keefe remains unsolved. Proctor is just one of multiple witnesses involving in the twice-failed prosecution of Karen for John's death who Read's lawyers have told Judge Gildea are attempting to avoid or delay depositions (including Colin Albert, Jennifer McCabe, Brian Higgins, Matt McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert). Last week, on Wednesday, I reported: In a shocking hearing before Judge Mark Gildea on Wednesday, Karen Read's lawyers announced that they have been forced to file a motion to compel a deposition of Colin Albert. Further, Karen's lawyers will be filing motions to compel depositions of Jennifer McCabe, Brian Higgins, Matt McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert, as those parties are seeking to delay their depositions until late July, or early August, of 2026. "Colin Albert refused to appear or produce documents...his attorney said he is unavailable and then, suddenly, said Colin would only be available for seven more days and, then, [Colin] would be gone for the entire discovery period," Karen's Lawyer, Aaron Rosenberg, told Judge Gildea during Wednesday's hearing. In that regard, here is the full recording of today's John O'Keefe and Karen Read hearing in Plymouth Superior Court. This case is one of three ongoing civil lawsuits (one in federal court and two in Plymouth District Court in front of Judge Gildea) that stem from the, yet-unsolved, murder of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe. To this day, it is unclear if anyone has found the Mystery Man who is suspected of being at the center of potential upcoming investigations by state and federal authorities as to John's death. Read more about that Mystery Man here - Judge Gildea began Wednesday's hearing by asking counsel for all parties how many depositions have been conducted in the case. "I am hoping at least four have been taken," said Judge Gildea. The O'Keefe lawyer told Judge Gildea that only three depositions have taken place. Judge then asked the O'Keefe lawyer what depositions need to still take place for the plaintiffs. "There are 12," the O'Keefe lawyer responded, including Paul Markowski. The O'Keefe lawyers also need to change Karen's deposition until June 24th. The O'Keefe lawyers changed Karen's deposition from July to June 19th, but multiple lawyer's will not be working on that day as that day is a federal holiday. Judge was not pleased that so few depositions have taken place, but Judge understood that June 19th is a federal holiday and, in turn, Karen's deposition will be held on June 24th, 2026. Karen's lawyers had proposed four other dates and Mr. Diller (the O'Keefe lawyer) picked a federal holiday, instead. "It is beyond belief to me the number of experienced lawyers involved in this case, the length the case has been pending...for however long it has been pending for all parties...that there are so few depositions that have taken place...I don't need to hear all the details, and the nitpicking, what I need to hear is, going forward, how you all are going to get the discovery done," Judge Gildea said to all lawyers. Things, at that point, got quite intense, as Karen's lawyers then noted to Judge Gildea that they have six depositions currently scheduled for the following six witnesses; Brian and Nicole Albert, Matthew McCabe, Allie McCabe, Jennifer McCabe and Brian Higgins. However, the law firm for all of those people got back to Karen's lawyers last night, on June 2nd, 2026, at 9:45PM and said NONE of those witnesses could appear on the dates scheduled for their depositions and, for some reason, none of those witnesses are able to appear for depositions until late July of 2026 at the earliest. Stunningly, no reason was given for why those witnesses refused to appear for their depositions on the dates originally proposed by Karen's lawyers, Attorney Rosenberg told Judge Gildea. Those notices of depositions went out on May 5th, 2026, said Karen's lawyers, when Judge Gildea asked about that date (indicating Judge Gildea, already displeased with discovery and deposition delays in the years-old case, was not pleased to hear about witnesses, on their own accord, attempting to delay depositions by two more months). Karen's lawyers, picking up on Judge Gildea's frustration, then noted that they intend to file motions to compel those witnesses to appear for depositions as a result of the proposed delays. Also, during the hearing, it was announced that former Massachusetts State Trooper Michael Proctor will be deposed by Karen Read's lawyers on Monday, June 8th, 2026, per a statement from Karen's lawyers in court on Wednesday. The O'Keefe lawyer, for their part, noted they intend to depose Aidan Kearney, Karen Read, Kaitlin Boudreau Read (Nathan Read's wife), Janet Read, Nathan Read, William Read, multiple witnesses from the bars (C.F. McCarthy's and The Waterfall), and an outstanding deposition that Karen's team needed to move last week. Judge Gildea then asked what, if anything, he could do to help the parties (other than moving quickly on motions before the court when submitted). Both parties said they will involve the court, in motion practice, as needed going forward. Judge then wanted to know what motions have been sent out under Rule 9(a). It was at that point that Karen's lawyers announced that she will be filing a motion to compel production of documents and the deposition of Colin Albert. "Colin Albert refused to appear or produce documents...his attorney said he is unavailable and then, suddenly, said Colin would only be available for seven more days and then [Colin] would be gone for the entire discovery period," Karen's Lawyer, Aaron Rosenberg, told Judge Mark Gildea during the hearing. Earlier, Karen also announced that she intends to file similar motions for Brian Higgins, Matt McCabe, Jen McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert, as those witnesses are attempting to avoid their depositions until late July or early August of 2026. The O'Keefe lawyer, for their part, told Judge Gildea they intend to serve a motion to compel regarding Aidan Kearney as a keeper of record (and, for some reason, Diller wants documents from Aidan's ongoing case in Norfolk Superior Court). "File a motion and we'll put it on for an expedited hearing," Judge Gildea said regarding that issue, and any other motions to compel the parties may want to file (including the motion regarding Colin Albert that has already been served, and should be in the docket in the next few weeks). When a motion is served under Rule 9(a), it is first given to the opposing party who then responds. Then, the moving party (the "movant") is able to file a sur-reply. Only at that point does the entire motion to compel get compiled as a so-called "Rule 9 (a) package" and, in turn, appear on the docket (with all filings related to a given motion showing up at the same time). It is unclear when the motions to compel the depositions of Brian Higgins, Jen McCabe, Matt McCabe, Nicole Albert and Brian Albert will be served and, eventually, docketed with the court. Penalties for third-parties who avoid discovery, or document production requests, can include court sanctions, compelled deposition dates, and adverse evidentiary rulings if a motion to compel is granted, yet further delays then occur. Judge Gildea told all of the lawyers present that he expects to dive deep into the issue of who was issued deposition notices in this case, who avoided those depositions, who delayed depositions and, in turn, what remedies the court will impose. "We served it Monday," the O'Keefe lawyer then said, as the hearing ended (indicating a number of motions to compel discovery, or depositions, may be heard over the coming weeks under the sweltering heat of Judge Gildea's virtual courtroom stare). More as I know it.

Grant Smith Ellis

24,953 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

LINK & INSTRUCTIONS HOW TO ATTEND OUR FEDERAL COURT HEARING VIA ZOOM NEXT MONDAY *Repost & share - We need to show the court that there is still very much public interest in this incredibly important landmark case. No government can be allowed to invoke such vile overreaching and tyrannical charter/human rights violations on Canadians ever again. Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit Hearing Date: November 3rd, 2025 - 1pm EST Case/file #: T-2536-23 - SHAUN RICKARD ET AL. v. HMK ET AL If you would like to attend the hearing virtually, please follow this link. Scroll down, go to page 2 and and click on the little green box with the pen (see attached screenshot). Then enter your information, click register and you will be sent an e-mail confirmation: *Please note, the hearing will now be held at the Federal Court in Toronto, not the Federal Court of Appeal as originally thought: 180 Queen St W Toronto ON M5V 1Z4 If you would like to attend in person, please contact the Clerk at the Federal Court and quote the file # above: T: 416-973-3356 E: audiences@fct-cf.ca Where we are at with the case: After nearly 4 years, the 15,000 pages of evidence – including some extremely damning/incriminating details – is getting closer to Court. Further to the Federal Court ruling that our landmark action can go to trial, the appeal to ensure the whole action can proceed will be heard on November 3rd, 2025 in the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Further to our earlier and full update below from January 9th of this year, we now now move a step closer to the opportunity to fully hold the Liberal government, and Justin Trudeau, to account in court. Their divisive, cruel and unscientific overreach in imposing a nearly 9 months ban on unvaccinated Canadians and Permanent Residents from travelling on planes, trains and ships caused hardship and damage to millions of people in Canada. The hard work of our talented young lawyer, Sam Presvelos, paid off in June 2022 when evidence emerging in discovery in those earlier stages of the case caused then Attorney General David Lametti to reconsider the government’s position and the ‘vaccine mandate for travel’ was suspended with the implicit threat being made that they would do it again if they wanted to do so. In a moment of respite those millions of people, denied their fundamental Section 6 rights for nearly 9 months, could once again travel to see their loved ones and family events; to work; and to take much needed vacation time. This appeal, which will be heard at the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto on November 3rd at 1pm Eastern Time, will consider whether Justice Kent Horne erred when he allowed the government’s motion to strike out two parts of our claim – those parts in relation to s.7 and s.12 of the Charter. Justice Horne allowed those parts in relation to s6 and s15 to go ahead to trial pending the outcome of this appeal and any further appeals that may follow. s.7 (life, liberty, security) deals with crucial rights that permit us all to decide for ourselves what happens to our body. We believe that the choice to accept a vaccine or not should be free of any sort of coercion or detrimental consequences imposed by any authority. They do not accept that the bar to their success in relation to s.7 is so high as to have no reasonable prospect of success and that their arguments should be allowed to proceed to trial. s.12 (cruel/unusual punishment) is normally heard in relation to the cruel and unusual punishment of people in the criminal justice system in relation to penal sanctions. We believe that then Prime Minister Trudeau developed the vaccine mandate as a deliberately cruel and unusual punishment for those Canadians who were exercising their s7 right to refuse the Covid-19 vaccines and, at the same time to use that punishment very publicly as a political campaign promise and ‘wedge issue’ in the 2021 General Election. The appeal will not be easy, but our case is in great hands with Sam Presvelos, the young litigator who achieved so much for millions of people in Canada who were, until June 2022, denied the right to even leave their country! If we succeed the government may then try to further appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. It is very apparent that they do not want this case to be heard and particularly, perhaps, the s.7 arguments. If we are unsuccessful at this stage, they may take their arguments to the Supreme Court. We want to have our arguments and evidence heard on all four Sections 6,7,12 and 15. If you would like to help support this incredibly important landmark lawsuit, you can do so via e-transfer: donations@freedomandjustice.ca or via the donations page on our website: More details can be found on our official website: Also more details/updates on the case and hearing here:
8:07

LINK & INSTRUCTIONS HOW TO ATTEND OUR FEDERAL COURT HEARING VIA ZOOM NEXT MONDAY *Repost & share - We need to show the court that there is still very much public interest in this incredibly important landmark case. No government can be allowed to invoke such vile overreaching and tyrannical charter/human rights violations on Canadians ever again. Vaccine Travel Mandates lawsuit Hearing Date: November 3rd, 2025 - 1pm EST Case/file #: T-2536-23 - SHAUN RICKARD ET AL. v. HMK ET AL If you would like to attend the hearing virtually, please follow this link. Scroll down, go to page 2 and and click on the little green box with the pen (see attached screenshot). Then enter your information, click register and you will be sent an e-mail confirmation: *Please note, the hearing will now be held at the Federal Court in Toronto, not the Federal Court of Appeal as originally thought: 180 Queen St W Toronto ON M5V 1Z4 If you would like to attend in person, please contact the Clerk at the Federal Court and quote the file # above: T: 416-973-3356 E: [email protected] Where we are at with the case: After nearly 4 years, the 15,000 pages of evidence – including some extremely damning/incriminating details – is getting closer to Court. Further to the Federal Court ruling that our landmark action can go to trial, the appeal to ensure the whole action can proceed will be heard on November 3rd, 2025 in the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Further to our earlier and full update below from January 9th of this year, we now now move a step closer to the opportunity to fully hold the Liberal government, and Justin Trudeau, to account in court. Their divisive, cruel and unscientific overreach in imposing a nearly 9 months ban on unvaccinated Canadians and Permanent Residents from travelling on planes, trains and ships caused hardship and damage to millions of people in Canada. The hard work of our talented young lawyer, Sam Presvelos, paid off in June 2022 when evidence emerging in discovery in those earlier stages of the case caused then Attorney General David Lametti to reconsider the government’s position and the ‘vaccine mandate for travel’ was suspended with the implicit threat being made that they would do it again if they wanted to do so. In a moment of respite those millions of people, denied their fundamental Section 6 rights for nearly 9 months, could once again travel to see their loved ones and family events; to work; and to take much needed vacation time. This appeal, which will be heard at the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto on November 3rd at 1pm Eastern Time, will consider whether Justice Kent Horne erred when he allowed the government’s motion to strike out two parts of our claim – those parts in relation to s.7 and s.12 of the Charter. Justice Horne allowed those parts in relation to s6 and s15 to go ahead to trial pending the outcome of this appeal and any further appeals that may follow. s.7 (life, liberty, security) deals with crucial rights that permit us all to decide for ourselves what happens to our body. We believe that the choice to accept a vaccine or not should be free of any sort of coercion or detrimental consequences imposed by any authority. They do not accept that the bar to their success in relation to s.7 is so high as to have no reasonable prospect of success and that their arguments should be allowed to proceed to trial. s.12 (cruel/unusual punishment) is normally heard in relation to the cruel and unusual punishment of people in the criminal justice system in relation to penal sanctions. We believe that then Prime Minister Trudeau developed the vaccine mandate as a deliberately cruel and unusual punishment for those Canadians who were exercising their s7 right to refuse the Covid-19 vaccines and, at the same time to use that punishment very publicly as a political campaign promise and ‘wedge issue’ in the 2021 General Election. The appeal will not be easy, but our case is in great hands with Sam Presvelos, the young litigator who achieved so much for millions of people in Canada who were, until June 2022, denied the right to even leave their country! If we succeed the government may then try to further appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada. It is very apparent that they do not want this case to be heard and particularly, perhaps, the s.7 arguments. If we are unsuccessful at this stage, they may take their arguments to the Supreme Court. We want to have our arguments and evidence heard on all four Sections 6,7,12 and 15. If you would like to help support this incredibly important landmark lawsuit, you can do so via e-transfer: [email protected] or via the donations page on our website: More details can be found on our official website: Also more details/updates on the case and hearing here:

Shaun Rickard

34,834 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

🟢GIVEAWAY🟢 Best comments or memes about this whole circus + RT this post. 10 winners will each get $50💎 (For evidence, supporting materials, and context, read both articles and watch the video included in the article I posted yesterday) Housebets.com & Porchy pay your debts A few people told me they did not fully understand the first article because there were too many moving parts: leaderboard accounts, rewards, weekly dates, monthly bonus, Tequity, game categories, withdrawals, Provably Fair, seed changes, migration, support tickets, ledgers and founder messages. Fair enough. The evidence is already there, and I still recommend reading the full articles and, above all, watching the video, because the video shows the reward system failing live. But this text is the cleaner version: the full story explained in plain English, without assuming the reader knows anything about crypto casinos, leaderboards or lossback systems. From all the evidence I’ve gathered, the Housebets story is not a normal “player lost money” complaint. It looks like a full transparency failure across the whole product: leaderboard, rewards, withdrawals, game categories, Provably Fair / Tequity mapping, support, migration and founder response. Housebets sold itself as a rewards-first casino: public leaderboards, weekly/monthly bonuses, fast withdrawals, VIP treatment and Provably Fair games. But every time I asked for the records behind those systems, snapshots, ledger entries, weekly cycles, GGR/NGR, slider logs, PF seed mapping, Tequity round IDs, withdrawal approval logs, the answer became some version of “forwarded to the relevant department.” This started long before the public dispute. I was not some random angry player who appeared after one bad session. In January I was helping Housebets and giving product feedback. I literally told support on 27 January that I was “testing the website for George,” while already dealing with a non-instant withdrawal and a 100% welcome bonus that had not applied. Support even asked me for “proof about your testing job.” The same chat shows the advertised 100% Welcome Bonus, the bonus not applying, and support saying the withdrawal needed internal confirmation instead of being instant. The welcome bonus issue never looked clean. Housebets advertised a 100% Welcome Bonus up to $1,000 on first deposit; I deposited, contacted support, and the bonus did not apply. Then support effectively turned a first-deposit bonus into a second-deposit workaround because the first one had not been applied properly. On 31 January I came back after another deposit and told them the bonus still had not been applied, even though I had already followed support’s instructions. Edward replied that he had “forwarded” the concern to the team. The same 100% welcome bonus was still being advertised in March. By April, the rewards system was already showing serious problems. I had the weekly slider at 100% lossback and told support I had lost money but the weekly did not appear. Jacky said the weekly was generated every Thursday at 00:01 UTC and gave actual internal figures: GGR $6,250, Total Bonus $6,083.99, NGR $168.31. So Housebets clearly had internal calculations when it wanted to explain why something might not pay. But when I later asked for full calculations, those same numbers suddenly became impossible to produce. Then on 18–19 April, the rewards page was bugged and would not let me claim. Support could see a pending weekly bonus of $717.37, but I could not claim it from the UI. Tee said it had been forwarded to the relevant department. That $717.37 later appears in the bonus ledger as Rakeback (20 Apr) 717.37089061, so I am not saying that specific one stayed unpaid forever. The point is worse: already in April, support could see a pending weekly reward while the player-facing reward page did not work. For a casino built around rewards, that is not a small bug. That is the product. In May, the UI and account data kept failing basic trust checks. On 8 May, I deposited 400 USDT; support said it had been credited, but I could not see it, and the proposed fix was to log out, clear cookies and cache. On 16 May, I asked why total deposits and withdrawals had disappeared from the menu; support said the platform was “in continuous evolution.” On 17 May, I asked for my total deposits and withdrawals, and support said they did not have direct access to that consolidated summary and would email it. That full official ledger did not arrive. So when Housebets later defends itself with UI screenshots, remember: this was the same UI where deposits could be credited but invisible, totals disappeared, rewards pages bugged, and support could not access consolidated account totals. Withdrawals were also not what was advertised. On 16 May, I asked why a crypto withdrawal was pending if withdrawals were supposed to be instant. Tee answered: “A few withdrawals require manual approval,” then added, “Our withdrawals are typically instant but…” That matters because a few days later the withdrawal delay became real damage. On 25 May, I told support before a match that I needed the funds to place a time-sensitive bet on another site in less than 20 minutes. I explained I wanted to bet around 60k at odds of 2.55. The withdrawal did not arrive in time. Later I told them the bet won and that I missed around 90k in profit because Housebets took more than two hours despite being warned before the match started. Jacky said he would raise the compensation case to the VIP team. Nobody resolved it. This was not one delayed withdrawal either. In my formal complaint I reconstructed several withdrawal delays: 23 May 02:55 → 08:03, around 5h08m; 25 May 03:05 → 08:09, around 5h04m; 17 May 03:54 → 08:02, around 4h08m; 18 May 04:46 → 08:11, around 3h25m; 16 May 05:23 → 08:12, around 2h49m. That is not “instant withdrawal.” And if later marketing says withdrawals are much faster now, the obvious question is: if this was the faster version, what did slow look like? The Provably Fair / Tequity side was another major issue. On 17 May I asked support how to verify an old Blackjack round. I did not ask for a generic explanation of Provably Fair; I asked where I could see the server seed, client seed, nonce and result for previous games. Support sent me to bet history, mentioned RTP, gave a generic PF explanation and showed the current Dice seed screen. When I said that did not let me verify previous games, they told me to clear cookies/cache. After doing that, I saw a new client seed and nonce 1 even though I had not played with that seed pair. I asked if Housebets changes seeds on every login. Support could not answer and told me to contact VIP. That seed/session behaviour is important. I later recorded video evidence around the seed changing after clearing cookies/cache and asked for the exact mapping: Housebets account ID → Tequity/provider player ID → session/currency context → seed pair → server seed hash → revealed server seed → client seed → nonce/cursor → raw outcome → final result. Housebets cannot sell Provably Fair if the player cannot verify historical bets, and “contact VIP” is not a verification algorithm. On 24 May, I asked for raw verification data for a specific Tequity Blackjack round: Round ID e1648d60-0da1-4433-a5ab-9ae39f5302e3, Blackjack, Tequity, bet amount 11,346 USDT, client seed O3YBZF7LBu, server seed hash starting 712875.... I asked for revealed server seed, nonce, full result JSON, card draw order and verification algorithm. I also asked about an apparent duplicate-card/deck question. Tee replied: “I don’t have the answers to your questions right now, but I’m forwarding your request to the relevant department.” That same day, I asked for a full audit of six Dice bets of 11,400 USDT each, total 68,400 USDT. I requested bet IDs, provider round IDs, roll results, seed data, balance ledger, request/session logs, security logs, retry flags, provider records and a full technical reconciliation. Tee replied: “I will forward this to the relevant department.” So when I asked for raw data, the answer was not data. It was forwarding. Again. There were also many large loss clusters that required reconciliation because of those unresolved PF, Tequity, category, RTP and session questions. In my complaint I listed clusters such as 25 May 02:17–02:54 Blackjack around 169,932 USDT; 16 May 12:31–13:26 Dice around 90,571.92 USDT; 26 May 02:48–03:58 Mines around 89,199 USDT; 24 May 06:20–06:21 Dice at 68,400 USDT; 26 May 00:11–01:41 Blackjack around 59,910 USDT; 25 May 22:51–22:59 Dice around 59,576 USDT; and several more between 40k and 56k. I am not saying every losing cluster proves manipulation by itself. I am saying that when PF mapping, provider logs, RTP/HE, category mapping and seed/session behaviour are unresolved, these sequences need a real reconciliation. The leaderboard is where the story becomes very hard for Housebets to explain. Around 19–20 May, two new accounts, elmourabut and lucasmartirini, appeared and started climbing every day at a vertiginous pace. Not normal slow leaderboard growth. Not a casual player building volume over time. They were created around that period and then started rising with huge wagering in a way that looked extremely unnatural for brand new accounts. By 29 May, I was first on both weekly and monthly leaderboards, and those two accounts were directly behind me with huge volume. In the monthly leaderboard screenshots, I was around $3.33M wagered, while elmourabut was around $1.29M and lucasmartirini around $1.08M. In the weekly leaderboard, I was around $1.096M, while those two accounts were around $635k and $578k. They were not normal accounts sitting at the bottom; they were directly behind me, applying pressure. In my formal complaint I recorded that elmourabut joined on 19 May and lucasmartirini on 20 May, that they showed zero visible withdrawals, large deposits/wagering and significant card-game volume, and I asked Housebets to confirm they were not staff, test, QA, admin, house-controlled, affiliate-controlled, internally funded, promotional, bonus-only or multi-account related accounts. This matters because a leaderboard is not passive. It is gamification. It makes players defend rank. When two new accounts appear behind you with hundreds of thousands or more than a million in volume, you are pressured to keep wagering. In my case, the disputed deposit sequence from 25 May 22:23 to 26 May 02:09 totals 91,168.375326 USDT. That sequence begins with 1,000.00 at 22:23 and continues with repeated deposits until 2,879.148969 at 02:09. The video later shows why those dates matter: there were deposits coming in, no gameplay withdrawal offsetting the sequence, a balance basically at zero, and later a leaderboard prize shown as P/L. I formally asked Housebets to confirm those two leaderboard accounts were real and eligible, and also to preserve wager logs, transaction records, balance adjustment logs, account flags, leaderboard calculation snapshots, support ticket logs, Telegram/email records and internal notes. Edward said he forwarded the request. In the same thread, he added that they were “working on fixing an issue regarding the weekly bonuses,” and then said the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” So the leaderboard issue and the weekly bonus issue are linked in time and support context. After that, Housebets confirmed by email that elmourabut and lucasmartirini were “legitimate and eligible accounts.” That email is the trap door. If they were legitimate and eligible, they should have remained in the leaderboard with their volume. If they were not, Housebets should never have confirmed them as legitimate and eligible. After that confirmation, the accounts disappeared from the leaderboard or stopped appearing in the positions their previous wagering required. I went back to support on 30 May and wrote: “There has been a material post-confirmation leaderboard change involving two accounts that Housebets had already confirmed as legitimate and eligible. I need the exact reason, timestamp, logs, and recalculation basis.” Edward said the matter was flagged and that I could expect a prompt response. I am still waiting for the actual explanation. Why did they disappear? My read is simple: because every hour that passed, there was more evidence around those accounts. They had been created around the same period, they were climbing at a speed that looked anything but human, they showed no visible withdrawals in the data I could see and reported, they appeared to be generating huge volume in unclear game categories, and the games/categories tied to that volume did not even make sense from the player-facing UI. When I started asking what they were actually playing, what Card meant, whether the volume was Tequity / UnOriginals / House Games, what RTP and house edge applied, and where the logs were, the questions became uncomfortable. Keeping those accounts visible became harder than removing them. So they disappeared. The game category issue made the leaderboard even more suspicious. On 30 May, I asked support why my own stats showed almost all my volume under Slots / Tragamonedas when I did not play real slots. I told them: “i dont play 3$ in unoriginals,” “i played all 3M in unoriginals,” and “ive never play slots.” I asked what “Card” was, where that game was, what RTP and house edge it had. Monica said Card was mainly Blackjack, Baccarat and Poker variants. Marcus later said the team was investigating why it showed that I mostly played slots when I had not. He could not give the exact game, RTP, HE, provider, category mapping or contribution logic. That matters because those same unclear categories were connected to leaderboard volume. If the site cannot clearly explain whether volume is Slots, Card, UnOriginals, House Games, Blackjack, Baccarat, Always 9 Baccarat or Tequity, then the leaderboard is not auditable for the player. I even asked which UnOriginals those two accounts were playing, and support told me to look at Live Bets. That is not an answer. I was not asking for gossip; I was asking what exact games generated leaderboard volume, what RTP/HE applied and whether that volume was eligible. There is also an earlier leaderboard-related precedent: Porchy had already told me in February that I would lose leaderboard places if I did not rename, because too many people were messaging support saying the site was not being fair due to my name and it “doesn’t make us look good.” That matters because it suggests leaderboard positioning was not treated as a sacred, untouchable system when public perception was involved. If leaderboard positions can be threatened for image reasons, then later claims that everything is purely automatic deserve scrutiny. Then Porchy made the leaderboard situation worse. Instead of producing logs or snapshots, he later said the leaderboard had “abusers” on it, that they were removed to help other players, and that it never affected me. Later he said they paid every single person, “even these abusers,” then called me “begging for money.” That creates a direct contradiction: Housebets confirmed the accounts as legitimate and eligible, then Porchy referred to leaderboard “abusers.” If they were abusers, why were they confirmed as legitimate and eligible? If they were eligible, why did they disappear? If they never affected me, where are the historical snapshots proving that? Once those accounts disappeared, Housebets paid the leaderboard prizes. On 1 June, the bonus ledger shows two Leaderboard entries: 5,007.46111706 and 1,001.49222341, totaling 6,008.95334047. That part was paid. But then Act Two started: the weekly and monthly rewards did not appear as separate ledger entries. The same bonus ledger shows those two 1 June entries as Leaderboard only, not Monthly Bonus, not Weekly Reload, not Lossback. The weekly timeline is a mess. On 28 May, the dashboard / UI said the weekly bonus was claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC, and the monthly was available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. That same night I told support the weekly had shown as available, then reset to 6 days without paying. Later I sent screenshots and wrote: “1M wagered and 0.2$.” Jacky said he had raised the issue to the technical team. So the weekly failure was reported live, not reconstructed after the fact. The next day, 29 May, Edward said they were fixing an issue regarding weekly bonuses and that the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” Then on 1 June, Spencer said the May weekly bonuses were 7th, 14th, 21st, and then due to migration the weekly moved to Monday, so there was one on the 25th on the new platform. He also said the 25 May weekly covered gameplay from 21–24 May, and that tech was looking at that plus the monthly bonus. The ledger does show a 25 May 02:10 Rakeback entry of 1,996.08334791, which likely corresponds to that 21–24 May weekly. But my major loss sequence starts about 20 hours later, on 25 May at 22:23, and continues until 26 May at 02:09. So the 25 May weekly cannot cover those losses. If weekly was still Thursday, the 25/26 losses should have been in the 28 May weekly. But the bonus ledger on 28 May shows only two tiny Rakeback entries, 0.28373945 and 0.00280958. If weekly moved to Monday because of migration, those losses should have appeared in the next weekly after 25 May. But on 1 June the ledger only shows Leaderboard entries. Then the final video shows the next Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting to 6d 23h. So the same loss sequence appears to fall into no paid weekly cycle. The 4 June support conversation makes this even more ridiculous. After I recorded the weekly reset video, I asked support a very simple question: what were the last weekly dates/cycles? The dashboard / support flow again said weekly bonuses are claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC. Jacky confirmed: “Weekly bonuses can be claimed every Thursday at 00:01 UTC in the Rewards tab,” and added that if not claimed by the following Wednesday at 23:59 UTC, it expires. But when I asked for the exact last four dates, Jacky said he had to check with the relevant department. When I pressed again, he said, “Sorry, As I am only a CS, Let me raise your concerns to relevant department.” I asked whether support did not have the information or simply could not answer. He replied: “Do you have any other concerns?” They use weekly cycles to decide whether to pay, but support cannot explain the weekly cycle. The monthly is missing too. The dashboard / UI said the monthly bonus is based on activity and VIP level from the previous month and is available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. In May I had more than 3,258,023.0829 wagered according to the formal complaint data. I also have proof/video that the monthly slider was set to 50/50. On 1 June, Spencer first told me I had claimed the Monthly Bonus at 1:12am BST around the same time as the monthly leaderboard reward. I immediately said I only received leaderboard prizes. Then Spencer changed the answer: “Our tech team are still actively working on issues regarding the monthly bonuses.” So first the monthly was claimed, then tech was still fixing it. The ledger still shows no Monthly Bonus entry. Housebets then seems to rely on “up overall” as a defence. But the video and ledger show why that does not work. My weekly/monthly profile later showed around +6,008 P/L with 0 deposits, 0 wagered and around 6,008 in bonuses. That number matches exactly the two 1 June Leaderboard payments. So the UI is showing leaderboard rewards as P/L. Then support used “up overall” to say I was not eligible for weekly lossback. That is not a clean lossback calculation. That is using a leaderboard reward as apparent profit to deny a lossback that should be based on actual eligible losses. There were also smaller reward-confusion issues along the way. On 22 May I asked for all pending bonuses,weekly, monthly, rakeback, level-up, anything, and support said the internal team would manually verify whether everything had been credited correctly and email me. On 24 May, I asked about level-up rewards because the reward looked like $3,500 for Pearl; support clarified it was $3,500 total across all Pearl levels, $500 per level. These are not the core issues, but they are part of the same pattern: rewards marketing, unclear UI, manual verification, emails that do not arrive, and players having to chase basic explanations. Then there is the migration. On 25 May, after the delayed withdrawal, missing VIP contact and unresolved issues, support told me my account would be moved to the new platform and that this upgrade would offer a better withdrawal process and fix many issues. Before that migration, I explicitly requested that no account data, internal data, logs, balance history, bonus history, bet history, provider records or pending issues be deleted. The response: “Your request has been relayed to the relevant department.” Again, forwarding. But if the old data is safe, Housebets should provide the old leaderboard snapshots, old weekly states, old bonus logs, old Tequity mapping and old withdrawal approval logs. The founder response did not fix anything. When Porchy finally engaged, he did not provide the records. He framed the settlement request as “so you want $100,000?” and asked whether I needed it or else I was going to post on X. I had already made clear this was not money for silence; I asked for logs, snapshots, withdrawal records, calculations and a counter-calculation if Housebets disagreed. He later referred to “abusers,” told me I was “up overall,” said “You are begging for money,” and suggested I “just do this to casinos.” Still no ledger. Still no weekly calculation. Still no monthly entry. Still no PF/Tequity mapping. Still no leaderboard snapshots. Another player also contacted me with screenshots pointing to similar categories of issues: private deals, leaderboard payout disputes, migration/account merge problems, missing history and a tiny monthly bonus despite claimed losses. I am not using that player’s case as the foundation of my claim without his full ledger, but it matters because it suggests the same type of opacity may not be isolated: private VIP/reward deals, leaderboard eligibility, monthly bonus calculations, migration and unclear history. If Housebets has private deals that affect leaderboard eligibility or rewards, it must explain how those deals interact with public leaderboards. So the overall picture is this: Housebets sold a public leaderboard and rewards system that pressured real wagering. Two new accounts appeared directly behind me with huge volume, were confirmed as legitimate and eligible, then disappeared after I asked for logs and questioned game categories. Housebets could not explain the exact games, RTP, house edge or category mapping behind the volume. The accounts were later framed by Porchy as “abusers,” contradicting the earlier eligibility confirmation. Once Housebets paid me the leaderboard prizes, those prizes were shown as P/L, and that contaminated P/L was then used to claim I was “up overall” and not eligible for lossback. At the same time, my real 25 May 22:23 → 26 May 02:09 loss sequence of 91,168.375326 USDT appears in no clean weekly cycle. The 25 May weekly covered 21–24 May according to Spencer, so it cannot cover that loss sequence. The 28 May weekly showed only tiny Rakeback entries and was already reported as broken. The 1 June ledger shows only Leaderboard entries. The later video shows Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting. And when I ask support for the exact weekly calendar, they cannot answer and send it to the relevant department. The monthly is the same story. The dashboard / UI says it is based on activity and VIP. I had more than 3.25M wagered in May. Spencer first says I claimed it, then says tech is still working on monthly bonuses. The ledger shows no Monthly Bonus. If Housebets says I was not eligible, they need to show the formula, slider history, cycle, GGR/NGR, eligible loss/activity, deductions and ledger result. If they cannot, “not eligible” is just another label. And this opens another can of worms: Tequity / provider configuration. Housebets cannot hide behind “the provider” whenever something goes wrong. The player does not deposit with Tequity. The player does not withdraw from Tequity. The player does not speak to Tequity support. The player does not compete in a Tequity leaderboard. The player plays on Housebets, with a Housebets wallet, Housebets UI, Housebets rewards, Housebets leaderboard and Housebets support. 1/2
22:49

🟢GIVEAWAY🟢 Best comments or memes about this whole circus + RT this post. 10 winners will each get $50💎 (For evidence, supporting materials, and context, read both articles and watch the video included in the article I posted yesterday) Housebets.com & Porchy pay your debts A few people told me they did not fully understand the first article because there were too many moving parts: leaderboard accounts, rewards, weekly dates, monthly bonus, Tequity, game categories, withdrawals, Provably Fair, seed changes, migration, support tickets, ledgers and founder messages. Fair enough. The evidence is already there, and I still recommend reading the full articles and, above all, watching the video, because the video shows the reward system failing live. But this text is the cleaner version: the full story explained in plain English, without assuming the reader knows anything about crypto casinos, leaderboards or lossback systems. From all the evidence I’ve gathered, the Housebets story is not a normal “player lost money” complaint. It looks like a full transparency failure across the whole product: leaderboard, rewards, withdrawals, game categories, Provably Fair / Tequity mapping, support, migration and founder response. Housebets sold itself as a rewards-first casino: public leaderboards, weekly/monthly bonuses, fast withdrawals, VIP treatment and Provably Fair games. But every time I asked for the records behind those systems, snapshots, ledger entries, weekly cycles, GGR/NGR, slider logs, PF seed mapping, Tequity round IDs, withdrawal approval logs, the answer became some version of “forwarded to the relevant department.” This started long before the public dispute. I was not some random angry player who appeared after one bad session. In January I was helping Housebets and giving product feedback. I literally told support on 27 January that I was “testing the website for George,” while already dealing with a non-instant withdrawal and a 100% welcome bonus that had not applied. Support even asked me for “proof about your testing job.” The same chat shows the advertised 100% Welcome Bonus, the bonus not applying, and support saying the withdrawal needed internal confirmation instead of being instant. The welcome bonus issue never looked clean. Housebets advertised a 100% Welcome Bonus up to $1,000 on first deposit; I deposited, contacted support, and the bonus did not apply. Then support effectively turned a first-deposit bonus into a second-deposit workaround because the first one had not been applied properly. On 31 January I came back after another deposit and told them the bonus still had not been applied, even though I had already followed support’s instructions. Edward replied that he had “forwarded” the concern to the team. The same 100% welcome bonus was still being advertised in March. By April, the rewards system was already showing serious problems. I had the weekly slider at 100% lossback and told support I had lost money but the weekly did not appear. Jacky said the weekly was generated every Thursday at 00:01 UTC and gave actual internal figures: GGR $6,250, Total Bonus $6,083.99, NGR $168.31. So Housebets clearly had internal calculations when it wanted to explain why something might not pay. But when I later asked for full calculations, those same numbers suddenly became impossible to produce. Then on 18–19 April, the rewards page was bugged and would not let me claim. Support could see a pending weekly bonus of $717.37, but I could not claim it from the UI. Tee said it had been forwarded to the relevant department. That $717.37 later appears in the bonus ledger as Rakeback (20 Apr) 717.37089061, so I am not saying that specific one stayed unpaid forever. The point is worse: already in April, support could see a pending weekly reward while the player-facing reward page did not work. For a casino built around rewards, that is not a small bug. That is the product. In May, the UI and account data kept failing basic trust checks. On 8 May, I deposited 400 USDT; support said it had been credited, but I could not see it, and the proposed fix was to log out, clear cookies and cache. On 16 May, I asked why total deposits and withdrawals had disappeared from the menu; support said the platform was “in continuous evolution.” On 17 May, I asked for my total deposits and withdrawals, and support said they did not have direct access to that consolidated summary and would email it. That full official ledger did not arrive. So when Housebets later defends itself with UI screenshots, remember: this was the same UI where deposits could be credited but invisible, totals disappeared, rewards pages bugged, and support could not access consolidated account totals. Withdrawals were also not what was advertised. On 16 May, I asked why a crypto withdrawal was pending if withdrawals were supposed to be instant. Tee answered: “A few withdrawals require manual approval,” then added, “Our withdrawals are typically instant but…” That matters because a few days later the withdrawal delay became real damage. On 25 May, I told support before a match that I needed the funds to place a time-sensitive bet on another site in less than 20 minutes. I explained I wanted to bet around 60k at odds of 2.55. The withdrawal did not arrive in time. Later I told them the bet won and that I missed around 90k in profit because Housebets took more than two hours despite being warned before the match started. Jacky said he would raise the compensation case to the VIP team. Nobody resolved it. This was not one delayed withdrawal either. In my formal complaint I reconstructed several withdrawal delays: 23 May 02:55 → 08:03, around 5h08m; 25 May 03:05 → 08:09, around 5h04m; 17 May 03:54 → 08:02, around 4h08m; 18 May 04:46 → 08:11, around 3h25m; 16 May 05:23 → 08:12, around 2h49m. That is not “instant withdrawal.” And if later marketing says withdrawals are much faster now, the obvious question is: if this was the faster version, what did slow look like? The Provably Fair / Tequity side was another major issue. On 17 May I asked support how to verify an old Blackjack round. I did not ask for a generic explanation of Provably Fair; I asked where I could see the server seed, client seed, nonce and result for previous games. Support sent me to bet history, mentioned RTP, gave a generic PF explanation and showed the current Dice seed screen. When I said that did not let me verify previous games, they told me to clear cookies/cache. After doing that, I saw a new client seed and nonce 1 even though I had not played with that seed pair. I asked if Housebets changes seeds on every login. Support could not answer and told me to contact VIP. That seed/session behaviour is important. I later recorded video evidence around the seed changing after clearing cookies/cache and asked for the exact mapping: Housebets account ID → Tequity/provider player ID → session/currency context → seed pair → server seed hash → revealed server seed → client seed → nonce/cursor → raw outcome → final result. Housebets cannot sell Provably Fair if the player cannot verify historical bets, and “contact VIP” is not a verification algorithm. On 24 May, I asked for raw verification data for a specific Tequity Blackjack round: Round ID e1648d60-0da1-4433-a5ab-9ae39f5302e3, Blackjack, Tequity, bet amount 11,346 USDT, client seed O3YBZF7LBu, server seed hash starting 712875.... I asked for revealed server seed, nonce, full result JSON, card draw order and verification algorithm. I also asked about an apparent duplicate-card/deck question. Tee replied: “I don’t have the answers to your questions right now, but I’m forwarding your request to the relevant department.” That same day, I asked for a full audit of six Dice bets of 11,400 USDT each, total 68,400 USDT. I requested bet IDs, provider round IDs, roll results, seed data, balance ledger, request/session logs, security logs, retry flags, provider records and a full technical reconciliation. Tee replied: “I will forward this to the relevant department.” So when I asked for raw data, the answer was not data. It was forwarding. Again. There were also many large loss clusters that required reconciliation because of those unresolved PF, Tequity, category, RTP and session questions. In my complaint I listed clusters such as 25 May 02:17–02:54 Blackjack around 169,932 USDT; 16 May 12:31–13:26 Dice around 90,571.92 USDT; 26 May 02:48–03:58 Mines around 89,199 USDT; 24 May 06:20–06:21 Dice at 68,400 USDT; 26 May 00:11–01:41 Blackjack around 59,910 USDT; 25 May 22:51–22:59 Dice around 59,576 USDT; and several more between 40k and 56k. I am not saying every losing cluster proves manipulation by itself. I am saying that when PF mapping, provider logs, RTP/HE, category mapping and seed/session behaviour are unresolved, these sequences need a real reconciliation. The leaderboard is where the story becomes very hard for Housebets to explain. Around 19–20 May, two new accounts, elmourabut and lucasmartirini, appeared and started climbing every day at a vertiginous pace. Not normal slow leaderboard growth. Not a casual player building volume over time. They were created around that period and then started rising with huge wagering in a way that looked extremely unnatural for brand new accounts. By 29 May, I was first on both weekly and monthly leaderboards, and those two accounts were directly behind me with huge volume. In the monthly leaderboard screenshots, I was around $3.33M wagered, while elmourabut was around $1.29M and lucasmartirini around $1.08M. In the weekly leaderboard, I was around $1.096M, while those two accounts were around $635k and $578k. They were not normal accounts sitting at the bottom; they were directly behind me, applying pressure. In my formal complaint I recorded that elmourabut joined on 19 May and lucasmartirini on 20 May, that they showed zero visible withdrawals, large deposits/wagering and significant card-game volume, and I asked Housebets to confirm they were not staff, test, QA, admin, house-controlled, affiliate-controlled, internally funded, promotional, bonus-only or multi-account related accounts. This matters because a leaderboard is not passive. It is gamification. It makes players defend rank. When two new accounts appear behind you with hundreds of thousands or more than a million in volume, you are pressured to keep wagering. In my case, the disputed deposit sequence from 25 May 22:23 to 26 May 02:09 totals 91,168.375326 USDT. That sequence begins with 1,000.00 at 22:23 and continues with repeated deposits until 2,879.148969 at 02:09. The video later shows why those dates matter: there were deposits coming in, no gameplay withdrawal offsetting the sequence, a balance basically at zero, and later a leaderboard prize shown as P/L. I formally asked Housebets to confirm those two leaderboard accounts were real and eligible, and also to preserve wager logs, transaction records, balance adjustment logs, account flags, leaderboard calculation snapshots, support ticket logs, Telegram/email records and internal notes. Edward said he forwarded the request. In the same thread, he added that they were “working on fixing an issue regarding the weekly bonuses,” and then said the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” So the leaderboard issue and the weekly bonus issue are linked in time and support context. After that, Housebets confirmed by email that elmourabut and lucasmartirini were “legitimate and eligible accounts.” That email is the trap door. If they were legitimate and eligible, they should have remained in the leaderboard with their volume. If they were not, Housebets should never have confirmed them as legitimate and eligible. After that confirmation, the accounts disappeared from the leaderboard or stopped appearing in the positions their previous wagering required. I went back to support on 30 May and wrote: “There has been a material post-confirmation leaderboard change involving two accounts that Housebets had already confirmed as legitimate and eligible. I need the exact reason, timestamp, logs, and recalculation basis.” Edward said the matter was flagged and that I could expect a prompt response. I am still waiting for the actual explanation. Why did they disappear? My read is simple: because every hour that passed, there was more evidence around those accounts. They had been created around the same period, they were climbing at a speed that looked anything but human, they showed no visible withdrawals in the data I could see and reported, they appeared to be generating huge volume in unclear game categories, and the games/categories tied to that volume did not even make sense from the player-facing UI. When I started asking what they were actually playing, what Card meant, whether the volume was Tequity / UnOriginals / House Games, what RTP and house edge applied, and where the logs were, the questions became uncomfortable. Keeping those accounts visible became harder than removing them. So they disappeared. The game category issue made the leaderboard even more suspicious. On 30 May, I asked support why my own stats showed almost all my volume under Slots / Tragamonedas when I did not play real slots. I told them: “i dont play 3$ in unoriginals,” “i played all 3M in unoriginals,” and “ive never play slots.” I asked what “Card” was, where that game was, what RTP and house edge it had. Monica said Card was mainly Blackjack, Baccarat and Poker variants. Marcus later said the team was investigating why it showed that I mostly played slots when I had not. He could not give the exact game, RTP, HE, provider, category mapping or contribution logic. That matters because those same unclear categories were connected to leaderboard volume. If the site cannot clearly explain whether volume is Slots, Card, UnOriginals, House Games, Blackjack, Baccarat, Always 9 Baccarat or Tequity, then the leaderboard is not auditable for the player. I even asked which UnOriginals those two accounts were playing, and support told me to look at Live Bets. That is not an answer. I was not asking for gossip; I was asking what exact games generated leaderboard volume, what RTP/HE applied and whether that volume was eligible. There is also an earlier leaderboard-related precedent: Porchy had already told me in February that I would lose leaderboard places if I did not rename, because too many people were messaging support saying the site was not being fair due to my name and it “doesn’t make us look good.” That matters because it suggests leaderboard positioning was not treated as a sacred, untouchable system when public perception was involved. If leaderboard positions can be threatened for image reasons, then later claims that everything is purely automatic deserve scrutiny. Then Porchy made the leaderboard situation worse. Instead of producing logs or snapshots, he later said the leaderboard had “abusers” on it, that they were removed to help other players, and that it never affected me. Later he said they paid every single person, “even these abusers,” then called me “begging for money.” That creates a direct contradiction: Housebets confirmed the accounts as legitimate and eligible, then Porchy referred to leaderboard “abusers.” If they were abusers, why were they confirmed as legitimate and eligible? If they were eligible, why did they disappear? If they never affected me, where are the historical snapshots proving that? Once those accounts disappeared, Housebets paid the leaderboard prizes. On 1 June, the bonus ledger shows two Leaderboard entries: 5,007.46111706 and 1,001.49222341, totaling 6,008.95334047. That part was paid. But then Act Two started: the weekly and monthly rewards did not appear as separate ledger entries. The same bonus ledger shows those two 1 June entries as Leaderboard only, not Monthly Bonus, not Weekly Reload, not Lossback. The weekly timeline is a mess. On 28 May, the dashboard / UI said the weekly bonus was claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC, and the monthly was available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. That same night I told support the weekly had shown as available, then reset to 6 days without paying. Later I sent screenshots and wrote: “1M wagered and 0.2$.” Jacky said he had raised the issue to the technical team. So the weekly failure was reported live, not reconstructed after the fact. The next day, 29 May, Edward said they were fixing an issue regarding weekly bonuses and that the weekly countdown was “not currently on Thursday evenings.” Then on 1 June, Spencer said the May weekly bonuses were 7th, 14th, 21st, and then due to migration the weekly moved to Monday, so there was one on the 25th on the new platform. He also said the 25 May weekly covered gameplay from 21–24 May, and that tech was looking at that plus the monthly bonus. The ledger does show a 25 May 02:10 Rakeback entry of 1,996.08334791, which likely corresponds to that 21–24 May weekly. But my major loss sequence starts about 20 hours later, on 25 May at 22:23, and continues until 26 May at 02:09. So the 25 May weekly cannot cover those losses. If weekly was still Thursday, the 25/26 losses should have been in the 28 May weekly. But the bonus ledger on 28 May shows only two tiny Rakeback entries, 0.28373945 and 0.00280958. If weekly moved to Monday because of migration, those losses should have appeared in the next weekly after 25 May. But on 1 June the ledger only shows Leaderboard entries. Then the final video shows the next Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting to 6d 23h. So the same loss sequence appears to fall into no paid weekly cycle. The 4 June support conversation makes this even more ridiculous. After I recorded the weekly reset video, I asked support a very simple question: what were the last weekly dates/cycles? The dashboard / support flow again said weekly bonuses are claimable every Thursday at 00:01 UTC. Jacky confirmed: “Weekly bonuses can be claimed every Thursday at 00:01 UTC in the Rewards tab,” and added that if not claimed by the following Wednesday at 23:59 UTC, it expires. But when I asked for the exact last four dates, Jacky said he had to check with the relevant department. When I pressed again, he said, “Sorry, As I am only a CS, Let me raise your concerns to relevant department.” I asked whether support did not have the information or simply could not answer. He replied: “Do you have any other concerns?” They use weekly cycles to decide whether to pay, but support cannot explain the weekly cycle. The monthly is missing too. The dashboard / UI said the monthly bonus is based on activity and VIP level from the previous month and is available on the 1st at 00:01 UTC. In May I had more than 3,258,023.0829 wagered according to the formal complaint data. I also have proof/video that the monthly slider was set to 50/50. On 1 June, Spencer first told me I had claimed the Monthly Bonus at 1:12am BST around the same time as the monthly leaderboard reward. I immediately said I only received leaderboard prizes. Then Spencer changed the answer: “Our tech team are still actively working on issues regarding the monthly bonuses.” So first the monthly was claimed, then tech was still fixing it. The ledger still shows no Monthly Bonus entry. Housebets then seems to rely on “up overall” as a defence. But the video and ledger show why that does not work. My weekly/monthly profile later showed around +6,008 P/L with 0 deposits, 0 wagered and around 6,008 in bonuses. That number matches exactly the two 1 June Leaderboard payments. So the UI is showing leaderboard rewards as P/L. Then support used “up overall” to say I was not eligible for weekly lossback. That is not a clean lossback calculation. That is using a leaderboard reward as apparent profit to deny a lossback that should be based on actual eligible losses. There were also smaller reward-confusion issues along the way. On 22 May I asked for all pending bonuses,weekly, monthly, rakeback, level-up, anything, and support said the internal team would manually verify whether everything had been credited correctly and email me. On 24 May, I asked about level-up rewards because the reward looked like $3,500 for Pearl; support clarified it was $3,500 total across all Pearl levels, $500 per level. These are not the core issues, but they are part of the same pattern: rewards marketing, unclear UI, manual verification, emails that do not arrive, and players having to chase basic explanations. Then there is the migration. On 25 May, after the delayed withdrawal, missing VIP contact and unresolved issues, support told me my account would be moved to the new platform and that this upgrade would offer a better withdrawal process and fix many issues. Before that migration, I explicitly requested that no account data, internal data, logs, balance history, bonus history, bet history, provider records or pending issues be deleted. The response: “Your request has been relayed to the relevant department.” Again, forwarding. But if the old data is safe, Housebets should provide the old leaderboard snapshots, old weekly states, old bonus logs, old Tequity mapping and old withdrawal approval logs. The founder response did not fix anything. When Porchy finally engaged, he did not provide the records. He framed the settlement request as “so you want $100,000?” and asked whether I needed it or else I was going to post on X. I had already made clear this was not money for silence; I asked for logs, snapshots, withdrawal records, calculations and a counter-calculation if Housebets disagreed. He later referred to “abusers,” told me I was “up overall,” said “You are begging for money,” and suggested I “just do this to casinos.” Still no ledger. Still no weekly calculation. Still no monthly entry. Still no PF/Tequity mapping. Still no leaderboard snapshots. Another player also contacted me with screenshots pointing to similar categories of issues: private deals, leaderboard payout disputes, migration/account merge problems, missing history and a tiny monthly bonus despite claimed losses. I am not using that player’s case as the foundation of my claim without his full ledger, but it matters because it suggests the same type of opacity may not be isolated: private VIP/reward deals, leaderboard eligibility, monthly bonus calculations, migration and unclear history. If Housebets has private deals that affect leaderboard eligibility or rewards, it must explain how those deals interact with public leaderboards. So the overall picture is this: Housebets sold a public leaderboard and rewards system that pressured real wagering. Two new accounts appeared directly behind me with huge volume, were confirmed as legitimate and eligible, then disappeared after I asked for logs and questioned game categories. Housebets could not explain the exact games, RTP, house edge or category mapping behind the volume. The accounts were later framed by Porchy as “abusers,” contradicting the earlier eligibility confirmation. Once Housebets paid me the leaderboard prizes, those prizes were shown as P/L, and that contaminated P/L was then used to claim I was “up overall” and not eligible for lossback. At the same time, my real 25 May 22:23 → 26 May 02:09 loss sequence of 91,168.375326 USDT appears in no clean weekly cycle. The 25 May weekly covered 21–24 May according to Spencer, so it cannot cover that loss sequence. The 28 May weekly showed only tiny Rakeback entries and was already reported as broken. The 1 June ledger shows only Leaderboard entries. The later video shows Weekly Reload reaching zero, paying nothing and resetting. And when I ask support for the exact weekly calendar, they cannot answer and send it to the relevant department. The monthly is the same story. The dashboard / UI says it is based on activity and VIP. I had more than 3.25M wagered in May. Spencer first says I claimed it, then says tech is still working on monthly bonuses. The ledger shows no Monthly Bonus. If Housebets says I was not eligible, they need to show the formula, slider history, cycle, GGR/NGR, eligible loss/activity, deductions and ledger result. If they cannot, “not eligible” is just another label. And this opens another can of worms: Tequity / provider configuration. Housebets cannot hide behind “the provider” whenever something goes wrong. The player does not deposit with Tequity. The player does not withdraw from Tequity. The player does not speak to Tequity support. The player does not compete in a Tequity leaderboard. The player plays on Housebets, with a Housebets wallet, Housebets UI, Housebets rewards, Housebets leaderboard and Housebets support. 1/2

Dr. W

20,491 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Check out our latest #Earth2 #creation the #MotorwayMarauder🌍✌️From #ConceptArt to #gameready, gives me #MadMax & #Terminator vibes - love it! Some #IMPORTANT things to remember about #Earth2 #drops leading up to #E2V1👇 1⃣Acquiring #skins is completely optional 2⃣ Notably, the #skins we drop leading up to the #E2V1 release will more likely have a ‘Limited Supply’, something that rewards our early supporters with increased rarity. These Limited Supply drops will become less frequent in the future being replaced with drops of unlimited supply but restricted availability requiring Players to wait for a skin to become available in the skin store or hope to acquire it via game play inside #E2V1 3⃣ Our goal is not to have these early #skin drops sell out during their maiden release, but rather provide an opportunity for our early supporters to secure skins they like at a discounted price with the welcoming guarantee of an all time Limited Supply. 4⃣ Most of the early #skin drops will naturally allow #Players to resell them, but importantly many will also be assigned with a once ever discount rate. #Skins that have Future Price Reduction assigned with “No” means that if the #skin does not sell out on its maiden drop and subsequently gets listed in store again at a future date, #Earth2 will never resell that #skin at any discounted rate. 5⃣ #Earth2 is building a modular clothing system, meaning that most items of clothing, especially if sold separately, will be interchangeable on avatars making them more useful and giving the #Player more ways to mix up their outfits, look the part & express themselves. 6⃣ The version of the skin you see in store is the base version you receive with the skin, however, there will also be opportunities to tailor outfits in game allowing for the adjustment in fabrics, prints, colours and more (be prepared for a little legwork though, unless you want to take your clothing items to another #Player who specialises in tailoring). 7⃣ #Earth2 is proud to have uniquely designed the #skins you listed in our store & it is important to remember that these #skins are the end result of a long and stringent internal character pipeline we have developed. Each skin starts from concept art which is reviewed and iterated on numerous times before being approved. Once approval is given, it is handed to our 3D modelling team for sculpting into high poly, then low poly, while receiving numerous reviews and adhering to our pipeline protocols. When the low poly version is finished, the 3D team then finishes with UV mapping and texture baking and runs their own QA process. Once the entire 3D sculpting process is approved, the models enter the skinning, rigging and weight painting process and are then passed to the animation team for further testing with various animations and another set of QA such as minimising clipping and identifying any other potential flaws in the model. The model then needs to go through the final process with a game developer to ensure it passed the final tests and is game ready for #E2V1. 8⃣ The above steps only represent a light explanation of our character and clothing pipeline, but as you can see we’re not simply selling static concept art images or a high poly 3D model that lacks any kind of optimisations resulting in little chance of it ever being game ready in its advertised state - there is a lot of work that takes place in order to get these skins to the stage our #Players see them in the video footage. Each skin sold helps support different parts of the development of Earth 2 providing us with new opportunities to further expand our team, speed up development and keep stepping closer to our short and long term goals for #E2V1 and #Earth2. 9⃣ We understand that fashion will become a big part of the #Metaverse, but we want to remind people that while some #Players may decide to set rules for certain skins being required for access or a ticket to entry under certain circumstances, from #Earth2’s perspective these skins are for cosmetic purposes only. 🔟 These skin drops also give #Earth2 the chance to show off our ability and versatility in avatar creation and accessories so even if you’re not keen on picking up a skin, remember to have fun and simply enjoy the progress! Also take heart every time you see a #skindrop, if the #E2V1 pre-alpha was not launching this year I wouldn't be dropping skins. We want to have at least some diversity for #avatars inside #E2V1 from the early stages! #Earth2 #Metaverse #Skins #Fashion #Collectibles #3DWorld #WIP #prealpha2024
1:29

Check out our latest #Earth2 #creation the #MotorwayMarauder🌍✌️From #ConceptArt to #gameready, gives me #MadMax & #Terminator vibes - love it! Some #IMPORTANT things to remember about #Earth2 #drops leading up to #E2V1👇 1⃣Acquiring #skins is completely optional 2⃣ Notably, the #skins we drop leading up to the #E2V1 release will more likely have a ‘Limited Supply’, something that rewards our early supporters with increased rarity. These Limited Supply drops will become less frequent in the future being replaced with drops of unlimited supply but restricted availability requiring Players to wait for a skin to become available in the skin store or hope to acquire it via game play inside #E2V1 3⃣ Our goal is not to have these early #skin drops sell out during their maiden release, but rather provide an opportunity for our early supporters to secure skins they like at a discounted price with the welcoming guarantee of an all time Limited Supply. 4⃣ Most of the early #skin drops will naturally allow #Players to resell them, but importantly many will also be assigned with a once ever discount rate. #Skins that have Future Price Reduction assigned with “No” means that if the #skin does not sell out on its maiden drop and subsequently gets listed in store again at a future date, #Earth2 will never resell that #skin at any discounted rate. 5⃣ #Earth2 is building a modular clothing system, meaning that most items of clothing, especially if sold separately, will be interchangeable on avatars making them more useful and giving the #Player more ways to mix up their outfits, look the part & express themselves. 6⃣ The version of the skin you see in store is the base version you receive with the skin, however, there will also be opportunities to tailor outfits in game allowing for the adjustment in fabrics, prints, colours and more (be prepared for a little legwork though, unless you want to take your clothing items to another #Player who specialises in tailoring). 7⃣ #Earth2 is proud to have uniquely designed the #skins you listed in our store & it is important to remember that these #skins are the end result of a long and stringent internal character pipeline we have developed. Each skin starts from concept art which is reviewed and iterated on numerous times before being approved. Once approval is given, it is handed to our 3D modelling team for sculpting into high poly, then low poly, while receiving numerous reviews and adhering to our pipeline protocols. When the low poly version is finished, the 3D team then finishes with UV mapping and texture baking and runs their own QA process. Once the entire 3D sculpting process is approved, the models enter the skinning, rigging and weight painting process and are then passed to the animation team for further testing with various animations and another set of QA such as minimising clipping and identifying any other potential flaws in the model. The model then needs to go through the final process with a game developer to ensure it passed the final tests and is game ready for #E2V1. 8⃣ The above steps only represent a light explanation of our character and clothing pipeline, but as you can see we’re not simply selling static concept art images or a high poly 3D model that lacks any kind of optimisations resulting in little chance of it ever being game ready in its advertised state - there is a lot of work that takes place in order to get these skins to the stage our #Players see them in the video footage. Each skin sold helps support different parts of the development of Earth 2 providing us with new opportunities to further expand our team, speed up development and keep stepping closer to our short and long term goals for #E2V1 and #Earth2. 9⃣ We understand that fashion will become a big part of the #Metaverse, but we want to remind people that while some #Players may decide to set rules for certain skins being required for access or a ticket to entry under certain circumstances, from #Earth2’s perspective these skins are for cosmetic purposes only. 🔟 These skin drops also give #Earth2 the chance to show off our ability and versatility in avatar creation and accessories so even if you’re not keen on picking up a skin, remember to have fun and simply enjoy the progress! Also take heart every time you see a #skindrop, if the #E2V1 pre-alpha was not launching this year I wouldn't be dropping skins. We want to have at least some diversity for #avatars inside #E2V1 from the early stages! #Earth2 #Metaverse #Skins #Fashion #Collectibles #3DWorld #WIP #prealpha2024

Shane Isaac 🌍2️⃣

19,007 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Ezra Levant: Thanks to floor crossers, Carney can now ram through his spy bill Using his newly acquired majority, Carney’s government has moved to dramatically curtail debate on Bill C-22, the so-called lawful access bill. The answer? It is a direct assault on parliamentary democracy and your freedoms. Last year, Mark Carney won the election with just 43 percent of the vote. That delivered him 169 seats out of 343 in the House of Commons, three short of the 172 needed for a majority. Canadians deliberately gave him a minority government. Sometimes voters do that on purpose, wanting to keep a politician on a shorter leash and force him to work with Parliament rather than dominate it. But Carney was not content with the verdict of the electorate. While the political establishment spent years warning that Donald Trump might refuse to accept election results, Carney set about changing his own. By persuading a string of opposition MPs to cross the floor, he secured the majority Canadians had declined to give him at the ballot box. The obvious question is why? Justin Trudeau governed for nearly a decade without a formal majority, relying on NDP support to pass budgets and survive confidence votes. There was little reason to believe Carney could not have done the same. Ezra’s answer is that Carney wanted something more than legislative support. He wanted the ability to shut down parliamentary scrutiny itself. That is now on full display. Using his newly acquired majority, Carney’s government has moved to dramatically curtail debate on Bill C-22, the so-called lawful access bill. The legislation would compel technology companies to retain user data for up to a year and make that information available to government authorities. Civil liberties advocates have raised serious concerns about privacy, government overreach and the expansion of state surveillance powers. The concerns are hardly theoretical. Canadians have already witnessed a government willing to freeze bank accounts and invoke extraordinary powers during the trucker protests. Mark Carney himself, while living in Europe at the time, wrote in The Globe and Mail that Ottawa should take a harder line against convoy participants and their supporters. It is therefore not surprising that critics view Bill C-22 as part of a broader push toward greater state control. What makes the situation particularly troubling is not only the substance of the legislation but the manner in which it is being advanced. The government has introduced a motion declaring that, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-22 will be pushed through Parliament on an accelerated timetable. In plain English, the normal rules are being set aside. Committee members will have just 30 minutes to complete clause-by-clause consideration of the bill. Any remaining amendments will be deemed moved and voted upon without further debate. The legislation will then move rapidly through report stage and third reading with strictly limited speaking time for opposition parties and virtually no opportunity for extended scrutiny. For a bill that constitutes one of the most significant expansions of government surveillance powers in Canadian history, Parliament is being afforded remarkably little time to examine the details. Professor Michael Geist, one of Canada’s leading experts on technology law and digital policy, has publicly criticized the government’s approach. Geist argues that hearings are being cut short, amendments are being rushed through without proper discussion, and the public is being denied the transparency normally expected during the legislative process. His warning is not about partisan politics but about the erosion of parliamentary accountability. This is why Carney needed those extra seats. The issue is not merely that opposition MPs crossed the floor. It is what those additional seats are now being used to accomplish. This is a double violation of democratic principles: first, altering the balance of Parliament after voters had already spoken; and second, using that altered balance to restrict Parliament’s ability to debate, amend and scrutinize legislation. The implications extend beyond a single bill. Across Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Australia, governments are increasingly embracing online surveillance measures, age-verification requirements and expanded regulatory control over digital spaces. These initiatives are almost always presented as necessary protections for children or public safety, yet they also require citizens to surrender more privacy and give governments more information about their online activities. It is a stark contrast to the vision of technological progress championed by figures such as Elon Musk, who promote innovation, space exploration, artificial intelligence and the expansion of human potential. One approach sees technology as a tool of freedom and advancement. The other increasingly treats it as something to be monitored, regulated and controlled. This is what an unchecked majority can look like under Mark Carney: Parliament reduced to a rubber stamp, debate curtailed, privacy placed at risk and major legislation rushed through with minimal scrutiny. Canadians deserve better. The democratic process only matters if it is respected when it becomes inconvenient. If Parliament is no longer permitted to properly examine legislation, question witnesses or challenge the government of the day, then the institution itself is diminished. That should concern every Canadian regardless of political affiliation.
12:13

Ezra Levant: Thanks to floor crossers, Carney can now ram through his spy bill Using his newly acquired majority, Carney’s government has moved to dramatically curtail debate on Bill C-22, the so-called lawful access bill. The answer? It is a direct assault on parliamentary democracy and your freedoms. Last year, Mark Carney won the election with just 43 percent of the vote. That delivered him 169 seats out of 343 in the House of Commons, three short of the 172 needed for a majority. Canadians deliberately gave him a minority government. Sometimes voters do that on purpose, wanting to keep a politician on a shorter leash and force him to work with Parliament rather than dominate it. But Carney was not content with the verdict of the electorate. While the political establishment spent years warning that Donald Trump might refuse to accept election results, Carney set about changing his own. By persuading a string of opposition MPs to cross the floor, he secured the majority Canadians had declined to give him at the ballot box. The obvious question is why? Justin Trudeau governed for nearly a decade without a formal majority, relying on NDP support to pass budgets and survive confidence votes. There was little reason to believe Carney could not have done the same. Ezra’s answer is that Carney wanted something more than legislative support. He wanted the ability to shut down parliamentary scrutiny itself. That is now on full display. Using his newly acquired majority, Carney’s government has moved to dramatically curtail debate on Bill C-22, the so-called lawful access bill. The legislation would compel technology companies to retain user data for up to a year and make that information available to government authorities. Civil liberties advocates have raised serious concerns about privacy, government overreach and the expansion of state surveillance powers. The concerns are hardly theoretical. Canadians have already witnessed a government willing to freeze bank accounts and invoke extraordinary powers during the trucker protests. Mark Carney himself, while living in Europe at the time, wrote in The Globe and Mail that Ottawa should take a harder line against convoy participants and their supporters. It is therefore not surprising that critics view Bill C-22 as part of a broader push toward greater state control. What makes the situation particularly troubling is not only the substance of the legislation but the manner in which it is being advanced. The government has introduced a motion declaring that, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-22 will be pushed through Parliament on an accelerated timetable. In plain English, the normal rules are being set aside. Committee members will have just 30 minutes to complete clause-by-clause consideration of the bill. Any remaining amendments will be deemed moved and voted upon without further debate. The legislation will then move rapidly through report stage and third reading with strictly limited speaking time for opposition parties and virtually no opportunity for extended scrutiny. For a bill that constitutes one of the most significant expansions of government surveillance powers in Canadian history, Parliament is being afforded remarkably little time to examine the details. Professor Michael Geist, one of Canada’s leading experts on technology law and digital policy, has publicly criticized the government’s approach. Geist argues that hearings are being cut short, amendments are being rushed through without proper discussion, and the public is being denied the transparency normally expected during the legislative process. His warning is not about partisan politics but about the erosion of parliamentary accountability. This is why Carney needed those extra seats. The issue is not merely that opposition MPs crossed the floor. It is what those additional seats are now being used to accomplish. This is a double violation of democratic principles: first, altering the balance of Parliament after voters had already spoken; and second, using that altered balance to restrict Parliament’s ability to debate, amend and scrutinize legislation. The implications extend beyond a single bill. Across Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Australia, governments are increasingly embracing online surveillance measures, age-verification requirements and expanded regulatory control over digital spaces. These initiatives are almost always presented as necessary protections for children or public safety, yet they also require citizens to surrender more privacy and give governments more information about their online activities. It is a stark contrast to the vision of technological progress championed by figures such as Elon Musk, who promote innovation, space exploration, artificial intelligence and the expansion of human potential. One approach sees technology as a tool of freedom and advancement. The other increasingly treats it as something to be monitored, regulated and controlled. This is what an unchecked majority can look like under Mark Carney: Parliament reduced to a rubber stamp, debate curtailed, privacy placed at risk and major legislation rushed through with minimal scrutiny. Canadians deserve better. The democratic process only matters if it is respected when it becomes inconvenient. If Parliament is no longer permitted to properly examine legislation, question witnesses or challenge the government of the day, then the institution itself is diminished. That should concern every Canadian regardless of political affiliation.

Rebel News

29,359 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

You are confusing cause and effect, and in doing so, you are missing the deeper structural reality that is the central point of the argument. Migration in Africa does not happen in a vacuum. People do not wake up and casually decide to leave their homes, families, and countries for no apparent reason. Movement of people across colonial borders is driven by economic collapse, political instability, conflict, and governance failures, yes, but also by powerful historical forces that shaped those very conditions in the first place. Not everyone has the third eye to see those historical forces at play unless they read, comprehend and follow ideas and not populist demagoguery. Apartheid was not just a South African policy that ended in 1994. Its effects still live with South Africans to this very day. It was part of a wider political and more importantly economic system of racial capitalism that structured the region’s economy. What you fixed in 1994 was only the political and not the economic side of it. South Africa was designed as the industrial hub, while neighbouring countries were deliberately underdeveloped and turned into labour reserves for South Africa’s economy. Migrant labour from countries like Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Lesotho was not an accident at all, it was built into the system. It was designed that way and remains so to this very day. The owners of the means of production then remain the owners of the means of production today. Black people are largely still workers. You have a few token black individuals at the top, but the majority remain little more than exploited labour. So when people move from their countries today, they are often moving along routes that were created decades ago. The inequality between South Africa and its neighbours did not emerge overnight, and it is not simply the result of “African leaders” in isolation of other key factors. It is the continuation of a historical economic design that concentrated wealth in one place and poverty in others. That does not absolve African governments of responsibility. Many have failed their citizens through corruption, mismanagement, and repression. I write about this daily, and I have gone to prison three times in my lifetime for doing so. I have had to leave my country to save my life for doing so. But to reduce a complex, multi-layered issue to “it is African leaders” is intellectually lazy and historically dishonest. It ignores history, economics, and global power dynamics. As for Malema, whether you agree with him or not, his political skill lies in identifying how political and economic narratives are shaped and who benefits from them. He is pointing out that anger is often redirected away from the very systems of inequality and towards vulnerable people, migrants, who did not create those conditions. If you want a serious conversation, then deal with the full picture. Migration is about history, economics, governance, and global inequality. Blaming one factor while ignoring the rest is not analysis at all, it is deceitful propaganda. The economically and intellectually illiterate are often the easiest targets of political propaganda, precisely because they are fed simple, emotionally satisfying explanations for complex structural problems. They are told who to blame for their suffering, migrants, neighbouring countries, or vague notions of “outsiders”, while the real drivers, historical dispossession, entrenched economic inequality, and elite collusion, are deliberately obscured. In Southern Africa, and particularly in South Africa, this manifests in xenophobic narratives that blame Zimbabweans or Mozambicans for unemployment and poverty, when in reality those conditions are rooted in a long standing economic architecture that concentrated wealth and ownership in very few hands. It is easier to turn the poor against the poor than to confront systems that benefit those in power. What is often forgotten in this debate is that the political elites of colonial South Africa and Rhodesia worked in concert to sustain a repressive regional system that enriched a minority while extracting labour and resources from the rest. Your former apartheid Prime Minister John Vorster says it in this video in a very tactful manner. That logic has not disappeared at all, it has merely changed form. Today, segments of the political elite in both South Africa and Zimbabwe continue to operate in ways that protect entrenched economic interests while the majority remain economically marginalised. South Africa was the only true white settler “home”, where wealth, infrastructure, and industry were concentrated, while territories like Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia), and Nyasaland (Malawi) functioned largely as economic outposts, feeding capital, labour, and raw materials into that system. The Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was presented as a project of regional integration, but in practice it reinforced patterns of extraction, with mining in Zambia, agriculture in Zimbabwe, and labour flows from Malawi all tied into a broader economic network dominated by South African capital. The same remains to this very day. The tragedy of focusing on Julius as the messenger rather than the message is something I speak about regularly, the need to focus on ideas and not personalities. You do not have to like Julius Malema. You do not have to agree with everything he says. All you need to do is focus on his message and interrogate it critically. I am not enslaved to Julius Malema’s ideas. I pick and choose what I agree with, and I am able to articulate a reasoned argument for both what I support and what I reject. You should do the same. One of the most powerful weapons of colonialism was the deliberate fragmentation of black people into small Bantustans, into isolated villages where communities were conditioned to view the next village with suspicion. In Rhodesia we had “reserves” and “keeps.” People from other Bantustans were treated as outsiders. That mentality was never dismantled, it still exists today. The idea of seeing others with suspicion simply because of an arbitrary line, a colonial border, remains deeply entrenched. Many do not fully appreciate how powerful and enduring that mentality and conditioning is. Yet when you look at the descendants of colonialists, they do not view each other through those same lenses. White Zimbabweans move into South Africa without attracting the same hostility because of the economic architecture that allows them to stay away from the so called lumpen. White people from across the world come and settle with ease in South Africa. In fact, one of the most visible figures advocating for the secession of the Western Cape is a British citizen, yet there is no comparable outrage from black South Africans. The same energy of protests and marches that is directed at fellow Africans is rarely directed there. That is not accidental at all, it is well designed that way. It speaks to the protection afforded by entrenched economic power and privilege, but also to a deeper psychological conditioning in how black people are taught to see each other and to see whiteness. This will not disappear overnight. It may not even disappear in my lifetime. But the task is to keep planting the seeds of awareness and unity. As Bob Marley said, you give your more to get your little. What you do today may seem small, but in time it contributes to something much larger, especially if there is collective effort to confront and resolve these divisions. One of the most important things colonialists understood was that education is the key to discernment, to the ability to interrogate and understand issues such as those I raised in this essay. That is precisely why they restricted access to it. Only a few black people were allowed meaningful education, and the consequences of that exclusion remain with us today, not only in South Africa but across much of the continent. We did not dismantle the systems that underpinned colonialism. We largely inherited them, changed the faces at the top, and continued to operate within the same structures. So I will end by saying this, if anyone truly wants change on the issues being debated, you must fix the foundation. You cannot repair window panes when the foundation itself is cracking. Immigration, whether legal or illegal, will always exist, but it is sustained not by foreigners alone, but by the system itself. When Zimbabweans cross the border without passports, they are often enabled by South Africans within a broken system. When documents are obtained illegally, it is again the system that enables it. When Zimbabwe’s political crisis persists without free and fair elections, regional dynamics, including South Africa’s political and economic interests, often play a role in sustaining that status quo. There is a web of political and economic interests that mirrors, in some respects, the relationships that existed during the colonial and apartheid eras. As long as those interests remain, there is little incentive for those in power to confront injustice decisively. The corruption and governance failures in Zimbabwe are real and significant, but they are part of a broader structural problem. The real issue is the foundation. If black South Africans were living well, with access to quality education, meaningful employment, and economic security, they would not be marching in the streets. The anger you see today is not simply about immigration. It is a reflection of an economic structure that has remained fundamentally unchanged, even after 1994. Repression underpinned by racism in Rhodesia effectively came to an end when South Africa shifted its position and recognised that the system was no longer sustainable. The same principle applies today. Repression underpinned by political corruption in Zimbabwe will begin to end the day South Africa, the regional power whether one accepts it or not, decides that the current situation is no longer acceptable. Zimbabwe’s crisis has, over time, been treated as a largely domestic issue rather than a regional one, yet the political and economic realities of Southern Africa make that distinction artificial. What happens in Zimbabwe does not exist in isolation, it is shaped, sustained, and, at times, enabled by regional dynamics, particularly South Africa’s stance. This may be an uncomfortable truth, but history consistently shows that regional power centres play a decisive role in determining outcomes. Ignoring that reality does not change it, it only delays the moment when it must be confronted. It was convenient then for John Vorster and successive apartheid regimes to continue using illegal migrants as a source of cheap labour in South Africa for menial jobs. It remains the same today. As I have said, the political and economic architecture of the apartheid era largely remains in place. What has changed are the political faces, the white faces that held power then and the black faces that hold office today, often operating within and alongside the same entrenched economic structures. Whether one accepts it or not, that is the reality of our politics in the region and of the economic architecture that continues to shape it. There is a reason why certain political actors avoid critically engaging with the structural drivers of immigration, particularly those that sustain flows of cheap labour. There is also a reason why figures like Helen Zille often emphasise the need to document illegal immigrants in South Africa, that position can be understood within the broader context of preserving an economic order that has long depended on controlling and managing labour rather than fundamentally transforming the conditions that produce it. That economic order is rooted in historical structures of concentrated power that shaped not only South Africa, but the wider region more than a century ago. How black Africans view themselves is often reflected in how they respond to political messages. It is why some are quick to criticise Julius Malema for positions that are, in substance, not fundamentally different from those expressed by Helen Zille. On immigration, there is significant overlap in what has been said across the political spectrum, including by the DA and the EFF. Yet the EFF is frequently viewed through a lens of hostility, in part because it is a black-led party, and that perception shapes the reaction it receives. As a result, some black citizens, influenced by long-standing narratives, direct harsher and more emotive criticism towards it. When similar points are made by figures like Helen Zille, the response is often markedly different. That contrast speaks to deeper historical conditioning and the psychological legacy of colonialism. It has not disappeared, and changing it will take time. The fundamental difference, however, lies in the intent and framing of their messages. Malema’s position on immigration is part of a broader effort to confront and address the structural inequalities created by colonial rule. Zille’s position, by contrast, can be seen as operating within and reinforcing an existing economic framework that has its roots in that same colonial architecture which feeds off cheap migrant labour. However, you can't fix the broken system by chasing away immigrants, legal or illegal, you can only empower black South Africans by allowing them to own the means of production and not fighting in the streets for crumbs. Have a lovely weekend.
6:23

You are confusing cause and effect, and in doing so, you are missing the deeper structural reality that is the central point of the argument. Migration in Africa does not happen in a vacuum. People do not wake up and casually decide to leave their homes, families, and countries for no apparent reason. Movement of people across colonial borders is driven by economic collapse, political instability, conflict, and governance failures, yes, but also by powerful historical forces that shaped those very conditions in the first place. Not everyone has the third eye to see those historical forces at play unless they read, comprehend and follow ideas and not populist demagoguery. Apartheid was not just a South African policy that ended in 1994. Its effects still live with South Africans to this very day. It was part of a wider political and more importantly economic system of racial capitalism that structured the region’s economy. What you fixed in 1994 was only the political and not the economic side of it. South Africa was designed as the industrial hub, while neighbouring countries were deliberately underdeveloped and turned into labour reserves for South Africa’s economy. Migrant labour from countries like Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Lesotho was not an accident at all, it was built into the system. It was designed that way and remains so to this very day. The owners of the means of production then remain the owners of the means of production today. Black people are largely still workers. You have a few token black individuals at the top, but the majority remain little more than exploited labour. So when people move from their countries today, they are often moving along routes that were created decades ago. The inequality between South Africa and its neighbours did not emerge overnight, and it is not simply the result of “African leaders” in isolation of other key factors. It is the continuation of a historical economic design that concentrated wealth in one place and poverty in others. That does not absolve African governments of responsibility. Many have failed their citizens through corruption, mismanagement, and repression. I write about this daily, and I have gone to prison three times in my lifetime for doing so. I have had to leave my country to save my life for doing so. But to reduce a complex, multi-layered issue to “it is African leaders” is intellectually lazy and historically dishonest. It ignores history, economics, and global power dynamics. As for Malema, whether you agree with him or not, his political skill lies in identifying how political and economic narratives are shaped and who benefits from them. He is pointing out that anger is often redirected away from the very systems of inequality and towards vulnerable people, migrants, who did not create those conditions. If you want a serious conversation, then deal with the full picture. Migration is about history, economics, governance, and global inequality. Blaming one factor while ignoring the rest is not analysis at all, it is deceitful propaganda. The economically and intellectually illiterate are often the easiest targets of political propaganda, precisely because they are fed simple, emotionally satisfying explanations for complex structural problems. They are told who to blame for their suffering, migrants, neighbouring countries, or vague notions of “outsiders”, while the real drivers, historical dispossession, entrenched economic inequality, and elite collusion, are deliberately obscured. In Southern Africa, and particularly in South Africa, this manifests in xenophobic narratives that blame Zimbabweans or Mozambicans for unemployment and poverty, when in reality those conditions are rooted in a long standing economic architecture that concentrated wealth and ownership in very few hands. It is easier to turn the poor against the poor than to confront systems that benefit those in power. What is often forgotten in this debate is that the political elites of colonial South Africa and Rhodesia worked in concert to sustain a repressive regional system that enriched a minority while extracting labour and resources from the rest. Your former apartheid Prime Minister John Vorster says it in this video in a very tactful manner. That logic has not disappeared at all, it has merely changed form. Today, segments of the political elite in both South Africa and Zimbabwe continue to operate in ways that protect entrenched economic interests while the majority remain economically marginalised. South Africa was the only true white settler “home”, where wealth, infrastructure, and industry were concentrated, while territories like Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia), and Nyasaland (Malawi) functioned largely as economic outposts, feeding capital, labour, and raw materials into that system. The Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland was presented as a project of regional integration, but in practice it reinforced patterns of extraction, with mining in Zambia, agriculture in Zimbabwe, and labour flows from Malawi all tied into a broader economic network dominated by South African capital. The same remains to this very day. The tragedy of focusing on Julius as the messenger rather than the message is something I speak about regularly, the need to focus on ideas and not personalities. You do not have to like Julius Malema. You do not have to agree with everything he says. All you need to do is focus on his message and interrogate it critically. I am not enslaved to Julius Malema’s ideas. I pick and choose what I agree with, and I am able to articulate a reasoned argument for both what I support and what I reject. You should do the same. One of the most powerful weapons of colonialism was the deliberate fragmentation of black people into small Bantustans, into isolated villages where communities were conditioned to view the next village with suspicion. In Rhodesia we had “reserves” and “keeps.” People from other Bantustans were treated as outsiders. That mentality was never dismantled, it still exists today. The idea of seeing others with suspicion simply because of an arbitrary line, a colonial border, remains deeply entrenched. Many do not fully appreciate how powerful and enduring that mentality and conditioning is. Yet when you look at the descendants of colonialists, they do not view each other through those same lenses. White Zimbabweans move into South Africa without attracting the same hostility because of the economic architecture that allows them to stay away from the so called lumpen. White people from across the world come and settle with ease in South Africa. In fact, one of the most visible figures advocating for the secession of the Western Cape is a British citizen, yet there is no comparable outrage from black South Africans. The same energy of protests and marches that is directed at fellow Africans is rarely directed there. That is not accidental at all, it is well designed that way. It speaks to the protection afforded by entrenched economic power and privilege, but also to a deeper psychological conditioning in how black people are taught to see each other and to see whiteness. This will not disappear overnight. It may not even disappear in my lifetime. But the task is to keep planting the seeds of awareness and unity. As Bob Marley said, you give your more to get your little. What you do today may seem small, but in time it contributes to something much larger, especially if there is collective effort to confront and resolve these divisions. One of the most important things colonialists understood was that education is the key to discernment, to the ability to interrogate and understand issues such as those I raised in this essay. That is precisely why they restricted access to it. Only a few black people were allowed meaningful education, and the consequences of that exclusion remain with us today, not only in South Africa but across much of the continent. We did not dismantle the systems that underpinned colonialism. We largely inherited them, changed the faces at the top, and continued to operate within the same structures. So I will end by saying this, if anyone truly wants change on the issues being debated, you must fix the foundation. You cannot repair window panes when the foundation itself is cracking. Immigration, whether legal or illegal, will always exist, but it is sustained not by foreigners alone, but by the system itself. When Zimbabweans cross the border without passports, they are often enabled by South Africans within a broken system. When documents are obtained illegally, it is again the system that enables it. When Zimbabwe’s political crisis persists without free and fair elections, regional dynamics, including South Africa’s political and economic interests, often play a role in sustaining that status quo. There is a web of political and economic interests that mirrors, in some respects, the relationships that existed during the colonial and apartheid eras. As long as those interests remain, there is little incentive for those in power to confront injustice decisively. The corruption and governance failures in Zimbabwe are real and significant, but they are part of a broader structural problem. The real issue is the foundation. If black South Africans were living well, with access to quality education, meaningful employment, and economic security, they would not be marching in the streets. The anger you see today is not simply about immigration. It is a reflection of an economic structure that has remained fundamentally unchanged, even after 1994. Repression underpinned by racism in Rhodesia effectively came to an end when South Africa shifted its position and recognised that the system was no longer sustainable. The same principle applies today. Repression underpinned by political corruption in Zimbabwe will begin to end the day South Africa, the regional power whether one accepts it or not, decides that the current situation is no longer acceptable. Zimbabwe’s crisis has, over time, been treated as a largely domestic issue rather than a regional one, yet the political and economic realities of Southern Africa make that distinction artificial. What happens in Zimbabwe does not exist in isolation, it is shaped, sustained, and, at times, enabled by regional dynamics, particularly South Africa’s stance. This may be an uncomfortable truth, but history consistently shows that regional power centres play a decisive role in determining outcomes. Ignoring that reality does not change it, it only delays the moment when it must be confronted. It was convenient then for John Vorster and successive apartheid regimes to continue using illegal migrants as a source of cheap labour in South Africa for menial jobs. It remains the same today. As I have said, the political and economic architecture of the apartheid era largely remains in place. What has changed are the political faces, the white faces that held power then and the black faces that hold office today, often operating within and alongside the same entrenched economic structures. Whether one accepts it or not, that is the reality of our politics in the region and of the economic architecture that continues to shape it. There is a reason why certain political actors avoid critically engaging with the structural drivers of immigration, particularly those that sustain flows of cheap labour. There is also a reason why figures like Helen Zille often emphasise the need to document illegal immigrants in South Africa, that position can be understood within the broader context of preserving an economic order that has long depended on controlling and managing labour rather than fundamentally transforming the conditions that produce it. That economic order is rooted in historical structures of concentrated power that shaped not only South Africa, but the wider region more than a century ago. How black Africans view themselves is often reflected in how they respond to political messages. It is why some are quick to criticise Julius Malema for positions that are, in substance, not fundamentally different from those expressed by Helen Zille. On immigration, there is significant overlap in what has been said across the political spectrum, including by the DA and the EFF. Yet the EFF is frequently viewed through a lens of hostility, in part because it is a black-led party, and that perception shapes the reaction it receives. As a result, some black citizens, influenced by long-standing narratives, direct harsher and more emotive criticism towards it. When similar points are made by figures like Helen Zille, the response is often markedly different. That contrast speaks to deeper historical conditioning and the psychological legacy of colonialism. It has not disappeared, and changing it will take time. The fundamental difference, however, lies in the intent and framing of their messages. Malema’s position on immigration is part of a broader effort to confront and address the structural inequalities created by colonial rule. Zille’s position, by contrast, can be seen as operating within and reinforcing an existing economic framework that has its roots in that same colonial architecture which feeds off cheap migrant labour. However, you can't fix the broken system by chasing away immigrants, legal or illegal, you can only empower black South Africans by allowing them to own the means of production and not fighting in the streets for crumbs. Have a lovely weekend.

Hopewell Chin’ono

21,194 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten