Hello and good morning or good afternoon wherever you might be. Welcome to our latest future tense conversation. Future tense for those of you who don't know is a collaboration between Arizona State University, America and slate magazine and what what we do is we look at the impact of technology on society. We do so with terrific articles on slate I say terrific because they're edited by my colleague. You can follow us on Twitter at future tense now. And my name is Andres Martinez by the way I am the editorial director of future tense and I'm also a professor of practice at the Cronkite school at Arizona State University. Today feels almost like a family celebration because we are here because one of our favorite future tense contributors Jeff Jeff cost of his published his latest book, and it is on a fantastic subject so what brings us here together is the issue of anonymity. And the question of whether we have a right to separate our advocacy and our speech our messaging from our identity. Jeff's new book, the United States of anonymity how the First Amendment shaped online speech. It's one of these awesome topics because oftentimes, these issues play out in the online space and in the internet and people often discuss them as if we have never seen anything like this before, right. So one of the things that we try to do at future tense and we've done so for the last couple of years in our free speech project and Jeff is really great at this is to provide context about underlying principles and and history to that informs of these debates and these new trade offs that are being negotiated and navigated in a new space but that are actually not entirely novel to put it mildly. I mean when you look at the history of anonymous speech in the United States that goes back to the very foundation of the Republic and has been an interesting tension throughout with tremendous rights given to people, thanks to anonymity, but at a cost and I'm really excited to have Jeff and Nora tease that out. So in terms of housekeeping, you'll notice there are buttons on the bottom of your screen where you can you can purchase Jeff's book. For those of you who also might have read Jeff's previous book, the 26 words that created the internet and spoiler alert that's that's our favorite section 230, you know how masterful Jeff is at bringing these issues to life. That's why we love publishing and met at future tense as well. You can also pose questions post questions down below, and we'll be referring to audience questions throughout the conversation. So, I mainly want to get out of the way at this point and learn from Jeff and Nora. In terms of a slightly more formal introduction, I should say that Jeff is also a, you know, I mentioned his previous book and my, my phone here is frozen so I want to make sure I get his title right This is the associate professor at the inner science, the cyber science department at the US Naval Academy, and of course the author of the just published United States of anonymity, really honored today to have Nora help us out and guiding the conversation. And I'll be this is a senior counsel and director to digital justice and civil rights program at free press. And she is also an ASU colleague in that she is a faculty associate at the Cronkite School of journalism and mass communication, where she is sharing a lot of her wisdom and expertise on first issues to our Cronkite students who are fortunate to have her. So thanks Jeff and Nora for doing this with us and nor I'd like to pass the moderating baton to you to guide us in this conversation. Thank you so much. Thank you so much Andres and thank you to the rest of the future tense team it's it's really wonderful to be here. I remember when we used to be in person for events like these and I lament that to some extent but Jeff, it's wonderful to to see you here. Before we get really started.  Yes, thank you. And I almost forgot so yeah everything I say today is only on my behalf now on behalf of the Naval Academy the Department of Navy or the Department of Defense, my family doesn't want to take credit for what I say it's just Oh, I love it. If you've watched Jeff speak before that's his boilerplate and he does it every time. And I sort of feel like we can't now have our discussion without it I look forward to it in a very surreal way. We can't set military policy on this so we have to be really careful. Good. Well, it's great to be here with everyone I will keep reminding you if you have questions please put them in the Slido and I'll be peppering questions from the audience throughout our discussion together. We have about 50 minutes with Jeff and I really want to dive in because this topic is one I think about all the time. And as a little bit of background I will just say, Jeff has now written three books, I think I'm right on that a textbook, the of course very well known 26 words that created the Internet, and now the United States of anonymity, which explores how the internet age has been shaped by, and how it has continued to now shape the First Amendment and our conceptions of free speech. This is a little bit of historical background I just sort of want to set the stage for us in the United States the ability to speak or engage without revealing one's identity has incredibly deep historical ties. From the earliest days in this country people have often sought anonymity as a way to shield themselves and to then be able to address difficult or controversial questions in our public spaces. If you've written about this of course in your new book, I would love to just sort of open up first some of the history of what anonymity has meant in this country. There are so many examples, whether it's the authors of the Federalist Papers, other cases from the early Supreme Court days. Tell us just a little bit about what the right to be anonymous has meant in this country. Yeah, that's a great way to open it and it really so the right to be anonymous really in terms of being a First Amendment right didn't really start to be recognized until the 1950s. But to really understand why it was recognized, you have to go back to even before the founding of our country to look at what was the way that people spoke about particularly important and difficult political issues and overwhelmingly it was anonymously or under pseudonym. So you had Thomas Payne writing common sense, signing it written by an Englishman. You had the letters from the farmer from Pennsylvania. You had the after we had independence we have the Federalist Papers that argued for the ratification of the Constitution that Hamilton Madison and Jay wrote under Publius, and they kept their identity pretty secret, and they had a few people who knew at the time that it was them and some people speculated but I mean they even went to the extent of using cipher to communicate there to communicate to shield their identities from being disclosed so and there were anti Federalists who wrote under pseudonyms. And that was just the tradition of speech, but it didn't really come up in terms of whether there's a First Amendment right to be anonymous until the late 50s sort of right after Brown versus Board of Education. There was going to be NAACP that was getting into trying to get Alabama and other states to desegregate under the Brown ruling and Alabama pushed back and one way that they tried to push back was to find this loophole in a immigration registration statute basically saying that NAACP did not properly register in the state so they filed a lawsuit to shut down rather than saying just file the right form. That wasn't the state's objective. They wanted to shut down the NAACP but even more alarmingly as part of the discovery forced the NAACP to disclose its membership lists, which obviously would expose members in the south to a lot of retaliation potentially so the NAACP challenged this and it went up to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that there is a right to anonymous association and that under the First Amendment. And then two years later they extended that to strike that right to speech to strike down an ordinance that required the authors of handbills to put their name on them and in that opinion in 1960 the Supreme Court wrote this is based on our tradition of anonymous speech going back to the federalist papers and these foundational documents and the court has since then reaffirmed the right in various contexts. It's not absolute. And there are a number of cases particularly in the campaign finance disclosure setting where the court has required disclosure but it's a fairly strong right and it's much stronger than any fundamental right of anonymity in many other countries. Well and my understanding is that you know this right to be anonymous has different protections in different contexts and as you already alluded there are these rights or the kinds of protections as part of speech and association rights, which are quite high I would say when it comes to how the court has you know reviewed what anonymity means for engaging in discourse at that level, but then there are those less protective areas and campaign finance is certainly one of them. And then there is this newer and burgeoning area, if we can even call it burgeoning at this point in time around speech online. It feels like we've arrived there, maybe some years ago, your book of course focuses on anonymous speech and what how that has sort of been shaped by the First Amendment but what for you at a personal level prompted the new book, because we've sort of gone through as quickly as possible in these first five minutes the the long history of what anonymity means the value of it and I'm curious, coming now to present day, you know, why you wanted to talk about and write about this book topic now. Yeah, so it really was, it was not a subject that I spent a tremendous amount of time on as an academic, but it was really an outgrowth of the section 230 work, because one of the main sort of to distill the summary of section 230 by its most ardent defenders they all that section 230 says is that you can't sue the platform for defamatory or otherwise illegal content, but you can sue the person who posted it or who wrote it. And that that sounds pretty straightforward, but then it's not always true, and it's not true for a few different reasons. And many of them get to anonymity the poster may have been using their neighbor's Wi Fi connection they might be using tour, they might be at a coffee house that doesn't require authentic logins, or even if they are using their own internet connection. What I was aware of, but I had not really pursued in depth was that that courts had set a fairly high standard to be able for a plaintiff in a defamation suit or some other related type of claim to use a subpoena to unmask an anonymous poster. And I really found that fascinating. And I've got to admit when I started when I when I started sort of the research and reading every case I could about anonymity, I was much more sympathetic to the plaintiffs because the cases that I hear about are involved sympathetic plaintiffs, people who have suffered from harassment and really horrific defamation, which I read about in the book. But what I found and what sort of change made made made everything more complex, which is fun when you're writing a book is that I found that so many of these cases, where people are trying to be unmasked the plaintiffs are big companies that are trying to figure out which employees criticize them. And that I'm not as sympathetic about I mean, obviously there could be there have been some legitimate claims by these companies but what I what we found going back to the 1990s, when you first had Yahoo Finance have a bulletin board where any pseudonymous person could go on and post about companies was that it really revolutionized the way that companies had to deal with criticism that before Yahoo Finance and before the criticism that companies received publicly was primarily from business journalists and they knew how to deal with that they complain. But they knew who it was, but the idea that some lowly employee could have the nerve to go to the world and say that the CEO is doing something that's not wise. That got under their skin, and they wanted to figure out how to deal with it. And they, until you had civil liberties groups, you had folks like Paul Levy, the EFF, you went until you had them really get in and it took years to basically get the courts to set high standards but the the companies were able to use this process to basically figure out who posted they had no really interest in actually litigating the case. They would typically use the subpoena to unmask the person, dismiss the case, fire them, and often make it more difficult for them to get a job again. And that's when you start to see the sort of the power rationals for anime that you have. I mean a lot of these employees, I mean some of them just didn't like their supervisor or they had crudges but I mean a lot of them were exposing really bad stuff that was happening or warning people like hey you don't want to work here. And they were really, and I personally have a problem with companies using our legal system and the power of a subpoena to unmask someone because they're not comfortable with being criticized. Well I want to come back to some of that because that's so fascinating. I guess I have a lot of questions Jeff, before we keep going I want to make another flag please put questions for all of you that are tuning in to our Slido. I'll be peppering those throughout the discussion so we want to make it as interactive as possible and this is your one chance to be with the complete legend that is Jeff so please please drop questions in. You know one of the things when I first started reading the book is, you know I just sort of thought to myself what an odd and exciting perspective to take on that you're dealing with online speech given your previous book, but also citing the First And that there is this weird tension I pick up on very early on in the book and thinking about where responsibility lies where the legal remedies are for people who are victims and I don't just mean those types of victims that are major companies trying to seek out who an anonymous complainant was but really the the more horrific stories and those are jarring. There is such a long line of anecdotal and research studies that look at how online abuse has affected people that it is when you know the perpetrators are anonymous. Their anonymity is a shield against any kind of remedy for victims who are silenced for any number of reasons, whether it's journalists or political dissidents. And so I would love for you to just sort of walk the audience through a little bit of what some of those stories look like and how did that shape the way you thought of the book. So are you talking about both sort of the positive uses and the benefits. Yeah. Yeah. So yeah I mean I, I think that the in terms of the benefits I mean there are so many I write about a privacy blogger named descent dough who I have long read and she is a psychologist and she has a real interest in privacy particularly data breaches and health privacy. And she really gets in there she reports on hackers who we all have reason to be afraid of. And she she gets and she also reports on companies that have really recklessly exposed customer data and so she has really good reason to be anonymous so I talk about her stories and the harassment that she's faced. But, but also the various rationales. I talk about my personal experiences with anonymity that that I view, I mean, I've used online bulletin boards there's one in DC DC urban moms and dads where people about a variety of subjects about health, finance jobs where people, it's the default is anonymous you can't, you can I guess write your name in the comment but there's no everyone posts as anonymous. And it's moderated so like the anything that's really abusive gets taken down but what I find is people are incredibly candid far more candid than you would be with anyone other than maybe your closest closest friends or relatives and even in that case you might not be. I think that is Jeff, I'm curious, I know that the sort of known psychological effect of online anonymity. Yeah, well, because you can be honest about, you know, this is, this was a time that I messed up at work, or this was. This was a really tough time in my relationship, something that you would not that I think a lot of people would not definitely post publicly where it could be Googled and their name would come up but even like with a casual acquaintance you wouldn't typically say a lot of that. And that I mean there are so many other uses. There, there are some uses that are controversial I write about a website called make them scared which was started by moderators who say and I emailed with them I don't know what their identities are but they're anonymous and they say they were Washington students who were during the Me Too revelations in 2018, they realized that a lot of the, the, a lot of the coverage was from people who involved in people who were very prominent, and they wanted to give a voice to the many, the many who were students at college who had who wanted to have their voice heard and they recognized that they often wouldn't want their name associated with the allegations so they actually start started a website with the list where people submit names of assaulters and harassers and the stories and I talked about the complex interaction with anonymity that the, so the men are named and there's a lot of criticism about having the men named the moderators started requiring the post the submitters to actually at least give their email address on their social media profile so they could verify and try to adjudicate disputes. And I mean it's gotten criticized quite a bit but I think it just demonstrates the power dynamic with anonymity again setting aside sort of the judgment about whether it should should be there. And then there are some truly disturbing uses of anonymity that I so the one that I spend the most time on that slate had actually reprinted involves someone named Ryan Lynn who was sentenced to 17 and a half years in prison which is a very high sentence for a cyber harassment and stalking related crime. And he, I found out about this. What one of my very good friends is Kerry Goldberg and she runs a law firm that is dedicated to helping victims of online harms. And I went to her and I said, you know, I'm writing this book about anonymity and we disagree about a lot. I also value her. We disagree about section 230 quite a bit. Oh, we do but talking with her always makes my knowledge expands my knowledge about 230 and it challenges my views and that's good. And so I said, you know, I'm writing about anonymity. Have you had any cases of any really tough cases involving anonymity and she immediately said yeah, Ryan Lynn case and so this was a case where he was in his twenties who he had been a computer science major. He moved into a house with a few other people who were around the same age. He was only there for a month. There was a dispute particularly with one female roommate, and he was able to access her online passwords because her laptop had been unsecured. So he was able to get into all of her accounts and and find an intimate thing details about her life as well as access intimate images. And for several months after he used tour VPNs all sorts of techniques to launch this horrific campaign against her sending intimate images and stories not only to her and her coworkers and friends but to her parents her parents coworkers, calling bomb threats, signing her up for fetish sites. I mean it really and what what really sort of challenged my views in many ways about anonymity with this case so I read through the really voluminous court records for this case but I also spoke with her and she talked about how she went I mean she it wasn't really a mystery who it was to her she she she was sure who it was. But there's a difference between being sure who it was and being able to get them to stop and have them prosecuted, or at least somehow get them to stop using legal means. So she went to the local police and they really wanted to help her and one police officer was so dedicated to this that he went into computer classes, but they weren't able to and by some stroke of fortune she ended up being acquainted with an acquaintance of Kerry. This was several months later and got in touch with Kerry and Kerry represented her and Kerry knows all the folks at DOJ and the FBI computer crimes. And because this involved one of the things he did was he sent child sex abuse material, and it also involved bomb threats so the FBI and DOJ got involved and they were able to basically he based on how he used a VPN they were able to get enough evidence to bring charges he played guilty and was sentenced to 17 and a half years in prison but this very as the woman told me this very very easily could not have been a DOJ case. And so that then I spend some time looking at you know how could, how did anonymity and shape this and obviously because he was able to hide enough of his identifying information he was able to engage in this really harmful conduct. But how would changing the First Amendment protections have altered that or help that. And I don't know how much they would have because if I mean if she had sued him which I think for a variety of reasons would not have been terribly effective just a civil suit. I mean I can't imagine a court clashing with subpoena in that case even under the high standards. I guess that some countries have real name requirements which I think would be unconstitutional in the United States, but even then I think there are we as we see with Facebook there are ways to circumvent real name requirements and so I looked at you know what what else could be done and I mean I think first the experience with law enforcement tells me that you know, in with other sorts of crimes, you don't always have law enforcement say you know we really want to help you we just don't have the experience with dealing with this sort with the sort of thing and so I really hope that local and state law enforcement invest more heavily in expertise on cyber crimes because they're not going away they're only going to get worse. I also think identifying identifying threats or troubling behavior among youths early. Yeah, his file his file showed some behavioral issues from when he went back when he was in middle school. I know it's hard it's hard to sort of spot what those would turn into but I think that there are there are a lot of interventions that I think would be more effective, because I don't know how changing anonymity would necessarily I don't know how it could actually be effective because I think if someone really is dedicated, they're going to be able to circumvent barriers, but then the people who actually really legitimately rely on anonymity for a good reason they might say you know I don't break the rules so I'm not going to so I think that's where it gets really really difficult to sort of evaluate but I think it's more than just looking at okay how do we restrict being anonymous because I don't know if that will actually solve the underlying problem. I mean, you started the book I'm curious I hope you'll answer this do you think that you were in your own mind, hoping to correct or debunk your own assumptions about your view of anonymity and the value of it. I'm so curious if you felt just privately when you started writing, I'm really more leaning in this pro anonymity posture. And I realized that's a little reductive but as I hear you talk I can kind of hear you talking yourself out of and then talking yourself out of the counter positions and I'm curious just that personal writing and drafting experience. How did you did you wrestle with somehow feeling like you were torn between sides. I went back I mean I had like a million drafts I was, I mean all through the editing process I was tweaking things and I mean ultimately I think that there are some things that could be improved. And I mean I think the issue is and I mean I looked at a lot of research social science research about online anonymity and what I saw was that you know, a lot of my, I probably came into the project much more willing to write something about anonymity and this book is not sort of just a tribute to anonymity I talked about some of the harms but when you look at some of the social science research what you see is that people are and this sort of does. It's it's coherent with my experiences which is that when people operate under their real names online, they actually get more aggressive and this is kind of what the research has found and that people who operate under pseudonyms often focus much more on the argument they're having and it's not as much of a personal attack then it is sort of trying to have a substantive discussion I mean I'm in my neighborhood I'm I'm on our next door next door group, which all is under real names and I actually participated in my first thread or respond into an extra thread to something that had like hundreds of comments they were all and I was like I can't do it I can't do it but it was something that dog group is like half of what's on next door. But but people got really vicious and they always do which is why I avoid it. And I think that and Facebook is the same way I mean Facebook has a real name policy it's not terribly well enforced, but they have one and I think a lot of people go by it and it's not like Facebook is the model of civility. And then you look at I spent a chapter looking at real name policies you look at Reddit and Twitter which have really made the ability to be pseudonymous something that sort of core to their product. And what you've seen in research is that I mean this is actually something, for example, the LGBT community has really relied on to be and that's what we've seen throughout the history of our country that groups that don't have the luxury of being anonymous, are speaking under their real names rely on being anonymous. So, I mean, I, I can speak under my real name, I mean I'm a tenured professor, I can, I mean I have a lot of advantages that I don't that I can say things. But there are a lot of people who don't have that that luxury, Jillian York at EFF, she she calls all of these proposals, they're like every few months they're these proposals to say let's just require every social media company to register people under their real names, and that'll solve everything and Jillian calls that the white man's gambit. As a white man I can say, yeah that's an appropriate characterization because I think it really does demonstrate pretty effectively that certain groups are much more able to use their real name so these restrictions on anonymity will disproportionately harm groups that don't have that ability. Well, when I teach about the First Amendment and sort of just this bigger concept around what free expression means the value of being able to speak to listen to engage. One of the things that I often ask my students is what I think the sort of hardest nut or nugget within teaching the First Amendment is, which is where is the line, so to speak, the line between allowable speech, and then everything else. And that's the question that, whether it's an illegal context, a moral context, any other conversation people will have very intense opinions that there is a body of content of speech that's over here, and then there's this other stuff. You know it can hurt someone maybe it can incite it can offend it can maybe cause other harms and in the online realm, we've just seen the explosion of both confusion and nuance and are, I think our policy leaders and other leaders really not quite know, as they wrestle with the question of what to do. Is it really a First Amendment issue not often and I try to make that clear to people that what happens online may not in part illuminated by you in your first book, you know may not actually be a question of government censorship. And so the question of a line being drawn and what the government can or cannot do is not what we're considering anymore it's something else. And I'm not sure there's necessarily a question in there but just the tension and like how we've gotten to a moment where the questions themselves are so nuanced. That's something that I try to hear and walk through with students to kind of make them aware of how difficult it is that this moment is just so complex. I'm curious for some of your reactions to that. Yeah, so I mean the and this comes really more from my section 230 experience because the book came out in 2019 I started writing it in 2015 and when I was writing in 2015. I'll say there were a number of academic publishers who were like this is far too obscure even for nobody knows what section 230 is so I found an academic publisher that was thankfully willing to take a chance on this weird law. But if in 2015 you told me that five years from now there will be presidential campaign rallies, where the candidate is talking about section 230 at a rally. And the other candidate also is saying that section 230 should be repealed. I would say that you were absolutely bonkers that there's no possible way that this is happening, but it has and so over the past few years I mean, pretty much every week, at least once once a week I'm meeting with staffers on the hill or members of Congress, who all have really I push back on this narrative that you know Congress doesn't understand technology at all. I think they do.  The problem is that we're so far apart on consensus as to what the problem is. And so, I mean they, they'll always asked me, well what's your solution what's your proposed solution. And I say okay to what problem. And when I talk with sort of individual interest groups they are very clear on what the problem is it's either harmful content, or it's you know platforms are censoring us. And there is, they're so far apart, because when I talk with the members and the staffers it's the same thing I'd say half the people I speak with on the hill are really legitimately concerned about harmful content. That is First Amendment protected so with or without 230 it's not something that we're going to regulate away. But some of it is defamation and things that can be can be addressed with 230 reform, but then the other half, say you know, why are we giving this immunity to an industry that so unfairly discriminates against people with our political viewpoints. And I try to explain well if you got rid of 230 they'd probably take down more content, but that's not really the issue the question is, why, why would we give them what they view as a subsidy is you know why why do we provide this immunity that so few other industries have anything even close to it. When they're just basically saying we're going to take down the sort of content and you try to explain well there's certain policies and standards and they try to apply them evenly but I mean they, it's an issue that needs to be addressed in terms of you know, why do we get some agreement, because I mean I think that if you want to even look at changing 230, then you first have to figure out what your goal here. And I mean, even if you do change 230, you still have First Amendment protections that the First Amendment does protect platforms from being forced to keep content up. I don't think that platform that social media platforms are like the phone company. We have some people who disagree with me on that but I, but I also think that you know, very frequently I get people on the other side who say, Well, we've got to deal with misinformation so we have to amend section 230. Well, what do you mean by misinformation because a lot of that is constitutionally protected. So you can't deal with it. It's a problem, but you're not going to fix it by eliminating or making changes to 230. But, but I mean my, ultimately we're so far apart from the vision of what the internet should look like that I don't, I think it's such such disagreement that I don't know what changes would satisfy at least even a majority right now. One of the biggest worries I have when it comes to the harms online, and this is to your question you may ask staffers and members of what's, you know, define the problem. One of the problems I find is really the kinds of, you know, extractive data practices we see by platforms themselves that are gathering data about us. And there has been what seems to be a rather encouraging movement within Congress and in Washington to think about privacy related protections of federal roadmap of some sort. And I'm curious as it relates to your new book now on anonymity. You know, just as we think of those potentials to pass federal privacy legislation. How might that impact the ability for one to feel empowered through anonymity. Do you think that it would. So I do, I think private. So what I write about in the book for the last part of it is that, you know, the First Amendment, despite sort of what you see in a lot of the current debate the First Amendment applies to state action. So it says that in the anonymity context it says that, you know, the Congress can't pass a law that requires real names on social media because that's government action. It applies to subpoenas, even though they're sought by private parties because they're using the power of the judiciary. But the First Amendment does not restrict the purely private actions, the purely private decisions of a private social media company. There was a time when this was not controversial. I'll say there are some people who will disagree with me on that. So the problem is that so much of our identifying information is not going to be addressed and protected by the First Amendment as we have more as I mean, I think could best be described by Shoshana Zuboff as surveillance capitalism that we have these private companies and I'm not just talking about the big tech companies. I'm frankly more concerned about the data brokers that sell your geolocation information and can which even without your name, I mean, I live in a place where nobody else works at the Naval Academy. So if someone gets a geolocation set where someone every day is traveling from my neighborhood to the Naval Academy, that's identified me and if there's any online commentary or anything that is associated with that, then that's identified. You have Cashmere Hills Excellent reporting on Queerview AI. And I think we do need privacy laws because you can't rely on the First Amendment to address that. And I'm worried about the direction in which our privacy laws have gone, because we've had basically non action for like two decades in Congress. I mean, they're like, okay, we'll regulate video tape rentals in the 1980s because of Robert Orks records being accessed and we'll have health privacy and financial institution privacy rules, but nothing generally. So the states have started to do it. And I don't think the states have done a very good job. And I not to, I don't think it's their fault, but I think both procedurally it's not terribly effective, I think the substance of it, basically giving people access and access, I think that's good. I think it's a good step. And I say in the book that I think it's a good step, but I don't think it's going to solve everything. In part because I'm talking about data brokers like I don't know who has all of my data and it's putting a big burden on individuals to figure that out. I mean, what I'd like to see, in addition to those choices is to have restrictions on companies that say, okay, there are certain things that you cannot do with personal data. And I mean, you've kind of seen that in the local government context involving facial recognition where some local governments have just said, you know, you're not law enforcement is not able to use facial recognition so they can't use Clearview. And I think that we need to have a much broader discussion at the federal level. Now that's what I'd like to see. I'm also realistic. I've been in DC for far too long. And I think that despite, you know, all of the upset about big tech, I think that this would be even far harder to pass than a section 230 bill because this will affect every type of company. And when you put all the companies together, that's a lot of lobbyists. And I worry just, I mean, my expectations might have just been battered from being in DC for too long, but I just think, you know, I don't see anything really meaningful when it affects such a wide range of companies. I really hope I'm wrong, because I think we need it. And I think we need to protect anonymity as well as other that privacy values. But I'm not terribly optimistic about it. Well, limits on data brokers and what they can do, or frankly, the way that they are currently selling our information to any other party, including intelligence agencies is one that often worries me. And when it comes to this sort of what's happening under the surface, I think most lay people have no idea what's really happening with their information. You know, of course you do or I do because we're in these issues every day, but for the most part, I think much of what happens to our data and, you know, very personal information, people either don't know or they say, Well, if that helps me have a better online experience, great, you know, then I can get my personalized ads. And so there is one, I think quite a bit of public education to do. And then of course the work of how do we properly reform and think of the policy solutions that take this on in a more meaningful way beyond just, as you've said, you know, choice for consumers but more restrictions or at least guardrails around what those other third parties can and can't do. I've started getting questions in the chat. Thank you all. I want to, we have a few now, Jeff, and we have about 12 minutes and I don't want to go over so I guess I'll sort of start with some of the bundled questions around some international considerations here. One, you know, we of course know that so much of what's happening online in the social media context is a lot of anonymous political speech coming from what one anonymous question asker has called foreign robots wearing track suits speaking in a Russian accent. And that prompts for me the question then of, you know, how do we think about what to do with that anonymous political speech. And is there maybe another international example that we can learn from in thinking about how do we protect legitimate interests for anonymity while minimizing the harm that it may bring. Yeah, so I mean I think that that raises a bunch of different questions. So I mean one thing in terms of the foreign misinformation. There's what one thing that and I try to sort of grapple with this in the book is what's what about the ability to receive anonymous speech, and also to anonymously receive speech which are two separate issues and we don't have as much good case law on that we have some court opinions about there being a right to receive speech from the 1960s. Joseph Tai, a law professor has, he's probably written the most sort of on point articles about the right to receive foreign speech which I would highly recommend and I don't think there are any easy answers because we've not been sort of the misinformation context and the Russian bots we've not necessarily dealt with that with that particular issue I don't know how to solve it easily because I mean again Facebook has always had a real name policy and they were not immune from the 2016 election from having some of a lot of foreign interference and I mean I think part of it is that we too often conflate impersonation with anonymity and those are two different issues so I mean almost every platform the big platforms at least they all prohibit impersonation, and if someone's impersonating someone else they're kicked off, but that's different than being anonymous. And so, I don't know, I mean, there are technological solutions for at least some of it, not all of it but I mean and the platforms are getting better on that. And other countries. It's hard I mean that so Germany actually had so in a lot of Europe, the subpoena standards are lower. It's easier to subpoena someone, but Germany has actually they did it's sort of still in the court system but they've made the books real name policy as a privacy violation. And so that that's one area where and I talked in the book about how in the United States we really view anonymity as a free speech issue and we have I mean it makes sense because we have a very first amendment and the courts have interpreted anonymity through the lens of the first amendment, but in Europe and also in Canada, they have their anonymity protections come also from their privacy values, the Canadian courts when they look at anonymity they also consider PAPIDA, which is their privacy law so most of many other countries I would not look to for protecting anonymity, because many other countries either have real name registration requirements or real name posting registration requirements. China has a requirement that you have to register under your real name with the government, but you can post under a pseudonym which to me is not all that much different than just having to post under a pseudonym, the Chinese government knows who your name is what your name is so yeah I mean I think that there's not I mean I think in a lot of ways the United States has some some of the most robust protections but again because it's limited to the first amendment and the first amendment is limited to state action that's where we have some boundaries. One of my favorite just in sort of a follow up here to this question is one of my favorite thinkers on this issue is really David Kay's work on anonymity in the global context and I'm sure you are familiar with his report from 2015. I would say are rather stringent view of what guardrails should look like and really what the value of both encryption and anonymity are in the global context which I'll just flag and and say that it's he does a tremendous he and I have frankly disagreed on quite a bit when it comes to the very clear need he feels for anonymity, even when it may allow for the flourishing of harms and we've we've disagreed on this before but it's a great report to at least for those in the audience to dip your into that international question. We have a few more questions Jeff and only a couple of minutes so I want to sort of pick one more from the audience and then I'll close us out with a couple of final things. Do you think that the political backlash to quote unquote censorship, whether that is credible or not is changing the calculus for how people view anonymous speech. You know, I, I think that the political backlash to misinformation it so the sort of the other side of the debate, I think that I think the on the side that say there's too much censorship by platforms. I don't think they're they're not focused as much on anonymity it's more the folks are saying you know we have to look at the harms and there there's this misperception that frankly I had when I started writing the book that anonymity equals harms, letting people speak without their names to catch means that there's some way to avoid responsibility and so it's going to be a bad thing. And I think that's really where more of the threat is coming from. Well, I want to give you a chance to have a couple of closing comments and I'm curious just to kick us off. You know what comes next for you, you've written this book I encourage everyone to buy it. It is a blast to read actually. And how are you thinking about your own work now in this context. Yeah, so this book actually has led into the book I'm currently writing. No, you're such an overachiever. So, I decided to take on a topic that doesn't have any controversy, which is explaining why the First Amendment protects a lot of false speech. Everyone's going to agree with me for during during the time when everyone is worried about misinformation. I'm taking the really popular stance that the First Amendment does and should continue to protect a lot of false speech. And kind of the first half of the book traces the various contexts in which US courts under both the First Amendment as well as common law and statutes have protected the ability and why courts have said, we should protect false speech and then the second half looks at, you know, how do you deal with misinformation within this framework without compromising that framework.  And why is that. And so, yeah, I think there are other ways to more effectively deal with these harms then just saying we're going to censor more speech. Well, that is very exciting. Certainly I, one of my favorite things about all of your work is your laying out what perhaps misconceptions are about issues and then the very elegant debunking of why that because of history and our legal jurisprudence and other elements is actually somewhat flawed and I see that in the First Amendment context all the time, you know, so many people will say, we're more divided than ever. And yet, we've been quite divided throughout history on a number of issues and certainly when it comes to speech and expression and so I really love and always value the way that you take that on carefully, whether it's in the digital context or, you know, other speech context so I'm thrilled to hear about this new book. I want to make a final plug as we wrap up for the United States of anonymous, Jeff Koss if you are fantastic. You're such a star it's wonderful to always be with you. People can buy the book where Jeff. They can buy it on Amazon, it's available on Amazon it's on Kendall there's an audible version Cornell presses website has copies, my personal favorite Powell's has copies so yeah it's pretty widely available on the various websites. Wonderful. Well, thank you all for tuning in. I will be closing us out the United States of anonymous how the First Amendment shaped online speech is, I would say a must read. It is not overwhelming it's exciting and I encourage everyone to get a copy so thank you, Jeff. Thank you, Andres for your wonderful introduction. Thank you to the rest of the future tense team for making today possible. Thanks.


Hi everyone, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com coming at you with 2020, Top's Inception Baseball, one box break number 18, random team break number 18. Only only sold 29 spots right here. Thanks everybody here cause there's no cardinals in this set for some particular reason. Let's roll it, let's randomize it, three and a four, seven times for each list. And at the end of the break, we'll re-randomize your names, we're gonna do the break randomizer first. At the end of the break, we're gonna randomize our names from top two spots, or we're gonna get spots in Transcendent Baseball Hall of Fame Edition, but let's do the break itself first. Seven, new dice roll for the other list too, but this one is seven, and seven. Anyone actually here for this break? I know this filled up a little while ago. John down to Rolando. All right, seven times for that. Oh, I guess there is base, yeah. Phillies down to Nationals. All right, John with the, I'm not gonna read all this, that's too late for me to read all this. Todd, you got my Dodgers. There's everybody right here. No one cares about this part. They just wanna see who gets the Transcendent spots. It's the only reason this break exists, just a little mini break. All right, Steve is here.  You have the Indians. There's Todd with my Dodgers right there. No one's trading, right? Trade window closed. All right, TWC, trade window closed. Adam's here just for moral support though. All right, so there's the final printout right there here in 2020 Topps Inception here. Second year, Fernanda to Tis Junior to 99. Do we get two autographs here? Look at, hang on a second. There's Otani, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. There's a Mitch Keller to 245 and a bonus auto. So Mitch Keller to 245 will go to the Pirates, Dan Maddox and the bonus auto is Gold, Ink, Autograph, 19 out of 25, Eson Diaz for Steve and the Marlins. So yeah, the Marlins too. There you go, nice. Feel like he's a up and coming player for the Marlins. There you go. There you have it, that's it now. Let's see who's gonna win those transcendent spots. Chance at two in this one box break. So let's grab everybody's name again, put them back into a blank list. New die, new die. Three times, top two after three. One, two, and three. After three times, and thanks everyone for getting into this, appreciate it. There will be more mini break opportunities to get into transcendent. So keep an eye out on JaspysCaseRays.com. Congrats to John and Matthew. Congrats to the two of you. Really appreciate everybody getting in. I appreciate, well even if you didn't win, I appreciate your orders too. Thank you very much everyone. Have a great night. We'll see you tomorrow at JaspysCaseRays.com.


Everybody forced here rip in 2022 contenders outtake football hobby 20 bucks full case number nine random divisions Find the results on your screen anytime at latein sports cards calm. Let's go ahead and get started Of all these the best Red Sox legends Anyone that a place with Red Sox at any point is automatically the goat. So all right. Good luck I'm sorry about that tray. You did hit a Matt Crowe book though. You did hit a book auto I don't know the biggest name but hitting a book auto is Not easy to do about dawn the bounty on her Freeze hall 900 points around to everybody at the ends 75 Matt Corral rookie ticket auto blue rookie ticket RPS blue NFC South 75 Orange Jacobs out of 50 for the AFC West and optic illusion Tom Brady NFC South Sweet Kenneth Walker the third on the base 250 a Connor Hayward rookie auto for the Steelers Donnie come on and Hutchinson on the rookie ticket auto RPS for the NFC North and Gold season ticket Joe burrow AFC North eight or six of ten rather six of ten AFC North Gold season ticket Joe Burrow Good thing can't do it Joe Burrow again to 75 X's and O's AFC North. Yeah, there's one in the first box Vaughn Tyler Smith To 99 rookie ticket auto teal Cowboys Kenneth Walker the third to 149 on the rookie ticket RPS red NFC West Kirk Cousins blue season ticket out of 99 NFC North and red white and blue mojo MVP contenders Justin Herbert AFC West Herbert number 11 of 13 Maybe maybe not. Maybe I saw something wrong As your point to answer everybody at the ends I was wrong. I was wrong. Maybe I was right, but I was wrong. You wish Jones, Jr. Rookie ticket RPS NFC North But I was right Daniel Jones number to 175 season ticket NFC East and NFC West and Gold Nick Bosa X's and O's Number nine out of ten Nick Bosa. All right two golds in the first four boxes. That's good stuff as a Pacheco Demption rookie ticket RPS auto variation and neon marble James Cook Neon marble to four Bill's AFC East neon marble James Cook big redemption the four on that one John meets you the third rookie ticket RPS silver AFC South got a Devontae Adams silver and an up-and-coming Brock Purdy Yep, the Sun's doing anything good in that game yet, or is it still just it's a route if Bailey zappy rookie We already did our basketball breaks tonight Nick. I always write a schedule. I think there's some in personals There's a schedule if you want to check it out got rookie ticket auto Kyron Williams blue to 175 NFC West There's been a rider a ridder rookie of the year auto for the Falcons to 75 Well, I mean it doesn't matter if they gave up or not because they don't have CP3. I don't have eight They don't have two of their most for their four important players. That's it By the depth silver Travis Kelsey chiefs And Derek Henry MVP contenders Titans silver emcee sound What's going on Randy zappy again got a Jack Jones rookie ticket silver auto Patriots AFC East The 75 rookie patch auto NFC East Brian Robinson jr AFC North red Jamar chase the 175 and a legit nice Lamar Jackson short print 100 points ramp to everybody at the end To 149 rookie ticket auto red or rookie ticket RPS red David Bell AFC North Silver McCaffrey NFC West and lottery ticket AFC North Jamar Chase Celtics fought fought that game in a tough one Taylor and Pierce Got an algea rookie ticket auto silver for the NFC South Nice card here AFC West induction auto John Elway Number two of 15 AFC West Elway silver Mahomes and The silver Peyton Manning AFC South Peyton Manning X's and O's insert crack nice. Oh He's candy Tyler Smith rookie ticket auto NFC East Bailey zappy at a 99 on the rookie ticket auto teal or RPS I should say AFC East It's a nice one here cracked ice rookie ticket Trayvon Walker Randy and Vaughn close your eyes 11 of 22 Trayvon Walker both 11 and 22 44 is visible by both of those Wow eBay one of one Wow Very nice and a party X's and O's number 1099 at the NFC West. I have way through my guys Look like we're gonna have to push those Prison Premier League choice breaks it tomorrow We're still 13 and 16 So no sell-out promo it looks like on those breaks Walker Kingsley Anak bar right to 175 rookie ticket auto blue NFC's north Demption Kenny Pickett rookie ticket RPS auto silver Kenny Pickett AFC North of course big congrats on now and we've got an orange rookie Romeo Dobbs NFC north to 50 and a breeze hall axis and O's jets pink to 75 AFC East Can I wonder what it's like being a fan of a basketball team that's in the playoffs? He has a likely to 99 rookie ticket auto teal for the AFC north. Do you go? Jalen Hertz perennial contenders autograph NFC East the birds Got birds 23 at 35 Noice Hertz Lou Gino Smith number 2 99 NFC West season ticket and a winning ticket Justin Herbert number to 75 for the AFC West Maybe next year maybe we'll just see what they do in free agency. I think that's the big tell All right, so three two stars officially there dang it cracking Skymore to 60 rookie of the year contender auto chiefs AFC West It's got a more pure strong junior on the rookie ticket RPS silver AFC East red, white and blue mojo rookie Damian Pierce. That's awesome It's a color match Damian Pierce 13 of 13 AFC South That's noise and round numbers green pulsar Garrett Wilson and trail on Berks to 30 AFC East AFC South World die 1 2 3 top 4 5 6 bottom This is a 6 going bottom here AFC South on this one on the bounty hunter There you are It's all I think about yeah, I'm not saying even Kyle does the same thing we're talking about getting bounties on drip and stuff It's a 50 rookie ticket out of David O'jabbo AFC North Desmond Ritter rookie ticket RPS NFC South silver belt for the AFC North and Olavé and London here 1 2 3 top 4 5 6 bottom It's gonna go 3 top this time. Let's go Saints AFC or and oh good. It's a nice cell both ways I forgot we're doing division there one I don't see south That's NFC South You won that card in the dice roll You would have won either way Nothing has a victory big dub NFC South Congrats on the card NFC East rookie ticket out of Cole Turner Malik Willis to 15 black scope rookie of the year contender auto nice AFC South And Hutchinson color match blue rookie to 99 Good stuff there. Oh, that's a jersey number. That's great 97 and 99 Jersey number hutch on the blue nice one NFC North It's awesome man and winning ticket Joe Burrow Jersey number match and color match all in one Just got to get a vooch back on the magic James and Williams No, happy Kyle would be I mean I'd be super happy people Kyle would be like over the moon, dude 900 points ramp everybody at the ends Isaiah Spiller AFC West rookie ticket RPS silver sauce red to 175 AFC East And Lamar Jackson to 50 X's and O's AFC North Oh, yeah, there's a dings on his leg there. We're gonna box Robert to the AFC spots red sauce Gotta get that on your burrito every time Red sauce. No, not ketchup. Don't you put ketchup on your burrito? Got a pick ins other 900 points card here Right, it's everybody Brian Robinson jr. Number to 60 Ricky the year contenders auto NFC East Debo Samuel number 299 The NFC West and winning ticket Josh Allen is 75 aFC East like the Durant trade and a vacuum isn't bad But considering the Sun situation, I don't know what they were trying to go for I'm sorry frog, you know, hopefully they get it out to you at some point Lawrence Olava with another 900 points card we're in that everybody at the end Jalen Tolbert NFC East Ricky ticket RPS silver orange Montgomery NFC North 250 and a say go on Barkley splitting image NFC East this one has a ding on it too next to the K NFC is getting a box and rapper now Desmond Ritter with an arm of a cat to a rookie ticket auto teal to 99 NFC South Anand Hutchinson green pulsar rookie ticket RPS to 30 NFC North 16 out of 30 Malik Willis Ricky orange to 50 AFC South and an Aaron Rodgers X's and O's silver digs Alec Pierce Jeremy Ruckert on the rookie ticket auto for the AFC East AFC's variation saw scarner rookie ticket RPS silver Silver gear Wilson now rookie ticket AFC East and Hassan Reddick NFC East X's and O's six points cards Six 900 points cards random to everybody here. Let's say nine six and three again top six are getting the Top six are getting points One two three four five six seven eight and nine Ryan s Tom B Josh T Rick E Chuck D and Scott a Let's go ahead and do a recap or recap the Magd cards Yeah, AFC North Redemption Kenny pick it on the rookie ticket RPS silver a Rookie ticket RPS auto variation neon marble the AFC East there gold Joe burrow Okay, remember we have everything Donnie was prepared. Don't worry guys. Yeah, he was autos of John each of the third Vilas Jones Jr. Tyler Smith Kenneth Walker the third Aidan Hutchinson Connor Hayward Matt Corral John Elway Tyler Algear David Bell Brian Robinson Jr. Jack Jones Desmond Ritter Kyron Williams sauce Gardner cherry ruckert Aidan Hutchinson green pulsar with an honor that we can't see a Yet a Jalen Tolbert Brian Robinson Jr. Isaiah Spiller Malik Willis on the Blackscoe Brookie the year contenders auto Cold Turner Desmond Ritter David O'Jobbo Pierre Strong Jr. Sky Moore Jalen Hurts for the birds I say a likely Kingsley on a bar a Bailey zappy and Tyler Smith That will do it for the break up next personal


Video Friday with Art Resin. Hey everyone, it's Video Friday. So as you can imagine, we resin a ton here at the studio. So anything that helps with a quick and easy cleanup is something that we love. Alcohol is something that we keep on hand to help with spills and to help with cleanup. Normally you buy it like this, but check this out. In a spray bottle, just pick up a spray bottle from your hardware store or dollar store, pour your alcohol in, clearly marked. And then check this out. There we go, after you pour, spray it. Couldn't be easier, wipe it down with some paper towel. And you can repeat this again if you want just to make sure there's no resin residue left on here. Important tip though, make sure that you wear gloves when you're working with alcohol and resin. Alcohol breaks down epoxy resin, but that enables your skin to absorb it. So you wanna make sure you've got gloves to protect your skin. That's it, video Friday with Art Resin. Ah, thank God that's over.


How's it going everybody? DottoDoy here with another Dragon Ball Fighters video, and this time around since the World Tour Finals for DBFC are so close to kicking off here in only a couple of days, taking place on January 26th and 27th, I figured what better time than now to talk about something that you're going to be seeing a lot of for sure during the tournament. And that thing that I'm referring to is the snapback meta. So let's start off by talking about what the snapback mechanic is. When you land a dragon rush on your opponent, you can hold the assist button correlating with a character on your opponent's team, and it will force their current character out and bring that other character back in. Pretty simple mechanic, right? The main benefit to doing this is that if your opponent has a character with blue health that he's currently having outside of the game in order to heal up, you can bring that character right back into the action, nullifying all of the blue health that they had. Now of course the tradeoff for doing this offensively is that you no longer get to set the opponent up for either a sliding knockdown or a hard knockdown that you could normally get after performing a successful dragon rush. So if that's the case, then why is it that snapping out an opponent's character is one of the strongest offensive options currently available to you in the game? To put it simply, this is just the best way currently in the game to make sure your opponent has as little control over the game as possible. And let me break down some of the reasons why that is. When your opponent's other character comes in, they can't control the time that they come out, the distance they go out, or even the location they come out of. It's always the same place, making it super easy to set it up, so the only option they already have out of the gate is to block, right away. If they try to click any other button, they will get hit unless the person on offense makes a mistake. And once they start blocking, they just have to keep blocking until their opponent lets up. They cannot guard cancel in the air, nor can they reflect, so they're having the little defensive options you have in fighters stripped away from them. And that's a lot of pressure to get for either one bar or no bar at all if your character is capable of pulling this off meterlessly. And the characters that are best with snapbacks have ways to loop their snapbacks effortlessly for the cost of little meter or none at that. As long as they can keep finding ways to get their enemy at an almost grounded state and land that dragon rush, they can keep up this crazy pressure for as long as their opponent struggles to block them. Now, part of the beauty of snapping out opponents is that technically any character in the game can do this. But when I think of snapping out opponents and doing it as efficiently and effectively as possible, two characters come to mind. Those two characters being Android 18 and Piccolo. We all already know that Android 18 is definitely a powerhouse when it comes to offensive pressure. But when you combine that with the fact that as long as she lands a single hit, she can call in the help of Android 17 and then immediately go into a dragon rush and snap the opponent back out. And then she can just keep looping this and looping this and make it a different mix up every time, always with the same result. This video I have in the background is definitely the ideal footage of Android 18 looping her opponents.  And while the opponent is covered in all the smoke and debris, Piccolo can try to mix them up from there all the way to the ground. And if Piccolo lands another hit, he can continue to do the exact same thing. Of course, this wouldn't be that good if the opponent could just take the hit and get out of it. But even if the opponent does opt to do that, Piccolo can still loop the combo from there. This is the one that you're going to want to pay extra attention to, because as of right now, both Hook and God and Goichi, two players that for sure are both going to be big names at the World Tour finals. Both of them are rocking Piccolo teams. With Goichi rocking Piccolo, Goku and Bardock, and I think Hook and God is rocking something similar to that, but maybe instead of Super Saiyan Goku, it's Vegeta. Don't quote me on that, I'm not 100% sure. And that pretty much concludes everything I had to say about the snapback. Obviously, it's a very simple mechanic that has worked like this ever since Dragon Ball FighterZ was first ever playable, and I saw that that actually confused a lot of people. And for good reason too, because usually with fighting games, you know, it takes a new patch to really get things shaken up. And even then, the meta is only usually shaken up in terms of characters and tier lists and things like that.  But when it comes to Dragon Ball FighterZ and snapbacks, this is just the case of people not really knowing how strong it truly was until other people started really messing with it. It's almost like Go-Tanks in a way. Go-Tanks was always super strong. It just took a lot of time for people to really start studying them. And the last thing that I wanted to talk about in this video is how do you fix this snapback problem in FighterZ? Because a lot of people have left me comments saying, I'm not really a huge fan of the snapback meta, I'm not too big of a fan of how the loops just keep going on and on. I kind of miss the old stuff. And then they asked me, so do you think this is going to be addressed in a patch? And the short answer to that is, yes, I definitely think this is going to be something they're going to look at after the World Tour Finals. Like I said, I think snapbacks are going to play a huge role during the final most intense moments in the tournament. So I think obviously they're going to be looking at it at least a little. So a couple of ways they could possibly fix this that came to my mind was either implement a hard cap on snapbacks saying, you know, if they can't even use the assist or something, then they can't be snapped out into that character.  I kind of agree with that. So I would rather see a cool down system implemented. If you snap out a character that you can't snap them back out for let's say like 10 or 15 seconds or some amount of time, it doesn't have to be anything too rigid. But yeah, guys, let me know your thoughts on the snapback mechanic, whether or not you think it's going to play a huge role at Dragon Ball FighterZ World Tour Finals. And what you just think of the snapback meta in and of itself. Leave me all those thoughts down below in the comments and while you're down there, if you like this video and channel, make sure to hit the like button and subscribe. It really helps the channel out in more ways than you can imagine. And it also makes sure you don't miss out on any videos coming up about Dragon Ball FighterZ Season 2. I'm going to be covering it all in-depth on this channel, every trailer, every release, every character we get. Ah man, it's going to be a ton of fun. Hopefully you guys choose to stick around. I got some videos up on your screen right now that you can check out if you're interested in any of them. I'm Dr. Doia. Thank you again for watching the video. I'll see you in the next one.


Now, as gunshots echo across the windswept snow-covered reaches of the wild northwest, Quakerpuff wheat and Quakerpuff rice, the breakfast cereal shot from guns, present the challenge of the Yukon. It's Yukon King, swiftness and strongest lead dog of the northwest, placing the trail for Sergeant Preston of the northwest mounted police in his relentless pursuit of lawbreakers. And King, one country. Gold, gold discovered in the Yukon, a stampede to the Klondike in the wild race for riches. Back to the days of the gold rush, with Quakerpuff wheat and Quakerpuff rice bringing you the adventures of Sergeant Preston and his wonder dog Yukon King as they meet the challenge of the Yukon. Cowboy! Yes, sir. Little wonder, many a top-action Hollywood movie star goes for a breakfast of Quakerpuff rice or Quakerpuff wheat. These king-size, ready-to-serve premium grains of rice or wheat pack a man-size taste wallop. They're good for you. They're shot from guns. Yes, actually exploded up to eight times normal size to make them crisp and tender. Tomorrow shore, enjoy this breakfast treat. Eat Quakerpuff rice or Quakerpuff wheat. It was late summer in the Yukon when Sergeant Preston and King returned to Dawson City after a trip to Forty Mile and reported to Inspector Maynard at mounted police headquarters. King's health, the constable and I finished the case out there in short order, sir. The men who robbed the express office are behind bars. I knew you wouldn't have come back unless they were, Sergeant. And I'm glad you're back. We have a case right here that needs attention. Oh, what is it, sir? Murder. Murder, eh? Has the killer been caught? No. You remember that old sourdough, Jeff Beckett? Yes, I do, sir. He has a cabin on the south-highs of town. Well, old Jeff was the victim. He was found dead in his cabin this morning. I see. Mike and Joe Dolan, who live just beyond Jeff's place... You mean the Dolan brothers who own the General Store? That's right, Sergeant. They stopped by to see if old Jeff wanted to give them an order to bring out when they went home. It seems that they were in the habit of doing that. Yes, sir, I know. Well, they found the door partly open and Jeff lying on the floor inside. He had been knifed over the heart. The knife was gone. They came right in and reported it this morning. I sent Constable Canby out there with the coroner right away. They find any clues? Canby said... What seemed to be footprints made by a woman's shoe outside the door? Well, that trail ought to be easy to follow. No, no, wait till I finish, Sergeant. The old man had his gun in his hand and it hadn't been fired. The coroner decided that the only way it could have happened was by someone who was an expert at throwing a knife. Someone who threw it faster than the old man could draw his gun. I see, sir. Just after they arrived at the cabin, there was a heavy downpour of rain. Oh. Not only that, but you know how fast news travels here, Sergeant. A curious crowd followed them out there and tramped all around the place. There goes any chance of having King follow a trail. That's what I mean. The footprints were obliterated. Canby is working on the case. He's making inquiries in Round Town now. Well, perhaps he'll turn up something, sir. Do you mind if King and I go to Jeff's cabin anyhow? Just have a look around. No, go right ahead, Sergeant. I want you to work in this case with Canby until you find the murderer. Well, do all we can, sir. I'll come back here after we visit the cabin. Have a long, King. After leaving headquarters, Sergeant Preston with King trotting at his side rode out to old Jeff Beckett's cabin. As he dismounted, he looked around carefully. It's too bad we didn't get here while those footprints were undisturbed, eh, fellow? Let's take a look inside. Entering the cabin, Sergeant Preston and King looked around, but found nothing significant. King sniffed the air whining. I know King has more than one sight in here. It's a confusion. Well, come on, fellow. We might as well go back to headquarters. Come on. Steady, Blacky. Steady now. Get up there! A short time after Sergeant Preston left headquarters, Constable Frank Canby triumphantly entered the inspector's office with a slim young man who was wearing handcuffs. Hi, Dennis. Go on in. Well, what's this? I've cracked the murder case, Inspector. Here's the killer. Yes, sir. This is Dennis Ames, who works in the express office. I know, but what do you mean? I didn't do it, I tell you. Facts are against you, Dennis. You might as well own up to the fact that you killed Jeff Beckett yesterday and made off with his gold. But I keep telling you. I didn't do it. I swear I didn't. What are the facts against him? He rode into town last night, sir, went to the cafe. He invited everybody to have a treat on him with him putting the bill. Yet he makes only a small salary at the express office. But I told you, went to the carnival just north of town yesterday and won that money. I found out that Jeff Beckett went to the carnival too. I say he was showing a lot of gold around. He left early. It has nothing to do with me. He must have followed him and jumped him at his cabin. No, no, I didn't. That's all you have to go on. I don't see you anywhere. Just a minute, Inspector, please. Last night, when he was in sort of a gay mood, Dennis Ames was showing a knife around at the cafe. I found a knife along the trail. Honest, you have to believe me. I wouldn't be showing it around if I'd used it to kill anyone, would I? You might. In the condition you were in last night. Just a minute. What about the footprints that were reported, Constable Canary? You and the coroner, as well as the two Dolan Center. I know, sir. They looked like the footprints of a woman. But Dennis here is from Texas. And always wears those high heel boots he has on now. There are small sizes, you can see, sir. We could have mistaken his footprints for a woman's. What about the knife, you spoke of? I have it here. I went by his cabin to find it there on the table. Dennis, I hate to do this, but the facts are against you. We'll have to hold you as a suspect. No. No, I didn't do it. I didn't. Sorry, Dennis.   You can't blame me. I didn't kill him. On the way back to headquarters, Sergeant Preston decided to stop off at the general's store.  Wait here, King. Wait for it. Well, Sergeant Preston, how are you, sir? Fine, Mike. I understand you and Joe are the ones who found Bucket's body this morning. That's right. Poor old Jeff was quite a shark, I can tell you. The coroner said he'd been dead for quite some time, since late yesterday. Last night, maybe. If you confine the woman who made them footprints, you'll have the killers' eye. Too bad it rained this morning and so many people went out there. Oh, here comes Joe. He's been at the cafe. Good afternoon, Sergeant. How are you, Joe? Mike and I were just discussing the murder. Maybe it'll surprise you to know that Constable Canby caught the killer just a short time ago. What's that you say? Canby found the murderer? Who is she, do you know? Tisn't a she, Sergeant. He just took in Dennis Ames, that young Texan fella, as the killer. Dennis Ames. Now, hold on a minute, Joe. You know as well as I do those were the prints of a woman's shoe we saw. Dennis wears small western boots with those high heels. He was throwing around a lot of gold at the cafe last night, they say. And he was showing a knife, which he says he found on the way in from the corner. Wish no. In spite of it all, I say the prints were too small for any man, boots or not. I've sold shoes too long not to notice. I believe Dennis when he says he found that knife. He's a nice lad. Somehow I would never have thought the Dennis Ames could harm anyone. The facts are the facts, Sergeant. He's in a bad spot one way or the other. There must be some way to show that Dennis didn't do it. I wish I could help the lad. The only way to help Dennis Ames, Mike, is to find the killer. You still think it was a woman, eh? That I do. He says he won his gold at the carnival, and I believe him. I was at the cafe last night when he said that. But I left before he showed the knife around, like to say he did. And who's to say he didn't find that too? The killer might have thrown it away or dropped it. That is possible. He said he found it coming from the carnival. That's right. The carnival? I wonder. Sure, then I heard several say that they saw old Jeff at that carnival yesterday. With plenty of gold to spend. I see. I think I'll write out to that carnival right now and look around. How about taking me along with you, sir? All right, come on, Mike. Later that afternoon, Sergeant Preston, with King at his side, walked slowly along the midway of the carnival. Eh, sure, there are plenty of women with this carnival, Sergeant. And most any one of them could have seen old Jeff with all the gold he was carrying. Eh, he was a great one for making a show but he had to spend it. Difficult to know just where to start looking for the one of my... No, wait a minute, Mike. Let's start here. Quiet, King. Have you ever shown in the Yukon? Yes. For only ten cents, you can come right inside and see Carlotta, the gorgeous and regal gypsy queen. Yes, folks. Don't miss seeing this beautiful gypsy girl actually pin the man to the wall with sharp gleaming knives thrown from 12 feet away. Step right up. The show starts in a minute. Remember the price already taken. I have an announcement to make. I'll listen to me, folks. Just a minute. I know that man. King and I saved him from wolves to what is a goner's sulker. That's not the truth now. What do you know about that? Folks, I have an announcement to make. The beautiful Carlotta won't be able to perform in her usual way this afternoon. But, but she will appear on the platform inside with her display of knives and will give an instructive and entertaining talk on her experiences in Europe and America. Now, each and every person who pays the admission price of ten cents will receive a picture. Yes, I sent a picture of this marvelous gypsy queen. Get your tickets right now. Thank you. All right. Step right up, folks. Get your tickets here. Only ten cents. Step right up. Come on, Mike, we'll go inside. Come along, King. Sergeant Preston and Mike moved to the front of the crowd near the small platform on which Carlotta stood waiting. King stood beside Preston. The great dog stared at the spangled woman his nose and the air sniffing. Then a low growl rose in his throat. Quiet, fellow. The understanding between Preston and King was great and the husky's low growl had meaning for the mountain. He noticed that Carlotta had a right arm and a sling. The crowd quieted as she finally spoke. But this is most unfortunate that I have hurt my arm. Yesterday morning I had the bad fall so I cannot throw the knives. But I will show them to you. I removed the cloth covering from this velvet-covered board and sewed. There they are. The beautiful gleaming knives held there in the loop. Look, Mike, the bottom loop is empty. One of those knives is missing. There will be someone's story. Mike, I have a feeling Carlotta's the one we're looking for. But for the same sake, we've got to prove it somehow. We'll continue our story in just a moment. Fellas and girls, look it. Man, oh man, here's the tallest man I've ever seen. I am the tallest man. The tallest man in the world. Boy, you must be. Say, how's it feel to be the tallest man in the world? No different. Gosh, I'll bet you eat a lot. Three good meals a day. Gee, what's your favorite meal? Breakfast, naturally. Breakfast, huh? Say, ever eat Quakerpuff rice or Quakerpuff wheat? Do I. Every day. Oh, you like rice or wheat shot from guns? Nothing better. Boy, you must be a champion Quakerpuff rice and wheat eater. I am by the case. What do you like best about them? They're big. About eight times normal size, like me. Bet you use lots of milk and cream. Got my own cow. Anything else you like about Quakerpuff rice and Quakerpuff wheat? That nut-like flavor. And they're good for you. That's right. A fellow like you needs plenty of food energy. And rice or wheat shot from guns furnishes extra food values of restored natural grain amounts of vitamin B1, niacin, and iron. Say, mind if I ask you one more question? Go right ahead. Well, tell me, how's the weather up there? Oh, rather crisp and fresh. Like Quakerpuff rice and Quakerpuff wheat.  I guess you know Quakerpuff rice and Quakerpuff wheat are never sold in bags or bulk. To get the original crisp, fresh, wheat or rice shot from guns, you always buy the big red and blue packages with the smiling Quakerman on the front. That's your guarantee that you're getting the one and only Quakerpuff rice and Quakerpuff wheat shot from guns. Try them for breakfast tomorrow. Now to continue our story.  In spite of the sling and her alibi that she'd been hurt the morning before. Preston, with Mike and King, left the tent and went to the place where the horses were waiting. Well, right back into town, Mike, I have a few questions I'd like to ask Dennis Anne. Sure, but why don't we look around a bit more, Sergeant? Since that gypsy girl has had her arm in her sling since just the morning, it stands to reason she's... Mike, I noticed something in that connection. And what was that? The barker outside didn't seem to know Carlotta was injured until Anton came out and made the announcement. Holy smoke, that's right. The girl hadn't been putting on a rack since yesterday morning. That barker would have known it. Say now, why didn't you ask him? Because carnival people stick together, he'd close up like a clam. One other thing, did you notice when King growled in there? I did that, I wondered. I feel sure King recognized Carlotta's scent as one of those he found at Jeff's cabin. I couldn't go only by that, of course. I get what you mean.  King and I are both working in the dark in a way, Mike, but we hope for the rest. Let's get going. Returning from the carnival grounds, Mike stopped at his store, and Sergeant Preston and King went on to police headquarters. As the molly and his dog entered, Constable Frank Canby rose from a chair to greet them. Uh, Inspector told me you were working on the Beckett murder case, Sergeant. That's right.  I've caught the murder already.  There's a difference, you know. Well, if you mean we haven't enough to make a case against him, I feel sure Ames will break down and confess before very long. Why should he? Frankly, I don't believe he did it. You don't. That's right. I don't. Well, Sergeant, I respect your judgment a lot. Mike Dolan has convinced those footprints at Beckett's place for definitely those of a woman. You went with me to the carnival grounds a while ago and there's a woman out there. I know. I went there early this morning and talked to the gypsy knife to her. She has an airtight alibi. She never left the carnival. What's more, her arm is injured and has been since yesterday morning, as you've probably found out. Yes, I saw her arm in a sling. A man who works with her, a fellow named Anton, swears to alibi. And they both claim someone stole one of her knives, too. Well, Ames was at the carnival yesterday afternoon. And he had a knife, just like the one that was lost. I see. I'd like to have a few words with your prisoner, Frank. Want to come along? Yes, I would, Sergeant. You think you can prove someone else murdered Jeff Beckett? I'd like to see how you go about it. It's all right with me. Let's go. Come along, Geek. He's in the end cell. I don't think he'll be there very long. Well, I hope you're right, Sergeant. Oh, well, that's a cell right there. Ames, Sergeant Preston wants to talk to you. Hello, Sergeant. Look, I didn't... Take it easy, Dennis. Will you answer a few questions for me? You'll have the right to refuse if you want to. Sure, I'll answer what I can. Is that your dog, King? I've heard about it. I never saw him before. Yes, that's King. I guess I always left him outside when I went into the express office. As the man momentarily observed King, the great dog sat at Preston's side, panting. The mount he noticed immediately, the King showed absolutely no interest in the young man standing just the other side of the bars. And this fact gave added significance to his theory that Dennis hadn't been at the Beckett cabin. Preston turned again to Dennis. You were at the carnival rather late yesterday, weren't you, Dennis? Yes, it so was. And you saw Jeff Beckett out there? I saw Jeff early in the afternoon. He was going around with a big poke of gold having a time for himself. Spending it on folks, telling them like he always does it, there was plenty more where that come from. You see, Sergeant, he admits he saw Jeff with a lot of gold and heard him boasting about having more. Now, look here, if you're all trying to track him in... No, Dennis, I didn't come here to do that. I want to help you. You do? Yes. So help me, Sergeant. I wasn't anywhere near to Jeff Beckett's place. You can help me find out who did go there, Dennis. Did you notice whether that gypsy girl did her night throwing act yesterday afternoon? Well, yeah. I went in and watched her throw those knives. You wouldn't admit that to the inspector and me a while ago, Sergeant? Instead of helping yourself... Wait a minute, Frank. Didn't you tell me a moment ago you learned the girl had her arm in a sling since yesterday morning? So she couldn't throw a knife either in her act or at Jeff Beckett? Yes, that's right, but... Oh, your macro, Sergeant, what are you driving at? I think she faked that injury, Frank, and that Anton lied to help her. I believe she spotted Beckett and followed him home and at the footprints are hers. How could that be proved? Gosh, if only you could prove it. Maybe I can. Mike and Joe Dolan would like to begin on the finish of this, get them, and meet me at the carnival tonight when it's closing. I think King and I have this figured out pretty well and we'll try to get the proof we need. That night, in the exhibit tent at the carnival, the gypsy girl Carlotta stood watching as the last group of people slowly went out. Then she called out loudly. Gus! Gus Anton!   I am sick of looking at them. Carry the knife board into my sleeping tent. All right. I've got it. Go ahead, lead the way. Do not let any of the knives drop out, Gus. I'm watching. Now, look, Carlotta. No use to get sore when I mention it, but that sling is hurting business. The people that come here want to see you throw the knives, like the posters out front say you do. This is something that cannot be helped, Gus. I knew the Mounties would send someone here this morning the first thing. And they did, as you know. Yes, and we convinced them. They arrested someone else. But I don't like the law coming around. I'm glad we'll be leaving if you can't soon. Oh, Gus, why do you always worry about things like you do? They have often been questioned by the law. That is what to expect when one is with a carnival. Maybe, but this is different. And what's more, you know it is. So? Did you not just say that they have caught someone and put him in the jail? He had mindless night, remember? And they blame him. Why should we be bothered more? I don't like it anyway. There's no chance. Put the knife board over there by my cart. All right. Check place for a woman. Tomorrow we'll be leaving on the boat to the states. There we can make more money with our act. We haven't taken in much today with you wearing that sling. Perhaps we have profit by it more than you think, no? Yes, maybe we did at that. Gus, I've been thinking. Perhaps we... Sorry I startled you. Sergeant Preston. Yes, I have a little business with your friend Carlotta. Gus, you know this mountain? Yes, yes, we have met before Carlotta. Tell him to leave. He has no right to come. Anton, that alibi you gave for Carlotta this morning. It wasn't true, was it? Yes, yes, it was, Sergeant. She hurt her arm yesterday. If there's been that sling, helpless, she was here all afternoon yesterday. You know, of course, that a young chap's been taken into custody as a murder suspect. We have here the news, Sergeant. It is too bad, no? No. He won't be in jail long. You mean you would try to pin that murder on me, huh? Go away, please. We have not the time for talking nonsense. I could not throw the knife as you can see. The law is bothersome. But we in the carnival are used to it. I am not afraid of you. Carlotta, please. It is no way to talk. I am tired. I shall rest on my cut. Anton, I'm convinced your so-called Gypsy Queen has gold hidden in this tent. It belongs to old Jeff Beckett, and I'm going to search for it. Thus, he has no right. Do not let him. I cannot stop him, Monty Carlotta. Thus, Anton, there's more respect for the law than you have, Carlotta. I'll start the search for that trunk there, right now. Just do something. Stop him, I say. Please, Carlotta, be quiet. He represents the law. Sergeant, stay away from that trunk. I warn you. Your warning doesn't mean much to me. Sergeant Preston is stooped to open the trunk and seemingly took his eyes off Carlotta for the moment. In the shadows just outside the tent opening, the great dog King stood watching. He saw Carlotta quickly slide her arm from the sling and reach behind her to the board that held the sharp gleaming knives.  King saw the man Anton dart forward, but Carlotta, blazing with fury, shoved Anton backward, causing him to fall. He struck the knife board and the knives fell loose, one of them falling under him on the ground. At the same time, Carlotta raised her hand for the throw at Preston. King sprang forward with a groan. Like a streaking shadow, the great dog leaped, grabbing Carlotta's appraised arm, causing her to fall to the ground. Help! Stop it, help! Okay, I'll put it on. All right, boy. He grabbed my injured arm and beat him. Don't put on an act. Are you all right, Sergeant? Yes, I'm all right. Glad it be. We were picking him from outside, and we thought, sure, she was going to get you with that knife. I was ready, and so was King. Hey, what's the matter with him? Anton fell on one of the loose and knives. I'll see if he's hurt. Watch her, King. Sergeant, one of the knives, it fell under me. The point went in my back. Maybe I'm done for. Let me look at you, Anton. Oh. Tell me, Gus, that alibi. It doesn't matter now. Maybe I'm dying. She is to blame for it, and for the other killing, too. Gus, do not talk! Please! Keep quiet, you. I have to, Carlotta. He saved my life once. You almost killed him just now. How did she work at Gus? She left here yesterday afternoon. Gone for a couple of hours. I took the barter's place so he didn't know. She faked the arm injury. I sort of like Carlotta, so I covered for her. Great day! And she's the one who killed Jeff Beckett after all. No! You cannot prove that. You cannot. The old man's gold is in that chunk. His initials J.B. are on the bags of gold. That settles it. Gus, you double-cross that. I am glad you are dying. I am a woman. I shall not end you. Gus isn't dying at all, and I formed a superficial. What? The doctor in town can fix him up, and he'll live to testify against you, Carlotta. You, subtle. If once more I had the chance, I would... That dog! He was the one who spoils everything. Too bad you didn't know the dog was waiting just outside. I thought Gypsy Queens could tell what was to happen. Like the one across the way who told me fortune. That one's only a Carmen Gypsy, no doubt. Not a queen like a great Carlotta.  You've thrown your last knife, Carlotta. I'm arresting you in the name of the queen for the murder of Jeff Beckett. Why, George, Sergeant, you did it. You proved Dennis Ames innocent. Better yet, Frank, with King's assistance, I proved Carlotta guilty. King knew that she'd been in that cabin. Now let's get back to headquarters. As far as I'm concerned, this case is closed. In just a moment, Sergeant Preston will give you a preview of Monday's adventure. To this program, remember, fellas and girls, you're in for such a treat Monday, you'll hardly believe your ears. Quaker Puffed Wheat and Quaker Puffed Rice have a surprise for you. Every single one of you listeners is getting in on something big, an offer that's out of this world. Tell your friends to listen. That's Monday. Listen, Monday, when Sergeant Preston and Yukon King meet the challenge of the Yukon, in the case, the doctor disappears. When Phil Carver's little boy became seriously ill after McComb couldn't be located, King and I took on the job of tracking down the doctor. We didn't know that he was being held prisoner by a pair of dangerous outlaws, and at all of us, including Phil's family, would soon find ourselves at the outlaws' mercy. Be sure to hear this exciting adventure Monday. These radio dramas, a feature of the challenge of the Yukon Incorporated, are created and produced by George W. Trendall, directed by Fred Flower Day, supervised by Charles D. Livingston. The part of Sergeant Preston is played by Paul Sutton. They are brought to you every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at the same time by Quaker Puffed Wheaton and Quaker Puffed Rice. The breakfast cereals shot from guns. For a delicious hot breakfast, eat Quaker Oats. The giant of the cereals is Quaker Oats. Delicious, nutritious, makes you feel ambitious. The giant of the cereals is Quaker Oats. Say, boys and girls, do you want to be a star someday in sports and activities? Then start on good Quaker Oats breakfast tomorrow because nourishing oatmeal gives you more growth and endurance than any other whole grain cereal. Remember, Quaker and Mother's Oats are the same. This is J. Michael wishing you good bye, good luck and good health from Quaker Puffed Wheaton and Quaker Oats.