The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.16 Dr Disrespect BAN Mystery & Interviews, Twitter Hack is Making The Government Nervous, More

Starting point is 00:00:00 on your dime in the middle of a pandemic. They're selling beans. Are you kidding me? Seriously. Sup, you beautiful bastards. Hope you have a fantastic Thursday. Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco Show. Buckle up. Hit that like button. Otherwise, I will punch you in the throat. And let's just jump into it. And the first thing we're going to talk about today is something that Kim Kardashian West, Elon Musk, and even Barack Obama have in common. They all had sex with Ray J on camera. That's a joke, it's a stupid joke. Elon didn't film when it was his turn.

Starting point is 00:00:30 But no, the real thing that they had in common is that all of their accounts were compromised yesterday on Twitter. And all the accounts affected tweeting out a variation essentially of this message, reading, "'I am giving back to my community due to COVID-19. "'All Bitcoin sent to my address below "'will be sent back double.

Starting point is 00:00:43 "'If you send $1,000, I will send back 2,000. Only doing this for the next 30 minutes, enjoy." Which I will say, in general, that doesn't seem believable. Like there's nothing in my head that goes, Yeah, Barack Obama would do this. But when you have the likes of Elon Musk, who is just so incredibly random on Twitter, for a second you're like, maybe?

Starting point is 00:00:59 But here's the thing, no matter the person that's tweeting it out, you should never trust one of these messages. Even me, for example, when yesterday I tweeted, "'It's simple. You has one cookie, you give me one cookies, "'I gives you two cookies, you can trust me.'" But you can't, I was just gonna steal your cookies by taking your cookies and then turning them

Starting point is 00:01:14 into several smaller cookies, and then giving you two of those cookies, which maybe is equal to half a regular cookie back to you. It's all part of my new program, Cookies for Cookies. It shows they're always more fun when I don't get sleep. But back on topic, reportedly enough people were tricked that the hackers reportedly made away with $120,000. And just to kind of paint you a picture

Starting point is 00:01:30 for how potentially far reaching this hack was, yesterday we saw Twitter so worried and concerned that for a time they actually disabled everyone with verified accounts from directly tweeting. Which, side note, is yet another reason why if you are in the United States or Canada, you should text me at 813-213-4423. In addition to getting extra special updates, exclusives,

Starting point is 00:01:49 I have the ability to message everyone or one person at a time. It's also what I use as a backup to communicate, whether it be I'm locked out of something or YouTube videos are being suppressed. But with this story, Twitter did this to prevent hackers from continuing to post tweets. But that move also opened up a whole different can of worms.

Starting point is 00:02:03 For example, the National Weather Service in Lincoln, Illinois was tweeting about severe thunderstorms at that time. But due to the lockout, they had to resort to just retweeting their bot account to keep people updated. But you know, one of the big questions here is how did this actually happen? I mean, sure, they may have guessed Elon Musk's password,

Starting point is 00:02:17 420-6969-GANG-GANG, with the G's capital, of course, but how did they get everybody? Well, it appears the situation has exposed some just absolutely massive security flaws at Twitter. And that's because according to Motherboard, hackers convinced a Twitter employee to help them hijack accounts. And understand, I'm not talking about some Twitter employee

Starting point is 00:02:34 being tricked into giving out the passwords to those accounts. No, Motherboard alleges that according to leaked screenshots and two anonymous sources who took over those accounts, that employee was bribed into handing over, at least indirectly, an internal tool that allowed them to hack into the accounts nearly simultaneously.

Starting point is 00:02:48 With one of the sources saying, "'We used a rep that literally done all the work for us.'" According to a Twitter spokesperson who spoke to Motherboard, "'The company is investigating whether that employee "'hijacked the accounts themselves "'or if they gave hackers access to the tool.'" With Twitter support also saying

Starting point is 00:03:00 in a statement yesterday evening, "'We detected what we believed to be "'a coordinated social engineering attack "'by people who successfully targeted some of our employees with access to internal systems and tools. Okay, but then you have the question of, well, how are these hackers actually granted access

Starting point is 00:03:12 to the account? And there, according to Alan Woodward, a cybersecurity expert at the University of Surrey, looks like the way this was done was by using the tools inside Twitter to reset contact details and then trigger password reset. Right, so essentially using this powerful Twitter tool, they changed emails attached to the accounts, and then they just made up their own password and logged into password resets. Right, so essentially using this powerful Twitter tool, they changed emails attached to the accounts,

Starting point is 00:03:26 and then they just made up their own password and logged into the account themselves. Right, so notably, an incredibly hard attack to try to counter defend yourself from if you're just the account holder. Now with this coming out, you had some people saying, "'Well, couldn't you just throw out the internal tool "'that allows employees to reset passwords?'

Starting point is 00:03:38 But as Woodward noted here, if you did that, people might end up just getting locked out of their accounts forever, which is why he's now suggesting having Twitter require more than one employee sign off on a password reset. Saying, if you allow such tools to exist and it's difficult to see how you'd not, then the only way to stop them being misused by an individual is to have a process in place to make sure you need two people internally to make it function.

Starting point is 00:03:56 Right, and this whole situation isn't about people just being scammed into sending crypto. It also brings up a general privacy question of, are we going to see something else? Right, with these accounts being compromised, are we about to see something private being released? But I mean, whoever did this had access to the accounts of the former president and Elon Musk, right? And then you think of President Trump, right? It doesn't appear that his account was hacked in this scam, but what if it had been?

Starting point is 00:04:15 Side note, with what Donald Trump tweets, I just wanna see that man's draft folder. Or I mean, possibly it's just empty. Also, as I was filming today, we got massive updates. We got the confirmation that the FBI has opened an investigation into this hack, as well was filming today, we got massive updates. We got the confirmation that the FBI has opened an investigation into this hack, as well as at the direction of Governor Andrew Cuomo,

Starting point is 00:04:29 the New York State Department of Financial Services has launched its own investigation, with Cuomo saying that the hack is, quote, "'deeply troubling and raises concerns "'about the cybersecurity of our communications systems,' which are critical as we approach the upcoming presidential election." But main point, that is where we are right now.

Starting point is 00:04:43 We may learn more in the future. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey saying yesterday, "'Tough day for us at Twitter. "'We all feel terrible this happened. "'We're diagnosing and we'll share everything we can "'when we have a more complete understanding "'of exactly what happened.'" But ultimately, that is where we are with this story.

Starting point is 00:04:56 And actually, the question I wanna pass off to you here, not only what are your thoughts about this hack, but also what are your thoughts about privacy in general? You know, it feels like every day there are stories about people getting hacked, privacy just completely out the window. So I guess my question to you is as you operate through life on these social media platforms or whatever you're using, do you currently operate from a standpoint of the things that you want to be private will remain private?

Starting point is 00:05:15 Do you just kind of have that hope but maybe an expectation that there's a possibility? Or are you maybe of the mindset of whatever I do privately, I'm gonna operate as if it would one day be public. Especially because with this most recent incident, if the most powerful people in the world aren't safe, why would you be safe? Yeah, let me know, I'd love to hear from you. And then let's talk about the situation around Dr. Disrespect, AKA Guy Bean.

Starting point is 00:05:37 We've had a lot of requests to cover this story, but there just hasn't been a ton to actually report on. Even that, in a sense, is a big part of this story. So for those that don't know, Guy, aka DrDisRespect, is one of the biggest streamers in the world. On Twitch, he has over four million followers. When he streams, he has a ton of concurrence.

Starting point is 00:05:53 Back in March, he signed a multi-year deal with Twitch to keep him streaming on the platform. But then, just a few weeks ago, on June 26th, we saw reports that DrDisRespect had been permanently banned on Twitch. And as far as why, we really don't know. Twitch, for their part, really didn't provide any detail, but rather responded with an incredibly vague statement

Starting point is 00:06:10 saying, As is our process, we take appropriate action when we have evidence that a streamer has acted in violation of our community guidelines or terms of service. These apply to all streamers regardless of status or prominence in the community. And then, not really any other information came out. Some claiming that they knew why,

Starting point is 00:06:25 but they weren't gonna talk about it because it was a sensitive matter. No confirmations of anything. The next day though, we end up seeing Dr. Disrespect seeming to confirm the rumors, tweeting, "'Champions Club' Twitch has not notified me "'on the specific reason behind their decision. "'Firm handshakes to all the support

Starting point is 00:06:39 "'during this difficult time. Dr. Disrespect.'" And after that, he didn't say or post anything for the next three weeks, and pretty much everyone's just been in the dark You know during those three weeks we did see a lot of speculation We've seen a number of theories But we really didn't hear anything else until today because it appears that guy has gone on a media spree Speaking with a number of outlets ranging from PC gamer all the way to the Washington Post

Starting point is 00:06:59 Here's the thing in those interviews while he gave insight into what's been going on with him He really didn't talk about why he was banned. Though, that appears to be very much for legal reasons with the Post reporting that when pressed on the subject, he frequently followed advice from his legal counsel to remain silent. And also, to use the PC Gamer interview as an example, they published the full transcript of the conversation.

Starting point is 00:07:17 And at one time there, we even see Guy's publicist interrupting him to redirect a question. But in this interview, Guy maintains that he still doesn't know why he was banned, telling the Post, Honestly, we just don't know. It was a total shock. Imagine showing up to work and the doors are closed

Starting point is 00:07:29 and you can't get inside. You're going, what's going on? And you've been told you've been fired. You haven't been told the reason why. We just weren't given an answer. It was the worst feeling. Also adding, I've been dealing with a lot of stress and anxiety.

Starting point is 00:07:39 You know, my wife and I both, this is our livelihood. We worked really hard to get to this point. Let's just say I've felt all the emotions that you could possibly feel. Also in these interviews, an interesting note that was touched on is you had Guy addressing some of the speculation and the theories around the ban and his last stream specifically.

Starting point is 00:07:52 Right, the interview is noting that there have been a lot of theories specifically around that final stream where at the end he kind of gets serious. It appears that he's breaking character. Life's weird right now. I- Oh my gosh! Oh my gosh!

Starting point is 00:08:02 Oh, it did, it did, it did! We'll get through this, okay? And, uh- Hey, Christopher. Dun, dun, dun! You better not taunt me! Oh, there you go. Fuck!

Starting point is 00:08:17 Right, you had a lot of people kind of understandably assuming that's when he found out that he was banned, but in these interviews, you actually have guys saying that it had nothing to do with the ban, that he was just kind of talking about the state of the world. Going on to say that he actually first learned about the ban when he was banned, but in these interviews you actually have guys saying that it had nothing to do with the ban, that he was just kind of talking about the state of the world. Going on to say that he actually first learned about the ban when he was watching a friend stream

Starting point is 00:08:29 and noticed that some of his creator features were missing. Then claiming that he sent an email to Twitch, which responded and told him that he was banned, but never explained the reason why. In some of these interviews they kind of try and touch on possible reasons that he may have been banned. For example, you have PC Gamer noting that he actually recently had discussions about the coronavirus

Starting point is 00:08:43 and conspiracy theories linking it to 5G, as well as the fact that in his last stream he talked about David Icke, who's a conspiracy theorist who was recently kicked off both YouTube and Twitter for spreading conspiracies and antisemitic claims. But when they asked Guy if that ever resulted in Twitch warning him or saying anything, he said no. And when they followed up by asking

Starting point is 00:08:58 if he thought it was the reason for his ban, he said, I don't think so, in fact, I. But then his publicist interrupted, telling him we're getting really close to dangerous territory here. Also in these interviews had PC Gamer noting that Twitch has recently been banning a lot of people who have been accused of sexual assault and other toxic behavior.

Starting point is 00:09:12 So they asked Guy whether he knew if his ban might have been a result of similar allegations, he responded, listen, I'm not interested in engaging crazy speculation. I've seen all the theories, I've seen all the possible conspiracies, and it's just like, I'm just not interested in engaging that type of stuff.

Starting point is 00:09:25 I have a great community of loyal fans and I'm totally focused on getting back and delivering great entertaining content and that's where the focus is. Another point and question in these interviews was what is happening next? And while Guy was pretty tight lipped on this matter as well, he did offer some insights,

Starting point is 00:09:37 telling PC Gamer that his relationship with Twitch was 100% over, saying, "'Obviously for legal counsel, I have to be careful here, "'but I can say, however, "'that I will not be returning to Twitch. So, I mean, that's it. And in fact, regarding Twitch specifically, he added that he is considering taking legal action

Starting point is 00:09:49 against the platform. As far as if Guy's planning to come back on any specific platform, he responded, Oh no, we're just focused on the Doc's return. We haven't made any decisions on platforms. We're not interested in looking for an exclusive or any of that stuff. And in a follow-up email after that interview,

Starting point is 00:10:01 he reportedly said that he's considering streaming independently on his website, in addition to other big options like YouTube and Facebook. Now, following these interviews, you had a lot of people kind of happy to get more information, though still frustrated that there wasn't more to learn. Though I think most people there blame Twitch

Starting point is 00:10:15 for not being more forthcoming. But also, we did see criticism of these interviews. For example, you had Slasher, aka Rod Breslau, who reports in the space, tweeting, "'Bunch of publications ran Dr. Disrespect interviews as straight up CAA backed puff pieces with absolutely no new information, nonsense answers, and as should be obvious,

Starting point is 00:10:32 still zero explanation on why he's banned. A collective fail from the media here. All right, so essentially kind of this mindset that these outlets were happy to take in the free views to provide us what was essentially just promo for Guy, which on that note, the timing of everything does appear to be very coordinated. The interview is coming out this morning, then on the DrDisRespect Twitter account, we saw a video.

Starting point is 00:10:50 It's a video that doesn't really show anything. It kind of is like a hype video. And I mean, no doubt there is a lot of attention in just like the first 37 minutes. It was viewed 1.1 million times just on Twitter. Though a lot of the responses to that video is, well, thank you for clearing everything up. Though you do have people pointing to his bio

Starting point is 00:11:05 that now newly showcases his YouTube URL. So now there's this question of, will he be popping up anytime soon? But yeah, ultimately that's where we are with this story. And I will say it is, I've really never seen anything like this. Like Twitch banning Guy Beam, it's one of the biggest bans from a mainstream platform.

Starting point is 00:11:21 But he wasn't just a creator, he was one of the creators with a multi-million dollar deal with them. And we don't know the reason. Twitch is saying, well, rules are rules. You have the guy that's banned saying, I don't know. And somehow the reason hasn't leaked yet. I'm genuinely surprised.

Starting point is 00:11:34 But for now, we kind of just have to wait to watch what happens next, because we're stuck in this limbo. But with that said, the question I want to pass off to you, especially if you're someone that's a part of the streaming community, whether you're someone that actually makes the content or you're just watching it. What are your thoughts around this? And then let's talk about the coronavirus. You heard of this thing?

Starting point is 00:11:50 You know with it we're seeing things like in the state of Florida there have been over 315,000 cases. It's responsible for more than 4,600 deaths. In fact, Florida broke their previous record now with over 150 coronavirus deaths in a single day. But actually the place and the person I want to focus on for right now is Georgia and Governor Brian Kemp. So, you know, right now as coronavirus cases are rising in the state, doctors are advising that the best way to prevent the spread is by wearing a mask. And so we saw Brian Kemp yesterday issuing an executive

Starting point is 00:12:15 order that prohibits local governments from enforcing mask mandates with him saying in a statement. I heard the jury's still out on science. Okay, so obviously that is not him, but the part about the executive order is true. While the order says that Georgia residents are strongly encouraged to wear face coverings, it actually suspends any state, county,

Starting point is 00:12:32 or municipal law requiring masks or face coverings. And this is something that's meant to have an immediate effect, because according to the Associated Press, around 15 local governments already had adopted these kinds of mandates. And while Kemp has said that they had no power in enforcing these kinds of rules,

Starting point is 00:12:44 the executive order makes it official, with Kemp's communication director saying on Twitter, "'Previous executive orders and now this order "'state no local action can be more "'or less restrictive than ours. "'We have explained that local mask mandates "'are unenforceable.'" Closing with, the governor continues

Starting point is 00:12:57 to strongly encourage Georgians to wear masks in public. And as far as why Kemp is against the rules, he told the Atlantic Constitution Journal that he believes it to be a bridge too far, adding, "'There's some people that just do not want to wear a mask. "'I'm sensitive to that from a political environment "'of having people buy into that "'and creating other issues out there.'"

Starting point is 00:13:13 But also, once again, masks are not a political tool to buy into. Studies show that they are truly effective in preventing the spread of the virus. This should not be a political issue, and when we look to Georgia, Georgia's cases are on the rise. The state has seen a total of 127,834 cases

Starting point is 00:13:26 and 3,091 deaths. Just yesterday, they reported another 3,871 new cases, which is their second highest daily case count to date, which is also why it's not a huge surprise that this move was met with backlash. With the mayor of Savannah, which previously had a mask order writing, "'It is officially official,'

Starting point is 00:13:41 Governor Kemp does not give a damn about us. Every man and woman for himself slash herself. Ignore the science and survive the best you can. In Savannah, we will continue to keep the faith and follow the science. Masks will continue to be available. You also have the mayor of Dunwoody, Georgia saying in a Twitter thread,

Starting point is 00:13:56 you know who is caught in the battle between the Georgia governor and local governments? Grocery store clerks, retail workers, and restaurant servers. In other words, just the folks who aren't likely to have health insurance and paid time off. Our small businesses asked us to mandate masks. Their employees are worried about being exposed. Without our mandate, some customers are pushing back

Starting point is 00:14:13 and arguing about wearing a mask. Local governments want to make sure small businesses thrive. And also adding that hospitals in the area are struggling with patient increases and community spread and closing. Incredibly sad for my community in Georgia tonight. Sorry that the governor has chosen to politicize your health. But also of note here, Kemp is not the only governor

Starting point is 00:14:30 sort of standing by not mandating masks. You also have people like Oklahoma governor Kevin Stitt, who actually yesterday announced that he tested positive for the coronavirus. But when he was asked whether he regretted not wearing masks more often, he said, quote, "'I don't really second guess anything.'" And regarding a potential mandate, he added,

Starting point is 00:14:45 "'I'm just hesitant to mandate something "'that's problematic to enforce.'" But also, I do wanna note, this also comes as other governors, specifically some Republican governors, are implementing mask mandates in their states. This, including Alabama Governor Kay Ivey, who announced that as of today,

Starting point is 00:14:58 the state has a mandatory mask requirement, which reportedly expires when the stay-at-home order ends, which is currently at the end of the month, with Ivey asking everyone to do their part in this, wear a mask, and also adding yesterday in a press conference. We are almost to the point where our hospital ICU is overwhelmed. Earlier this week, 87% of ICU beds statewide were occupied. Folks, the numbers just do not lie. Right, you have cases and deaths on the rise in Alabama.

Starting point is 00:15:28 We're all seeing the same thing in Texas, where earlier this month, Governor Greg Abbott actually ordered that most Texans wear masks in public, this applying to anyone in a county with more than 20 confirmed COVID-19 cases. Yeah, that's where we are with this story. Also, side note, actually somewhat connected, I uploaded a bonus video over on the

Starting point is 00:15:43 youtube.com slash DeFranco Does channel. I upload there at now a rate of eight times a year. It involves to a certain degree the mask situation in Huntington Beach, so maybe check that out. But with this story, I do wanna pass the question off to you. What are your thoughts on this? What do you think of Kemp's move here? Do you think it does make sense

Starting point is 00:15:57 or do you think it is a weird political play? While the number of cases are going up, why encourage people to wear masks but then actively go after the local governments that are trying to control it? I personally think, and it's not just based off of this decision, that Kemp is a complete moron, but this is the Philip DeFranco Show.

Starting point is 00:16:11 Whether you agree or disagree, I do wanna hear from you. And that is actually where I'm going to end today's show. As always, for the three of you still here, thanks for being a part of the show and maybe hitting that like button. I appreciate ya. Also, if you're new here, you want more of these daily dives into the news.

Starting point is 00:16:22 Hit that subscribe button, definitely tap that bell to turn on notifications. Also, if you're looking for more to watch more of these daily dives into the news, hit that subscribe button, definitely tap that bell to turn on notifications. Also, if you're looking for more to watch, I actually uploaded a kind of lighthearted bonus video, or maybe you just missed yesterday's show, you wanna catch up, you can click or tap right there to watch that. But with that said, of course, as always,

Starting point is 00:16:34 my name's Philip DeFranco, you've just been filled in, I love yo faces, and I'll see you next time. I hope you liked this video. Subscribe if you like it.

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 7.16 Dr Disrespect BAN Mystery & Interviews, Twitter Hack is Making The Government Nervous, More

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.