LGBT Tech, Social Media @ the Border –– Talking Tech w/ Chris Wood, Michelle De Mooy & Rita Cant
The US government wants to know the identifiers for your social media accounts –including your Twitter handle, the name you use on your Facebook account, and perhaps even your OkCupid profile – if you're a visa waiver holder at the border. Michelle & Rita break down the clear privacy and free speech implications.<br><br>ALSO – Forty percent of US homeless youth identify as LGBT, and for them technology is often essential to survival, critical to overcoming the unique obstacles they face. Chris Wood, co-founder and Executive Director of the LGBT Technology Partnership & Institute, goes into detail about what he's doing to help.<br><br>Additional info about Chris Wood & the LGBT Technology Partnership and Institute:<br>lgbttech.org<br>@LGBTtech<br><br>More info about the DHS proposal re: social media @ the border: <br>http://bit.ly/SayNoSMCustoms<br>http://bit.ly/DHSsmCmt<br><br>Attribution: sounds used from Psykophobia, Taira Komori, BenKoning, Zabuhailo, bloomypetal, guitarguy1985, bmusic92, and offthesky of freesound.org.
Top Keywords
- lgbt 0.022
- rita 0.009
- community 0.009
- lgbt community 0.007
- media 0.007
- customs 0.007
- youth 0.007
- social media 0.006
- homeless 0.006
- homeless youth 0.006
- well 0.006
- facebook 0.005
Transcript
Welcome to Tech Talk. Bye. CT.
Tea.
Welcome to CDT's Tech Talk, where we dish on tech and Internet policy while also explaining what these policies mean to our daily lives. I'm Brian Wasilowski, and it's time to talk tech. After a little summer break, we've got a great welcome back to work episode for you. We'll be talking about a controversial proposal from the US Customs and Border Protection that would ask visitors to The US to voluntarily share information about their social media accounts. And we'll hear about the LGBT technology partnership and institute from its co founder the nonprofit is doing tremendous work to empower and protect at risk members of the LGBT community through tech Most travelers have had to fill out a customs form before, whether returning to The US from abroad or upon arrival to a foreign country. In all of my travels, I must say that The US customs form is unquestionably one of the most detailed and time intensive to fill out. Well, if the Department of Homeland Security gets its way, non US citizens visiting from certain countries will soon have even more questions to answer. And the proposed new questions are raising some serious privacy and free expression concerns. So what are these new questions? Well, all the US government wants to know is the identifiers for your social media accounts. Easy. This includes your Twitter handle, the name on your Facebook account, and perhaps your OkCupid profile. Joining me to talk about the proposal today are Michelle Des Moines and Rita Kent, who both would unquestionably have incredibly popular OkCupid profiles. Although neither one of you is on that, I assume. No shame in it, but, no need to be on it because Michelle is married. Be upset if I were. That's right. And Rita, well, we're just gonna leave that one where it is. Welcome, Michelle and Rita. Thank you, Brian. So happy to be here. Cupid. Yay. So tell me about this proposal. What is it and what are they really trying to accomplish with it?
So I can tell you, Brian, that, the proposal in our from our perspective is really ineffective, invasive, and prohibitively expensive. It's basically the the DHS, the Customs and Border Control, asking people who are a part of this ESTA program, which is a waiver to to get, into the country a little more easily. And there's an application form. You fill it out three days before you come into the country. And and the application is very detailed. It asks a lot of information including health status, but it doesn't ask this. And this is new. And we're very concerned, as as everybody knows, social media accounts are a gateway into an enormous amount of personal information, including your political beliefs, your religious beliefs, you know, things like reading lists and media interests. And then probably one of the most important points is that it's a window into your family and friends. So this isn't just about one person, it's about a whole connection, a whole community of people who are on your social media accounts. And and just to put a fine point on it, you know, social media is highly idiosyncratic. It's highly contextual. I'm sure if we all looked at our friends and things we've liked, you know, we might be surprised. There are things on there. There are also sometimes third party postings that people don't even know about. Sure. So, you know, that that's sort of the basic overview of why we're concerned.
Okay. So this is just for people traveling from certain countries. I mean, is it just there's certain countries that are eligible for this sort of program? Is that that the deal with it? It's not all visitors to The US. Is that right? Yeah. That's right. The Visa Waiver Program covers mostly European countries as well as Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand,
and a few others. But we're our major concern with that is that this isn't just going to be contained to those countries. Obviously, customs is concerned about visitors from all countries and we can only see this this proposal spreading.
So if I were to, you know, offer up up upon arrival all of my social media accounts, you know, whether it be Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, you know, just by giving them that information, is that actually something that they couldn't figure out already? Or is it, you know, what's what's kind of the issue with this? Because I mean, most of my accounts are
public but with Mhmm. Privacy settings, like, very different privacy settings, for example, on my Facebook compared to Twitter. Well, that's a good point actually. You know, what is public by default depends on the social media platform. And, you know, DHS has said they're only collecting publicly available information. But there are a lot of components missing from this proposal like for example, even the basics. What constitutes a social media Does that include TripAdvisor? Does that include, you know, lots of of of platforms? OkCupid, you know, what type of activity and connections actually raise concern? You know, is it some connections that you have? What what exactly do they mean when they say they're looking for activity and connections? They don't define this. There's also importantly no clear way to correct or otherwise protest a decision to deny an ESTA application. So if you are somehow flagged, you not only don't necessarily know why but you also have no way to correct that. So you will be in a database as identified
as you know a part of some kind of program that flags you but you don't have any way to change that or correct it. And we think that's a really big problem. So that could I mean, it could be the social media accounts that flag that. It might not be. You just don't know. But I would imagine you would, if you're a visitor, have a lot of incentive to fill out that because I believe it's optional is the proposal, right, to optionally fill out these. But I would imagine it would create a lot of incentive to not leave things blank if you're trying to get a visa into a country.
Well, the value to somebody coming into The United States to visit their family or friends or to engage in business or to do any of the tourist things that that people want to do in The United States is just so great, that, you know, calling this a voluntary disclosure really really doesn't capture the kinds of incentives that are there at play. And I think Rita is being nice. I think it's it's let's be honest. It's it's coercive
in the sense that you feel like if you don't put something in, you're gonna be flagged. And, you know, it's also slightly ridiculous because I I'm assuming if you're a fairly probably not gonna say death to America is my social media account identifier. I'm just I'm just guessing. Sure. So, you know, there there are lots of components of this that just seem sort of ill advised and and not thought out. And you actually, Michelle, mentioned the cost of this a little bit. You alluded to this being ineffective and, you know, potentially costly.
Why is that? I mean, how how could actually DHS or customs actually analyze this? I could see how that would be a major issue.
So, yeah, we we think, you know, when you introduce a program like this, for example, there's a cost that's not just monetary. There's introducing significant noise as we call it. So you're putting all kinds of new data into, different databases that are watching terrorist activity, whether it's NSA or other law enforcement agencies that, you know, we think is not actually gonna be useful. It's just going to obscure, you know, the the what's really going on and perhaps make it more difficult for us to find people who are out to do us harm. The, the cost component is also about the government shifting resources into a program. So this is not inexpensive. You have to train a bunch of customs and border agents. You are building new components to a software. You're deploying new, you know, a new application. All of these things cost money, and we think that that's shifting resources into something that is ineffective and invasive.
Great. So we haven't touched too much on the free expression concerns around this. Definitely a lot of the privacy and practical concerns. Merida, what are some of the free expression concerns we have with this?
Well, yeah. Brian, like it or not, as you know, social media is now taking a place alongside television, radio, and print as important media outlets for news and politics. Facebook serves some 1,700,000,000 active users around the world, and many of them rely on, like, personalized, feeds from their the people they follow on Facebook as a primary source for their news. So these sort of self curated pages and the personalized news feeds, they can reveal so much, as Michelle said, about our ideas, our perspectives, our our views on the world. And asking, our customs agents to screen people coming to the country based on those political and religious beliefs and affiliations. It just seems like a recipe for ideological exclusion. I think, you know, flying well Muslim is just going to take off in a in a whole another way. Mhmm. And we also think that, you know, even if the majority of customs officials stay true and stay honest, self disclosing all of our reading lists and news sources and the people we follow and the pundits we listen to, it it'll take a big toll on freedom of expression. This is the chilling effect of of scrutiny and why would you take that risk? Mhmm. If you're an immigration reformer or if you're an anti abortion activist,
you're definitely incentivized to just delete your account or even just stay home. Yeah. I thought this is not completely related but, there was a new story or earlier this week that, I believe it was The New York Times did on on Facebook and kind of what they think about you based on your likes and all that sort of thing. You know, Facebook has access to all your information that you you post on there, and I'm guessing that the agents would have have access to some of the information. And, you know, I went through and did that exercise and saw, well, they got a lot right, but they also got a lot wrong. And how, like, me liking something one time Mhmm. Let them just think that I, you know, was still living in The Middle East, which I did in the past. And, like, there's just things that were kind of not correct in there. So and that's a fuller picture than I would guess agents have. So I'm guessing that could even magnify the problem in terms of profiling or drawing false conclusions based on social
media. That's right. And that also goes to Michelle's point about cost. We can try to automate these things, but as we know, even the greatest algorithm in the world can't get it right a 100% of the time. And that means we'll have to do significant human review just to correct the errors of algorithmic processing. And as we know, humans are biased as well. Yeah. Right. And I think that's that goes to the point too that, you know, Muslim people who are assumed to be or are of Muslim faith or Arab descent they're already persecuted in a lot of ways a lot already profiled and face a lot of difficulties
this will just add to that so what are the odds of this proposal moving forward does it have legs I mean it seems to be getting a lot of attention but is it really something that's going to happen?
Well, no. It has gotten a ton of attention. We've seen civil rights groups, immigration groups, and digital rights groups really coming together and pushing back strongly against this proposal. We wrote a joint letter to Customs and Border Protection. We have 33 signatories from the top civil rights organizations in the country. And, the American technology companies are really coming together to explain how this proposal will catch on a border border patrol organizations all around the world and then what that could mean for the safety of anyone, including American travelers.
And we see thousands of people submitting public comments. So we're hoping that that with this push, the administration will take notice. That's And and I was just gonna say that's a really big deal that tech companies like Facebook and Twitter, some of the biggest names, some of with the most users are saying this is not okay. You know, it's not easy for companies to come out and possibly be in the position of defending, you know, in the way that the media might put it, defending terrorism or somehow not siding with with the side of safety. But, of course, that's not true. But they're taking that risk, and they're taking it because this really matters. This this question of privacy and freedom of speech goes to the heart of the work that we do, but also the work that they do. Yeah. And I I think that point that Rita raised too that,
sure, this is a US proposal right now, but it is one that could spread and you could see other countries do it. I mean, some of these services are banning countries, you know, like China, for example, where, you know, Facebook's not allowed, and I think Twitter is banned there as well. So having to offer up your your information there would, I think, make a lot of Americans uncomfortable when traveling abroad if that started to be the norm. So really interesting stuff. Great work on this. Thank you so much, Michelle and Rita. And before I let you both go, I want to plug that Rita, who is our free expression fellow, her fellowship ends in gosh a month. Is that right, Rita? I mean, we're we're still in denial here. But, if you've been listening and you're like, wow, that Rita, she is smart. You are right. And she's also hitting the job market. So if you're you're interested in hiring a talented first amendment lawyer, broader than just first amendment, but free expression lawyer, passionate advocate in that space, Rita Cat is is the the person for you. So, you know, reach out to us for that one. She is on the market and thank you for all you've done in your two years at CDT, Rita. Thank you. Thank you. It's been a great experience.
A total catch in every way.
And on that that note bye Michelle and Rita thank you Brian thanks 40% of US homeless youth identify as LGBT yes 40% or about 650,000 youth, which is the same as the population of Baltimore or Helsinki, Finland. For home homeless youth, technology is often essential to survival, and homeless gay youth often face unique obstacles. Joining Tech Talk today is someone doing incredible work to help homeless LGBT youth, and he's also running a number of other programs aimed at ensuring the LGBT community enjoys the full benefits of technology. Christopher Wood is the co founder and executive director of the LGBT Technology Partnership and Institute. Welcome, Chris. Thanks for having me. I must say when I was reading that script, every time I say LGBT now, I think of Donald Trump. And I wanna make sure it doesn't sound like it's the first time I've used that term. So, forgive any times that I, like, pause too much and say that. So tell me about LGBT tech. Give me your elevator speech on people who may not be familiar with your program and your work. So, LGBT tech was essentially started to go ahead and help the LGBT community around technology and ensure that they had an equal voice,
around the technology community and policies. Up until this point, you had several different groups that were touching pieces of it, but not one centered on research and making sure that individuals like politicians and those running companies actually understood what the best practices were for LGBT and why it was different. That was really why we founded it and started it. For me personally though, it goes a little bit deeper. Going into when I came out in high school, growing up in a military family, both parents, both mom and dad were military, and really, why a couple instances that happened in my life where coming out was not the best experience and but over time my parents and I repaired that relationship. And in 2010 I was actually one of the first people to be held hostage in The United States And so that was, by bomb point and gun point. And that was really the start for me in trying to figure out, okay, what can I do that's a little bit different? Why can I you know, how can I help the community that I identify with and and
live in each and every day? I mean, I I don't think you can say, you know, tease that story a little bit. You were held hostage. I mean, I know it's a little off topic. Tell us a little bit about that. You know, I'm sure you've had to talk about it a lot. Yeah. Absolutely. I I've so I've been in a lot of different career fields, from nonprofit
is where I started here in DC, eventually going into gay media, newspaper print and magazine, and then moving to Discovery Communications, broadcast television marketing. I was at Discovery Communications up in Silver Spring and I returned from lunch after starting employment about nine months earlier, and walked into the lobby to be staring down the barrel of a gun in the hands of a guy wrapped with pipe bombs and propane tanks, and a and a gun in his hand.
My goodness. Well, we're glad that that's ended, I guess, for you in an okay way. I'm glad that you're here with us. Scary situation. But let's talk about let's get back to really why you're on. So you have a a great program, that I teased a little bit in the intro for, homeless LGBT youth. It was, I believe called Connect for Life and now it's called Power On. Tell us about this program. It is. This was a really
innovative, program for the community and for the community and for the tech community, overall. One thing that we learned early in our formation was that we really needed to look at research. What is going on with the community? Why is it different? How is it different? And for us, one of the areas that kept popping up was the homeless LGBTQ youth population, which represents about 650,000 people, which is a lot, which is why we often reference it in the size of cities so that people can truly understand the grand scale. There's only about 2,200,000 homeless youth on the streets of America. But to have 40% of those identify as LGBT, we know that there's a large problem. We also realize that technology has the opportunity to help that problem, empower them as individuals. And actually, that's supported by research. Doctor Eric Rice out of UCLA in California was one of the first ones to talk about these kids using in California was one of the first ones to talk about these kids using technology to pull their bootstraps up, get themselves off the street, get a job, get a place to live, find a warm comfortable place to eat, and really take themselves to the next level without the support of a normal family system or actually at American University. Her name was Andrea Hackl and she created the first research, the Connect for Life research here in DC. We took that and decided we would do a beta test in technology, create the smallest possible model and let's test it. We did that. We had some great partners behind us to go ahead and do that. And what we learned over the last year was that it's not just cell phones and connecting on the streets, which was the Connect for Life program, but it's all technology. And it's the different points that they access that technology. So libraries or LGBT centers or LGBT homeless youth shelters or, just homeless or just youth shelters like Smile or Casa Ruby or any of the number ones here in DC. And those were crucial points for them as well. And it was the computers there. It was the laptops there, the tablets there, and the cell phones they could take with them. And so we learned, with Connect for Life that we had to go ahead and expand that program into other tech. We also had to, include it so that, the technology was sustainable because it's really hard to go out and buy new technology all the time. We know how much, you know, this tech can cost. And so implementing a program, which is the Power On side and with several partners, we have found a sustainable way to go ahead and collect old, older technology, recycle it, compliant with 14 different acts acts including FIPA and HIPAA and data destruction. And put that technology to work on the streets for our community. And as a side, not all of these centers are LGBT specific. Sometimes they're just shelters that help homeless youth that happen to have a program geared towards LGBT. So it kind of helps the broader population as well. It's not just focused on LGBT, when we get it into the center. So, Connect for Life was the first part. We rebranded Power On, in June because of, we really took LGBT tech took on the role as being the leader of Power On. It consists of the Trevor Project, Straight But Not Narrow, which is Josh Hutcherson or PETA from Hunger Games, his organization, and human IT. And the four of us together bring a lot of different, strengths. And we are able to go ahead and push out a a program that is very helpful for youth across the country.
So we're really, really excited about it. And we've had some expansion. Yeah. That's impressive. I didn't realize all that expansion. And, you know, you raise an interest point. A lot of people, when we talk about some of our issues, libraries come up a lot and people think that, you know, the old physical library is is something of the past. And, I mean, I think your point is that, no, not the case. They're definitely different and they serve different purposes, but they are often a place where, you know, it's the only place people can be connected, where they go for the Wi Fi connection or where they get the laptops and the things that you can't necessarily do on mobile.
Exactly. Libraries have actually, for our community, have always been a safe place. Librarians often, were the ones that youth or just people from the community could come talk to, about coming out before the Internet, before the expansive knowledge of the Internet. And they're still continuing to serve that purpose today, in a broader
technology standpoint. One of my very first jobs was in the library. And, while I was not a librarian, all I could really do was set up the, the microfiche that's dating myself. It was a great experience and certainly, you know, major community center then. So glad that they still are. You touched on this a little bit, you know, policy issues that you know about, you know, all the acronyms. I know your organization does a fair amount of policy advocacy work. What are some of the issues that you're looking at that are hot for the rest of the year and potentially in 2017? Although, of course, we're not quite sure what the political landscape is going to look like in 2017.
So I think that there's, a couple. One is privacy and security have always been a huge thing for us, in varying degrees. I think we continue to look at the way privacy and security could negatively impact our community, but I think we also are looking at how it could positively impact our impact our community. And as we've worked with CDT or any of the other organizations, that are specifically focused down on privacy, one of the things that we we love to talk about is, just for example, the way, you know, health information could impact and really help our community by understanding what is going on in our community. A while back, I think, maybe six or seven years ago, there was a spread of the CDC started to notice some conversation on Twitter, just talking about different symptoms that would identify something spreading, a virus or something like that. And so something like that for our community could be very very helpful and a lot of people may go to like HIV or AIDS but when you're, I like to point out the fact that some subsets of our community like the lesbian population, over fifty percent of lesbians are not out to their providers and so they're doing self diagnosing by going online, by talking to friends, hopefully not showing that all over social media. But it is, those statistics and that tracking is important for us to be able to identify things that might be going on in our community. But on the flip side, we wanna make sure that we're doing it anonymously. So again, the privacy and policy issues are definitely big for us. Things that the danger of privacy breaches are always huge for us. Even the largest, largest, most secure companies today can be hacked. And if they are holding any of this identifying information that could any way, shape, or form be used to target either individuals in the LGBT community, high profile individuals or just the overall LGBT community, I think it could be very detrimental. And I think this past summer we've seen a lot of those negative sides of, of the hate towards the LGBT community. And so it's been hard to watch. But I think we need to make sure as a society, as society globally, society here in The United States, that we are, doing our best to protect that information. And if it does, how are we making sure that those individuals are protected? Yeah. I mean, there was just the story the other day about some of the information that WikiLeaks
had published about, you know, a a gay man or a gay population in Saudi Arabia, where it's, of course, illegal and punishable by death to be gay. So, I mean, thinking about data in the sort of way that, it's not just numbers, it's about people and it actually could be used in horrible ways. Certainly, the LGBT community, is no stranger to that. So, you touched on this a little bit, social media, online harassment, it's been in the news a lot. It's certainly something that we're thinking about here. What are your thoughts on how maybe social media platforms or online platforms, if not social media, can be a little bit more welcoming and inclusive for the LGBT community.
So I'm gonna answer that in just a minute. I have two more, which is very, very important. I have two more, though. I think that, one area that we're also focused on is is the lifeline programs and just low cost access to Right. Communication, broadband, texting, cell phones. So that's actually something that we're gonna be talking about in our fall forum in October, November. We're doing our our fall forum series. And the other side is going to be actually mobile health which I know is very interesting to you. So we're Absolutely. And really kind of highlighting newer technologies out there and why it's so important to our community. So those are two other areas that we're going to be kind of diving into, a little bit more in-depth and I think in really interesting ways this fall. Great. Now the online harassment piece. I will,
You're so good. You always get everything in. I'm impressed.
I've been taught well. The know, I think the important thing to remember about cyberbullying is that there's two components to it. One, you have the person who's actually committing the cyberbullying. And that person, oftentimes, what researchers found, would not necessarily say the things that they are saying online to the person's face. And I think in some, in some social media marketing components they are combating by keeping it human and making sure that individuals realize that they are tied to their profile either by their name or what have you like Facebook. Others are more anonymous like Twitter or any of the other various ones I could I could rattle off. Off. And I think those companies are coming at it and combating it in a different way as well, especially if it has anything to do with, you know, serious harassment. Does it mean that we catch it every single time? No. But I think where we have to start is the education from the person's point of view and understand you know, continuously pushing and making sure that individuals understand, that what they say online is the same as I'm saying to it in person. And I think those have been some of the most effective campaigns, against cyberbullying. The second piece is and I think the other side is that schools and or administrators and or parents getting involved at the same level as if a kid physically, physically or verbally talk to somebody like you or I bullying them. Getting involved in that same level online when and if they can. I realize again, not always possible. Sometimes kids hide it. But I think that that's one way to look at it. The second way to look at it is from the social media perspective and the platform that it's actually happening on. And I think a lot of companies have been trying to combat this as best they can. And I'll use Facebook as an example. We actually one of Facebook's really big sides is that they, real names. Making sure that every person is tied, even if you have a page, is tied to that person. We actually found a small glitch in their system this past year and we highlighted it, for them. Basically somebody could remain anonymous if they owned a page because their name wasn't necessarily tied to the page. And if they were using that page to attack people in their community and I'm not talking community like DC size. I'm talking small rural community where, you know, half the world's population lives. And you are specific someone is specifically using that page as a vehicle to go ahead and clearly attack somebody online at a public profile. Everyone knows who they're talking about. But yet when Facebook looks at that, they don't necessarily see that, you know, somebody attacking them or they don't see somebody being, doing it anonymously. And so we've worked with them. Actually, just recently, Facebook came out with the, solutions inbox in your, in your settings page, where if you report something, you can follow-up on it and figure out exactly where it is in the status rather than this little, you know, drop down, report this, and then you have no idea where it goes and what's, you know, what's happened with it. As well as taking a smaller, more defined look and actually, rather than just going by the policy, actually going by the spirit of the policy. Right. And I think that they were not only really receptive to it, they were wanting to engage in the conversation, and I think it's that proactive approach that these companies are using and different platforms are using to go ahead and help curve a lot of the issues that are happening. Well,
most of them or at least put a dent in it. Yeah. And anonymity online is certainly a complicated issue because, I mean, there are certainly for an LGBT community, there's pros to anonymity. Of course. Especially as you're not out or you're looking for answers and that sort of thing. So, it's a tough issue that these companies have to face and not one answer. So thank you for your perspective on that. Before I let you go, I want our audience to hear even more about the great things you're doing. You are a busy, busy man with lots of endeavors. You started two nonprofits. I know this and a couple other businesses. Tell us what you're doing these days beyond LGBT tech. So I don't know exactly when this is going to air. So I'll just be We're going to air it in like a week. Okay. I'll be I'll turn it over fast here.
Yeah. I'll be out there. So yeah, I, I started about two years ago, actually about four years ago, started creating our own bath line with my husband and, that got put on the back shelf and then taken out and put on the back shelf and taken out. And about a year ago, a year and a half ago, we took it to market. So now we have one location, one store location, which is now home decor and artisan bath products, our own artisan bath products in Staunton, Virginia. We have a couple of employees. It normally fills my weekends because LGBT tech fills my weeks. But, it's been really rewarding. It has been, it's been good for my brain that's kind of all over the place and allows me to try something new, you know every single day. The other side is my husband and I have been going to foster and adoptive classes for the last six months. Oh my goodness.
So that is big life news.
We are, I can't go much further than saying that without getting in a lot of trouble. Sure. But I will say that it has without getting in a lot of trouble. Sure. But I will say that it has been a, a different experience for for us and learning a lot about kids and being a gay adoptive, you know, couple. So lots going on. Really excited.
And, you know, thanks for highlighting those. Well, absolutely. Well, good luck with the adoption. I know that's a tough process and, you will be a great parent, no doubt. Thanks. And good luck on this tour as well.
Yeah. And if if you don't mind, I wanna do a quick plug. So we do have our fall forum coming up, which will be here in DC. So those listening to the podcast in DC, please keep your eye out for, that announcement coming up. Lgbttech.org is our is our website. LGBT Tech is our Twitter handle and we are we'd love to engage with anybody who has questions, thoughts, comments,
and as always, we appreciate the partnership with CBT. Of course. Our pleasure. Thanks for being on. Thanks. That's it for this episode of Tech Talk. Be sure to visit CDT's website, cdt.org, for the latest updates on our free expression and privacy efforts. And also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, and connect with us on LinkedIn. I'm Brian Wizelowski. Thanks for listening.
