Elon Musk’s X allows China-based propaganda banned on other platforms

X accused of overlooking propaganda flagged by Meta and criminal prosecutors.

See full article...

 

[Mute999]

It was a sloppy argument (and gawd knows I've made enough of those myself online) but there's a solid point behind what he was stating, even beyond the open question as to whether the Revolution led to deep rooted democratic tendencies in French society as a whole outside of it's own direct experience; and that point is, we really do need to find a way to bring critical rationality into public debate, because our societies are becoming increasingly dysfunctional and dystopian, and there seems a complete unwillingness to accept just how complicit we are in our own destruction.

This is of course not a new concern; The Marquis of Condorcet in 1785 famously gave a mathematical proof that if on average a voter was even slightly above 1/2 more likely to get the right answer than the wrong one, the larger the electorate the more likely a society was to trend towards good government.

But if they're not... Dictatorships will mathematically always be superior to Democracy precisely because less people are involved. Stupid individuals come and go, but to ensure absolutely that policy is always awful, you need millions of people only a tiny fraction inclined towards being wrong.

And the truth of a position isn't the same as the wisdom of taking that position.

A very simple example, as the resident Russia-bot here, let me illustrate a very powerful tool Russia uses to sew division; It is the statement "There are liberal people, with liberal values in America." That statement alone is enough to drive increasingly nearly half of the population into a rage. And it's completely true as well; There are liberal people out there! Look, there's a lot of them on these very forums, in fact. With the corresponding reaction that one or two incredibly enraged, desperately sad people run hundreds of sockpuppets trying to shout down and bully and run interference against those self-same hated liberals.

Now much as people want to believe, because it fits simplistic black and white narratives, that those angry lunatics are all working from a troll farm in Russia... Most of them are almost certainly home grown. Fed by decades of Murdoch owned media. And hateful bigots like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly etc. They may side with Russia now, because the discourse has become so insane that they'll say anything to strike back against the hated "liberals", but Russia didn't, for example, remove the Fairness Doctrine in US media which allowed them to run off into one sided bonkers-ville. That was Ronald Reagan.

And as long as there are no standards of debate, no civility, no moderation and enforcement of moderation, there's no need for complex propaganda; The simple truth is itself now a controversy, because we treat it all like a team sport where there has to be good guys and bad guys, winners and losers. This is what makes what Musk is doing with Twitter (It has Twitter DNA, therefore it is and always will be Twitter, no corportate pronouns here thank you) so harmful; not that the lies, or even truths are coming from Russia or China. But because abandoning any sort of social responsibility to reason continues to undermine the idea that anyone has to think about, or even acknowledge the complexity of real life and apply mature judgements to it.

It's our collective stupidity, not the actual position on any one policy, that is driving us towards democratic collapse.

This is very, very well put. And the accuracy of these statements is a very frightening thing. The optimist and idealist in me is being squashed the longer I live and the more I see the same things you state here as well.
Young me thought the internet would drive an age of both factual enlightenment and social acceptance between peoples of all nations, ethnicities, beliefs, etc. Simply by having access to the facts at our fingertips, and seeing just how similar we all are.
NEVER would I have thought that we as people are so resistant to the facts that we'd happily 'believe' the most ridiculous conspiracy theories over obvious facts that don't line up with what we want, nor that we'd be so strongly divided over it through the basic 'us vs them' attitude. Nor would I ever have thought that racism and hatred would instead run rampant and be actively encouraged.
I don't think I underestimated the 'powers that be' and their capacity to do evil for the sake of staying at the top. I did, however, sorely, no, massively overestimate our collective intelligence, empathic capabilities, and willingness to accept facts when put in front of us.
We humans have proven cruel and stupid throughout our history but we could hide behind a lack of access to facts and accurate information. We no longer have that excuse. The access is right there and our response is to aggressively attack it, renounce it, and make up nonsense that fits our cruel, spiteful, and petty little minds and theories. We have truly shown who we, collectively, are. And it is ugly and frightening.

Edit: them grammars be hard

 

[Jiggers]

Just imagine if this robber baron was given control of your local water utility.

 

[Snarky Robot]

Just gonna repeat my comment

Why is it that folks like you always moan about how mean everyone is being to poor wiiddle Elon Musk, while addressing literally nothing about the article? Couldn't possibly be that actually addressing the content would make you take a shitty position OR accept that other have a point, could it?

Let's try: do you believe that it's a GOOD thing that Twitter allows propaganda that nobody else does?

Edit: I think it's worth noting that the comment he's repeating is him complaining that Ars is reporting on...(checks notes)...a social media site being directed funded by organizations and individuals on terrorist watch lists. Then, as now, he refused to address whether or not he supports those actions or believes that the revelations are newsworthy regardless of which company did it.

 

[gsgrego]

Just gonna repeat my comment from the other author's Ars Muskraking article a mere couple days ago:



Enjoy yer self righteous circle jerk.

So you support terrorism.

It's funny how every right wing website ends up with terrorists and pedos.

 

[chronoss2022]

Why the fuck would I imagine that when it's not even a thing that has any possibility whatsoever? Just so I can project all the bad things I think Musk might do onto a completely irrelevant situation?

DETROIT WANTS TO TALK TO YOU

 

[pbcheese]

All the musk stans should consider like, smoking some weed and taking a ceramics class or something. Maybe try eating some new cuisine and have a one night stand. You know, do some normal human being shit and see if that returns them semi-rationality

 

[Snarky Robot]

All the musk stans should consider like, smoking some weed and taking a ceramics class or something. Maybe try eating some new cuisine and have a one night stand. You know, do some normal human being shit and see if that returns them semi-rationality

...returns?

 

[pbcheese]

...returns?

I’m being optimistic!

 

[DarthSlack]

Says the poster letting someone else do all their thinking for them

 

[Spalls]

I think the next StarShip test needs 2 test pilots…Musk and Trump.

Starship is famous for its huge cargo capacity. I don't think we need to limit it to just those two. ;-)

 

[arthursp]

View attachment 74363

This pic reminded me:
Some stand-up comedian (don't remember who) said: "Musk always has attractive girlfriends but he himself looks like he was whittled from a piece of ham".
Accurate! Money can't buy charisma nor character!

 

[gsgrego]

All of you arguing that "someone" should censor what you read are ignoring the fact that the United States has survived for 250 years by allowing people to say whatever they wish. Disinformation is nothing new.

All of you calling for censorship have forgotten the history of why we have the First Amendment. You may as well wear your powdered wigs and decry those damn American colonists disrespecting their betters.

Don't ask someone else to do your thinking for you. That road leads to tyranny.

So you think Republicans hate America?

 

[Snarky Robot]

Don't ask someone else to do your thinking for you.

Considering the skill level you're displaying..maybe you should?

Again: government is government. Private industry is not. If the government tells private industry to moderate something, that is government censorship and is violates the 1st Amendment. If the company makes their own moderation decisions, it doesn't violate the 1st Amendment. If the government tries to prevent the company from being able to moderate as they see fit, that is ALSO a violation of the 1st Amendment. Free speech is a negative right.

If you want to piss and moan about moderations choices, feel free. If what you really need is drama and dumb arguments, make it about the 1st Amendment.

 

[MarcMadness]

THE PROPER TERM is called a market economy , where it has social programs and a capitalist market with regulations...many most successful nations have this.

Not disagreeing with the overall point, but the implication here is that capitalist markets can exist without regulation which is false.

 

[scrimbul]

So you think Republicans hate America?

The law about business-friendly center-right Republicans, libertarians, christian nationalists and American-born Russian tankies, and anarchist MAGA voters who specifically want to burn the system down to either die in the catharsis or inherit the ashes, tends to give uncomfortable prescience that liberal voters and commenters don't like to take to its logical conclusion 'Do unto others as they would do unto you' in regards to voting for Republicans = voting for domestic terrorism.

Nobody likes the fact that you have to reach back to the Southern Democrats' Reconstruction era, charge modern-day MAGA Republicans with those crimes, add to the current ones, and strip their right to representation as a result for a time. In fact, Biden is the nominee specifically to prevent that approximate outcome from being considered.

Populism by its definition tends to be myopic, stupid and destructive offering overly simple solutions to complex problems, and literally everything else has already been tried to negotiate with those voters on a level playing field, so the only answer left everyone hates is to make those right-wing voters second-class citizens and take every conspiratorial accusation from them as both a confession of something they did and an invitation to do unto them until the accusations stop.

It's what the posters in kazo's camp don't understand, that the time to lay down their arms was 2010 and actually have taken 'yes' for an answer on immigration and health care reforms in those years but tangible economic prosperity and evenly distributed gains aren't their actual goal, it's somewhere between the enrichment of the wealthy as cult leaders and general anarchy to reject liberalism specifically and always has been.

 

[daveishereagain]

All of you arguing that "someone" should censor what you read are ignoring the fact that the United States has survived for 250 years by allowing people to say whatever they wish. Disinformation is nothing new.

All of you calling for censorship have forgotten the history of why we have the First Amendment. You may as well wear your powdered wigs and decry those damn American colonists disrespecting their betters.

Don't ask someone else to do your thinking for you. That road leads to tyranny.

People can 'say whatever they wish'? Trump would like a word with you.
As usual, the FREEZE PEACH!!!! morons don't heed the warning 'Best to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt'. Your ilk wouldn't know the Constitution if it hit you in the face.

 

[Mute999]

Maybe it’s the messaging, but the research is solid on the point that we need more housing. I would love to hear a counterpoint explaining how less housing makes it more affordable.

Ugh, no one here is making the argument that less housing makes it more affordable. So no one needs to engage you in this dreamed-up faux argument and no one needs to defend that position that only you pretend was taken.

People have brought many arguments against your self-admitted pro capitalism 'defense' that just building more is the only answer, which you have failed to address in return, resorting instead in pretending some ridiculous stance was taken.

Capitalism and the rich buying housing as investments and to diversify their wealth portfolios are the very things that brought on the shortage. Making many more houses would bring the price per house down, of course, as well as the value of the investment in them the wealthy made. But true capitalism (which was the ideology firmly in place during the slide into this housing shortage, ergo cannot be the answer to it) will not allow that to happen. Better to make much more money on each newly built house by building some, but too few, than to destroy their inflated value and the value of the rich elite's wealth investment by actually solving the crisis so regular peeps can afford a house.
Nah, nuch better to own the tight market and make the plebs rent.
That IS what unfettered capitalism did here and will continue to do.

 

[daveishereagain]

That word isn't in the headline?

Well, if you just read headlines one ends up as you seem to be.

 

[AmanoJyaku]

You may as well wear your powdered wigs

You're trying to get us accused of being groomers, aren't you...

 

[tRexx]

Elon's business and personal interests come first. Did you expect something different?

 

[AmanoJyaku]

Twitter allowing these terrible posts (people pretending to be US citizens!) would seem to fall under the very same rule.

(And I shouldn't need to point out that the right to free speech applies to spheres far wider than interactions with government.)

Curious... I don't see anyone arguing in favor of government censorship. We're outraged at Twitter allowing disinformation. We're allowed to be outraged.

 

[Mute999]

Corporate ownership of homes is an extremely recent phenomenon. It’s about 20-25% of homes and includes a lot of multi family housing. Housing asset prices have been rising steadily for decades now and corporate ownership hasn’t meaningfully increased asset prices.

Define 'extremely recent' and also, I am not just talking about corporate ownership. In fact, I was referring much more to purchasing of houses as investments by wealthy individuals.
Since housing prices have very significantly outpaced inflation since 1963, this has become an ever larger issue with time (most rich people don't 'invest' in things that doesn't outpace basic inflation).

Unfettered capitalism would have the opposite problem, which is losing picturesque towns to massive apartment complexes that you see in Asia (much higher population density).

Which is why people are arguing first for other solutions than to just build tons of houses everywhere.

 

[klarg]

Maybe it’s the messaging, but the research is solid on the point that we need more housing. I would love to hear a counterpoint explaining how less housing makes it more affordable.

Apart from the specific argument in case (whatever that is), like many “staunch capitalist” you advance arguments that might work, presuming open markets (free & fair), while usually also staunchly opposing measures to make markets open.

 

[jballou]

I literally showed you my cdc source of data and added the two largest categories after naming them. It’s actually 60% of costs go to those 2 categories.

I don’t know why it’s so contentious to point out the fact that healthcare is expensive because healthcare providers are well compensated.

It wouldn’t be controversial if true. The contention is that you made assumptions about the data which are not supported, and instead of seeking another source to validate your position, you’ve just doubled down in calling your assumptions facts.

I can see salary being part of the problem, but you’re arguing that it’s a primary factor while willfully ignoring much larger cash burners like insurance and executive costs.

Hence why the downvotes, and lack of your position being taken seriously.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

The Twitter files revealed

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

 

[AmanoJyaku]

The Twitter files revealed that Republican and Democrat legislators got Twitter to censor posts that offended them one way or another.

No, they didn't. If you actually read those files, you'd see Twitter had the choice to remove posts. Sometimes it agreed the posts were dangerous, and took them down. Other times it disagreed, and the posts stayed up. That's not censorship. Censorship means involuntary removal.

Or maybe you did read the files, and I'm giving you too much credit for being able to understand them. I have to remember the Carlin Rule.