Twitter and Elon Musk

[cardiganstarlet]

3 hours ago, Lolo said:

It will be interesting to see where the real power is: the highest political office in the US (and the world) or the supposedly richest person on the globe with numerous connections and influence… it could be devastating. 
 

Quote Cersei: ‚Power‘ is power…

Money has always been in control. It’s just more out in the open now as more billionaires are narcissists who can flaunt on (or own) social media.

The conglomerates and wealthy individuals who donate (to both parties) killed any chance of meaningful change in American political discourse years ago.

[Raider of the lost Ark]

13 minutes ago, sotos8 said:

history  is always repeating itself , Hitler and Mussolini had been idolized by the people of their countries ,especially Hitler

One can only hope, history does not repeat itself given the examples you provided. Well, except for their endings obviously. Also, the idea that Hitler was universally liked by the German population is not necessarily true. Keep in mind, the NSDAP "only" had 44.5 percent of the seats in parliament (less than MAGA) and it took the ban of the Communist Party and cancellation of their votes to gain a majority in parliament which in resulted passed the Ermächtigungsgesetz (without the votes of the Social Democrats) to enshrine absolute power of the NSDAP. Also, the capital Berlin was a "red city" back then. The NSDAP only had 1 percent more (28%) than SPD (27%) and KPD (27%). Hitler relationship to Berlin was ambivalent. He liked the power and influence Berlin had on a global level, as basically the only so called "Weltstadt" in Germany. Therefore it made sense to him to make it "Welthauptstadt" and rename the city to "Germania". Of course, he did not like what Berlin stood for cuturally and socially. The liberal and open-minded attitude of Berlin citizens. He never changed his primary residence from Munich to Berlin. Much of the impression that basically all of Nazi Germany idolized Hitler stems from the propaganda material produced by Goebbels Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda. The impression is very obviously false. But as we have seen back then and now, it does not need "all" or an absolute majority to destroy a nation and do the most evil things to society. 

[Raider of the lost Ark]

13 minutes ago, cardiganstarlet said:

Money has always been in control. It’s just more out in the open now as more billionaires are narcissists who can flaunt on (or own) social media.

The conglomerates and wealthy individuals who donate (to both parties) killed any chance of meaningful change in American political discourse years ago.

What I find shocking, is that there is not more outrage about those billionaires financing the elections and bowing down to Trump. WTF is it with those "donations" for the inauguration? Talking about history repeating itself, back in day in Nazi Germany, from the very beginning the biggest supporters of Hitler and the NSDAP were industrialists. Krupp, Thyssen etc. The similarities are so obvious. 

[runa]

All of this is so scary… 

[jonski43]

44 minutes ago, runa said:

All of this is so scary… 

I'm not too bothered. They'll all turn on each other when they don't get their way. Musk has just called for the resignation of Nigel Farage after previously offering his party $100 million. 

[Raider of the lost Ark]

And here we go ... Zuckerberg has just announced that Meta will no longer have fact checks for the sake of "freedom of expression". There will be "community notes". 

THIS is the time the EU needs to react. There are already laws in place, but obviously people like Zuckerberg do not care anymore. To make them (or at least shareholders) care again, existing laws need to be strenghtened and consequently used. Fine Meta and X into oblivion or shut them down, if they do not follow the laws. Don't wait or give them second chances. If they fail to adress certain issues like removing questionable content, fine them immediately. No more discussions. And make them open to get sued more easily by private citizens or organizations in cases Meta and Co fail to act properly and in line with local laws. 

But first, the EU should follow Australia and restrict access to social media for people under 16. Immediately. You will see, how soon Zuckerberg will fall in line. He is that kind of opportunist. He cannot afford to lose Europe as a market. 

[runa]

1 hour ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

And here we go ... Zuckerberg has just announced that Meta will no longer have fact checks for the sake of "freedom of expression". There will be "community notes". 

THIS is the time the EU needs to react. There are already laws in place, but obviously people like Zuckerberg do not care anymore. To make them (or at least shareholders) care again, existing laws need to be strenghtened and consequently used. Fine Meta and X into oblivion or shut them down, if they do not follow the laws. Don't wait or give them second chances. If they fail to adress certain issues like removing questionable content, fine them immediately. No more discussions. And make them open to get sued more easily by private citizens or organizations in cases Meta and Co fail to act properly and in line with local laws. 

But first, the EU should follow Australia and restrict access to social media for people under 16. Immediately. You will see, how soon Zuckerberg will fall in line. He is that kind of opportunist. He cannot afford to lose Europe as a market. 

Dana White, very close to Trump, just joined Meta's board : 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/01/06/dana-white-meta-board-directors-trump/

[SOON]

 

[elijah]

20 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

One can only hope, history does not repeat itself given the examples you provided. Well, except for their endings obviously. Also, the idea that Hitler was universally liked by the German population is not necessarily true. Keep in mind, the NSDAP "only" had 44.5 percent of the seats in parliament (less than MAGA) and it took the ban of the Communist Party and cancellation of their votes to gain a majority in parliament which in resulted passed the Ermächtigungsgesetz (without the votes of the Social Democrats) to enshrine absolute power of the NSDAP. Also, the capital Berlin was a "red city" back then. The NSDAP only had 1 percent more (28%) than SPD (27%) and KPD (27%). Hitler relationship to Berlin was ambivalent. He liked the power and influence Berlin had on a global level, as basically the only so called "Weltstadt" in Germany. Therefore it made sense to him to make it "Welthauptstadt" and rename the city to "Germania". Of course, he did not like what Berlin stood for cuturally and socially. The liberal and open-minded attitude of Berlin citizens. He never changed his primary residence from Munich to Berlin. Much of the impression that basically all of Nazi Germany idolized Hitler stems from the propaganda material produced by Goebbels Reichsministerium für Volksaufklärung und Propaganda. The impression is very obviously false. But as we have seen back then and now, it does not need "all" or an absolute majority to destroy a nation and do the most evil things to society. 

That was VERY interesting to read. I always wondered how the very liberal Berlin and Germany of the 20s/30s, much liberal than anywhere in the world, turned to Nazism. Basically the winning of the "majority" of the Nazis was rigged. Then they just suppressed all opposition by force. 

[runa]

3 hours ago, elijah said:

That was VERY interesting to read. I always wondered how the very liberal Berlin and Germany of the 20s/30s, much liberal than anywhere in the world, turned to Nazism. Basically the winning of the "majority" of the Nazis was rigged. Then they just suppressed all opposition by force. 

In our political system, here, in Canada, you can have a "majority" with 33-35% of votes, which means you will decide all you want, no matter what, even if more than 60% of the population didn’t vote for you. This is crazy. 
Anything can happen, in this case, and pretty quickly. 

[Raider of the lost Ark]

3 minutes ago, runa said:

In our political system, here, in Canada, you can have a "majority" with 33-35% of votes, which means you will decide all you want, no matter what, even if more than 60% of the population didn’t vote for you. This is crazy. 
Anything can happen, in this case, and pretty quickly. 

How does that work? In Germany, you need at least 50% of votes in parliament (Bundestag) to pass laws. 67% if you try to change the constitution (certain parts, like the first paragraph "(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority. ..." cannot be changed at all. In addition, many laws need a majority in the second chamber (Bundesrat) as well. Also, the president needs to ratify laws and could decline to sign a law if he or she thinks the law is not in line with the constitution. But this is very rare. While technically, a party with the most votes, like 35% of popular vote could govern as a minority government, but they would not get anything done without the votes from other parties in parliament. As a result we always have coalitions to form a government with at least 50%+ of seats. This is also the reason why it is currently impossible for the AfD (the neo-nazi party) to get into power because no other party is willing to work, to form a coalition with them. I say currently because I don't trust the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and maybe at some point we will have a situation similar to Austria, which will soon have its first neo-nazi (well, old-nazi actually, the party was founded by former Nazis in the 50s) chancellor. 

[jonski43]

5 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

How does that work? In Germany, you need at least 50% of votes in parliament (Bundestag) to pass laws. 67% if you try to change the constitution (certain parts, like the first paragraph "(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority. ..." cannot be changed at all. In addition, many laws need a majority in the second chamber (Bundesrat) as well. Also, the president needs to ratify laws and could decline to sign a law if he or she thinks the law is not in line with the constitution. But this is very rare. While technically, a party with the most votes, like 35% of popular vote could govern as a minority government, but they would not get anything done without the votes from other parties in parliament. As a result we always have coalitions to form a government with at least 50%+ of seats. This is also the reason why it is currently impossible for the AfD (the neo-nazi party) to get into power because no other party is willing to work, to form a coalition with them. I say currently because I don't trust the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and maybe at some point we will have a situation similar to Austria, which will soon have its first neo-nazi (well, old-nazi actually, the party was founded by former Nazis in the 50s) chancellor. 

I think it's slightly misleading data above. The winner might have only 30% of the TOTAL voting population, but they will still win the election with over 50% of the votes because people who didn't vote are not included in a first past the post system.

In the UK, we often have governments that only got a quarter or a third of the total voting population but if people don't vote, they're not counted. 

 

[runa]

6 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

How does that work? In Germany, you need at least 50% of votes in parliament (Bundestag) to pass laws. 67% if you try to change the constitution (certain parts, like the first paragraph "(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority. ..." cannot be changed at all. In addition, many laws need a majority in the second chamber (Bundesrat) as well. Also, the president needs to ratify laws and could decline to sign a law if he or she thinks the law is not in line with the constitution. But this is very rare. While technically, a party with the most votes, like 35% of popular vote could govern as a minority government, but they would not get anything done without the votes from other parties in parliament. As a result we always have coalitions to form a government with at least 50%+ of seats. This is also the reason why it is currently impossible for the AfD (the neo-nazi party) to get into power because no other party is willing to work, to form a coalition with them. I say currently because I don't trust the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) and maybe at some point we will have a situation similar to Austria, which will soon have its first neo-nazi (well, old-nazi actually, the party was founded by former Nazis in the 50s) chancellor. 

That's a First Past the Vote system, which means the winner takes all : 

There is 338 ridings, in Canada. 
When a party gets more than 169 seats (50% of 338), he is considered a majority. Once he has that majority, he does anything he wants. 

But, in the end, see the image above, 60% of voters didn't vote for him. 

If the party with the most seats has less than 169, he is considered in minority. He has to work with other parties to get shit done. 
When I was younger, there were only 2 big parties in Canada (Conservative (right) and Liberal (center-left)) but now there is more than that and the votes are divided. 

[runa]

53 minutes ago, jonski43 said:

I think it's slightly misleading data above. The winner might have only 30% of the TOTAL voting population, but they will still win the election with over 50% of the votes because people who didn't vote are not included in a first past the post system.

In the UK, we often have governments that only got a quarter or a third of the total voting population but if people don't vote, they're not counted. 

 

Not how it works in Canada. I'm not talking of Total population, I'm talking of Total real vote. See my explanation above. 

[Raider of the lost Ark]

@runa Thank you for the explanation. All those "the winner takes it all" systems are highly problematic from my perspective. Just as the electoral college in the U.S. A large part of the voters basically lose their representation. I think the German system appears to be more democratic for representative purposes. We have two votes actually. 1) You vote for a direct candidate, representing your constituency. 2) You vote for a party. In the majority of cases people vote the same. Party A and the candidate that belongs to party A. In case the results differ: Candidate of party A and party B win the respective majority, so called overhang mandates come into play. Since the regular number of seats in our parliament is purely based on the second vote, the party vote percentage wise, a system kicks in that adds further seats to make sure the representation based on percentage is still correct. Let's say, party A has 10% of the vote which is around 60 seats. But there are 10 candidates of this party who won the direct vote, with a different party winning the second vote. That makes 70 seats. But 70 seats are no longer 10% of the regular number of seats available. In result other parties will get additional seats to balance the overall result. As a consequence our current parliament has 734 seats, while 598 is the regular number. A little bit complicated. There are videos on YT that explain the thing a little better. 

[runa]

When Justin Trudeau, a Liberal, got elected 9 years ago, he promised he would reform our electoral system. He said he was inspired by Germany, @Raider of the lost Ark.
But after a few months, he broke his promise, saying no system is perfect and bla bla bla, so he decided he wouldn’t change anything.
The next election, in 2019, he lost his majority. Guess he regretted his decision. 

[elijah]

15 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

@runa Thank you for the explanation. All those "the winner takes it all" systems are highly problematic from my perspective. Just as the electoral college in the U.S. A large part of the voters basically lose their representation. I think the German system appears to be more democratic for representative purposes. We have two votes actually. 1) You vote for a direct candidate, representing your constituency. 2) You vote for a party. In the majority of cases people vote the same. Party A and the candidate that belongs to party A. In case the results differ: Candidate of party A and party B win the respective majority, so called overhang mandates come into play. Since the regular number of seats in our parliament is purely based on the second vote, the party vote percentage wise, a system kicks in that adds further seats to make sure the representation based on percentage is still correct. Let's say, party A has 10% of the vote which is around 60 seats. But there are 10 candidates of this party who won the direct vote, with a different party winning the second vote. That makes 70 seats. But 70 seats are no longer 10% of the regular number of seats available. In result other parties will get additional seats to balance the overall result. As a consequence our current parliament has 734 seats, while 598 is the regular number. A little bit complicated. There are videos on YT that explain the thing a little better. 

The German voting system is definitely the more democratic one. Its no wonder most European states have similar voting systems. However, it could cause other problems like in Bulgaria: since 2022 the Parliament have become too fragmented, there are 7 or 8 parties, the electorate doesn't vote en masse (35 percent electoral activity), so in result too many extreme, homophobic and racist parties are voted in and its hard (even impossible) to form any government.

[jonski43]

ThickTok is banned in the US from Sunday! Will the Chinese off to sell it to Musk?

[Raider of the lost Ark]

1 hour ago, jonski43 said:

ThickTok is banned in the US from Sunday! Will the Chinese off to sell it to Musk?

Why would they? They can afford to not sell it. And people are already "fleeing" to that other platform, Red Note, which correctly translates to Little Red Book but that is maybe too close to Mao Zedong? From what I have heard, this platform is even more problematic than TikTok. All this could be handled by the U.S. government by introducing proper data and privacy protection laws comparable to the EU. But this would apply to Meta and X as well. Therefore it makes more sense to just ban the foreign player. The fact that the U.S. do not even try to hide the corruption any longer is astounding. 

[SOON]

 

[runa]

1 hour ago, Camacho said:

 

We know who is the real president, don’t we?

[Cyber-Raga]

So I assume Heil Musk is the appropriate salutation from now on? 

[promise to try]

this Musk is fucking ceazy, and it´s fucking dangerous.

[sotos8]

“It was an accident!! He’s autistic!!” pic.twitter.com/eOCgJ4cPBr

— evan loves worf (@esjesjesj) January 21, 2025

[Nikki]

there were so many cameras on him. he knew the world watched. it's the fucking inauguration.. 

ADL looking for excuses is so weird! they're so pro Israel they don't care about hurting jewish people everywhere else? "we should give him grace" WTF?

I can't believe people are downplaying this.. It shouldn't be questioned. he knew what he did. I can't believe they're trying to find excuses or say he's a troll. you don't joke about this stuff,especially given the context. it happened during a president's inauguration from a far right party

[Raider of the lost Ark]

@Nikki As you said correctly, ADL is pro-Israel (government). That's why they cry "anti-semintism" everytime someone has something critical to say about the Israeli government. But here? A lame excuse. We shall not trust our eyes, although what we saw was pretty clear. I think it is pretty clear ADL made a huge mistake here and no one will take anything from them seriously without taking a closer look at the things they do or the things they condemn because this particular statement looks rather suspicious for an organization like that. They should not be suprised if people will scrutinze their statements because the whole thing here looks rather corrupt. 

[SOON]

 

[SOON]

 

[SOON]

 

[acko]

On 1/29/2025 at 5:38 AM, Camacho said:

 

Italy as a culture to dissapear 

Just fucking die already.