It occurred to me yesterday that before Musk bought twitter I had no real opinion of him at all, good or bad. Since then I’ve learned there’s a weird cult of Musketeers who are prepared to jump in front of any valid criticism to defend him like they’re his online secret service.
True. And there are also those whose new mission in life seems to be pearl clutching about Musk and Twitter, 24/7.
All good advice here, but we can't escape Musk-fanboy-ism if we stick to MOL.
But if your Twitter existence is going to be nothing but arguing with teenage dumbasees and Musk fanboys, and then bitching about how terrible Twitter is, better for you and for all of us that you just leave. /8
I hadn't been using Twitter very much over the past year or so because the right-wing trolls were getting tiresome, and they're pretty much everywhere, not just in politics. So I haven't deleted my account, and I still visit a bit (mainly when someone embeds a Twitter sports highlight video in an article). But I'm not going to spend a lot of time on any platform that annoys me more than it enlightens me.
Elon had an exchange with former CIA Dir Brennan, who said "Good people in democracies need a more effective way to prevent attention-craving, emotionally immature, & highly devious individuals, esp those of means, from being socially, culturally, & politically destructive."
Elon replied, "Your house is glass".
Saving @nohero the opportunity to "out" me, I'm posting my comment (great video, by the way):
Two thoughts:
1. That wouldn't be "outing" you.
2. On the Twitter you have many posts with misinformation and with affirmation of some pretty awful assertions. I haven't referred to them here. Interestingly, there are a lot of very good points which have been made in this thread over the last few days which you may argue with on the Twitter, but not here.
[Edited to add] The Brennan statement you refer to is a short clip from an obviously longer interview, "It does bear the hallmarks of Russian disinformation". At the time, nobody had access to any facts to confirm the claims that had been made.
Here's what Brennan says, "So, I think there are a lot of issues related to this New York Post story that reportedly referenced the Hunter Biden emails, and as I and several of my former colleagues have pointed out publicly, that it does bear the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.
"Now, we don't know whether or not that is the case, but there's just a lot of things that are cropping up now that may not be what they appear at first blush, and I do think it's important that John Ratcliffe or Christopher Wray provides the underlying data or analysis to support their conclusions and assertions."
Paul, to quote Elon, "Your house is glass".
You:
"2. On the Twitter you have many posts with misinformation and with affirmation of some pretty awful assertions. I haven't referred to them here. Interestingly, there are a lot of very good points which have been made in this thread over the last few days which you may argue with on the Twitter, but not here."
Please show some integrity (do you still have any?) and post them here. Thank you.
Regarding John Brennan, you're not so stupid that you don't understand that when he (and 50 other former intel officers) said the NY Post articles bore "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation" that their purpose was to generate media headlines to brainwash the public into believing the lie. As intended, the disclaimer was ignored, but gave sycophants like you "cover" to say "they didn't really say it".
Matt Orfalea's compilation is a crash course in media disinformation/brainwashing, in which Brennan played a key role:
I don't think the behavior of the drivers has much to do with the fact that Musk is a leaky sack of wet manure. I doubt that, in California, many of the drivers are fans of his MAGA agenda. They're just a-holes.
That's some serious analysis.
I wasn't analysis, it was truth telling. I can see why you would be unfamiliar with it.
I have to say that it has been interesting/sad to watch your metamorphosis over the last few years from a hard left liberal to a hard right authoritarian. Some weird stuff going on in your mind, I guess.
I hope there is someone in your life who will be able to stage an intervention and get you the help you so obviously need.
I don't think the behavior of the drivers has much to do with the fact that Musk is a leaky sack of wet manure. I doubt that, in California, many of the drivers are fans of his MAGA agenda. They're just a-holes.
That's some serious analysis.
I wasn't analysis, it was truth telling. I can see why you would be unfamiliar with it.
I have to say that it has been interesting/sad to watch your metamorphosis over the last few years from a hard left liberal to a hard right authoritarian. Some weird stuff going on in your mind, I guess.
I hope there is someone in your life who will be able to stage an intervention and get you the help you so obviously need.
I've always fought against media lies and supported free speech. That's what I did, that's what I'm doing.
The difference between now and then is that much of the liberal world succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome and became believers and loyalists of neocons, corporate media and the military-industrial-intelligence complex which lied to them for decades and continues to do so today.
The demonization of Elon Musk is their latest cause.
Great article on NBC website about the the faux hysteria of liberals, who -- no matter how much they hate their enemy-du-jour -- can't quit Twitter.
You wanted to distribute leaflets at the Short Hills mall. The mall gave you an option that you weren’t happy with, but it was the only way to reach that audience. Did you walk out right away?
Great article on NBC website about the the faux hysteria of liberals, who -- no matter how much they hate their enemy-du-jour -- can't quit Twitter.
You wanted to distribute leaflets at the Short Hills mall. The mall gave you an option that you weren’t happy with, but it was the only way to reach that audience. Did you walk out right away?
It turns out that it wasn't a way to reach that audience, which became clear when I saw where I was told to stand.
It was the equivalent of Maplewood designating Highland Pl and Everitt Pl as where people are allowed to leaflet in the village.
PS There actually are reasonable restrictions on where people can leaflet in the village -- not standing in front of doorways of businesses, for instance.
I've always fought against media lies and supported free speech. That's what I did, that's what I'm doing.
The difference between now and then is that much of the liberal world succumbed to Trump Derangement Syndrome and became believers and loyalists of neocons, corporate media and the military-industrial-intelligence complex which lied to them for decades and continues to do so today.
The demonization of Elon Musk is their latest cause.
"2. On the Twitter you have many posts with misinformation and with affirmation of some pretty awful assertions. I haven't referred to them here. Interestingly, there are a lot of very good points which have been made in this thread over the last few days which you may argue with on the Twitter, but not here."
Please show some integrity (do you still have any?) and post them here. Thank you.
I do still have some integrity, and it's comforting to know that nobody would pay any mind to your claims that I lack it.
How about your insistence (see prior post for example) that Elon Musk has said nothing or done nothing which could be criticized, the way he's been criticized on this thread? I think that is enough of a response to your "demand".
Here's what Brennan says, "So, I think there are a lot of issues related to this New York Post story that reportedly referenced the Hunter Biden emails, and as I and several of my former colleagues have pointed out publicly, that it does bear the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.
"Now, we don't know whether or not that is the case, but there's just a lot of things that are cropping up now that may not be what they appear at first blush, and I do think it's important that John Ratcliffe or Christopher Wray provides the underlying data or analysis to support their conclusions and assertions."
...
Regarding John Brennan, you're not so stupid that you don't understand that when he (and 50 other former intel officers) said the NY Post articles bore "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation" that their purpose was to generate media headlines to brainwash the public into believing the lie. As intended, the disclaimer was ignored, but gave sycophants like you "cover" to say "they didn't really say it".
I'm not so stupid that I don't, first, read what was actually said, and then form an opinion.
In contrast, you decided you "knew" what his point was, and when shown his full statement decided to double down and created your argument that I and others would be "stupid" not to see it your way.
Edited to add: Pres Obama's definition of "wokeness" is as good as you'll get.
President Obama isn't giving a "definition of wokeness" in the clip. He is admonishing people not to act superior just because you think you're right and the other person is wrong.
Mr. Surovell didn't dispute that here. But he kept making the claim on the Twitter, including yesterday -
"2. On the Twitter you have many posts with misinformation and with affirmation of some pretty awful assertions. I haven't referred to them here. Interestingly, there are a lot of very good points which have been made in this thread over the last few days which you may argue with on the Twitter, but not here."
Please show some integrity (do you still have any?) and post them here. Thank you.
No. I did have an account I barely used. When I went to delete it, looks like the last time I tweeted was once in 2016, and a small run in 2012. I'm largely off FB as well -- mostly there only if I need to buy or sell something, or sometimes some service recommendations or other local stuff.
I've long had a number of issues with the large social media companies. Probably my biggest complaint is the whole surveillance capitalism thing. I'm very much not a fan of the way users are turned into data mines -- as they say, if you're not paying for it, you're the product. I think running a social media site at a national (and more so at a global) scale strongly incentivizes that, though -- there's no way you're going to get enough people to pay enough to even break even on the cost of all the infrastructure and ongoing maintenance needed to run at that scale, much less make the kinds of profits investors expect. That naturally leaves advertising, and since the more you can convince advertisers you're able to "target" their ads they more you can get them to pay, that strongly incentivizes intrusive data mining of your users.
So my primary social media is here, a few other small forum sites, and the odd Slack community. Sometimes Discord, though haven't really gotten into any community there yet. Also joined a Mastodon instance recently to give the whole Fediverse a look.
Mr. Musk’s team has also deliberated the merits of not paying severance to the thousands of people who have left the company since he took over, when there were about 7,500 full-time employees. While Mr. Musk and his advisers had previously considered forgoing any severance when discussing cuts in late October, the company ultimately decided that U.S.-based employees would be given at least two months of pay and one month of severance pay so that the company would be compliant with federal and state labor laws.
Mr. Musk’s team is now reconsidering whether it should pay some of those months, according to two people familiar with the discussions, or just face lawsuits from disgruntled former employees. Many former employees still have not received any paperwork formalizing their separation from Twitter, five people said.
It turns out that it wasn't a way to reach that audience, which became clear when I saw where I was told to stand.
”It turns out …”
I figure those users of Twitter you mock are still seeing how it turns out.
I'm not mocking anyone for waiting to see how it turns out.
I'm mocking "hellscaper" propagandists like this:
Twitter is becoming the hellscape we were promised it would not be. I am still here for now but please subscribe to Democracy now for free. It is the best way to stay in touch and informed. https://t.co/fWb0S8HYDN
No. I did have an account I barely used. When I went to delete it, looks like the last time I tweeted was once in 2016, and a small run in 2012. I'm largely off FB as well -- mostly there only if I need to buy or sell something, or sometimes some service recommendations or other local stuff.
I've long had a number of issues with the large social media companies. Probably my biggest complaint is the whole surveillance capitalism thing. I'm very much not a fan of the way users are turned into data mines -- as they say, if you're not paying for it, you're the product. I think running a social media site at a national (and more so at a global) scale strongly incentivizes that, though -- there's no way you're going to get enough people to pay enough to even break even on the cost of all the infrastructure and ongoing maintenance needed to run at that scale, much less make the kinds of profits investors expect. That naturally leaves advertising, and since the more you can convince advertisers you're able to "target" their ads they more you can get them to pay, that strongly incentivizes intrusive data mining of your users.
So my primary social media is here, a few other small forum sites, and the odd Slack community. Sometimes Discord, though haven't really gotten into any community there yet. Also joined a Mastodon instance recently to give the whole Fediverse a look.
You should take a look. You'll find just about anyone who's information and views (pro-and con-) you're interested in. No obligation to post.
Here's what Brennan says, "So, I think there are a lot of issues related to this New York Post story that reportedly referenced the Hunter Biden emails, and as I and several of my former colleagues have pointed out publicly, that it does bear the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.
"Now, we don't know whether or not that is the case, but there's just a lot of things that are cropping up now that may not be what they appear at first blush, and I do think it's important that John Ratcliffe or Christopher Wray provides the underlying data or analysis to support their conclusions and assertions."
...
Regarding John Brennan, you're not so stupid that you don't understand that when he (and 50 other former intel officers) said the NY Post articles bore "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation" that their purpose was to generate media headlines to brainwash the public into believing the lie. As intended, the disclaimer was ignored, but gave sycophants like you "cover" to say "they didn't really say it".
I'm not so stupid that I don't, first, read what was actually said, and then form an opinion.
In contrast, you decided you "knew" what his point was, and when shown his full statement decided to double down and created your argument that I and others would be "stupid" not to see it your way.
@nohero -- be honest. The media blew up the "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation" part of the statement and ignored the disclaimer. Just as the signers knew would happen.
Matt Orfalea's video shows exactly how the media handled it.
Edited to add: Pres Obama's definition of "wokeness" is as good as you'll get.
President Obama isn't giving a "definition of wokeness" in the clip. He is admonishing people not to act superior just because you think you're right and the other person is wrong.
Mr. Surovell didn't dispute that here. But he kept making the claim on the Twitter, including yesterday -
"2. On the Twitter you have many posts with misinformation and with affirmation of some pretty awful assertions. I haven't referred to them here. Interestingly, there are a lot of very good points which have been made in this thread over the last few days which you may argue with on the Twitter, but not here."
Please show some integrity (do you still have any?) and post them here. Thank you.
So my Twitter posts of "misinformation and with affirmation of some pretty awful assertions" becomes -- in your mind -- my posting of Pres Obama's definition of "wokeness".
I'm not mocking anyone for waiting to see how it turns out.
I'm mocking "hellscaper" propagandists like this:
Then recommending and linking to that NBC story in reference to “the faux hysteria of liberals who -- no matter how much they hate their enemy-du-jour -- can't quit Twitter” must have been a mistake, since it mentions no hellscaper propagandists like Marc Elias.
All good advice here, but we can't escape Musk-fanboy-ism if we stick to MOL.