Elon Musk

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Gloucester Saint said:

Hold the front page - are Soggy and Hypo agreeing on something?

Shit. Changed my mind. Musk is a fringe loon with the same impact on world affairs as the homeless man who sleeps on the bench at the Common. 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Because over the years people have said the same thing over and over about media moguls and really that's the best kind of comparison to make - with someone like Rupert Murdoch, Randolph Hearst and Lord Beaverbrook.  Ultimately they had some influence and I'm not denying that but it was limited in the same way that Musk's is.  Talk about recency bias.

You're comparing an apple and a pip imo. That said, I get your point that Musk isn't as powerful in many respects as men with military's under their control, but unusually I agree with Hypo. I think the point really is that we're now in a different era and power can, and is, exterted in different ways and the power of global influence is hugely powerful. 

Edited Tuesday at 23:06 by egg

[whelk]

8 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

So you didn't say, "In some ways musk has more power and influence than anyone in human history"?  That's an incredible claim, the whole of human history?  Seriously?  Hitler, Stalin, FDR, Reagan, Lenin, Caesar, Churchill, Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Peter the Great, Napoleon.  That's just off the top of my head.

No mention of the great lady?

I’m with you though. Lazy people hearing information and talking shit isn’t as mind blowing and life transforming. The fact that many seem to have fuck all to do other than be on social media is sad but I am of that generation that bemoans those seeming to be ‘influenced’ by vacuous people and numbing themselves to waste their three score years and ten. 

 

[The Kraken]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

The person who liked Rallyboys post or Elon Musk?

Yeah I read it back and realised I could’ve been clearer, it could go either way I suppose.

[hypochondriac]

Just now, whelk said:

No mention of the great lady?

I’m with you though. Lazy people hearing information and talking shit isn’t as mind blowing and life transforming. The fact that many seem to have fuck all to do other than be on social media is sad but I am of that generation that bemoans those seeming to be ‘influenced’ by vacuous people and numbing themselves to waste their three score years and ten. 

 

I think your suggesting that because he wields that influence that that's somehow a positive thing? It's not mind blowing or life transforming but it has a huge influence and impact. 

[hypochondriac]

Would be very interesting if something like this is part of the motivation for Musk's tweets. It would probably suit him if Trump goes to war with the EU and UK over free speech and regulation of social media. 

[egg]

11 minutes ago, whelk said:

No mention of the great lady?

I’m with you though. Lazy people hearing information and talking shit isn’t as mind blowing and life transforming. The fact that many seem to have fuck all to do other than be on social media is sad but I am of that generation that bemoans those seeming to be ‘influenced’ by vacuous people and numbing themselves to waste their three score years and ten. 

 

I don't want to believe that idiots like Musk have a huge influence but alas they do. We're living in a world where rhetoric is stated as fact, and a huge number of people lap it up. Something being rolled out on the pages of the sun back in the day carried much less weight than it going out on X, then being disseminated from there. 

There was a time when noise from someone like Musk wouldn't have made it's way across the ocean. That's not the case and we can't avoid that he's now having an impact on British politics - the fact that we're discussing him tells a story. 

Edited Tuesday at 23:18 by egg

[whelk]

1 minute ago, egg said:

I don't want to believe that idiots like Musk have a huge influence but alas they do. We're living in a world where rhetoric is stated as fact, and a huge number of people lap it up. Something being rolled out on the pages of the sun back in the day carried much less weight than it going out on X, then being disseminated from there. 

There was a time when noise from someone like Musk wouldn't have made it's way across the ocean. That's not the case and we can't avoid that he's now having a fact on British politics - the fact that we're discussing him tells a story. 

I mean Kardashians, Tate, the gamers and idiots my kids listen to when could be reading books not specifically Musk

Musk has caused some headlines but 24/7 news is also a problem as shit gets reported on as nothing else to say. Banal tweets etc.

However kids don’t get their news from X although in echo chambers of various bias so it is bleak in terms of true information reaching the masses. I actually asked two of my kids what they thought of Musk. Nothing good and horrible man were the answers.

[hypochondriac]

Just now, whelk said:

I mean Kardashians, Tate, the gamers and idiots my kids listen to when could be reading books not specifically Musk

Musk has caused some headlines but 24/7 news is also a problem as shit gets reported on as nothing else to say. Banal tweets etc.

However kids don’t get their news from X although in echo chambers of various bias so it is bleak in terms of true information reaching the masses. I actually asked two of my kids what they thought of Musk. Nothing good and horrible man were the answers.

Quite a number of commentators felt that Joe rogan and Musk swung the election for Trump. I do think your underestimating the influence that social media has on a global scale, even if Musk doesn't have much of an impact on your children specifically. 

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Quite a number of commentators felt that Joe rogan and Musk swung the election for Trump. I do think your underestimating the influence that social media has on a global scale, even if Musk doesn't have much of an impact on your children specifically. 

What social media commentator swung the UK election to Labour? Easy to say Rogan etc for Trump but I don’t think it is that simple. Beyoncé and Swift didn’t swing it for Harris. 

[hypochondriac]

10 minutes ago, whelk said:

What social media commentator swung the UK election to Labour? Easy to say Rogan etc for Trump but I don’t think it is that simple. Beyoncé and Swift didn’t swing it for Harris. 

Harris didn't do a long form interview that reached tens of millions of people in less than a day with Beyonce or Swift. Rogan's channel absolutely dwarfs the traditional media and mainstream news. Similarly Musk's pronouncements and various media on X has had incredible viewerships.

Beyond them, someone like Andrew Tate has had a giant influence on loads of young people, far greater than some random pop star or actor had decades ago. 

Social media has less of an impact over in the UK admittedly but I think it's impact is increasing. Farage for example has a large following on tiktok and that sort of thing is only going to grow as we tend to follow America with stuff like this. 

Edited Tuesday at 23:39 by hypochondriac

[whelk]

Interesting interview here with the journalist who broke the story. Answers Turkish’s cover up question. Not as clear cut as either side may think 

 

[revolution saint]

31 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Harris didn't do a long form interview that reached tens of millions of people in less than a day with Beyonce or Swift. Rogan's channel absolutely dwarfs the traditional media and mainstream news. Similarly Musk's pronouncements and various media on X has had incredible viewerships.

Beyond them, someone like Andrew Tate has had a giant influence on loads of young people, far greater than some random pop star or actor had decades ago. 

Social media has less of an impact over in the UK admittedly but I think it's impact is increasing. Farage for example has a large following on tiktok and that sort of thing is only going to grow as we tend to follow America with stuff like this. 

Indeed, in some ways Joe Rogan has more power and influence than anyone else in human history.

[hypochondriac]

28 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Indeed, in some ways Joe Rogan has more power and influence than anyone else in human history.

Correct. In some ways he does. I wouldn't say more than Musk though given the latter's other business interests and spheres of influence and the technology he is in charge of. Starlink for example has enormous influence. 

Edited yesterday at 00:37 by hypochondriac

[revolution saint]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Correct. In some ways he does. I wouldn't say more than Musk though given the latter's other business interests and spheres of influence and the technology he is in charge of. Starlink for example has enormous influence. 

Where would you place Tom Paine in your list of power and influence in the whole of human history? When he wrote Common Sense, still the most widely read pamphlet ever, he helped galvanise a nation into revolution. And then, blow me, if that wasn’t enough he buggers off wrote The age of reason and helped out in the French Revolution. Clearly not on the same level as Musk or Rogan. Maybe fourth behind Russell Brand?

[hypochondriac]

18 minutes ago, revolution saint said:

Where would you place Tom Paine in your list of power and influence in the whole of human history? When he wrote Common Sense, still the most widely read pamphlet ever, he helped galvanise a nation into revolution. And then, blow me, if that wasn’t enough he buggers off wrote The age of reason and helped out in the French Revolution. Clearly not on the same level as Musk or Rogan. Maybe fourth behind Russell Brand?

You're confusing saying things of value with influence. Just because a lot of what Musk says isn't valuable doesn't mean he has no influence. This is frankly a bizarre take to have. I'm not saying Musk is worth listening to, simply that lots of people do listen him and he has a very large influence and impact as a consequence. It's not a controversial thing to say.

The availability of the Internet has changed the reach and power of what someone says and their influence to a degree that I don't think you have quite appreciated. The amount of people that Musk and others are able to reach almost instantly is unprecedented in human history. 

Edited yesterday at 01:08 by hypochondriac

[revolution saint]

26 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

You're confusing saying things of value with influence. Just because a lot of what Musk says isn't valuable doesn't mean he has no influence. This is frankly a bizarre take to have. I'm not saying Musk is worth listening to, simply that lots of people do listen him and he has a very large influence and impact as a consequence. It's not a controversial thing to say.

The availability of the Internet has changed the reach and power of what someone says and their influence to a degree that I don't think you have quite appreciated. The amount of people that Musk and others are able to reach almost instantly is unprecedented in human history. 

Straw man argument. The only judgement I’m making is that Musk is not, in some ways, the most powerful and influential person in human history. 
It’s a stupid argument, ironically ignoring virtually all of human history.

[sadoldgit]

It really doesn’t matter where this person ranks. He has a level of influence that should be worrying for anybody who cares about the abuse of power.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmngpvv08lo.amp

[Turkish]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

It really doesn’t matter where this person ranks. He has a level of influence that should be worrying for anybody who cares about the abuse of power.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmngpvv08lo.amp

It’s obviously worrying you if you’re posting about it at 3am in the morning 🤣🤣

[egg]

7 hours ago, whelk said:

Interesting interview here with the journalist who broke the story. Answers Turkish’s cover up question. Not as clear cut as either side may think 

 

Thanks for the link. I'll take a listen later. 

[hypochondriac]

6 hours ago, revolution saint said:

Straw man argument. The only judgement I’m making is that Musk is not, in some ways, the most powerful and influential person in human history. 
It’s a stupid argument, ironically ignoring virtually all of human history.

I haven't ignored all of human history. You're ignoring the Internet and the fact that it does things that haven't been possible in the rest of human history. You can disagree with me but it's not a stupid argument. 

He has an awful lot of power and influence, whether you believe it's the most in human history in some ways or not. 

Edited yesterday at 08:04 by hypochondriac

[egg]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

It really doesn’t matter where this person ranks. He has a level of influence that should be worrying for anybody who cares about the abuse of power.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crmngpvv08lo.amp

Yep. Having influence but unknown motives isn't ideal. The facts are that he's unsettling a number of European leaders all whist his mate Trump is unsettling a number of other global leaders. Christ knows what they're playing at, but when you have Musk taking a vote on liberating Britain, and Trump wanting to annex other sovereign countries, you know that you've got interesting times ahead. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep. Having influence but unknown motives isn't ideal. The facts are that he's unsettling a number of European leaders all whist his mate Trump is unsettling a number of other global leaders. Christ knows what they're playing at, but when you have Musk taking a vote on liberating Britain, and Trump wanting to annex other sovereign countries, you know that you've got interesting times ahead. 

Let's not go overboard. No one is going to attempt to conquer Britain. 

[whelk]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Let's not go overboard. No one is going to attempt to conquer Britain. 

Many Vietnamese are trying to migrate to our country. Yanks were hopeless last time at trying to take them out

[egg]

18 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Let's not go overboard. No one is going to attempt to conquer Britain. 

Of course they're not, but for whatever reason, the worst double act since cannon & ball are unsettling Europe and others which ain't ideal. 

[Turkish]

9 hours ago, whelk said:

Interesting interview here with the journalist who broke the story. Answers Turkish’s cover up question. Not as clear cut as either side may think 

 

Thanks for sharing that. It's more than interesting a must listen to for everyone commenting on this thread. I'll let people listen to it themselves and make their own minds up but its rare to hear someone speak with such power, in depth knowledge and unbiased stance. I thought the guy summed it up well at the end when said two things can be true at the same time and like you say it certainly isn't clear cut. 

[Turkish]

40 minutes ago, egg said:

Of course they're not, but for whatever reason, the worst double act since cannon & ball are unsettling Europe and others which ain't ideal. 

Ant & Dec disagree with you.

[egg]

7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Ant & Dec disagree with you.

Good shout. I forgot Hale & Pace as well. 

[revolution saint]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

I haven't ignored all of human history. You're ignoring the Internet and the fact that it does things that haven't been possible in the rest of human history. You can disagree with me but it's not a stupid argument. 

He has an awful lot of power and influence, whether you believe it's the most in human history in some ways or not. 

Musk isn't the living embodiment of the internet or social media though.  Of course he has a voice, and of course social media has an impact but (and I want to be quite specific here) he is not "in some ways the most powerful and influential person in all of human history".  He's not even the best exponent of social media to leverage attention into power (Trump).  There's been many many people in human history that have been powerful and influential and they've all done something - what has Musk actually done (apart from making a shit ton of money)?  The starlink thing is a good exercise in his execution of power and that's a good example to use but there's not much else besides creating some headlines that get people worked up.

So, yeah, you can make an argument that the internet is a powerful tool but don't conflate Musk with the internet.

[whelk]

51 minutes ago, egg said:

Good shout. I forgot Hale & Pace as well. 

Speedie and Dixon?

[trousers]

 *Ahem*

[egg]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Thanks for sharing that. It's more than interesting a must listen to for everyone commenting on this thread. I'll let people listen to it themselves and make their own minds up but its rare to hear someone speak with such power, in depth knowledge and unbiased stance. I thought the guy summed it up well at the end when said two things can be true at the same time and like you say it certainly isn't clear cut. 

I've not had a chance yet but I'll listen to it later. My interest will be to understand the evidence of a potential cover up, not speculation or opinion. 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, trousers said:

 *Ahem*

Blimey, Trump & Musk are struggling for top 5 shit now. 

[sadoldgit]

Again, I don’t want to get into the whole league placing thing but I am not a young man and cannot recall any one person who, as an unelected individual, caused so much consternation amongst so many foreign governments in such a short space of time as Elon Musk. Trump was the POTUS and will be again soon. Of course he has a bigger voice. That is what makes this so problematic. No one voted for Elon Musk.

[egg]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

Again, I don’t want to get into the whole league placing thing but I am not a young man and cannot recall any one person who, as an unelected individual, caused so much consternation amongst so many foreign governments in such a short space of time as Elon Musk. Trump was the POTUS and will be again soon. Of course he has a bigger voice. That is what makes this so problematic. No one voted for Elon Musk.

Yep. He's an unelected megalomaniac being given a massive platform, and as yet unknown authority. For me it's impossible not to look at what he and Trump are saying and doing in the round. 

[sadoldgit]

I know that the forum Islamophobes will not bother to read this article, but it clearly explains the issues here and how the “Asian Rape Gang” label is being used as a weapon against certain racial/religious groups in this country.

https://irr.org.uk/article/asian-grooming-gangs-media-state-and-the-far-right/

[whelk]

I don’t click on any links posted by arrogant uninformed blinkered bigots

[Lord Duckhunter]

36 minutes ago, egg said:

I've not had a chance yet but I'll listen to it later. My interest will be to understand the evidence of a potential cover up, not speculation or opinion. 

Maggie Oliver, who was part of the previous inquiry says the grooming gang section was a “whitewash” and explains why here. She claims only 1 victim was allowed to give evidence, Rochdale was only mentioned in relation to Cyril Smith, many towns weren’t mentioned,  and her evidence was cut. Pretty easy to find out if those things are true. Also says race absolutely played a part in this particular type of abuse, despite what some people claim. She doesn’t want another enquiry though. 
 

 

Edited yesterday at 11:02 by Lord Duckhunter

[Doctoroncall]

Original report can be downloaded here if anyone is interested in the 450 ish page report or the summary. 

Edited yesterday at 11:13 by Doctoroncall

[The Kraken]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

I don’t click on any links posted by arrogant uninformed blinkered bigots

And I don’t click on any post by forum anti-Semites.

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Maggie Oliver, who was part of the previous inquiry says the grooming gang section was a “whitewash” and explains why here. She claims only 1 victim was allowed to give evidence, Rochdale was only mentioned in relation to Cyril Smith, many towns weren’t mentioned,  and her evidence was cut. Pretty easy to find out if those things are true. Also says race absolutely played a part in this particular type of abuse, despite what some people claim. She doesn’t want another enquiry though. 
 

 

No surprise that you choose to completely miss the point again. Anyway, haters are going to hate. Why don’t you ask why the Tory Party did absolutely nothing to implement the recommendations of the previous 7 year enquiry?

So, Musk has already turned Twitter/X into a platform to disseminate far right propaganda, we now have Meta doing away with fact checking. You have to wonder what Trump has used to buy Zuckerberg off.

Before the right wing apologists start having a pop again, the vast majority of stuff that appears on my phone is anti Starmer, anti Labour, anti Liberalism and pro right/alt right/far right politics.

A political commentator made the point this morning that it is now very difficult to win an election with social media. Just let that sink in for a while given the way X and Meta are going.

Edited 23 hours ago by sadoldgit

[Sarnia Cherie]

The Tories should have implemented the findings of the grooming gangs inquiry but didn't act on any of the 20 recommendations put forward, despite being in power for long enough. Now they are shouting from the rooftops for yet another inquiry. It's just an excuse to kick the can a bit further down the road and not actually do anything. The UK has previous for these long-drawn out scandals. Hillsborough, Post Office, Infected Blood, Grenfell Tower, to name a few. They all take far too long with no improvements made and the victims waiting for decades for justice and compensation. Those responsible are never brought to book either. Governments of all major parties need to stop wetting themselves at the word 'Racist'. The plain facts are that these despicable crimes were carried out predominately by Asian men on young, white, vulnerable girls. We do not need another lengthy inquiry. We need someone with a backbone to implement the previous inquiry's findings now and lock up the perpetrators'.  

[The Kraken]

1 minute ago, Sarnia Cherie said:

The Tories should have implemented the findings of the grooming gangs inquiry but didn't act on any of the 20 recommendations put forward, despite being in power for long enough. Now they are shouting from the rooftops for yet another inquiry. It's just an excuse to kick the can a bit further down the road and not actually do anything. The UK has previous for these long-drawn out scandals. Hillsborough, Post Office, Infected Blood, Grenfell Tower, to name a few. They all take far too long with no improvements made and the victims waiting for decades for justice and compensation. Those responsible are never brought to book either. Governments of all major parties need to stop wetting themselves at the word 'Racist'. The plain facts are that these despicable crimes were carried out predominately by Asian men on young, white, vulnerable girls. We do not need another lengthy inquiry. We need someone with a backbone to implement the previous inquiry's findings now and lock up the perpetrators'.  

Andy Burnham setting his point out very well.

 

[sadoldgit]

3 minutes ago, Sarnia Cherie said:

The Tories should have implemented the findings of the grooming gangs inquiry but didn't act on any of the 20 recommendations put forward, despite being in power for long enough. Now they are shouting from the rooftops for yet another inquiry. It's just an excuse to kick the can a bit further down the road and not actually do anything. The UK has previous for these long-drawn out scandals. Hillsborough, Post Office, Infected Blood, Grenfell Tower, to name a few. They all take far too long with no improvements made and the victims waiting for decades for justice and compensation. Those responsible are never brought to book either. Governments of all major parties need to stop wetting themselves at the word 'Racist'. The plain facts are that these despicable crimes were carried out predominately by Asian men on young, white, vulnerable girls. We do not need another lengthy inquiry. We need someone with a backbone to implement the previous inquiry's findings now and lock up the perpetrators'.  

A great many of the perpetrators are already behind bars.

The point here is that child sex abuse is a problem and hasn’t been dealt with effectively for many years. It isn’t just Asian rape gangs. As we know it is more likely to happen within families and it has also been endemic in the Christian church for years (not that you know it based on the outage here against one ethnicity whilst virtually ignoring another).

If we are to believe that rape cases were ignored because the perpetrators were Muslims or of other Asian backgrounds, why were Christian abusers ignored for so long and why don’t the people who are very vocal about one not so vocal about the others?

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

Andy Burnham setting his point out very well.

 

it was a bit of a silly opening question really given we know there were local enquiries and Jess Phillips said that's what Oldham should do. The ask was for a national enquiry, which Andy Burnham agreed was the case. He generally talks a lot of sense.

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

A great many of the perpetrators are already behind bars.

The point here is that child sex abuse is a problem and hasn’t been dealt with effectively for many years. It isn’t just Asian rape gangs. As we know it is more likely to happen within families and it has also been endemic in the Christian church for years (not that you know it based on the outage here against one ethnicity whilst virtually ignoring another).

If we are to believe that rape cases were ignored because the perpetrators were Muslims or of other Asian backgrounds, why were Christian abusers ignored for so long and why don’t the people who are very vocal about one not so vocal about the others?

Just so we are clear, why are you against a national enquiry?

[whelk]

8 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

A great many of the perpetrators are already behind bars.

The point here is that child sex abuse is a problem and hasn’t been dealt with effectively for many years. It isn’t just Asian rape gangs. As we know it is more likely to happen within families and it has also been endemic in the Christian church for years (not that you know it based on the outage here against one ethnicity whilst virtually ignoring another).

If we are to believe that rape cases were ignored because the perpetrators were Muslims or of other Asian backgrounds, why were Christian abusers ignored for so long and why don’t the people who are very vocal about one not so vocal about the others?

Thick cunt

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

Thick cunt

He knows what he's doing. 

[hypochondriac]

9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

it was a bit of a silly opening question really given we know there were local enquiries and Jess Phillips said that's what Oldham should do. The ask was for a national enquiry, which Andy Burnham agreed was the case. He generally talks a lot of sense.

I've always liked Andy Burnham. Always strikes me as someone who genuinely wants to make a positive impact and is prepared to work across party lines and praise his opponents. I can respect that. 

[whelk]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

He knows what he's doing. 

Almost every other poster offers something of interest to read. This fella just drones on with his prejudices