Hacker News Reader

Comment by snovv_crash | Hacker News Reader

He refused to censor Russian news sources via Starlink?

He won’t and can’t yet admit it publicly, but his ideology is closer to Russian ideology than what used to be the west moral values (human rights, democracy, free speech, …). He’s a natural born liar, bullshiter, cheater… he lied his way to become the richest person in the US. He’s similar to trump. No real expertise, just bold bullshit statements. He stands for nothing, except his personal glory, money and domination. How can anyone not see this is beyond me…

Some sources on which you base your argument would help.

I could link some drama and bad press on him, but it's beyond that. Just like you only need to listen to Trump for a few monologues to know it's all rotten inside. With Musk, the "benefit of the doubt" period is probably longer, as he targets a more educated audience.

But for me it's now clear he's not a good person by any mean. He's filthy rich and not anywhere close to satiation, now he's throwing his money at twitter "to defend freedom of speech". That's gross, he's obviously after more control over twitter to better push his personal agenda. I don't pretend to know what it is, but it's certainly not about human rights, freedom of speech or democracy...

> Just like you only need to listen to Trump for a few monologues to know it's all rotten inside.

Again with the mind reading. You might be right by the way. It’s not like I’m an Elon Musk fan boy or Trump fan boy. But you have no idea what’s going on in other people’s heads. They might be better people than your hallucinations, or they might be substantially worse people. Those of us outside of their brains simply don’t know.

So... do you sincerely feel like you have no idea if Trump is a good and honest person or not? With so many, many red flags, at some point you have to go with what your intuition is telling you, right? If you're still giving "benefit of the doubt" to Trump, what would make you take a stance?

I'm really concerned with that current mood of not "taking sides"... At some point you have to say what you stand for. And acknowledge that Trump is miles away from that, assuming you stand for human rights, democracy, honesty, ...

Or maybe he actually, somehow, stand for those values. Then he does a so bad job at promoting them that he's still harmful. Why are people so quick to say "we don't know" regarding Trump, and then "but Biden sure is doing a terrible job".

Something sounds off.

What did I say about Biden? What did I say about benefit of the doubt? Or did you answer the wrong comment?

You said "we can never know". I don’t buy these way to dismiss critics, when evidence is overwhelming. Sure we can never be certain of anything. Yet we make choices in our lives, we go with what we feel is likely true. I hear a lot of such very "prudent" views about Trump and Musk. I never hear such prudent views about non-fascist persons. Suddenly the same people have strong opinions… doesn’t sound like honest discourse to me.

This is a disingenuous argument because we are capable of judging people based on the outcomes of their actions. By your metric, you can't estimate people's attitudes and mindsets at all, you can just eternally say "what they just did was bad but we can't hold that against them".

> By your metric, you can't estimate people's attitudes and mindsets at all, you can just eternally say "what they just did was bad but we can't hold that against them".

More hallucinations

Its an opinion man, not a peer-reviewed journal.

Actually it’s not an opinion, like saying I enjoy pizza with pineapple. It’s a completely unsupportable statement of fact.

It's their opinion of a person. You can judge someone without having explicit statements from them

You absolutely can, I agree. But you can’t read their mind.

You can infer what they think based on their words and actions. You’re pedantry here about not knowing what someone is thinking without “mind reading” is A: incorrect unless you believe inferring things is impossible and B: a pointless interrupt to the conversation

great contributions you're providing here.

> He stands for nothing, except his personal glory, money and domination.

Mind reading.

Instead of hearing to what he says, look at what he does. To be fair, carefully hearing to what he says or implies already hints at... nothing good.

> He won’t and can’t yet admit it publicly, but his ideology is closer to Russian ideology than what used to be the west moral values (human rights, democracy, free speech, …).

Strange post when Russia is currently committing genocides, something I don't think Tesla has ever done!

The hypocritical interpretation: He saw the opportunity for positive marketing for his company with only little investment.

So he is pro free speech and non censorship and allowing for idiots to make idiots of themselves. I see no problem here.

Having come from a quasi socialist dictatorship and being a foreign born Hispanic ,I would fight for the right of the racist idiots to post there idiotic comments. You fight ignorance with education and rational debate, not with censorship.

It appears that Elon wants to treat Adults as Adults and let them make up their own minds. Unless you are bad at adulting this shouldn't be a negative, but a positive. Let me make up my own mind and don't have a Corporate Oligarch and a Gov't riddled with conflict of interest spoon feed me or use group think bullying to shape society based on Tech Oligarch morality and political believes.

Only that these idiots become one radicalized group of 40% of Americans and try to topple the United States again.

Your comment is exactly why we shouldn't censor people and the consequence of getting filtered uncontested MSM and Oligarch scrubbed news , if you are insinuating there was an insurrection.

If anyone has become radicalized its the tech oligarch, hollywood, MSM and BOTH the democrat and republican party.

They do nothing but promote hatred , intolerance, and violence among the people in order to keep them fighting with each other.

> You fight ignorance with education and rational debate, not with censorship.

If humans were rational, that might be true, but humans aren't rational. Studies, and just looking at people's response to social media, have shown this.

Try changing someone's opinions with facts, and it will usually fail, but systematically post a bunch of fake content on social media, and many people will literally be willing to ruin their lives or even die over it.

So, if humans aren't rational, why do you trust anyone to curate available information and do their censorship duties well?

And?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com