> It's refreshing to see that the Kagi founder isn't on a political correctness crusade and chooses to focus on product.
What does waging wars and committing war crimes have to do with political correctness? Please help me understand. Besides, Kagi is heavily politicized, their moto is "humanize the web". Can't really see how one can be for humanizing the web when they have no problems financing regimes that dehumanize actual humans.
Yandex is connected to Russia's government similarly to how Google/Microsoft/Amazon/etc are connected to US's government, and perhaps Israel's government. Should he stop dealing with those companies too?
For someone who's totally not a Nazi, he sure keeps doing Nazi-adjacent things, such as calling people on government benefits part of the "parasite class" and supporting the AfD.
The fact that nobody is actually shocked by Grok's new behavior should be telling.
Yeah Nazis were against social welfare, but calling him a nazi because of that is a stretch.
supporting afd does not make him a nazi, nor is afd a nazi party.
Elon supports Netanyahu and Israel, a jewish state.
Elon is not a socialist, nor a nationalist. Elon is more free speech (not perfect) while Nazis are big on censorship. He is opposite to Nazi idealogy in most cases, specially the most important parts
Every major social media is complying with government takedowns. None of them are operating illegally.
Saying twitter is the most censored is completely delusional. "Controversial" (e.g alex jones, nick fuentes) people can't even make an account on other social media sites
> Saying twitter is the most censored is completely delusional
It's simply the facts. Elon allows people like Nick Fuentes and Alex Jones on the site because they share a political agenda. Twitter is the only social media site where e.g. links to competitor platforms are suppressed while the owner of the site artificially boosts his own posts above those that are more popular.
Twitter is the most cutting edge censorship platform.
What political agenda does he share with Nick Fuentes? They are complete opposites.
Links to competitor platforms being suppressed lol. Other social media sites ban you for having viewpoints that do not align with theirs. Who cares about linking to competitor platforms?
> What political agenda does he share with Nick Fuentes? They are complete opposites
They don't agree on everything, but it's simply wrong to state they are on opposite sides. They're both far right public figures and extreme Trump supporters that later became critics of the administration. I wouldn't label Elon as a Nazi, but he thinks racism is based just like Fuentes and is generally supportive of Nazi talking points which he is wont to retweet.
> Links to competitor platforms being suppressed lol
That's literally systematic censorship. The fact that you so flippantly dismiss it says a lot about your intellectual honesty on the topic.
> Other social media sites ban you for having viewpoints that do not align with theirs
> Same Elon that wants millions of indians with H1-B visas?
i think it's 100% true that somebody can be racist and also want to abuse the H1B program for personal gain
> I am much more concerned about opposing views being silenced.
which opposing view? let's be specific. some views are actually based in antisocial, harmful, selfish, worthless greed and we don't have to platform them.
> i think it's 100% true that somebody can be racist and also want to abuse the H1B program for personal gain
Then you have to make a very strong case of him being racist. Racists don't usually want to flood their country with foreigners.
> which opposing view? let's be specific. some views are actually based in antisocial, harmful, selfish, worthless greed and we don't have to platform them.
And who decides what views are antisocial, harmful, selfish, worthless greed? Is capitalism worthless greed? Trans can be considered harmful by some. Communism/Socialism is considered harmful by others. None of those should be banned.
To be specific, one view that gets you banned is talking about the overwhelming influence that "Israel" has over United States, media, news and politics/government.
> Then you have to make a very strong case of him being racist. Racists don't usually want to flood their country with foreigners.
i'm finding it hard not to respond glibly here. are you familiar with the history of slavery in america? or, perhaps, the history of apartheid in south africa? the point you're trying to make here does not stand.
> Is capitalism worthless greed?
i strongly believe so, so write me off now i guess
> Trans can be considered harmful by some
that's bait, but fine. by whom? to whom? don't bring up vague hypotheticals if you're not willing to defend their conclusions.
How are you comparing H1-B visas to slavery? Completely dishonest comparing work visas to forced slavery.
> i strongly believe so, so write me off now i guess
So do you see now why free speech is important, and that censoring content under vague labels like "harmful" or "worthless greed" isn't actually good, since a pro capitalist government can consider your statements as such?
> that's bait, but fine. by whom? to whom? don't bring up vague hypotheticals if you're not willing to defend their conclusions.
Bait how? Current US administration considers it harmful. Conservatives consider it harmful. The average person few decades considered it harmful.
He's obviously far right and everyone knows this, it's not worth my time to argue the point. Funny coming from someone throwing out insults like "delusional".
> Elon thinks racism is based? Same Elon that wants millions of indians with H1-B visas? Is that the far right view?
The two do not contradict each other. We're on HN, everyone understands the financial dynamics that underpin Elon's support for Indian immigration, none of that precludes him from racism. Your reasoning is even weaker than "the black friend" defense.
> Like what?
There are many examples. Google "you have said the actual truth" for one. I won't do further research on your behalf since you don't really care.
> Censoring competitor platforms is the least of my concerns when it comes to censorship
In other words, you don't actually care about censorship, you just have an axe to grind.
> I am much more concerned about opposing views being silenced.
And yet Twitter regularly silences critics while propping up sycophants. It seems to me that you're just dismissing it because it aligns with your biases.
Elon is not far right. It's just a label thrown at people as an attempt to invalidate their views rather than confronting the views themselves.
Ah yeah, he's so racist that he wants millions of foreigners in his country. It makes absolute no sense. You also haven't even provided any reasoning for him being racist.
> Google "you have said the actual truth" for one
That one is actual truth btw. But of course, in true "Nazi" fashion, he did an apology tour in Israel and in auswitzch.
It's funny how the claims of nazi links is always far reaching at straws. Oh he replied "you have said the actual truth" to someone on twitter talking about white hatred. Or he did a "nazi salute" while saying my heart goes out to you! Always nothing of substance. Nothing he does is pro 'nazi'. Importing millions of foreigners as a nazi is like being a jewish nazi btw. Goes completely against the ideaology.
I don't like elon musk but calling him racist/a nazi is just completely wrong.
> In other words, you don't actually care about censorship, you just have an axe to grind.
No, I care about censoring people's views and opinions and not censoring links to other platforms. If you can't see the difference then you are being dishonest.
> And yet Twitter regularly silences critics while propping up sycophants
No it doesn't regularly silence critics. Sometimes he will temporarily ban someone in his tantrum. Like I said, not perfect, but far better than any other mainstream social media. Regular stuff on twitter would get you insta banned elsewhere.
Believe what you like - Elon's right-wing political agenda is well documented and well known, even among the right wing.
It's similar regarding his endorsing antisemitism and racism. However, I understand that people on the right don't believe anything is racist or antisemitic unless it's something the Democrats are doing or saying, so I can at least accept that as the standard talking point.
It's not surprising that you also believe what is unequivocally a Nazi salute is "my heart goes out to you". I know you don't agree, but there's no discussion to be had about what is clearly apparent to the naked eye.
As far as the censorship goes, just google something like "elon musk silences critics" for many examples. You can save yourself the time to explain why it's all fake news and lies, I get it, but even some right-wingers have faced censorship from Elon, funny how even they suddenly agree with all the crazy liars when the leopard bites their face.
Anyway, we're operating in a fundamentally different reality. No point in discussing this further, but feel free to reply and I will read it. Have a great day.
I really don't know how to explain to you that "imports and employs people for cheap, compliant labor" does not automatically mean "personally likes those people".
Reword "Ah yeah, because Nazis were big on importing millions of Indian workers" to "Ah yeah, because Confederates were big on importing millions of African workers" and you'll see the dramatic logical failure in your attempted argument.
> Dude loves jews even
Thomas Jefferson reportedly loved Sally Hemmings. He still kept her (and his own resulting children!) enslaved.
If he didn't like those people, why would he want to share the country with millions of them?
Confederates weren't importing slaves (Let's just say there's a reason why slave auctions were often closed on Saturdays), but anyway, it's a different analogy since the slaves were not participating in society. They were slaves. They imported them knowing their kids will not share schools, they will not share restaurants, etc. They were imported with the impression they will not become American citizens. The millions of Indian workers have a pathway to greencard, or often they have children which become US citizens.
If you want to claim that Elon is racist despite him wanting millions of foreigners, you have to provide strong support for your claim.
Israel is the tip of the lance of the American Imperialism projecting power throughout the Middle East with the American backing. The regular American isn’t the beneficiary in any way, quite on the contrary, its their taxes that are backing it.
Iran will definitely continue pursuing uranium enrichment. IRIB claims that the enriched uranium stockpile was moved away from those locations - which makes sense, so they probably didn't lose their stockpile. They will build new enrichment sites, which means bombing again.
I think it's too early to say that the Fordow facility has definitely been destroyed. So far I've only heard Trump make the claim and I'm not inclined to take his word for it.
True, Trump's words are worthless. I'm hearing that the Iranian state media is claiming no irreversible damage at Fordow / only entry points were targeted - but ofcourse that doesn't carry much weight either.
FWIW one take on all of this that I have considered is that Israel and the US have been looking for an out that allows them to claim to have successfully achieved their objectives. I wouldn't be surprised if this attack was unsuccessful but won't be followed up if that becomes apparent later.
Israel only just (before this US bombing) claimed they had set Iran's nuclear program back by 2-3 years. I found the timing of the announcement curious.
This after suffering extensive damage from direct missile strikes (Haifa port/refinery, Mossad headquarters, Wiezmann institute, C4I/cyber defense, etc). I think the missile strikes have been much more damaging than expected and understandably under-reported. Weapons expert Ted Postol of MIT claims Israel's missile defense is only intercepting around 5%.
I think Israel will be very unhappy if things continue to escalate without further US involvement. Depending on how Iran retaliates against the US, further involvement might not be forthcoming. We've seen seen Iran attack a US base in Jordan without causing escalation from the US. Could expect something similar.
Unauthorized in the sense of a violation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a signatory. Whether Iran is actually violating the treaty is a matter of some dispute.
It's literally an anvil they drop out of the sky hoping to punch through structures like an aerial drilling platform. I guess it's dope, but it seems like cartoon armament to me.
"According to an anecdote, the idea arose after a group of Royal Navy officers saw a similar, but fictional, bomb depicted in the 1943 Walt Disney animated propaganda film Victory Through Air Power,[Note 10] and the name Disney was consequently given to the weapon."
Let's get rid of all nuclear weapons. Why are we picking on Israel here? Unlike the US Israel has never used theirs (or admitted they actually have them). Russia has openly threatened the west with nuclear attack.
It's not really the reason Iran wants to have nuclear weapons though. Iran wants to have nuclear weapons to destroy Israel but more generally to be able to act with impunity.
Israel has nothing against Iran. Before the Islamic revolution there were warm relations between the countries and the people. They are pretty distant geographically and until now have never fought a direct war. Iran has been actively attacking Israel via proxies for decades now and openly claims it wants to destroy it. Israel, at least to date, has shown that it can be trusted to use nuclear weapons as a pure deterrent.
I'd rather live in a world without nuclear weapons but I'm a lot more worried about Russia and Pakistan (e.g.).
By the way, we've seen what value security guarantees have to countries willing to give up nuclear deterrence in Ukraine. Not worth anything.
Israel and the Palestinians have a history of violence from Israel's first day as a country. Israel and Iran not really. More recently Israel has been attacked by Palestinians on Oct 7th. Iran was involved in training Hamas: https://ecfr.eu/article/iran-hamas-and-islamic-jihad-a-marri...
"The Hamas-led attacks against Israel on 7 October reflected their own independent calculations. Although they could not have happened without the provision of long-term Iranian support, the attacks likely came as an unwelcome surprise for Tehran, which over the last two months has avoided giving Palestinian groups full-throated support. Whether Hamas and PIJ remain tightly aligned with Iran, however, will depend on the outcome of the war in Gaza and wider dynamics in the Middle East’s fluctuating geopolitics."
Israel has really no history of any hostility towards Iran that predates their proxy wars on Israel. There is absolutely no rational reason or excuse for Iran to be attacking Israel.
Israel has been oppressing Palestinians long before Oct 7th.
Israel was involved in supporting ISIS. That's why ISIS never attacked Israel (except that one time accidentally which they apologized for! How crazy is that?)
> Israel has really no history of any hostility towards Iran that predates their proxy wars on Israel. There is absolutely no rational reason or excuse for Iran to be attacking Israel.
Israel has a history of hostility towards multiple neighbouring states. US has invaded Iraq for Israel. Iran does not want to be next.
> Exactly.
So you agree Israel should not be allowed nuclear weapons
Israel wasn't really at war with either Lebanon or Yemen or with the Palestinians. It was with Hezbollah and the Houthis and Hamas. All attacked Israel with no provocation before Israel retaliated.
Syria is a different story. Israel did bomb military assets in Syria once the Assad regime fell/fled out of concerns they would fall into the hands of Jihadists. It also took territory to expand the zone it controls in case said Jihadists have intentions of proceeding into Israel. It took advantage of a vacuum in an uncertain security situation. During Assad's reign it did not bomb Syria since the 1973 war (where Syria attacked Israel with no provocation, that was Assad the father fwiw).
Sure, by that token the US wasn’t really at war with Germany or Vietnam, it was at war with the Nazis and the Viet Cong. It’s a meaningless distinction to anyone actually affected by the wars.
Additionally, Israel bombed Damascus during Assad’s reign.
Here’s one recent example (bombing an embassy building):
Iran seemed like they were doing fine in the existence department, no? I have a lot of disagreement (to put it mildly) with Israel, but I think they'd be fine letting Iran be if they'd stop funding Hezbollah and the Houthis, and quieted down with the "Israel must be destroyed" rhetoric.
(And before the argument changes subject, I think Iran [and others] are justified in being angry with Israel about what they're doing in Gaza.)
Netanyahu has consistently said he wanted a regime change in Iran, alongside Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan. Iran does not want to end up like the other countries.
I mean, other neighboring countries close to Israel have largely made peace with the country, and they have no nukes. Iran stands out in terms of constantly funding proxies to attack it.
