September 25, 2024

"Mr. Trump appeals to some Silicon Valley elites because they identify with the man. To them, he is a fellow victim of the state..."

"... unjustly persecuted for his bold ideas. Practically, he is also the shield they need to escape accountability. Mr. Trump may threaten democratic norms and spread disinformation; he could even set off a recession, but he won’t challenge their ability to build the technology they like, no matter the social cost.... Most Americans... blame tech companies for contributing to the mental health crisis among teenagers, political polarization, rampant misinformation and privacy violations. Many of us, reading the evidence about social media’s negative effects on our children, do not want to make the same mistake of failing to create guardrails for new technologies, however promising they may be. Mr. Trump’s tech supporters see it differently. Echoing monopolists of the past, they say they are the victims of zealous progressives who want to overregulate the industry.... But just as we needed rules of the road for cars and safety regulations for planes, we need to manage these new technologies through public policy to ensure we like what they are doing to us, not resign ourselves to letting them run wild...."

Writes Chris Hughes, chair of the Economic Security Project (and a co-founder of Facebook), in "Why Do People Like Elon Musk Love Donald Trump? It’s Not Just About Money" (NYT).

109 comments:

n.n said...

Bigots, reactionaries, capitalists, now they are progressive.

rehajm said...

No mention of Musk’s hatred of Democrats coordinating with tech companies to suppress free speech I see. What bilge….

rehajm said...

These are intelligent people who are troubled by the direction Democrats want to go…

RideSpaceMountain said...

"he is also the shield they need to escape accountability."

The 'accountability' they're trying to escape is the blackmail democrats have put them under for not toeing the line and spreading their message. Tech companies like Alphabet and Meta that are still on the reservation get a pass. Companies like X are off the plantation and must be brought to heel.

The entire edifice of public communication in this country is and has served as a multi-trillion dollar in-kind contribution to the democratic party and socialism in general, and that facade of trust has been broken.

These companies are exploiting cracks, and "the accountability" they're escaping is the Damoclean Sword held over their heads by the deep state that avoids accountability at all costs. Of course tech wants out from under.

Art in LA said...

What ever happened to "Think Different", from the old Apple ad campaign? I believe Apple is headquartered in Silicon Valley, right? ;-)

I'm again reminded of the Rush song "Subdivisions" ... "conform or be cast out."

Kakistocracy said...

A rich man, appointing the world’s richest man to… write the regulations that govern the income & assets of the rich? This candidate is supposed to be a man of the working class? What a joke.

narciso said...

ever since he sold the new republic to steinhardt (which didn't improve things) we hadn't heard from chris, wasn't he one of the facebook stockholders with diluted shares

Original Mike said...

I don't need to be lectured by a founder of Facebook on "spreading disinformation".

Gusty Winds said...

Elon Musk has explained clearly why he supports Trump. Musk thinks Biden/Harris and the Democrats are working toward one party totalitarian rule via 1) voter fraud and 2) importing illegal immigrants and allowing them to vote. Both are obvious. Here we get some beta-cuck liberal, in the NYTs of course... telling us the "real reason" why Musk supports Trump. Such bullshit.

RideSpaceMountain said...

A professional fluffer, appointed by the crazy party to...certify the regulations that govern every American's daily lives? This hooker is supposed to be the candidate after receiving zero primary votes? What a joke.

Iman said...

Indeed!

Jupiter said...

"Mr. Trump may threaten democratic norms and spread disinformation ..."
Or then again, maybe there is zero evidence to support that moronic claim.

Iman said...

eat teh cat, ricardo.

CJinPA said...

The same argument was made about Reagan and earlier industries. Strip away the tech jargon, and it's just a call for more regulation and the dangers of insufficient government involvement.
Few under 40 would know how old this argument is.

Freeman Hunt said...

"we need to manage these new technologies through public policy to ensure we like what they are doing to us"

No, thank you.

Dave Begley said...

As if Chris Hughes has any credibility.

Gusty Winds said...

Do we really thinks Chris Hughes analysis in genuine? I don't think for a minute he believes any the bullshit he writes. It's sophistry. As soon as the "disinformation" platitude us used, you know the author if full of shit.

Ice Nine said...

>"Mr. Trump appeals to some Silicon Valley elites...we need to manage these new technologies through public policy"<

I see. So because Trump appeals to some of these tech magnates, "we need to manage these new technologies through public policy."

Let me fix that for clarification: "We (Democrats - now known as the party of technocrats and coastal elites, btw) need to manage these new technologies (those of them headed up by those to whom Trump appeals, that is) through public policy." (Sergey, Larry, Sundar, Zuck, Reed...you guys are good.)

Kate said...

1- Trump was ready to ban TikTok at one point. To call him hands off with tech is wrong.

2- Just because tech bros don't agree with this writer's solution to children's exposure to social media doesn't mean they're indifferent to the problem.

3- Agreeing with a candidate's policies isn't the same as liking the man.

4- Being open to new ideas, as Trump showed with his visit to the crypto conference, doesn't mean he supports unfettered markets. It does mean that he listens, and everyone likes to be heard.

Lloyd W. Robertson said...

Progressives want the tech to keep developing so they can control us all. Republicans may want to make sure the private sector is free to innovate. A lot of common ground there were a lot of people can get hurt.

Leland said...

Elon Musk likes Donald Trump because Trump doesn’t call Elon a villain for supporting free speech and providing thousands of jobs in EV cars manufacturing and space access. The people behind Harris would be happy to put Elon in jail or simply let Brazil in jail. See Pavel Durov.

Dave Begley said...

"Hughes and Sean Eldridge [husband] bought a $2 million residence in New York's 19th congressional district with the reported purpose of permitting Eldridge to run for the congressional seat there. In 2014, Eldridge lost his congressional bid by 29 points." From Wikipedia. Hughes also bought and sold (at a loss) the New Republic magazine.

planetgeo said...

The Democrats treat businesses just like the mob does...play ball by their rules and pay your protection fee or you're going to be in a world of hurt. And both Trump and Musk have learned that the hard way. You shouldn't need to be the world's smartest person to see daily evidence of that reality.

Talk about "accountability". What a Bozo article.

Earnest Prole said...

I suspect it’s because tech is neurodivergent-friendly and tolerates — indeed, some would say celebrates — narcissism. It takes all kinds to make the world go round.

Esteban said...

What garbage. The Dems and upper class elites ignore democratic norms more than anyone.

Paul Zrimsek said...

He somehow manages to be a Baptist and a bootlegger at the same time.

Paul Zrimsek said...

But just as we needed rules of the road for cars and safety regulations for planes, we need to manage these new technologies through public policy to ensure we like what they are doing to us, not resign ourselves to letting them run wild....

Now do the New York Times.

MadisonMan said...

Another NYTimes article that started with a biased idea in the journalist's mind, and then was written with items found to support the bias.

Kevin said...

Too many people readily accept the need for "sensible regulation" at face value, even as they have no idea what that might mean.

Yancey Ward said...

You know Hughes really, really wanted to write "Trump claims, without evidence, that he is being persecuted."

Kakistocracy said...

It’s a handful of west coast financiers doing what Wall Street bankers have long done — feathering their nests. They represent Silicon Valley about as much as the traditional Wall Street types represent the Bronx.

I don’t entirely disagree with some of the sentiment around innovation and competition, but if these people think a Trump presidency can’t hurt their businesses then they are delusional.

There’s something disingenuous about Silicon Valley. It wouldn’t exist without government funding from DARPA in the 1970s.

Yet many entrepreneurs seem to read Atlas Shrugged and decide they’ve done it all themselves, and all regulation is bad etc.

Of course no-one will challenge them while stock prices keep rising.

Original Mike said...

"Silicon Valley. It wouldn’t exist without government funding from DARPA in the 1970s."

So if DARPA hadn't provided some funding way back when, we'd all be sitting here in 2024 twiddling our thumbs with no internet. You really believe that?

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Sounds like Chris is auditioning for Head Propaganda Minister. If Kamala can’t use him I’m sure Kim Jong-Un has an opening.

reader said...

I thought parents were the guardrail that’s supposed to protect their children. Of course that means you have to parent your kid not befriend them.

I jail broke the iPhone my son used and placed an app on it that tracked location, numbers called, texts sent and received, and websites visited. I didn’t check it daily or even weekly. I told him I did it and I wanted him to stop and think about the consequences of everything he did and how it could impact him. I stopped when he was in high school and told him he had to start thinking of how things would impact his college applications and later his jobs/family.

RideSpaceMountain said...

What he's saying is that government intervention in free markets is good, so long as those it helped "pay the pizzo" and bend over and take it when the deep state commands. It's quite fascist actually. Mussolini would be proud.

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Cook said...

"I don't need to be lectured by a founder of Facebook on 'spreading disinformation.'"


Why would you even fleetingly consider FACEBOOK a source of information at all, much less one that is "spreading disinformation?" It's a digital party line, an all-hours gathering place for friends (and "friends") to share their interests and opinions. Do you also consider cocktail parties or local taverns or the guys running three card Monte games in Times Squares as sources of information/disinformation? Sheesh!

Harun said...

Yes, Facebook is a source of information. And yes, if your neighbor says he saw a burglar breaking into cars last night, its actually news. Facebook also censored news in 2020 and censors people a lot. The "guardrails" were wrong- the Biden laptop was news and it was used in Hunter's trial.

n.n said...

That is such a meta-projection of his authentic selfie.

Jaq said...

" Mr. Trump may threaten democratic norms and spread disinformation; he could even set off a recession"

You mean democratic norms like voter ID, or settling election disputes as per the US Constitution by consulting state legislatures, or refraining from using one's power over the DoJ to prosecute one's political rivals based on known lies?

Or spread known disinformation such that the laptop came from Russia, or that the Clinton bought and paid for "dossier" was somehow real enough to investigate Trump for two years based on something that the CIA head wrote in his own notes at the time they first came up that it was cooked up by the Hillary campaign?

And speaking of a recession? This is just them tipping that hand that we are already all but in one, thanks to the Smoot Hawley style impacts of the sanctions we imposed as part of our bid to expand NATO to the doorstep of the Kremlin. The only thing keeping us out of a recession is the unsustainable policy of borrowing a trillion dollars every three months to pay the bills.

Once you see it, it becomes such a joke, how our elites always accuse their enemies of whatever it is that they are doing.

Harun said...

Meanwhile we know Facebook censored the truth in 2020. They admitted to it. Chris Hughes, look in the mirror, bro. You're the censor. You're the one doing disinformation.

Jaq said...

They are far too obvious nowadays. Just like Ingaramus, Rich, and 'Dr Weevil,' not a word comes from their keyboards but what it has been approved by the appropriate minister of propaganda.

Dude1394 said...

Trump may even bring on a recession. Absolute bull****.

Cormac Kehoe said...

It may well be that government has a role "to create guardrails for new technologies," but surely parents play a much bigger role when it comes to social media sites. Try growing a pair and not giving your 5 year old a tablet or your 10 year old a phone. And if you do give your child a device (you wimp), block all the social sites and youtube etc.

Jaq said...

Don't you remember? Al Gore invented the internet. I thought that everybody knew that.

Michael K said...

Nobody is saying Trump is "Working Class," Bich. It's just that they do better when he is running things and keeping his promises

Original Mike said...

"Why would you even fleetingly consider FACEBOOK a source of information at all,"

Well that's a non sequitur. I don't consider Facebook, nor FACEBOOK, a source of information. I'm referring to their collusion with the Biden administration to spread disinformation.

Michael K said...

Agreed

tim maguire said...

Sometimes the Times commenters surprise me with their ability to see through the propaganda and manipulation. This was not one of those times. The hatred of Trump is too strong to see through BS even this blatant.

Steve said...

So Musk is on Team R. Bezos, Zuckerberg, Paige and Gates are all on Team D. Is this article merely calling out tech guys/gals who don't step into line?

Robert Cook said...

"Yes, Facebook is a source of information. And yes, if your neighbor says he saw a burglar breaking into cars last night, its actually news. Facebook also censored news in 2020 and censors people a lot. The 'guardrails' were wrong- the Biden laptop was news and it was used in Hunter's trial."

Facebook, (or, rather, it's myriad of users) can publish actual "information," just as your neighbor or in-laws may provide you with accurate information. But that does not make Facebook, or your neighbor or in-laws actual "information sources," that is, news organs and other sources that exist (purportedly) entirely to promulgate accurate "information." One cannot accept anything published on Facebook as being true until it is verified by other, more responsible sources. Of course, any source can be either accurate or inaccurate, but news organs stand and fall on their function (and reputation) as providers of information; the expectation is that they are providing accurate information, to the degree available as events are unfolding...unless and until that expectation is voided by outright (and proved) deception by the "news source." With Facebook or your friends or relatives, it's the opposite: assume it's bullshit first, and accept only what is verified later by other sources.

Original Mike said...

"[Facebook is] a digital party line, an all-hours gathering place for friends (and "friends") to share their interests and opinions."

You do understand that FACEBOOK does not view itself that way, right? They absolutely consider themselves an information source. (For the record, I do not have a Facebook account. Their business model disgusts me.)

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Spreading disinformation like Kamala claiming her boss was on top on his game just days before he had to drop out of the race due to cognitive impairment?

Jamie said...

One cannot accept anything published on Facebook as being true until it is verified by other, more responsible sources.

And if we discover that Facebook is purposely suppressing information that we might otherwise be able to check up on with other, more responsible sources that are also suppressing that information?

The problem, or at any rate one problem, with this debate is that the Left insists on treating each individual instance of pro-Left censorship or information suppression as an isolated event, rather than a piece of a systemic pattern. It's the flip side of the "convicted of 34 felonies! Indicted 144,000 times!" thing - an attempt at a statistical trick, with the object obfuscation of the truth.

narciso said...

Sometimes as Taranto wags, Times readers do read their own paper, their writers don't usually,

chuck said...

Ye old lizard brain wears a tux when in public.

John henry said...

Mr. Trump may threaten democratic norms

I'd like someone to explain HOW he threatens democratic norms. (Defining democracy as majority rule)

Then I would need someone to explain WHY threatening democratic norms would be a bad thing?

The problem with democracy is in the second syllable, cracy meaning, roughly "rule".

The United States were founded on the principle of freedom. Hamilton thought that was obvious from the body of the Constitution but wiser, more farseeing heads prevailed, and we got the first 10 Amendments "The Bill of Rights" they are all about freedom. Freedom of assembly, press, religion, arms freedom from searches etc. All those freedoms were at heart, freedoms protecting us from govt.

Until recently US politics and most political speech has been about liberty and freedom and the like (we always paid lip service if we did not always honor it in practice) The CIA did not found "Radio Democracy" or Radio Democratic Europe" to bring the skinny to the lesser nations. It was "Radio Liberty" and "Radio Free Europe". FDR did not make a big deal of the "4 democracies", it was the 4 freedoms.

Democracy, election of a republican form of govt, has always been in the mix. But somewhat down from the top. We have always been more about freedoms.

Democracy is all about imposing govt on us and regulating, restricting or elminating those freedoms. If 51% can free the slaves, 51% can reimpose slavery. If 51% can allow unlimited abortion, 51% can forbid any abortion.

Or anything else.

We need less govt and less democracy. Not more. Democracy is not compatible with freedom. I prefer the latter.

John Henry

John henry said...

I said 51% decides if gay marriage is legal or illegal. True in theory, not in practice in most democracies. It is the noisy 20% or so, perhaps less, that push things through claiming to be the majority. And then tell us "This is what democracy looks like." Yes, it does. And that is why I am not a fan.

My body, my choice.

John Henry

Kakistocracy said...

It's not that these individuals are involved in technology; it's that they've become rich from their involvement in technology. They're wealthy people who will vote for a Republican to protect their wealth. Competence in government to them means a person in government who will act in such a way as to let them win. And not just a bit, but in a winner-take-all way. It's Peter Thiel's theory that every tech investment should turn into a monopoly (read his lectures on economics), and Thiel has said, on the record, that he "will hold [his] nose and vote for Trump." Silicon Valley venture capitalists enjoy a great many tax breaks that they are afraid of losing and that is the sole reason they would support Trump.

I'm sure partners in private equity firms and other wealthy individuals will on the whole support Trump for the same reason.
This is likely the most accurate take. What better way to mitigate the consequences of protectionism and anti-trust regulators than to bribe the guy in charge?

Aggie said...

Kamala is from the 'working class', then? Take your time: Tell us all about her 'working class' roots and experiences as a lifelong, professional politician living off the public teat.

John henry said...

I don't see what business govt has regulating tech AT ALL. A democracy might decide that we really only need one search engine and Google is it. Then restrict the rights of others to play in at field. Kind of like we do with electricity.

Ditto Twitter, Facebook, TikTok et al.

Not me. I like the idea of many competitors fighting it out. I don't like Google so almost never use it. I switched to DDG 10-15 years ago, used Privatlee before that. Google has no benefits over those, or Bing. I've been using Brave on my desktop for the past month or two. Works great, as good as any other. There are specialized search engines if I need them.

When the govt took control of Twitter people said "Tough shit, start your own. It's a private business it can do what it likes" So now we have Gab, Discord, Truth, Mastodon and other Twitter clones. Best of all, someone with money decded he didn't like Twitter and now we have X.

And so on.

Freedom. Freedom to choose which services we patronize and which we shun.

My keyboard, my choice.

John Henry

Shouting Thomas said...

A ton of fancy verbiage to disguise what we’re talking about here: censorship.

John henry said...

very few of the regulations that touch us daily are imposed by govt. If you buy a TV, as I was thinking about Monday (Could not find one without spyware) it has an HDMI port. And every HDMI cable and device will work with it.

Or a lightbulb. Every light bulb will fit in every socket.

Or a hose bib, or a tin can or most anything we touch.

Very little of it is regulated by govt. If I want to make a lightbulb with different threads, I am free to do so. Nobody will buy it because it does not fit anything, but I can make them and try to sell them.

When the govt does try to regulate stuff, it is a fiasco. Back in the 80s govt wanted to mandate the 5-1/4" floppy as the standard. Had they done that, we never would have gotten the 3-1/2" floppy, or the 1TB (equal to millions of floppies) thumb drive that I can carry around in my sock.

I can see a case for regulating or banning Tik-Tok but because it is Chinese and we have some issues with them. I can't see a case for banning or regulating X or Facebook, or Google etc. And I am against regulating or banning Tik-Tok.

I would like to see President Trump, in January, announce that henceforth no Google or Chrome on govt computers. Ditto facebook or even X except for official communication.

But there is no need to regulate it.

John Henry

Butkus51 said...

Democrats never have told a lie. Ever.

Every issue today can be traced back to democrat policies. Inflation, border, crime, covid, war, Kids (stupid, entitled or transitioning), etc.

I'll throw in Epstein , good old Harv and Diddy.

But they never lie dammit.

Peachy said...

You really are clueless - bich.

Peachy said...

No. It's a simple question of rejecting the authoritarian Left.

Marcus Bressler said...

Yeah, FB never was a news source... Bwhahahaha. I seem to remember if you tried to post anything about Covid that was not in total alignment with The Narrative, you got censored and given a link to a site with the "correct form of thinking about Covid." That makes it a news source.

John henry said...

Anyone else remember these "People for the American Way" TV commercials from the 1980s? Here is one from 1985 about the right to like different kinds of music.

Tagline: "The right to have and express your own opinions. Freedom of thought. It's the American Way"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX1sRdfQ8Uo

From 1980 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEyIrGM0K6g

More recently they seem to have gone to the darkside of never trumpism.

John Henry

John henry said...

Robin Williams in a moving 1985 performance as "The Flag"

John Henry

Michael K said...

Well, it worked with Biden. Trump has his money, so less risk.

Michael K said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Leora said...

The drive of the mediocre to manage the productive never ceases to amaze me.

mccullough said...

Musk and Trump build things.

Leland said...

Yes.

Leland said...

I see a reason, but not in this medium. FCC is absolutely necessary to keep communication channels open. Otherwise people would be jamming radio waves with the winner having the biggest broadcast power and highest antenna. But the internet doesn’t have this problem, but it can still get dominated other ways. Those other ways don’t get resolved by the regulation they claim is necessary.

Michael K said...

I worry that he might be too late to stop the one we are in. Remember how the GHWBush "recession" had ended before his term was up. "It's the economy, stupid" was a lie. Bush was just a bad candidate.

Michael K said...

Which makes them rare anymore.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

As if airplanes would be "unsafe" without the guiding hand of government. Seems like there were no doors falling off Boeings during the deregulated airline era but it happens now. Traffic rules for cars are mostly a local issue and if a speed limit is too low, for example, you can lobby your town to change it. It was a good 40 or more years after cars were widely adopted before we had Federal highway regulations. Seatbelts were introduced without government rules.

I don't think this writer thought these things through or really knows anything.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

That was group Norman Lear founded. A family friend was a longtime employee of his production company.

Original Mike said...

"Facebook trained government officials on how to censor Americans, giving them access to a special portal for reporting “misinformation,” according to new documents released by America First Legal (AFL).

The company “streamlined” the censorship process for the Biden-Harris administration’s Centers for Disease Control (CDC), according to an AFL press release. The presentation detailed the training CDC employees received, including how to submit posts for removal, the organization said."


The fact that this happened is no longer news, but this gives us a look at the mechanics of the process.

Dogma and Pony Show said...

I think the author's fairly glib assumption that it's a good idea for government or anyone else to be able to pre-approve the development of new technologies needs careful examination. Who could possibly trust the government to make the right calls on what technologies should or should not be developed, and to not abuse the power to decide?

Christopher B said...

Walter Duranty read that stream of BS from Cookie, and grinned from ear to ear

Shahid Q. Public said...

Note the lack of specifics as to this accountability that the Silicon Valley folks are trying to avoid. That’s because his “accountability” is just obeisance to Democrat partisan preferences.

Kakistocracy said...

I think the trade-off is very simple. Vance, like Trump, will cut their taxes, disable the regulatory agencies, and give them gold-plated access to the White House.

Musk is a giant blinking billboard blaring out to the American people that the system needs serious reform. In fact, that may be the biggest takeaway from the Republican convention--the need for America to go in new more democratic directions. Certainly it needs to listen to the majority of its women who now more than ever dominate its middle.

The Republican party on display at the RNC was a plutocratically addled group drunk on its own Kool Aid. A good Democratic party should be able to really run up the score on these guys.

Original Mike said...

"and give them gold-plated access to the White House."

Yeah, tech's lack of access to the White House the last four years has been hard on them…

PM said...

The maker of the world's most popular electric car. They hate him. So awesome.

Mary Beth said...

Most Americans... blame tech companies for contributing to the mental health crisis among teenagers, political polarization, rampant misinformation and privacy violations.

Most? There was a time when novels were blamed for the same sorts of things. It's easier to blame social media than to find and correct the real causes of these problems.

Original Mike said...

"It's easier to blame social media than to find and correct the real causes of these problems."

There's pretty good evidence that social media IS the real cause of these problems. Check out Jonathan Haidt's compelling research on the problem.

Just because blaming novels was stupid, it does not follow that blaming social media is too.

Craig Mc said...

"Mr. Trump may threaten democratic norms..."

My trip-wire signaling that the author is an idiot, and I can safely ignore anything else they have to say.

Michael K said...

I can remember back before Microsoft even had a lobbyist in DC. The Democrat Congress was mauling them until Gates hired a lobby staff to pay off the Congress.

Michael K said...

Bich, as usual, is claiming to know things he has no idea of. Hewlett and Packard started their company in 1939, long before DARPA.

boatbuilder said...

What the government insider techies like Hughes want is the power to censor without the liability for wrongful censorship. What the Trump/Musk people want is free speech, without liability for failing to censor.
One approach is consistent with the Constitution.

Mikey NTH said...

The Left is very conformist in their studied nonconformity.

Michael K said...

Bich is once again in fantasy land. Married women are mostly Republicans. It is young women who are single that vote D. Looking for daddy.

boatbuilder said...

Right--and the major media and Hollywood--which unabashedly promote and celebrate Democrat/socialist positions and values--are narcissist-free.

boatbuilder said...

So there are no wealthy people who support Democrats? Is protection of wealth the only reason to support Republicans? What about Zuck, Bezos, Buffett?
My daughter and son-in-law live in Old Town Alexandria. A whole lot of wealth in evidence. Not a lot of Republicans (aside from my son-in-law). That wealth doesn't come from private industry (at least not directly). It's government money. Obtained from taxpayers and distributed to and by those in power. Which Democrats (and GOPe Republicans) are all in favor of.

Rocco said...

Original Mike
"So if DARPA hadn't provided some funding way back when, we'd all be sitting here in 2024 twiddling our thumbs with no internet. You really believe that?"

And Tang. Don't forget Tang.

Elisha Gray was a brilliant inventor who invented the telephone. Unfortunately for him, he invented it a couple of months after Alexander Graham Bell had already invented the telephone.

Most breakthroughs don't come about in isolation. If one person didn't invent something, someone else would have not much later.

boatbuilder said...

Yeah, no "gold-plated access to the White House" when the Dems hold the office.
What does the Constitution say about "new more democratic directions?" Go screw with some other country's founding principles before you mess with those of the Greatest Nation in History.

Lazarus said...

First of all, deep psychology isn't needed. The economy was better under Trump. Isn't that something good and a reason to support him? Second, are social media tycoons really flocking to Trump? I suspect some engineering types producing hardware or practical apps may be. But I doubt Facebook, Instagram or Google are gaga for Trump. Musk is definitely an outlier.

Drago said...

LOL

And to think LLR-democratical Chuck felt comfortable enough with Abacus Boy LLR-democratical Rich to represent the FakeCon gaslighters on Althouse blog that he (Chuckles) bowed out after completely destroying his faux lifelong republican persona....only to have fakecon Rich say "hold my low calorie soy boy beer"!

Too funny.

Bruce Hayden said...

Nope. I was involved in designing data comm software, throughout the latter half of the 1980s. There were other alternatives. We wrote our own protocols (for the USDA), and were just a year or two early for the TCP/IP Revolution. We tried to implement it over X.25, but had lower level addressing problems. They were solved with DNS, but by then, we had moved on. The government was starting to mandate OSI. Not really realistic, as it turned out. If not TCP/IP, I think next most likely was probably DECNET. Not IBM’s SNA, because it depended on static, pre-defined routing. That worked with small-ish reworks, but was infeasible for larger ones.

Bruce Hayden said...

The US govt is currently slow walking Space X’s bigger rocket launches, simply because it can. And because Musk supports Trump, and the bureaucrats slow walking the approvals are fans of Comrades Harris and Walz.

Mason G said...

"The maker of the world's most popular electric car. They hate him. So awesome."

Some of them own one his cars, purchased before the batsignal went out to leftards that he was unclean. That's got to have something to do with the hate.

Darkisland said...

Perhaps the FCC is necessary to allocate the radio spectrum. But there is a market based justification to not have the govt regulate it. I want the market solution to work but I am not 100% certain that it always will. I am 100% certain that it will work almost always.

In the 90s there was an expression "The internet sees censorship as damage and routes around it" We see that with the Twitter sale as well as all the Twitter alternatives. The market works, provided we let it. With very few exceptions.

There are about 4 billion possible IPV4 addresses and everyone needs one to communicate. There are about 8bn people in the world so it would seem to be the classic definition of a scarce resource. Where is the govt regulation? IP addresses are regulated by private organizations. We seem to be getting on just fine.

We definitely need some govt. No argument from me there. Do we need an FCC? Dunno. I think not but I don't know. The real question is how little govt can we get by with and what should it do?

John Henry

Original Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
rehajm said...

WTF do they believe that will accomplish? The man is the closest human to a $1 trillion net worth. Do they believe that will harm him economically?

Inga said...

Tim, projection! You are the Russian useful idiot they so like.

Rusty said...

Robert said,
"With Facebook or your friends or relatives, it's the opposite: assume it's bullshit first, and accept only what is verified later by other sources."
You mean like that unimpeachable rag "Counterpunch"?

DINKY DAU 45 said...

Yes what do they say"Chrisitans predicting the coming of the Deceiver, the Anti-Christ and what do they do when he shows up? They buy a counterfeit bible from him(you know adding the documents of our nation)and even though th CINO'S (Christians in Name Only) dont read the bible and the scripture that states"for every man that hears the WORD of the prophecy of this book adds anything unto these things,God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book)Hypocrisy deluxe ,the folks that like to Hate their next door neighbor but don't forget to say Grace" In the end every knee shall bow..... The con gets the conned,bibles,sneakers,stock,coins,cards , so easily duped, a phrase closely associated with P.T. BARNUM "there is a sucker born every minute" (no evidence he actually said it but it figures from that fella.