politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

Turkish delight for Erdogan from Elon Musk – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,217
edited May 2023 in General
Turkish delight for Erdo?an from Elon Musk – politicalbetting.com

If you want to buy the platform to help right wing governments around the world, just say it with your chest. It’s your money, go for it, but spare us the free speech BS. Old twitter rejected 50% of these demands, which isn’t perfect. New Twitter complies 100%.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,975
    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?
  • eekeek Posts: 28,592
    edited May 2023
    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    By allowing Governments to censor some of twitter whole parts of the world will be seeking another option - such as bluesky as invites become available.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,840
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    It is a delicacy. Not quite in the same league as Hawaiian pizza, but delicious nonetheless.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,049
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    On a pizza, of course.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,975
    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,168
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    I'm afraid this is Thought Crime. I can confirm the Police have been notified and are on their way.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    There was a 19% increase in turnout in voting in Germany in the Turkish elections reported a few days ago when voting ended, compared to last time. Not sure if this is good or bad news for Erdoğan. Last time he did much better in Germany than in Turkey, but I'm hopeful the higher turnout is the opposition being more united and better organised than last time.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,437
    MAGA fans will say Twitter censored Trump and now the gag's on the other foot.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,975
    Taz said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    On a pizza, of course.
    Ban this sick filth.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    Putting aside the controversy surrounding twitter in Turkey the actual counting of the votes can be trusted . The process is far more rigorous than in the UK and although Erdogan has interfered with the media it’s simply impossible currently to find votes or get rid of opposition votes .

    Whether this rigorous process will survive another 5 years if Erdogan wins is of course another matter .

    The results of this election will have a huge impact on the west especially the EU and Cyprus , it’s very personal for me as my family are from there and Erdogan has been a disaster for any type of resolution to the division of the island since 1974 .

    I’m not expecting a miracle even if the opposition wins but really at this point anything is better than Erdogan .
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468
    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Sovereign Individuals, as someone once said.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,865
    edited May 2023
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    Anything involving rosewater as a flavouring is minging. Redolent of potpourri and nursing homes.
  • CorrectHorseBatCorrectHorseBat Posts: 1,761
    Heh, a poster mentioned the Twitter story yesterday and was assured Elon had acted correctly throughout.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
  • eekeek Posts: 28,592
    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Well given that the only people who seem to have twitter blue are idiots you block instantly or ladies aiming to advertise their wares I can see why he goes for the easy option...
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    CorrectHorseBat said:

    Heh, a poster mentioned the Twitter story yesterday and was assured Elon had acted correctly throughout.

    After my last post on this subject I have been in contact with Mr Musk's representatives and I am now happy to confirm that is the case (subject to a few minor details being finalised).
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,149
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    You don't know what your missing, it's delish.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468
    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    To an extent, sure. There's never been pure meritocracy; upper class twits have always thrived better than the brilliant poor.

    But the extent of the problem is increasing since the postwar generation. We're aware of it in terms of the inordinate difference it makes to life chances of you inherit a fraction of a house from your grandparents. But there is something happing at the very top as well.

    Because wealth accumulates exponentially, it's much harder to start on the ground floor and get somewhere big in life. The lead some people start with, and the death of substantial provincial businesses, has made that sort of progression much harder.

    Maybe that's inevitable- or more likely the side effects of levelling the playing field aren't ones we want. But the trends point to a dark place. Because society only works if most people feel.they have a reasonable stake in it.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    Simply not the case during the second half of the 20th century in Western countries.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,148
    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,257
    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,950
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.

    Would be delighted to see Leeds and Leicester follow Southampton into the Championship. But for now, Forest need as much of a gap as they can get, so I'm hoping City take the 3 points this afternoon - and Everton move that bit further away from us.

    Plus, City need the win when they are still juggling the treble.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,257
    edited May 2023
    nico679 said:

    Putting aside the controversy surrounding twitter in Turkey the actual counting of the votes can be trusted . The process is far more rigorous than in the UK and although Erdogan has interfered with the media it’s simply impossible currently to find votes or get rid of opposition votes .

    Whether this rigorous process will survive another 5 years if Erdogan wins is of course another matter .

    The results of this election will have a huge impact on the west especially the EU and Cyprus , it’s very personal for me as my family are from there and Erdogan has been a disaster for any type of resolution to the division of the island since 1974 .

    I’m not expecting a miracle even if the opposition wins but really at this point anything is better than Erdogan .

    The voting system looks pretty resilient.*
    My concern would be that a losing Erdogan might attempt a coup. I don’t know how unlikely that might be - but it’s not as though it hasn’t been tried before.

    *Good thread on that here for anyone wanting details.
    https://twitter.com/OguzArikboga/status/1657706023694618625
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,318
    WillG said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    Simply not the case during the second half of the 20th century in Western countries.
    It was true, but less and less so.
    Now it’s more and more so.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461
    That response from Musk is a wonderful encapsulation of capitulation to censorship.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,257
    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,148
    Stuartinromford said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    To an extent, sure. There's never been pure meritocracy; upper class twits have always thrived better than the brilliant poor.

    But the extent of the problem is increasing since the postwar generation. We're aware of it in terms of the inordinate difference it makes to life chances of you inherit a fraction of a house from your grandparents. But there is something happing at the very top as well.

    Because wealth accumulates exponentially, it's much harder to start on the ground floor and get somewhere big in life. The lead some people start with, and the death of substantial provincial businesses, has made that sort of progression much harder.

    Maybe that's inevitable- or more likely the side effects of levelling the playing field aren't ones we want. But the trends point to a dark place. Because society only works if most people feel.they have a reasonable stake in it.
    The real change was that the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs failed to lose control of their creations.

    So instead of proper piles of debt with every advance and innovation sold off for immediate shareholder return, they accumulate giant piles of money instead.

    Instead of being pushed out of their own companies by Wall Street, Wall Street now begs them for money
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    Off-topic: does anyone else think the new Octordle 'sequence' puzzle is far too easy?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    Stuartinromford said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    To an extent, sure. There's never been pure meritocracy; upper class twits have always thrived better than the brilliant poor.

    But the extent of the problem is increasing since the postwar generation. We're aware of it in terms of the inordinate difference it makes to life chances of you inherit a fraction of a house from your grandparents. But there is something happing at the very top as well.

    Because wealth accumulates exponentially, it's much harder to start on the ground floor and get somewhere big in life. The lead some people start with, and the death of substantial provincial businesses, has made that sort of progression much harder.

    Maybe that's inevitable- or more likely the side effects of levelling the playing field aren't ones we want. But the trends point to a dark place. Because society only works if most people feel.they have a reasonable stake in it.
    It’s just a reversion to the norms of human history.

    Fundamentally people success by associating themselves with a power centre. It’s not a question of “upper class twits”.

    Even in a “normal” job you find a mentor or a manager who you work with and for; they promote your interests and career in return for your hard work and support. More obviously you have the host of attractive junior SPADs clustered around fat balding MPs.

    What we have done is essentially eliminate many other power centres - so people will associate themselves with money in order to further their own personal interests.

    Life is not and has never been a meritocracy.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    WillG said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    Simply not the case during the second half of the 20th century in Western countries.
    Oh, you sweet, innocent child

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,869
    It is very wrong by Twitter in my opinion. I do wonder how much it will benefit Erdogan this late in the game though - hopefully the effect will be the reverse of the one intended.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,416
    edited May 2023
    [deleted: Cybertrucks not really interesting]
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,416
    edited May 2023
    Malmesbury said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

    We already have countries that do that.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Malmesbury said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

    So you have the details of which law Twitter is complying with and how?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    Simply not the case during the second half of the 20th century in Western countries.
    It was true, but less and less so.
    Now it’s more and more so.
    Broadly speaking the influence of the old families persisted (although diminished) well into the 60s. From the 60s through the mid 80s workers collectives were alternative power centres until they took on the government directly and lost.

    There was a period during the 80s and 90s when there was something close to a meritocracy. But from the late 90s / early 2000s we’ve seen the rise of the tech plutarchs, the hedge funders, the oligarchs, the narrowing of government circles and a lot of other trends.

    Unless you are a power centre in your own right then you associate with one for protection and advancement

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited May 2023
    In another place with even more troubled elections, the Shinawatra's are back

    Voting has begun in Thailand's general election, where the daughter of ousted former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra is the frontrunner...

    Mr Thaksin, a telecommunications billionaire, is loved by many lower income Thais but is deeply unpopular with the royalist elite. He was ousted in a military coup in 2006, when his opponents accused him of corruption. He has denied the allegations and has since been living in exile since 2008 in London and Dubai...

    Meanwhile, Mr Prayuth, 69, is lagging in opinion polls. He seized power from the government of Mr Thaksin's sister, Yingluck Shinawatra, in 2014, following months of turmoil...

    The constitution, written while Thailand was under military rule, created a 250-seat appointed senate, which gets to vote on the choice of the next PM and government.

    As the senators were all appointed by the coup leaders they have always voted in favour of the current, military-aligned government, and never in favour of the opposition.

    So technically any party without the senate's backing would need a super-majority of 376 out of the 500 seats, an unobtainable target.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-65567781
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,500
    Luckyguy1983 said:

    It is very wrong by Twitter in my opinion. I do wonder how much it will benefit Erdogan this late in the game though - hopefully the effect will be the reverse of the one intended.

    Erdogan's electoral games do not always bear fruit. From 2019:

    "The Istanbul mayoral election, where CHP candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu defeated AKP candidate and former Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım by just under 14,000 votes (0.17%), remained disputed for two weeks after the vote. This result was made public after a blackout, by which point the CHP candidate was up by more than 24,000 votes. Numerous recounts, electoral complaints, legal disputes, alleged corruption, accusations of terrorist involvement and police operations took place after the election, initiated mainly by the AKP.
    İmamoğlu was sworn in as mayor, though a new election was held on 23 June. The result was an unexpected landslide victory for İmamoğlu, who defeated Yıldırım by over nine points, 54.2% to 45%."

    Shades of Winchester 1997 by-election ...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Turkish_local_elections
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,914
    ...
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.

    Would be delighted to see Leeds and Leicester follow Southampton into the Championship. But for now, Forest need as much of a gap as they can get, so I'm hoping City take the 3 points this afternoon - and Everton move that bit further away from us.

    Plus, City need the win when they are still juggling the treble.
    It's looking quite comfortable for Citeh at the moment.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    JosiasJessop said:

    Luckyguy1983 said:

    It is very wrong by Twitter in my opinion. I do wonder how much it will benefit Erdogan this late in the game though - hopefully the effect will be the reverse of the one intended.

    Erdogan's electoral games do not always bear fruit. From 2019:

    "The Istanbul mayoral election, where CHP candidate Ekrem İmamoğlu defeated AKP candidate and former Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım by just under 14,000 votes (0.17%), remained disputed for two weeks after the vote. This result was made public after a blackout, by which point the CHP candidate was up by more than 24,000 votes. Numerous recounts, electoral complaints, legal disputes, alleged corruption, accusations of terrorist involvement and police operations took place after the election, initiated mainly by the AKP.
    İmamoğlu was sworn in as mayor, though a new election was held on 23 June. The result was an unexpected landslide victory for İmamoğlu, who defeated Yıldırım by over nine points, 54.2% to 45%."

    Shades of Winchester 1997 by-election ...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Turkish_local_elections
    Hopefully he has not learned the wrong lessons from that event. Contrast with the Chinese who, having seen how the Hong Kong voters reacted at parish elections, took steps to make sure that never happened again.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,657
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.

    Would be delighted to see Leeds and Leicester follow Southampton into the Championship. But for now, Forest need as much of a gap as they can get, so I'm hoping City take the 3 points this afternoon - and Everton move that bit further away from us.

    Plus, City need the win when they are still juggling the treble.
    Everton 0 City 2 at half time
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    The insidious influence of nostalgia.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,437
    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.

    Off to Conservative Home you go.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited May 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
    Like some other 'free' thinkers Musk seems almost enchanted by the power of a strongman.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,500
    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
    Like some other 'free' thinkers Musk seems almost enchanted by the power of a strongman.
    But it's okay; he builds cool rockets and electric cars driven by rich prats. ;)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    JosiasJessop said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
    Like some other 'free' thinkers Musk seems almost enchanted by the power of a strongman.
    But it's okay; he builds cool rockets and electric cars driven by rich prats. ;)
    I like him when he does the first!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049
    edited May 2023
    fpt
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    DavidL said:

    there are areas where we can have better regulations that are different.

    In theory, maybe?

    In practise, not really.
    One obvious area is financial services. London is by far the most sophisticated financial services in Europe and has highly respected regulators (although their failure to jail some bankers for the practices that contributed to the GFC is a black mark). London used to have considerable influence over the ECB's regulations for these reasons but now they can simply get on with it rather than moving at the slower pace that EU regulation inevitably goes at given the need to bring at least a majority along with it. I think that this is an area where the ECB will often choose to follow us rather than the other way around.

    But I personally would not dispute that this was oversold. Like most areas both the advantages and disadvantages of EU membership were hugely distorted and exaggerated by both sides of the debate. It really is time to move on from this.
    There's no shame in not understanding financial services. Just that you needn't parade that ignorance on a public internet forum

  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,984
    Fry’s Turkish Delight is grotesque but I’ve had some rather tastier examples in Turkish restaurants
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Puts me in mind of one of the playable factions in the Endless Space series - The Horatio.

    Incredibly wealthy and only slightly less deranged, Horatio was a trillionaire who left to discover his own star cluster. Finding a planet sprinkled with labs of ancient cloning technology left by the Endless, the boredom soon drove Horatio to create a race of allies, servants, and slaves who were every bit as beautiful as the most beautiful person in the universe - Horatio. Once the planet was repopulated, Horatio the First had only to look up, regard the stars, and realize how much more beautiful they, too, would be if they were filled with...Horatio. The rest, as they say, is history.

    Tell me Musk or Bezos would not do it if they could.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
    Like some other 'free' thinkers Musk seems almost enchanted by the power of a strongman.
    Not sure that’s particularly fair on Musk.

    He’s behaving the way he is because he thinks it’s in his interests to do so.

    It’s just business.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,148
    viewcode said:

    Malmesbury said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

    We already have countries that do that.
    Yes - but do we want companies in on that game?

    United Fruit, anyone?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,165
    kle4 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    The insidious influence of nostalgia.
    The Fry’s chocolate covered stuff was absolutely minging, the proper stuff is delightful. Just thinking about the former makes me feel a bit sick while I could probably make myself sick by eating too much of the latter.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,500
    BlancheLivermore said:

    Fry’s Turkish Delight is grotesque but I’ve had some rather tastier examples in Turkish restaurants

    *real* Turkish delight is lovely stuff, unlike that Fry's concoction.

    It's a bit like *real* baklava, which is absolutely scrumptious. My home-made stuff is never as good (although making it at home allows me to vary the recipe).
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,080
    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,491
    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    By allowing Governments to censor some of twitter whole parts of the world will be seeking another option - such as bluesky as invites become available.

    That’s being generous to Musk. I don’t think he’s (just) an idiot who’s stumbled into this. He’s someone who repeatedly shows support for right-wing populism and conspiracy theories.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited May 2023
    ping said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
    Like some other 'free' thinkers Musk seems almost enchanted by the power of a strongman.
    Not sure that’s particularly fair on Musk.

    He’s behaving the way he is because he thinks it’s in his interests to do so.

    It’s just business.
    Seems pretty fair to me. He likes to share conspiracies, he has openly stated he shouldn't have to follow rules and agreements he disagrees with (because they are 'imposed' and therefore invalid) and engages in the petty use of power to bully and dominate people (like the time he publicly claimed a guy did not work and was fired on twitter, because he disagreed with him, and turns out it wasn't the case) - it seems entirely consistent that his inclination was not to resist for the sake of business in the long term, but to go along with the powerful man without a second's thought because that's what he would do if he could.

    He certainly is not the free speech absolutist he once claimed.
  • WillGWillG Posts: 2,366
    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    It is - and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent anything challenging their power. I don't think we really have the will to fight them, not in the short term.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,500
    bondegezou said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    By allowing Governments to censor some of twitter whole parts of the world will be seeking another option - such as bluesky as invites become available.

    That’s being generous to Musk. I don’t think he’s (just) an idiot who’s stumbled into this. He’s someone who repeatedly shows support for right-wing populism and conspiracy theories.
    This is the 'man' (and I use that word loosely) who claimed his son died in his arms. When he did not.

    I've been saying that Musk is a liar for years. I'm now willing to go further, but wish to save OGH legal costs...
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,437
    tlg86 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.

    Off to Conservative Home you go.

    Carey Street more likely.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,975
    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    The insidious influence of nostalgia.
    The Fry’s chocolate covered stuff was absolutely minging, the proper stuff is delightful. Just thinking about the former makes me feel a bit sick while I could probably make myself sick by eating too much of the latter.
    I’ve only ever eaten the Fry’s version.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,437
    kle4 said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    It is - and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent anything challenging their power. I don't think we really have the will to fight them, not in the short term.
    We are fighting Big Tech Media for more censorship, not less. Won't someone think of the children?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,779
    ping said:

    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    Perhaps he thinks them through and then takes the option that's profitable for him, regardless of the consequences for others?
    Musk know exactly what he’s doing.

    The Turkish government asked Twitter to censor its opponents right before an election and @elonmusk complied — should generate some interesting Twitter Files reporting.
    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1657407941828395010

    Did your brain fall out of your head, Yglesias? The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?
    https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1657422401754259461

    What Wikipedia did: we stood strong for our principles and fought to the Supreme Court of Turkey and won. This is what it means to treat freedom of expression as a principle rather than a slogan.
    https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/1657494022741426180

    Twitter used to routinely challenge Turkey’s takedown requests

    Erdogan actually had Twitter banned in Turkey in 2014 for refusing to comply. (the courts later ended the ban.)

    but that was on the “censorship” version of Twitter, not this new “free speech” one
    https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1657371482928869376
    Like some other 'free' thinkers Musk seems almost enchanted by the power of a strongman.
    Not sure that’s particularly fair on Musk.

    He’s behaving the way he is because he thinks it’s in his interests to do so.

    It’s just business.
    Then he should drop all the self-justifying posturing and admit he's just trying to maximise his profits.

    In the situation we're in now, tech billionaires trying to maximise their profits, regardless of the consequences, is an extremely dangerous thing for our species.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,302
    WillG said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
    How would you go about it?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    kle4 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
    They are trying to close down legal free speech by a senior politician with the claim that she is breaching a barrister’s obligation to “conduct themselves in an appropriate manner”.

    That’s not what the code of conduct was intended to achieve
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,144
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    kle4 said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Turkish delight is utterly minging, how can people eat it?

    The insidious influence of nostalgia.
    The Fry’s chocolate covered stuff was absolutely minging, the proper stuff is delightful. Just thinking about the former makes me feel a bit sick while I could probably make myself sick by eating too much of the latter.
    I’ve only ever eaten the Fry’s version.
    The real thing is worth looking out for, a friend always brings me some from Istanbul
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,246
    I regret what Musk has done to Twitter, which has been an informative and sadly irreplaceable platform for me over the years.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,984
    How come nobody’s discussing today’s FA Cup final?

    They sold all the tickets doncha know?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    williamglenn said:

    WillG said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
    How would you go about it?
    Don’t break them up.

    Regulate them as a public utility instead
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,679
    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    Simply not the case during the second half of the 20th century in Western countries.
    Oh, you sweet, innocent child
    People comfortable with gross inequality often seek to patronise people who aren't by making out it's just the way of the world. It's a common technique to defend privilege by those on the right side of it. If I received a pound for every time I come across it I'd soon need an offshore haven for my loot.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,491
    StillWaters said:

    kle4 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
    They are trying to close down legal free speech by a senior politician with the claim that she is breaching a barrister’s obligation to “conduct themselves in an appropriate manner”.

    That’s not what the code of conduct was intended to achieve
    As she’s a senior politician, she doesn’t need to be a barrister, so where’s the problem? She can just remove herself from the barrister system.

    If she wants to remain a barrister, then she’ll have to juggle being a senior politician and the code of conduct required of barristers.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,688
    Malmesbury said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

    The company is doing what all companies do and interpreting the legal position. In the past they have interpreted the requests for censorship as being outside the law, suffered a short term hit until it can be properly adjudicated, and then been able to continue. That is the moral position to take.

    Musk, who I admire in many other ways in spite of his flaws, has decided to ignore the past experiences with Turkey and has agreed to self imposed censorship. This is stupid in two ways.

    1. It makes a mockery of his claims about free speech.
    2. It ignores the previous history and legal precendent in Turkey where such attempts to mute Twitter have been declared illegal.

    It is a stupid decision and one I hope he will come to regret.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,416
    JosiasJessop said:

    bondegezou said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    By allowing Governments to censor some of twitter whole parts of the world will be seeking another option - such as bluesky as invites become available.

    That’s being generous to Musk. I don’t think he’s (just) an idiot who’s stumbled into this. He’s someone who repeatedly shows support for right-wing populism and conspiracy theories.
    This is the 'man' (and I use that word loosely) who claimed his son died in his arms. When he did not.

    I've been saying that Musk is a liar for years. I'm now willing to go further, but wish to save OGH legal costs...
    As I put it: "we're not going to Mars, are we..." :(
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    kinabalu said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    StillWaters said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    ‘Twas always thus
    Simply not the case during the second half of the 20th century in Western countries.
    Oh, you sweet, innocent child
    People comfortable with gross inequality often seek to patronise people who aren't by making out it's just the way of the world. It's a common technique to defend privilege by those on the right side of it. If I received a pound for every time I come across it I'd soon need an offshore haven for my loot.
    You misunderstand me. I was mocking @WillG ’s assertion that the second half of the twentieth century was some kind of earthly paradise in the west.

    I’m not comfortable with gross inequality. I don’t think it’s a stable long run equilibrium. A degree of inequality is a good thing (it acts an an incentive) but it needs to be self correcting either through social pressure (my preference) or government action. Individuals should not be able to stand apart from the civilisations that enabled them.


  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,688
    bondegezou said:

    StillWaters said:

    kle4 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
    They are trying to close down legal free speech by a senior politician with the claim that she is breaching a barrister’s obligation to “conduct themselves in an appropriate manner”.

    That’s not what the code of conduct was intended to achieve
    As she’s a senior politician, she doesn’t need to be a barrister, so where’s the problem? She can just remove herself from the barrister system.

    If she wants to remain a barrister, then she’ll have to juggle being a senior politician and the code of conduct required of barristers.
    Nah, I don't like Braverman at all but this is bullshit.No one else is asked to make such choices. She won't be a politician for ever and will then want, I assume, to return to being a barrister. Why should she have to remove herself from the system simply for exercising her right to free speech which is fundamental to political activity.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    bondegezou said:

    StillWaters said:

    kle4 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
    They are trying to close down legal free speech by a senior politician with the claim that she is breaching a barrister’s obligation to “conduct themselves in an appropriate manner”.

    That’s not what the code of conduct was intended to achieve
    As she’s a senior politician, she doesn’t need to be a barrister, so where’s the problem? She can just remove herself from the barrister system.

    If she wants to remain a barrister, then she’ll have to juggle being a senior politician and the code of conduct required of barristers.
    Of course.

    But the idea that a legal political comment should be criticised as “conduct unbecoming” is dangerous territory.

    I hope that the Bar Council say it’s not their place to pass judgement on cases like this
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,842
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Anyhoo, I've reinvested by Eurovision winnings on City to drop points against Everton today.

    Oh dear....
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Agree with consensus. Real Turkish delight is magnificent. As is real baklava (which I happen to be eating right now after a tough day of snorkelling in the Red Sea). Times are hard but we must all
    do what we can




  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,302
    StillWaters said:

    williamglenn said:

    WillG said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
    How would you go about it?
    Don’t break them up.

    Regulate them as a public utility instead
    That would mean breaking them up to some extent because they're international.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,500
    viewcode said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    bondegezou said:

    eek said:

    Yep Musk is an idiot who doesn't think through the consequences of taking the easy option.

    By allowing Governments to censor some of twitter whole parts of the world will be seeking another option - such as bluesky as invites become available.

    That’s being generous to Musk. I don’t think he’s (just) an idiot who’s stumbled into this. He’s someone who repeatedly shows support for right-wing populism and conspiracy theories.
    This is the 'man' (and I use that word loosely) who claimed his son died in his arms. When he did not.

    I've been saying that Musk is a liar for years. I'm now willing to go further, but wish to save OGH legal costs...
    As I put it: "we're not going to Mars, are we..." :(
    He has done nothing to further scientific research at Mars. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. He has made no probes, and done no research into it. He *has* made a successful LEO rocket, and is trying to build a massive rocket, but his plan to get to Mars (his plan for doing it in 2022 has flown merrily by) is just pure b/s.

    Compare and contrast to Beck at RocketLab. He is fascinated by Venus, and despite being a much smaller company, with a much smaller rocket, is planning to launch a self-funded probe to so *science* at Venus.

    https://www.rocketlabusa.com/missions/upcoming-missions/first-private-mission-to-venus/
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,688
    StillWaters said:

    williamglenn said:

    WillG said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
    How would you go about it?
    Don’t break them up.

    Regulate them as a public utility instead
    Isn't the problem that we don't want to treat them as a public utility? We don't hold BT or EE responsible for the conversations held on their phone networks. We don't hold Anglian Water responsible if someone uses their water to drown someone in a bath. Treating them as public utilities wil not solve the issue.

    And the problem with treating them as monopolies is that - certainly in the case of a comany like Facebook, they are far from being a monopoly. They are just very successful at what they do and people chose to use them. There are lots of alternatives and they are well used and supported.

    When Twitter was bought by Musk there was all that talk about people moving to Mastadon. And yet a few months later and everyone is still talking about Twitter.

    People use these social media platforms because they like them. Forcing them to use others against their will seems to me to be particularly stupid.

    And I say that as someone who thinks the whole of Twitter and its alternatives are stupid.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,500
    "The former Archbishop of York has been forced to step down from his Church of England role after a review into how he handled a child sex abuse allegation."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-65588621
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,475
    williamglenn said:

    StillWaters said:

    williamglenn said:

    WillG said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
    How would you go about it?
    Don’t break them up.

    Regulate them as a public utility instead
    That would mean breaking them up to some extent because they're international.
    Not in a meaningful sense. It’s a bit more complicated that’s all.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,215
    DoubleCarpet said:

    Turkey links

    Voting in the presidential and parliamentary elections closed at 3pm UK time, but apparently under Turkish law, results might not be released until 7pm our time, which just feels so dodgy right from the off :(

    Looks like counting is at polling stations as per most countries, which means that small rural stations would ordinarily be able to report in under an hour after poll close.

    Voting system is two rounds as per France/Brazil etc. Possibility that Kılıçdaroğlu wins outright today but this is Turkey where Erdoğan has ruled as either PM or president since 2003.

    DYOR but Erdoğan is currently 4 on Befair which looks value to me so I've had a nibble.

    https://www.star.com.tr/video/canli.asp

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

    https://www.ysk.gov.tr/tr/14-mayis-2023-secimleri/82491

    https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-elections-2023-what-you-need-know-2023-05-12/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Turkish_presidential_election

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.211349566?loginStatus=SUCCESS&ott=bjAJI5cMDc0uaB13PVN9v7OSIHdR8VjUWR3sqpkjPnE07+8YUSs3/J6i/AZtVA4U

    If you find any result maps, would be very grateful if you could post.

    Many thanks,

    DC

    To be fair polls close in our GEs at 10 and we rarely get any results before 1am (those Sunderlandy ones notwithstanding).
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,491
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    bondegezou said:

    StillWaters said:

    kle4 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
    They are trying to close down legal free speech by a senior politician with the claim that she is breaching a barrister’s obligation to “conduct themselves in an appropriate manner”.

    That’s not what the code of conduct was intended to achieve
    As she’s a senior politician, she doesn’t need to be a barrister, so where’s the problem? She can just remove herself from the barrister system.

    If she wants to remain a barrister, then she’ll have to juggle being a senior politician and the code of conduct required of barristers.
    Nah, I don't like Braverman at all but this is bullshit.No one else is asked to make such choices. She won't be a politician for ever and will then want, I assume, to return to being a barrister. Why should she have to remove herself from the system simply for exercising her right to free speech which is fundamental to political activity.
    No one else? Other politicians are also barristers. Other politicians also have other jobs that have concomitant codes of conduct.

    If she wants to return to being a barrister later in her career, presumably she could just re-register as a barrister, going through the usual processes.

    Barristers have a code of conduct. If you feel this conflicts with a right to free speech, take it up with the barristers. Why should Braverman get special treatment? If there’s a problem, doesn’t it affect all barristers?
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 891
    Turkey results maps

    Ok so I've managed to find the holy grail of any election results coverage after the local TV stations, and that's the results map, 2018 included for comparison.

    https://www.haberturk.com/secim/secim2023/cumhurbaskanligi-secimi

    https://www.haberturk.com/secim/secim2018/cumhurbaskanligi-secimi
  • eekeek Posts: 28,592
    TimS said:

    DoubleCarpet said:

    Turkey links

    Voting in the presidential and parliamentary elections closed at 3pm UK time, but apparently under Turkish law, results might not be released until 7pm our time, which just feels so dodgy right from the off :(

    Looks like counting is at polling stations as per most countries, which means that small rural stations would ordinarily be able to report in under an hour after poll close.

    Voting system is two rounds as per France/Brazil etc. Possibility that Kılıçdaroğlu wins outright today but this is Turkey where Erdoğan has ruled as either PM or president since 2003.

    DYOR but Erdoğan is currently 4 on Befair which looks value to me so I've had a nibble.

    https://www.star.com.tr/video/canli.asp

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

    https://www.ysk.gov.tr/tr/14-mayis-2023-secimleri/82491

    https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-elections-2023-what-you-need-know-2023-05-12/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Turkish_presidential_election

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.211349566?loginStatus=SUCCESS&ott=bjAJI5cMDc0uaB13PVN9v7OSIHdR8VjUWR3sqpkjPnE07+8YUSs3/J6i/AZtVA4U

    If you find any result maps, would be very grateful if you could post.

    Many thanks,

    DC

    To be fair polls close in our GEs at 10 and we rarely get any results before 1am (those Sunderlandy ones notwithstanding).
    There are also 2 elections today - Parliamentary elections via a D'Hondt method alongside the Presidential election - that by itself takes time.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,491
    StillWaters said:

    bondegezou said:

    StillWaters said:

    kle4 said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Nigelb said:

    Suella Braverman accused of breaching barristers’ code over ‘racist’ language
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/14/suella-braverman-accused-of-breaching-barristers-code-over-racist-language

    Politicians should be opposed politically, not via the pettifogging rule book of some Tufty Club professional body.
    If she is accountable to a professional body why shouldn't she be? It should not affect her ability to he Home Secretary even if as a Barrister she faces consequences.

    Yes, this can be abused, and we see people for instance using the law as a means of political activisim. But on the other hand some people make the exact same point - oppose people politically not legally - to in effect claim politicians should also be immune from consequence if they commit actual crimes.
    They are trying to close down legal free speech by a senior politician with the claim that she is breaching a barrister’s obligation to “conduct themselves in an appropriate manner”.

    That’s not what the code of conduct was intended to achieve
    As she’s a senior politician, she doesn’t need to be a barrister, so where’s the problem? She can just remove herself from the barrister system.

    If she wants to remain a barrister, then she’ll have to juggle being a senior politician and the code of conduct required of barristers.
    Of course.

    But the idea that a legal political comment should be criticised as “conduct unbecoming” is dangerous territory.

    I hope that the Bar Council say it’s not their place to pass judgement on cases like this
    There’s no point in a code of conduct if it merely reiterates the law. So of course the code of conduct will forbid things that are legal.

    Braverman is the one who wants to be a politician and a barrister at the same time, and Braverman is the one who made comments that were widely criticised across the political spectrum. What’s wrong with Braverman being responsible for her actions?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468
    StillWaters said:

    williamglenn said:

    WillG said:

    Cookie said:

    Fully agree that this is bad.
    But Musk isn't alone in this. Facebook and Google also appear to censor views they don't agree with. The power we, as consumers, have handed to big tech is the problem, not specifically Musk.

    You can't ever expect millions of consumers to collectively co-ordinate. We need government action to break up monopolies.
    How would you go about it?
    Don’t break them up.

    Regulate them as a public utility instead
    We have enough problems with regulated utilities spreading sewage everywhere as it is.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,914
    Leon said:

    Agree with consensus. Real Turkish delight is magnificent. As is real baklava (which I happen to be eating right now after a tough day of snorkelling in the Red Sea). Times are hard but we must all
    do what we can




    Remind me. Which is you?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,606
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Malmesbury said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

    The company is doing what all companies do and interpreting the legal position. In the past they have interpreted the requests for censorship as being outside the law, suffered a short term hit until it can be properly adjudicated, and then been able to continue. That is the moral position to take.

    Musk, who I admire in many other ways in spite of his flaws, has decided to ignore the past experiences with Turkey and has agreed to self imposed censorship. This is stupid in two ways.

    1. It makes a mockery of his claims about free speech.
    2. It ignores the previous history and legal precendent in Turkey where such attempts to mute Twitter have been declared illegal.

    It is a stupid decision and one I hope he will come to regret.
    On turkish politics, Erdogan is a thug and something of an autocrat - but he ain’t no Putin

    Tho one wonders if he will voluntarily relinquish power if he loses this election
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 891
    TimS said:

    DoubleCarpet said:

    Turkey links

    Voting in the presidential and parliamentary elections closed at 3pm UK time, but apparently under Turkish law, results might not be released until 7pm our time, which just feels so dodgy right from the off :(

    Looks like counting is at polling stations as per most countries, which means that small rural stations would ordinarily be able to report in under an hour after poll close.

    Voting system is two rounds as per France/Brazil etc. Possibility that Kılıçdaroğlu wins outright today but this is Turkey where Erdoğan has ruled as either PM or president since 2003.

    DYOR but Erdoğan is currently 4 on Befair which looks value to me so I've had a nibble.

    https://www.star.com.tr/video/canli.asp

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

    https://www.ysk.gov.tr/tr/14-mayis-2023-secimleri/82491

    https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-elections-2023-what-you-need-know-2023-05-12/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Turkish_presidential_election

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.211349566?loginStatus=SUCCESS&ott=bjAJI5cMDc0uaB13PVN9v7OSIHdR8VjUWR3sqpkjPnE07+8YUSs3/J6i/AZtVA4U

    If you find any result maps, would be very grateful if you could post.

    Many thanks,

    DC

    To be fair polls close in our GEs at 10 and we rarely get any results before 1am (those Sunderlandy ones notwithstanding).
    Yes, but we count at counting centres, not polling stations like most of the rest of the world does. First results from the Czech presidential earlier this year were about 20 minutes after polls closed.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,416
    DoubleCarpet said:

    Turkey links

    Voting in the presidential and parliamentary elections closed at 3pm UK time, but apparently under Turkish law, results might not be released until 7pm our time, which just feels so dodgy right from the off :(

    Looks like counting is at polling stations as per most countries, which means that small rural stations would ordinarily be able to report in under an hour after poll close.

    Voting system is two rounds as per France/Brazil etc. Possibility that Kılıçdaroğlu wins outright today but this is Turkey where Erdoğan has ruled as either PM or president since 2003.

    DYOR but Erdoğan is currently 4 on Befair which looks value to me so I've had a nibble.

    https://www.star.com.tr/video/canli.asp

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

    https://www.ysk.gov.tr/tr/14-mayis-2023-secimleri/82491

    https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/turkey-elections-2023-what-you-need-know-2023-05-12/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Turkish_presidential_election

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.211349566?loginStatus=SUCCESS&ott=bjAJI5cMDc0uaB13PVN9v7OSIHdR8VjUWR3sqpkjPnE07+8YUSs3/J6i/AZtVA4U

    If you find any result maps, would be very grateful if you could post.

    Many thanks,

    DC

    Useful as ever, @DoubleCarpet : thank you.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,215
    edited May 2023
    Leon said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Malmesbury said:

    Gardenwalker said:

    WillG said:

    Governments need to wake up to the problem of richer and richer billionaires dominating our economy, our speech and our elections. We are now at gilded age levels of inequality and if you project forward the trends, individual billionaires will be more powerful than major governments in 50 to 100 years time. When you combine that with inheritance, we will eventually end up with an economy where meritocracy ends as money, power and success depends more on being in the proximity various family dynasies and their corporations than merit, intelligence or work ethic.

    Neo-feudalism.
    Which brings us back to the topic at hand.

    Aside from conflating requests for censorship with laws, what we have here are people complaining that a company is obeying local laws. Rather than violating them.

    Many of the same people back the EU requirements for monitoring, editing and blocking on social media.

    Ah, but the morality of Turkey vs EU - true.

    But do we want a world where companies or owners of companies decide which countries laws are a bit shitty and which aren’t?

    The company is doing what all companies do and interpreting the legal position. In the past they have interpreted the requests for censorship as being outside the law, suffered a short term hit until it can be properly adjudicated, and then been able to continue. That is the moral position to take.

    Musk, who I admire in many other ways in spite of his flaws, has decided to ignore the past experiences with Turkey and has agreed to self imposed censorship. This is stupid in two ways.

    1. It makes a mockery of his claims about free speech.
    2. It ignores the previous history and legal precendent in Turkey where such attempts to mute Twitter have been declared illegal.

    It is a stupid decision and one I hope he will come to regret.
    On turkish politics, Erdogan is a thug and something of an autocrat - but he ain’t no Putin

    Tho one wonders if he will voluntarily relinquish power if he loses this election
    There have been a few in that position in recent years. Populists with authoritarian tendencies, who definitely do things to suppress opposition but you’re never sure if they’d go the whole hog and fix an election.

    Bolsonaro, Trump, Orban, Sakashvili (he walked, but may be regretting that now), Modi.

    The ANC have yet to be tested on this and probably won’t be for a long time. Netanyahu hasn’t done in the past but times have changed.

    I’m in no doubt Trump would have become a dictator if he came to power in a less established democracy.
  • YokesYokes Posts: 1,345
    The rumours around President Big Hat of Belarus' health status continue to grow.

    This much can be said with a degree of confidence in the last lot of days:
    1. He is unwell and the public signs are there.
    2. Someone on a private jet used for Russian government business has turned up in Minsk yesterday, that is not a common visitor
    3. He has visited hospital

    After that its speculation of anything between he is dead already to he will be back wearing his big Field Marshal hat in a week or so after some treatment. It is worth watching though as some things add up and some don't.

    Meanwhile the Russians have lost 4, possibly 5, military aircraft over their own border territory in the last 48 hours, the worst loss in such a short time of airborne aircraft since the war started. No one, it appears, has an explanation other than one was definitely downed by a missile.
This discussion has been closed.