Sure sure. The guy who unprompted endorsed a trump appointment that has deep US Telco ties, bizarrly said “the GOP is the party for the little guy,” had nothing but wonderful things to say about J.D vance, stated that Chuck Schumer slow rolled 2 internet privacy bills because of “quid pro quo” with his daughters working for big tech, used the phrase “triggered” unprompted, and just randomly added “88” to the end of his new user name.
Yeah, that guy is just neutral and disillusioned with the Democratic party. It’s not utterly clear what spaces and politics he aligns with. That would just be wholley unknowable.
Yen is an idiot yes I don’t anybody can disagree on that one.
But he was born in 88 and while it is well known on the internet the general public doesn’t know it’s other meaning (except the Germans and maybe the American’s).
I live in NL and I can ask around and the majority of people will not know what it means. Probably the same with 34, 69 en 420 for the matter.
I also don’t believe that endorsing one statement means that you agree with the entire pov of the person/party, but I am not American.
Believe what you want and the best thing is to just use a personal domain for your email
It wasn’t unprompted - he was literallyreplying to the announcement of the appointment on Twitter. An announcement of a person he thought would be great for a role that he’s apparently been advocating for action against big tech in for years.
He’s born in 1988 you dolt.
The ugliest thing about Lemmy I’ve noticed so far is that it enjoys disinformation just as much as Reddit - as long as it fits the circlejerk, updoots this way.
Huh, I noticed you cherry picked two things to try to refute (interesting that you ignored him hiding “88” in binary and the fact he specifically tagged Trump in that tweet) and ignored all the others I listed. Its almost like you want to spread disinfo about how this is a non issue instead of actually digging into it.
Explain his fandom for J.D vance (a tech millionaire funded by the biggest, most privacy invading, facebook funding, Palentir creating tech billionaire ever, Peter theil) while endlessly criticizing Chuck Schumer, his statement that the GOP “was there for the little guy,” that the GOP was going to take on big tech even while they bent the knee and were donating millions directly to Trump in real time, his use of the term “triggered” to describe offending someone, on and on.
Go on, keep excusing all the clear MAGA “mask on” indicators. Tell us why a CEO in a foreign country, that keeps heaping praise on one party while using their cultural shibboleths, also “coincidentally” used an in-group dog whistle, is actually totally non partisan. That should be easy, right?
The 88 thing is the complete tip of the iceberg for me. I can’t honestly imagine the thought process needed to reach a conclusion that a Taiwanese guy (8 is a lucky number) born in '88 would put that number as a dog-whistle (which is not really part of his own cultural landscape) for Nazis, while dealing with a PR issue.
It’s like looking at a crashed car, tire marks on the ground and suggesting it must have been a sharknado and not a car accident.
“Hide your power level” mask on behavior from the alt right love to play these plausible deniability games while still signaling their actual intent. You see it with the “my heart goes out to” or “i’m just autisitc” cover for musks nazi salute, or the “he was just waving” Bannon nazi salute. They made a nazi salute, but of course it cant be a nazi salute, wink wink.
I honestly find the 88 to be a faint indicator in this case, but it was a wildly tone deaf one if so. When someone claiming neutrality is making very partisan endorsements for a party that’s steeped in all of the same memetic game playing, you cant ignore the dog whistles.
The problem is that those arguments are not falsifiable. If not one, but two completely reasonable explanation cannot convince you of someone motivations, nothing can. However, I don’t care if Musk did or did not a Nazi salute. His actions speak much louder (in a bad sense) than the aesthetic that he decides to adopt.
Proton donation pattern for example would be a strong indicator to measure intentions.
but it was a wildly tone deaf one if so
Maybe. But also maybe people are allowed to have different cultural references, and in a global context (i.e., the internet) we should expect diversity. I - for example - had never heard of this 88 thing, and I would definitely not think about it at all the next time I create a username, and I didn’t think it when I went to a barber shop that has that number in the name. Likewise, I wouldn’t call anybody writing “Merry Xmas” tone deaf for missing the reference to the X MAS of infamous history (and just recently in the news). For some people it’s apparently impossible to see their culture as non-universal (at the cost of sounding stereotypical, folks from US have particularly this problem after decades of cultural hegemony).
for a party that’s steeped in all of the same memetic game playing, you cant ignore the dog whistles
This all happened before Musk/Bannon salute. Just to specify it.
A lot of human actions are unfalsifiable because we can’t read minds. That why inference about what people say and do is important.
Musks and others nazi salute is just a reference to this behaviour writ large. It’s not the beginning of it at all. Nazi and alt right groups have been doing dog whistles for decades, and the internet has proved a fertile ground for the behavior.
Its fine to not be aware of things like “88” or “14 words” or the like, but they are dog whistle memes used by racists and nazis, the people the mainstream right has been shifting towards for years and years. You very well may have some cultural touchstones that coincidentally use the same memes without that racist context, but when you’re applauding the racists and using the terms at the same time?
Satre has a great quote about how facists dont care about what they say or do, as language is just a game to them:
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Jean-Paul Sartre
This game is wholley embraced by racists, so giving people “the benefit of the doubt” plays right into their game of feigning decroum while ramping up hate.
Again this may be an unfortunate coincidence for the proton CEO, but that does not undermine the overall point that he currently appears steeped in rightwing ideology, and that is not okay for someone claiming to uphold freedom and privacy.
Lastly, Protons past donations are laudable, but plenty of groups had laudable donations before they became vile. Look at google’s past philanthropy as an example, or their since retired “dont be evil” motto. They certainly don’t live up to those standards today, and it looks like Proton is on the same course.
I agree with you on the principle. In this case I disagree with the premise. Years of actions I think easily out weight that tweet. If that’s the only reason to be suspicious, then I don’t think it’s warranted.
Sure sure. The guy who unprompted endorsed a trump appointment that has deep US Telco ties, bizarrly said “the GOP is the party for the little guy,” had nothing but wonderful things to say about J.D vance, stated that Chuck Schumer slow rolled 2 internet privacy bills because of “quid pro quo” with his daughters working for big tech, used the phrase “triggered” unprompted, and just randomly added “88” to the end of his new user name.
Yeah, that guy is just neutral and disillusioned with the Democratic party. It’s not utterly clear what spaces and politics he aligns with. That would just be wholley unknowable.
Yen is an idiot yes I don’t anybody can disagree on that one.
But he was born in 88 and while it is well known on the internet the general public doesn’t know it’s other meaning (except the Germans and maybe the American’s).
I live in NL and I can ask around and the majority of people will not know what it means. Probably the same with 34, 69 en 420 for the matter.
I also don’t believe that endorsing one statement means that you agree with the entire pov of the person/party, but I am not American.
Believe what you want and the best thing is to just use a personal domain for your email
It wasn’t unprompted - he was literally replying to the announcement of the appointment on Twitter. An announcement of a person he thought would be great for a role that he’s apparently been advocating for action against big tech in for years.
He’s born in 1988 you dolt.
The ugliest thing about Lemmy I’ve noticed so far is that it enjoys disinformation just as much as Reddit - as long as it fits the circlejerk, updoots this way.
Huh, I noticed you cherry picked two things to try to refute (interesting that you ignored him hiding “88” in binary and the fact he specifically tagged Trump in that tweet) and ignored all the others I listed. Its almost like you want to spread disinfo about how this is a non issue instead of actually digging into it.
Explain his fandom for J.D vance (a tech millionaire funded by the biggest, most privacy invading, facebook funding, Palentir creating tech billionaire ever, Peter theil) while endlessly criticizing Chuck Schumer, his statement that the GOP “was there for the little guy,” that the GOP was going to take on big tech even while they bent the knee and were donating millions directly to Trump in real time, his use of the term “triggered” to describe offending someone, on and on.
Go on, keep excusing all the clear MAGA “mask on” indicators. Tell us why a CEO in a foreign country, that keeps heaping praise on one party while using their cultural shibboleths, also “coincidentally” used an in-group dog whistle, is actually totally non partisan. That should be easy, right?
This comment is a perfect example of why I have written https://loudwhisper.me/blog/proton-fediverse-burnout/
The 88 thing is the complete tip of the iceberg for me. I can’t honestly imagine the thought process needed to reach a conclusion that a Taiwanese guy (8 is a lucky number) born in '88 would put that number as a dog-whistle (which is not really part of his own cultural landscape) for Nazis, while dealing with a PR issue.
It’s like looking at a crashed car, tire marks on the ground and suggesting it must have been a sharknado and not a car accident.
Nicely written blog post, it actually sums it up pretty nicely imo
Thanks, I appreciate it.
“Hide your power level” mask on behavior from the alt right love to play these plausible deniability games while still signaling their actual intent. You see it with the “my heart goes out to” or “i’m just autisitc” cover for musks nazi salute, or the “he was just waving” Bannon nazi salute. They made a nazi salute, but of course it cant be a nazi salute, wink wink.
I honestly find the 88 to be a faint indicator in this case, but it was a wildly tone deaf one if so. When someone claiming neutrality is making very partisan endorsements for a party that’s steeped in all of the same memetic game playing, you cant ignore the dog whistles.
The problem is that those arguments are not falsifiable. If not one, but two completely reasonable explanation cannot convince you of someone motivations, nothing can. However, I don’t care if Musk did or did not a Nazi salute. His actions speak much louder (in a bad sense) than the aesthetic that he decides to adopt. Proton donation pattern for example would be a strong indicator to measure intentions.
Maybe. But also maybe people are allowed to have different cultural references, and in a global context (i.e., the internet) we should expect diversity. I - for example - had never heard of this 88 thing, and I would definitely not think about it at all the next time I create a username, and I didn’t think it when I went to a barber shop that has that number in the name. Likewise, I wouldn’t call anybody writing “Merry Xmas” tone deaf for missing the reference to the X MAS of infamous history (and just recently in the news). For some people it’s apparently impossible to see their culture as non-universal (at the cost of sounding stereotypical, folks from US have particularly this problem after decades of cultural hegemony).
This all happened before Musk/Bannon salute. Just to specify it.
A lot of human actions are unfalsifiable because we can’t read minds. That why inference about what people say and do is important.
Musks and others nazi salute is just a reference to this behaviour writ large. It’s not the beginning of it at all. Nazi and alt right groups have been doing dog whistles for decades, and the internet has proved a fertile ground for the behavior.
Its fine to not be aware of things like “88” or “14 words” or the like, but they are dog whistle memes used by racists and nazis, the people the mainstream right has been shifting towards for years and years. You very well may have some cultural touchstones that coincidentally use the same memes without that racist context, but when you’re applauding the racists and using the terms at the same time?
Satre has a great quote about how facists dont care about what they say or do, as language is just a game to them:
This game is wholley embraced by racists, so giving people “the benefit of the doubt” plays right into their game of feigning decroum while ramping up hate.
Again this may be an unfortunate coincidence for the proton CEO, but that does not undermine the overall point that he currently appears steeped in rightwing ideology, and that is not okay for someone claiming to uphold freedom and privacy.
Lastly, Protons past donations are laudable, but plenty of groups had laudable donations before they became vile. Look at google’s past philanthropy as an example, or their since retired “dont be evil” motto. They certainly don’t live up to those standards today, and it looks like Proton is on the same course.
I agree with you on the principle. In this case I disagree with the premise. Years of actions I think easily out weight that tweet. If that’s the only reason to be suspicious, then I don’t think it’s warranted.