7 ms·

Elon's unchecked power at building a model? Or at politics? I always worry whenever I see people telling me how to feel - rage in this case. We are in a politi

Elon's unchecked power at building a model? Or at politics? I always worry whenever I see people telling me how to feel - rage in this case. We are in a political system that is oriented more around getting people to feel rage and hatred as opposed to consensus and deliberation. Elon is the face of that, but it's a much longer and larger problem. Throw in the complete dismisal that anyone not scared of this is ignorant, shuts down discussion. The problem I have with Elon is that they are wasting a once in a lifetime chance to actually address and fix systematic problems with the US government. Deploying LLMs in the government space doesn't fear me with dread. Continuing the senseless partisan drive of the 20 years does.

KerrAvon 2y ago
Has it occurred to you that the people who feel rage fundamentally understand the situation, and you may be undereducated in this area? What do you think are the root causes of that “senseless partisan drive”? I’d suggest starting with Rick Perlman’s book “Nixonland” if you’re interested.
- InTheArena 2y ago
  As a Historian (and a German historian in particular) - I've spent a reasonable amount of time educating myself on the nature of fascism and in particular the break down of democracies (Wiemar, France, and also the erosion of civil liberties during the great depression in the United States). I have also been a delegate to both the RNC and the DNC at a state level. This is not a appeal to authority, but rather a honest response to your request for my education level. IMHO, The root cause of the "senseless partisan drive" is the fact that he founding fathers could not come up with a way to restrict parties (they called them "interests") and left them unchecked. This is a constant "sin" of the American political system, and is a key reason Slavery survived as long as it did, why separate but equal became the law of the land, why America shot itself in the foot several time with the Banks of America and why we are looking at the wrong side of history now. The parties now act to destroy each other as their prime directive, rather then to better the country. I liken this to Wiemar Germany, where the increasing radicalization of both the Nazis and the Communists led to political instability and eventual violence that destroyed the government. That erosion of democratic norms, as well as the "other side must be destroyed for us to survive" messaging is the true threat, IMHO. I would strongly suggest Richard Evan's three part history on Nazi history to understand Fascism. Don't worry, you can still hate and worry about Trump and think he is the next coming of Hitler afterwords - it will just be for better reasons.
- concordDance 2y ago
  Given the two of you probably have different models of reality, perhaps you two can try and figure out which is correct by seeing which model gives better predictions? So try to come up with some sort of future observation that can be made where you think the other person's model would give a different answer to yours about what you would be able to objectively observe. What do you reckon?
  - vlovich123 2y ago
    Over what time scale, how do we agree on facts, and how do we evaluate things that require a common value system to determine whether the facts are good or bad?
    - concordDance 2y ago
      The idea would be that the two of them collaboratively agree on some observable prediction they differ on. E.g. level of officially reported government spending in 4 years time or gdp growth rate next year or number of plane crashes next year or what have you. Just some observable metric. If they literally can't come up with a single observable predictive difference then the predictive aspects of their models are actually equivalent and they are only narratively different and don't "really disagree". Like Copenhagen interpretation vs many worlds.
      - vlovich123 2y ago
        Many things don't have quantifiable metrics like that. For example, is USA still a democracy in 4 years? Are people more or less free?. You know, important questions that aren't just economic numbers. Even semi-quantifiable stuff like "are Americans better educated" is debatable on many topics if you can't agree on truth. Oh, and that GDP growth rate number? That relies on a lot of trust as to who's doing the reporting. For example, many people don't believe China's reported GDP numbers. What makes you think the USA doesn't devolve to such a distrust as well.
        concordDance 2y ago
- diggan 2y ago
  > Has it occurred to you that the people who feel rage fundamentally understand the situation, and you may be undereducated in this area? Regardless of how justified the rage is or not, being very emotional about things usually have one of two effects on people A) people gets taken aback by someone's strong emotions or B) people get inspired/taking with the emotion, even feeling that emotion stronger themselves. Sometimes also C) they don't really care either way. What probably isn't helpful, is calling someone is "undereducated" when they're clearly saying that they're person (A), and just because they may or may not agree with you (although parent didn't even clearly say they disagree, just that they're "taken aback" a bit). Some people are calm regardless of what's going on around them, even if the world would be on fire, they'd try to describe what's going on around them with careful words and consideration. It isn't wrong or right, just like the people who feel rage and very emotional aren't wrong or right, it's just a showcase how we're different. But we should aim to at least understand each other, not by trying to provoke, instigate or look down on others, but by asking questions to clarify and to better understand.
- elorm 2y ago
  You're doing the exact same thing he is addressing in that statement above. He's not belittling anyone's rage, he's speaking about people who incite others to feel the rage with them. Now let's turn your question around. Has it occurred to you that the people who feel rage fundamentally misunderstand the situation and are completely undereducated in this area, and are only fuelled by sensationalism and Media manipulation? And then I suggest you go read Dirty Politics by Kathleen Hall Jamieson if you're interested, because that's what people who want to sound more intelligent than the other half of the conversation always do. How does it help anyone?
- jtrn 2y ago
  Has it occurred to you that nothing is more powerful for coming up with intellectual arguments than a strong driving emotion? Yes, rage might be the appropriate and response given the situation. But it’s often true that it starts with an emotion, and then people just argue from there. Even while being wrong. Just look at all the people with contradictory opinions in history, both with strong, emotional rage, and and equally certain of their connection. Throwing the fact that people actually has a tendency to want to be angry.
- normalaccess 2y ago
  Rage is the fuel of the internet, but it’s fundamentally useless when it comes to seeking truth. Social media platforms are engineered to maximize engagement, and the most engaging emotion is anger. This isn’t accidental—outrage drives clicks, shares, and ad revenue. The internet has long been called a “hate machine,” and there’s plenty of truth to that. This creates an environment where misinformation and emotional appeals spread faster than facts. When discussing complex, non-trivial topics, logic and reason are the only tools that can cut through the noise. But in a system designed to reward outrage, those tools are often drowned out. I highly recommend Sam Vaknin's talk about Social Media toxicity. Sources: Outrage is the most profitable emotion https://www.cityam.com/outrage-most-profitable-emotion-so-advertisers-trying-make/ https://www.cityam.com/outrage-most-profitable-emotion-so-ad... Sam Vaknin: The TRUE Toxicity of Social Media Revealed - Interview by Richard Grannon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o58mFU004hg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o58mFU004hg
spankalee 2y ago
> actually address and fix systematic problems with the US government I wonder if you could even name what some of these critical problems are? Or have you just been told that there are problems that justify this chaos?
- InTheArena 2y ago
  I'm happy to, thought the end of your statement strongly suggestions that you have are not acting in honest faith by asking this question. 1) All positions have become partisan, which political ideology being as critical to promotion in high level positions. 2) Congress refuses to act as the constitution intends, and have delegated their budget making authority to the executive branch. 3) The government specific procurement system is almost as expensive as what is being procured. 4) Auditing the government is almost impossible. 5) The debt load on the government is becoming unsustainable. 6) The lack of "digital transformation" (what we called it in banking) means poor service. 7) The unfunded liabilities (mostly at a state level) will swamp budgets in a few years. 8) Most large contracts should be fixed contracts, not cost plus contracts. Companies can do bilk the government for things that are a order of magnitude cheaper to the outside world. 9) Medicare refuses to lower health care costs (by reducing rates) due to political pressure. 10) No rationalization of government spending or revenue has occured since the post world war 2 era.
  - m2024 2y ago
    [dead]
  - dralley 2y ago
    All of your points can be summed up as "Congress refuses to do their job". Breaking all the laws to bypass the government does not "actually address and fix systematic problems with the US government", that is an absurd position. Caesar did not fix the Roman Republic. And opposition to DOGE is not on the basis that people don't care about government efficiency. It's on the basis that the shit they're doing has nothing to do with government efficiency. There's not even a pretense of trying to calculate the "benefit" part of the cost-benefit equation with the cuts they are doing, they are just slashing and burning without any concern for outcomes as a power play and messaging tool. Elon is famous for doing this at Tesla and Twitter and all evidence points to it being incredibly harmful. This isn't efficient! https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/02/15/return-to-office-mandate-trump-desks/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/02/15/return-to... And not everything is about efficiency. Laying off veteran's crisis hotline workers or refusing to pay for the USAID employees you've just abandoned to be extracted (or in one case, medevac'd after a medical emergency) from the places they were sent to is just cruel (and again, illegal).
swalsh 2y ago
> Continuing the senseless partisan drive of the 20 years does. I think what the government is going through right now is wrapping up the last political system. The idea that Democrats and Republicans just need to learn how to work together is just wrong. The parties are being destroyed, and I think we should all cheer that. They were built to address the issues of the 20th century, and neither party in the current form is ready to address 21st century issues. I think AI, Climate change, world demographic changes around the world (ie: low birthrates) is going to seriously alter everything about our world from geopolitics, to economy, even social issues. The democrats are stuck in supporting the new deal bureaucracy and the post ww2 order. That's over, it's crumbling right now, and i'm not going to try and defend any of it personally. It's just obsolete. The old Republican party your dad probably supported is dead too, that died a while ago. The new Republican party seems to be an alliance of people who just really want to cheer the crumbling of the old system (MAGA) and the first emergence of what politics in the 21st century is going to look like (the tech alliance). Democrats would be smart to understand it's a new century we have new threats, new challenges, and need new institutions.... and this IS NOT a once in a lifetime opportunity to fix our government. This is the first draft of our new political system, and they have a choice to participate in shaping it, but they will need to get votes, and to get votes they need to stop stalking about obsolete ideas.
- OvbiousError 2y ago
  Consolidating power in the hands of the few very rich is not something new, it's just the old come again.
- mrtesthah 2y ago
  Is this new political system akin to a banana republic? Because that’s what happens when you replace non partisan workers with loyalists in order to eliminate all accountability and oversight. Turning the rule of law into a partisan issue is a receipt for endemic corruption. And even if you think the rule of law is antiquated, you’re misanthropically cheering the destruction of the largest institution in the world that 330 million people depend on for survival.
- bastardoperator 2y ago
Tycho 2y ago
But it is a partisan issue. All these people on fat NGO salaries, all these federal workers not pulling their weight, all the welfare abuse, all these aid payments - which party do you think is keen to keep the spigot flowing? Of course, it would be a shame if they didn’t audit the Pentagon as well, definitely massive graft happening there.
- cpursley 2y ago
  It’s just wild to me that an attempt to tally up whats in the community grain store and where it’s allocated out to is even considered a bipartisan issue.
  - matwood 2y ago
    The problem is the person doing the tallying is doing it behind closed doors, has routinely been shown to lie to further his interests and has already been caught lying with the tallies he's released. The GOP controls both houses and the POTUS. They could absolutely do a top to bottom audit with full transparency and make cuts where needed. But that's not what this is about.
    - cpursley 2y ago
      Is that totally true, though? Maybe they have pulled wool over my eyes, but it seems like we've seen more transparency in the last few weeks than the last 40 years. Just poke around a bit: https://doge.gov/savings https://doge.gov/savings And please even try to explain how this sort of thing is even remotely in America's best interest: https://www.usaspending.gov/award/CONT_AWD_FA865018C7886_9700_-NONE-_-NONE- https://www.usaspending.gov/award/CONT_AWD_FA865018C7886_970... > ACTIVE SOCIAL ENGINEERING DEFENSE (ASED) LARGE SCALE SOCIAL DECEPTION (LSD) Then there's the basic accounting 101 things like improper categorization, 150 year old people getting social security, etc. Why should the US government be held to a lower standard than a publicly traded company?
      - matwood 2y ago
Hasu 2y ago
> I always worry whenever I see people telling me how to feel - rage in this case. No one told you to feel rage. > Throw in the complete dismisal that anyone not scared of this is ignorant, shuts down discussion. Weird, there are a lot of comments doing discussion in reply to the parent comment. It hasn't been shut down at all! You read those words and disagreed with them, and wrote your own words in response. You're doing the discussion you're claiming is being shut down! What are you even talking about?

KerrAvon 2y ago

Has it occurred to you that the people who feel rage fundamentally understand the situation, and you may be undereducated in this area? What do you think are the root causes of that “senseless partisan drive”? I’d suggest starting with Rick Perlman’s book “Nixonland” if you’re interested.

InTheArena 2y ago
As a Historian (and a German historian in particular) - I've spent a reasonable amount of time educating myself on the nature of fascism and in particular the break down of democracies (Wiemar, France, and also the erosion of civil liberties during the great depression in the United States). I have also been a delegate to both the RNC and the DNC at a state level. This is not a appeal to authority, but rather a honest response to your request for my education level. IMHO, The root cause of the "senseless partisan drive" is the fact that he founding fathers could not come up with a way to restrict parties (they called them "interests") and left them unchecked. This is a constant "sin" of the American political system, and is a key reason Slavery survived as long as it did, why separate but equal became the law of the land, why America shot itself in the foot several time with the Banks of America and why we are looking at the wrong side of history now. The parties now act to destroy each other as their prime directive, rather then to better the country. I liken this to Wiemar Germany, where the increasing radicalization of both the Nazis and the Communists led to political instability and eventual violence that destroyed the government. That erosion of democratic norms, as well as the "other side must be destroyed for us to survive" messaging is the true threat, IMHO. I would strongly suggest Richard Evan's three part history on Nazi history to understand Fascism. Don't worry, you can still hate and worry about Trump and think he is the next coming of Hitler afterwords - it will just be for better reasons.
concordDance 2y ago
Given the two of you probably have different models of reality, perhaps you two can try and figure out which is correct by seeing which model gives better predictions? So try to come up with some sort of future observation that can be made where you think the other person's model would give a different answer to yours about what you would be able to objectively observe. What do you reckon?
- vlovich123 2y ago
  Over what time scale, how do we agree on facts, and how do we evaluate things that require a common value system to determine whether the facts are good or bad?
  - concordDance 2y ago
    The idea would be that the two of them collaboratively agree on some observable prediction they differ on. E.g. level of officially reported government spending in 4 years time or gdp growth rate next year or number of plane crashes next year or what have you. Just some observable metric. If they literally can't come up with a single observable predictive difference then the predictive aspects of their models are actually equivalent and they are only narratively different and don't "really disagree". Like Copenhagen interpretation vs many worlds.
    - vlovich123 2y ago
      Many things don't have quantifiable metrics like that. For example, is USA still a democracy in 4 years? Are people more or less free?. You know, important questions that aren't just economic numbers. Even semi-quantifiable stuff like "are Americans better educated" is debatable on many topics if you can't agree on truth. Oh, and that GDP growth rate number? That relies on a lot of trust as to who's doing the reporting. For example, many people don't believe China's reported GDP numbers. What makes you think the USA doesn't devolve to such a distrust as well.
      - concordDance 2y ago
diggan 2y ago
> Has it occurred to you that the people who feel rage fundamentally understand the situation, and you may be undereducated in this area? Regardless of how justified the rage is or not, being very emotional about things usually have one of two effects on people A) people gets taken aback by someone's strong emotions or B) people get inspired/taking with the emotion, even feeling that emotion stronger themselves. Sometimes also C) they don't really care either way. What probably isn't helpful, is calling someone is "undereducated" when they're clearly saying that they're person (A), and just because they may or may not agree with you (although parent didn't even clearly say they disagree, just that they're "taken aback" a bit). Some people are calm regardless of what's going on around them, even if the world would be on fire, they'd try to describe what's going on around them with careful words and consideration. It isn't wrong or right, just like the people who feel rage and very emotional aren't wrong or right, it's just a showcase how we're different. But we should aim to at least understand each other, not by trying to provoke, instigate or look down on others, but by asking questions to clarify and to better understand.
elorm 2y ago
You're doing the exact same thing he is addressing in that statement above. He's not belittling anyone's rage, he's speaking about people who incite others to feel the rage with them. Now let's turn your question around. Has it occurred to you that the people who feel rage fundamentally misunderstand the situation and are completely undereducated in this area, and are only fuelled by sensationalism and Media manipulation? And then I suggest you go read Dirty Politics by Kathleen Hall Jamieson if you're interested, because that's what people who want to sound more intelligent than the other half of the conversation always do. How does it help anyone?
jtrn 2y ago
Has it occurred to you that nothing is more powerful for coming up with intellectual arguments than a strong driving emotion? Yes, rage might be the appropriate and response given the situation. But it’s often true that it starts with an emotion, and then people just argue from there. Even while being wrong. Just look at all the people with contradictory opinions in history, both with strong, emotional rage, and and equally certain of their connection. Throwing the fact that people actually has a tendency to want to be angry.
normalaccess 2y ago
Rage is the fuel of the internet, but it’s fundamentally useless when it comes to seeking truth. Social media platforms are engineered to maximize engagement, and the most engaging emotion is anger. This isn’t accidental—outrage drives clicks, shares, and ad revenue. The internet has long been called a “hate machine,” and there’s plenty of truth to that. This creates an environment where misinformation and emotional appeals spread faster than facts. When discussing complex, non-trivial topics, logic and reason are the only tools that can cut through the noise. But in a system designed to reward outrage, those tools are often drowned out. I highly recommend Sam Vaknin's talk about Social Media toxicity. Sources: Outrage is the most profitable emotion https://www.cityam.com/outrage-most-profitable-emotion-so-advertisers-trying-make/ https://www.cityam.com/outrage-most-profitable-emotion-so-ad... Sam Vaknin: The TRUE Toxicity of Social Media Revealed - Interview by Richard Grannon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o58mFU004hg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o58mFU004hg

spankalee 2y ago

> actually address and fix systematic problems with the US government I wonder if you could even name what some of these critical problems are? Or have you just been told that there are problems that justify this chaos?

InTheArena 2y ago
I'm happy to, thought the end of your statement strongly suggestions that you have are not acting in honest faith by asking this question. 1) All positions have become partisan, which political ideology being as critical to promotion in high level positions. 2) Congress refuses to act as the constitution intends, and have delegated their budget making authority to the executive branch. 3) The government specific procurement system is almost as expensive as what is being procured. 4) Auditing the government is almost impossible. 5) The debt load on the government is becoming unsustainable. 6) The lack of "digital transformation" (what we called it in banking) means poor service. 7) The unfunded liabilities (mostly at a state level) will swamp budgets in a few years. 8) Most large contracts should be fixed contracts, not cost plus contracts. Companies can do bilk the government for things that are a order of magnitude cheaper to the outside world. 9) Medicare refuses to lower health care costs (by reducing rates) due to political pressure. 10) No rationalization of government spending or revenue has occured since the post world war 2 era.
- m2024 2y ago
  [dead]
- dralley 2y ago
  All of your points can be summed up as "Congress refuses to do their job". Breaking all the laws to bypass the government does not "actually address and fix systematic problems with the US government", that is an absurd position. Caesar did not fix the Roman Republic. And opposition to DOGE is not on the basis that people don't care about government efficiency. It's on the basis that the shit they're doing has nothing to do with government efficiency. There's not even a pretense of trying to calculate the "benefit" part of the cost-benefit equation with the cuts they are doing, they are just slashing and burning without any concern for outcomes as a power play and messaging tool. Elon is famous for doing this at Tesla and Twitter and all evidence points to it being incredibly harmful. This isn't efficient! https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/02/15/return-to-office-mandate-trump-desks/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2025/02/15/return-to... And not everything is about efficiency. Laying off veteran's crisis hotline workers or refusing to pay for the USAID employees you've just abandoned to be extracted (or in one case, medevac'd after a medical emergency) from the places they were sent to is just cruel (and again, illegal).

swalsh 2y ago

> Continuing the senseless partisan drive of the 20 years does. I think what the government is going through right now is wrapping up the last political system. The idea that Democrats and Republicans just need to learn how to work together is just wrong. The parties are being destroyed, and I think we should all cheer that. They were built to address the issues of the 20th century, and neither party in the current form is ready to address 21st century issues. I think AI, Climate change, world demographic changes around the world (ie: low birthrates) is going to seriously alter everything about our world from geopolitics, to economy, even social issues. The democrats are stuck in supporting the new deal bureaucracy and the post ww2 order. That's over, it's crumbling right now, and i'm not going to try and defend any of it personally. It's just obsolete. The old Republican party your dad probably supported is dead too, that died a while ago. The new Republican party seems to be an alliance of people who just really want to cheer the crumbling of the old system (MAGA) and the first emergence of what politics in the 21st century is going to look like (the tech alliance). Democrats would be smart to understand it's a new century we have new threats, new challenges, and need new institutions.... and this IS NOT a once in a lifetime opportunity to fix our government. This is the first draft of our new political system, and they have a choice to participate in shaping it, but they will need to get votes, and to get votes they need to stop stalking about obsolete ideas.

OvbiousError 2y ago
Consolidating power in the hands of the few very rich is not something new, it's just the old come again.
mrtesthah 2y ago
Is this new political system akin to a banana republic? Because that’s what happens when you replace non partisan workers with loyalists in order to eliminate all accountability and oversight. Turning the rule of law into a partisan issue is a receipt for endemic corruption. And even if you think the rule of law is antiquated, you’re misanthropically cheering the destruction of the largest institution in the world that 330 million people depend on for survival.
bastardoperator 2y ago

Tycho 2y ago

But it is a partisan issue. All these people on fat NGO salaries, all these federal workers not pulling their weight, all the welfare abuse, all these aid payments - which party do you think is keen to keep the spigot flowing? Of course, it would be a shame if they didn’t audit the Pentagon as well, definitely massive graft happening there.

cpursley 2y ago
It’s just wild to me that an attempt to tally up whats in the community grain store and where it’s allocated out to is even considered a bipartisan issue.
- matwood 2y ago
  The problem is the person doing the tallying is doing it behind closed doors, has routinely been shown to lie to further his interests and has already been caught lying with the tallies he's released. The GOP controls both houses and the POTUS. They could absolutely do a top to bottom audit with full transparency and make cuts where needed. But that's not what this is about.
  - cpursley 2y ago
    Is that totally true, though? Maybe they have pulled wool over my eyes, but it seems like we've seen more transparency in the last few weeks than the last 40 years. Just poke around a bit: https://doge.gov/savings https://doge.gov/savings And please even try to explain how this sort of thing is even remotely in America's best interest: https://www.usaspending.gov/award/CONT_AWD_FA865018C7886_9700_-NONE-_-NONE- https://www.usaspending.gov/award/CONT_AWD_FA865018C7886_970... > ACTIVE SOCIAL ENGINEERING DEFENSE (ASED) LARGE SCALE SOCIAL DECEPTION (LSD) Then there's the basic accounting 101 things like improper categorization, 150 year old people getting social security, etc. Why should the US government be held to a lower standard than a publicly traded company?
    - matwood 2y ago

Hasu 2y ago

> I always worry whenever I see people telling me how to feel - rage in this case. No one told you to feel rage. > Throw in the complete dismisal that anyone not scared of this is ignorant, shuts down discussion. Weird, there are a lot of comments doing discussion in reply to the parent comment. It hasn't been shut down at all! You read those words and disagreed with them, and wrote your own words in response. You're doing the discussion you're claiming is being shut down! What are you even talking about?