11 ms·

E.U. Prepares Major Penalties Against X

139 points by dotcoma 2y ago

rvnx 2y ago
Trying to meddle and interfere with foreign elections wasn't Elon Musk's smartest idea
- spiderfarmer 2y ago
  He spent an outrageous amount to buy his own platform just to boost tweets that ironically highlight how making - or losing - money doesn’t reflect talent in anything else.
  - ttyprintk 2y ago
    Well, he wants to do business in Germany yet when the cameras are on, he can’t suppress Nazi salutes. He says he wants a trial.
    - kreetx 2y ago
      There are a compilation of these salutes of top Democrats doing similar gestures. Has there been anything more by Elon on this front in addition to moving his arm (accidentally) in a specific angle?
      - owebmaster 1y ago
        > Has there been anything more by Elon on this front in addition to moving his arm (accidentally) in a specific angle? Is this your most honest reaction to his act? Have in mind that he did it twice to be sure everyone got it.
        kreetx 1y ago
        I personally think the resemblance is accidental (have you seen how many times AOC does it in one video?). But hand gestures weren't the worse thing the nazis in Germany did - have you seen anything else that supports your caim?
      - spiderfarmer 1y ago
        Musk retweeted a post suggesting that public sector workers, not Adolf Hitler, were responsible for mass murders during the Holocaust. But hey. Are you really curious or just cosplaying?
        kreetx 1y ago
        Only the single leader committed the crimes?
- NotGMan 2y ago
  EU is doing this all the time to its own member states...
  - Calwestjobs 2y ago
    Czechs vote guy who does NAZI salutes on the street, to european parliament, Slovaks voted guy who is lobbying for usage of russian oil and taking bribe of 1% of price of russian oil which slovak state company buys... So we do not need more conspiracy theories about meddling, we need to address and deal with real things already toxic for community. Yes as you guessed nothing in here has any relation to ExTwitter nor Youtube nor fakebook. /s
    - arandomusername 2y ago
      Do you mean russian gas instead of oil? Worth nothing that russian gas is a lot cheaper than any alternative. Slovakia is not a rich country. It could be that people just want to pay less for their energy.
      - Calwestjobs 1y ago
        gas and oil pipelines from russia thru ukraine are slovak state property. russian gas is cheaper is russian propagandist lie. or it is true but in sense that there are bribes prized in. slovakia pays market price but percentage of that price is diverted to bank accounts in russia and turkey (or atleast was ,there is chatter that they moved some money to east asia because of sanctions) as a payment for slovak gov signing deal with russia until i think 2030 or 2035 or something like that. for example similar contract with ukraine was signed only for 10 years (i have no info about bribes in UA). and it ended last december... russia is paying hungary and slovak governments to transport fossils, so governments do not have reason to do reverse adria flow, bring fossils from other pipelines etc etc. ( irony is that someone hacked czech premier Fialas ExTwitter account instead of Filip Turek nazi .... account ) as i understood it, LCOE for battery + renewables is on par with nuclear for years, and similar price of gas peaking... + EU is doing all sorts of programs to lower energy needs of buildings... "funny" thing is that future chinese battery manufacturing capacity IN EUROPE will displace russian gas in long term...
jrepinc 2y ago
Good, it is a start. And much better would be for those EU politicians, journalists and other people to move to Mastodon, Pixelfed, and similar independent platforms. That would make a much better example.
- distracted_boy 2y ago
  No one is truly independent when it comes to politics. Everyone belongs to a political tribe, and if you don't, you are against whatever tribe you are currently engaging with.
  - microtonal 2y ago
    I am not sure how that is a reaction to the grandparent, but we also don't fall into the same us-versus-them trap that divides the US. I think most people in the EU agree on several basic principles regardless of their political preferences: - If you get sick, costs should be covered by universal health insurance. - If you lose your job, there should be a safety net. - When you retire, there should be a decent pension. - Everybody should have access to good education. - We don't want war. - We don't want to be powerless against megacorps. In other words, there is much more that is binding us than what is dividing us (in my country, pretty much every party from extreme left to populist right agrees on these things). For those things that we don't agree on, we should find compromises.
    - tempo3565 2y ago
      [dead]
    - arandomusername 2y ago
      Those aren't that universally agreed upon (except war/megacorps/education) in working class/middle class. It's just that EU has high amount of people depending on those safety nets/pensions that any politician not for it is committing political suicide.
    - luckylion 2y ago
nikanj 2y ago
This would turn out very interestingly, because Elon Musk enjoys a level of access to the US executive branch that other companies only dream of. The fury and retribution from POTUS would be terrible, if the company of his close friend was fined by his mortal enemies
- guerrilla 2y ago
  Mortal enemies? That's a bit dramatic. Whether Trump understands it or not, the EU is his ally and Russia his an example of an "enemy" (i.e. geopolitical competitor).
- dotcoma 2y ago
  We're ready for a fight.
  - renewiltord 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - bigyabai 2y ago
      > An actual fight showed up at their doorstep and they were too addicted to their fossil fuels As an American that doesn't sound too unfamiliar to me either. Remember "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq?
      - renewiltord 2y ago
        Problem solved. We now produce more oil than anyone else. Germany isn’t going to get there. They can’t make nuclear at the national level and they can’t do wind at the state level. Leaves solar in a country with less insolation than New England.
    - wordofx 2y ago
      Spreading Russian conspiracy theories now?
    - 2y ago
andrewclunn 2y ago
[flagged]
- DaSHacka 2y ago
  They may actually live to regret it this time. Screwing with Apple is one thing, but trying to "make an example" out of a company with strong ties to the current administration won't end well for them.
  - AlecSchueler 2y ago
    Are we really saying the government of Europe should be afraid of a foreign business? That honestly sounds like even more reason they should be fighting to regulate.
    - jahewson 2y ago
      The government of Europe is afraid of losing their censorship regime, and thus their hold on power.
  - redeeman 2y ago
    and what are you proposing is gonna happen?
  - Phyx 2y ago
    Lol, whatcha gonna do? Hit us with tarifs?
    - DaSHacka 1y ago
      There is far, far worse that can happen than merely instituting higher tariffs
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    The US already completely alienated Europe. What is Trump going to do, declare war on the EU? He's already set the bridge on fire.
distracted_boy 2y ago
[flagged]
budududuroiu 2y ago
Accountability is oligarchs’ kryptonite
twalkz 2y ago
I guess at some point the EU has to do something if they want companies to keep implementing these regulations under the calculus of “cost of implementation vs. cost of fines that arise from non-compliance”. I would love to believe that some companies would follow these regulations even without severe threat, because they’re the right thing to do for users, but I know in a lot of cases it can take significant time, effort, and money to keep up with every regulation coming out of the EU
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
  Companies don't really care about "the right thing to do for users." They care about maximizing profits from you. If you're hoping companies are going to "do the right thing for you" on their own, you're probably going to be disappointed.
  - fullshark 2y ago
    Once upon a time these companies valued their user base, afraid they would leave and find another way to use their time. I guess they’ve got the data that their users are all addicted and will never do that. At least until they push too hard.
    - exe34 2y ago
      that's because of the network effect: while you're a small part of people's network, you can be replaced easily. once you've connected 60-90% of their network (including the sort of people they follow online, not necessary people they meet in meatspace), you don't need to worry too much about getting replaced.
    - Zak 2y ago
      When there's a significant opportunity for growth in userbase, corporate social media is good to users. Once that plateaus, they look to grow something else, usually advertising revenue. The current incentive structure rewards growth more than a stable profitable state, which I think is a mistake.
    - 2y ago
casenmgreen 2y ago
This "example" stuff is pure BS. Treat everyone equally before the law.
banqjls 2y ago
If they actually were issuing this fine because of violations of the DSA they wouldn't be afraid of retaliation from the US. Just read that bullshit quote about what a blue checkbox on a profile means or not means...
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > If they actually were issuing this fine because of violations of the DSA they wouldn't be afraid of retaliation from the US This is the retaliation. We made the first moves. The White House’s contempt for Europe has been laid bare—trying not to anger Trump, at this point, would be superfluous.
  - banqjls 2y ago
    When you say the White House’s contempt do you mean when they decided to stop spending money on Ukraine or…? I’m European and I couldn’t care less about blue checkmarks and I don’t want social networks censoring people. After all, every time the commission has publicly clashed with Musk it has been because the commission wanted more censorship and Musk doesn’t care. On what side should I be?
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > When you say the White House’s contempt do you mean I mean the attitude shown in Signalgate. Europe is seen as a competitor to American power. (Also, like, threatening to invade an EU member’s territory.)
      - rsynnott 2y ago
        In practice, I suspect the immediate trigger here was tariffs.
    - grey-area 2y ago
      Probably not on the side of the sieg-heiling oligarch.
    - 2y ago
neonate 2y ago
https://archive.ph/y7Yah https://archive.ph/y7Yah
amazingamazing 2y ago
They should do 100B - what’re they gonna do? Same for the rest of American big tech. Sue ‘em all, 5B a year. Just pass a law naming them specifically for a special tax.
- Pulcinella 2y ago
  Does the EU not have protections against bills of attainder?
  - nradov 2y ago
    Not really, no. The lack of such protection is one of the many flaws in the foundational EU treaties and charters.
jdminhbg 2y ago
> Unlike Google, Meta, Apple and Amazon, which are publicly traded, X is owned solely by Mr. Musk. EU regulators are considering using a piece of the law that lets them calculate a fine based on revenue that also includes other companies Mr. Musk privately controls, like his rocket maker, SpaceX. That increases the potential penalty to well over $1 billion, one person said. Is the NYT wrong here or is the EU? It's private but it's not "solely owned" by a longshot. Either way, this is some pretty amazing Calvinball even by EC standards.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > It's private but it's not "solely owned" You’re right. Controlled would be correct, as it invokes the legal concept of common control. (No idea if it’s a thing in the EU.)
- jeltz 2y ago
  It is much more likely that the NYT journalist misunderstood something. The question is what.
- lambda 2y ago
  While others certainly have a financial interest in it, it is not publicly traded and Musk solely controls it. For instance, he just unilaterally sold it to another of his privately held companies, xAI, for a valuation he made up. Musk's privately held companies, and to a large degree Tesla as well, are all things he treats as effectively one big company that he controls; he'll take employees from one to another at will, he sells them to each other or spins them out at will in all stock transactions, etc. The EU regulations allow seeing through such sham company boundaries that are all controlled by a single entity, and treating them as a single company.
  - arandomusername 2y ago
    How do you know that the shareholders of X did not have a voice in acquisition by xAI?
    - 2y ago
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
Baiting Musk into some 3AM rage tweets might be a smart move. It would subtly align the anti-Musk forces among Democrats and within the GOP with Europe.
- joakleaf 2y ago
  Musk is already (frequently) raging against EU — the topics include freedom of speech and immigration… and calling the foreign minister of Poland “a little man”. There is a reason the Tesla brand is suffering in Europe.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Musk is already (frequently) raging against EU My point is turning up the temperature of his comments is to Brussels’ benefit.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    and he also wants the US to withdraw from NATO, which means directly and concretely increasing the risk of war in Europe. Unpopular measure in Europe obviously.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > he also wants the US to withdraw from NATO, which means directly and concretely increasing the risk of war in Europe He’s Molotov-Ribentropping Europe with his overtures to Moscow and demands for mineral rights.
  - arandomusername 2y ago
    > and calling the foreign minister of Poland “a little man”. Just for context, which I think is important here: The foreign minister said Poland is paying for Starlink for Ukraine ($50m/year) and that they will be forced to look at other suppliers if they prove to be unreliable. Elon responded back claiming that $50m is a small fraction of the cost, there's no substitute and said "Be quiet, little man". > the topics include freedom of speech and immigration Most of EU citizens are pro freedom of speech and anti immigration btw.
soygem 2y ago
[dead]
NotGMan 2y ago
>> using a piece of the law that lets them calculate a fine based on revenue that also includes other companies Mr. Musk privately controls, like his rocket maker, SpaceX. So basicaly lets just use some stupid law that lets us randomly take into account all of the other property of a businessowner. And then EU people wonder why no one wants to build companies in an environment like that...
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  Common control is a deeply precedented concept. Otherwise you could avoid any consequences by splitting business across infinite entities. In any case, Musk is the last person to be able to complain about lawlessness.
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  Limited liability laws are not protection against the consequence for illegal acts. They are exclusively protection against economic risks.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  … I mean pretty much everywhere does this sort of thing to some extent. If you don’t, then companies will just put all their risky/liability-attracting activity in a notionally-independent entity with no assets.
AlchemistCamp 2y ago
This was the particularly notable part: > ” The Digital Services Act allows fines of up to 6 percent of a company's total worldwide annual turnover. EU regulators suggested last year that they could calculate fines by including revenue from Musk's other companies, including SpaceX.”
- 762236 2y ago
  It would be interesting to see SpaceX retaliate against the EU, such as by charging a fee for all EU launches to cover the EU's lawfare.
  - owebmaster 2y ago
    SpaceX (and Elon) likes government funding, not tariffs.
waltercool 2y ago
[dead]
djha-skin 2y ago
> for breaking a landmark law to combat illicit content and disinformation What does this mean for Reddit? Does the EU regulate Reddit like this as well?
- seivan 2y ago
  [dead]
grey-area 2y ago
Interesting news given the recently announced US trade war vs the entire world, with special treatment for rivals like the EU and China. It seems the EU have decided the most effective response to an oligarchy declaring trade war is to target the leading oligarchs with government influence. Expect more actions which enrage Trump and Musk and an escalation from both sides. This won’t end well for either side IMO.
- microtonal 2y ago
  with special treatment for rivals like the EU Until three months ago we were also strong allies. But there has been nothing but contempt from the current administration towards the EU and Europe. That said, the EU usually prepares these cases very meticulously. As the article says, they already started in 2023 and issued a preliminary ruling last year. Also, it seems like the issue can still be settled without a fine: The European Union and X could still reach a settlement if the company agrees to changes that satisfy regulators’ concerns, the officials said. That said, it's likely that there have been many deliberations about this and other fines (e.g. Apple) and there were rumors that the EU was going to play softer to appease Trump. But I guess Vance's speech at the NATO conference, the disdain for Europe in the leaked Signal chats (which was completely misplaced because Houthis are attacking vessels as a revenge for Israel's attack on Palestine), and then the high tariffs on EU exports (where Trump only takes into account goods and not services) made the EU decide to show teeth instead. IMO in the end it's the best thing to do, worst thing is to appear weak with these bullies (apparently Trump called Jean-Claude Juncker 'a brutal killer').
- Detrytus 2y ago
  What influence? Musk is already being kicked out of the government.
  - grey-area 2y ago
    Don’t believe the stories they tell, look at what they do instead.
    - 1y ago
rcpt 2y ago
The DSA violation was news in 2024 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/eu-says-elon-musks-paid-verification-deceives-x-users-threatens-big-fines/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/eu-says-elon-mus... And the EU is right. Elons blue check boosting logic absolutely violated those laws. Other companies played by the rules and made their systems DSA compliant. Elon did not, now he needs to pay.
- marris 2y ago
  I am not familiar with the DSA. 1. Are companies permitted to charge for badges under DSA? 2. Is there an example of another social media that EU officials have identified as being compliant with DSA?
  - immibis 2y ago
    You can read the text: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng If English isn't your native language, that's okay - these are translated into every European language and you can select a translation here. Article 25, clause 1: > Providers of online platforms shall not design, organise or operate their online interfaces in a way that deceives or manipulates the recipients of their service or in a way that otherwise materially distorts or impairs the ability of the recipients of their service to make free and informed decisions. These EU regulations tend to specify policies, not mechanisms to achieve them. Mechanisms to enforce the policy, however, are specified. They are written like that precisely so you won't try to weasel your way around a requirement. If they had said "verified badges may not be sold" then you would try to say "this isn't a verified badge but a they-paid-us badge." By wording it vaguely, it cannot be weaseled. And indeed, it is a they-paid-us badge... but it's designed to look identical to the verified badge, on purpose, because Elon knew verified badges were something people wanted, and people wanted them because they were a status symbol, and they were a status symbol because they indicated your account was in some sense more trustworthy than average. And Elon knew that. I don't know whether people still see the badges that way today. Probably not, because all the sane people deleted their accounts and don't care. But it was the case, when the badges were introduced, that they were designed to trick people who didn't know they were now pay badges. You might think everyone knew that, but that's just because everyone in your bubble knew that because they're very online people. Would your grandmother know it?
Schnitz 2y ago
Targeting Elon’s companies is a very smart play in this trade war. It has little to no economic impact in the EU but at the same time has a big impact on him, it might drive a wedge between him and Trump and it also pushes him into an obvious conflict of interest. The US started treating everyone else like an adversary, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the favor is being returned.
- buyucu 2y ago
  100% tariff on all Teslas, regardless of which factory they come from. A total ban on all advertising on Twitter. This should get the orange man's attention.
  - akmarinov 2y ago
    Can’t tariff Germany’s factory- how would you even go about legislating that? The way to go about it so to start mandating that all cars have rain sensors, or dashboard instruments or HUD, or radar if they do TACC or parking sensors - things that most other cars have, but would be a pain for Tesla to add back in for just one region
    - buyucu 2y ago
      You can target specific companies with sanctions, like they have done with Russian oligarchs.
- josteink 2y ago
  > Targeting Elon’s companies is a very smart play in this trade war. It has little to no economic impact in the EU but at the same time has a big impact on him US senators are threatening to withdraw the US from NATO if the EU pushes through with this obvious lawfare. https://x.com/ianjaeger29/status/1908113116774244838?s=46 https://x.com/ianjaeger29/status/1908113116774244838?s=46 Nicely done, Ursula. You’ll get the war you crave so badly.
  - archagon 2y ago
dionidium 2y ago
> Blue checkmarks "used to mean trustworthy sources of information," Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton said. Obviously you can write a law that says anything you want, but as an aesthetic matter, this strikes me as pretty ridiculous. A company makes up a thing called a "blue checkmark" and then, what, it has to mean the same thing for the rest of all time? It's not like the new Twitter lied about what was happening. They said plainly that they were changing the checkmark system to mean something new. Why would anybody cheer a government stepping in to say, "no, sorry, you can't do that?"
- happytoexplain 2y ago
  As much as we would like otherwise, law is a subjective tool. We implement objectivity as much as is feasible, e.g. using careful wording and precedent, but ultimately it would be a fool's errand to attempt to make it 100% objective/deterministic. All this to say, we tend to oversimplify in our criticisms when more objectivity would have given us a result we agree with. We tend to agree that we want laws to stop businesses from "tricking people". The specifics vary widely, but the goal itself is unavoidably subjective, so there will always be some subjectivity in its application.
  - dionidium 2y ago
    In the United States we have a long, foundational legal tradition in support of Free Speech and free enterprise for this very reason. The bar is set very high precisely because we know where things go when it's not. This specific case wouldn't clear a low bar, much less a high one. I, too, have been turned off by Musk's behavior over the last year, but the idea that this case has nothing to do with that is risible.
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      To be fair, US free speech laws have never grappled with as concentrated publishing/social ownership as we have now.
      - deleted 1y ago
buyucu 2y ago
Good. I hope they are not timid. I would also like a 100% tariff on all Tesla cars, regardless of where they are made.
- arandomusername 2y ago
  Tesla has a factory in Germany. Tariffs are for exports/imports.
  - buyucu 2y ago
    You can target specific companies with sanctions, like they have done with Russian oligarchs.
    - arandomusername 2y ago
      Again, Tesla has factory in Germany. How are you going to tariff locally produced goods?
      - mvid 2y ago
        By adding 100% to the price on all cars sold that are produced from that factory as long as it is owned by an adversarial individual. The factory can always be sold to another company.
        arandomusername 1y ago
        What a wonderful way to make sure no foreign companies build factories inside EU.
        buyucu 1y ago
        did the russian sanctions do that? elon musk is no different than your average russian oligarch
josephcsible 2y ago
If such a law existed in the US, it wouldn't matter that you violated it, since it would be found invalid under the First Amendment. Does the EU not have any equivalent to protect freedom of speech from unjust laws?
- Snild 2y ago
  Aren't libel laws such laws?
  - josephcsible 2y ago
    No, because the US has those, and X isn't violating them.
- arandomusername 2y ago
  It's EU. Our favourite pasttime is to regulate.
- AlecSchueler 2y ago
  The equivalent is in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Title II - Freedoms, Article 11). But I'm not sure why you think freedom of expression permits a business to publish things in a mis-leading manner?
  - josephcsible 2y ago
    That says "The exercise of these freedoms [...] may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law", which seems to basically be saying that laws can override freedom of speech in the EU.
    - AlecSchueler 2y ago
      Yes, of course. That's why when I buy some food I know that the list of ingredients is the actual list of ingredients and not someone's free expression. That helps me feel safer as a consumer. Same in this Twitter case. Does it really work differently in the US?
dotcoma 2y ago
To the mods: Why was my link to arstechnica hijacked and transformed into a link to the NYTimes? This is creepy.
- amysox 2y ago
  Especially since NYT is paywalled and Ars is not.
  - kreetx 2y ago
    https://archive.ph/y7Yah https://archive.ph/y7Yah
- jdenning 2y ago
  This is a valid question -- any response from mods?
  - xracy 1y ago
    There is another comment that answers "why" I assume dang doesn't have the time to answer all of these individually. But tl;dr it's in the guidelines for posting on the site why this happened.
- 93po 2y ago
  if i had to guess: NYT was the original source of the news and Ars is just reporting on NYT reporting. Or alternatively, Ars is frequently really slanted and disingenuous to the point of dishonesty fairly often
- StackRanker3000 2y ago
  I’m guessing this is the article you submitted: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/04/eu-may-make-an-example-of-x-by-issuing-1-billion-fine-to-musks-social-network/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/04/eu-may-make-an-e... This is the first sentence in it, which links to the New York Times article the submission was changed to: > European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against X, including a fine that could exceed $1 billion, according to a New York Times report yesterday. These are the Hacker News guidelines (you’ve been on here for 18 years, perhaps time to give them a read): https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter. This isn’t creepy, this is in line with the rules.
Frederation 2y ago
[flagged]
sunshine-o 2y ago
I left Twitter 10 years ago because I believe it is toxic. Now to everyone applauding those kind of things with a "the enemies of my enemies are my friends" logic: I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years HN will be inaccessible from the EU because it promotes non compliant and dangerous software. If you don't believe me, read the EU Cyber resilience act. It is slowly paving the way to this. HN is already blocked in China.
- StanislavPetrov 2y ago
  It's amazing more people don't understand this. In a free society people have the right to say things that are stupid, wrong, toxic and just plain false. If you live in a society where the government assumes the power to control what you are allowed to say you no longer live in a free society, period. This holds true whether you're talking about the EU's assault on free speech or the Trump administration's assault on free speech when it comes to criticizing Israel. It's amazing so many are willing (and eager!) to surrender their freedoms to what they perceive as benevolent overlords with their best interest at heart. What they fail to understand is that once you have lost the ability to speak freely, you inevitably lose all of the other freedoms that go along with it. Your benevolent overlords now possess the power to arbitrarily classify anything they don't like (especially that which threatens their power) as "misinformation" or "dangerous speech" or whatever other euphemism they invent to silence you. Just because you may today happen to agree with the people who decide what you are allowed to say doesn't mean you will agree with them tomorrow. And tomorrow you won't be able to object, because your ability to speak freely will be gone.
  - gls2ro 2y ago
    I think you are confusing the right to say things with a right to not be subjected to consequences for what you say. I think in US as in EU if you say something that is breaking a law you have to pay the consequence. The difference may be in EU having more laws and US less that are concerned with consequences.
    - kreetx 2y ago
hulitu 2y ago
> E.U. Prepares Major Penalties Against X Meta, Amazon, Alphabet and Microsoft are our friends. They pay so well. /s
rich_sasha 2y ago
While it's nice to see EU hitting where it hurts, and $1bn is a lot of money by most scales, it isn't, insanely, that much to Musk. If I believe Google, his net worth is still over $300bn, so such fine would be less than 0.5% of his net worth. Given his pattern of behaviour, he may well try to turn it all into a joke and be emboldened for more. That said, I don't know how much cash Twitter and SpaceX have. Possibly not a lot. Tesla does have more, but it's publicly owned and much harder for Musk to raid for cash.
hayst4ck 2y ago
Authoritarianism is on the rise world wide. Liberalism (Democracy) is clearly on the decline. Social media with private intelligence is the cause. Social media is a private and state intelligence goldmine. Those with resources study what is said and craft messages to influence people's actions in real life. They then pay social media to promote these messages and then use all the data collected via rampant surveillance capitalism in order get feedback. That makes campaign successes measurable and therefore tunable. Penalties alone won't be enough to stop right wing or oligarchic movements in Europe or to protect western liberalism. A fine to an oligarch is only a declaration of war, not a meaningful check on power. China set up the GFW because they realized that they could not subject illiterate subsistence farmer who have never left their home town to foreign interference, so they created a digital border. Yes, it also serves to put down dissent and that is bad, but it also keeps china more stable than it would be otherwise. Even Americans came around and voted to put the first brick in America's own great firewall by voting to ban TikTok. If the founders didn't bend to the current administration, then it would be banned right now for exactly the risk China saw when they implemented their own digital border. It is not enough to fine when you have no border. Peter Thiel and his Palantir will actively work against European governments with the aid of X and Facebook by offering aid to those who can afford it with money or loyalty, which gives material power to those with selfish goals, who can use them to craft governments more amenable to their goals: Weak, divided, angry, gridlocked, and most importantly de-regulated. Europe needs a digital border.

139 points by dotcoma 2y ago

rvnx 2y ago

Trying to meddle and interfere with foreign elections wasn't Elon Musk's smartest idea

spiderfarmer 2y ago
He spent an outrageous amount to buy his own platform just to boost tweets that ironically highlight how making - or losing - money doesn’t reflect talent in anything else.
- ttyprintk 2y ago
  Well, he wants to do business in Germany yet when the cameras are on, he can’t suppress Nazi salutes. He says he wants a trial.
  - kreetx 2y ago
    There are a compilation of these salutes of top Democrats doing similar gestures. Has there been anything more by Elon on this front in addition to moving his arm (accidentally) in a specific angle?
    - owebmaster 1y ago
      > Has there been anything more by Elon on this front in addition to moving his arm (accidentally) in a specific angle? Is this your most honest reaction to his act? Have in mind that he did it twice to be sure everyone got it.
      - kreetx 1y ago
        I personally think the resemblance is accidental (have you seen how many times AOC does it in one video?). But hand gestures weren't the worse thing the nazis in Germany did - have you seen anything else that supports your caim?
    - spiderfarmer 1y ago
      Musk retweeted a post suggesting that public sector workers, not Adolf Hitler, were responsible for mass murders during the Holocaust. But hey. Are you really curious or just cosplaying?
      - kreetx 1y ago
        Only the single leader committed the crimes?
NotGMan 2y ago
EU is doing this all the time to its own member states...
- Calwestjobs 2y ago
  Czechs vote guy who does NAZI salutes on the street, to european parliament, Slovaks voted guy who is lobbying for usage of russian oil and taking bribe of 1% of price of russian oil which slovak state company buys... So we do not need more conspiracy theories about meddling, we need to address and deal with real things already toxic for community. Yes as you guessed nothing in here has any relation to ExTwitter nor Youtube nor fakebook. /s
  - arandomusername 2y ago
    Do you mean russian gas instead of oil? Worth nothing that russian gas is a lot cheaper than any alternative. Slovakia is not a rich country. It could be that people just want to pay less for their energy.
    - Calwestjobs 1y ago
      gas and oil pipelines from russia thru ukraine are slovak state property. russian gas is cheaper is russian propagandist lie. or it is true but in sense that there are bribes prized in. slovakia pays market price but percentage of that price is diverted to bank accounts in russia and turkey (or atleast was ,there is chatter that they moved some money to east asia because of sanctions) as a payment for slovak gov signing deal with russia until i think 2030 or 2035 or something like that. for example similar contract with ukraine was signed only for 10 years (i have no info about bribes in UA). and it ended last december... russia is paying hungary and slovak governments to transport fossils, so governments do not have reason to do reverse adria flow, bring fossils from other pipelines etc etc. ( irony is that someone hacked czech premier Fialas ExTwitter account instead of Filip Turek nazi .... account ) as i understood it, LCOE for battery + renewables is on par with nuclear for years, and similar price of gas peaking... + EU is doing all sorts of programs to lower energy needs of buildings... "funny" thing is that future chinese battery manufacturing capacity IN EUROPE will displace russian gas in long term...

jrepinc 2y ago

Good, it is a start. And much better would be for those EU politicians, journalists and other people to move to Mastodon, Pixelfed, and similar independent platforms. That would make a much better example.

distracted_boy 2y ago
No one is truly independent when it comes to politics. Everyone belongs to a political tribe, and if you don't, you are against whatever tribe you are currently engaging with.
- microtonal 2y ago
  I am not sure how that is a reaction to the grandparent, but we also don't fall into the same us-versus-them trap that divides the US. I think most people in the EU agree on several basic principles regardless of their political preferences: - If you get sick, costs should be covered by universal health insurance. - If you lose your job, there should be a safety net. - When you retire, there should be a decent pension. - Everybody should have access to good education. - We don't want war. - We don't want to be powerless against megacorps. In other words, there is much more that is binding us than what is dividing us (in my country, pretty much every party from extreme left to populist right agrees on these things). For those things that we don't agree on, we should find compromises.
  - tempo3565 2y ago
    [dead]
  - arandomusername 2y ago
    Those aren't that universally agreed upon (except war/megacorps/education) in working class/middle class. It's just that EU has high amount of people depending on those safety nets/pensions that any politician not for it is committing political suicide.
  - luckylion 2y ago

nikanj 2y ago

This would turn out very interestingly, because Elon Musk enjoys a level of access to the US executive branch that other companies only dream of. The fury and retribution from POTUS would be terrible, if the company of his close friend was fined by his mortal enemies

guerrilla 2y ago
Mortal enemies? That's a bit dramatic. Whether Trump understands it or not, the EU is his ally and Russia his an example of an "enemy" (i.e. geopolitical competitor).
dotcoma 2y ago
We're ready for a fight.
- renewiltord 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - bigyabai 2y ago
    > An actual fight showed up at their doorstep and they were too addicted to their fossil fuels As an American that doesn't sound too unfamiliar to me either. Remember "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq?
    - renewiltord 2y ago
      Problem solved. We now produce more oil than anyone else. Germany isn’t going to get there. They can’t make nuclear at the national level and they can’t do wind at the state level. Leaves solar in a country with less insolation than New England.
  - wordofx 2y ago
    Spreading Russian conspiracy theories now?
  - 2y ago

andrewclunn 2y ago

[flagged]

DaSHacka 2y ago
They may actually live to regret it this time. Screwing with Apple is one thing, but trying to "make an example" out of a company with strong ties to the current administration won't end well for them.
- AlecSchueler 2y ago
  Are we really saying the government of Europe should be afraid of a foreign business? That honestly sounds like even more reason they should be fighting to regulate.
  - jahewson 2y ago
    The government of Europe is afraid of losing their censorship regime, and thus their hold on power.
- redeeman 2y ago
  and what are you proposing is gonna happen?
- Phyx 2y ago
  Lol, whatcha gonna do? Hit us with tarifs?
  - DaSHacka 1y ago
    There is far, far worse that can happen than merely instituting higher tariffs
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  The US already completely alienated Europe. What is Trump going to do, declare war on the EU? He's already set the bridge on fire.

distracted_boy 2y ago

[flagged]

budududuroiu 2y ago

Accountability is oligarchs’ kryptonite

twalkz 2y ago

I guess at some point the EU has to do something if they want companies to keep implementing these regulations under the calculus of “cost of implementation vs. cost of fines that arise from non-compliance”. I would love to believe that some companies would follow these regulations even without severe threat, because they’re the right thing to do for users, but I know in a lot of cases it can take significant time, effort, and money to keep up with every regulation coming out of the EU

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
Companies don't really care about "the right thing to do for users." They care about maximizing profits from you. If you're hoping companies are going to "do the right thing for you" on their own, you're probably going to be disappointed.
- fullshark 2y ago
  Once upon a time these companies valued their user base, afraid they would leave and find another way to use their time. I guess they’ve got the data that their users are all addicted and will never do that. At least until they push too hard.
  - exe34 2y ago
    that's because of the network effect: while you're a small part of people's network, you can be replaced easily. once you've connected 60-90% of their network (including the sort of people they follow online, not necessary people they meet in meatspace), you don't need to worry too much about getting replaced.
  - Zak 2y ago
    When there's a significant opportunity for growth in userbase, corporate social media is good to users. Once that plateaus, they look to grow something else, usually advertising revenue. The current incentive structure rewards growth more than a stable profitable state, which I think is a mistake.
  - 2y ago

casenmgreen 2y ago

This "example" stuff is pure BS. Treat everyone equally before the law.

banqjls 2y ago

If they actually were issuing this fine because of violations of the DSA they wouldn't be afraid of retaliation from the US. Just read that bullshit quote about what a blue checkbox on a profile means or not means...

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> If they actually were issuing this fine because of violations of the DSA they wouldn't be afraid of retaliation from the US This is the retaliation. We made the first moves. The White House’s contempt for Europe has been laid bare—trying not to anger Trump, at this point, would be superfluous.
- banqjls 2y ago
  When you say the White House’s contempt do you mean when they decided to stop spending money on Ukraine or…? I’m European and I couldn’t care less about blue checkmarks and I don’t want social networks censoring people. After all, every time the commission has publicly clashed with Musk it has been because the commission wanted more censorship and Musk doesn’t care. On what side should I be?
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > When you say the White House’s contempt do you mean I mean the attitude shown in Signalgate. Europe is seen as a competitor to American power. (Also, like, threatening to invade an EU member’s territory.)
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      In practice, I suspect the immediate trigger here was tariffs.
  - grey-area 2y ago
    Probably not on the side of the sieg-heiling oligarch.
  - 2y ago

neonate 2y ago

https://archive.ph/y7Yah https://archive.ph/y7Yah

amazingamazing 2y ago

They should do 100B - what’re they gonna do? Same for the rest of American big tech. Sue ‘em all, 5B a year. Just pass a law naming them specifically for a special tax.

Pulcinella 2y ago
Does the EU not have protections against bills of attainder?
- nradov 2y ago
  Not really, no. The lack of such protection is one of the many flaws in the foundational EU treaties and charters.

jdminhbg 2y ago

> Unlike Google, Meta, Apple and Amazon, which are publicly traded, X is owned solely by Mr. Musk. EU regulators are considering using a piece of the law that lets them calculate a fine based on revenue that also includes other companies Mr. Musk privately controls, like his rocket maker, SpaceX. That increases the potential penalty to well over $1 billion, one person said. Is the NYT wrong here or is the EU? It's private but it's not "solely owned" by a longshot. Either way, this is some pretty amazing Calvinball even by EC standards.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> It's private but it's not "solely owned" You’re right. Controlled would be correct, as it invokes the legal concept of common control. (No idea if it’s a thing in the EU.)
jeltz 2y ago
It is much more likely that the NYT journalist misunderstood something. The question is what.
lambda 2y ago
While others certainly have a financial interest in it, it is not publicly traded and Musk solely controls it. For instance, he just unilaterally sold it to another of his privately held companies, xAI, for a valuation he made up. Musk's privately held companies, and to a large degree Tesla as well, are all things he treats as effectively one big company that he controls; he'll take employees from one to another at will, he sells them to each other or spins them out at will in all stock transactions, etc. The EU regulations allow seeing through such sham company boundaries that are all controlled by a single entity, and treating them as a single company.
- arandomusername 2y ago
  How do you know that the shareholders of X did not have a voice in acquisition by xAI?
  - 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

Baiting Musk into some 3AM rage tweets might be a smart move. It would subtly align the anti-Musk forces among Democrats and within the GOP with Europe.

joakleaf 2y ago
Musk is already (frequently) raging against EU — the topics include freedom of speech and immigration… and calling the foreign minister of Poland “a little man”. There is a reason the Tesla brand is suffering in Europe.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Musk is already (frequently) raging against EU My point is turning up the temperature of his comments is to Brussels’ benefit.
- rvnx 2y ago
  and he also wants the US to withdraw from NATO, which means directly and concretely increasing the risk of war in Europe. Unpopular measure in Europe obviously.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > he also wants the US to withdraw from NATO, which means directly and concretely increasing the risk of war in Europe He’s Molotov-Ribentropping Europe with his overtures to Moscow and demands for mineral rights.
- arandomusername 2y ago
  > and calling the foreign minister of Poland “a little man”. Just for context, which I think is important here: The foreign minister said Poland is paying for Starlink for Ukraine ($50m/year) and that they will be forced to look at other suppliers if they prove to be unreliable. Elon responded back claiming that $50m is a small fraction of the cost, there's no substitute and said "Be quiet, little man". > the topics include freedom of speech and immigration Most of EU citizens are pro freedom of speech and anti immigration btw.

soygem 2y ago

[dead]

NotGMan 2y ago

>> using a piece of the law that lets them calculate a fine based on revenue that also includes other companies Mr. Musk privately controls, like his rocket maker, SpaceX. So basicaly lets just use some stupid law that lets us randomly take into account all of the other property of a businessowner. And then EU people wonder why no one wants to build companies in an environment like that...

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
Common control is a deeply precedented concept. Otherwise you could avoid any consequences by splitting business across infinite entities. In any case, Musk is the last person to be able to complain about lawlessness.
marcosdumay 2y ago
Limited liability laws are not protection against the consequence for illegal acts. They are exclusively protection against economic risks.
rsynnott 2y ago
… I mean pretty much everywhere does this sort of thing to some extent. If you don’t, then companies will just put all their risky/liability-attracting activity in a notionally-independent entity with no assets.

AlchemistCamp 2y ago

This was the particularly notable part: > ” The Digital Services Act allows fines of up to 6 percent of a company's total worldwide annual turnover. EU regulators suggested last year that they could calculate fines by including revenue from Musk's other companies, including SpaceX.”

762236 2y ago
It would be interesting to see SpaceX retaliate against the EU, such as by charging a fee for all EU launches to cover the EU's lawfare.
- owebmaster 2y ago
  SpaceX (and Elon) likes government funding, not tariffs.

waltercool 2y ago

[dead]

djha-skin 2y ago

> for breaking a landmark law to combat illicit content and disinformation What does this mean for Reddit? Does the EU regulate Reddit like this as well?

seivan 2y ago
[dead]

grey-area 2y ago

Interesting news given the recently announced US trade war vs the entire world, with special treatment for rivals like the EU and China. It seems the EU have decided the most effective response to an oligarchy declaring trade war is to target the leading oligarchs with government influence. Expect more actions which enrage Trump and Musk and an escalation from both sides. This won’t end well for either side IMO.

microtonal 2y ago
with special treatment for rivals like the EU Until three months ago we were also strong allies. But there has been nothing but contempt from the current administration towards the EU and Europe. That said, the EU usually prepares these cases very meticulously. As the article says, they already started in 2023 and issued a preliminary ruling last year. Also, it seems like the issue can still be settled without a fine: The European Union and X could still reach a settlement if the company agrees to changes that satisfy regulators’ concerns, the officials said. That said, it's likely that there have been many deliberations about this and other fines (e.g. Apple) and there were rumors that the EU was going to play softer to appease Trump. But I guess Vance's speech at the NATO conference, the disdain for Europe in the leaked Signal chats (which was completely misplaced because Houthis are attacking vessels as a revenge for Israel's attack on Palestine), and then the high tariffs on EU exports (where Trump only takes into account goods and not services) made the EU decide to show teeth instead. IMO in the end it's the best thing to do, worst thing is to appear weak with these bullies (apparently Trump called Jean-Claude Juncker 'a brutal killer').
Detrytus 2y ago
What influence? Musk is already being kicked out of the government.
- grey-area 2y ago
  Don’t believe the stories they tell, look at what they do instead.
  - 1y ago

rcpt 2y ago

The DSA violation was news in 2024 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/eu-says-elon-musks-paid-verification-deceives-x-users-threatens-big-fines/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/07/eu-says-elon-mus... And the EU is right. Elons blue check boosting logic absolutely violated those laws. Other companies played by the rules and made their systems DSA compliant. Elon did not, now he needs to pay.

marris 2y ago
I am not familiar with the DSA. 1. Are companies permitted to charge for badges under DSA? 2. Is there an example of another social media that EU officials have identified as being compliant with DSA?
- immibis 2y ago
  You can read the text: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng If English isn't your native language, that's okay - these are translated into every European language and you can select a translation here. Article 25, clause 1: > Providers of online platforms shall not design, organise or operate their online interfaces in a way that deceives or manipulates the recipients of their service or in a way that otherwise materially distorts or impairs the ability of the recipients of their service to make free and informed decisions. These EU regulations tend to specify policies, not mechanisms to achieve them. Mechanisms to enforce the policy, however, are specified. They are written like that precisely so you won't try to weasel your way around a requirement. If they had said "verified badges may not be sold" then you would try to say "this isn't a verified badge but a they-paid-us badge." By wording it vaguely, it cannot be weaseled. And indeed, it is a they-paid-us badge... but it's designed to look identical to the verified badge, on purpose, because Elon knew verified badges were something people wanted, and people wanted them because they were a status symbol, and they were a status symbol because they indicated your account was in some sense more trustworthy than average. And Elon knew that. I don't know whether people still see the badges that way today. Probably not, because all the sane people deleted their accounts and don't care. But it was the case, when the badges were introduced, that they were designed to trick people who didn't know they were now pay badges. You might think everyone knew that, but that's just because everyone in your bubble knew that because they're very online people. Would your grandmother know it?

Schnitz 2y ago

Targeting Elon’s companies is a very smart play in this trade war. It has little to no economic impact in the EU but at the same time has a big impact on him, it might drive a wedge between him and Trump and it also pushes him into an obvious conflict of interest. The US started treating everyone else like an adversary, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the favor is being returned.

buyucu 2y ago
100% tariff on all Teslas, regardless of which factory they come from. A total ban on all advertising on Twitter. This should get the orange man's attention.
- akmarinov 2y ago
  Can’t tariff Germany’s factory- how would you even go about legislating that? The way to go about it so to start mandating that all cars have rain sensors, or dashboard instruments or HUD, or radar if they do TACC or parking sensors - things that most other cars have, but would be a pain for Tesla to add back in for just one region
  - buyucu 2y ago
    You can target specific companies with sanctions, like they have done with Russian oligarchs.
josteink 2y ago
> Targeting Elon’s companies is a very smart play in this trade war. It has little to no economic impact in the EU but at the same time has a big impact on him US senators are threatening to withdraw the US from NATO if the EU pushes through with this obvious lawfare. https://x.com/ianjaeger29/status/1908113116774244838?s=46 https://x.com/ianjaeger29/status/1908113116774244838?s=46 Nicely done, Ursula. You’ll get the war you crave so badly.
- archagon 2y ago

dionidium 2y ago

> Blue checkmarks "used to mean trustworthy sources of information," Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton said. Obviously you can write a law that says anything you want, but as an aesthetic matter, this strikes me as pretty ridiculous. A company makes up a thing called a "blue checkmark" and then, what, it has to mean the same thing for the rest of all time? It's not like the new Twitter lied about what was happening. They said plainly that they were changing the checkmark system to mean something new. Why would anybody cheer a government stepping in to say, "no, sorry, you can't do that?"

happytoexplain 2y ago
As much as we would like otherwise, law is a subjective tool. We implement objectivity as much as is feasible, e.g. using careful wording and precedent, but ultimately it would be a fool's errand to attempt to make it 100% objective/deterministic. All this to say, we tend to oversimplify in our criticisms when more objectivity would have given us a result we agree with. We tend to agree that we want laws to stop businesses from "tricking people". The specifics vary widely, but the goal itself is unavoidably subjective, so there will always be some subjectivity in its application.
- dionidium 2y ago
  In the United States we have a long, foundational legal tradition in support of Free Speech and free enterprise for this very reason. The bar is set very high precisely because we know where things go when it's not. This specific case wouldn't clear a low bar, much less a high one. I, too, have been turned off by Musk's behavior over the last year, but the idea that this case has nothing to do with that is risible.
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    To be fair, US free speech laws have never grappled with as concentrated publishing/social ownership as we have now.
    - deleted 1y ago

buyucu 2y ago

Good. I hope they are not timid. I would also like a 100% tariff on all Tesla cars, regardless of where they are made.

arandomusername 2y ago
Tesla has a factory in Germany. Tariffs are for exports/imports.
- buyucu 2y ago
  You can target specific companies with sanctions, like they have done with Russian oligarchs.
  - arandomusername 2y ago
    Again, Tesla has factory in Germany. How are you going to tariff locally produced goods?
    - mvid 2y ago
      By adding 100% to the price on all cars sold that are produced from that factory as long as it is owned by an adversarial individual. The factory can always be sold to another company.
      - arandomusername 1y ago
        What a wonderful way to make sure no foreign companies build factories inside EU.
        buyucu 1y ago
        did the russian sanctions do that? elon musk is no different than your average russian oligarch

josephcsible 2y ago

If such a law existed in the US, it wouldn't matter that you violated it, since it would be found invalid under the First Amendment. Does the EU not have any equivalent to protect freedom of speech from unjust laws?

Snild 2y ago
Aren't libel laws such laws?
- josephcsible 2y ago
  No, because the US has those, and X isn't violating them.
arandomusername 2y ago
It's EU. Our favourite pasttime is to regulate.
AlecSchueler 2y ago
The equivalent is in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Title II - Freedoms, Article 11). But I'm not sure why you think freedom of expression permits a business to publish things in a mis-leading manner?
- josephcsible 2y ago
  That says "The exercise of these freedoms [...] may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law", which seems to basically be saying that laws can override freedom of speech in the EU.
  - AlecSchueler 2y ago
    Yes, of course. That's why when I buy some food I know that the list of ingredients is the actual list of ingredients and not someone's free expression. That helps me feel safer as a consumer. Same in this Twitter case. Does it really work differently in the US?

dotcoma 2y ago

To the mods: Why was my link to arstechnica hijacked and transformed into a link to the NYTimes? This is creepy.

amysox 2y ago
Especially since NYT is paywalled and Ars is not.
- kreetx 2y ago
  https://archive.ph/y7Yah https://archive.ph/y7Yah
jdenning 2y ago
This is a valid question -- any response from mods?
- xracy 1y ago
  There is another comment that answers "why" I assume dang doesn't have the time to answer all of these individually. But tl;dr it's in the guidelines for posting on the site why this happened.
93po 2y ago
if i had to guess: NYT was the original source of the news and Ars is just reporting on NYT reporting. Or alternatively, Ars is frequently really slanted and disingenuous to the point of dishonesty fairly often
StackRanker3000 2y ago
I’m guessing this is the article you submitted: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/04/eu-may-make-an-example-of-x-by-issuing-1-billion-fine-to-musks-social-network/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/04/eu-may-make-an-e... This is the first sentence in it, which links to the New York Times article the submission was changed to: > European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against X, including a fine that could exceed $1 billion, according to a New York Times report yesterday. These are the Hacker News guidelines (you’ve been on here for 18 years, perhaps time to give them a read): https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter. This isn’t creepy, this is in line with the rules.

Frederation 2y ago

[flagged]

sunshine-o 2y ago

I left Twitter 10 years ago because I believe it is toxic. Now to everyone applauding those kind of things with a "the enemies of my enemies are my friends" logic: I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years HN will be inaccessible from the EU because it promotes non compliant and dangerous software. If you don't believe me, read the EU Cyber resilience act. It is slowly paving the way to this. HN is already blocked in China.

StanislavPetrov 2y ago
It's amazing more people don't understand this. In a free society people have the right to say things that are stupid, wrong, toxic and just plain false. If you live in a society where the government assumes the power to control what you are allowed to say you no longer live in a free society, period. This holds true whether you're talking about the EU's assault on free speech or the Trump administration's assault on free speech when it comes to criticizing Israel. It's amazing so many are willing (and eager!) to surrender their freedoms to what they perceive as benevolent overlords with their best interest at heart. What they fail to understand is that once you have lost the ability to speak freely, you inevitably lose all of the other freedoms that go along with it. Your benevolent overlords now possess the power to arbitrarily classify anything they don't like (especially that which threatens their power) as "misinformation" or "dangerous speech" or whatever other euphemism they invent to silence you. Just because you may today happen to agree with the people who decide what you are allowed to say doesn't mean you will agree with them tomorrow. And tomorrow you won't be able to object, because your ability to speak freely will be gone.
- gls2ro 2y ago
  I think you are confusing the right to say things with a right to not be subjected to consequences for what you say. I think in US as in EU if you say something that is breaking a law you have to pay the consequence. The difference may be in EU having more laws and US less that are concerned with consequences.
  - kreetx 2y ago

hulitu 2y ago

> E.U. Prepares Major Penalties Against X Meta, Amazon, Alphabet and Microsoft are our friends. They pay so well. /s

rich_sasha 2y ago

While it's nice to see EU hitting where it hurts, and $1bn is a lot of money by most scales, it isn't, insanely, that much to Musk. If I believe Google, his net worth is still over $300bn, so such fine would be less than 0.5% of his net worth. Given his pattern of behaviour, he may well try to turn it all into a joke and be emboldened for more. That said, I don't know how much cash Twitter and SpaceX have. Possibly not a lot. Tesla does have more, but it's publicly owned and much harder for Musk to raid for cash.

hayst4ck 2y ago

Authoritarianism is on the rise world wide. Liberalism (Democracy) is clearly on the decline. Social media with private intelligence is the cause. Social media is a private and state intelligence goldmine. Those with resources study what is said and craft messages to influence people's actions in real life. They then pay social media to promote these messages and then use all the data collected via rampant surveillance capitalism in order get feedback. That makes campaign successes measurable and therefore tunable. Penalties alone won't be enough to stop right wing or oligarchic movements in Europe or to protect western liberalism. A fine to an oligarch is only a declaration of war, not a meaningful check on power. China set up the GFW because they realized that they could not subject illiterate subsistence farmer who have never left their home town to foreign interference, so they created a digital border. Yes, it also serves to put down dissent and that is bad, but it also keeps china more stable than it would be otherwise. Even Americans came around and voted to put the first brick in America's own great firewall by voting to ban TikTok. If the founders didn't bend to the current administration, then it would be banned right now for exactly the risk China saw when they implemented their own digital border. It is not enough to fine when you have no border. Peter Thiel and his Palantir will actively work against European governments with the aid of X and Facebook by offering aid to those who can afford it with money or loyalty, which gives material power to those with selfish goals, who can use them to craft governments more amenable to their goals: Weak, divided, angry, gridlocked, and most importantly de-regulated. Europe needs a digital border.