Joining Liz Wolfe and Zach Weissmuller to discuss the progression of the disagreement between America and its European allies on speech and surveillance
Listened to it this am. A great conversation. The Reason folks frustrate me for some reason. I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it's the whole libertarian problem of vague but smug complaint with no doable suggested course of action. I love your visible focus on the massive problem with search, preserving source docs, etc. Steve Bannon said something straightforward but eyeopening on this the other day: that the faustian bargain between the government and the tech lords (exactly the same bargain between the government and the Wall Street/ Hank Paulson thieves that you've documented at length) protected the tech titans from competition, and their products all suck beyond suckage as a consequence. Google & co. need to broken up just as the government institutions, IC, MIC, big-pharma and the rest do.
That was one of the biggest things I agreed with the Biden admin on. Anti-trust is a good idea and crony capitalism is a bad one. You're seeing the extent of it through DOGE somewhat.
Good stuff, Matt! Thank you! Took a break at 46:00 minutes in - Wow! The Scandal of the Century, maybe? Wow! - The US intelligence apparatus builds speech control mechanisms for the EU that violate The Constitution, then use the EU laws in the US as an end-around to control online speech.
Maybe they're not as stupid as I thought they were. Maybe they're just clumsy.
At one hour into the interview, when that scary German ghost-woman speaks, I hear the words she says and I can hear myself at one time saying the same thing. I'm embarrassed to hear her say things that I once said. I think she believes what she is saying. At one time not long ago I did too.
Learning is a process. If you're smart, it's a life-long process. I've learned so much over these last few years, and I'm better off. Thank you Matt Taibbi, Zack Weissmueller, Liz Wolfe, and all that dared to defy Orwell's demons.
I enjoy Reason's podcasts, and it's nice to see Matt here. I don't always agree with Reason's economic politics (though I almost always do on civil liberties), but they're open-minded. Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, Robby Soave, Liz Wolfe, Zach Weissmuller, and the rest always treat their subjects with respect. They've had great conversations with Matt, full of actual intellectual curiosity and discussion. Imagine that! (The exact opposite of of, say, a Medhi Hasan who only wanted to throw crowd-sourced, and mostly inaccurate gotchas, in Matt's face to diminish Matt's work, without letting his audience hear an iota of why that work is important.)
While listening to this podcast I googled the Romanian presidential election to see if there was an update and saw that Georgescu has now been arrested and charged with crimes. I didn’t realize this kind of thing was happening in Europe.
I absolutely care about surveillance concentrations being used for US censorship, because it already happened. I continually worry about the weak grip we have by incremental irrational dependency on centralized technical systems, with no manual backup, and boondoggle expensing that has jammed through by the bureau State. Proliferate incorporate use of biometrics for routine travel and finance is driven by the credentials industry, most supported by neocon Republicans who bargain with incrementalism. People are sleepy. You get the sense they do not care about being frog-boiled and waking up in a technical cage where they get swatted by say the IRS or the FBI for a routine expense; which, again, happened to Donald Trump.
The US federal government harasses US citizens for their politics. That is illegal, but they do not enforce against themselves. Until that changes, people need to take personal responsibility to refute or refuse consent or deny legal tenure for concentrated ID policies and programs like Know Your Customer, REAL ID and Fusion Centers etc. and powers with detention powers denigrating rational cybersecurity amenities like encryption when they will not abide by the 4th and 5th Amendments.
Oh-ho! More government shenanigans again! I never dreamed there was so much corruption. You’re doing a great service by exposing as much as you possibly can, Matt. Thank you!
It was in response to a comment that Matt had made in the first third of the conversation. Unfortunately, I'm old and can't remember what was said. I believe Matt was quoting Vance by saying the EU cancelled the election. Given that we are building the base, you can bet we are equally culpable.
There's something in the discussions of foreign influence on elections that seems pertinent, but which I haven't heard discussed in detail. Matt touches on this when he wonders what voter would change their vote based on propaganda they see on social media. That is, what is the relative impact of the interference and how do you measure that? The interference is often presented as though it were the only voice in the room with the implication that it accounts for a large part of the unexpected outcome. Take the US 2016 presidential election. I think the estimates of what the Russians might have spent for their influence was on the order of $500k to perhaps $10+ million. Yet, according to the Washington Post, the presidential+congressional campaigns spent $6.5 billion, over 650x as much as the Russians. Presumably, some corporate funded PACS spent much more than the Russians. Shouldn't we address that before we get around to the loose change the Russians spent? Or if we assume the Russians are more effective and get more propaganda bang for their buck, the campaigns that spent billions clearly need to fire their incompetent messaging teams, maybe even hire the Russians for messaging. What is the effectiveness of ANY dollar spent (or any social media account created), whether by foreign or native influences? It seems like I need to know that before I can decide whether some group has undue influence.
Why so confrontationa regarding your reporting when it comes to Europe and the US? I like reading your editorials because of the non partisan nature of your world view. Facts speak for themselves.
Listened to it this am. A great conversation. The Reason folks frustrate me for some reason. I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it's the whole libertarian problem of vague but smug complaint with no doable suggested course of action. I love your visible focus on the massive problem with search, preserving source docs, etc. Steve Bannon said something straightforward but eyeopening on this the other day: that the faustian bargain between the government and the tech lords (exactly the same bargain between the government and the Wall Street/ Hank Paulson thieves that you've documented at length) protected the tech titans from competition, and their products all suck beyond suckage as a consequence. Google & co. need to broken up just as the government institutions, IC, MIC, big-pharma and the rest do.
That was one of the biggest things I agreed with the Biden admin on. Anti-trust is a good idea and crony capitalism is a bad one. You're seeing the extent of it through DOGE somewhat.
Can’t think of anything of substance that I agree with dished out by the hopelessly authoritarian and corrupt Biden administration.
Good stuff, Matt! Thank you! Took a break at 46:00 minutes in - Wow! The Scandal of the Century, maybe? Wow! - The US intelligence apparatus builds speech control mechanisms for the EU that violate The Constitution, then use the EU laws in the US as an end-around to control online speech.
Maybe they're not as stupid as I thought they were. Maybe they're just clumsy.
At one hour into the interview, when that scary German ghost-woman speaks, I hear the words she says and I can hear myself at one time saying the same thing. I'm embarrassed to hear her say things that I once said. I think she believes what she is saying. At one time not long ago I did too.
Learning is a process. If you're smart, it's a life-long process. I've learned so much over these last few years, and I'm better off. Thank you Matt Taibbi, Zack Weissmueller, Liz Wolfe, and all that dared to defy Orwell's demons.
84 and still learning.
I enjoy Reason's podcasts, and it's nice to see Matt here. I don't always agree with Reason's economic politics (though I almost always do on civil liberties), but they're open-minded. Nick Gillespie, Matt Welch, Robby Soave, Liz Wolfe, Zach Weissmuller, and the rest always treat their subjects with respect. They've had great conversations with Matt, full of actual intellectual curiosity and discussion. Imagine that! (The exact opposite of of, say, a Medhi Hasan who only wanted to throw crowd-sourced, and mostly inaccurate gotchas, in Matt's face to diminish Matt's work, without letting his audience hear an iota of why that work is important.)
Matt, this was a great interview. You did an exceptional job speaking, succinct and you educated them I think.
While listening to this podcast I googled the Romanian presidential election to see if there was an update and saw that Georgescu has now been arrested and charged with crimes. I didn’t realize this kind of thing was happening in Europe.
I absolutely care about surveillance concentrations being used for US censorship, because it already happened. I continually worry about the weak grip we have by incremental irrational dependency on centralized technical systems, with no manual backup, and boondoggle expensing that has jammed through by the bureau State. Proliferate incorporate use of biometrics for routine travel and finance is driven by the credentials industry, most supported by neocon Republicans who bargain with incrementalism. People are sleepy. You get the sense they do not care about being frog-boiled and waking up in a technical cage where they get swatted by say the IRS or the FBI for a routine expense; which, again, happened to Donald Trump.
The US federal government harasses US citizens for their politics. That is illegal, but they do not enforce against themselves. Until that changes, people need to take personal responsibility to refute or refuse consent or deny legal tenure for concentrated ID policies and programs like Know Your Customer, REAL ID and Fusion Centers etc. and powers with detention powers denigrating rational cybersecurity amenities like encryption when they will not abide by the 4th and 5th Amendments.
Oh-ho! More government shenanigans again! I never dreamed there was so much corruption. You’re doing a great service by exposing as much as you possibly can, Matt. Thank you!
Terry Gilliam's "Brazil" has turned into our present world.
I believe we are building the largest air base in Europe in Romania.
Really?
Is that what this is all about with the huffily disallowed election?
It was in response to a comment that Matt had made in the first third of the conversation. Unfortunately, I'm old and can't remember what was said. I believe Matt was quoting Vance by saying the EU cancelled the election. Given that we are building the base, you can bet we are equally culpable.
There's something in the discussions of foreign influence on elections that seems pertinent, but which I haven't heard discussed in detail. Matt touches on this when he wonders what voter would change their vote based on propaganda they see on social media. That is, what is the relative impact of the interference and how do you measure that? The interference is often presented as though it were the only voice in the room with the implication that it accounts for a large part of the unexpected outcome. Take the US 2016 presidential election. I think the estimates of what the Russians might have spent for their influence was on the order of $500k to perhaps $10+ million. Yet, according to the Washington Post, the presidential+congressional campaigns spent $6.5 billion, over 650x as much as the Russians. Presumably, some corporate funded PACS spent much more than the Russians. Shouldn't we address that before we get around to the loose change the Russians spent? Or if we assume the Russians are more effective and get more propaganda bang for their buck, the campaigns that spent billions clearly need to fire their incompetent messaging teams, maybe even hire the Russians for messaging. What is the effectiveness of ANY dollar spent (or any social media account created), whether by foreign or native influences? It seems like I need to know that before I can decide whether some group has undue influence.
New to substack. I paid, but all I see is videos. I thought he posts articles too?
He does. Just been a lot of audio this last week. Check the archives. I'm also a new subscriber and there's a huge backlog to work through
Typo in title, Looking forward to listening!
Cubs hat, sweet
Matt is in a continual state of miffed-ness at the people who now make up the press... and argue non-stop for censorship.
Why so confrontationa regarding your reporting when it comes to Europe and the US? I like reading your editorials because of the non partisan nature of your world view. Facts speak for themselves.
FREE PALESTINE