Whatever Musk tweets or reposts, including reposts (the content directly visible in the repost and videos without opening a thread) after market creation, counts. Whatever is visible under "Posts" on his page, even if deleted later, also counts. Replies, etc., do not count.
I reserve the right to mark any answer as N/A for any reason, especially low value answers (i.e. "Tesla" or "United States") according to my judgement. Please ask beforehand. [payments for submissions won't be returned]
Maximum of 10 submissions/user
Resolution criteria
I'll be fairly relaxed, but it should be clear and obvious. I.e. if he tweets "the president does[...]," Joe Biden would resolve to yes. However, "Obamacare" won't resolve "Obama." "Transgender" isn't enough to resolve "LGBT," but "LGBTQIA+" and "transgender, [...] homosexuals and bisexuals" would resolve "LGBT." If you need more examples, please feel free to ask.
I'll use my own judgment and might seek input from mods in unclear cases or decide to N/A.
I won't bet in this market. [expect M$1 to push certain answers in the ranking]
The question closes on May 1st at 0:00 PST. Any submissions without proof by May 2nd at 0:00 PST will be resolved as NO.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ3,510 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,657 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,390 | |
| 4 | Ṁ938 | |
| 5 | Ṁ317 |
@traders The deadline for posting has passed. If you have additional evidence, please comment before May 2nd at 0:00 PST. Otherwise, all remaining submissions will be resolved NO.
The new question is here:
There have been some changes to the criteria: Videos and podcasts will no longer be considered, and "literally" submissions must now be made directly by Musk himself.
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1784442916632760650
starting at ~27m there are a few mentions of Optimus 🙃
lots of talk about Nuclear Power in this one (starts around ~9min)
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1785037439498686689
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1784388834538762425
around 10min in to this horrible speech she mentions the Ukraine war (and I'm speechless that this is something he has pinned and is endorsing on his profile)
@shankypanky Starting "the problem with" is perhaps not an endorsement but still I agree quoting it and pinning it, so more people see it, doesn't seem like appropriate responsible behaviour.
@ChristopherRandles if it weren't any form of endosement, he could simply make a post about it (or retweet something more in line with his perspective). I agree it's not an endorsement insofar as a 1:1 agreement with what she has to say. but between all of his posts about border crossings and immigration, and the fact that he apparently thinks the only problem with the theory is that is fails to address low birth rates (while featuring the video for the last two days on the top of his page where he has 181M followers) is pretty supportive of the speech overall. he did start with "the problem with" but that was related to the theory being incomplete, not refuting anything she has to say. as far as I can tell he thinks Europe needs to both stay more white and increase birth rates.
@shankypanky Yes I did say 'perhaps', it could be mainly disagree or a slight issue. Is he saying it is the only problem with great replacement? Not sure, hard to tell. I would accept that it appears Musk thinks it is a/the major problem. That seems a bit weird, it might be more understandable if populations in Europe were already falling significantly due to birth rates.
>"he thinks Europe needs to both stay more white and increase birth rates" might be a little harsh on him. He is clearly in favour of more legal migration so that doesn't really fit with 'need to stay more white'.
If he wants to talk about need for higher birth rates then fine. Not sure I see it as being as urgent as he seems to be implying, but I have no problem disagreeing over that. This manner of talking about birth rates by quoting this tweet seems more obnoxious feeding a narrative of whites being discriminated against but if Musk wants to be obnoxious then I would defend his right to do so but I would still 'merely' disagree about it being appropriate for him.
If the woke narrative of white privilege has gone too far leading to discrimination against whites, how should this be countered? I am not sure. Pushing a line of whites being discriminated against seems likely to just cause more hostility between "tribes"?
@ChristopherRandles just curious (and for context): did you watch the video he's retweeted and pinned here?
@shankypanky Elon doesn’t endorse anything in the video. He is exclusively criticizing it. And pinning it because he thinks it’s an important discussion.
@CharlieBauer The problem is that he endorses watching Vlaardingerbroek's speech by sharing it. I agree that he doesn't go along or endorse Vlaardingerbroek's opinion in this particular case.
(Just fyi, he has done so on other topics in the past.)
@shankypanky both him and the speaker are right.
People's cultures and communities are being disrupted and fading away. People have a right to preserve both. It is not about skin colour.
When similar things happen in the opposite political and ideological direction, people like you call it "colonization".
@tbird Why do you say "People have a right to preserve both."? If an impartial meritocracy resulted in more diversity at all levels in society, why would anyone have the right to say no to this?
@shankypanky I have watched it in full now but had only watched brief bits enough to see I didn't really want to watch it in full. My comments were mainly about what I thought Musk was saying/implying. Not sure watching it all makes any difference.
@ChristopherRandles because ample self-determination is a good thing and necessary for prosperity and survival, diversity within every cross-section is not.
If you want to argue against a right to life and freedom, be my guest.
@tbird I agree "ample self-determination is a good thing". If the upper middle class children see more value in getting educated and put more effort in such that the upper middle classes remain more culturally similar than the population then I think it is fine to base on merit and continue on that basis.
The question was based on "If an impartial meritocracy resulted in more [not equal] diversity at all levels in society" so I don't think your "ample self-determination is a good thing" necessarily fully addresses this situation dependent question.
It seems entirely plausible to me that activists grab data saying we are staying more culturally divided than a randomly distributed population and far too easily jump to conclusion that 'something must be done'. As this seems well intentioned, it is hard to fight that tendency.
@ChristopherRandles diversity is not intrinsically good like freedom, self-determination and survival. Some cultures are better than others.
If a core subset of values leads to better outcomes, then it is a good idea to spread the word. It is, in fact, impossible to have a prosperous society without shared culture and values.
As for the "upper middle class" point, I disagree with your premises that the middle class value education and effort more and that they are culturally homogeneous. It is not defined by merit either. The best outcomes for society most certainly come from expanding opportunity across and between all social classes.
@tbird I agree with most of your last post.
I don't think I was saying 'upper middle class are culturally homogeneous'. I certainly agree with expanding opportunity being essential to getting best outcomes. I think if merit based, the 'upper middle class' (for want of better term) does become more diverse over time just a lot slower than many activists want to see.
Re "impossible to have a prosperous society without shared culture and values" which way around? The prosperous society creates its own culture and values or are shared cultural values necessary before a prosperous society can be created? Could a mix of different cultures who are aware of their differences but agree to differ/respect each other and work together as appropriate create a prosperous society? If not, why? It has largely not happened but is this due to transport not being as easy until recently and prejudice? Does it have to be a fight for supremacy of culture?
@ChristopherRandles not if the cultures are incompatible. Some people mix and integrate well and some don't. This was totally uncontroversial until recently -- most countries have had time requirements and citizenship tests for immigrants for many decades.
It is not a fight for the "supremacy of culture", because it's not a zero-sum game. Cooperation among different peoples has been shown to be great. But some values are diammetrically opposed.
You either believe in women empowerment and independence, or you believe they should be covered head to toe and not leave the house alone. You either believe in individual freedom and privacy, or you accept surveilance and overwhelming state control. You either believe in property rights, ingenuity, and enterprise, or you believe that private property is theft and that the outputs of hard work must be shared equally with people who need it but haven't produced.
You cannot reconcille some of those ideas, and therefore you cannot have a prosperous society without committing to some of them.