A little further away, but not much, from the hypocrisy of a human rights lawyer turned prime minister who refuses to take action where it is most needed to protect human rights.

From John Naughton at substack.com/home/post/p-...

"...software is not an asset, it’s a liability. The capabilities that running software delivers — automation, production, analysis and administration — those are assets. But the software itself? That’s a liability. Brittle, fragile, forever breaking down ..."

And *of course* social media must be regulated to be responsible --- here's looking at you Elon, and you Altman ... free speech is not *any* speech ... free Chat babble is not *any* babble.

This story seems fairly typical of the problem. There are external factors that frame the consequences of an action said to be triggered by social media. But social media is not causal.

wapo.st/4ab6irt

Corollary? The causal chain is presented backwards - it is not social media that erodes thought ... but thought that erodes social media ... or should I write 'thought', as in Bannon, Farage, Le Pen, Höcke, etc. The fascist disease arises from history that long predates the Internet as we know it,