> manipulated its algorithms for the purposes of “foreign interference.”
Foreign interference seems like a pretty long shot.
JumpCrisscross•7mo ago
Shouldn’t be. Musk was a U.S. SGE and under the material influence of various foreign powers while directly influencing Grok and Twitter. If there is evidence he influenced any of these products against the interests of France in that time, particularly at the behest or in the interest of the U.S. or one of those foreign powers, the charges should stick.
andsoitis•7mo ago
If the article is accurate, it states that they have opened a criminal investigation into X, not any of the company’s officers.
JumpCrisscross•7mo ago
Sure, the point is X would have been operating under unusual foreign influence from Musk qua U.S. official (and influenced by other powers) in France. It’s not clear Musk broke French law. But it shouldn’t be hard to show X did, since there is zero chance they did the sort of siloing enterprises routinely do to protect against such fuckups.
andsoitis•7mo ago
> It’s not clear Musk broke French law. But it shouldn’t be hard to show X did
I have to admit, I’m not proficient in French law so I am less confident in expressing conviction either way.
Did you have a particular law I mind? The article is pretty vague.
andsoitis•7mo ago
Foreign interference seems like a pretty long shot.
JumpCrisscross•7mo ago
andsoitis•7mo ago
JumpCrisscross•7mo ago
andsoitis•7mo ago
I have to admit, I’m not proficient in French law so I am less confident in expressing conviction either way.
Did you have a particular law I mind? The article is pretty vague.