Politics
Musk Claims Trump Interview Targeted by Cyber Attack

Musk Alleges Cyber Attack Targeted Trump Interview Renowned entrepreneur and owner of the esteemed social media company X, Elon Musk, recently made a startling revelation regarding the highly anticipated livestreamed conversation between himself and former President Donald Trump.

Musk boldly claims that this significant event was targeted by a malicious cyber attack. The alleged attack, which occurred on Monday, has sparked widespread concern and demands for a thorough investigation into the incident.
The involvement of two influential figures, Musk and Trump, in a public discourse on the X platform undoubtedly drew substantial attention from millions of users worldwide.
However, the unexpected cyber attack threatens the integrity and security of the platform, as well as the freedom of expression it symbolizes. Musk’s assertion of this targeted assault reinforces the urgency for heightened cybersecurity measures and safeguards in the digital realm.
In light of these distressing events, it is crucial that we recognize the importance of protecting the platforms that facilitate significant conversations of global significance.
The alleged cyber attack on the Trump interview serves as a stark reminder of the vulnerabilities that exist in our interconnected world.
It is imperative that we collectively address these threats to preserve the integrity, authenticity, and safety of our digital landscapes. As discussions surrounding this incident intensify, it is our responsibility to advocate for stronger cybersecurity protocols and remain vigilant in safeguarding against future attacks.
The need for robust protective measures cannot be overstated, as they are paramount in preserving the democratic principles that underpin open and transparent dialogues on public platforms.
The Trump interview
The much-anticipated interview between Elon Musk and former President Donald Trump on X, formerly Twitter, was disrupted by what Musk described as a DDoS attack.
The interview, which was streamed live on X Spaces, experienced technical issues, sparking frustration among viewers. Musk, who owns the platform, claimed that the disruption was due to a deliberate cyberattack aimed at overwhelming X’s servers.

Elon Musk, owner of the social media company X, hosted Trump on the platform for a livestreamed conversation on Monday News BY BBC News
The Trump-Musk interview
The Trump-Musk interview, which attracted significant attention, was expected to be a major event on the platform. However, the technical glitches overshadowed the discussion, leading many to question the platform’s preparedness for high-profile events.
DDoS attacks, or Distributed Denial of Service attacks, involve overwhelming a website or service with a flood of internet traffic, rendering it inaccessible.
Musk’s accusation points to a broader concern about the vulnerability of social media platforms to such attacks, especially during politically charged events.
The interview’s timing was also notable, as it came shortly after the European Union’s Thierry Breton criticized X for not doing enough to combat disinformation. This incident may add pressure on X to enhance its security measures.
For those who missed the interview, it is available for replay on X, though the interruptions marred much of the live experience.
you can find the news about the Musk-Trump interview and the alleged cyber attack on major news websites like BBC and Al Jazeera. Simply visit their websites and search for “Trump Musk interview cyber attack” for more information.
You May Like :
Entrepreneur Warns a Kamala Harris Presidency Would Hurt Lower to Middle-Class the Most
Elon Musk Shares Stunning Satellite Video of Moon, Captions it “Home Sweet Home”
Judge Wendy Li Earns Endorsement From Asian American Bar Association of NY In Race for Queens Surrogate’s Court Judge
Politics
US President Biden accuses Trump of making people anxious with false information

While former President Trump has criticized the administration’s response to the hurricane that made landfall in southern states last month and caused major damage, President Biden has released false information and made people anxious. accused of being.
Hurricane Heleen made landfall in the United States late last month, causing a series of floods and landslides in the southern states of North Carolina and other areas, causing major damage.

Photo taken on October 9th, Florida, before Hurricane Milton made landfall.
Regarding this hurricane, former President Trump stated that the Biden administration would allocate almost all of its disaster response funds to support illegal immigrants, and only provide support of $750, or approximately 110,000 yen in Japanese yen, to victims.
He claims that there is no such thing and criticizes it as ``the worst disaster response in history.
On the 9th, at a meeting held at the White House to discuss disaster response, President Biden denied these claims and emphasized that ``Mr. Trump is leading the attack on lies.
Irresponsible and persistent disinformation and lies are making people feel unsafe, undermining trust in rescue and recovery efforts, and harmful to those who need help most.
In the United States, there are growing concerns that another hurricane will land in the southern state of Florida and cause damage again, and with less than a month left until voting day in the presidential election, disaster response has become a new issue.
Politics
Germany’s ports and China: How to reconcile openness, resilience and security?

Germany is dependent on its ports for the smooth running of its open economic model and has benefited from globalization in recent decades when the internationalization of its value chains strengthened its competitiveness.
Yet, with today’s hardening geopolitics, the vulnerabilities of Europe’s leading economic power are becoming apparent.
Germany’s ports are an indispensable interface between its production base and its export markets, as well as for its sources of supply. Crucial to its competitiveness, Germany’s ports are becoming increasingly indispensable for energy supplies given the country’s decoupling from Russian hydrocarbons, and they are essential for the deployment of military equipment to Europe’s eastern flank.
This is why particular vigilance is required in ports such as Hamburg, where the Chinese shipping company COSCO has acquired a stake in the company operating the Tollerort terminal. This transaction would scarcely have worried anyone in the past.
But now it is the subject of bitter discussions, with the Zeitenwende (“change of era”) announced by Olaf Scholz in reaction to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.
Increased caution seemed to gain a foothold in order not to repeat past mistakes –until the German Chancellor decided in favor of the acquisition. Given closer ties between China and Russia, China’s assertive stance on the international stage, and increased pressure on Germany from its American ally to clarify its position with regard to its main trading partner, Germany is seeing its room for maneuver shrink.
Today, we need a more European approach that goes beyond short-term, profit-driven concerns. But to achieve this, we need to put in place a range of resources to be deployed in a resolutely cooperative approach.
About the Author:
Marie Krpata is Research Fellow at the Study Committee on Franco-German Relations (Cerfa) at the French Institute of International Relations – Ifri, where she dedicates her research activities to the European Union and the external relations of the Franco-German couple.
Politics
The Global economy is more vulnerable than it seems. World leaders appear largely unwilling to invest in preserving global economic integration

World leaders are so preoccupied with wars, power struggles, social tensions, and political polarization that they appear largely unwilling to invest in preserving global economic integration. History, economic theory, and current empirical trends indicate that this is a mistake.
PARIS/VANCOUVER – Today’s economic outlook is strangely contradictory. While global markets, led by technology and energy, have been ebullient over high short-term profits, the mood at the Spring Meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund last month was decidedly somber.
Two global institutions that normally speak in banalities issued strong warnings about the growing risks of economic fragmentation.
The Rise of Mesoeconomics
WILLIAM H. JANEWAY details how a long-neglected field of economic study can be applied to today’s most pressing policy challenges.
The idea that an interdependent global economy can work within a geopolitical system based on the national sovereignty of nearly 200 states has always reflected a certain amount of idealism. Or perhaps it was more like hubris.
This strange marriage did, after all, collapse in the 1930s, with the division lasting through the end of World War II.
But idealism was not dead, and the global system was subsequently rebuilt on a foundation of agreed rules, shared international institutions, a degree of mutual forbearance, and crisis management.
From the start, security considerations were kept as separate as possible from the economy, but this became especially important in the 1990s, when countries with radically different regimes began integrating into the global economy.
Today, however, the foundations of this system are eroding fast, and global economic integration has seemingly gone into reverse. As Gita Gopinath, the IMF’s first deputy managing director, recently explained, economic fragmentation could have far-reaching implications for trade, such as reduced efficiency gains, and increase the risk of macro-financial volatility.
Fragmentation could also reduce capital flows to the Global South and undermine the provision of global public goods, including climate action.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter, PS on Sunday
[email protected]
Five key factors are driving this trend toward fragmentation. First, rising geopolitical risks have fueled mistrust and reduced systemically important countries’ will to cooperate.
Though policymakers rarely acknowledge it, a crisis over Taiwan – a flashpoint in the Sino-American rivalry – could well bring down the global economic system.
Second, key countries are increasingly allowing security considerations to shape economic policy, with some taking expansive action to secure access to inputs, infrastructure, and technologies. While this is understandable, countries must exercise restraint.
Whereas globalization happened gradually, a deglobalization process driven by security-motivated measures (which are almost guaranteed to trigger escalation by rivals and partners) would probably be fast and unwieldy, posing severe systemic risks.
PS_Sales_Spring_1333x1000_V1
SPRING SALE: Save 40% on all new Digital or Digital Plus subscriptions
Subscribe now to gain greater access to Project Syndicate – including every commentary and our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – starting at just $49.99.
SUBSCRIBE NOW
The third factor underlying economic fragmentation is a deepening rift between the Global North and Global South. Public and private support for developing economies has collapsed at a time when many are wrestling with the legacy of the COVID-19 pandemic and confronting climate change.
The decades-long trend toward convergence with developed economies has seemingly been interrupted, and resentment is building in the Global South. Net financial flows to developing countries have turned negative in 2023, and the trend is worsening in 2024.
This partly explains the reluctance or refusal of many Global South countries to back the West on key geopolitical issues, such as sanctions against Russia in response to its war of aggression in Ukraine.
Fragmentation also reflects the rapid escalation of climate risks and disasters. With “once-a-lifetime” floods, mega-fires, and droughts proliferating, many countries are at risk of destabilization within the next few years, and there is no global “safety net” in place. Meanwhile, as Harvard’s Dani Rodrik has pointed out, countries are competing for dominance in green technologies, rather than working together to accelerate progress.
Lastly, the exponential growth of artificial intelligence is fueling national competition, rather than the global cooperation that is required. As MIT’s Daron Acemoglu and Simon Johnson have noted, regulations, policies, and institutions will be essential to ensure that AI creates jobs, rather than only destroying them. Global South countries need a voice in AI regulatory efforts.
To be sure, the global economic system still has many sources of resilience. As the recent Indonesian, Indian, and Brazilian G20 presidencies have shown, most of the Global South remains committed to both interdependence and global governance.
Furthermore, the private sector is still characterized by interdependence. We still have dedicated international organizations, global education networks, and a global civil society.
But we must not underestimate the dangers ahead. There is good reason to think that the coming months and years will bring a series of shocks and crises.
If leaders respond with tit-for-tat policies aimed at securing advantages over rivals, the integrated global economy could unravel. The speed of that process could overwhelm policymakers, and the path from economic pain to social upheaval to the abandonment of shared global rules may well prove to be short.
As it stands, leaders are so preoccupied with wars, power struggles, social tensions, and political polarization that they appear largely unwilling to invest in saving the integrated global economy, let alone strengthening its capacity to deal with the existential risks we face. But history, economic theory, and current empirical trends indicate that this is a mistake.
Even a partial collapse of our interdependent global economic and financial systems would be catastrophic, not least because it would undermine investment in global public goods.
For politicians worried about migration’s effect on their countries, it is worth noting that, without massive investments in combating climate change, reversing desertification, and reducing poverty, millions could be attempting to cross the Mediterranean by 2050.
National security must be a priority for policymakers. But measures to “secure” the economy must be combined with efforts to improve communication with rivals and invest in global public goods.
To this end, world leaders should use the G20 and other plurilateral bodies to elevate working groups and institutions that support collective governance, with a focus on managing AI risks, addressing climate change, and averting the collapse of the global economic system on which we depend.
About the Authors:
Bertrand Badré, a former managing director of the World Bank, is CEO and Founder of Blue like an Orange Sustainable Capital and the author of Can Finance Save the World? (Berrett-Koehler, 2018).
Yves Tiberghien, Professor of Political Science and Director Emeritus of the Institute of Asian Research at the University of British Columbia, is a visiting scholar at the Taipei School of Economics and Political Science.
-
Entertainment & Sports6 months ago
Rachael Sage Releases Powerful Reimagined Acoustic Album, Another Side
-
Business6 months ago
Global Academic Excellence with XI TING’s Professional Tutor Team
-
Entertainment & Sports6 months ago
From Start to Success: 40 Stories of Successful C-Suite Executives Now Available for Pre-Order
-
Entertainment & Sports6 months ago
Thousands Celebrate Lisa Vanderpump’s 7th Annual World Dog Day in West Hollywood
-
Tech6 months ago
Brazil vs. Colombia Live Updates – Live Copa America 2024
-
Entertainment & Sports6 months ago
VetStem Cell Therapy Improves Quality of Life for Dog with Hip Arthritis
-
Crypto News6 months ago
Cubic Introduces DTECH Fusion Edge High-Performance Compute (eHPC) at Special Operations Forces Week
-
Politics6 months ago
Germany’s ports and China: How to reconcile openness, resilience and security?