Small quibble to the (rightfully) accepted answer by James K that was too long for a comment:
To be fair, $x=24^{+1}_{-3}$ doesn't mean that $21 \le x \le 25$, but that with a particular amount of certainty (usually 68%), $21 \le x \le 25$.
Correspondingly, $x=24^{\times 2}_{\div3}$ would mean that, with some certainty, $8 \le x \le 48$.
Symmetric vs. asymmetric uncertainties
With non-Gaussian, asymmetric errors, given only the two values for the lower and upper error there's no way to know the corresponding 95% interval, 99% interval, and so on. You would have to know the full PDF for that.
But if the errors are Gaussian, the $n$'th sigma is equal to $n\sigma$. That is, if the quoted error represents one standard deviation, then for $x=24\pm2$ you know that with 99% certainty the result is $20 \le x \le 28$.
By analogy, if the errors of this notation are normally distributed in log space, as I would think is the case, the $n$'th sigma would be equal to $\sigma^n$. That is, if $x=4000^{\times}_{\div}4$, then
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
1000 \le x\le \phantom{1}16\,000 & (\mathrm{68\% \,\,confidence})\\
\phantom{1}250 \le x\le \phantom{1}64\,000 & (\mathrm{95\% \,\,confidence})\\
\phantom{10}60 \lesssim x\le 256\,000 & (\mathrm{99\% \,\,confidence})\\
(\mathrm{etc.}) &
\end{array}
$$
Please use logarithms
Personally, I think this notation is horrible. To avoid confusion, instead of $x=4000^{\times}_{\div}4$ I'd much rather write $\log x = 3.6\pm0.6$. Then
$$
\begin{array}{rcl}
3.0 \le \log x \le 4.2 & (\mathrm{68\% \,\,confidence})\\
2.4 \le \log x \le 4.8 & (\mathrm{95\% \,\,confidence})\\
1.8 \le \log x \le 5.4 & (\mathrm{99\% \,\,confidence})\\
(\mathrm{etc.}) &
\end{array}
$$
which is (roughly) the same as above.