Musk offers to buy Twitter

But this is also why I'm confused, this is a case where he should know better than to fire the account managers overseeing your primary revenue stream. It'd be like if SpaceX suddenly fired everyone managing their NASA and DOD accounts.

Yeah he made mistakes up front and is having to back up but not having to advertise it. One reason not to have a PR department is when you're in that boat. "No comment" not as safe as no department!

There are almost certainly some behind-scenes communications going on with regulators, advertisers and corporate or government-type Twitter accounts with very large followings.

This despite whatever nonsense Musk is tweeting publicly as red meat for his newly reacquired fans of absolute free speech. He has to keep traffic up, no matter that he's not making money off it at the moment, and yet he has to be able to prove he's in compliance with regulations. The assurances (with some kind of proof) that he needs to supply privately include these:

moderation of illegal content is occurring,​
security against breaches is in place,​
engineering staff has ability to minimize failures and prevent catastrophic ones,​
and... he's working on turning over operations to a guy in the biz..,.​

Everybody wants to make money. But past that, the big institutions and corporations, media outlets, government agencies, influencers DO NOT HAVE AN ALTERNATE LANDING PLACE arranged yet.

So they feel like they're over a barrel and they don't like it. So they in addition to the advertisers are seeking assurances from Twitter that the thing has some guardrails around it, enough to let them hang in there watchfully for now and "see how it goes."

They all want what they have had on Twitter, which is a nice concentrated one-stop shop for picking up news they can use, for public service announcements, for media exposure and spinoffs through those outlets to "everywhere"...

Elon Musk does know this. Or he's realizing it now from pressure by not only advertisers but those other organizations and influential setups with millions and millions of followers.

So Elon is finally in lightbulb-on phase... realizing he has to keep all those highly followed accounts on board or he'll NEVER get the big name advertisers back. They're interdependent, and individual accounts in turn all follow or are exposed to a bunch of those outlets and so provide ad revenue potential every time they pick up their devices.

So what should he do now? Keep tweeting nonsense to those desirous of "absolute free speech" and meanwhile rustle up proof of having some fences around and a floor under Twitter. Shovel that info into the anxious email accounts of all those important Twitter account holders who together spell a reason for advertisers to resume putting up ads on Twitter.

"Tell them all whatever they want to hear.." -- with just enough pony in that pile of manure.
 
All this makes sense assuming Elon's being rational about it, or at least can be. The more I see though, the less I'm inclined to believe he's being rational. If that's just him trolling, still not sure how that's good news.

But yes, there's going to need to be some drastic changes to undo the damage to the company's current revenue stream. To be honest, I figured the company would limp along, getting squeezed by the extra debt that it can't afford without doubling revenue. I didn't expect Elon to put pennies on the tracks and get surprised at the derailment that results.
 
From Casey Newton

Twitter is reinstating roughly 62,000 accounts that were suspended, each with more than 10,000 followers. One of the accounts has 5 million followers. 75 have more than 1 million. Internally, employees are calling it the Big Bang
..
For executives who have been looking for an excuse to stop pretending that they care about diversity issues, then, Musk seems to be providing huge inspiration.


:sick:(n)

All Elon is going to do is fully pivot this thing over to the unsavory side
You can't let back on all the suspended grossness and expect it to just "work out" or be attractive still
 
From Casey Newton

Twitter is reinstating roughly 62,000 accounts that were suspended, each with more than 10,000 followers. One of the accounts has 5 million followers. 75 have more than 1 million. Internally, employees are calling it the Big Bang
..
For executives who have been looking for an excuse to stop pretending that they care about diversity issues, then, Musk seems to be providing huge inspiration.


:sick:(n)

All Elon is going to do is fully pivot this thing over to the unsavory side
You can't let back on all the suspended grossness and expect it to just "work out" or be attractive still
You just get the feeling that he must be on something, regardless of my feelings on the guy it's hard to see how any sane and rational person with such a great reputation can crash something like this so hard. I mean if it were Trump, you get it because that guy fucked every company he's ever touched, but I'm with @Nycturne here, it just doesn't make sense.
 
You just get the feeling that he must be on something, regardless of my feelings on the guy it's hard to see how any sane and rational person with such a great reputation can crash something like this so hard. I mean if it were Trump, you get it because that guy fucked every company he's ever touched, but I'm with @Nycturne here, it just doesn't make sense.

I do have to wonder what sort of feedback echo chambers he's mixed in with
He may be fully bought into the mostly all made up or exaggerated/distored aggrieved mindset

His tweet about the Apple 30% cut was bizarre.

Screenshot 2022-11-28 at 18.55.21.png


That HAS to be roiling up his crowd and trying to get outrage firing at Apple. There's no way, at all, that he doesn't know about Apple and their App Store and their rules.
That has been a topic of controversy (the cut, who they take it from, how much, when and why) for literally years.

He's way too plugged in to not know that -- so tweeting about it like he did today had to be just to stir up the followers

He's just gone full "troll mode"
Really disheartening and disappointing to see from someone in his position
 
I do have to wonder what sort of feedback echo chambers he's mixed in with
He may be fully bought into the mostly all made up or exaggerated/distored aggrieved mindset

His tweet about the Apple 30% cut was bizarre.

View attachment 19702

That HAS to be roiling up his crowd and trying to get outrage firing at Apple. There's no way, at all, that he doesn't know about Apple and their App Store and their rules.
That has been a topic of controversy (the cut, who they take it from, how much, when and why) for literally years.

He's way too plugged in to not know that -- so tweeting about it like he did today had to be just to stir up the followers

He's just gone full "troll mode"
Really disheartening and disappointing to see from someone in his position

There was a post on Twitter I’ll see if I can dig it up, basically saying most people don’t realize what kind of bubble/echo chamber most VCs/wealthy tech bros live in and how radicalizing it has been especially in recent years. He stressed that not all were like that but more than enough were.

Edit: here it is

 
@dada_dave

Great find!

On that note, it should be noted that Post (a place that some are fleeing twitter for) is partially backed by Andreesens a16z

If one is paying attention here, the billionaires are trying to monopolize everything everywhere you look.
They'd love to have control over Twitter as well as anything that looks like it or "competes" with it.

Full information control so they can further tip the scales and shape all the information as they see fit.
It's a very cynical ploy to claim Twitter was "censoring everyone" ...and then be trying to actually own Twitter and anything like it

Billionaires are not our friends and no friends of anyone who likes anything resembling democracy
 
@dada_dave

Great find!

On that note, it should be noted that Post (a place that some are fleeing twitter for) is partially backed by Andreesens a16z

If one is paying attention here, the billionaires are trying to monopolize everything everywhere you look.
They'd love to have control over Twitter as well as anything that looks like it or "competes" with it.

Full information control so they can further tip the scales and shape all the information as they see fit.
It's a very cynical ploy to claim Twitter was "censoring everyone" ...and then be trying to actually own Twitter and anything like it

Billionaires are not our friends and no friends of anyone who likes anything resembling democracy
Yeah I can’t independently vouch for this guy’s knowledge of VC culture but given what we’re seeing, it certainly seems to fit and be more than just Musk.
 
I do have to wonder what sort of feedback echo chambers he's mixed in with
He may be fully bought into the mostly all made up or exaggerated/distored aggrieved mindset

His tweet about the Apple 30% cut was bizarre.

View attachment 19702

That HAS to be roiling up his crowd and trying to get outrage firing at Apple. There's no way, at all, that he doesn't know about Apple and their App Store and their rules.
That has been a topic of controversy (the cut, who they take it from, how much, when and why) for literally years.

He's way too plugged in to not know that -- so tweeting about it like he did today had to be just to stir up the followers

He's just gone full "troll mode"
Really disheartening and disappointing to see from someone in his position
He’s definitely trolling. How can you not know about Apple taking 30%? I’m kind of hoping Apple actually pull Twitter from the App Store. It might give Mastodon a nice boost.
 
View attachment 19708

Credit to CNN here..
Outrageous troll behavior from Elon

Flat out making stuff up and putting it out there/endorsing it/retweeting it, etc

But he's said this?

FiqjgpOXoAQseND
It’s even more outrageous as most news agencies adopted as sympathetic a framing to his attacks on Apple as possible in their headlines/ledes (including CNN).

Thread:

 
This has nothing to do with free speech in the way he's positioning it.
I guarantee you "civilization" will be fine if we have toxic people/behavior moderated off of Twitter

Guy has gone bananas.


View attachment 19704

View attachment 19706

People in his wealth class are obsessed with thinking they can solve/control all the world’s problems simply because they’ve accumulated so much wealth. Doesn’t help that, at least in the the US, a big percentage of the population seems to think that too along with a system that hands them the keys to everything…free of charge in a lot of cases.
 
From Casey Newton

Twitter is reinstating roughly 62,000 accounts that were suspended, each with more than 10,000 followers. One of the accounts has 5 million followers. 75 have more than 1 million. Internally, employees are calling it the Big Bang
..
For executives who have been looking for an excuse to stop pretending that they care about diversity issues, then, Musk seems to be providing huge inspiration.


:sick:(n)

All Elon is going to do is fully pivot this thing over to the unsavory side
You can't let back on all the suspended grossness and expect it to just "work out" or be attractive still

This is a side note but it’s amazing that, even when sometimes I think they have a point, how universally those in the anti-Apple dev/tech coalition seem to be just the worst from Basecamp to Facebook and beyond.

Edit: I am of course referring to the executives, or perhaps an even better description: tech personalities, at these companies, not everyone. And of course Musk joining them just adds to that.
 
Last edited:
This reminds me of a study that concluded that right-wing men are open to dating left-wing women but left-wing women aren't really open to dating right-wing men.

And this reminds me of Fox News' reaction to polling data showing that a majority of unmarried women vote Democrat.
Their reaction wasn't: Hey, the Republicans have to make sure that their politics don't oppress unmarried women, like creating sensible abortion laws.
No, their reaction was: We have to get these women married!
Like that is going to change their political opionion! Shows how chauvinistic their thinking is!

As for Elon Musk brining up Apple's secret 30% tax...
First of all, it isn't secret.
Secondly, if he missed Epic complaining about those 30% for months, he must have been living under a rock!

Finally, as for Elon Musk posting made up stuff.
In Latin there is a saying that fits perfectly here: Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi.
(Disclamer: My Latin was bad back in school and is almost non existent now, but a few things stuck, like this one.)
It basically means:
What Jupiter (i.e. the highest god) is allowed to do, the oxen are not allowed to do.
To put it another way: He thinks the rules don't apply to him.
 
I’m sorry but no. He’s cruel, vindictive, and petty. He may issues beyond that, but a malignant narcissist with money and power who seeks the adoration of the worst people and punches down at the most marginalized is not a trait of autism and many who are on the spectrum have been rather vocal about not linking autism with this kind of behavior.
I didn't expect my thoughts on Elon Musk to be popular, but fellow poster and good chap @Yoused has encouraged me to share my contrarian opinions in the past, and I did so in my small way here. As I said, I don't have strong opinions on Mr. Musk, as a human being. I certainly don't worship him, as some apparently do, but I don't hate him, either. I'll save my ire for real dictators. (Which, after an extraordinarily unpleasant experience concerning that subject, I have banned myself from the politics forums.)
Also, in my line of work I'm come across lots of people with ASD and some of the other things mentioned there. I even had good reason to believe I'm on the spectrum myself. One trait we all have in common is not being egotistical assholes. Some of his wild and crazy behaviors might easily be written off under the umbrella of autism. But that's leave plenty of other things that can only be explained by him being a massive tool. I'm a developer myself. So some of his recent actions have hit too close to home to retain any of my respect.
As I said, I'm not diagnosing Mr. Musk, just speculating on what may inform us on some his behavior. After I made my post, I found that Musk claims to have Asperger's, a now defunct term to describe those on the spectrum. Also, I never claimed that a mental health diagnosis can explain his publicly known persona, just that a mental health component could be involved, and not necessarily ASD. I listed many disorders, and wasn't aware of Mr. Musk's diagnosis before I made that post; I was speaking in generalities.

Regardless, I appreciate your responses and critiques.
How about you summarize what you mean to say about Musk? In a few words what do you think is good vs bad about him?
Okay, well, since you asked, I shall do my best to reply, despite my strong inclination to remain silent. I would first ask my left-leaning friends here to keep in mind that I am very much outnumbered here, on this specific issue, and I am not trying to start a one-man war on my favorite forum. This is simply me stating my personal opinion, I know everyone else here will disagree, which I am perfectly fine with.

I shall start out with the bad about Mr. Musk. I think he spreads himself too thin, makes impulse decisions, and doesn't understand the wisdom of silence. He has his hands in too many pies, can't focus on any one thing, and his mercurial nature has lead to a poorly planned acquisition of Twitter, from a business perspective. I think he hurt his newly purchased company by not thinking through staffing decisions. He should have already had a game plan long before the acquisition was completed, and now he and his remaining employees are suffering from that lack of foresight.

On the good side, I see SpaceX. I consider this to be Mr. Musk's greatest achievement and what will define his legacy. While his social media shenanigans feel important in the moment, his other companies like Tesla, the Boring Company, and yes, Twitter, don't really matter, not in the long-term. If humanity wishes to ensure its ultimate survival, we must become a space faring species. That means Mars colonies, that means an outpost on Europa, that means landing on Titan, that means venturing to Proxima-Centauri.

None of these things will happen in my lifetime, but they will eventually happen, as long as we continue to invest in enterprises like SpaceX. I value his drive to push humanity outward, over any of the other endeavors of Mr. Musk, and would prefer that he spend all of his time working on his rocket ships. We need to think big, need people who are willing to push forward, and I think SpaceX is at the forefront of much of that, along with Blue Origin and such. I think private enterprises in concert with organizations such as NASA and the ESA, along with contractors like Northrup Grumman, are vital to the future of our species.

Regarding the ongoing Twitter saga, daily matters are always in the forefront of our minds, it's the immediacy of the news cycle. Right now we are still in a global pandemic, undergoing an energy crisis, sustained economic recession, a brutal war in Europe, many are facing risk of famine, and Elon Musk has purchased Twitter. One of these things is not like the others, so I'm going to prioritize what I consider to be the most important of those issues. I just can't get myself worked up over a social media platform. However, I can understand why other folks here do, because it's at the intersection of both technology and politics, which is of great interest and concern to most of the people who visit Talked About.

Now, in regards to Twitter itself...

Firstly, I shall state the obvious. In the United States, First Amendment protections only apply to prosecution from the government, except in rare cases. Being a U.S. citizen, I'm going to approach it from that stance. I realize that other countries have different laws concerning speech, but Twitter is a U.S. company. I know that private entities, such as social media, can police their own business, and who posts on their sites, as they please. I don't think the government should dictate what should be said on social media, whether that be the owners, or the posters. That also goes for advertisers and users, who can spend their dollars and time elsewhere, of course, if they are dissatisfied with the platform.

While I think Mr. Musk has been quite ham-fisted in the way he has handled the acquisition, I am far more inclined to agree with his "free speech absolutist" mentality, than the restrictions that had been in place. I very much believe that the more voices, the better. I don't think the public should be infantilized by censoring things that make us uncomfortable, we should all have the right to be offended, not be coddled by the whims of corporate policy.

Unless somebody is literally breaking the law, I think they should be able to say what they want on Twitter. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. You can't make terrorist threats or threaten to assassinate a politician. You can be taken to court for slander or libel. Twitter has become the online "town square", in many respects, and I think it should be treated just as a physical town square.

I may find someone's words to be disagreeable, I may find them repugnant, they may make me angry, but I'm not going to stand in the way while they say them. Mr. Musk's thinking on the issue is similar to my own.

As I said, my thoughts on this issue are going to be extraordinary unpopular around these parts. I like all the folks here, please don't associate your anger with Mr. Musk with my personal opinion on the issue. I'm not Elon, I think he has handled the transition poorly, I simply agree with his general philosophy regarding free speech on Twitter.

"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."
- George R.R. Martin
 
I didn't expect my thoughts on Elon Musk to be popular, but fellow poster and good chap @Yoused has encouraged me to share my contrarian opinions in the past, and I did so in my small way here. As I said, I don't have strong opinions on Mr. Musk, as a human being. I certainly don't worship him, as some apparently do, but I don't hate him, either. I'll save my ire for real dictators. (Which, after an extraordinarily unpleasant experience concerning that subject, I have banned myself from the politics forums.)

As I said, I'm not diagnosing Mr. Musk, just speculating on what may inform us on some his behavior. After I made my post, I found that Musk claims to have Asperger's, a now defunct term to describe those on the spectrum. Also, I never claimed that a mental health diagnosis can explain his publicly known persona, just that a mental health component could be involved, and not necessarily ASD. I listed many disorders, and wasn't aware of Mr. Musk's diagnosis before I made that post; I was speaking in generalities.

Regardless, I appreciate your responses and critiques.

Okay, well, since you asked, I shall do my best to reply, despite my strong inclination to remain silent. I would first ask my left-leaning friends here to keep in mind that I am very much outnumbered here, on this specific issue, and I am not trying to start a one-man war on my favorite forum. This is simply me stating my personal opinion, I know everyone else here will disagree, which I am perfectly fine with.

I shall start out with the bad about Mr. Musk. I think he spreads himself too thin, makes impulse decisions, and doesn't understand the wisdom of silence. He has his hands in too many pies, can't focus on any one thing, and his mercurial nature has lead to a poorly planned acquisition of Twitter, from a business perspective. I think he hurt his newly purchased company by not thinking through staffing decisions. He should have already had a game plan long before the acquisition was completed, and now he and his remaining employees are suffering from that lack of foresight.

On the good side, I see SpaceX. I consider this to be Mr. Musk's greatest achievement and what will define his legacy. While his social media shenanigans feel important in the moment, his other companies like Tesla, the Boring Company, and yes, Twitter, don't really matter, not in the long-term. If humanity wishes to ensure its ultimate survival, we must become a space faring species. That means Mars colonies, that means an outpost on Europa, that means landing on Titan, that means venturing to Proxima-Centauri.

None of these things will happen in my lifetime, but they will eventually happen, as long as we continue to invest in enterprises like SpaceX. I value his drive to push humanity outward, over any of the other endeavors of Mr. Musk, and would prefer that he spend all of his time working on his rocket ships. We need to think big, need people who are willing to push forward, and I think SpaceX is at the forefront of much of that, along with Blue Origin and such. I think private enterprises in concert with organizations such as NASA and the ESA, along with contractors like Northrup Grumman, are vital to the future of our species.

Regarding the ongoing Twitter saga, daily matters are always in the forefront of our minds, it's the immediacy of the news cycle. Right now we are still in a global pandemic, undergoing an energy crisis, sustained economic recession, a brutal war in Europe, many are facing risk of famine, and Elon Musk has purchased Twitter. One of these things is not like the others, so I'm going to prioritize what I consider to be the most important of those issues. I just can't get myself worked up over a social media platform. However, I can understand why other folks here do, because it's at the intersection of both technology and politics, which is of great interest and concern to most of the people who visit Talked About.

Now, in regards to Twitter itself...

Firstly, I shall state the obvious. In the United States, First Amendment protections only apply to prosecution from the government, except in rare cases. Being a U.S. citizen, I'm going to approach it from that stance. I realize that other countries have different laws concerning speech, but Twitter is a U.S. company. I know that private entities, such as social media, can police their own business, and who posts on their sites, as they please. I don't think the government should dictate what should be said on social media, whether that be the owners, or the posters. That also goes for advertisers and users, who can spend their dollars and time elsewhere, of course, if they are dissatisfied with the platform.

While I think Mr. Musk has been quite ham-fisted in the way he has handled the acquisition, I am far more inclined to agree with his "free speech absolutist" mentality, than the restrictions that had been in place. I very much believe that the more voices, the better. I don't think the public should be infantilized by censoring things that make us uncomfortable, we should all have the right to be offended, not be coddled by the whims of corporate policy.

Unless somebody is literally breaking the law, I think they should be able to say what they want on Twitter. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. You can't make terrorist threats or threaten to assassinate a politician. You can be taken to court for slander or libel. Twitter has become the online "town square", in many respects, and I think it should be treated just as a physical town square.

I may find someone's words to be disagreeable, I may find them repugnant, they may make me angry, but I'm not going to stand in the way while they say them. Mr. Musk's thinking on the issue is similar to my own.

As I said, my thoughts on this issue are going to be extraordinary unpopular around these parts. I like all the folks here, please don't associate your anger with Mr. Musk with my personal opinion on the issue. I'm not Elon, I think he has handled the transition poorly, I simply agree with his general philosophy regarding free speech on Twitter.

"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."
- George R.R. Martin

Sure. Musk has free speech rights too, and if he wants to turn Twitter into a qanon antiwoke all lives matter own the libs just asking questions cesspool, that’s his right.

But users and advertisers also have the right not to participate or pay for that.

The problem is he thinks “free speech” means “speech free of consequences.” It does not.
 
While I think Mr. Musk has been quite ham-fisted in the way he has handled the acquisition, I am far more inclined to agree with his "free speech absolutist" mentality, than the restrictions that had been in place. I very much believe that the more voices, the better. I don't think the public should be infantilized by censoring things that make us uncomfortable, we should all have the right to be offended, not be coddled by the whims of corporate policy.

Unless somebody is literally breaking the law, I think they should be able to say what they want on Twitter. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. You can't make terrorist threats or threaten to assassinate a politician. You can be taken to court for slander or libel. Twitter has become the online "town square", in many respects, and I think it should be treated just as a physical town square.

I may find someone's words to be disagreeable, I may find them repugnant, they may make me angry, but I'm not going to stand in the way while they say them. Mr. Musk's thinking on the issue is similar to my own.

As I said, my thoughts on this issue are going to be extraordinary unpopular around these parts. I like all the folks here, please don't associate your anger with Mr. Musk with my personal opinion on the issue. I'm not Elon, I think he has handled the transition poorly, I simply agree with his general philosophy regarding free speech on Twitter.

While understand your point, I believe there is a substantial conflict between theory and practice in these matters. Some laws and principles were put in place because of very valid reasons but changing circumstances may have twisted them beyond the original noble idea. Two party setup was a great idea for ensuring political stability, not so much when people vote because of family tradition instead of critical political discourse and preferences. Indirect presidential election system was a great idea to organise election on a vast, scarcely populated territory, not so much if the population density has changed so tremendously that small population areas of low economical importance hold substantially more political power than major economic hubs. Unrestricted gun ownership was a great idea in the time where people lived in constant danger and had to do their own policing and justice enforcing, not so much when the weapons got so destructive that you risk getting preventively shot by law enforcement during a routine check. Free economy and freedom of business was a great idea for ensuring economic growth and technological development, not so much if strong market players can collude in oder to manipulate the situation to their favour. Universally protected freedom of speech is a great idea for promotion of pluralism and healthy exchange of opinions and ideas, not so much when small radicalized groups can hide unpunished behind modern technology and free speech to aggressively oppress and infringe on the freedom of others.

In the end, there is an important distinction between freedom as in "freedom to express yourself and to make your choices" and freedom as in "freedom to do whatever you want, including opressing and abusing others". I do not believe that justice is possible without preventive regulation. Modern connected world is facing extreme challenges, simply because the connectedness makes it easy for a bad player to misuse and manipulate the social structures. Just look how Russia or Trump are successful with their strategy of blatant, obvious lies. The potential for societal harm is tremendous. I for one am not willing to give up on the principles of freedom and egality and let a small group of idiots rule the world with demagoguery and manipulation.


The problem is he thinks “free speech” means “speech free of consequences.” It does not.

Yeah, this is one very important bit. Musk's stance on this is highly dishonest and manipulative. He depicts himself as a paragon of freedom and defender of choice while aggressively pursuing and mobbing those who make their own choice. Not to mention that he already uttered multiple high-profile lies.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top