Musk offers to buy Twitter

....Elon's pretty much unfettered though. Seems like only the regulators or banks/co-investors get to say no.

yes, very much.

I've not paid much attention to Musk in the past, but in recent weeks I've read some things that he's said......and it's amazing how he just rambles along. Much like Trump, he's vague about things and just talks without really getting definite about specifics.......it's all meaningless babbling to fill some space

maybe there's some secret scheme behind it all??
 
yes, very much.

I've not paid much attention to Musk in the past, but in recent weeks I've read some things that he's said......and it's amazing how he just rambles along. Much like Trump, he's vague about things and just talks without really getting definite about specifics.......it's all meaningless babbling to fill some space

maybe there's some secret scheme behind it all??
I'm surprised no one has yet posted this gem from a recent Twitter spaces meeting with engineers. He surmises that the thing needs "a total write of the whole thing" to the chagrin of the Twitter engineers who, ya know, actually built the thing...

 
I'm surprised no one has yet posted this gem from a recent Twitter spaces meeting with engineers. He surmises that the thing needs "a total write of the whole thing" to the chagrin of the Twitter engineers who, ya know, actually built the thing...



Dear lord, I kinda want to hear more just to get a better feel for just how much I would need to run away from this guy. But I’ve never seen open rebellion of engineers against upper management like this in what sounds like a high level “here’s my vision” meeting.

I’ve worked on major efforts on legacy codebases. I know you can do some impressive things with the right plan. And my experience with that would make me run from a “green field” effort like Musk suggests here. It’s a recipe for delivering late, if at all.
 
The new "Views" feature is an absolute disaster. Localization breaks the layout in languages other than english, the icon doesn't make any sense, promoted posts don't show the view count and have the wrong text displayed when you tap on the button... To me it's clear that, in the pursuit of actually delivering *any* feature, they pieced together parts of the Twitter analytics functionality (hence the icon) and called that a new feature. This probably didn't even require many changes server-side, only on the client (iOS/Android). But the execution has truly rookie mistakes. I can only assume this is due to developer deadlines being too tight. If this is the best Twitter 2.0 can do...
 
If you don't know who these people are, good for you! I'm glad your life is so insulated as to not have to care. Others aren't so lucky.
Re: the words of hateful people: If I can suggest some advice- if you let these people like these affect you, you’re only giving them power and there is nothing you can do to stop people like this from existing. If they deserve to be kicked off platforms for misconduct so be it but it’s not worth ruminating over. It’s not a matter of being insulated or indifferent, it’s a matter of now allowing them negatively affect you. And this coming from a Jewish person sees antisemitism all the time and has personally experienced plenty. Everyone has the ability to choose how they let others words affect them.

I know of Andy Ngo, he’s nobody journalist who only came “prominence” (that’s a very generous term) because someone thee a milkshake at him. I haven’t heard the name Kim dotcom in a decade- all I know is he started the Mega site and last I knew the government was after him. Laura Loomer is a rabid bigot but honestly don’t know what she has accomplished other than losing a run for Congress.
Here's an example from this thread:
I see the post, but I don’t know really understand the point your making because I have zero context. I checked the news, France never lost power AFAIK around 12/18. And if we call Europe’s energy crisis a loss, what is the the other loss to bring the score to 2:0? And why is it halftime? So I don’t understand the post in the first place or what is particularly humorous. Perhaps you have more insight into this?

The best I can infer that kimdotcom thinks that the cost of France/NATO supporting Ukraine is too high (lack of energy resources/high energy prices). Considering I don’t know any other statements he’s made, I wouldn’t interpret that as making fun of people who don’t have energy. Nor a pro-Putin statement. I would also infer based on Musk’s response and other posts he thinks this war should be ended as quickly as possible with compromises. I have no reason to believe he actually supports what Putin is doing even if some of his proposed peace deal aligns with Putin… that is the nature of a compromise.

I personally think the West should frankly be doing more to support Ukraine and that the benefits of supporting them outweighs the costs. That said, I can understand why some people may not support it.

It’s totally unreasonable to label people as being “pro-Putin” or a “Putin puppet” for having a different opinion on foreign policy. For example, people making $12/hr and have a family to feed might be more concerned about the cost of energy than Ukrainian. Or maybe wars like Vietnam and Iraq have lead some people into an anti-interventionist position or they believe we have domestic problems that need to be addressed before we get involved in other country’s disputes. These aren’t opinions I have, but I can understand why people might have them.

It’s worth reflecting upon how many serious problems and conflicts in the world at this moment that we don’t pay attention to.

If nothing else his transphobia is on pretty full display, I mean I posted about it right here, not just in this thread but right after my reply to you:
Again, this is not really compelling- it’s a 3rd party vaguely describing a conversation. Direct quotes would be nice.

The problem with the transphobia topic as a whole is that people have different ideas about what constitutes transphobia. I would remind you however Musk has a transgender child. For example, if someone says it’s unfair for transwomen to compete in female sports, some people say that’s transphobia. Others think its misogyny to allow such competition. If someone talks about the profound increase in children seeking gender affirming care as troubling, is that transphobic? If a research find there is a strong peer influence leading to this rise are the researchers transphobic?

Frankly, I have no idea what Musk plans to do with this topic. It’s a controversial issue with a lot of emotions. I believe there are appropriate and inappropriate ways of discussing the things. That said, there is also a difference between thoughtful l, respectful discussion and harassment. Intentionally deadnaming or misusing of pronouns in order to offend someone I do think constitutes harassment. As my mother says “if you don’t have anything nice to say don’t say it”.

Look, I think we’re very much on the same page here. I am not a fan of Musk and never have been. I think he’s extremely narcissistic and egocentric, dishonest, manipulative, and doesn’t appear to demonstrate much respect for others. Its often hard to discern what he actually thinks from the trolling comments he uses to seek attention in line with all those Axis II Cluster B psychological traits.

I’m not by no means defending him. I’m just saying people are a lot more complex than this very much black and white portrayal of people’s personalities. And I find it very interesting how the media will try to take people down- again, many of these Musk issues have existed for years, but it wasn’t until he tried to buy twitter everything changed. I think that says something.
 
According to the Guardian this morning, (the loathsome) Mr Musk has just ordered the removal of the suicide prevention feature (#ThereIsHelp) from Twitter.

What a perfectly dreadful person.

I can’t conjure of any line of thinking that could possibly justify removing such a feature. The most reasonable explanation I would assume (knowing nothing about how these things work) it was removed or disabled in error. That’s still not a good excuse, but it’s at least understandable that could happen.

If he ordered to have the feature removed, that’s really just inexcusable and frankly quite troubling.

As with anything, I think it’s important to understand what actually happened before jumping to conclusions though.
 
I can’t conjure of any line of thinking that could possibly justify removing such a feature. The most reasonable explanation I would assume (knowing nothing about how these things work) it was removed or disabled in error. That’s still not a good excuse, but it’s at least understandable that could happen.

If he ordered to have the feature removed, that’s really just inexcusable and frankly quite troubling.

As with anything, I think it’s important to understand what actually happened before jumping to conclusions though.
According to Reuters yesterday, Twitter claims the feature is being revamped and will return. If true, it's unclear why they removed it temporarily. Regardless, it's another example of the chaos that's followed Musk's takeover. Even if he wasn't directly responsible for this episode, it speaks to his incompetence running a company.
 
According to Reuters yesterday, Twitter claims the feature is being revamped and will return. If true, it's unclear why they removed it temporarily. Regardless, it's another example of the chaos that's followed Musk's takeover. Even if he wasn't directly responsible for this episode, it speaks to his incompetence running a company.
well revamped in musks world means worse or non existent.
 
I see the post, but I don’t know really understand the point your making because I have zero context. I checked the news, France never lost power AFAIK around 12/18. And if we call Europe’s energy crisis a loss, what is the the other loss to bring the score to 2:0? And why is it halftime? So I don’t understand the post in the first place or what is particularly humorous. Perhaps you have more insight into this?

The best I can infer that kimdotcom thinks that the cost of France/NATO supporting Ukraine is too high (lack of energy resources/high energy prices). Considering I don’t know any other statements he’s made, I wouldn’t interpret that as making fun of people who don’t have energy. Nor a pro-Putin statement. I would also infer based on Musk’s response and other posts he thinks this war should be ended as quickly as possible with compromises. I have no reason to believe he actually supports what Putin is doing even if some of his proposed peace deal aligns with Putin… that is the nature of a compromise.

Kim Dot Com is pretty unabashedly pro-Putin, just anti-West in general - thinks Bucha was a false flag, that the Ukrainians are full of Nazis (which given his predilections for wearing german helmets with swastikas and signed copies of Mein Kampf who regularly complains about Jews running Hollywood you'd think he'd like if it were true), that the West provoked the war, that Russia is defending itself and its people, that sort of thing. This is not a case of "who knows why Kim thinks this way ... look he said peace was good [which he has] that must be it, he just want peace!" The context of the post is that France were lagging and didn't look very good in the first half - they had "low energy". Russia is bombing Ukraine's power grid causing massive blackouts and harm to the civilian population while trying to cause Europe "to freeze" in winter. So the joke from their perspective is that since everyone blames everything on Russia France's low energy on the pitch must be Russia's fault. Elon thinks that's *hilarious*. I didn't say that made Elon pro-Putin, but it does make him an asshole and is another example of him jocularly interacting with those who are gladly pro-fascist right like the others on the list I wrote above. Oh and it's amazing how often Elon's proposed solutions align with dictatorships, like giving Taiwan to China and nearly 20% of Ukraine to Russia. Henry Ford would be proud.

Edit: As for the rest of your post, again you're taking each element in isolation and refusing to synthesize. I'm really reminded by those who kept chiding during the Donald Trump years "who knows what he meant by that? can you really say that was racist or mocking disabilities or ... maybe it was totally innocent!" Normally I would say you can listen to the Twitter space yourself, but Elon had it removed. And as for your advice to me, I would like to offer some counter advice: consider that being so insouciant in the face of bigotry and insisting on its unknowability is maybe not as sophisticated a response as you seem to think it is - that maybe instead it's demeaning and insulting. Lastly, you’re not the only one here capable of considering other points of view or distinguishing between bigotry and other factors. Lecturing the rest of us on not jumping to conclusions is especially galling when you yourself don’t appear to be following the subject at hand.
 
Last edited:
I’m going to try to stay out of this after this post, as I had to walk away and put the last thread on ignore that started down this road. Precisely because there’s a lot of FUD about me and mine out there on this topic, and people keep phrasing it as if they are just asking questions rather than taking to heart we are talking about people’s lives. But at the same time, I also need to stand up for me and mine.

If someone talks about the profound increase in children seeking gender affirming care as troubling, is that transphobic?

When it’s being used to equate being trans to a social contagion, then yes. When it’s being used to argue that the increase itself is a problem, rather than try to understand why, then yes. When it‘s being used to work back from a conclusion or reinforce a pre-existing bias or belief that trans people need interventions to dissuade them from being trans, then yes. See phrenology, et al.

When we stopped stigmatizing being left handed, we saw sharp increases of people “being left-handed”. Was it because it was now trendy, or because we stopped rapping on the knuckles of anyone trying to write with their left hand in school? As stigmas around being anything but straight loosen, we see increases in people being open about not being straight. Oh gee, when we stop giving gay men the choice of prison or chemical castration when it’s found out, maybe they’ll talk about it more in public. Maybe more people will understand why they feel the way they do instead of bottling it up, and maybe more people will not hide the fact that they aren’t straight.

One of the most common things I see being discussed in the trans community is how being able to interact with other trans people and hear them describe their experiences unfiltered finally helped put language to something they already felt. To bring those things into the light rather than hide them. This is a community that in the last couple decades, with help of the internet, is finally figuring out how to tell their story their way, rather than in the myopic way the media has treated and questioned trans people in the past (which if you haven’t seen the stuff from the 90s, it’s gross and voyeuristic, talk about sexualizing people). It’s akin to left handed people finally finding other left handed people in a world that raps your knuckles for writing with “the wrong hand” and being able to go “oh hey, it’s not just me, I don’t have to feel shame for this”. Or akin to a woman finally being given the mental framework to understand why they’ve never had any gratifying relationships with men, but keep wanting to flirt with their cute lady barista.

There’s unfortunately some junk science in this space that has been used for decades to stigmatize being trans, much like with the gay and bisexual communities, and some very recent efforts as well that has helped fuel the new panic around trans people.

If a research find there is a strong peer influence leading to this rise are the researchers transphobic?

Citation needed. See above.
 
When it’s being used to equate being trans to a social contagion, then yes. When it’s being used to argue that the increase itself is a problem, rather than try to understand why, then yes. When it‘s being used to work back from a conclusion or reinforce a pre-existing bias or belief that trans people need interventions to dissuade them from being trans, then yes. See phrenology, et al.

When we stopped stigmatizing being left handed, we saw sharp increases of people “being left-handed”. Was it because it was now trendy, or because we stopped rapping on the knuckles of anyone trying to write with their left hand in school? As stigmas around being anything but straight loosen, we see increases in people being open about not being straight. Oh gee, when we stop giving gay men the choice of prison or chemical castration when it’s found out, maybe they’ll talk about it more in public. Maybe more people will understand why they feel the way they do instead of bottling it up, and maybe more people will not hide the fact that they aren’t straight.

Couldn’t agree more.
 
On the topic of acquisitions, I have been through several of them in my time and they're not all bad depending on who it is and how the company is taken over. In my experience those who come in, watch what everyone is doing, taking their time learning about operations, IT, etc. and then making decision based on that are typically successful.

Those who come in like a wrecking ball, knowing nothing about any of it and just want to "change it up" for the sake of changing it up have had the worst turnover and least success. I get there are some exceptions, especially if the company being acquired is failing in some way, etc. but for the most part I've seen little success this way personally.
 
Last edited:
At the time they were being considered they didn't have equal or better reliability - SpaceX rockets were still having accidents up to a couple years before - in contrast DoD launches hadn't failed in decades. Saving 10s of millions in launch costs is silly when the risk is billions in payload + the time lost on a national security asset. Again obviously it worked out, but at the time Elon was complaining, they had no track record of reliability. However, as Elon Musk complained about, DoD contracts are notoriously byzantine - that part is a valid complaint and in order to compete, even with a superior product, it requires a large amount of politicking and connections. Hence, the second part of my earlier post.



Kinda my point. Elon’s companies are notorious for cutting corners, amplifying risks, and ignoring regulations. Not okay when the stakes are high.

Article says the FAA just ordered an investigation after that. That alone should have been enough to force Elon out of that business completely.
 
Musk being distracted with his Twitter mess seems to really be amplifying and helping the TSLA dump

I'm loving it

Can't happen to a more perfectly unsavory character.
Nearly 100% self inflicted damage
I know.

The fact that this is entirely self-inflicted simply adds to my........sense of schadenfreude.

Actually, I am attempting to suppress a wholly unseemly snort of laughter, these days, whenever I read anything about Mr Musk; a thoroughly nasty piece of work, a racist, a sexist, an utter narcissist.
 
Last edited:
There is a new movie out about a really stupid really really wealthy guy. Naturally, fans of Elon assume it must be referencing him.

We watched the movie last night and immediately thought it was at least partially referencing Musty. It's truly sad as he was enjoying generally positive press before the Twitter mess.
 
We watched the movie last night and immediately thought it was at least partially referencing Musty. It's truly sad as he was enjoying generally positive press before the Twitter mess.

It’s probably fair to at least say that Musk did feed into the film somewhat. But it’s also partly all the other new tech money CEOs too.

Much like Knives Out took jabs at old money.
 
Back
Top