Imagine being such a good communicator that between sitting down to talk to your semi estranged daughter or buying a tech platform, you choose the latter.
More like Elon was more interested in ruining one of the most popular was us poor people had to unite against the likes of people like Elon. I don’t think he’s smart enough to make that call on his own so I’m pretty sure he’s under the direction of someone else.
Seems awful weird to me that twitter, facebook, and Reddit have all had similar types of issues recently and resulted in dramatic user loss. It’s not coincidence, and it’s not for the face value reasons, it’s to remove our ability to organize against them.
Musk is an idiot who bought Twitter stock, tried to pump and dump, waived due diligence as part of the pump, and found himself contractually obligated to buy the company. Everything since then is what Musk thinks are good ideas.
Mr Musk had initially rushed to embrace the news when Jenna, formally known as Xavier, transitioned at age 16.
To me this suggests that he first thought it would seem hip and contrarian to support his trans daughter, then he realized that actually the people he considers hip and contrarian are all about hating on trans kids now, and so swiftly pivoted to doing that. (I don't imagine he had any strong feelings about his daughter as a person either way - it's not like he was around for her childhood changing diapers or whatever)
Everything in the 90s was Xtreme. He’s 52 which means he was in his 20s that decade. He got way into the X-Games, ate nothing but warheads extreme candies and Taco Bell extreme nachos, drank the 7-11 Xtreme Gulp, and watched the Extreme Ghostbusters.
I’ve hypothesized before that he just bought Twitter to destroy a platform for “woke” people, but it’s still weird reading it out like this. This whole thing reads like destroying one of the biggest social media platforms while wasting billions of dollars is about the same level of investment for him as buying a new phone is for me. Not insignificant, but also something he just does on a whim. And honestly I think his daughter will not exactly like him more after this lol. Rich cunts like Elon buying whatever they fancy just to gain more power is exactly what she’d hate if the article is to be believed.
This is revisionist, that sequence of events was what caused him to start to play footsie with the idea of buying Twitter, the SEC saying that’s a big no-no is what made him actually make the offer to buy it and then he was forced by a court to finish the deal after a long legal battle to not buy it
Don’t forget the part where Dorsey literally conned him by playing to his ego. Jack cashed out almost a billion in cash to himself even though Twitter was close to bankruptcy. It was brilliant.
What cracks me up the most is that Jack already had a Twitter clone in the works, ready to be released once Musk burns down the old plattform and people wish for Twitter but without Musk back.
Genuine question: given that running a platform like that costs money, and that money must come from somewhere, what would you actually do if you were in charge of running it? You either take money from advertisers, or you charge users directly, and I'd hazard to guess that if you'd nuke your account upon seeing ads, you probably wouldn't pay actual money to use it.
Not the person you were speaking to, but get nationalised or run on donations as a non-profit.
But I do pay more than my share for most fediverse instances that I use (which reminds me, I use this one enough - should probably make my donation regular)
Honestly, I would love to see a Wikipedia-style social media platform take off, but I really don't know if the finances could work out. Wikipedia already struggles, and it's obscenely useful. I don't think nationalization is really feasible for social media - at least in an American context - because it would be subject to the government's legal limitations on regulating free speech, which are extremely minimal. A federally run platform would not be able to remove literal unironic Nazism, which is probably going to be a bit of a turn-off to normal people.
Not really, no. Freedom of speech is very strongly ingrained in our Constitution. The only legal restrictions on it are essentially direct threats or incitement of violence.
"Go kill this Jew" - Absolutely illegal.
"Go kill the Jews" - Illegal
"The Jews should be killed" - Borderline based on circumstances
"The Jews deserve to die" - Borderline, but probably protected by the Constitution
"The Jews deserved the Holocaust" - Almost certainly protected by the Constitution
Thank you for the breakdown. I had some vague conception of American free speech protections being pretty intense, but this illustrates the individual distinctions well
Time for the new game, “GPT? Or just bad writing?”
Mr Musk had initially rushed to embrace the news when Jenna, formally known as Xavier, transitioned at age 16.
But when she later cut him out of her life entirely, he knew he had a fight on his hands, a battle which would eventually culminate in the world’s richest man buying Twitter for $44 billion.
This is all that is said about her cutting him out of her life.
Despite his businesses, Tesla, SpaceX and Starlink, all outperforming their rivals and soaring in value, Mr Musk was still unfulfilled in April 2022.
Shivon Zilis, a director of Neuralink, Mr Musk’s AI firm and the mother of his twins, told him: “You don’t have to be in a state of war at all times. Or is it that you find greater comfort when you’re in periods of war?”
Mr Musk said his “default settings” include always wanting “to push my chips back on the table or play the next level of the game.”
Somehow both unbelievable and completely believable that he is going to try and blame his child for making the stupid decision to pay so much for Twitter and for waving due diligence, which would have given him space to back out of the deal.
telegraph.co.uk
Newest