|
BryanFazekas wrote: was to find evidence of malfeasance on the part of Twitter management, and sue them.
The point of that was so he could use it to invalidate the purchase contract because the due diligence would then be fraudulent.
BryanFazekas wrote: they are already the target regarding their practices, so Musk may be dog piling
He just attacks people that do not agree with him.
BryanFazekas wrote: have a screw loose.
Perhaps megalomania.
|
|
|
|
|
Apple's hypocrisy definitely needs to be exposed - Musk is just crazy enough to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
Are the lights still on over there??
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Errr... Twitter usage is actually up since Musk took over.
|
|
|
|
|
Ya, but do they have any programmers left to work on it? 
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
No idea if they have enough now... but even the biggest Twitter fanboy has to admit that they were WAY OVER-STAFFED when Musk took over.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have a problem with Musk like so many people here apparently do.
I try to live by the mantra of cleaning my doorstep before I clean others. I don't always succeed at this but I do try.
So, you can hate on Musk all you want until your heads explode, or you can chill out, and worry about more important things.
|
|
|
|
|
I have no problem with Musk as a person. And never had.
I do have a problem with the deeds people with enormous power who do bad things. Such as opening the gates to hate speech and misogyny. Such firing people with the "wrong" opinions. And being arrogant about the whole thing.
Most of all, as my original post indicates, I am fairly certain that he is destroying his own fortune. And I do find that interesting, to observe. And if I am wrong, it still is interesting.
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
|
|
|
|
|
megaadam wrote: Such as opening the gates to hate speech and misogyny. Such firing people with the "wrong" opinions. And being arrogant about the whole thing.
Those are 3 very interesting sentences all in a row. If you look through the eyes of the 10's of thousands of Twitter accounts "permanently" suspended by the previous regime simply for the mistake of questioning the effectiveness of cloth masks, canceling in-person school or mentioning the contents of a certain person's laptop it takes on a whole different perspective. Just saying...
|
|
|
|
|
At least he drew the line at Alex Jones...
Paul Sanders.
If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter - Blaise Pascal.
Some of my best work is in the undo buffer.
|
|
|
|
|
fgs1963 wrote: If you look through the eyes of the 10's of thousands of Twitter accounts "permanently" suspended by the previous regime simply for the mistake of questioning
Rather certain that the bans were put into place after they did it repeatedly and ignored the warnings that twitter sent to them.
So more of a matter of stupidity, ignorance and/or arrogance. On the user's part.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: they did it repeatedly and ignored the warnings that twitter sent to them.
So?
Twitter and Facebook have already admitted that the US DOJ pressured them to advance the official government narratives that COVID did not come from a Chinese lab, masks and social distancing were very effective, lockdowns were essential and safe, children would not be harmed by missing in-person instruction and that Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation.
Pretty much every one of these narratives has proven to be false yet anyone (including scientists, doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers, etc...) who questioned any of these narratives and didn't cow to the US DOJ / Twitter insane censorship was kicked off. Nobody should be OK with this scenario. Nobody!
|
|
|
|
|
fgs1963 wrote: Twitter and Facebook have already admitted that the US DOJ...
Even if true none of what you said has anything to do with what I said.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure it does.
When social media (directed by the government and/or political parties) censor public discourse in the US the public will rebel. As they should...
|
|
|
|
|
fgs1963 wrote: censor public discourse in the US
Twitter is not "public discourse".
It is a company.
If someone wants to carry a sign up and down on a public sidewalk then they can. But they don't get to do the same thing inside a store because the store is a company. The company is free to decide what and who has access the store.
That isn't new. Read up on how Hearst used his newspapers.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: Twitter is not "public discourse". It is a company.
You're wrong for 3 reasons:
First, and most importantly, as you see in the "Twitter Files" being released over the last few weeks and as I mentioned in my post - the US government (DOJ and others), the DNC and the Biden campaign all had their hands in the process of Twitter's censorship. It wasn't just a company...
Second, due to the scope and ubiquity of modern social media it can easily be argued that their moderation cannot be political in nature. Imagine if cell phone systems (AT&T, Verizon, etc...) decided they would only carry traffic for specific political parties or refused service to specific candidates. Whether you like it or not there are rules in place to stop this and Twitter is not above those rules.
Lastly, all I said was that "people will rebel". Surely you don't think Twitter is some kind of official institution that the general public MUST accept and use... right? We're still allowed to make our own choices... right?
|
|
|
|
|
fgs1963 wrote: First, and most importantly, as you see in the "Twitter Files"
Sigh...and a retail store must a have business license. And they cannot advertise graphic porn in the window even if they want to. And there are many other things they must follow as well.
fgs1963 wrote: Second, due to the scope and ubiquity of modern social media it can easily be argued that their moderation cannot be political in nature
You can desire that. But it is not part of the US Constitution. There is however a way to modify the Constitution so get busy if you feel that is viable.
And it still ignores that my original comment that they were banned after ignoring the policies of the company whose service they were using.
fgs1963 wrote: Lastly, all I said was that "people will rebel"
No you said the following
censor public discourse in the US the public will rebel.
And as I said and continue to say it is not "public".
|
|
|
|
|
For me, the only result of all this hype is that I start using Twitter. Out of curiosity. It's not that bad to be honest.
There is only one Vera Farmiga and Salma Hayek is her prophet!
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
It only looks like a "war" to the general public.
The fact that the "Twitter app" is now "Musk's app", is a good enough reason to stay away from it. (IMO).
If I wanted to use Twitter (and I don't), I'd use a browser. I don't know how many people get that part.
And they're confusing free will (ads) and free speech.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Gerry Schmitz wrote: The fact that the "Twitter app" is now "Musk's app", is a good enough reason to stay away from it. (IMO).
What has he done that you have this attitude? Space-X, Tesla, Starlink, Boring?
I personally think Space-X is elephanting amazing and on that alone I admire the guy.
Has he done dickish business moves over the years - yeah. Pretty much de rigueur for the billionaire class. I don't stop using Apple products because Jobs was an ass, I don't stop using Windows because Gates use monopolistic business tactics.
What is about this guy that drives everyone crazy? Is it simply his politics? 
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
DRHuff wrote: What has he done that you have this attitude? ... Has he done dickish business moves over the years - yeah. Pretty much de rigueur for the billionaire class.
And there you have answered your own question. Why the f*** would we want to be ruled by a**holes? I sure don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Better get used to it. 80+% of politicians and business leaders are a**holes. Musk just gets more press than most.
|
|
|
|
|
And yet you are...
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly, yes. Many of us are trying to change that. Wish us well...
|
|
|
|
|
DRHuff wrote: What is about this guy that drives everyone crazy? Is it simply his politics?
I don't think Gates or Jobs fired dozens of people for using an internal account that was specifically set up to encourage free speech.
I don't think Gates or Jobs claimed that they could save children trapped in a cave with rising water using robots. And then insulting the leader of the team that would in fact go on to rescue those children.
Now Jobs probably did make promised claims for new products that never showed up. But perhaps not as much.
The only 'politics' that I have seen from Musk that matter are his attempts to rationalize his behavior for what is obviously his personal agenda by claiming that it is the fault of others because of their politics.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
