Tugger wrote:

TSS wrote:

An interesting phenomenon has occurred since Mr. Musk's bid was accepted. If Twitter has nothing to hide and there was no intentional manipulation going on behind the scenes at Twitter, then what is the explanation for this? Disposing of evidence before the new boss takes over, perhaps?

Twitter Is PANICKING And May Be Purging Code That Hurt Conservatives, Creepy Conspiracy Unveiled-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGtYJ8keRQc

OMG, this is what fake "conservatives" have sunk to.

I say fake because they aren't conservative or Republican's, they are MAGA's or Trumplicans. They make up crap to trigger their base. Gotta love conspiracy theories, they sure do. Especially ones are made up and then handed around as if "it's on YouTube, it must be true". (That kinda worse than "A pilot told me" or "I saw it on the internet".)

And this is the horde driving Republican policies now? God save us.

Tugg

Tim Pool lmao...

...and then JFK Jr will return as Trump's running mate and CFO of Twitter and Mike LIndell will turn off all of the voting machines and horse paste will finally be revealed to cure covid

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

TSS wrote:

An interesting phenomenon has occurred since Mr. Musk's bid was accepted. If Twitter has nothing to hide and there was no intentional manipulation going on behind the scenes at Twitter, then what is the explanation for this? Disposing of evidence before the new boss takes over, perhaps?

Twitter Is PANICKING And May Be Purging Code That Hurt Conservatives, Creepy Conspiracy Unveiled-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGtYJ8keRQc

The explanation is a bunch of unverified conjecture from a YT channel that obviously loves to trigger people as their revenue model. I don’t see any video titles in their channel listing that are not histrionic.

And even if there were ‘intentional manipulation’ happening within a private entity, is that illegal? Did the BOD know? Was policy in place and all PR/CTO/COO/CCO entities were aware? Much to be looked at before anything worth reacting to.

Something is really going on, considering many prominent conservatives have seen bumps of up to more than 100K followers. Don't see any reason to believe that other than Twitter was shadow banning conservatives.

Whether it is or isn't going on is irrelevant to just about everything, especially how a business is run. Conservatives have other platforms they can use if they don't like that one. All this 'story' really represents is what I said - a way for YT and other commentators to stoke outrage that pads their outrage-based incomes.

Aaron747 wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

The explanation is a bunch of unverified conjecture from a YT channel that obviously loves to trigger people as their revenue model. I don’t see any video titles in their channel listing that are not histrionic.

And even if there were ‘intentional manipulation’ happening within a private entity, is that illegal? Did the BOD know? Was policy in place and all PR/CTO/COO/CCO entities were aware? Much to be looked at before anything worth reacting to.

Something is really going on, considering many prominent conservatives have seen bumps of up to more than 100K followers. Don't see any reason to believe that other than Twitter was shadow banning conservatives.

Whether it is or isn't going on is irrelevant to just about everything, especially how a business is run. Conservatives have other platforms they can use if they don't like that one. All this 'story' really represents is what I said - a way for YT and other commentators to stoke outrage that pads their outrage-based incomes.

Being legal doesn't mean morally right?

TSS wrote:

An interesting phenomenon has occurred since Mr. Musk's bid was accepted. If Twitter has nothing to hide and there was no intentional manipulation going on behind the scenes at Twitter, then what is the explanation for this? Disposing of evidence before the new boss takes over, perhaps?

Twitter Is PANICKING And May Be Purging Code That Hurt Conservatives, Creepy Conspiracy Unveiled-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGtYJ8keRQc

MAY?
I may win the Powerball if I pick the right 6 numbers.
All this post shows is why Conservatives constantly feel like they get owned. They fall for fraudulent material that enriches the con artist, while keeping the viewer enraged.

c933103 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Something is really going on, considering many prominent conservatives have seen bumps of up to more than 100K followers. Don't see any reason to believe that other than Twitter was shadow banning conservatives.

Whether it is or isn't going on is irrelevant to just about everything, especially how a business is run. Conservatives have other platforms they can use if they don't like that one. All this 'story' really represents is what I said - a way for YT and other commentators to stoke outrage that pads their outrage-based incomes.

Being legal doesn't mean morally right?

So is the government supposed to legislate morality? IE: Be more involved and less-limited??

casinterest wrote:

TSS wrote:

An interesting phenomenon has occurred since Mr. Musk's bid was accepted. If Twitter has nothing to hide and there was no intentional manipulation going on behind the scenes at Twitter, then what is the explanation for this? Disposing of evidence before the new boss takes over, perhaps?

Twitter Is PANICKING And May Be Purging Code That Hurt Conservatives, Creepy Conspiracy Unveiled-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGtYJ8keRQc

MAY?
I may win the Powerball if I pick the right 6 numbers.
All this post shows is why Conservatives constantly feel like they get owned. They fall for fraudulent material that enriches the con artist, while keeping the viewer enraged.

And even if they did...SO WHAT. It's a private company, vote with your feet and don't use the platform. I continue to be amused by this trend we're seeing of "conservatives" wanting to dictate their morality or agenda onto private industry -- you know, the ones who I grew up hearing for years and years need the government to be off their back. I suspect one of the things we're really seeing is that certain voices within the conservative movement recognize they don't have a better platform for their message and aren't able to devise an alternative, and they want control of the message board. Whether the great and powerful Elon Musk actually facilitates that remains to be seen. Meanwhile he's more than happy to play ball with censorship and government intervention when it lines his pocket. HALF of Tesla cars are built in China...and where's his criticism of China when they shutdown Shanghai? Crickets. California puts in a lockdown, and Holy Hannah you'd think the state was chewing off his leg and he sues the state. So let him buy Twitter if he wants to, but spare me this horsesqueeze about free speech.

On topic of Elon Musk buying things; https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxBI2UP7 ... PfwvDg00fH

(for the record it's not real if it wasn't obvious).

All of this fake outrage from the right over "finally having free speech on Twitter" is just that: fake outrage. Plenty of Republicans are on Twitter. Talking about how masks don't work and "woke liberal mobs" and grooming and such. I know I sound like a broken record, but this is the truth. Republicans are on Twitter. As long as they don't incite violence or make obvious lies, they have a platform. Stop thinking this is a win, Republicans. It is not.

BTW, does this mean you will let football players take a knee during the National Anthem? I mean, free speech and all....

luckyone wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Whether it is or isn't going on is irrelevant to just about everything, especially how a business is run. Conservatives have other platforms they can use if they don't like that one. All this 'story' really represents is what I said - a way for YT and other commentators to stoke outrage that pads their outrage-based incomes.

Being legal doesn't mean morally right?

So is the government supposed to legislate morality? IE: Be more involved and less-limited??

I don't think one can only criticize illegal things

c933103 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Being legal doesn't mean morally right?

So is the government supposed to legislate morality? IE: Be more involved and less-limited??

I don't think one can only criticize illegal things

Which is fair, but that is not the ethos of some complaining about "free speech."

c933103 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Being legal doesn't mean morally right?

So is the government supposed to legislate morality? IE: Be more involved and less-limited??

I don't think one can only criticize illegal things

Nobody said that, it just smacks of being fake when only targeting SNS platforms or being free speech focused. If Americans were serious about going after legal business that manipulate conditions, they would focus more attention on our health insurance industry - just one example.

seb146 wrote:

All of this fake outrage from the right over "finally having free speech on Twitter" is just that: fake outrage. Plenty of Republicans are on Twitter. Talking about how masks don't work and "woke liberal mobs" and grooming and such. I know I sound like a broken record, but this is the truth. Republicans are on Twitter. As long as they don't incite violence or make obvious lies, they have a platform. Stop thinking this is a win, Republicans. It is not.

BTW, does this mean you will let football players take a knee during the National Anthem? I mean, free speech and all....

Really? Seems kind of strange that right after Musk buys Twitter that the Biden administration and DHS is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" gee what a coincidence. Not that DHS has about a million other pressing issues to be handling right now they feel that this is what we should be spending money on and they put a left wing looney toon in charge of running it Nina Jankowicz oh that seems like it would not be biased *rolls eyes*. I think it's high time to kick DHS secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the street.

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/us-c ... nformation

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of this fake outrage from the right over "finally having free speech on Twitter" is just that: fake outrage. Plenty of Republicans are on Twitter. Talking about how masks don't work and "woke liberal mobs" and grooming and such. I know I sound like a broken record, but this is the truth. Republicans are on Twitter. As long as they don't incite violence or make obvious lies, they have a platform. Stop thinking this is a win, Republicans. It is not.

BTW, does this mean you will let football players take a knee during the National Anthem? I mean, free speech and all....

Really? Seems kind of strange that right after Musk buys Twitter that the Biden administration and DHS is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" gee what a coincidence. Not that DHS has about a million other pressing issues to be handling right now they feel that this is what we should be spending money on and they put a left wing looney toon in charge of running it Nina Jankowicz oh that seems like it would not be biased *rolls eyes*. I think it's high time to kick DHS secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the street.

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/us-c ... nformation

Stratosphere, come on now, I know you are smart. You seriously can't be blind to the fact that the problem with disinformation has been going for years now, yes? You are seeing what is a coincedence as something more than it really is.

Disinformation is occurring across numerous platforms. From TV (Russia Today anyone?) to radio (internet and broadcast) and of course the huge amount across numerous websites from Facebook to Twitter to purported news only sites.

There may have been some small final pushes with this all but the Twitter purchase (which still has not happened) by Mr. Musk is not the cause of what has been created.

Tugg

The EU has just passed the Digital Services Act a few days ago, that might have something to do with it : https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/22/digital ... ntent.html

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of this fake outrage from the right over "finally having free speech on Twitter" is just that: fake outrage. Plenty of Republicans are on Twitter. Talking about how masks don't work and "woke liberal mobs" and grooming and such. I know I sound like a broken record, but this is the truth. Republicans are on Twitter. As long as they don't incite violence or make obvious lies, they have a platform. Stop thinking this is a win, Republicans. It is not.

BTW, does this mean you will let football players take a knee during the National Anthem? I mean, free speech and all....

Really? Seems kind of strange that right after Musk buys Twitter that the Biden administration and DHS is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" gee what a coincidence. Not that DHS has about a million other pressing issues to be handling right now they feel that this is what we should be spending money on and they put a left wing looney toon in charge of running it Nina Jankowicz oh that seems like it would not be biased *rolls eyes*. I think it's high time to kick DHS secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the street.

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/us-c ... nformation

After being drown out by shrieks of "ivermectin works" and "fake ballots" and "liberals demand open borders" and "immigrants bring diseases" and "liberals are grooming our children" are countered with facts (but those are worthless because the source is biased) you don't think we need fact checkers?

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of this fake outrage from the right over "finally having free speech on Twitter" is just that: fake outrage. Plenty of Republicans are on Twitter. Talking about how masks don't work and "woke liberal mobs" and grooming and such. I know I sound like a broken record, but this is the truth. Republicans are on Twitter. As long as they don't incite violence or make obvious lies, they have a platform. Stop thinking this is a win, Republicans. It is not.

BTW, does this mean you will let football players take a knee during the National Anthem? I mean, free speech and all....

Really? Seems kind of strange that right after Musk buys Twitter that the Biden administration and DHS is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" gee what a coincidence. Not that DHS has about a million other pressing issues to be handling right now they feel that this is what we should be spending money on and they put a left wing looney toon in charge of running it Nina Jankowicz oh that seems like it would not be biased *rolls eyes*. I think it's high time to kick DHS secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the street.

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/us-c ... nformation

That is going to backfire tremendously. Democrats dont learn and really believe they will be in power for ever. The lady in charge of the board is on the record against Trump doing that same board she is leading.

The irony here is that the formation of the disinformation board, has itself resulted in a wave of disinformation. Could not be clearer why something like that is needed. How effective it can be, remains to be seen. But certainly with regard to clearly false issues, such as election fraud and vaccine conspiracy theories, it can help to have those addressed openly as false in public forums.

The main issue is that people can easily be persuaded not to believe the government, or the science, when their party is not in power. The board is probably not going to change that. But at least can help to create policies that favor truthful representation of issues.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

stratosphere wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of this fake outrage from the right over "finally having free speech on Twitter" is just that: fake outrage. Plenty of Republicans are on Twitter. Talking about how masks don't work and "woke liberal mobs" and grooming and such. I know I sound like a broken record, but this is the truth. Republicans are on Twitter. As long as they don't incite violence or make obvious lies, they have a platform. Stop thinking this is a win, Republicans. It is not.

BTW, does this mean you will let football players take a knee during the National Anthem? I mean, free speech and all....

Really? Seems kind of strange that right after Musk buys Twitter that the Biden administration and DHS is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" gee what a coincidence. Not that DHS has about a million other pressing issues to be handling right now they feel that this is what we should be spending money on and they put a left wing looney toon in charge of running it Nina Jankowicz oh that seems like it would not be biased *rolls eyes*. I think it's high time to kick DHS secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the street.

https://katv.com/news/nation-world/us-c ... nformation

That is going to backfire tremendously. Democrats dont learn and really believe they will be in power for ever. The lady in charge of the board is on the record against Trump doing that same board she is leading.

Nope. Try again. Democrats know they will lose power. We look at history. We know midterm elections are not kind to the party holding the White House. This is why the renewed anger over Hunter Biden and "woke" and grooming and all the Republican trigger words. Republicans believe they don't have to run on kitchen table issues because they believe they have won. Historically, they have.

The deal is apparently on hold. Is Musk looking for a way out, or is this just another of his publicity grabbing moves? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... -elon-musk

luckyone wrote:

The deal is apparently on hold. Is Musk looking for a way out, or is this just another of his publicity grabbing moves? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... -elon-musk

It's Musk...what isn't a ploy for publicity?

Aaron747 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

The deal is apparently on hold. Is Musk looking for a way out, or is this just another of his publicity grabbing moves? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... -elon-musk

It's Musk...what isn't a ploy for publicity?

This is what I don't get. Not knowing enough about the sector, I am wary of commenting on Tesla but on Space X?
What he has done there is truly remarkable, yes he had some (sensible and well directed) help from NASA but that investment has paid off handsomely already, he's truly on board there, with good reason.
So why all this farting around buying Twitter?
It doesn't make anything, does not 'add value' as far as I can see.
He should back away, concentrate on what most know and those who do, admire him for.
That Starship is still a huge work in progress, if it comes off who cares about a social media platform.
(I know, living in the wrong century aren't I? Well this one has largely sucked so far).

GDB wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

The deal is apparently on hold. Is Musk looking for a way out, or is this just another of his publicity grabbing moves? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... -elon-musk

It's Musk...what isn't a ploy for publicity?

This is what I don't get. Not knowing enough about the sector, I am wary of commenting on Tesla but on Space X?
What he has done there is truly remarkable, yes he had some (sensible and well directed) help from NASA but that investment has paid off handsomely already, he's truly on board there, with good reason.
So why all this farting around buying Twitter?
It doesn't make anything, does not 'add value' as far as I can see.
He should back away, concentrate on what most know and those who do, admire him for.
That Starship is still a huge work in progress, if it comes off who cares about a social media platform.
(I know, living in the wrong century aren't I? Well this one has largely sucked so far).

The short answer is you have to be a gambler and comfortable with taking big risks to do what he has done. That does NOT mean that he is invincible. It does not mean that every gamble he takes is going to pay off. For people like that, their flaws are just as exaggerated as their successes.

As for the hemhawing about Twitter, sometimes even the big dog bites off more than he can chew. Who knows. Guess we'll see.

Edit: "But shares of Tesla, which Musk has been selling to fund some of the acquisition of Twitter, have tumbled since it was revealed the social platform had become a Musk target.

Those shares have lost a quarter of their value in the last month, and have fallen from about $1,150 in early April when Musk confirmed he had taken a huge stake in Twitter, to about $762 Friday.

“So it’s become much more expensive for him to buy this company using his Tesla shares,” Silver said.

Musk’s net worth, estimated by Forbes earlier this week at $240 billion, has fallen to $223 billion as of Friday.

Tesla shares may have benefitted from Twitter bot accounts over the years as well. A University of Maryland researcher recently concluded that such bots have been used to generate hundreds of thousands of positive tweets about Tesla, potentially buoying its stock in years when it was under pressure." Emphasis mine.
https://thehill.com/news/ap/ap-technolo ... y-on-hold/

luckyone wrote:

GDB wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

It's Musk...what isn't a ploy for publicity?

This is what I don't get. Not knowing enough about the sector, I am wary of commenting on Tesla but on Space X?
What he has done there is truly remarkable, yes he had some (sensible and well directed) help from NASA but that investment has paid off handsomely already, he's truly on board there, with good reason.
So why all this farting around buying Twitter?
It doesn't make anything, does not 'add value' as far as I can see.
He should back away, concentrate on what most know and those who do, admire him for.
That Starship is still a huge work in progress, if it comes off who cares about a social media platform.
(I know, living in the wrong century aren't I? Well this one has largely sucked so far).

The short answer is you have to be a gambler and comfortable with taking big risks to do what he has done. That does NOT mean that he is invincible. It does not mean that every gamble he takes is going to pay off. For people like that, their flaws are just as exaggerated as their successes.

As for the hemhawing about Twitter, sometimes even the big dog bites off more than he can chew. Who knows. Guess we'll see.

Edit: "But shares of Tesla, which Musk has been selling to fund some of the acquisition of Twitter, have tumbled since it was revealed the social platform had become a Musk target.

Those shares have lost a quarter of their value in the last month, and have fallen from about $1,150 in early April when Musk confirmed he had taken a huge stake in Twitter, to about $762 Friday.

“So it’s become much more expensive for him to buy this company using his Tesla shares,” Silver said.

Musk’s net worth, estimated by Forbes earlier this week at $240 billion, has fallen to $223 billion as of Friday.

Tesla shares may have benefitted from Twitter bot accounts over the years as well. A University of Maryland researcher recently concluded that such bots have been used to generate hundreds of thousands of positive tweets about Tesla, potentially buoying its stock in years when it was under pressure." Emphasis mine.
https://thehill.com/news/ap/ap-technolo ... y-on-hold/

His 'eccentric' behavior was well known and sometimes, with the insults he flung at someone who had the temerity of succeeding in rescuing those Thai boys stuck in that cave, being a warning of a dark side.
Even so, I mentioned Starship because though a bold concept, Musk has increasingly applied practical engineering solutions to it, it's not a one man band but he is the driving force.
It's just hard to match the man who gives a long interview with an amateur space reporter, with clarity and often admitting he did not know things, with wanting Twitter, which he could also do with moderating his use of.

GDB wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

luckyone wrote:

The deal is apparently on hold. Is Musk looking for a way out, or is this just another of his publicity grabbing moves? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... -elon-musk

It's Musk...what isn't a ploy for publicity?

This is what I don't get. Not knowing enough about the sector, I am wary of commenting on Tesla but on Space X?
What he has done there is truly remarkable, yes he had some (sensible and well directed) help from NASA but that investment has paid off handsomely already, he's truly on board there, with good reason.
So why all this farting around buying Twitter?
It doesn't make anything, does not 'add value' as far as I can see.
He should back away, concentrate on what most know and those who do, admire him for.
That Starship is still a huge work in progress, if it comes off who cares about a social media platform.
(I know, living in the wrong century aren't I? Well this one has largely sucked so far).

Comment from this CNN article ( https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/13/tech ... index.html ) say the following:

"The Street will view this deal as 1) likely falling apart, 2) Musk negotiating for a lower deal price, or 3) Musk simply walking away from the deal with a $1 billion breakup fee," Ives wrote. "Many will view this as Musk using this Twitter filing/spam accounts as a way to get out of this deal in a vastly changing market."


I think it make sense that with tech stocks falling so much in recent weeks, Musk would want a lower price compared to the price tag he initially offered when the acquisition started.

The thing about Musk is that he can use Twitter as an indirect control loop for his interests. Today he signaled that he would pause the acquisition, which drove the Twitter stock price down, and the Tesla price up. When it got to the level he wanted, he tweeted again that he still intended to go through with the acquisition, which halted the slide.

If he now lowers his bid for Twitter, it will be based on the price & slide that he himself determined. I don't think that would escape the notice of the SEC. Nor would it be his first time doing that. You'd think he would stop using Twitter for that purpose, especially as he wants to own it. But he doesn't seem to be able to stop himself.

He certainly is smart enough to understand what will happen in the market with those tweets. Which raises the question of whether he wants to own Twitter to preserve that ability for himself. Maybe he saw the Twitter restrictions as potentially threatening his use of it for this purpose.

Avatar2go wrote:

The thing about Musk is that he can use Twitter as an indirect control loop for his interests. Today he signaled that he would pause the acquisition, which drove the Twitter stock price down, and the Tesla price up. When it got to the level he wanted, he tweeted again that he still intended to go through with the acquisition, which halted the slide.

If he now lowers his bid for Twitter, it will be based on the price & slide that he himself determined. I don't think that would escape the notice of the SEC. Nor would it be his first time doing that. You'd think he would stop using Twitter for that purpose, especially as he wants to own it. But he doesn't seem to be able to stop himself.

He certainly is smart enough to understand what will happen in the market with those tweets. Which raises the question of whether he wants to own Twitter to preserve that ability for himself. Maybe he saw the Twitter restrictions as potentially threatening his use of it for this purpose.

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

Hasn't he already breached rules by buying a big stake in Twitter without disclosing it at the appropriate time ?

lightsaber wrote:

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

Yeah, I have to think the SEC is watching the whole thing with some trepidation. It just gets more and more strange which each development. If it involved just a fight between Musk and the Twitter board, that would be one thing. But it obviously has affected market value of many unrelated stocks.

I think Musk is a new phenomenon, essentially by exploiting social media within the business world, similar to how Trump was a new phenomenon by exploiting social media in the political world. We don't really have rules for that yet.

Avatar2go wrote:

I think Musk is a new phenomenon, essentially by exploiting social media within the business world, similar to how Trump was a new phenomenon by exploiting social media in the political world. We don't really have rules for that yet.

He is definitely well aware of that aspect too.

He has made, if I understand correctly three major errors in the course of this bid:

1. bought many shares and with the intention of buying more without following proper procedures.

2 He incorrectly submitted information that he was a passive buyer, not an active buyer

3 He made these offers to buyout Twitter without asking for the information he should have. I don't know how that intertwines with signing a confidentiality agreement which he did not. He is now claiming the 'bot' numbers are higher than Twitter's public statements, along with his own guess as to the number. His public statements seem to greatly reduce his credibility and weaken his legal bargaining position.

My opinion is that he should not have been tweeting his thoughts on this buyout without having a top notch corporate attorney vetting everything. He has opened himself to certain accusations of fraud and bad faith - needlessly. He seems to want to be tweeter in chief.

Avatar2go wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

Yeah, I have to think the SEC is watching the whole thing with some trepidation. It just gets more and more strange which each development. If it involved just a fight between Musk and the Twitter board, that would be one thing. But it obviously has affected market value of many unrelated stocks.

I think Musk is a new phenomenon, essentially by exploiting social media within the business world, similar to how Trump was a new phenomenon by exploiting social media in the political world. We don't really have rules for that yet.

Is it common for business chiefs to request the SEC to investigate their own deal? And would the SEC even have a way of investigating the "bots" at Twitter? Plus doesn't Elon hate the SEC anyway? The whole thing seems like such a dumb sh!t show

MaverickM11 wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

Yeah, I have to think the SEC is watching the whole thing with some trepidation. It just gets more and more strange which each development. If it involved just a fight between Musk and the Twitter board, that would be one thing. But it obviously has affected market value of many unrelated stocks.

I think Musk is a new phenomenon, essentially by exploiting social media within the business world, similar to how Trump was a new phenomenon by exploiting social media in the political world. We don't really have rules for that yet.

Is it common for business chiefs to request the SEC to investigate their own deal? And would the SEC even have a way of investigating the "bots" at Twitter? Plus doesn't Elon hate the SEC anyway? The whole thing seems like such a dumb sh!t show

It's turning into an Elon moment. First he says it's not about the money, now it apparently is? And SEC is a retaliatory witch hunt organization out to get him, but now apparently it's ok to go after Twitter?

At some point the narrative is no longer credible. The market seems to think so too, based on how it has discounted Twitter share price.

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

0.000125% of his fortune. But sure, tell me inequality isn't a problem.

lightsaber wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

The thing about Musk is that he can use Twitter as an indirect control loop for his interests. Today he signaled that he would pause the acquisition, which drove the Twitter stock price down, and the Tesla price up. When it got to the level he wanted, he tweeted again that he still intended to go through with the acquisition, which halted the slide.

If he now lowers his bid for Twitter, it will be based on the price & slide that he himself determined. I don't think that would escape the notice of the SEC. Nor would it be his first time doing that. You'd think he would stop using Twitter for that purpose, especially as he wants to own it. But he doesn't seem to be able to stop himself.

He certainly is smart enough to understand what will happen in the market with those tweets. Which raises the question of whether he wants to own Twitter to preserve that ability for himself. Maybe he saw the Twitter restrictions as potentially threatening his use of it for this purpose.

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

5% users mean 1 in 20.
For one, it definitely make sense that less than 1 users out of every 20 you saw are bots
But on the other hand, 1 bot out of 20 user is actually a very high number. Like this particular thread discussing Musk buying Twitter have maybe 40-60 users participating in the discussion, 5% would mean 2 or 3 users are bots. And bots tend to be more active than human users since they are bots they don't need a human brain to think before performing and engaging in every actions and they don't have to do other things in life either. So the result would be small yet disrupting amount of content being read by users are made by bots.

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Avatar2go wrote:

The thing about Musk is that he can use Twitter as an indirect control loop for his interests. Today he signaled that he would pause the acquisition, which drove the Twitter stock price down, and the Tesla price up. When it got to the level he wanted, he tweeted again that he still intended to go through with the acquisition, which halted the slide.

If he now lowers his bid for Twitter, it will be based on the price & slide that he himself determined. I don't think that would escape the notice of the SEC. Nor would it be his first time doing that. You'd think he would stop using Twitter for that purpose, especially as he wants to own it. But he doesn't seem to be able to stop himself.

He certainly is smart enough to understand what will happen in the market with those tweets. Which raises the question of whether he wants to own Twitter to preserve that ability for himself. Maybe he saw the Twitter restrictions as potentially threatening his use of it for this purpose.

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

5% users mean 1 in 20.
For one, it definitely make sense that less than 1 users out of every 20 you saw are bots
But on the other hand, 1 bot out of 20 user is actually a very high number. Like this particular thread discussing Musk buying Twitter have maybe 40-60 users participating in the discussion, 5% would mean 2 or 3 users are bots. And bots tend to be more active than human users since they are bots they don't need a human brain to think before performing and engaging in every actions and they don't have to do other things in life either. So the result would be small yet disrupting amount of content being read by users are made by bots.

I just wonder, though....

I probably had a Twitter account. I don't know if it is active. I never used it much. Just commented on a few things. I didn't care for it, so I just stopped. I wonder if my account counted as a bot?

Newark727 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

0.000125% of his fortune. But sure, tell me inequality isn't a problem.

Worse than that on the HR end. Essentially ‘ya our CEO broke the law but here’s a severance package’

seb146 wrote:

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

The SEC needs to investigate. Both sides. If bots aren't a problem, good. If a problem...
https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-t ... 935698/amp

Lightsaber

5% users mean 1 in 20.
For one, it definitely make sense that less than 1 users out of every 20 you saw are bots
But on the other hand, 1 bot out of 20 user is actually a very high number. Like this particular thread discussing Musk buying Twitter have maybe 40-60 users participating in the discussion, 5% would mean 2 or 3 users are bots. And bots tend to be more active than human users since they are bots they don't need a human brain to think before performing and engaging in every actions and they don't have to do other things in life either. So the result would be small yet disrupting amount of content being read by users are made by bots.

I just wonder, though....

I probably had a Twitter account. I don't know if it is active. I never used it much. Just commented on a few things. I didn't care for it, so I just stopped. I wonder if my account counted as a bot?

I don't think so.
First of all, users of these social network are typically counted according to metrics like Daily Active User or Monthly Active User. So if you aren't active for that particular day or month, then your account outright wouldn't be counted into the number of user at all. And the presented data is usually the average number across multiple days.

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

Wow, $100k per inch!

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

Skeletons? its pretty obvious whats going on. You can be the wealthiest man, or even the President of the US, but if you go against the powerful connected interests of the world, their goal is to take you down.

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

The going rate was around $130k just a few years ago...
That inflation really is insane.

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

Skeletons? its pretty obvious whats going on. You can be the wealthiest man, or even the President of the US, but if you go against the powerful connected interests of the world, their goal is to take you down.

Here's a novel idea: how about just not sexually assaulting women?

AirWorthy99 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Not for nothing, but skeletons starting to emerge from Elon’s closet. He paid a SpaceX employee $250K to stay quiet about exposing himself to her on the company jet in 2016.

https://www.engadget.com/elon-musk-spac ... 58875.html

Skeletons? its pretty obvious whats going on. You can be the wealthiest man, or even the President of the US, but if you go against the powerful connected interests of the world, their goal is to take you down.

Um no, HR and corporate counsel do not recommend paying out 4 years' salary, even within your own company, if there is no merit to the claim. She probably told others contemporaneously, that came out in internal investigation, Musk may have even copped to it - hence the payment and NDA.

It's just plain idiotic to mess with employees. He should have done what old money always used to do and stick to escorts.

Funny how 'free speech warriors' are so keen to hand out NDA's.
Could it be that the only people who really think, not just concerning Musk here by any means, that these powerful people really believe in free speech, are those dopey enough to be duped them and their BS?
Or just jealous old boomers who never could and never will now have that kind of power and resource but of course, as seen on this and other threads, it's the victims fault, be they employees or women in general. who certain people on here clearly have a major problem with.
You never grew out of your early teens, did you?

Well, that didn't take long, When Elon was seen as chief Climate Change Spokesman, he could walk on water. Say some mean things about he left and now his a sex predictor. So predictable.

william wrote:

Well, that didn't take long, When Elon was seen as chief Climate Change Spokesman, he could walk on water.

LOL if you thought of him this way after he starting hyping cryptocurrency

william wrote:

Well, that didn't take long, When Elon was seen as chief Climate Change Spokesman, he could walk on water. Say some mean things about he left and now his a sex predictor. So predictable.

He's practically Jesus Christ Himself. I can't believe the eViL wOkE liBeRalz made SpaceX pay $250K for a harassment claim against him 4 years ago. They must have known this moment would come when Musk would say mean things about him!

MaverickM11 wrote:

brain rot

This pretty much sums it up. To quote George Carlin: "the world is a freak show, but in America you get a front row seat".

We're being literally pushed up against the stage at this point.

william wrote:

Well, that didn't take long, When Elon was seen as chief Climate Change Spokesman, he could walk on water. Say some mean things about he left and now his a sex predictor. So predictable.

Who thought that? Granted fan boys who will hear no wrong against him do exist. That does not sound like most people though.
His 'issues' are quite well known, at least to those remotely paying attention to the news in general really.
Such as his notorious slurs against someone who did a rescue he couldn't, I remember that being in the news, discussed on here.
Maybe you have not being paying attention, maybe most people are not so binary in their views, are you?

I greatly admire him for SpaceX, (but then a team once employed by Nazi Germany played a major role in the US Space program).
It's something I have always followed, it's success should speak for itself, however his ultimate goal will be, as he has said to be fair, very challenging. I would say I'd not bet against him getting there, however if he is so distracted with all this twitter nonsense, maybe not.

Don't have the knowledge about the industry to judge Tesla as a product, as a market changer, the informed opinion I've seen does think he has helped to popularize electric cars.
Though I've seen coverage of serious problems with racism tolerated in the car plants and a poor employee safety culture.

His other mass transport projects seem, something I am somewhat knowledgeable about, vaporware and more for PR as far as I can tell.

GDB wrote:

william wrote:

Well, that didn't take long, When Elon was seen as chief Climate Change Spokesman, he could walk on water. Say some mean things about he left and now his a sex predictor. So predictable.

Who thought that? Granted fan boys who will hear no wrong against him do exist. That does not sound like most people though.
His 'issues' are quite well known, at least to those remotely paying attention to the news in general really.
Such as his notorious slurs against someone who did a rescue he couldn't,

That was the nanosecond I knew he was a truly horrible person. And at this rate, probably just projecting.

william wrote:

Well, that didn't take long, When Elon was seen as chief Climate Change Spokesman, he could walk on water. Say some mean things about he left and now his a sex predictor. So predictable.

What in the world is a sex predictor? Now there is a future product worth billion$!! Sure beats asking the 8-ball before a date.