https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/14/elon-mu ... mpany.html

Interesting to watch. A 20% premium, what will the Board decide? What is sad, pathetic, predictable or fascinating are both sides of the political spectrum are spinning already.

This is just another pump and dump for him.

It's the billionaires' world; we just live in it...

Alternative Headline (courtesy of the tweet machine) - Twitter being bought by a thin-skinned, pro-Covid, Bitcoin-pumping convoy-praising shitposting weirdo under federal investigation, whose big moment on Twitter was calling a Thai cave diver a pedo because he objected to the weirdo’s bullshit

Since I think Twitter is a cesspool for the elites I really don't mind Elon Musk trying to cause trouble and take it over.
The only time I really go on it is when there is things like a political debate and its good for sports.

It amuses me and that's about it and I will kick back with the popcorn.

skyservice_330 wrote:

Alternative Headline (courtesy of the tweet machine) - Twitter being bought by a thin-skinned, pro-Covid, Bitcoin-pumping convoy-praising shitposting weirdo under federal investigation, whose big moment on Twitter was calling a Thai cave diver a pedo because he objected to the weirdo’s bullshit

I have to admit, Bruce Arthur nailed it with this.

LabQuest wrote:

This is just another pump and dump for him.

How, if they accept his offer?

White man pays $43B to say the N word.

Is that kid still tracking his jet on twitter?

skyservice_330 wrote:

Alternative Headline (courtesy of the tweet machine) - Twitter being bought by a thin-skinned, pro-Covid, Bitcoin-pumping convoy-praising shitposting weirdo under federal investigation, whose big moment on Twitter was calling a Thai cave diver a pedo because he objected to the weirdo’s bullshit

Ugh I forgot about the Thai diver incident. He really blazed a trail for conservatives labeling everyone pedophiles today.

Elon Musk says he’s ‘not sure’ he’ll be able to buy Twitter after $43 billion bid, teases a plan B
http://cnbc.com/2022/04/14/elon-musk-no ... itter.html

MaverickM11 wrote:

Elon Musk says he’s ‘not sure’ he’ll be able to buy Twitter after $43 billion bid, teases a plan B
http://cnbc.com/2022/04/14/elon-musk-no ... itter.html

Perhaps he just wanted to pump the share price and sell the 9-odd% he owns at a nice profit.....
But I'd think the SEC would have something against that à la taking Tesla private?

Another eccentric guy with a big ego and an agenda. Elon Musk wants to be bigger than a car company (honestly how many car company CEOs can the average person on the street identify?). Fine, whatever. At least he can't run for POTUS.

The ironic part is he has admitted to having Asperger’s syndrome, which clearly has an effect on social skills. Yet, he wants to buy a massive social media platform. I can’t see where this could go wrong.

Don't have a Twatter account and don't read Tweets so I could really careless who buys it or who posts there or who doesn't

He's against "censorship" and would probably stop the moderating process.

If that happens, I can see Twitter getting banned in my country;

Aesma wrote:

He's against "censorship" and would probably stop the moderating process.

If that happens, I can see Twitter getting banned in my country;

China? Russia? North Korea?

No, France. In fact the GAFAM are already regularly put on the spot for refusing, or being too slow, to censor cyberstalking, even of kids. Or of the "first lady"...

Now the EU has given itself, under French leadership, new powers to rein in these companies, especially regarding their anticompetitive practices, and Macron just talked about the possibility of dismantling them.

Aesma wrote:

No, France. In fact the GAFAM are already regularly put on the spot for refusing, or being too slow, to censor cyberstalking, even of kids. Or of the "first lady"...

Now the EU has given itself, under French leadership, new powers to rein in these companies, especially regarding their anticompetitive practices, and Macron just talked about the possibility of dismantling them.

Interesting point of order - GAMAM often claim their content volume is simply too high to catch everything. But you have to question that claim given their level of infrastructure development and talent onboard. Surely the last few years would have provided enough time to develop more robust systems, no?

Been more than amused today watching the extreme online types utterly melting down trying to reconcile their “Of course Twitter can ban Trump, they’re a private company” takes with Musk buying Twitter being the death of democracy.

I can't wait for Twitter stock to tank. Maybe that is why he is doing it. Everyone sells their shares, delete their accounts, gives up, he buys it and turns it into yet another streaming service. Just what we need...

flyguy89 wrote:

Been more than amused today watching the extreme online types utterly melting down trying to reconcile their “Of course Twitter can ban Trump, they’re a private company” takes with Musk buying Twitter being the death of democracy.

I’m more amused by both sides trying to spin this against their opponents. Both sides should go have a cold shower.

[twoid][/twoid]

cpd wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

Been more than amused today watching the extreme online types utterly melting down trying to reconcile their “Of course Twitter can ban Trump, they’re a private company” takes with Musk buying Twitter being the death of democracy.

I’m more amused by both sides trying to spin this against their opponents. Both sides should go have a cold shower.

Ditto, although one particular very prominent progressive tweeter’s apoplectic breakdown seemed to be cluttering my newsfeed today…but yes plenty of amusement to be had from the reaction of either side.

[quote="seb146"]I can't wait for Twitter stock to tank. Maybe that is why he is doing it. Everyone sells their shares, delete their accounts, gives up, he buys it and turns it into yet another streaming service. Just what we need...[/quote]

Yeah, the said the same thing about Tesla stock a few years ago.

lightsaber wrote:

He'll give the market what it wants. Twitter has far more potential than it currently realizes.

How so? Honestly no clue what the upside is here. More advertising? Pay for tweets?

flyguy89 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

cpd wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

Been more than amused today watching the extreme online types utterly melting down trying to reconcile their “Of course Twitter can ban Trump, they’re a private company” takes with Musk buying Twitter being the death of democracy.

I’m more amused by both sides trying to spin this against their opponents. Both sides should go have a cold shower.

Ditto, although one particular very prominent progressive tweeter’s apoplectic breakdown seemed to be cluttering my newsfeed today…but yes plenty of amusement to be had from the reaction of either side.

True, but having grown up with the ACLU fighting for free speech, its weird seeing a certain section of people state, "free speech" is bad.......unless its agrees with theirs.

Twitter’s board adopted a poison pill that makes it hard for Elon Musk to buy a significantly larger stake in the company.

Twitter Moves to Block Elon Musk From Increasing Stake

https://www.wsj.com/articles/twitter-mo ... q3wsZPSgJE

Poison Pill unleashed, not surprising, the reasons will be entertaining to read.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/15/twitter ... mpany.html

"“The Rights Plan will reduce the likelihood that any entity, person or group gains control of Twitter through open market accumulation without paying all shareholders an appropriate control premium or without providing the Board sufficient time to make informed judgments and take actions that are in the best interests of shareholders,” the company said in a press release.

Twitter noted that the rights plan would not prevent the board from accepting an acquisition offer if the board deems it in the best interests of the company and its shareholders"

Because they are waiting for Jeff Bezos? 20% premium is not enough? Can't wait for opening bell Monday.

william wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]

cpd wrote:

I’m more amused by both sides trying to spin this against their opponents. Both sides should go have a cold shower.

Ditto, although one particular very prominent progressive tweeter’s apoplectic breakdown seemed to be cluttering my newsfeed today…but yes plenty of amusement to be had from the reaction of either side.

True, but having grown up with the ACLU fighting for free speech, its weird seeing a certain section of people state, "free speech" is bad.......unless its agrees with theirs.

Free speech is essential, but it isn't the same as being allowed to say anything about anyone, especially not on twitter or FB.

Free speech is not using social media to try to stage a coup.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

william wrote:

flyguy89 wrote:

[twoid][/twoid]
Ditto, although one particular very prominent progressive tweeter’s apoplectic breakdown seemed to be cluttering my newsfeed today…but yes plenty of amusement to be had from the reaction of either side.

True, but having grown up with the ACLU fighting for free speech, its weird seeing a certain section of people state, "free speech" is bad.......unless its agrees with theirs.

Free speech is essential, but it isn't the same as being allowed to say anything about anyone, especially not on twitter or FB.

Free speech is not using social media to try to stage a coup.

Here's the thing.
Go on twitter and look up some middle eastern leaders and see what they were/are saying. About Israel for example.
Just 1 example.
Then let me know what's wrong with the whole picture.

Also as a fresh example plenty of russian propaganda / straight up lies.
Twitter "limits" (whatever that means) 300 gov accounts but only since APR 4th.

Twitter policy is not written in stone. It's a fluid line that moves as far as interests go.

So, twitter has cancelled right wing speech so this is why Republicans want Musk to take over? To own the libs?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/1 ... r-00025447
https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/ri ... trump-back

seb146 wrote:

So, twitter has cancelled right wing speech so this is why Republicans want Musk to take over? To own the libs?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/1 ... r-00025447
https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/ri ... trump-back

I don't know about that but there is a lot of hypocrisy with Twitter's "moderation". What is this fear among a certain political group about a change in moderation? Its half programmed canned answers, pretty easy to spot the think tanks answers from either political side.

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronaviru ... ikely-bots

And to be fair, this talking point from the right has been debunked too about Twitter.

https://factcheck.thedispatch.com/p/fac ... witter?s=r

Putin does not have a Twitter account..........sort of.

william wrote:

seb146 wrote:

So, twitter has cancelled right wing speech so this is why Republicans want Musk to take over? To own the libs?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/1 ... r-00025447
https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/ri ... trump-back

I don't know about that but there is a lot of hypocrisy with Twitter's "moderation". What is this fear among a certain political group about a change in moderation? Its half programmed canned answers, pretty easy to spot the think tanks answers from either political side.

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronaviru ... ikely-bots

And to be fair, this talking point from the right has been debunked too about Twitter.

https://factcheck.thedispatch.com/p/fac ... witter?s=r

Putin does not have a Twitter account..........sort of.

Is the theory that less moderation = more engagement, ie more revenue?

MaverickM11 wrote:

william wrote:

seb146 wrote:

So, twitter has cancelled right wing speech so this is why Republicans want Musk to take over? To own the libs?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/1 ... r-00025447
https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/ri ... trump-back

I don't know about that but there is a lot of hypocrisy with Twitter's "moderation". What is this fear among a certain political group about a change in moderation? Its half programmed canned answers, pretty easy to spot the think tanks answers from either political side.

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronaviru ... ikely-bots

And to be fair, this talking point from the right has been debunked too about Twitter.

https://factcheck.thedispatch.com/p/fac ... witter?s=r

Putin does not have a Twitter account..........sort of.

Is the theory that less moderation = more engagement, ie more revenue?

Could be. Or more even keep moderation. Since China banned them not exactly a lot new markets for new eyeballs, why chase off a part o the customer base.

For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less.

The above got deleted but was a follow-on to a post that mentioned HWSNBN which apparently caused someone to run to the teacher.

In India, the RW made a copy of Twitter, called it Khoo or something similar. They had copied everything modifying a bit here and there so it may look 'different'. I was expecting some centrists to migrate over to the new service. But that idea failed miserably and most of them who had left Twitter came back and deleted the messages stating that they are gone forever on Twitter or something and later they came crawling back to Twitter.

pune wrote:

In India, the RW made a copy of Twitter, called it Khoo or something similar. They had copied everything modifying a bit here and there so it may look 'different'. I was expecting some centrists to migrate over to the new service. But that idea failed miserably and most of them who had left Twitter came back and deleted the messages stating that they are gone forever on Twitter or something and later they came crawling back to Twitter.

There is already open infrastructure and software that allow easy implementation of Twitter alternatives. Called Mastodon. It's designed in a way even individuals can easily use it.

PixelPilot wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

william wrote:

True, but having grown up with the ACLU fighting for free speech, its weird seeing a certain section of people state, "free speech" is bad.......unless its agrees with theirs.

Free speech is essential, but it isn't the same as being allowed to say anything about anyone, especially not on twitter or FB.

Free speech is not using social media to try to stage a coup.

Here's the thing.
Go on twitter and look up some middle eastern leaders and see what they were/are saying. About Israel for example.
Just 1 example.
Then let me know what's wrong with the whole picture.

Also as a fresh example plenty of russian propaganda / straight up lies.
Twitter "limits" (whatever that means) 300 gov accounts but only since APR 4th.

Twitter policy is not written in stone. It's a fluid line that moves as far as interests go.

Even when it come to speech that directly call for mass killing of many human, or promotion and advocation of war crimes and use of BCN weapons and terrorism, I still think that social media is an important open platform to let people see what's being said and occurred all around them, even for things that better off never exists in the world. Only this way others can visibly see the threat and react to it. And that's probably also a reason why messages about the war are circulated via like Telegram, Twitter, Tiktok, and other anonymous online platforms, instead of some other even more strictly moderated services like Facebook.
What is needed is to take down the echo chambar inside social network content ranking system and let messages from different groups spread more easily across the entire platform, so that different people can see and react to same type of messages, instead of just what their friends with similar political and social orientation posts. Instead of more moderation and further grouping people into their own comfort zone of messages. But it will probably be very difficult since fewer segregation go against the reason why social networks are attractive to their users and earn view for advertisers that allow the platform to not lost money.

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Free speech is not using social media to try to stage a coup.

That’s exactly what bloodthirsty dictators of places like Libya and Bahrain must have said during the Arab Spring.

PPVRA wrote:

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:

Free speech is not using social media to try to stage a coup.

That’s exactly what bloodthirsty dictators of places like Libya and Bahrain must have said during the Arab Spring.

They aren't western democracies.

Bricktop wrote:

For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less.

I would disagree. Who is moderating? What are they looking for? There are grey areas and some moderators go crazy while others ignore things.

Vaccine discussions, voting rights, and nudity are three right off where there are grey areas. If people don't want to get vaccinated or vote, fine. Don't. But, don't ban and moderate people out of existence if they demand no one gets vaccines or vote. Nudity? See: Janet Jackson.

There does need to be moderation. No doubt. Blocking and reporting things like violent attempts to overthrow the government or kidnapping elected officials.

Who would’ve thought Elon Musk was this hot for Trump. I knew he liked the guy but obviously he sees something in him. The way Trump turns on the most random insecure men is something I will never be able to understand.

santi319 wrote:

Who would’ve thought Elon Musk was this hot for Trump. I knew he liked the guy but obviously he sees something in him. The way Trump turns on the most random insecure men is something I will never be able to understand.

Is he though? Maybe I'm oblivious but I don't find Elon thinking really...anything about him.

When will people learn that Musk is as much of a silver spoon, fail up piece of garbage as Trump?

N1120A wrote:

When will people learn that Musk is as much of a silver spoon, fail up piece of garbage as Trump?

This. Ask 10 people at SpaceX what they think of Musk, you'll get 10 very different answers.

Aaron747 wrote:

N1120A wrote:

When will people learn that Musk is as much of a silver spoon, fail up piece of garbage as Trump?

This. Ask 10 people at SpaceX what they think of Musk, you'll get 10 very different answers.

Of course. The guy is a personality cult. What John Oliver described in Trump as a $h!tty lifestyle brand.

What a change in attitude.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/25/tech/elo ... index.html
Twitter reportedly nearing deal to sell itself to Elon Musk
"
In the days following Musk's bid, Twitter's board put in place a so-called poison pill that would make it more difficult for Musk to acquire the company without its approval. There were also questions about whether the company would try to find another buyer.
However, CFRA senior equity analyst Angelo Zino said Monday that Twitter's board more seriously considering Musk's offer may have come "from the Board's realization that an alternative bid from a 'white knight' may be difficult to come by, especially following the decline in asset prices from social media companies in recent weeks/months.""

william wrote:

What a change in attitude.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/25/tech/elo ... index.html
Twitter reportedly nearing deal to sell itself to Elon Musk
"
In the days following Musk's bid, Twitter's board put in place a so-called poison pill that would make it more difficult for Musk to acquire the company without its approval. There were also questions about whether the company would try to find another buyer.
However, CFRA senior equity analyst Angelo Zino said Monday that Twitter's board more seriously considering Musk's offer may have come "from the Board's realization that an alternative bid from a 'white knight' may be difficult to come by, especially following the decline in asset prices from social media companies in recent weeks/months.""

It is a good deal financially. I'm just surprised that there was no more opposition to this.
Money talks. I bet majority of shareholder couldn't care less what kind of content goes in there as long as $$ check out.

Bricktop wrote:

For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less.

I'd ask you and Max Boot the same question...what is the difference between "censorship" and "content moderation?"

N1120A wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

N1120A wrote:

When will people learn that Musk is as much of a silver spoon, fail up piece of garbage as Trump?

This. Ask 10 people at SpaceX what they think of Musk, you'll get 10 very different answers.

Of course. The guy is a personality cult. What John Oliver described in Trump as a $h!tty lifestyle brand.

SpaceX/Starlink has been more successful than Boeing in the last decade, true or false?

FlapOperator wrote:

Bricktop wrote:

For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less.

I'd ask you and Max Boot the same question...what is the difference between "censorship" and "content moderation?"

Private ownership vs public mandate would be the simplest way I view that. Private entities are free to moderate their platforms in whatever way they choose. Censorship is a government entity dictating what may and may not be said in either a public or private forum.