The argument was about someone talking about "left leaning", so this is a completely useless red herring.
Has Twitter become better or worse since Musk controlled it?
I’m going by what you quoted and posted.
You were replying to Lexicus, so I recommend reading stuff again in that case
You were replying to Lexicus, so I recommend reading stuff again in that case
He then, same point applies.
Lexicus
Deity
I think you may have forgotten the point, which was originally that people who edit wikipedia tend to be "left-leaning," and I suppose therefore wikipedia is categorically "biased" and untrustworthy. What does the fact that "non-left-leaning" is also a very broad/vague category have to do with this?
I don’t think that makes it untrustworthy, but people should keep this bias in mind if it’s accurate that most people who edit it are left-leaning.
This goes back pages following back and forth arguments here. I was responding to your post specifically. So people to the right of Barrack Obama are idiots?
Estebonrober
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2017
- Messages
- 5,867
If anything they let too much "other side's" takes on these types of websites. A database of encyclopedic like material is always going to favor a "left wing" position on say history or economics because reality leans that way. Barking like a dog about white replacement theory does not change reality that other people have a right to exist and media companies have a right to pander to them as well...
or anthropogenic climate change...or critical race theory...or gender spectrum... an encyclopedia should not tolerate an "opposite" view when that view is jsut ignorance. At that point the encyclopedia is no longer informational, it has become a piece of propaganda.
GoodEnoughForMe
n.m.s.s.
Literally every ban has an explanation. I mean, I’ve clearly laid out the facts here, you’re the one laying out feelings.
Narz
keeping it real
Old management pretty bad, the typical self-owning, regressive, censorous, oligartic, fake progressive types that make the left look bad.
Not really a Musk fan but it is fun to see him say basically nothing & causing such pearl clutching
Berzerker
Deity
Selling paintings or influence in Ukraine? The entanglements between the Bidens and Ukrainian corruption played a role in why we're closer to nuclear war. But this is larger than the typical grift that follows party politics around like a trail of slime left behind a slug. The Democrats and their corporate/deep state allies rigged the election by censoring information and now they're going after Musk because he says he wont let party politics censor Twitter.
We'll find out in November
I didn't need him to see the Democrats censor a news story before the election. At least Palin could actually see Russia, Democrats see Russians everywhere like it was 1950.
You didn't mention any lies, what are they?
What did he switch? He's been consistently pro-vaccine, anti-mandate. Democrats hate him because he criticizes them, its that simple.
Will this $45 billion purchase of Twitter ultimately bankrupt Musk?
SpaceX could go bankrupt if Starship doesn't work.
The government starting up the Ministry of Truth under Homeland Security days after this Twitter purchase seems ominous since the government will also be needed to approve Starship.
Twitter itself is an anchor around his neck financially.
Will it even make enough money to pay the employees (who will no longer load up on stock) and pay the interest on his loans?
Where is the business partner to help assume some risk?
Tons of shares were pledged as collateral to banks to get the loans, but if Tesla goes under $400 the banks get to liquidate with forced selling.
And Tesla itself needs to grow an unbelievable amount to justify their current stock price.
If he is smart, he will declare fraud since Twitter inflated their user numbers and then back out of the deal.
The people who use Twitter love censorship and can't get enough of it.
If he makes them mad and they stop tweeting, he threw away $45 billion.
Look how crazy people are acting already.
The whole deal just doesn't work on any level that I can see.
SpaceX could go bankrupt if Starship doesn't work.
The government starting up the Ministry of Truth under Homeland Security days after this Twitter purchase seems ominous since the government will also be needed to approve Starship.
Twitter itself is an anchor around his neck financially.
Will it even make enough money to pay the employees (who will no longer load up on stock) and pay the interest on his loans?
Where is the business partner to help assume some risk?
Tons of shares were pledged as collateral to banks to get the loans, but if Tesla goes under $400 the banks get to liquidate with forced selling.
And Tesla itself needs to grow an unbelievable amount to justify their current stock price.
If he is smart, he will declare fraud since Twitter inflated their user numbers and then back out of the deal.
The people who use Twitter love censorship and can't get enough of it.
If he makes them mad and they stop tweeting, he threw away $45 billion.
Look how crazy people are acting already.
The whole deal just doesn't work on any level that I can see.
:LOL: Buy Twitter now; use it up through the 2024 election cycle and throw it away for a big profit.
Elon Musk Plans to Take Twitter Public a Few Years After Buyout
Tesla chief says he could stage IPO within three years of acquisition
Elon Musk, who has agreed to take Twitter Inc. TWTR -0.55%▼ private in a $44 billion deal, has told potential investors he could return the social-media company to public ownership after just a few years.
Mr. Musk said he plans to stage an initial public offering of Twitter in as little as three years of buying it, according to people familiar with the matter. The deal is expected to close later this year, subject to conditions including the approval of Twitter shareholders and regulators, the company has said.
Mr. Musk, the Tesla Inc. chief, has been speaking to investors such as private-equity firms, which could help lower the $21 billion he plans to kick in to help pay for the deal. The rest of the money is coming from loans. One firm considering participating is Apollo Global Management Inc., The Wall Street Journal has reported.
Private-equity firms often take companies private with an eye toward fixing them up outside of the spotlight and then taking them public again within five years or so. Mr. Musk’s signal that he plans to do something similar could help assure potential investors that he would work quickly to improve Twitter’s business operations and profitability. He has given few details about his exact plans for the company other than that he wants it to be less censorious in content moderation. At one point he said he doesn’t care whether he makes money on the deal. Mr. Musk has a history of missing his timelines and targets at Tesla, the electric-car company.
Even though Mr. Musk is the world’s richest man, scraping together the funds to seal the deal was no mean feat. Once he managed to do so, Twitter’s expected resistance eased and the two sides quickly agreed to a deal at his original offer price of $54.20 a share.
Elon Musk Plans to Take Twitter Public a Few Years After Buyout
Tesla chief says he could stage IPO within three years of acquisition
Elon Musk, who has agreed to take Twitter Inc. TWTR -0.55%▼ private in a $44 billion deal, has told potential investors he could return the social-media company to public ownership after just a few years.
Mr. Musk said he plans to stage an initial public offering of Twitter in as little as three years of buying it, according to people familiar with the matter. The deal is expected to close later this year, subject to conditions including the approval of Twitter shareholders and regulators, the company has said.
Mr. Musk, the Tesla Inc. chief, has been speaking to investors such as private-equity firms, which could help lower the $21 billion he plans to kick in to help pay for the deal. The rest of the money is coming from loans. One firm considering participating is Apollo Global Management Inc., The Wall Street Journal has reported.
Private-equity firms often take companies private with an eye toward fixing them up outside of the spotlight and then taking them public again within five years or so. Mr. Musk’s signal that he plans to do something similar could help assure potential investors that he would work quickly to improve Twitter’s business operations and profitability. He has given few details about his exact plans for the company other than that he wants it to be less censorious in content moderation. At one point he said he doesn’t care whether he makes money on the deal. Mr. Musk has a history of missing his timelines and targets at Tesla, the electric-car company.
Even though Mr. Musk is the world’s richest man, scraping together the funds to seal the deal was no mean feat. Once he managed to do so, Twitter’s expected resistance eased and the two sides quickly agreed to a deal at his original offer price of $54.20 a share.
amadeus
Serenity now
Like AOL Time Warner? I think Musk is putting his money into a big turkey.
But if he can sell in 2025 for $60 billion.....
Narz
keeping it real
We're not??
amadeus
Serenity now
It’s times like this I look back at the ancient philosophers and wonder what insights they had into how markets, something of which they had no understanding, would work in the future.
“Just because we're stuck in a bubble, doesn't mean we can't cause any trouble.”
— Pauly Shore
— Pauly Shore
amadeus
Serenity now
Musk floated the idea of pay-per-tweet for commercial/government accounts.
Paying $40,000,000,000, which already strikes me as absurd, for a website, then to try and charge users? I don’t see the technical barriers to entry being that rough—AT&T, whoever could easily set up their own thing.
Musk gives me doubts about the individual accumulation of so much wealth, even if it’s just a collective fiction (I’d rather have land, or oil, or a factory than a tech stock.) But then again, I wonder if the “fix” of it wouldn’t be worse than the problem.
Paying $40,000,000,000, which already strikes me as absurd, for a website, then to try and charge users? I don’t see the technical barriers to entry being that rough—AT&T, whoever could easily set up their own thing.
Musk gives me doubts about the individual accumulation of so much wealth, even if it’s just a collective fiction (I’d rather have land, or oil, or a factory than a tech stock.) But then again, I wonder if the “fix” of it wouldn’t be worse than the problem.
I have not read the tread as I do not really use twitter, but I thought it is funny that Musk can call out twitter for using a sample size of 100 and then quoting a figure "less than 5 percent" figure was the latest earnings release, and potentially getting sued for breaking an NDA. The earning release is supposed to be providing information to shareholders, so if it is really misleading then twitter are in trouble. If it is not misleading then there is no issue in Musk calling them out.
Also, what reputable company leaves "Microsoft Word" in the title of their financial statements?
Also, what reputable company leaves "Microsoft Word" in the title of their financial statements?
BBC mussing on why Musk may be making a thing about the bots:
If either party in the Twitter deal walks away now, there's a $1bn termination fee.
That may sound like small change to a multi-billionaire - although Mr Musk maintains he is asset-rich rather than cash-rich - but it perhaps gives him leverage to successfully shave a few billion off the offer price, because $1bn is not small change to Twitter and its shareholders.
Does anyone know what this means? I would have assumed it means that if Musk "walks away" from the deal over the bot count he would have to pay twitter 1bn, but then the next bit does not make sense.That may sound like small change to a multi-billionaire - although Mr Musk maintains he is asset-rich rather than cash-rich - but it perhaps gives him leverage to successfully shave a few billion off the offer price, because $1bn is not small change to Twitter and its shareholders.
