Elon Musk now owns 9.2% of twitter...update.. will soon be the sole owner as Board of Directors accepts his purchase offer

[Brovane]

Anyways did we ever find out which banned accounts Elon reactivated once he took ownership a couple days ago?

That is the thing he didn't take ownership a couple of days ago. Shareholders haven't even voted to accept the buyout, only the board did. So I have no idea why all these people are claiming that Musk already changed a bunch of stuff at Twitter.

 

[dank69]

That is the thing he didn't take ownership a couple of days ago. Shareholders haven't even voted to accept the buyout, only the board did. So I have no idea why all these people are claiming that Musk already changed a bunch of stuff at Twitter.

Fake news.

 

[senseamp]

It's a risky bet, but some group might consider building a mainstream Twitter alternative, now that Twitter will be taking a hard alt-right turn.

The platform needs to be very technically polished but that isn't enough to overcome the entrenched network effect.

So it's even more important, that you also focus on winning a large number of high profile users, like go after Lady Gaga (and thus her 80 Million plus followers). It seems like a platform that allows open season on anyone different, won't be compatible with Gaga and her monsters. Get many other musicians and mainstream figures onside, you might be able to start an avalanche that leaves Twitter as an alt-right shell (and Musk with multi-billion hole in his wallet). Start quiet negotiations now, and stay in stealth until the Twitter deal closes.

Even with Musk driving people away from Twitter, this would be a very difficult challenge, but it's the best possible response.

In many parts of the world, Telegram is a bigger deal than Twitter.

 

[Heartbreaker]

Guys he's fucking with you, showing @dphantom for the moron he is.

Anyways did we ever find out which banned accounts Elon reactivated once he took ownership a couple days ago?

AFAICT: None.

Right Wingers are just flocking to the site in anticipation of the Musk Free for all.

For instance, Tucker Carlson is back, and he strongly implies Musk let him back on, but in reality, TC just finally deleted his offensive tweet and was allowed back, nothing to do with Musk controlling Twitter, except that TC wants to be part of the story so came back, by doing the thing he said he never would (deleting that tweet).

Tucker Carlson Deletes Tweet That Got Him Suspended, Pretends Elon Musk Restored His Account

Tucker Carlson's show appears to have misled his viewers about why he is back on Twitter after a month-long suspension, which implied was ended by Elon Musk.

www.mediaite.com

 

[Pens1566]

AFAICT: None.

Right Wingers are just flocking to the site in anticipation of the Musk Free for all.

For instance, Tucker Carlson is back, and he strongly implies Musk let him back on, but in reality, TC just finally deleted his offensive tweet and was allowed back, nothing to do with Musk controlling Twitter, except that TC wants to be part of the story so came back, by doing the thing he said he never would (deleting that tweet).

Tucker Carlson Deletes Tweet That Got Him Suspended, Pretends Elon Musk Restored His Account

Tucker Carlson's show appears to have misled his viewers about why he is back on Twitter after a month-long suspension, which implied was ended by Elon Musk.

www.mediaite.com

Yeah, this is accurate. There was some actual info released yesterday (?) from twitter that the swings in follower counts were from people deleting/deactivating or coming back on their own in anticipation.

 

[nOOky]

Hmmm maybe this will kill Truth Social? I've not been on that one, can any of our members tell us how Truth Social is doing upon the news about Twitter? I know we have to have a few from here on there.

 

[iRONic]

Hmmm maybe this will kill Truth Social? I've not been on that one, can any of our members tell us how Truth Social is doing upon the news about Twitter? I know we have to have a few from here on there.

See Donny Dumbfuck announce his platform name

on YT at the 5:00 minute mark.

 

[dank69]

Hmmm maybe this will kill Truth Social? I've not been on that one, can any of our members tell us how Truth Social is doing upon the news about Twitter? I know we have to have a few from here on there.

Nunes was on Fox the other day begging them to promote it more so, yeah.

 

[hal2kilo]

See Donny Dumbfuck announce his platform name

on YT at the 5:00 minute mark.

Yea, bu, but Joe Biden.

 

[digiram]

What will all the magas be able to say on Twitter that they can’t say now once musk takes over? You’re free to say whatever you want, but not free from consequences of saying stupid crap. Just free to not get banned I suppose. Never used Twitter myself.

 

[herm0016]

I find all the butt hurt about him being a rich guy buying twitter and how its terrible for the country and the government should step in are the same ones that said "it's a private business that can ban whoever they want" is very funny.

 

[dank69]

I find all the butt hurt about him being a rich guy buying twitter and how its terrible for the country and the government should step in are the same ones that said "it's a private business that can ban whoever they want" is very funny.

Like Shapiro?

 

[herm0016]

Like Shapiro?

anyone. all of them. nice bait though.

 

[Brovane]

Like Shapiro?

Like Robert Reich.

 

[Heartbreaker]

I find all the butt hurt about him being a rich guy buying twitter and how its terrible for the country and the government should step in are the same ones that said "it's a private business that can ban whoever they want" is very funny.

Actually you seem to be constructing a straw man there.

The same people that said before, that private business can moderate as they see fit, are still saying that.

We are unhappy with an Asshat like Musk in sole control of media platform, but we aren't asking for the government to control speech.

 

[1prophet]

Thanks to Musk we finally get our very own Ministry of Truth headed by the Democrat version of Dolores Umbridge.

Biden's plan to set up 'truth ministry' gets panned from his opponents

USA's Department of Home Security (DHS) is setting up a new Disinformation Governance Board, reported Politico Playbook. The board is being set up to coordinate countering misinformation related to homeland security. It will reportedly focus 'specifically' on irregular migration and Russia. The...

www.wionews.com

Biden sets up a new 'Disinformation Governance Board' under DHS

Biden set up a new board to combat disinformation related to homeland security - headed by a woman who questioned the validity of Hunter's laptop and criticized free speech on social media.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[herm0016]

Actually you seem to constructing a straw man there.

The same people that said private business can moderate as they see fit, are still saying that.

We are unhappy with an Asshat like Musk in sole control of media platform, but we aren't asking for the government to control speech.

Oh not everyone.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Zorba]

Tesla stock is down almost 18% in the past 5-days. Based on the loans he took out with Tesla stock as collateral he would face a Margin call once the stock starts dipping below $600.

I wonder what the penalty is that he faces if he walks away from the deal at this point? Usually in these types of deals there is some type of penalty if the purchasing party decides to walk away before the deal is closed. I am glad I ejected at $1230 last November with most of my Tesla shares. This has got to be brutal for anyone that has Tesla stock. Tesla had record earnings in Q1 and now this crap.

I've heard it's a $1B breakup fee.

 

[kt]

Like Robert Reich.

View attachment 60815

You're just grasping at straws now and can't even get enough straws to build your strawman argument.

 

[dank69]

Like Robert Reich.

View attachment 60815

That is not a call for government intervention.

 

[dank69]

anyone. all of them. nice bait though.

Not meant to be bait. It's a counterpoint. I offered an example of someone on the right doing what you're claiming people on the left are doing. I am not aware of any prominent leftists calling for government intervention.

 

[Zorba]

I find all the butt hurt about him being a rich guy buying twitter and how its terrible for the country and the government should step in are the same ones that said "it's a private business that can ban whoever they want" is very funny.

Who here has said the government should block it? Or did you just make up another strawman?

 

[Brovane]

Not meant to be bait. It's a counterpoint. I offered an example of someone on the right doing what you're claiming people on the left are doing. I am not aware of any prominent leftists calling for government intervention.

Former President Obama gave a Speech at Stanford last week arguing for government regulation of social media.

https://barackobama.medium.com/my-remarks-on-disinformation-at-stanford-7d7af7ba28af

And by the way, I believe and I’ve seen that regulation and innovation are not mutually exclusive. Here in the United States, we have a long history of regulating new technologies in the name of public safety, from cars and airplanes to prescription drugs to appliances. And while companies initially always complain that the rules are going to stifle innovation and destroy the industry, the truth is, is that a good regulatory environment usually ends up spurring innovation because it raises the bar on safety and quality.

And it turns out that innovation can meet that higher bar. And if consumers trust that new technology is doing right by them and is safe, they’re more likely to use it. And if properly structured, regulation can promote competition and keep incumbents from freezing out new innovators.

A regulatory structure, a smart one, needs to be in place, designed in consultation with tech companies, and experts and communities that are affected, including communities of color and others that sometimes are not well represented here in Silicon Valley, that will allow these companies to operate effectively while also slowing the spread of harmful content. In some cases, industry standards may replace or substitute for regulation, but regulation has to be part of the answer.

 

[dank69]

Former President Obama gave a Speech at Stanford last week arguing for government regulation of social media.

https://barackobama.medium.com/my-remarks-on-disinformation-at-stanford-7d7af7ba28af

And by the way, I believe and I’ve seen that regulation and innovation are not mutually exclusive. Here in the United States, we have a long history of regulating new technologies in the name of public safety, from cars and airplanes to prescription drugs to appliances. And while companies initially always complain that the rules are going to stifle innovation and destroy the industry, the truth is, is that a good regulatory environment usually ends up spurring innovation because it raises the bar on safety and quality.

And it turns out that innovation can meet that higher bar. And if consumers trust that new technology is doing right by them and is safe, they’re more likely to use it. And if properly structured, regulation can promote competition and keep incumbents from freezing out new innovators.

A regulatory structure, a smart one, needs to be in place, designed in consultation with tech companies, and experts and communities that are affected, including communities of color and others that sometimes are not well represented here in Silicon Valley, that will allow these companies to operate effectively while also slowing the spread of harmful content. In some cases, industry standards may replace or substitute for regulation, but regulation has to be part of the answer.

How is that a call for the government to step in and prevent Musk from acquiring Twitter? Regulating an industry can mean anything. It doesn't necessarily mean limiting free speech. There are already limits to what you can post online.

 

[Zorba]

Former President Obama gave a Speech at Stanford last week arguing for exactly that, government to control speech on social media.

https://barackobama.medium.com/my-remarks-on-disinformation-at-stanford-7d7af7ba28af

And by the way, I believe and I’ve seen that regulation and innovation are not mutually exclusive. Here in the United States, we have a long history of regulating new technologies in the name of public safety, from cars and airplanes to prescription drugs to appliances. And while companies initially always complain that the rules are going to stifle innovation and destroy the industry, the truth is, is that a good regulatory environment usually ends up spurring innovation because it raises the bar on safety and quality.

And it turns out that innovation can meet that higher bar. And if consumers trust that new technology is doing right by them and is safe, they’re more likely to use it. And if properly structured, regulation can promote competition and keep incumbents from freezing out new innovators.

A regulatory structure, a smart one, needs to be in place, designed in consultation with tech companies, and experts and communities that are affected, including communities of color and others that sometimes are not well represented here in Silicon Valley, that will allow these companies to operate effectively while also slowing the spread of harmful content. In some cases, industry standards may replace or substitute for regulation, but regulation has to be part of the answer.

And he's right. Still literally nothing about block Musk or controlling speech. More about Section 230 reform. Which considering Instagram is a massive contributor to teenage girl suicide, I think it's time to have some discussion about whether they should have more regulations.