|
Should I step down as head of twitter This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
420 | 4.43% |
| No |
|
69 | 0.73% |
| Goku |
|
9001 | 94.85% |
| Total: | 9490 votes | ||
|
when elon's twitter buyout fails they should give him a new twist on the hellban: elon can still tweet, but every single post is replaced by the dril corncob tweet
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
"Describe in single words, only the good things that come in to your mind about... my penis."
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 14:52
|
|
|
Tesla status: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgZf-auOZxI
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2022 18:23
|
|
|
Zil posted:https://twitter.com/jaspscherer/status/1533892995610730496 lmao that's a consumer protection act who in texas is being harmed by the % of bot accounts on twitter? twitter is free. to be covered it specifically has to be a good or service purchased for money. and I doubt consumer protection can stretch to buying a whole company.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2022 22:18
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:So what happened to Elon's margin loan against Tesla? Everything's been tanking so how close is he to getting liquidated? not at all. he signed a deal that he *could* get a margin loan against tesla. but he hasn't bought twitter yet, so nothing has actually happened. and now it looks like he's not doing margin loans against tesla stock at all, but instead going to private equity.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2022 21:18
|
|
|
Yaldabaoth posted:"Nazi" is not an exaggeration when it comes to pro-apartheid white south africans, especially since the musks ran their emerald mine like a death camp for native africans. lmao every time the emerald mine story gets retold it gets better I got no love for musk but people gotta stop with this poo poo
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
External Organs posted:Can't wait for the shitbeard wars of succession. lol as if he's gonna split his wealth among his kids. when they turn 20 they can have $1000 and go look for a job like he did. ol' musky is definitely gonna have himself cryofrozen and put all his money into a foundation that researches immortality or robo-brains and poo poo. so he can then be unfrozen and live forever. (personally I hope he succeeds because I can think of no better punishment than for him to awaken in the fully automated luxury gay communism space future where his wealth is meaningless and everyone thinks he's a shitbird.)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2022 00:45
|
|
|
Yeah this is not gonna be a years-long thing, other writers who know about this stuff are also saying that it'll be quick. My guess is that the judge enforces specific performance and twitter agrees to a bigger payout than just the $1 billion to let Musk walk away. Twitter is happy, the banks who are regretting signing the finance offers are happy, Musk is mildly humiliated but still super-rich.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2022 22:06
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:did twitter actually tell elon “no” at any point, as the top block in the meme suggests? i thought they just enacted a clause to prevent hostile takeovers, they offered him a board position which fizzled, and then he made an offer to buy the whole place, which the board considered and accepted. was there a point where the board tried to refuse the offer and got overruled somehow? Yeah they told him no, at the start when he was just buying a shitload of twitter shares they wanted nothing to do with him. Even the board position was kinda obligatory -- if someone owns that many shares you kinda have to give them that. But most of it was because he was getting semi-control of the company for cheaper than they felt they could get from a buyout. And the board seat fell through because Elon had already violated securities laws by not disclosing his position. Once Musk got baited into saying "ok I'll just buy twitter" and they called his bluff, that's when they were happy to sell for $54 a share. Bad Purchase posted:banning someone who is intentionally loving with your business is a no-brainer, they don’t need a specific clause because they already have the right to ban anyone for any reason. Banning him might be argued as a violation of the non-disparagement part. I think when Elon was harassing twitter workers he was kinda trying o get them to take action against his account, but twitter didn't bite. also your username / thread content synergy is excellent 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2022 20:08
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Help me cause i aint the legaling type but by waiving his right to inspection of the business and such, Not quite, the due diligence is stuff that happens before you sign the deal. So by waiving due diligence, what that means is "I will take Twitter's word as true about everything they say about the business, rather than get their data and books to run the numbers myself while we're still negotiating". But if hypothetically Twitter was super lying about something, for example the % of bots, that is not covered by waiving due diligence. Twitter in that case would have done a bad thing and be in violation of the merger deal (in which Twitter said "these numbers are truthful" and Elon said "I accept that you're telling the truth"). Twitter would then have to pay the $1 billion to Elon, and also get hosed up by the SEC for lying to their shareholders. Which is all very unlikely. One of the people in this deal has a history of lying to their shareholders, and it ain't Twitter.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2022 01:04
|
|
|
Sophy Wackles posted:Did he waive due diligence though? Sounded like twitter was refusing to provide any of the internal user data until after he agreed to the deal and started making threats. No, he didn't start yelling about twitter's data and bot accounts until after he signed the merger deal. At which point the due diligence thing was already over. Then 3 things happened: 1. Telsa stock took a big dump. 2. Twitter stock didn't go up. 3. The stock market overall was going down. #3 means he way overpayed. He bought at the peak of the market, and agreed to too high of a price because twitter was playing hard to get. He got double-dared into spending $44 billion. #2 means that investors aren't confident he can actually pull it off. And #1 means that people aren't fully jokerfied into the Cult of Musk. They see him putting up a buttload of Tesla stock as collateral and thing "wow maybe this insanely overvalued stock won't go up forever". Telsa's stock runs on Elon hype, right now Elon looks like an idiot who stuck his dick in a beehive because somebody said he couldn't impregnate a bee. Plus it's made the deal more expensive for him and his bankers. Sophy Wackles posted:I would guess twitter has been lying for years about bot and shill type accounts. Here's the thing: anywhere they report on this, they talk MDAU: monetizable daily active users. So the twitter bots that spam every Musk-related tweet with "Elon Musk will double your bitcoin, send money here"? Those aren't MDAUs. They're bots running scripts that don't see ads, or twitter doesn't charge for the ads they load. So twitter is saying less than 5% of the users that they charge advertisers for are bots. Or in other words, "less than 5% of our non-bot users are bots". And that's what Elon will have to prove: that twitter is lying about a thing carefully chosen to be true but meaningless. Klyith fucked around with this message at 03:21 on Jul 13, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2022 03:17
|
|
|
Sydney Bottocks posted:
Maybe he'll be like "gently caress it I'll just never set foot in Delaware again". Then he can continue to be an enormous rear end in a top hat and send poop emojis to the judge when she orders him to buy twitter. Every other billionaire in the world is content to do crimes, get caught, pay a fine that represents 10-50% of what they made doing the crimes, and then go right back to crimes. "Oh dear, you caught me.  " Musk could be the one to go full Lex Luthor on this poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2022 02:22
|
|
|
Nice Tuckpointing! posted:"Der, uh, what's the hangup?" JFK said. Money, they answered. And the rest is history. Give or take eight more years of cool developments. So do you think money has been the hangup for lockheed-martin or boeing any time in the past 10 years though? SpaceX got government funding to develop their rocket. They got $2 billion total for development and flights in the commercial resupply program. (12 flights, meaning $166 mil per flight) Lockheed-Martin charged $190 million per flight of the Atlas V, and put zero of that into development. They get $41 billion dollars per year from the US government. The problem was not money. It was politics, monopoly power, and an insanely greedy and actually evil corporation. Musk could have an app on his phone that randomly lights an occupied tesla on fire every time he loses a game of candy crush, and he still wouldn't be as evil as lockmart.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:do you think ULA isn't spending money on rocket development? before spacex, no, they absolutely were not. nobody was with any seriousness. Lockmart and boeing had divided the US gov't launch needs neatly between them and were free to charge as much as they wanted for minimal effort. Nasa was spending money on SLS, but 95% of that goes to keeping Shuttle contractors from a number of important congressional districts fully employed. Euros had started planning an ariane 6 but that was not particularly new. And russia didn't have the money to do real development of any of their stuff that's been in prototype forever. now they are, but unfortunately for them they hitched themselves to the other wannabe-lex-luthor billionaire to make their rocket engines. they've got a dozen of their new rockets ready to have engines put on them, and no engines. Like, this doesn't mean that Elon Musk was a super genius or whatever; he picked a stale, corrupt, non-innovative industry to compete against and did so. It's not exactly hard to beat people in a footrace when they aren't even walking.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:I'm pretty sure if you offered Raytheon or Lockheed a giant pile of money to build you a rocket you want to ride to mars they wouldn't refuse on the grounds that that's not evil enough. It's still about the money, and who's actually offering it. Yes, and the pile of money they want is pretty loving big. That's the corruption and greed part. They wouldn't do it for a contract that wasn't cost-plus accounting. Literally. Neither of them applied to Commercial Resupply, lockheed didn't apply for Commercial Crew, and boeing got accepted for Crew and immediately started bitching that it was fixed-cost. Then did the minimum amount of work for performance, hoping that SpaceX would also have problem that they could then say "see, you can't make a safe vehicle without cost-plus!" A Wizard of Goatse posted:Rocketry's been stagnating for a while because there's no real moneymaking applications to sending them further into space, and we can reach every population center on earth just fine on existing technology. It was stagnating because the launch prices were so astronomical that only the biggest entities could afford to do anything in space, therefore the launches/year were tiny, therefore there was minimal incentive to improve the rockets, therefore the price never came down.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
Even in the USA or other places where most power is from burning carbon, an electric car is both more efficient at turning X fuel into Y miles and substantially cleaner in terms of non-CO2 air pollution*. *maybe not in West Virginia or somewhere with lots of coal power and crappy air quality regulations
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
The Bloop posted:Just remove inheritance I'd be on board with the libertarian "equal opportunity, not equal results" schtik if they also advocated zero inheritance / wealth transfer to children. 0% taxes during life, 100% tax upon death.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2022 22:09
|
|
|
Somfin posted:This just leads to motherfuckers pouring all that accumulated wealth into an I'm not touching you system like a trust fund so that they don't technically have anything to tax on death The point isn't that it would be unworkable and full of loopholes. So are the ideas of getting rid of all regulation because bad actors will be corrected by the markets, or privatized police/firefighting/roadbuilding, or that all voluntary contracts become the highest enforceable law. These are libertarians, coming up with unworkable social systems is what they do. The point is that it isn't even part of the proposal, when the wealth of your parents is the most obvious hole in the idea that anyone has "equal opportunity". Unless that just means that everyone had an equal chance to be born rich.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2022 13:24
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:Or does the process of acquiring/actually possessing that kind of money warp your personality to the point that you become incapable of having a healthy relationship? It's definitely this. Having a ton of money means you are constantly surrounded by people who never say "no". It doesn't seem to kill relationships with a wife/SO every time, but it absolutely warps things. KitConstantine posted:Are lady-boss billionaires just as lovely, relationship-wise? Does male socialization play a part? As far as the sex stuff goes, it seems to be pretty male. So socialization, and probably a bit of  . There aren't as many prominent female billionaires but I've never heard of one having crazy sex scandals.KitConstantine posted:Are only American* billionaires like this? Silvio Berlusconi looks at Musk's sexual proclivities and is like "ha, what a vanilla prude."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2022 15:03
|
|
|
Often Abbreviated posted:But the big "ISN'T THERE SOMEONE YOU FORGOT TO ASK?" is that major institutional shareholders were promised fat sacks of money. Blackrock, Morgan Stanley, Vanguard etc, they don't give a poo poo about whatever petty politics is driving this. They are vast, uncaring agglomerations of shareholder value. The contract says they get the money, so they get the money. The ones that were financing the deal on Elon's side will be massively happy for it to fall through and get out of a loan that was buying an inflated asset and using inflated assets as security. The big institutional shareholders of twitter would like more money, but it's not like they can sue Elon over it. And TBQH they probably prefer stability and a few billion less profit. They're loving massive, a billion swing up or down isn't really a big deal. The reason twitter can't just let Elon walk for the billion break-up fee and then ban him as a final "gently caress off" is more likely the mid-size guys and big individuals, who could sue the corporate officers over it. Not Morgan Stanley & Blackrock.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2022 16:30
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:the risk is low, but i don't think it's zero. elon is not the only person who thinks twitter's 5% bot estimate is intentionally misleading. there's been public research into the subject for years that doesn't line up with twitter's assessment. of course it may not be a lie technically, because they have a proprietary methodology that involves a human sampling 100 "daily active users" and using some criteria to say that 5 or less are bots on average. This misses the fact that the bot estimate is 5% of MDAU (monetizable daily active users), which don't represent the entire population of twitter. Their sampling method is starting by only looking at that subset. Bots are generally not monitizable users: spam bot farms don't waste time loading ads. All the other bot people are looking at the whole population because they don't have twitter's data on who looks at ads and who doesn't. Anyways pretty much all of the business & legal reporters have been saying no, there is zero chance that the thing gets invalidated due to bot numbers. the thing that elon has a chance with is his requests for information and whether twitter was giving him everything promptly enough.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 02:29
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:the issue is whether the trial reveals that information, which twitter wants to hide Asspull guess here but I'd bet that delaware corporate court is a pretty good venue for getting evidence sealed as proprietary corporate information. Bad Purchase posted:and also whether their 5% metric has been used in a misleading way to investors, or their methodology is bad to the point of being fraudulent. That's the thing that everyone is saying has pretty much zero chance whatsoever because twitter gets to select all the criteria for bot-vs-human and MDAU-vs-not, the methodology is whatever they want, and their investor report has a rather steep disclaimer on it. Like it could happen. But twitter would have to be giant idiots to lie about a thing where they pretty much have free reign to define the rules for truth, and even then they still get some wiggle room. e: Bad Purchase posted:i really don't get everyone leaping to twitter's defense and pretending they're angels just because they're against elon. Klyith fucked around with this message at 03:40 on Aug 15, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 03:38
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:but the bigger thing i don't know the answer to is if the court discovers evidence of fraud in the proprietary information, then what? are they under any obligation to report it? are they under any obligation to keep it sealed? Yes, if twitter is committing fraud on the level of lying in their SEC filings and the evidence gets in court it will become public. Bad Purchase posted:just because something is proprietary and opaque doesn't mean it can't be fraudulent. like, suppose there was an email out there where jack or whoever was in charge at the time wrote to the bot counting department and said "hey we need to make this problem go away, make sure the number stays below 5%". that would be evidence that investors were intentionally misled. i highly doubt any such evidence will be found or even exists, but fishing for that is basically all elon can do. This is true but it's very unlikely that the judge will allow Elon to go on a fishing trip without much stronger evidence than he has. Elon really *wants* this to happen because it will drag things out and require months of discovery. Then his bank financing commitments will expire, and he might find other reasons to nix the deal. If there was a big discovery process twitter would be motivated to give in and lower their price. The judge has already put a short date on the trial start, meaning she isn't swayed by Elon's initial filing. (Also very few people tend to leave that type of my_crimes evidence around. Even Theranos, the most fraudulent frauds in recent history, were less stupid than that. You have to look at bitcoin to find that type of idiocy.) Bad Purchase posted:but there have been people itt who vigorously defend twitter's honor about their bot metrics when really we don't and can't know. but twitter certainly has a financial motivation to hide the problem and i don't think it's unreasonable to wonder if they're being dishonest. it really shouldn't affect the elon trial, and i guess it's hard for me to say in this thread that i'm skeptical about twitter's metrics without also sounding like i'm rooting for elon, which i absolutely am not. Don't think of it as a defense of twitter's metrics, think of it as a recognition that the game they're playing is rigged. Two things can be true at once: twitter is infested with bots, and twitter's reporting is not legally fraudulent. Bad Purchase posted:i wrote: Those are two different people my dude. Bad Purchase posted:the "past fraud" thing comes from some reporting i read on elon's initial court filings. Court filings will play more games with the truth than twitter's bot metrics, lmao. edit: basically Elon's legal team is giving non-admitted "evidence" (a different bot tracker) and saying "this proves fraud" (it doesn't). That's a totally normal thing for lawyers to do, declare they've won before the trial even starts. Klyith fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Aug 15, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 14:43
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:i’ve never said he had any chance of actually winning or running out the clock, only that the chance a settlement could be reached is not zero You should really go and read all the Matt Levine columns at bloomberg about this whole shitshow. He has laid out very clearly how the bot this is no danger to twitter other than completely ridiculous scenarios like most of twitter being fake. (Also he's a good and witty writer, and possibly responsible for the recent crypto crash!) His general prediction is that a settlement is the most likely outcome, Elon does not buy Twitter, but that said settlement will not be favorable to Musk at all. And that the judge will probably be encouraging a settlement, because forcing the idiot to buy a company that he no longer wants and will probably wreck is bad for everyone. Elon just sold $7 billion worth of tesla shares so uh it seems like negotiations are probably already happening. edit: Bad Purchase posted:what is your explanation for the current share price being $44.50? People don't believe he will be finishing the purchase at $54, which is a good assumption. But note that just a few weeks ago it was under $40, reflecting even less expectation that it would happen. Klyith fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Aug 15, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 23:42
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:i've been arguing against the people who believe a settlement is impossible this whole time. no, you've been arguing that the bot thing was a actual possible danger to twitter if anything you are saying that a settlement might be more plausible because twitter has reason to settle. they don't, unless elon pays a shitload more than $1 billion.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
Durzel posted:It would never be legal to drive in Europe, where regulations exist to stop people getting straight up murdered by vehicles made out of solid steel with jutting angles. I don't know what US regulations are like but I'd like to think they would have problems with it too. oh you sweet sweet innocent soul. what does your heart tell you about the place that made it legal to commit vehicular homicide on a protestor? the US has zero national regulations for pedestrian safety
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2022 13:31
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Got it, push hundreds of asteroids into mars to make it magnetic. Bing bang. Funny thing is, that would actually work. If you threw half the asteroid belt into Mars, you'd probably make it hot enough to restart a dynamo in the core. Then it would have a magnetic field again. It'd also be a ball of molten magma, so settling on it would be kinda hard for a few tens of millions of years. But hey: you want to make an omelet, you gotta crack a new Late Heavy Bombardment!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2022 03:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:it ties into the "effective altruism" movement, which asserts that it's actually good for humanity to increase your own personal wealth by hurting people and destroying the planet, because having more money means you'll be able to donate more to charity later, so becoming a billionaire at all costs is actually the most altruistic thing possible because you'll be able to leave a lot of money to charity on your deathbed No, effective altruist movement doesn't say that, they just say to do real measurements and statistics on charity and development aid so you know if you had good results. It's not a terrible thing. Ideally if you help people you actually improve their lives -- and there are *lots* of cases where 1st world development aid had zero positive effect or negative effects. Core of EA was started by academics with good values like actually listening to the poor 3rd world people because maybe they're smarter than you about how their world works. It's popular among the rationalist community, and that's the overlap with libertarian techbros, and then you get the 'rationalist' libertarians who are really just Objectivists but don't want to be associated with Rand anymore.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2022 14:09
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:but the problem there is usually the high-level management. the folks on the ground who're actually working with the people in need usually have some decent idea of what has to be done. This is sometimes not true at all, particularly in places where your folks on the ground are not from the culture they are working with. Deptfordx posted:I think I've spotted where this theory breaks down in the real world. Yeah if the techbros were actually donating large sums continually and directly, rather than at the end of their lives and to a foundation that's at least partially a vehicle to employ their children and family, it would probably be true. Also the whole "I need to donate to AI threat or space colonization, not poverty or climate change" thing. Heck if we had 1950s marginal tax rates it might be true, even the government could probably do some good with 91% of Jeff Bezos's money.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2022 16:42
|
|
|
In actual Elon Musk vs Twitter news, he's already getting owned by the judge for not producing everything twitter wants for discovery. Twitter had 1 side of a text message conversation they got from one of Elon's bankers, and but Elon hadn't given then his own texts for that time period, and the judge was like quote:Assuming that Musk's response was not telepathic, one would expect some evidence of it in Defendants' document production.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
Zil posted:He is such a dumb rear end. Like seriously how does he get any serious scientists to work on his stupid ideas? He is not, in fact, serious about that. This is just a game he plays on twitter. He throws out something like that that gets attention just so he can reply to random stans and make them all horny for him. That's how he made a posse of twitter nerds who fight to the death for his attention. It's the same thing as a twitter egirl, but he uses it for stock manipulation instead of amazon wish lists. (And lest this appear as if I think he's playing 5d chessmaster here, no, this isn't some massive brain move. Elon is a pretty smart guy who has been deluded by success into believing that he's a comic book super-genius.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
Re the how smart is elon question? We can now set a lower bound on his intelligence: he is marginally smarter than this guy.Matt Levine posted:This week Trevor Milton goes on trial for allegedly doing fraud at Nikola Corp., the electric-vehicle startup that went public via SPAC; its stock traded as high as $79.73 when the SPAC deal was announced, and it closed at $5.36 yesterday. Nikola is most famous for making a video showing its truck moving; it had not made a working truck yet, so it rolled the truck down a hill so it looked like it could drive. I feel like if you did that for Masayoshi Son, and he was impressed and said “that truck sure can drive,” and then you were like “nah we rolled it down a hill, gotcha!” he would appreciate your craziness and give you $50 billion. But if you do it for public investors you will get arrested.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2022 00:24
|
|
|
I am a really ethical, upstanding guy who cares deeply about user security, privacy, and the bad standards of pervasive data collection common in the tech industry. What group of people can I take these concerns to, in the knowledge that they'll do the best thing for the ordinary people? I know, the US congress! Like I think the guy really just does have his heart in the right place. What I really would love to know is whether he is just super naive and thinks this will change anything, or whether he put together a report specifically to help Elon because he thinks Elon will do a better job.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2022 17:58
|
|
|
Mozi posted:mm not having paid much attention to the details here i figured musk was paying him somehow (directly or indirectly) to gum up the proceedings in other threads with infosec goons who know more about the guy, the impression I got was that he's known as a very good, ethical, and competent (at infosec) person ie the type of guy who really would take a high-paying job at twitter, and then get in fights with them about data collection
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
Party Ape posted:Isn't he testifying to congress because it was a carve out in his NDA? He wasn't allowed to tell most people everything he knows (which is apparently not much)? whistleblower complaints in general were a carve out, which is why Mudge went public in that method He's testifying before congress because twitter vs elon has given the spotlight to anything connected to twitter and congress-critters love a spotlight. Also 50% of congress hates big tech for banning nazis, and the other 50% of congress hates big tech for turning people into nazis for ad profits. So they're both happy to talk poo poo about twitter. The question is whether this is a valid whistleblower complaint at all: Mudge is alleging a bunch of stuff that's extremely common in big tech, and questionable whether it's illegal in any way (either directly illegal or SEC illegal vis a vis financial reports). Ordinarily I am guessing that a kinda bogus whistleblower complaint would be super dangerous for someone in this guy's position -- twitter could sue him despite the carve-out and win. They just say to a court "this whistleblower report contains no allegations that would result in regulatory action, even if they were true". Prove that and they can claw back all the money they gave him and probably damages too. But, plot twist motherfuckers! If Mudge's complaint is ineffective and twitter wins vs Elon in delaware, Elon is forced to buy twitter. Elon now controls twitter, and has no motive* to gently caress over the guy who tried to do him a solid. OTOH if Elon wins, the whistleblower complaint is likely a big part of it and maybe** gives him the cover he needs. So he's set up a coin flip of heads I win tails you lose***. * other than being a giant dick? ** matt levine says the most useful thing for elon is that twitter did a settlement with Mudge without consulting him, which maybe isn't useful cover vs a NDA suit *** exception: if twitter vs elon ends via out of court settlement with elon handing over a sack of cash but not owning twitter. elon doesn't own twitter, twitter still has reason to sue him into a hole in the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2022 01:49
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:are the cars still poo poo? it seems like the coverage of stuff like whompy wheels and random fires seems to have fallen off this month a multiple tesla cars randomly caught on fire a telsa electric grid battery installation randomly caught on fire and a tesla factory caught on fire, but not randomly because that factory has previously caught on fire due to poor safety
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2022 00:51
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:I'm sad that sexbots were brought up but these tweets weren't IDK why Elon Musk would want to gently caress a sexbot, robots can't get pregnant.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2022 19:13
|
|
|
Zzulu posted:I do think it's interesting from a psychological standpoint how so many people will always flock to certain famous people and start worshipping, defending and follow them. It's like in some peoples DNA to just be followers of people with higher standings “Whoever had created humanity had left in a major design flaw. It was its tendency to bend at the knees.” haljordan posted:What if Elon loses his case against Twitter and tells the court to eff off? Other people have brought this up and there's a problem for Musk: Telsa and SpaceX are also both Delaware companies. This means they obey the laws of Delaware, and their stocks & ownership are recorded in systems that Delaware has ultimate control of. The Delaware court, if pushed with that type of lawbreaking, could literally strip Musk of possession of however much Tesla stock and SpaceX ownership that they judge equal to what he owes. (Plus punitive damages / contempt of court) Not that it would happen unless Musk was such a huge idiot that he was just openly defying the court. His main move will be to make his financing impossible. The US banks are obligated to give him financing, but other partners like the saudis and the crypto exchange could bail.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Twitter is pushing hard to argue that specific performance is the only reasonable penalty, and that no amount of payoff can compensate for the lasting damage Elon has already done to the company. A lawyer will say "specific performance is the only remedy" to the court but that doesn't mean they won't agree to a settlement, it just means they want the best possible settlement for their client. I'm just parroting Matt Levine here, but a thing that may happen is the judge will drop some large hints that she's inclined to order specific performance to Musk as a way of saying "reach a settlement, idiot".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2022 19:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 07:49 |
|
|
Anton Chigurh posted:Very true, but maybe he wanted to make a lot of money instead? Very few people are smart enough to get a BA in physics and also become successful businessmen and CEOs of large companies, or make them profitable. Just look at all the science nerds who work for NASA or CERN, for example. Smart in physics to be sure and many high level PhDs. You need to re-examine the idea that the difference between the average successful business owner and the mega-rich gazillionaire is that the gazillionaire is smarter. They're smart enough to run a successful business. Ok, that's not nothing. Lots of people are dumb as hell and can't even do that. But the ones who go from successful to gazillionaire are about luck, contingency, and external factors that have nothing to do with the smarts of the guy in charge. X.com wasn't the only online bank & payments company in 2000. There weren't many of them, but there were others. They happened to merge into Paypal and Paypal happened to be the internet payment company that took off instead of Flooz or Beenz. (Also a BA in Physics is not a particularly huge accomplishment, it's being a college graduate. A BA is what you get when you duck out on all the advanced classes. The accomplishment is that he got a econ degree from Wharton at the same time.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2022 14:53
|
|