|
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 | ||
|
Panic! At The Tesco posted:https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1518623997054918657 Elon has no chill at all, he’s absolutely not going to be able to handle anyone with any notoriety criticising him. This is going to be pretty funny to be honest.
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
Panic! At The Tesco posted:i've never understood why any billionaire, or heck even multi millionaire, would post online at all. honestly I can think of so much rad poo poo to do with unlimited money that I could spend the rest of my life doing it. but I guess that's one of the many reasons I'm not one.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2022 21:57
|
|
|
Given he added the ability to buy Teslas with Bitcoin, and then removed it after he "found out that it's not really that green after all", which is essentially like someone saying that they discovered that McDonalds sold fast food after sitting down and asking for the wine menu, there's an above average chance he'll back out after publicly announcing that he "found something" in Twitter's accounts, or source code, or maybe a closet, that means he can't proceed with the purchase. And he'll have like 1000 people praising him for exposing what they already believed, another 1000 crying that they spent their life savings on Dogecoin and now it's going back down again, and the rest posting about XYZ crypto that he should back.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2022 09:58
|
|
|
Kale posted:Also breaching a supposed part of the acquisition deal which said not to disparage twitter, it's employee or users as well. Definitely the kind of person I'd also want to work for and who clearly has good intentions. The skies the limit for Twitter. It's pretty lol how people are wringing their hands raw with hot takes like "this.. this is the moment that will kill Twitter", like Twitter isn't a cesspool already. Frankly, Musk buying Twitter might actually be good for humankind, because he might inadvertently destroy it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2022 15:45
|
|
|
The thing with Musk is that because he's an actual 200+ billionaire he doesn't really have much of an incentive to ensure Twitter is profitable at the expense of his beliefs - real or based around pushing buttons (arguably the same thing). He would, and has, caused damage to Tesla stock at various points, on a whim. Contrast that with someone like Tim Cook, who ultimately cares 100% about Apple's profitability and stock price. Tim Cook could say things that are controversial but when it comes to the crunch he wouldn't do anything that would risk increasing profitability. Basically what I'm saying is that Musk, being a billionaire and a troll, is definitely someone who would torpedo Twitter in the pursuit of his beliefs, and only lose a small amount of sleep over it if that actually happened (his recent stock rewards from Tesla hitting targets is almost as much as he would be personally spending to acquire Twitter). I would be rather pleased if Twitter got destroyed, because I view it as a cancer on society like social media generally, but at the same time there are a bunch of people, particularly disenfranchised minorities, that are validated by using it, so.. yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2022 13:09
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:Looking increasingly likely like he's trying to find reasons to back out. He likes pushing buttons, actually buying Twitter without any real plan to make money from it, or even know what it is in due diligence terms, is very much on brand for him.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2022 16:26
|
|
|
Zil posted:Is this a subtle way of reducing headcount since Telsa stock has tanked? Also - the article above says it went to execs, but there was actually a follow-up email that went to all staff, just to make it clear that everyone at Tesla needs to be thinking about doing 40 hours in the office minimum.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
Given Musk is basically as addicted to Twitter as Trump was, banning him "just cos" would be glorious. It would probably force through the sale too because he's exactly the sort of person you'd imagine would be determined to buy the company just to unban himself.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
Apologies if already posted - but I read this and felt like it answers a lot of questions: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-07-09/elon-s-out There is an interesting point made about whether or not Elon would actually comply with anything if ordered to by a lower court, "What if the court orders Musk to close the deal and he says no? They’re not gonna put him in Chancery jail", and what impact this would have on the Delaware corporate law system as a whole. I kinda feel like it's all very well courts telling normal people they are bound by XYZ and are ordered to do ABC, but billionaires? Billionaires who are more than happy to weaponise ~100M of followers?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2022 09:46
|
|
|
Well, yeah, it is ridiculous.. I think it's more of a case of him being likely to just laugh about a serious judgement openly, knowing they aren't going to do anything to him or that any fine he gets would be less than what he's being asked to pay to actually proceed with it all. Honestly the funniest thing would be Twitter just straight up banning him, although they can't easily do that with obvious legitimacy within the confines of their own rules.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2022 11:37
|
|
|
Irradiation posted:That's not even the most deranged response. Several companies who started much later than they did are already ahead of them in terms of delivered & in the wild ALKS and ADAS, they just don't call it "autopilot" or "full self driving". Will someone please think of Tesla's feelings??
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
StrangersInTheNight posted:It won't, it's already synonymous with luxury as a brand, which is all you really need for rich people to keep buying it. I actually have a Tesla Model 3, and paid extra for the FSD option, I bought in to the hype and promises when I bought it in 2020. Practically none of it has been realised, and as is de rigueur things that were promised as "coming later this year" never did. The build quality and paint is suspect, by far the worst of any car I've owned. I've been told by the detailer guy that I use for everything that it is "one of the better ones", which is damning with faint praise. Practically all of the driver convenience stuff you expect in modern cars at this price point, or even substantially less, is either completely missing or doesn't work. Auto headlights is not fit for purpose, the car can't "see" distant rear lights, is glacial at turning off for oncoming cars - if it turns off at all, doesn't turn off in higher ambient light areas, and turns off at reflections from street signs. Auto wipers are a lottery, thanks to Musk's ~vision~ of getting rid of the $5 Bosch rain sensor used on older Teslas and reinventing the wheel with cameras and AI. This wouldn't be so bad if it even reached parity with the aforementioned sensor, but it doesn't. As a camera based system it naturally fails in low light situations, and often completely fails to tune the wiper speed to the prevailing conditions. It has dry wiped the screen on more than one occasion. All of that is to say that there are plenty of choices now in the EV space, and it's really only battery & motor efficiency where Tesla have a lead, together with the historical aspirational value of the brand (which, since Elon is extremely online, is not much to write about). Customers like myself who have bought one and realised afterwards that the whole experience has a strong Emperor's New Clothes smell about it are going to be drawn to those competitors that actually build the cars a lot better and have ALKS and ADAS tech that - whilst not being called Autopilot or Full Self Driving - is just as capable if not more so. (I'm in Europe where autonomous development has stood still for years, but at least my car isn't driving itself into kerbs on "FSD beta").
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
I'm probably being simple but as far as I know bot numbers, accuracy, etc doesn't form part of the contract that Musk signed. I'm sure I read that there is no mention of bots anywhere in it. He could've done his due diligence beforehand and even made contract fulfilment contingent on bot number verification, but he didn't. On that basis I'm not sure how you can introduce bot numbers in anything but the broadest "this is symptomatic of bad form and a culture of misrepresentation that poisons the well" terms, which sounds very unlikely to get anywhere in a court that is extremely well versed in contract law, being the de facto location for incorporation for this very reason. Durzel fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Aug 15, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2022 11:06
|
|
|
Is "Econonmy" supposed to mean something, or am I just being dumb in even asking?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2022 11:25
|
|
|
Jet Jaguar posted:OMG the replies to any criticism of this piece of garbage... 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. Fortunately Musk never has to deliver it, like everything else.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2022 12:17
|
|
|
Look, Tony Stark created a new element by firing a particle accelerator - or something - at a triangle. If he can accomplish that then who are you to say that Musk's rockets can't eat space trash?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2022 16:27
|
|
|
What happens when the CybertruckTM becomes a boat? Does it just get carried off wherever the current is going, or is Musk imagining it’ll deploy a concealed rudder and propeller to “drive” to shore, ala James Bond? Fun fact: on early Model 3s you’d end up with water in the trunk if you opened the lid, due to a design flaw.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 16:38
|
|
|
Captain Hygiene posted:I only watch actual video clips of him speaking onc3 in a long while, and I'm surprised every time by what an uncomfortable, uncharismatic speaker he is. Like, he's just up there spouting obvious made-up bullshit, but there's not even a forceful personality behind it to make it seem real, why would anybody pay attention to that? I mean, I find Apple's keynotes to be sterile, and Tim Cook is a charisma vacuum, but Tesla's ones are just a shambles. I guess the ultimate question is - will 2023 be the year that people actually stop believing in all of the bullshit Elon says is coming "next month" for $99?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
I'm leaning towards this all being a delaying tactic. If he completes "as is" he and the financiers backing it will be losing money on day 1. A lot has happened since the time the offer was made and now, and the markets are a lot worse than they were. I don't think he or his backers actually want it to complete. I'm also taking at face value that he has got cold feet about it, and doesn't particularly want it anymore. We have to bear in mind that whilst $44B is a ridiculous sum of money, he's the richest guy in the world so for him this is like buying a car or a house. He's fallen out of love with it and all of the negative things he has been saying about it I think he still believes. By all accounts there seems to have been a groundswell of encouragement for him to take it over, including from his ex-wife, petitioning him to take it over and delete it, or "combat the wokeism" (wouldn't have pegged Talulah Riley as a militant radical free speech activist). Perhaps now that buzz has worn off and people have stopped fellating him over the prospect - in the cold, dark light of day he's realised what he's getting into. In simple terms as I see it If he loses debt financing then technically it won't be his fault that he can no longer complete, and ought to only be on the hook for the $1B break clause come what may. I can't see how the Delaware court could impose punitive damages, or that any subsequent case from Twitter would go anywhere. Proving that he prevaricated and intentionally delayed the process to lose financing on purpose would be nigh on impossible to prove definitively, I'd say. Twitter are between a rock and a hard place here. His legal team are complaining that "they won't take yes for an answer", because Twitter won't terminate the active legal case until he completes. Obviously they are right not to terminate it, as doing so would leave them massively vulnerable if he changes his mind again - for which he has form. They have said as much in their statements. It also feels like a no-win situation for them. The only people who benefit are shareholders in the very short term. If he completes the share price will drop post sale and gently caress knows what Twitter will actually become (perhaps if its flushed down the toilet it would be a net positive thing for society). If he doesn't complete then Twitter are left reeling, share price takes a big hit (who else besides a turbo autist like Musk would ever consider paying that much for them?), and they just plod along in their weakened state. It all feels like brinkmanship at this point, very bizarre really given the takeover process ought to be fairly simple and prescriptive, and would be if Elon weren't involved.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2022 10:09
|
|
|
The expectation that he can or will complete must be pretty low for Twitter to essentially decide that the court case is their better option in terms of getting money out of Musk. Based on his histrionics both inside and outside of this deal it's probably a wise strategy. What will be interesting is how the Delaware judge handles Musk pivoting to say that he's trying to buy the company but that Twitter won't let him. I understand that he's got an extension, but what happens after that when (as seems likely) he'll still be prevaricating? Truly bizarre.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2022 16:28
|
|
|
But what about the randos that committed funds to the deal, e.g. the likes of Binance, etc? Are they bound by the same terms? Do they have the same spectre of reputational damage hanging over them were they to back out?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2022 17:22
|
|
|
Gotcha, that makes sense. Sucks to be Elon then I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
It's not going to be Bitcoin, it'll be Dogecoin if anything. That said given that almost everyone using Twitter are consumers rather than producers, how on Earth are you going to monetise them that way? What would they be paying for - some kind of tiered content service where you get notified of people you follow a bit quicker than others (e.g. delayed tweets). I honestly have no idea. That's even before you fall at the first hurdle of getting your average person using Twitter - those that are targeted by advertisers - to get all set up buying crypto via the website, and turn it into something that has to be regulated in various markets, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2022 13:24
|
|
|
King Carnivore posted:Chuds are freaking out about Elong’s choice of costume:  Musk can get people to buy any old poo poo it seems, even Halloween costumes on November 2nd.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2022 12:43
|
|
|
greazeball posted:Nothing advertisers love more than a CEO touting a product that will let users see fewer ads. I'd wager for the vast majority of people the only value Twitter actually has is that you can publicly shame companies into responding to requests that they can usually just ignore (e.g. emails). It is pretty lol though that the richest guy in the world thinks that charging the producers of content is the logical thing to do when consumers of it are like 90%+ of users. He's also fucken nuts if he genuinely thinks that Twitter is a town square where people come to freely exchange ideas and rub chins at opposing and unconventional viewpoints. He of all people should know what a polarising cesspit it is. I also didn't even know Twitter had ads until reading the King vs Musk argument. I don't even think I see them in the app on my iPhone?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2022 13:33
|
|
|
crime weed posted:more commits = better So basically someone who penned an extraordinarily verbose README.md lives to fight another day!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2022 14:58
|
|
|
In all seriousness why is someone who is verified allowed to change their display name? If they are allowed, why doesn't it trigger losing the blue tick and having to be re-verified? (I think that's being proposed now). Seems pretty obvious to me. Instead Elon saying that all parody has to be explicitly labeled seems like the worst possible solution, and is unworkable from a moderation point of view.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 11:50
|
|
|
That was painful to read. I feel like you owe me $8.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 12:10
|
|
|
TulliusCicero posted:Why the gently caress did E-Groin buy Twiiter for 44 billion anyway? I can't imagine the court would have forced him to complete since it was evident - at least for a time - that they were unhappy bedfellows. What seems more likely is that he would've had a punitive fine of several billion dollars. More than the $1b break clause, but less (a lot less) than the purchase price. A low double figures billion fine seemed most likely. That would have sucked for Musk, paying that sort of money having nothing to show for it, but at the same time you would've thought as a ~shrewd businessman~ that paying 3x the valuation of a consistently loss making company that hasn't come up with a strategy for effectively monetising its userbase in 16 years was much, much worse - yet here we are. This is history in the making - hubris, schadenfreude, comedy, portent - rolled into one. We're seeing a modern day Emperor's New Clothes parable playing out in real time, in real life. I'm curious as to how Tesla stock will fare in all of this. The stock price of that is predicated on the continued belief that Musk has a Midas touch. He's always been a complete bullshitter with timelines for autonomous driving, etc but the general public - who are mystified by the technology - have generally continued to fall for this crap, but it's hard to see how that will continue with Twitter - which they can understand - playing out the way it is. That's before you even consider the financial ramifications if he needs to sell more stock to shore Twitter up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 15:38
|
|
|
Eeyo posted:The court couldn’t impose any kind of fine or punitive penalty. The contract was written such that if it did not go through the only amount of damages Twitter could collect was 1 billion. So the court had 2 options for ruling: Musk pays 1 billion, or specific performance is ordered, where Musk would be compelled to purchase Twitter. Third option being settlement out of court. I guess what I was thinking of was what would happen if the court said he had to buy Twitter and he claimed he couldn't (I guess that wouldn't work since he did have financials in place), or wouldn't, or something? Like what would actually happen in that case?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
Durzel posted:I'm curious as to how Tesla stock will fare in all of this. The stock price of that is predicated on the continued belief that Musk has a Midas touch. He's always been a complete bullshitter with timelines for autonomous driving, etc but the general public - who are mystified by the technology - have generally continued to fall for this crap, but it's hard to see how that will continue with Twitter - which they can understand - playing out the way it is. That's before you even consider the financial ramifications if he needs to sell more stock to shore Twitter up. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 17:50
|
|
|
Bad Purchase posted:found here: https://polititweet.org/tweets?account=44196397&deleted=True https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fg-POn8X0AIpbuf?format=jpg
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 18:24
|
|
|
priznat posted:Esther is the worst type of engineer quisling - old enough she should loving know better than to run interference for a lovely boss, possibly THE shittiest boss. We can debate the ignominy of someone overtly climbing the ladder on public display, but to her credit it’s probably going to pay dividends for her personally. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2022 04:26
|
|
|
Presumably that "Official" moniker only shows up if you actually click through to look at someone's profile? What if you just see their tweet that has the regular old $8 blue check mark that for years has meant it's the authentic person? Why not just make the super-verified people have gold checks or something, I dunno. Obviously Musk doesn't see any problem with launching features and then unwinding them as soon as he gets any negative feedback from someone noteworthy enough. Those poor engineers working through the night to get this poo poo done.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2022 18:27
|
|
|
Installed that addon to Firefox that tells you if entities are actually verified or whether they just gave $8 to Elon, and had a hearty lol when I saw this: (this is the product manager who famously slept on the floor for Musk so her team could crunch a feature that ended up being delayed, launched and then unlaunched again)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
I could buy that Twitter was overstaffed in terms of the ratio of soulless career bootlickers that please Musk to people who just want a healthy work/life balance, but I can't conceive of what Musk's goal is here, unless it really is to destroy Twitter from within, investment be damned. That frankly is the only explanation that makes any sense, but it doesn't square with other entities getting involved in the financing, unless they simply had no foresight that this was going to happen. Every decision he has made has alienated advertisers, and it's clear - or at least his tweets suggest - that these are the most important people to him. He's not even appealing to the right, as many feared, he's just indiscriminately flushing pieces of it down the toilet with every passing moment. We're through the looking glass on this one.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2022 18:47
|
|
|
Aramis posted:I think Musk has correctly identified that ad-centrism is the root cause of most of what makes social medias awful. Mind you, like all of his "insights", it's something that a lot of actual serious and believable people have been saying for years. The ultimate goal of weaning off twitter from ad revenue, or at least the current dynamics of it, somehow is something that is 100% needed. The fact Twitter has only turned a profit in 2 quarters in 16 years of being incorporated suggests quite clearly to me that the problem of monetising the service to a sufficient level is enormous. Frankly, if Musk had only paid the going rate for Twitter - estimated to be ~$8b - he'd still be facing trying to reinvent a loss-making company in a way no one prior to him in 16 years had conceived of. As it is, with debt servicing at ~$1b a year, it seems like an entirely impossible task. Your average Twitter user is not going to pay anything at all to consume the content, much like how they don't when using YouTube, etc. Ads are pretty much the only way to coax any money out of the hundred million odd actual users who post nothing at all.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
I genuinely thought Musk taking over Twitter would basically mean business as usual in the short term, with some staff quitting because they didn't want to work for him, but overall a relatively minimal level of drama. Even the retrograde "everyone back in the office for 40+ hours a week" edict was forseeable given that's what he did previously with Tesla, so not really dramatic. This was more than I ever dared hope for. Even him publicly dragging on his employees, getting shown up for his ignorance by them and then saying "you're fired!" like it's The Apprentice is extremely funny, since I know those engineers dgaf and have plenty of options, if they weren't already halfway out the door. Come to think of it.. maybe Musk basically is Trump lite back on Twitter at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 11:33
|
|
|
Ups_rail posted:I dont have a twitter and I am not signing up. The technical and implementation side of it isn't particularly noteworthy (no offence to sysadmins), the architecture is no different than any other entity needing to serve X requests concurrently, with the capacity to scale on demand. It would take more than what we've seen already to destroy Twitter, but it certainly is possible. Anyone who doubts that need only look at MySpace.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 11:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
MikeJF posted:Eh, the noteworthy engineering challenge with twitter is its capacity and loadbearing at scale, and they've done a pretty impressive job stabilising that at radically high traffic nowadays, as compared to the old fail whale era. The real value is in the captured userbase (while it lasts).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2022 12:12
|
|