At your service https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...tter-free-speech-matt-taibbi-substack/673698/
www.techdirt.com
So a man has rules for using his company and we are complaining?
I guess you don’t know what FREE speech means. Also I don’t idolize a GD foreigner except foreigner 4
Biased but at least reputable. But you shouldn’t rely on an opinion piece.At your service https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...tter-free-speech-matt-taibbi-substack/673698/
More specifically
Elon Musk Still Loves ‘Shadow Banning’ Those He Doesn’t Like
Late last year, we wrote about the extremely misleading discussion around “shadow banning” on Twitter. The history of the term is important, as it originated as a tool to defeat trolls, and it had …
His lenders have cut the company’s value to a third of the acquisition purchase price. That is of a company that had turned a profit in 2018 and 2019.
This is why the government shouldn’t rely on private industry in order to disseminate information (in my opinion). Don’t get me wrong, the way Twitter is implementing this is short-sighted, but if the government ACTUALLY cared about getting this info out there, they’d have a reliable system to do so that wasn’t subject to the whims of an idiot charlatan like Musk.
Twitter lost hundreds of millions in 2021 as well. And that was with twitter cooking the books.
While I tend to agree with much of what you just said, there is absolutely no desperation to make interest payments. The Tesla stock price rose $58 a share in June. Musk owns 412 million shares. So, on paper he made almost $24 billion in June on Tesla stock.
He bought it, then realized it was a bad investment. Tried to back out, but the courts wouldn't let him. Some people's ego makes them think they are good at everything. The smartest of people can keep their ego in check and realize they are not.
Sure it lost hundreds of millions in 21. So too did every ad-dependent business. But its trend line was outstanding, particularly when you look by quarterly revenue. Would it go back to its profit from two years before? Who knows. More likely, a larger company would have acquired it. Disney nearly did a few years before.
Not every add dependent business lost hundreds of millions. Those who had an insanely bloated workforce may have. It was a very poorly run business with fraudulent numbers.
Call me a tinfoil hat guy if you want, but some believe he may be sinking it intentionally. I’m not saying I believe that but I’m open to the possibility.
I understand musk can satisfy the entire purchase price. But he’s committed publicly to not sell any Tesla stock for two years—so he’s illiquid on that item. Of course he could break that rule, but then he would subject Tesla (and himself) to shareholder derivative suits and possible SEC scrutiny.
Correct, but he would find plenty of lenders these days if he needs funds to make payments on his Twitter loans.
For what purpose? Someone else will just rise up with something better. Zuckerberg is already trying to develop something better.
I’m not sure what the purpose would be. Just saying that’s a belief that’s out there. Several of the decisions made have driven hoards of people away. He’s smarter than that.
I’d be lying if I said I knew, but for someone who desired to grow something, his decisions have been puzzling, no?
I think he's a business man who got so full of himself he thought he could be a social warrior savior. It's happened before. It generally leads to bad decisions. The ego can outweigh the smarts at times.
I’m interested to see how it all shakes out. He may indeed be breaking it down to build it up.
