Elon Musk takeover of Twitter

[Jovialis]

Personally, I think this is fantastic. I hope he pulls it off, and actually makes it less censoral to the right. It would be a great blow to the ideological monopoly the Democrats have on social media. It is not because I tend to side right-of-center. In fact I think right-wing echo chambers are equally as bad. There must be the abilty to have debate, without fear of retribution. Echo chambers of such scale as twitter are the true threat to our freedom, and civil liberty.

[Jovialis]

Citing facts, citing statistical data, etc should never be considered "implicit bias"; that is absurd. It is dismissal of reality, and is dangerous. It is one thing to point out issues with looking at just the numbers without a more nuanced explanation of other factors. It is another thing to shout people down, and intimidate them. That is anti-intellectual thuggery, and stupidity.

[firetown]

Personally, I think this is fantastic. I hope he pulls it off, and actually makes it less censoral to the right. It would be a great blow to the ideological monopoly the Democrats have on social media. It is not because I tend to side right-of-center. In fact I think right wing echo chambers are equally as bad. There must be the abilty to have debate, with fear of retribution. Echo chambers of such scale as twitter are the true threat to our freedom, and civil liberty.

I am looking forward to more fact-based discussions counteracting "climate science" propaganda.

[Jovialis]

If Elon Musk pulls it off, and makes good on his promise, I might actually promote my activities on there again. The reason why my account was "banned" was because I didn't want to give them my phone number to "verify" my identity. I found that to be too invasive. On top of that, my page shows a vague reason for it being suspended, as if I did something wrong or extremist.

[firetown]

If Elon Musk pulls it off, and makes good on his promise, I might actually promote my activities on there again. The reason why my account was "banned" was because I didn't want to give them my phone number to "verify" my identity. I found that to be too invasive. On top of that, my page shows a vague reason for it being suspended, as if I did something wrong or extremist.

A couple of my 10-year-old FB pages suffered the same demise. Twitter has been very lame, but now there might be a rebirth. I am not into the "alternative" social networks like Gab. I don't need ideology on either side. Just some fact-based input here and there.

[Jovialis]

A couple of my 10-year-old FB pages suffered the same demise. Twitter has been very lame, but now there might be a rebirth. I am not into the "alternative" social networks like Gab. I don't need ideology on either side. Just some fact-based input here and there.

Indeed, that's why it is hard for me to watch the cable news channels for very long, like Fox, CNN, etc. I try hear what all sides say. But they're so partisan, I can't take it 100% seriously.

[bigsnake49]

I have no problem with honest debate but when you have a huge platform like Twitter or Facebook you have to moderate discussion or it becomes a cesspool of conspiracy theorists and you leave yourself vulnerable to lawsuits. Do we really want QAnon and Alex Jones to be part of our national discourse and to be the source of "facts"?

So why don't the Republicans get a reputable website that presents their facts in a non accusatory, non conspiratorial, non "every democrat politician is a cannibalistic pedophile" manner?

Just remember it was not the Democrats and the left leaning press that tried to and are still trying to overthrow the will of the voters. When self respecting Republicans throw Trump and his ilk out of the party then I might vote for them. Until then I will vote for the Democrats because they are the lesser of the two evils. I will also read The NY Times and the Washington Post because what is the alternative? Fox News? Haha...Now I also read the Economist and listen to the BBC to get a bit more info about the world.

[Jovialis]

I have no problem with honest debate but when you have a huge platform like Twitter or Facebook you have to moderate discussion or it becomes a cesspool of conspiracy theorists and you leave yourself vulnerable to lawsuits. Do we really want QAnon and Alex Jones to be part of our national discourse and to be the source of "facts"?

So why don't the Republicans get a reputable website that presents their facts in a non accusatory, non conspiratorial, non "every democrat politician is a cannibalistic pedophile" manner?

Just remember it was not the Democrats and the left leaning press that tried to and are still trying to overthrow the will of the voters. When self respecting Republicans throw Trump and his ilk out of the party then I might vote for them. Until then I will vote for the Democrats because they are the lesser of the two evils. I will also read The NY Times and the Washington Post because what is the alternative? Fox News? Haha...Now I also read the Economist and listen to the BBC to get a bit more info about the world.

Maybe the problem is the fact that they are huge platforms, and should be broken up.

Qanon, and Alex Jones don't represent the GOP.

Trump and his ilk? 74,223,369 voters?

Democrat-friendly news stations should be held responsible for the countless riots that ensued throughout the country. That guy who shot up the subway in Brooklyn was on Youtube making a lot of videos saying he wanted to kill people. He is a terrorist and was influenced by Left-wing propaganda. Where are the moderators to censor people who aren't white right-wing people?

Where are all the "White Supremacist terrorists" who are purported to be the greatest threat to our country? Biden is a complete moron.

[firetown]

So why don't the Republicans get a reputable website

What kind of nonsense is this? Are major social networks now officially "Democrat websites"?
I don't want Democrat or Republican networks. We need networks that are not biased.

[LTG]

Musk is just playing games. He himself knows it's not possible to takeover Twitter, no matter how much he offers, because Twitter is not really a private company. It's an extension of the U.S. State Department, much like Google, Facebook and YouTube. All of these media platforms are under the direct control of the U.S. government and intimately linked with the CIA in particular. It's unlikely they were created for that purpose, but it's clear that at some point during the Obama administration they were co-opted to function as the main propaganda wing of the American Empire. After the death of Hollywood, PR disasters in the Middle East and a general decline in U.S. hard power, the state became much more reliant on cultural power through platforms like Twitter to disseminate propaganda.

[carmenfalkon]

Twitter is a liberal scrap-heap (no offense), a lot of propaganda, advertising, no objectivity. I think Musk will not change anything.

[Angela]

Well, he did it, as he was bound to do, or those people on the Board of Directors would have left themselves open to lawsuits by shareholders for breach of fiduciary responsibility when their now inflated share prices dropped perhaps even below where they were at the start.

Even the Kool-Aid drinkers can sometimes be shocked out of their indoctrination when liability to the tune of very high numbers suddenly gets brought to their attention.

Plus, just generally, nobody has made money betting against Elon Musk.

[Maciamo]

I have been using Twitter quite a lot over the last year - more than ever before. I use it mostly to follow interesting posters about science, technologies and archaeology, or just beautiful pictures of nature or architecture. I really don't care about the platform for political purposes or to follow celebrities. That's just not in my personality.

As for Elon Musk's takeover, since I am not political, I doubt I will see any difference. But that prompted me to check what are Elon's political views. I checked a few sites for balance, but this page seems to summarise his views well. He is neither a Republican nor a Democrat and describes himself as an Independent, somewhere in the middle. He is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. In fact that is exactly how I would describe myself to an American audience. Like me he also cares a lot about the environment and humanitarian issues. We share the same passion for technology and he told his followers on Twitter that "The woke mind virus is making Netflix unwatchable", a statement that I readily support when I see new pseudo-historical series like Bridgerton. I like the fact that Mr Musk is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)'s largest donator.

[bigsnake49]

Yeah, I thought it was a bad investment. I just don't see what he will bring to the table. As far as being a free speech absolutist, there is no such thing. The EU already warned him that he has to play by their rules which include content moderation pertaining to harassment, hate speech, revenge porn among others. You think that twitter won't have to obey rules in China? Russia? India? Pakistan? Saudi Arabia? In the US they at a minimum have to content restrict child porn. How long before other restrictions are also imposed. Hate speech? Racism? Nazism, Anti-semitism. If he wants absolute free speech how long before he is sued if twitter is used for nefarious purposes by one of these fringe groups.

This is a quote from the horses mouth:

By "free speech," I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law.
If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people."

But is it just federal law that he will not go beyond or state law? Remember that both Florida and Texas passed laws that restricted the ability of social media platforms to moderate content (i.e., stop Trump misinformation). Jusdges declared both laws unconstitutional because it violates a companies first Amendment rights.

Elon Musk has a "huge responsibility" to combat dangerous, potentially life-threatening health misinformation on Twitter, the World Health Organization said Tuesday.
The United Nation's health agency commented on Monday's news that the tech billionaire has struck a deal to purchase Twitter for $44 billion. WHO officials stressed how damaging misinformation and disinformation could be when it's widely spread in digital spaces like Twitter.
"In cases like this pandemic, good information is life-saving," Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO's Health Emergencies Programme, said. "In some cases, [it's] more life-saving than having a vaccine in the sense that bad information sends you to some very, very bad places."

https://arstechnica.com/science/2022...tter-who-says/

There goes your absolute free speech.

[bigsnake49]

What kind of nonsense is this? Are major social networks now officially "Democrat websites"?
I don't want Democrat or Republican networks. We need networks that are not biased.

Earth to firetown, Fox News is not neutral OK? CNN is not neutral.

[firetown]

Earth to firetown, Fox News is not neutral OK? CNN is not neutral.

Reread my post.

[Hawk]

I actually quite like Twitter, and hopefully Elon makes it even better.

Twitter have been contributing to Website development for decades with their open source CSS framework Bootstrap, Elon wants to open source the feed Algorithm as far as i have heard. Interesting to see the future.

[Jovialis]

Too bad Elon Musk is backing out of the deal. However, the fact that the sheer amount bots and fake accounts were enough for his lawyers to say it was not a wise deal is telling.

Perhaps twitter just fluffs it's popularity and influence. Maybe dumb politicians, and corporations are being dupped by analyzing what is being said there, and think it translates to votes/profit. When in fact what is being said could mostly be coming from foreign-bots.

[Jovialis]

So according to Twitter, they only have 5% bots in their community.

However, according to a private investigation, that number is 12%
https://www.jpost.com/business-and-i...article-708104

Then you have to consider, how many accounts are made by the same people using multiple accounts.

How many accounts are inactive? Etc.

Something tells me that it is probably more than just 12%, otherwise, why would Musk look the other way at the 11th hour? Musk had previously speculated that it could be 20% of accounts.

[Angela]

Too bad Elon Musk is backing out of the deal. However, the fact that the sheer amount bots and fake accounts were enough for his lawyers to say it was not a wise deal is telling.

Perhaps twitter just fluffs it's popularity and influence. Maybe dumb politicians, and corporations are being dupped by analyzing what is being said there, and think it translates to votes/profit. When in fact what is being said could mostly be coming from foreign-bots.

I agree. It's vastly overpriced for what it generates in income as well.

Never understood why he wanted to buy it. Maybe to expose it and destroy it. Doing a good job.

[Jovialis]

I agree. It's vastly overpriced for what it generates in income as well.

Never understood why he wanted to buy it. Maybe to expose it and destroy it. Doing a good job.

Indeed, I feel this really takes the teeth out of it.

[bigsnake49]

Well he waived due diligence so he has no recourse except drag the case through the courts.

Maybe Twitter can suspend his twitter account since he's been using his account there to talk down Twitter in order to buy it cheaper. They should have suspended/moderated his account the moment he tried to buy it.

I do agree that at $44B Twitter is vastly overpriced but then nobody twisted his arm or kicked him in the nuts forcing him to buy it.

[Angela]

^^He's playing a game of chess, and they're playing checkers. He's driving down the price and if they take him to court to compel him to buy, he can get ALL the data through discovery. :) That would include not just the real number of bots, but the actual earnings, private correspondence and on and on.

They're going to wind up BEGGING him to buy it on any terms whatsoever, or they're all broke.

"Following Elon Musk’s announcement to drop out of his anticipated $44 billion buyout of Twitter, the company has the option to sue and compel him into completing the transaction anyway.
Unfortunately for Twitter, this would mean laying bare the actual amount of bots and bot activity occurring on the platform. This was Musk’s original source of contention when considering the purchase and ultimately, the final price of the deal."

[bigsnake49]

^^He's playing a game of chess, and they're playing checkers. He's driving down the price and if they take him to court to compel him to buy, he can get ALL the data through discovery. :) That would include not just the real number of bots, but the actual earnings, private correspondence and on and on.

They're going to wind up BEGGING him to buy it on any terms whatsoever, or they're all broke.

"Following Elon Musk’s announcement to drop out of his anticipated $44 billion buyout of Twitter, the company has the option to sue and compel him into completing the transaction anyway.
Unfortunately for Twitter, this would mean laying bare the actual amount of bots and bot activity occurring on the platform. This was Musk’s original source of contention when considering the purchase and ultimately, the final price of the deal."

Delaware Chancery which is the venue, is very matter of fact, you signed a contract with no contingencies and no due diligence you have to stick to it. They don't mess around. I looked at the contact and it's pretty ironclad.

[ihype02]

^^He's playing a game of chess, and they're playing checkers. He's driving down the price and if they take him to court to compel him to buy, he can get ALL the data through discovery. :) That would include not just the real number of bots, but the actual earnings, private correspondence and on and on.

They're going to wind up BEGGING him to buy it on any terms whatsoever, or they're all broke.

"Following Elon Musk’s announcement to drop out of his anticipated $44 billion buyout of Twitter, the company has the option to sue and compel him into completing the transaction anyway.
Unfortunately for Twitter, this would mean laying bare the actual amount of bots and bot activity occurring on the platform. This was Musk’s original source of contention when considering the purchase and ultimately, the final price of the deal."

Lol that is just a random meme made by a fan he found out. He is butthurt about getting sued so he is making those excuses in public. Literally everyone knows bots are rampant on Twitter. Twitter is not losing much.

No way he was expecting to get sued.

If it was a plan he certainly would not make it public until he won the case.