Elon Musk and Twitter

[Sun_Worshiper]

Share your thoughts on Elon Musk's takeover of twitter:
- Will Twitter, which is (as I understand it) terrible at generating revenue, but great at piling up debt, turn around under Musk's leadership?
- Will Musk turn it into a free-for-all of radicalism and/or free speech or will efforts in this direction be prevented by advertisers and others?
- Are you on Twitter and, if so, do you plan to change your tweeting behavior?

[dismalist]

Here is a thoughtful discussion of Musk's options and the challenges facing him by a tech lawyer: https://www.city-journal.org/elon-musk-free-speech-crusade-twitter

I would add to the article that Musk didn't spend $44 billion, about $3 billion more than Twitter's recent market capitalization, for his hobby or his health. He wants to make money. "Free speech" is one shtick in the commercial world with which to make money, but only one, or part of one.

Subscriptions have contributed to the narrowing of opinion in what used to be newspapers. We get to choose whose propaganda we pay attention to. Maybe the same will work for Twitter. I don't know.

I am not now nor have I ever been a tweeter, for the medium is the message.

[mahagonny]

The bird is freed! No, I don't use it, and I don't even really consider it healthy, but it's become another of many infiltrations by the fascist left, so Elon Musk owning it can only bring improvement. My hope, and also my prediction, is that between this development and the upcoming elections it is going to become obvious that most of the American people wish to put things like wokeism, quack theories about rising white supremacy, queering up your kids for fun and political power, and the diversity/equity/inclusion brute to sleep (euthanized).

[Ruralguy]

It would be financially ridiculous for Musk to let Twitter be a free for all. He might allow it, but the advertisers won't.

[ciao_yall]

Share your thoughts on Elon Musk's takeover of twitter:
1) Will Twitter, which is (as I understand it) terrible at generating revenue, but great at piling up debt, turn around under Musk's leadership?
2a) Musk turn it into a free-for-all of radicalism and/or free speech or: 2b) will efforts in this direction be prevented by advertisers and others?
3 Are you on Twitter and, if so, do you plan to change your tweeting behavior?

1) No, because I think the one reason Twitter is terrible at generating revenue is that it has not been a great platform for generating engagement.
2a) Signs point to yes already. 2b) Not bloodly likely. With fewer users, coupled with unwillingness to have ads accidentally placed next to offensive content, advertisers will just drop off.
3) No. Well, apparently I have an account. I did try to delete it but since I forgot the password, I'm not going to bother with it.

[secundem_artem]

I'm not a big fan of social media but have tried using both FB and Twitter for classroom purposes with only middling success.  I dropped the FB attempt years ago, but tried Twitter last year.  Students don't seem that enthused, so I'm unlikely to now try Instagram or Tik Tok or whatever shiny new thing becomes the next shiny new thing.  I really don't care if Twitter makes money or if it continues to be an algorithmically driven curse upon rational discussion in the public square.

As to Elon?  Personally, I think he's crazy as a shit house rat. 

[dismalist]

...

As to Elon?  Personally, I think he's crazy as a shit house rat.

He has to be. Otherwise he wouldn't be filthy rich!

[mahagonny]

...

As to Elon?  Personally, I think he's crazy as a shit house rat.

He has to be. Otherwise he wouldn't be filthy rich!

Well, it seems to be that persons on the autism spectrum or with bipolar disorder are the ones who change history, often as not. Crazy, or crazy talented?

ETA: I just learned that he voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020 but now considers the democratic party the party of division and hate, and likes Ron DeSantis. Which is just about how I have felt.
So does free speech on Twitter prohibit expressions of hate? Can you say "I hate so-and-so (or their group)" without including any threats? I guess we'll find out.
It's not a pleasant thing to talk about, but I suspect just about everyone hates some others.
And I believe it's a protected right.
"She never bothers with people she hates. That's why the lady is a tramp." And we thought, that is a song for sophisticated people.

[kaysixteen]

WRT the wildly overpriced purchase of Twitter he was stupid enough to make, do we know exactly how much of this money was actually Musk's, vs borrowed funds or funds from investors he conned into ponying up help for him?  And exactly how do we know that he is 'the richest man in the world'?  What are the criteria on which this judgment is made, and who made such determination?

[dismalist]

WRT the wildly overpriced purchase of Twitter he was stupid enough to make, do we know exactly how much of this money was actually Musk's, vs borrowed funds or funds from investors he conned into ponying up help for him?  And exactly how do we know that he is 'the richest man in the world'?  What are the criteria on which this judgment is made, and who made such determination?

Mustn't let one's emotions take over one's analysis.

WRT the wildly overpriced purchase of Twitter

To you and me, maybe, but what's $3billion between friends?

he was stupid enough to make

People make mistakes. They are stupid only if they do so systematically.  I don't think Elon makes systematic mistakes. If he did, he wouldn't be rich.

how much of this money was actually Musk's, vs borrowed funds or funds from investors he conned into ponying up help for him?

That is known and it doesn't matter. He didn't con babe-in-the-wood lenders and investors. They're not helping him. They expect a profit. If he doesn't deliver, they may not invite him to dinner again.

'the richest man in the world'

He's worth about $241billion. Forbes magazine enumerates rich people. Most of their wealth in is in publicly traded companies, so it's not too difficult to figure this out.

[hmaria1609]

'the richest man in the world'

He's worth about $241billion. Forbes magazine enumerates rich people. Most of their wealth in is in publicly traded companies, so it's not too difficult to figure this out.

Depending on what day of the week it is!

[dismalist]

'the richest man in the world'

He's worth about $241billion. Forbes magazine enumerates rich people. Most of their wealth in is in publicly traded companies, so it's not too difficult to figure this out.

Depending on what day of the week it is!

I'll settle for Tuesday! :-)

[kaysixteen]

If he really has $241b, then that is $200b more than he paid for Twitter, more or less, so he would not have had to borrow anything nor get any investors to help him.   He could just write a check.   It would clear. 

The Forbes richest people list is apparently notoriously easy to game.

[dismalist]

If he really has $241b, then that is $200b more than he paid for Twitter, more or less, so he would not have had to borrow anything nor get any investors to help him.   He could just write a check.   It would clear. 

The Forbes richest people list is apparently notoriously easy to game.

Ah, K-16, you don't appreciate all the possibilities of high finance! [Nor do I.] That's all risk containment. Nobody is gaming a list that has no payoff.

Remember by the wisdom of Mark Twain that there are two ways of dealing with risk. One is: Don't put all your eggs in one basket. The other is: Put all your eggs  in one basket and watch that basket! Clearly, Elon doesn't have enough guts to follow the second strategy, so he follows the first. I sympathize with him; I'd be gutless too. Even if one divided all numbers by1 x many, many zeros.

[mahagonny]

Elon Musk has been photographed in the company of Donald Trump, and they were both smiling. So he's officially a guy we shouldn't like.

ETA: From American Greatness

The New York Times gave fastidious expression to this canard in a story headlined "Twitter, Once a Threat to Titans, Now Belongs to One." A "threat to titans," eh? What do you suppose that means? The Times explains in its subhead. "A decade ago, the social media platform was a tool for rebels and those challenging authority. But over time, the powerful learned how to use it for their own goals."

Like the NYT has not been a titan themselves that is worried about threats. They dost protest too much.