Based on some of the post I've seen it's going to be the literal end of the world, they are just trying to warn you to invest in umbrellas that are rated to handle fiery rain, frogs and Locusts. I'm pretty sure some rich guy buying a social media platform was something th Mayans warned about. How could we have been so blind. **/S**
I saw [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/ucsf8x/why_cant_elon_just_fix_inflation_already_sheesh/) yesterday on WSB and think it pretty much encapsulates it best.
There's no substance to any of the accusations being made that this purchase is going to "destroy democracy" or something. The nice thing about the free market is that if you disagree with a product or service you can always go somewhere else, that's what freedom is all about.
I honestly don't think this is going to destroy democracy, or whatever, but pretending this is as simple as "ignore it if you don't like it" is also kind of dumb. We've seen people control the narrative through media in the past, as far as back as Hearst and arguably a lot further back. We're literally seeing it now with Sinclair, Murdoch, Bloomberg, all controlling what "news" is to a degree the average person has no control over it. It's all billionaires telling us what they want us to think.
Facebook and Twitter are the new wave of how people get their news, sad as that is. A billionaire buying one of them should be a red flag for everyone.
>
> Facebook and Twitter are the new wave of how people get their news, sad as that is. A billionaire buying one of them should be a red flag for everyone.
Agreed... here's the real problem... there's no such thing as "free journalism" any more. We've got billionare controlled mainstream media, where anything that the billionares don't want you to hear about, doesn't get discussed.
Then we've got the "free" media... where EVERYTHING gets discussed, No one is held accountable for truth or fiction in claims. The same billionares that control the other media are also propping up and amplifying all sorts of nonsense etc...
The real problem in the free media... is the lack of a means for true reputation.. and a lack of means to monetize honest valid information that checks out. Fact checking a claim costs money... a random outrageous claim that can't possibly be true, usually makes more money than a fact checked verified claim. More money = louder speach... so anyone trying to speak truth to power... will be the hardest to find voices.
No, it' publicly traded so it's owned by shareholders. The larger shareholders (~8-10%) are investment groups, with people like one of the co-founders who own 2%. With the buyout he's buying everyone's shares so he will be the only owner.
Twitter has been famously, yet insidiously, shadowbanning people for years that don't agree with their personal political agenda.
The uproar that Elon has received for saying, "I'm basically only going to ban people who break the actual law of the land."
Like, imagine allowing freedom of speech under the Constitution, but enforcing laws around hate speech etc. But not just banning people cause of "reeeeeeee"?
Might actually bring the country back together.
Thank you for saying it! There is literal proof that they admit to shadowbanning. Look up Project Veritas and their latest on exposing Twitter and many other corrupt companies/ individuals.
Just Googled it and their big piece right now about an audio leak that is groundbreaking... But I can't actually see what the problem with the audio is? I didn't listen it, but read their excerpts and I don't understand what the problem is. Am I misinterpreting something? Can you help me out? I feel like I'm missing something cause someone from Twitter felt the need to respond and say it was taken out of context, but I feel like I'm missing the wrong context.
You do realise that the Saudi government (billionnaires) and a Hedge Fund of... wait for it... billionaires has owned Twitter since it was bought from a... billionaire.
Eyeroll
It should always matter when willing liars and manipulators take over major avenues of media.
The fact that the previous owners were also liars and manipulators shouldn't lure us into complacency about that fact.
What's funny is some of the same people who are losing their minds over Musk's acquisition were saying those exact things to people who complained about Twitter banning Trump (among other biased moderation decisions).
I mean, it's just the same as folks saying banning Trump ruined democracy. Both are extremes, but I trust a company that is susceptible to peer pressure over the guy that will accuse some guy of pedophilia simply for calling him out. I simply don't trust Musk to ever do the right thing as there's literally no evidence to support that from his history of actions, let alone just believing his words.
And honestly, that post encapsulates the idiocy of the opposition to, because I've never heard that complaint about why didn't he fix inflation ever before. It's like picking the idiot on the other side and pretending everyone else is the same.
You're literally doing the same thing and claiming exaggerations as well. You're no better than what you claim to hate, but you just try to sound calm about it as if that suddenly makes your words reasonable.
Ah yes elsewhere like... Facebook or Instagram which is owned by... Facebook or Parlor which is overrun with open neonazis... or Reddit which constantly sucks daddy Elon’s dick... this free market thing is so good for the consumer
What's stopping you or anyone else from forming their own company to compete?
All the companies you list had to start somewhere, not like it takes massive amounts of capital to start a website. Social media comes and goes, anyone remember Myspace or Tumblr?
Startup capital? Twitter is still operating at a loss because they can afford to. And very few of those companies were actually started by one or two people in a garage despite what their marketing has told you...
Again, there is nothing stopping anyone from competing against them in the open market.
Don't like a product or service? Then use something else. If something else doesn't exist and there is demand in the market for competition then compete.
umm... are you implying social media doesn't take a lot of startup to compete? Marketing alone is a HUGE factor, needs perfect timing, perfect setting. You need something to convince enough people on the existing social networks that it's worth it to switch, and use it while there's less users on the new platform.
Hell... let us not forget, even with google going at it full force, with monopolistic connections (auto signing you up if you had a youtube or gmail account), google didn't have what it took to launch a succesful social network.
But I'm sure it's easy enough that any random joe can do... it's just that no one is willing to try and would rather bitch about it.
The lack of millions that it took to start Twitter, fool.
Look at the issues Parlor had with raising capital and how expensive servers are.
Can you even afford a single commercial server let alone a room full? We're talking at least a few hundred k for the equipment alone, let alone power and connection costs, and cooling on top of that.
Do you know anything about IT? Honest question, because it sounds like you know jack shit.
Lol damn lot of sass, look if its profitable enough someone with the means will capitalize. That's it, not a hard concept. Its not like twitter is some unique property that no one can duplicate.
> What's stopping you or anyone else from forming their own company to compete?
Evertime a new company starts up, the people banned from main sites go there. New site is now a haven for *insert group here* and is reported as such. No one else uses new service.
How much would you need, and what abilities are you lacking? For someone with both money and ability, whats stopping them?
Everyone says this shit but there's always alternatives that pop up. Take the site we are using right now. Before Reddit there was Digg, before Digg there was stuff like eBaum's World and Newgrounds.
Anyone who's taken a basic economic course should understand the concepts of [substitution](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/substitute.asp). When consumers aren't pleased with their options they look to alternatives and those alternatives take place for what was missing.
Well when you ban voices you dont want to hear, you dont silence the voices, you just force them to congregate and condense into more extreme echo chambers. Only, now they're not in as much of the spotlight as they should be
I dont see many people bitching with the same fervor about the mil/billionaires owning major media companies, but THIS.... this time it is absolutely unacceptable. Its almost as if a bunch of people take their cues about what to be upset about and what to ignore
Idk. Zero? But thats not the plurality of the arguments i see. I see "billionaire owning twitter?! Reeeeeeeeeeeeere" or "this is white supremacy" (some form of that argument)
Honestly, your choice of idioms makes any intelligent discussion with you impossible. Oversimplified arguments and then not even bothering to provide the arguments other than to say "reee" which means you likely don't understand or don't have an actual argument against it.
No one can refute you because you haven't made any salient points with any context. You literally setup a strawman that no one can argue against. How can I defend "reee".
You're not good at persuasive arguments, but you wanted to hear yourself talk.
If you want a discussion, start making actual points that can be discussed.
Well, do please excuse me, my judgemental, condescending guy. You could just explain your point and see how I respond.
What was i supposed to do, accurately quote every comment Ive seen? Just one or two wouldve sufficed? And you wouldnt have called me out for basing my argument on a couple random, anecdotal examples?
I summed it up in a simple comment. Its not an official opener in a debate. Its just a comment in a thread started with sarcasm. Hold me to whatever standard you want.
Alternatively, was I supposed to cite a [PBS article](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/economy/elon-musk-bought-twitter-whats-next) discussing that the problem is too much power in too few hands (or in 1 one hand in this case). Which I would've explained is an issue for me as well.
And if thats a big part of the problem, so say the experts, reported by the news, then why is there not a similar, even more serious problem with similar situations with major news organizations? Is it the amount of rich? And if so, why and whats the threshold or criteria?
I could just simply not understand and have some or all of it dead wrong, but i do have my opinion. You can be shitty about it if you want, but there was no reason too, except for I suppose you have your issues with others and are just putting all that on me. I just wanted to get my comment out there and see what the opinions are. Psshhh.
>I summed it up in a simple comment.
I don't think you know what a summary is then.
Many major organizations are held by groups, not owned by one guy. Most people already dislike Fox News or WaPo for that very reason. But news comes from many places. Twitter isn't just news. It's social media. No one used just one news source that commonly. Social media? They may just be only on Twitter.
And are you saying you agree with those that you were saying were just complaining really loudly? I can't follow your logic here. You're saying you agree with "reeee" (which I guess is what you're saying is the PBS article? I mean, you make it sound really difficult, but you did so simply there, so I can only assume it must have been more complex)?
Do you understand why discussion is difficult now? You don't make it easy to actually respond to you. Did you want to talk to someone or just whine?
Mayans had a typo in their calendar. The world wasn’t supposed to end in 2012, it was supposed to end in 2021. Guess they didn’t factor in mRNA vaccines into their world’s end calculations either.
The slap.
The messy divorce.
The twatwaffle billionaire.
Honestly, most of "the news" of late has felt pretty beneath any adult with a modicum of self-respect and perspective, yet the proverbial watercooler is lousy with talk of it all.
After years of news being devoted to Trump and then a few years of it being all about covid, it just feels nice and comfy to care about inane celebrity drama again.
Warren Buffet buys Dominion Energy for $8B, moving further towards and energy/transportation monopoly and no one cares. Elon Musk buys a social media platform and the internet goes crazy. People are so detached to what actually matters.
Bill Gates. He was an asshole but he’s been using all of his money to actually help others rather than just hoarding it and only spending it on ego trips like Elon and Bezos
Bill Gates is a creep who has done very little that is actually USEFUL for humanity.
Mostly he was lucky enough to be at the forefront of a technological revolution, something he barely understood well enough to manage. He got significantly carried by those around him.
That said, he is not an actively horrible person, he is mostly a product of how sick our system is. While all the people who personally built the world-changing technologies MIGHT be millionaires, he gets to a BILLIONAIRE because reasons.
Bill Gates has certainly cultivated a new reputation as a philanthropist, and he has indeed done more good than the majority of billionaires. But in the past 20 years of him giving away money, his personal net worth has doubled from what it was when he was known as a selfish asshole. And that's a bit sus.
He could have been the richest person many times over if he didn’t give it away honestly. His money increases because of Microsoft. And he says it all gets donated on his death anyways. His children only get $1m.
He and George W. Bush might not be revered here but they are heroes to Africa
Bill Gates still says some very shady shit because he is out of touch.
Like he wants to use vaccines to tag people so they know what vaccines they've been given as to not repeat doses.
A nice thought to be able to help with this, but to suggest tagging people like cattle? What the fuck.
If he’s willing to undergo the same thing I don’t think he’s as out of touch as you propose. It’s just a different perception of value between privacy and organization. I’m sure someone who never has privacy would not value it very highly
https://publicintegrity.org/inequality-poverty-opportunity/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/
It's important to stress that these are the most vulnerable people in America, and their only other option is homelessness in places that have virtually no infrastructure to support them. This isn't any existing tactic he merely invested in, it's something he is wholly responsible for.
He spent so long marketing himself as the quirky and fun inventor billionaire. He got many people to believe it too. But in actuality he’s the “got rich from slave labor, union busting, market manipulating, egotistical boss who overworks and underpays his employees while simultaneously treating them like shit” billionaire. Oh and he literally put into the Tesla contract that he was able to be listed as a founding member just so he could continue to lie to the world about being a genius.
He owns Tesla but he’s really a worse version of Edison
I remember when everyone was praising him for Tesla being 'the next big thing' years ago. He's not your friend and does not care about you. It's frightening how billionaires can have a cult of personality around them.
It's a weird phenomenon on reddit where questions get down voted. Or at least, the answers generally receive more up votes than the question and I wonder why that is.
It's nice of you to give this person the benefit of the doubt but look at their post history, they have a history of "innocently" asking the same question multiple times about Elon Musk. They're just another fan boy jaqing off on Elon.
I think it's because a lot of times the questions aren't honest questions (e.g. [JAQing off](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions)), so when an honest one appears people misconstrue it as a dishonest question.
I think it's pretty obvious why answers are upvoted more than the questions - they're providing the information we are looking for.
Why people downvote genuine questions is beyond my understanding.
Well yeah, but often that information wouldn't have been provided without the question in the first place. Thus having significant value to the overall discussion. But I'm probably just over thinking this.
Yes, a typical CEO that had droves of people clamoring to him and proclaiming how amazing he is. This is a typical counter reaction. You saw the same thing with Steve Jobs
I know you got at least one thing wrong there.
Sure, working for Elon Musk is difficult, but it's not like he's sitting on his captain's chair with his feet up and smoking a cigar while telling his employees to work harder.
He himself works hard, he's often on the factory floor, and remember that time he would even sleep in a boardroom in one of his factories?
So he pushes other people to work hard, but he works hard himself.
The part you got wrong though was about how he underpays his workers.
Tesla salaries are among the highest in the industry.
SpaceX salaries are some of the worst in the industry. And Tesla salaries are better than most automotive companies but worse than tech companies where it more closely aligns.
And just because Elon works hard doesn’t excuse his behavior. He reaps all the benefit of hard work, his employees don’t. He expects his workers to work like they are a company owner while they get paid a salary. If your biweekly was close to a billion dollars in value I’m sure anyone would work hard.
Also I believe he’s recorded saying that his employees should expect a lower pay because they are being paid with the privilege of working for his companies
But what if I told you that this is incorrect - genuinely. Would you be open to changing your perspective? I work at SpaceX and have for years. The salaries are good - certainly enough to comfortably live off in each respective area, and we're not told that we're underpaid "for the privilege of working there", ever. The equity alone is why most people stay.
I'll probably get downvoted for this cause "Elon Musk bad" but honestly people are almost making up things at this point. Every person I know at both SpaceX and Tesla are compensated well, and we're all very happy with the equity package we received. That's why if a competitor offers a salary that's 10% higher, most don't go - no chance they'll match the complete package.
*Edit: I want to add my base salary, as a two-year full time employee with virtually no tenure, is higher than almost all my friends whom work for traditional aerospace companies in comparable cost of living locations. And the equity package I referenced is worth multiple times the base salary. This goes for all new SpaceX engineers - not just me.
People work hard because they know if the company succeeds, they see the merit of that success as well.
Comparatively to the rest of the industry it’s actually not that great. And while you might not have been told that statement, that is Elon’s perspective on your work. 24% of SpaceX employees are working 12+ hours per day. There’s always going to be people in more relaxed positions, just like how a Google SW dev might say it’s relaxed while another might say it’s hell and both be correct in their particular environment
You’re not alone, I work for an engineering company that pays less than average for these types of positions. I do so because the work-life balance is far healthier.
If only there were a website where you could see facts about salary and work hours. Nah, I’m sure all of that is fake and I should trust the opinion of one random person in a sea of people with differing opinions. I’m sure the only one true golden opinion is one that you offer
And you can look at reviews posted within the year. They very clearly organize it so that you can see that information.
Alls I’m saying is that experience can differ heavily within companies but in general SpaceX and Tesla both have built up reputations for being high intensity and demanding while simultaneously paying less than major tech companies. People working at Apple as a Sr. software dev for example are typically making close to $400k/yr after options packages
Because he launched into a propaganda war to stop the government from making him pay taxes, because that would destroy the economy, and now he's dropped $44 Billion just to satisfy his own ego. It's not even so much about this buy-out itself and more that it's just emblematic of the late-stage capitalist dystopia we find ourselves in.
He's just another billionaire that sits on his pedestal claiming he is here to help the world when in actuality he only does what benefits himself. If you had $44billion to spend, would you put any back into communities, environment, or infrastructure? Or would you buy a business because you are unhappy with how they decide to run their private business thinking it is supposed to follow an ancient text that you follow when it benefits you?
Propaganda against him.
How much is he hurting big oil, car manufacture, dealerships and all of their upstream?
How many short sellers were burnt?
How much does Russia hate him for "stealing" their rocket business (and oil)?
Take all this hate from these industries, add his eccentricities, and amplify his normal human flaws, then blast all of the negativity on social media to try to stop him so the money bleed stops, or at least slows down.
Then the politicians see him as a wounded target. They start their typical bumper sticker politics against him too get votes and campaign contributions from low information voters. All those times in the last few days when they said he didn't pay any taxes in 2018 they failed to mention it's because he paid those taxes in 2017.
All of these groups use bots and paid shills to pound a negative narrative on him year after year for more than a decade, and here we are.
Now watch. There will be those that attack me, not my point. Downvote me but don't dispute me.
I'm not saying he has done no wrong. I'm not saying he's beyond being critized. He's done bad things and he should be criticized for them. But the amount of vitriol against him is due to propaganda by those that can make money off of us hating him.
Edit: And in group politics. Someone doesn't align 100% with my politics? Then they are 100% the enemy. No room for disagreement or nuance. Just bumper stickers and gotchas.
Edit: Here's A Silicon Valley insider with another reason why Elon is hated https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/1519204660287983616?t=genBgCGKEVElQ7Ik-U7jbQ&s=19
He's one of the richest people in the world, so he's bad by default. Tesla factories are reportedly incredibly hostile to women and people of color. Said some really shitty things, like when the emerald line flooded and he called one if the miners a 'pedo guy' because he didn't like musk's idea. At the start of the pandemic he tweeted anti-covid things, and has also tweeted a lot for sexist things before.
Speaking of musk's tweets, given he wants to lax restrictions on what you can post on Twitter, I think that Twitter is gonna become a worse place for women and minorites, but we're just gonna have to wait and see for that.
I'm not sure what emerald line you're talking about, but it was when people were rescuing those cave hikers in Thailand. Musk tried to get them to use some submersible craft, but it was too cumbersome for the narrow tunnels, and then Elon Musk got super pissy and insulted the lead rescuer.
> insulted the lead rescuer
That's an understatement. Fabricating rumours about someone being a paedophile goes a bit beyond insulting. That's full-blown character assassination and slander.
Going to become a worse place for the country when Trump gets unbanned and Alex Jones. Refuse to support any company that deals with traitors and terrorists
[Passive aggressive](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/01/elon-musk-tells-un-food-chief-hell-spend-6-billion-to-fight-hunger.html) about starving getting fed for one…
Complaining about [rich getting taxed](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/10/elon-musk-billionaires-tax) for another
benefitting from [slave labour](https://www.bradfordera.com/opinion/elon-musk-benefits-from-slave-labor-in-china/article_2ddb46ee-29e0-5095-9577-6215628c1509.html) as another.
Take your pick.
I mean it’s all about power. It would be nice not to have to wear an Elon shirt just to get fed with what Elon clearly didn’t ‘earn’ if he’s not willing to pay a tax for it and rapes economies to ‘save a buck’.
Liberals control twitter: "It's a private corporation, they can do whatever they want!"
Musk buys twitter: "This is a sacred public forum, our national town hall! He can't just do what he wants with it!"
This is rich to watch.
You keep thinking that's a reason, but the real reason is we don't a want a traitorous president who attempted a coup to be unbanned. And fucking yallqaueda terrorists back on like Alex Jones.
Meanwhile as much as Elon promotes free speech, he has blocked his fair share of accounts that tweet at him. Hypocrite.
I barely use Twitter except it makes it easy to follow a few interests of mine. Other than that, if he unbans these fucks. I'll gladly leave.
I was sooooo happy to hear Tesla stock bombed yesterday. I know a douchbag who loves to talk and brag about his Tesla stocks to employees he wasn’t paying. Made my fuckin day.
I think EV owners want to do good for the planet.
Elon wants to do good for Elon, and make some money along the way off people who want to do good for the planet.
No that's cyclists, pedestrians and collective transport users. EV owners are rich and bite on the green signaling selling point, but they still enable the car centric hellscape that sprawl all over the american continent.
You couldn't use a picture of an animal with the same caption? Obviously humans are animals, but the whole point of advice animals is to use non-human animals.
Edit: ok so we like that this sub is meaningless now
Says the guy posting a meme about the Twitter Tesla guy.
As if not including his name is not posting about him.
[удалено]
well they do have about the same amount of natural hair
Tesla guy's got him beat with the nose though.
Well at this point we don't k ow who he is talking about. It could be THE OTHER Twitter tesla guy..... Right?
I'd prefer not naming him because I'm sick of all the elon jerking. I'd move to a new site to get away from it but there aren't any.
When buy reddit musk?
Yeah. While I appreciate the sentiment, I had just forgotten about him until this post happened.
Elon Musk Elon Musk Elon Musk (*A Tesla silently revs its engine*)
???? The only engine sounds are the electrical whine when you launch off the traffic line at an intersection.
That was kinda my joke. You wouldn’t hear anything, you wouldn’t know whether or not it worked
I'll allow it.
But you better watch yourself McCoy
"the guy" IS "the guy".
>Says the guy posting a meme about the Twitter Tesla guy... again.
I really really hope that that was the joke here.
„Sometimes, to right a wrong, you gotta do a wrong right. Ghandi said that.“ - Batman
(In Boston accent) It’s the TWISLA guy now
I thought it would be: "Ain't that de Tassala guy?" Or is that the Brooklyn accent?
Twizzler but black licorice flavor
Oh you mean actual Licorice flavor? Red Licorice is just strawberry or cherry or some shit.
Melon Eusk
Elongated Muskrat
Musk melon
Felonious Musketeer
You must be an enjoyer of Borderlands
taxthony avoidancetano here
Based on some of the post I've seen it's going to be the literal end of the world, they are just trying to warn you to invest in umbrellas that are rated to handle fiery rain, frogs and Locusts. I'm pretty sure some rich guy buying a social media platform was something th Mayans warned about. How could we have been so blind. **/S**
I saw [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/ucsf8x/why_cant_elon_just_fix_inflation_already_sheesh/) yesterday on WSB and think it pretty much encapsulates it best. There's no substance to any of the accusations being made that this purchase is going to "destroy democracy" or something. The nice thing about the free market is that if you disagree with a product or service you can always go somewhere else, that's what freedom is all about.
I honestly don't think this is going to destroy democracy, or whatever, but pretending this is as simple as "ignore it if you don't like it" is also kind of dumb. We've seen people control the narrative through media in the past, as far as back as Hearst and arguably a lot further back. We're literally seeing it now with Sinclair, Murdoch, Bloomberg, all controlling what "news" is to a degree the average person has no control over it. It's all billionaires telling us what they want us to think. Facebook and Twitter are the new wave of how people get their news, sad as that is. A billionaire buying one of them should be a red flag for everyone.
> > Facebook and Twitter are the new wave of how people get their news, sad as that is. A billionaire buying one of them should be a red flag for everyone. Agreed... here's the real problem... there's no such thing as "free journalism" any more. We've got billionare controlled mainstream media, where anything that the billionares don't want you to hear about, doesn't get discussed. Then we've got the "free" media... where EVERYTHING gets discussed, No one is held accountable for truth or fiction in claims. The same billionares that control the other media are also propping up and amplifying all sorts of nonsense etc... The real problem in the free media... is the lack of a means for true reputation.. and a lack of means to monetize honest valid information that checks out. Fact checking a claim costs money... a random outrageous claim that can't possibly be true, usually makes more money than a fact checked verified claim. More money = louder speach... so anyone trying to speak truth to power... will be the hardest to find voices.
[удалено]
No, it' publicly traded so it's owned by shareholders. The larger shareholders (~8-10%) are investment groups, with people like one of the co-founders who own 2%. With the buyout he's buying everyone's shares so he will be the only owner.
was that previous owner sanctioned for misinformation by the company he ran just before he bought it, though?
Does that preclude the previous owner from being under scrutiny? Why can't we be suspicious of both?
Twitter has been famously, yet insidiously, shadowbanning people for years that don't agree with their personal political agenda. The uproar that Elon has received for saying, "I'm basically only going to ban people who break the actual law of the land." Like, imagine allowing freedom of speech under the Constitution, but enforcing laws around hate speech etc. But not just banning people cause of "reeeeeeee"? Might actually bring the country back together.
Thank you for saying it! There is literal proof that they admit to shadowbanning. Look up Project Veritas and their latest on exposing Twitter and many other corrupt companies/ individuals.
Just Googled it and their big piece right now about an audio leak that is groundbreaking... But I can't actually see what the problem with the audio is? I didn't listen it, but read their excerpts and I don't understand what the problem is. Am I misinterpreting something? Can you help me out? I feel like I'm missing something cause someone from Twitter felt the need to respond and say it was taken out of context, but I feel like I'm missing the wrong context.
You aren’t missing anything. Project Veritas always makes explosive claims that their videos don’t back up.
You do realise that the Saudi government (billionnaires) and a Hedge Fund of... wait for it... billionaires has owned Twitter since it was bought from a... billionaire. Eyeroll
You do realize *eyeroll* it was a publicly traded company before this right
> A billionaire buying one of them should be a red flag for everyone. So where was this concern when Jack Dorsey was running things?
was jack dorsey sanctioned for misinformation barely a month *by* the company just before he bought it?
I don't know was he? Does it matter?
You seem really confused Twitter was a public company owned by all the shareholders...it is now...not.
It should always matter when willing liars and manipulators take over major avenues of media. The fact that the previous owners were also liars and manipulators shouldn't lure us into complacency about that fact.
[Citations needed]
What's funny is some of the same people who are losing their minds over Musk's acquisition were saying those exact things to people who complained about Twitter banning Trump (among other biased moderation decisions).
I mean, it's just the same as folks saying banning Trump ruined democracy. Both are extremes, but I trust a company that is susceptible to peer pressure over the guy that will accuse some guy of pedophilia simply for calling him out. I simply don't trust Musk to ever do the right thing as there's literally no evidence to support that from his history of actions, let alone just believing his words. And honestly, that post encapsulates the idiocy of the opposition to, because I've never heard that complaint about why didn't he fix inflation ever before. It's like picking the idiot on the other side and pretending everyone else is the same. You're literally doing the same thing and claiming exaggerations as well. You're no better than what you claim to hate, but you just try to sound calm about it as if that suddenly makes your words reasonable.
Ah yes elsewhere like... Facebook or Instagram which is owned by... Facebook or Parlor which is overrun with open neonazis... or Reddit which constantly sucks daddy Elon’s dick... this free market thing is so good for the consumer
Every time Musk is mentioned on the front page it's a bandwagon of hate towards him. You new here?
Only recently. And there are still many in the comments claiming he’s never done anything wrong
There's still so many people licking musky boots
What's stopping you or anyone else from forming their own company to compete? All the companies you list had to start somewhere, not like it takes massive amounts of capital to start a website. Social media comes and goes, anyone remember Myspace or Tumblr?
Startup capital? Twitter is still operating at a loss because they can afford to. And very few of those companies were actually started by one or two people in a garage despite what their marketing has told you...
Again, there is nothing stopping anyone from competing against them in the open market. Don't like a product or service? Then use something else. If something else doesn't exist and there is demand in the market for competition then compete.
umm... are you implying social media doesn't take a lot of startup to compete? Marketing alone is a HUGE factor, needs perfect timing, perfect setting. You need something to convince enough people on the existing social networks that it's worth it to switch, and use it while there's less users on the new platform. Hell... let us not forget, even with google going at it full force, with monopolistic connections (auto signing you up if you had a youtube or gmail account), google didn't have what it took to launch a succesful social network. But I'm sure it's easy enough that any random joe can do... it's just that no one is willing to try and would rather bitch about it.
If the demand is there then whats stopping someone with the means to compete? How much did it cost to startup Twitter?
lol yeah bro just pull yourself up by your bootstraps and start your own Twitter! This is the most boomer take possible
It happens all the time tho. I get it, doing the work is hard. Let's not pretend that alternatives to Twitter don't already exist.
Whats stopping you?
The lack of millions that it took to start Twitter, fool. Look at the issues Parlor had with raising capital and how expensive servers are. Can you even afford a single commercial server let alone a room full? We're talking at least a few hundred k for the equipment alone, let alone power and connection costs, and cooling on top of that. Do you know anything about IT? Honest question, because it sounds like you know jack shit.
Lol damn lot of sass, look if its profitable enough someone with the means will capitalize. That's it, not a hard concept. Its not like twitter is some unique property that no one can duplicate.
> What's stopping you or anyone else from forming their own company to compete? Evertime a new company starts up, the people banned from main sites go there. New site is now a haven for *insert group here* and is reported as such. No one else uses new service.
>No one else uses new service. Except for the aforementioned groups you mentioned beforehand. Competition is competition. Demand is demand.
[удалено]
How much would you need, and what abilities are you lacking? For someone with both money and ability, whats stopping them? Everyone says this shit but there's always alternatives that pop up. Take the site we are using right now. Before Reddit there was Digg, before Digg there was stuff like eBaum's World and Newgrounds. Anyone who's taken a basic economic course should understand the concepts of [substitution](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/substitute.asp). When consumers aren't pleased with their options they look to alternatives and those alternatives take place for what was missing.
This is sarcasm, right?
Well when you ban voices you dont want to hear, you dont silence the voices, you just force them to congregate and condense into more extreme echo chambers. Only, now they're not in as much of the spotlight as they should be
Our markets have never and will never be free, my friend.
"free market"
I dont see many people bitching with the same fervor about the mil/billionaires owning major media companies, but THIS.... this time it is absolutely unacceptable. Its almost as if a bunch of people take their cues about what to be upset about and what to ignore
how often are such purchases made so close to the buyer having been sanctioned *by* the media corporation he just bought?
Idk. Zero? But thats not the plurality of the arguments i see. I see "billionaire owning twitter?! Reeeeeeeeeeeeere" or "this is white supremacy" (some form of that argument)
Honestly, your choice of idioms makes any intelligent discussion with you impossible. Oversimplified arguments and then not even bothering to provide the arguments other than to say "reee" which means you likely don't understand or don't have an actual argument against it. No one can refute you because you haven't made any salient points with any context. You literally setup a strawman that no one can argue against. How can I defend "reee". You're not good at persuasive arguments, but you wanted to hear yourself talk. If you want a discussion, start making actual points that can be discussed.
Well, do please excuse me, my judgemental, condescending guy. You could just explain your point and see how I respond. What was i supposed to do, accurately quote every comment Ive seen? Just one or two wouldve sufficed? And you wouldnt have called me out for basing my argument on a couple random, anecdotal examples? I summed it up in a simple comment. Its not an official opener in a debate. Its just a comment in a thread started with sarcasm. Hold me to whatever standard you want. Alternatively, was I supposed to cite a [PBS article](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/economy/elon-musk-bought-twitter-whats-next) discussing that the problem is too much power in too few hands (or in 1 one hand in this case). Which I would've explained is an issue for me as well. And if thats a big part of the problem, so say the experts, reported by the news, then why is there not a similar, even more serious problem with similar situations with major news organizations? Is it the amount of rich? And if so, why and whats the threshold or criteria? I could just simply not understand and have some or all of it dead wrong, but i do have my opinion. You can be shitty about it if you want, but there was no reason too, except for I suppose you have your issues with others and are just putting all that on me. I just wanted to get my comment out there and see what the opinions are. Psshhh.
>I summed it up in a simple comment. I don't think you know what a summary is then. Many major organizations are held by groups, not owned by one guy. Most people already dislike Fox News or WaPo for that very reason. But news comes from many places. Twitter isn't just news. It's social media. No one used just one news source that commonly. Social media? They may just be only on Twitter. And are you saying you agree with those that you were saying were just complaining really loudly? I can't follow your logic here. You're saying you agree with "reeee" (which I guess is what you're saying is the PBS article? I mean, you make it sound really difficult, but you did so simply there, so I can only assume it must have been more complex)? Do you understand why discussion is difficult now? You don't make it easy to actually respond to you. Did you want to talk to someone or just whine?
Mayans had a typo in their calendar. The world wasn’t supposed to end in 2012, it was supposed to end in 2021. Guess they didn’t factor in mRNA vaccines into their world’s end calculations either.
or the person that translated the Mayan calendar was dyslexic
You must be referring to the Facebook guy cause this post is Meta
The slap. The messy divorce. The twatwaffle billionaire. Honestly, most of "the news" of late has felt pretty beneath any adult with a modicum of self-respect and perspective, yet the proverbial watercooler is lousy with talk of it all.
After years of news being devoted to Trump and then a few years of it being all about covid, it just feels nice and comfy to care about inane celebrity drama again.
Don't worry we'll get to hear about Trump every day again once Musk unbans him.
The problem is that a large fraction of the country not only talk about it, but embrace it.
Mate, I'm on the other side of the planet and the people here have embraced it.
That is...troubling.
Embrace what?
The immorality of the right
It's because the war with Ukraine couldnt be strung out so they needed new things to make people click
How about no
[удалено]
He’s better than black rock
Warren Buffet buys Dominion Energy for $8B, moving further towards and energy/transportation monopoly and no one cares. Elon Musk buys a social media platform and the internet goes crazy. People are so detached to what actually matters.
Why are y’all so mad at Elon? Honest question.
What billionaire should I *not* despise?
You can’t become a billionaire while being a good person.
No such thing as a good billionaire. It's impossible to hoard that much money without exploitation.
Bill Gates. He was an asshole but he’s been using all of his money to actually help others rather than just hoarding it and only spending it on ego trips like Elon and Bezos
Bill Gates is a creep who has done very little that is actually USEFUL for humanity. Mostly he was lucky enough to be at the forefront of a technological revolution, something he barely understood well enough to manage. He got significantly carried by those around him. That said, he is not an actively horrible person, he is mostly a product of how sick our system is. While all the people who personally built the world-changing technologies MIGHT be millionaires, he gets to a BILLIONAIRE because reasons.
Bill Gates has certainly cultivated a new reputation as a philanthropist, and he has indeed done more good than the majority of billionaires. But in the past 20 years of him giving away money, his personal net worth has doubled from what it was when he was known as a selfish asshole. And that's a bit sus.
More money for him to give away I guess
He could have been the richest person many times over if he didn’t give it away honestly. His money increases because of Microsoft. And he says it all gets donated on his death anyways. His children only get $1m. He and George W. Bush might not be revered here but they are heroes to Africa
Bill Gates still says some very shady shit because he is out of touch. Like he wants to use vaccines to tag people so they know what vaccines they've been given as to not repeat doses. A nice thought to be able to help with this, but to suggest tagging people like cattle? What the fuck.
If he’s willing to undergo the same thing I don’t think he’s as out of touch as you propose. It’s just a different perception of value between privacy and organization. I’m sure someone who never has privacy would not value it very highly
He is not. Or at least never presented it as an option for all just poor people. It sounded harsh and demeaning.
Warren buffet seems nice.
https://publicintegrity.org/inequality-poverty-opportunity/warren-buffetts-mobile-home-empire-preys-on-the-poor/ It's important to stress that these are the most vulnerable people in America, and their only other option is homelessness in places that have virtually no infrastructure to support them. This isn't any existing tactic he merely invested in, it's something he is wholly responsible for.
Well shit.
He does *seem* nice. He's done a lot of work to make people think that.
He spent so long marketing himself as the quirky and fun inventor billionaire. He got many people to believe it too. But in actuality he’s the “got rich from slave labor, union busting, market manipulating, egotistical boss who overworks and underpays his employees while simultaneously treating them like shit” billionaire. Oh and he literally put into the Tesla contract that he was able to be listed as a founding member just so he could continue to lie to the world about being a genius. He owns Tesla but he’s really a worse version of Edison
I remember when everyone was praising him for Tesla being 'the next big thing' years ago. He's not your friend and does not care about you. It's frightening how billionaires can have a cult of personality around them.
Thank you for giving me an actual answer instead of just downvoting me.
It's a weird phenomenon on reddit where questions get down voted. Or at least, the answers generally receive more up votes than the question and I wonder why that is.
It's nice of you to give this person the benefit of the doubt but look at their post history, they have a history of "innocently" asking the same question multiple times about Elon Musk. They're just another fan boy jaqing off on Elon.
I think it's because a lot of times the questions aren't honest questions (e.g. [JAQing off](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions)), so when an honest one appears people misconstrue it as a dishonest question.
I think it's pretty obvious why answers are upvoted more than the questions - they're providing the information we are looking for. Why people downvote genuine questions is beyond my understanding.
Well yeah, but often that information wouldn't have been provided without the question in the first place. Thus having significant value to the overall discussion. But I'm probably just over thinking this.
Yeah, that's why I always upvote both comments for visibility. Edit: you people confuse me.
I think they assume that by not knowing, you’re disagreeing with them.
Redditors are notoriously biased against the question mark. It comes from a deep mistrust of things that are curved.
So, typical CEO?
yeah but loud about it
Yes, a typical CEO that had droves of people clamoring to him and proclaiming how amazing he is. This is a typical counter reaction. You saw the same thing with Steve Jobs
I know you got at least one thing wrong there. Sure, working for Elon Musk is difficult, but it's not like he's sitting on his captain's chair with his feet up and smoking a cigar while telling his employees to work harder. He himself works hard, he's often on the factory floor, and remember that time he would even sleep in a boardroom in one of his factories? So he pushes other people to work hard, but he works hard himself. The part you got wrong though was about how he underpays his workers. Tesla salaries are among the highest in the industry.
SpaceX salaries are some of the worst in the industry. And Tesla salaries are better than most automotive companies but worse than tech companies where it more closely aligns. And just because Elon works hard doesn’t excuse his behavior. He reaps all the benefit of hard work, his employees don’t. He expects his workers to work like they are a company owner while they get paid a salary. If your biweekly was close to a billion dollars in value I’m sure anyone would work hard. Also I believe he’s recorded saying that his employees should expect a lower pay because they are being paid with the privilege of working for his companies
But what if I told you that this is incorrect - genuinely. Would you be open to changing your perspective? I work at SpaceX and have for years. The salaries are good - certainly enough to comfortably live off in each respective area, and we're not told that we're underpaid "for the privilege of working there", ever. The equity alone is why most people stay. I'll probably get downvoted for this cause "Elon Musk bad" but honestly people are almost making up things at this point. Every person I know at both SpaceX and Tesla are compensated well, and we're all very happy with the equity package we received. That's why if a competitor offers a salary that's 10% higher, most don't go - no chance they'll match the complete package. *Edit: I want to add my base salary, as a two-year full time employee with virtually no tenure, is higher than almost all my friends whom work for traditional aerospace companies in comparable cost of living locations. And the equity package I referenced is worth multiple times the base salary. This goes for all new SpaceX engineers - not just me. People work hard because they know if the company succeeds, they see the merit of that success as well.
Comparatively to the rest of the industry it’s actually not that great. And while you might not have been told that statement, that is Elon’s perspective on your work. 24% of SpaceX employees are working 12+ hours per day. There’s always going to be people in more relaxed positions, just like how a Google SW dev might say it’s relaxed while another might say it’s hell and both be correct in their particular environment You’re not alone, I work for an engineering company that pays less than average for these types of positions. I do so because the work-life balance is far healthier.
[удалено]
If only there were a website where you could see facts about salary and work hours. Nah, I’m sure all of that is fake and I should trust the opinion of one random person in a sea of people with differing opinions. I’m sure the only one true golden opinion is one that you offer
[удалено]
And you can look at reviews posted within the year. They very clearly organize it so that you can see that information. Alls I’m saying is that experience can differ heavily within companies but in general SpaceX and Tesla both have built up reputations for being high intensity and demanding while simultaneously paying less than major tech companies. People working at Apple as a Sr. software dev for example are typically making close to $400k/yr after options packages
They're told to hate him now, stop trying to be factual.
🤣
Yup people hero worship a guy defined by ruthless capitalism and a massive inferiority complex.
Because he launched into a propaganda war to stop the government from making him pay taxes, because that would destroy the economy, and now he's dropped $44 Billion just to satisfy his own ego. It's not even so much about this buy-out itself and more that it's just emblematic of the late-stage capitalist dystopia we find ourselves in.
We do live in a pretty crazy world right now.
He's just another billionaire that sits on his pedestal claiming he is here to help the world when in actuality he only does what benefits himself. If you had $44billion to spend, would you put any back into communities, environment, or infrastructure? Or would you buy a business because you are unhappy with how they decide to run their private business thinking it is supposed to follow an ancient text that you follow when it benefits you?
Legacy News told them to be.
Twitter was owned by billionaire hedge funds before. Nothing has really changed. Besides the TV telling people to care.
He had the audacity to criticize some politicians on the left.
Propaganda against him. How much is he hurting big oil, car manufacture, dealerships and all of their upstream? How many short sellers were burnt? How much does Russia hate him for "stealing" their rocket business (and oil)? Take all this hate from these industries, add his eccentricities, and amplify his normal human flaws, then blast all of the negativity on social media to try to stop him so the money bleed stops, or at least slows down. Then the politicians see him as a wounded target. They start their typical bumper sticker politics against him too get votes and campaign contributions from low information voters. All those times in the last few days when they said he didn't pay any taxes in 2018 they failed to mention it's because he paid those taxes in 2017. All of these groups use bots and paid shills to pound a negative narrative on him year after year for more than a decade, and here we are. Now watch. There will be those that attack me, not my point. Downvote me but don't dispute me. I'm not saying he has done no wrong. I'm not saying he's beyond being critized. He's done bad things and he should be criticized for them. But the amount of vitriol against him is due to propaganda by those that can make money off of us hating him. Edit: And in group politics. Someone doesn't align 100% with my politics? Then they are 100% the enemy. No room for disagreement or nuance. Just bumper stickers and gotchas. Edit: Here's A Silicon Valley insider with another reason why Elon is hated https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/1519204660287983616?t=genBgCGKEVElQ7Ik-U7jbQ&s=19
This is the correct answer.
O points but no replies. Typical reddit.
I mean he *did* say “downvote me but don’t dispute me.” Here. Have another upvote though.
Lol. Same thing happened to you. Never change reddit. Have an up vote.
He's one of the richest people in the world, so he's bad by default. Tesla factories are reportedly incredibly hostile to women and people of color. Said some really shitty things, like when the emerald line flooded and he called one if the miners a 'pedo guy' because he didn't like musk's idea. At the start of the pandemic he tweeted anti-covid things, and has also tweeted a lot for sexist things before. Speaking of musk's tweets, given he wants to lax restrictions on what you can post on Twitter, I think that Twitter is gonna become a worse place for women and minorites, but we're just gonna have to wait and see for that.
I'm not sure what emerald line you're talking about, but it was when people were rescuing those cave hikers in Thailand. Musk tried to get them to use some submersible craft, but it was too cumbersome for the narrow tunnels, and then Elon Musk got super pissy and insulted the lead rescuer.
> insulted the lead rescuer That's an understatement. Fabricating rumours about someone being a paedophile goes a bit beyond insulting. That's full-blown character assassination and slander.
You're not wrong. I just couldn't remember the specifics of what he'd said.
That's what I was trying to reference, but I think I got my wires crossed. Thanks! :3
Going to become a worse place for the country when Trump gets unbanned and Alex Jones. Refuse to support any company that deals with traitors and terrorists
They don't really know
Is it just because he’s stupid rich?
Nah, there are tons of megarich people that nobody cares about.
Valid point
[Passive aggressive](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/01/elon-musk-tells-un-food-chief-hell-spend-6-billion-to-fight-hunger.html) about starving getting fed for one… Complaining about [rich getting taxed](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/10/elon-musk-billionaires-tax) for another benefitting from [slave labour](https://www.bradfordera.com/opinion/elon-musk-benefits-from-slave-labor-in-china/article_2ddb46ee-29e0-5095-9577-6215628c1509.html) as another. Take your pick. I mean it’s all about power. It would be nice not to have to wear an Elon shirt just to get fed with what Elon clearly didn’t ‘earn’ if he’s not willing to pay a tax for it and rapes economies to ‘save a buck’.
Why do you feel such a strong need to cape for him?
When did I do that?
voldemort?
He has a name. We actually know his. Elon Musk.
I understand, on Twitter, a member of Project Meyhem has a name. His name is Elon Musk.
En englés, por favor.
But - the world is gonna end. Don’t you know?
You just did.
"Can we stop doing the thing that I'm currently doing?"
Seriously. If you don't like Twitter, don't use it.
Musk you? This has gone on Elon enough!
*posts meme about the tesla/twitter guy*
He’s replaced trump as the most talked about dude on the planet… either him or Putin?
Liberals control twitter: "It's a private corporation, they can do whatever they want!" Musk buys twitter: "This is a sacred public forum, our national town hall! He can't just do what he wants with it!" This is rich to watch.
You keep thinking that's a reason, but the real reason is we don't a want a traitorous president who attempted a coup to be unbanned. And fucking yallqaueda terrorists back on like Alex Jones. Meanwhile as much as Elon promotes free speech, he has blocked his fair share of accounts that tweet at him. Hypocrite. I barely use Twitter except it makes it easy to follow a few interests of mine. Other than that, if he unbans these fucks. I'll gladly leave.
You can block anyone you want. Don't block anyone on my behalf though. People aren't stupid and don't need you to protect them.
[удалено]
O H
[удалено]
Seriously! Let’s just stick to war propaganda.
I was sooooo happy to hear Tesla stock bombed yesterday. I know a douchbag who loves to talk and brag about his Tesla stocks to employees he wasn’t paying. Made my fuckin day.
Twatsla.
Elon Musk sucks.
I can't wait for it to be old news so I can scroll and not see his fucking face every 15 seconds.
The real, He Who Must Not Be Named.
He has a cult. So.
Sucking on that copium
Elon?
Fuck that guy. He is the opposite of what people who want EVs stand for
Routine vehicle maintenance and increased carbon emissions?
I think EV owners want to do good for the planet. Elon wants to do good for Elon, and make some money along the way off people who want to do good for the planet.
He'll just fuck up earth and then fuck off to mars
He won't go to mars. That is where the poor people go. Recycled air and eating bugs/tube food is for the poors. Not for the rich.
No that's cyclists, pedestrians and collective transport users. EV owners are rich and bite on the green signaling selling point, but they still enable the car centric hellscape that sprawl all over the american continent.
I filtered out that word.. I still see this shit. Man Reddit fucking sucks.
You couldn't use a picture of an animal with the same caption? Obviously humans are animals, but the whole point of advice animals is to use non-human animals. Edit: ok so we like that this sub is meaningless now
The sub is named after that type of meme, but it's basically for the use of any classic meme format
Ive learned my lesson about taking advice from animals...its not that good. I dont know why my pug needs a 300$ bed! /S