The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
wesimmo said:
Apparently, Musk can't be held accountable for anything he says on video as it's 'possible' that it was a deep fake. Even if said speech was witnessed by lots of people and journalists.

gizmodo.com

Elon Musk's Attorneys Claim Deepfake Defense in Tesla Autopilot Case

Tesla's lawyers wrote they can't "admit or deny the authenticity of video and audio recordings" where Musk hypes Autopilot's ability. The judge didn't buy it.
gizmodo.com gizmodo.com
Click to expand...
Sounds like his lawyers are on the same level as Trump’s…
 
unwashed potato! said:
Yes. He filtered a company that was making their own rival service.

Wait and see for BlueSky .

Defenders will first say no Elon doesn't. Then when Elon does, defenders will say "well it's his company he cna do what he wants".
Click to expand...

I think that would have been okay if he hadn't tried to hide behind his terrible $44bn purchase of a Titanic-like leaking tech oddity by going full on with "FREE SPEECH EVERYWHERE, TOWNHALL FOR ALL YO!". If he had not said that then yes, you can probably limit your competitors gaining traction on the very platform you own (because you're an idiot and overpaid for lols). When you have said that then you look like exactly as you are but - importantly - not to those who cannot see.

I said this in the dumpster fire Star Citizen thread where the believers account for 98% of the posts: us, this discourse, these situations, will be the studies of the future and I would give anyone who said "In summary, that was LOL" a first class Hons.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
I think that would have been okay if he hadn't tried to hide behind his terrible $44bn purchase of a Titanic-like leaking tech oddity by going full on with "FREE SPEECH EVERYWHERE, TOWNHALL FOR ALL YO!". If he had not said that then yes, you can probably limit your competitors gaining traction on the very platform you own (because you're an idiot and overpaid for lols). When you have said that then you look like exactly as you are but - importantly - not to those who cannot see.

I said this in the dumpster fire Star Citizen thread where the believers account for 98% of the posts: us, this discourse, these situations, will be the studies of the future and I would give anyone who said "In summary, that was LOL" a first class Hons.
Click to expand...
Of course, he can block all the links he wants, but it doesn't stop him looking like a weak scared baby. Twitter survived how many years, and now he's scared of competitors.

He knows twitter is disliked more than ever. He knows there's an appetite for a better alternative due to his own faults.

The blocking is the action of a man that's scared. Nothing else to it.
 
unwashed potato! said:
Of course, he can block all the links he wants, but it doesn't stop him looking like a weak scared baby. Twitter survived how many years, and now he's scared of competitors.

He knows twitter is disliked more than ever. He knows there's an appetite for a better alternative due to his own faults.

The blocking is the action of a man that's scared. Nothing else to it.
Click to expand...
IIRC that's not exactly true for certain types of company in the US where you are blocking purely to make it harder or block someone from accessing information about a competing service, at least if you're a certain size.
I seem to remember seeing some US lawyers pointing it out and the case law behind it, as otherwise you end up with the likes of one ISP stopping you being able to see information/visit websites for a competing ISP, and IIRC it applies to larger "social media" platforms as well.

I seem to remember it got brought up when Musk was trying to stop people posting links to their other social media accounts, and the likes of "link tree" where you post all your social media accounts/your own website/links to buy your content (often used by the likes of authors and musicians).
 
Chris Wilson said:
Doesn't this very forum block mention of competitors?
Click to expand...
Yes. This forum knows that it is weak to competition, in that, if OCUK sell something for £50, and there's another site selling it for £25, you'll buy from the cheaper most likely.

Twitter wasn't weak to this before. It knew it was a service people would use and intertwine with other social sites.

Under Elon that's not the case. Elon wants to block competitors so that users can leave the site he's made them want to leave.

Pointing out the weaknesses that OCUK faces doesn't make it some how less of a true point that twitter is now weak to the same ones.
 
Chris Wilson said:
Doesn't this very forum block mention of competitors?
Click to expand...
We do, however two things.
1: We're not a massive social media company, and social media is not the primary focus of the company.
2: We're not in the US.

The thing about blocking competition from memory applies specifically if you are over a certain size and are attempting to stifle the competition, especially if you are a well established company whilst the competition are much smaller and the market relatively limited (it's meant to prevent a monopoly or virtual monopoly provider* in one sector being able to abuse that power).
It's complicated but basically it's part of the reason MS got into trouble for their practice of bundling IE in with Windows 95 and ended up having to do the "bowser choice" thing for years as part of their settlement.
I can't remember the full details, but basically in the US it's intended to stop the likes of say Verizon (or AOL back in the day) stopping you seeing/being able to contact another phone provider or ISP.

It's also IIRC something that can affect your status as a "common carrier", if you're actively blocking access to competitors simply because they are competitors.



*OCUK are in no way shape or form a "monopoly or virtual monopoly" provider of computer parts available over the internet in the UK (I mean they're big, but not that big :p ).
 
Last edited:
Colonel_Klinck said:
Bill Maher is a comedian and talk show host. Its a friendly chat on the sofa. Your idea of a challenging interview is about the same as Elon's it seems.
Click to expand...

Elon doesn't owe anyone a challenging interview, he isn't a Politician that needs to be held to account. I doubt you liked that interview at all since both the audience and the interviewer liked Elon.
 
He owns one of the worlds most influential social media companies and inserts himself and it into politics on a regular basis, so he does need to be held to account. And he was the one that said he'd be doing these interviews, he just made sure they were softball.

I didn't watch it, I saw some take out bits on Twitter, that was enough to know it was just those two pleasuring each other over their obsession with the "woke mind virus".
 
Last edited:
Begbie said:
For clarity, it's the law plus 2 weeks. He hasn't cut it to only two weeks as the headline claims.

So California law is 12 weeks, so it's 14 weeks of paternity leave. So it's cut by 6 weeks?

Bit of a misleading article really.
Click to expand...

That's true but most states particularly red ones like Texas don't have any state level legal paid parental leave.

Most decent companies these days will offer 12 weeks paid or the state local laws whichever is greater
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
He owns one of the worlds most influential social media companies and inserts himself and it into politics on a regular basis, so he does need to be held to account. And he was the one that said he'd be doing these interviews, he just made sure they were softball.

I didn't watch it, I saw some take out bits on Twitter, that was enough to know it was just those two pleasuring each other over their obsession with the "woke mind virus".
Click to expand...

I thought the Musk / Twitter brouhaha had nothing to do with politics and the users were just worried the billionaire Musk was losing money and running it to less than the viewers level of acceptable investment professionalism?

Latterly the word "politics" is becoming a lot more prevalent in these supposedly apolitical objections.... :)
 
Chris Wilson said:
I thought the Musk / Twitter brouhaha had nothing to do with politics and the users were just worried the billionaire Musk was losing money and running it to less than the viewers level of acceptable investment professionalism?

Latterly the word "politics" is becoming a lot more prevalent in these supposedly apolitical objections.... :)
Click to expand...

I should have stopped reading at "I thought.." clearly you didn't.
 
I noticed that search is no longer available for non-registered users. It still shows up on the top right of the page, but if you type in something and hit enter, it redirects you to the login page. So I tried from my browser history as I have searched a particular term dozens of times.

Example URL from my history: https://twitter.com/search?q=synasethesia

The browser auto redirects to https://twitter.com/i/flow/login

So I checked on Google if Elon Musk has changed anything, and yes it's a change he has made himself to the site to try and get more people to sign up.

I'm not signing up to Twitter under Elon Musk, nor whoever the site was previously under as. Too much politics on there, around the stuff I was trying to search for.
 
Roar87 said:
Elon doesn't owe anyone a challenging interview, he isn't a Politician that needs to be held to account. I doubt you liked that interview at all since both the audience and the interviewer liked Elon.
Click to expand...
I watched it and Elon, as always, comes across as 'super smart nerd in highschool but how do humans work?'. He is and can be funny; he's pretty engageable when you watch him on most things, and surprisingly funny but just not always in the way he means. A massive problem is that he seems to have no one covering the 'but how do humans work' part. He does because he can not because it is for good. He says what he likes ('pedo') because he can and he'll then ignore it or hire the best lawyers (covfefe) to make it go away.

I imagine he looks at his Roar and his simpbase and doesn't pay it a second glance which is true to form but also funny, in his own way.
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
I noticed that search is no longer available for non-registered users. It still shows up on the top right of the page, but if you type in something and hit enter, it redirects you to the login page. So I tried from my browser history as I have searched a particular term dozens of times.

Example URL from my history: https://twitter.com/search?q=synasethesia

The browser auto redirects to https://twitter.com/i/flow/login

So I checked on Google if Elon Musk has changed anything, and yes it's a change he has made himself to the site to try and get more people to sign up.

I'm not signing up to Twitter under Elon Musk, nor whoever the site was previously under as. Too much politics on there, around the stuff I was trying to search for.
Click to expand...

Facebook does this as well and so does instagram, I think they now all require you to login. It’s going to put a lot of people off signing up now just to search. All sites was once open but not any more.

These sites want every single bit of your life in data form.
 
Last edited:
[FnG]magnolia said:
I watched it and Elon, as always, comes across as 'super smart nerd in highschool but how do humans work?'. He is and can be funny; he's pretty engageable when you watch him on most things, and surprisingly funny but just not always in the way he means. A massive problem is that he seems to have no one covering the 'but how do humans work' part. He does because he can not because it is for good. He says what he likes ('pedo') because he can and he'll then ignore it or hire the best lawyers (covfefe) to make it go away.

I imagine he looks at his Roar and his simpbase and doesn't pay it a second glance which is true to form but also funny, in his own way.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's quite as bad as you're making him out to be, he probably has more social skills than 90% of people on here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom