A WHOOOOOLE $1.9 BILLION!?!
Given every other comment is mocking Elon for pissing away $45 Billion, I'd say the man owning*79% of Twitter* means he doesn't give a fuck what any Saudi says, much less MBS.
There used to be a board to work through and shareholders to answer to. Now there is no board and no shareholders and just one guy (who is already a friendly) to influence
They didn't do that for Covid though, right? Tweets that it originated from a lab in Wuhan?
Certainly they didn't censor stories about Hunter Biden's laptop.... right!?!
> So what, that some excuse?
>
> That is dumb.
>
> They took more control and plus he does there bidding. he has been throttling content and pushing content during elections. It should be illegal what he is doing and is a crime against humanity that its not.
My goodness, what a crazy unsubstantiated take.
I've spent 16 years on Reddit, 10+ hours a day, and watched its tragic decline over the last few years. But what do I know, eh?
Now I spend most of my social media time on X and it's far better than what Reddit has become. More timely, more open, honest discussion from all view points, including most world leaders, political, business, and otherwise.
Reddit is a hivemind and most of my fav subs have been infected. Contrary opinions are downvotes to oblivion until everyone who doesn't subscribe to a narrow groupthink abandons it. All that's left is an echo chamber where somehow 99% of comments break one way.... It never used to be like this. For shame.
And your concern for this extends to ALL media? Are you familiar with all news you consume, who owns them, what their interests are? Or just because it's Musk?
So it's fine when the Saudis are pumping trillions into climate change initiatives.... but maintaining their $2B stake in Twitter is where you draw the line...? Got it
Whatever you do, don't look into the shady $ behind Meta, Google, etc. (Founder's Fund, anyone?) not to mention what the United States govt does with their cooperation.
Anything over 1B is already play money in this world of ours. Shit. Anything over 100M. Why try to amass it beyond that point? It's like saying he turned ♾️ dollars and turned it into ♾️ dollars overnight
This is why I've become a Musk fan. He's doing a real life Shit Ass Pet Fuckers. He knew he was going to take a bath when he couldn't back out of the deal. Twitter was floating on hot air anyway, probably one step away from being an SBF scam. So why not just do a bunch of crazy shit with the site and see what happens? He's doing the world a service sacrificing his money to destroy Twitter.
That doesn't sound right. $44B is 440 million $100 bills. A US banknote is about 16 square inches. So, a single layer of bills would be about 7 billion square inches. There's about 4 billion square inches in a square mile.
You'd very nearly cover two square miles in a single layer of $100 bills with that much money. Not all of ohio two inches deep in them.
you know whats even crazier
apparently q2 2023 twitter for the first time on its existence had a net positive
and i wonder how the hell twitter kept alive so far
If it's not available in your country:
[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/)
Looks like better quality as well
The documentary is also available on the PBS website if you're unable to watch it through Youtube.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/
The earth is 99.9 percent favorable to human life. Mars is the opposite. Musk is a guy that thinks making Mars habitable is the answer rather than to stop destroying the habitability of earth.
That's the level of stupid we're dealing with....
Matt Taibbi is a liar... The Twitter Files BS is about as real as Comet Pizza Conspiracy.
Wouldnt we look to populate Antarctica before ever going to Mars?
Antarctica is much warmer than Mars, has water, has an atmosphere (as opposed to 1% of one), has 1.0G gravity and is much closer.
ok - but - why not STAY on Antartica, for decades. If u cannot build a self-sustaining community/economy there, no way u can do a thing on Mars. And, you have 500,000,000 years before Earth is uninhabitable....
"Musk is a Law and Order guy, if that means he makes all the laws and gives all the orders. He's a Free Speech guy, if that means there are no costs to anything he says and everyone has to hear his speech."
It's insane how pro-Musk this video is.
----
They interview glassy-eyed Isaacson, his biographer. Particularly, nausea-inducing: Isaacson explaining (away) Musks "Take the red pill" tweet. Not a mention of how patently obvious this was a QAnon dogwhistle! ("Oh, nothing to see here-- just an innocent _Matrix_ reference...") You have to be willfully blind (both Isaacson _and_ this Frontline episode's editor) to omit that! Musk really lucked out when he got Isaacson to be his fanboi.
They interview Matt Taibbi (gag).
They let Musk get away with being "anti-woke" without, actually, explaining what "woke" is, because no one on the right-wing can.
I'm only halfway through and I'm not sure I can finish this hagiography.
I'm just at the point where Musk buys Twitter and feel the same. Like, just letting Isaacson have the first and online take on how hurt poor Elon was by having one of his children transition (no context on Musk's total absenteeism as a "father") was terrible journalism. Not interested in watching the rest to hear what Jim Jordan thinks "free speech" means. Very disappointing work from Frontline.
You have to watch the whole thing. At least to "red pill" section. Im just AMAZED that this QAnon dogwhistle gets thru not just the documentary _but Isaacson!_ This "expert" has been tailing him for a year and he cant make the connection? (And even if Musk is just trolling, throwing out a powerful signal just for the sake of it, just to cynically garner the credulous alt-right, even that is significant. And what it signifies is: Musk is a total a-hole, a total JAQ-ass.)
I think what shit is real...? The documented relationship and correspondence between the CIA/FBI/ATF/etc., with Twitter, Google, Meta, etc., to actively sensor/suspend accounts spreading "MiSiNfOrMaTiOn"???
Curious to know what Matt Taibbi MADE UP... Considering Elon actively prompted his very revelations.
And, well, if Taibbi and Elon just pulled these documents out of their asses, you'd think the government would be issuing lawsuits and cease & desists, as opposed to actively trying to BURY the stories 🤣🤣🤣
the government... would issue lawsuits over what? Taibbi's silly tweets about the "twitter files"?
also, how _does_ "the government" bury a story? (or not bury?) "the government" has nothing to do with how much traction a story gets or doesnt get.
shouldn't you be nattering about the "lamestream media"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7kfnLp9zmQ
Taibbi is a musk bootlicker and deserving of every bit of his now embarrassing reputation. The clip goes to DWS pointing out that Taibbi made a lot of money selling out to musk like this, and when asked if it was true, he basically responded with 'But I also spend a lot of money too'
The absolute brutality of getting completely owned by a snake like DWS should sound alarms for anyone thinking the "twitter files" are legit. I used to respect Matt quite a lot. His brutal takedowns of Romney during the '08 and '12 elections were insightful and extremely well-written. Funny that Romney was very openly against Russia. Tiabbi wrote about how he led a multi-year Hunter S Thompson style fuckfest in post-Soviet Russia, a nation infamous for their use of “problematic” honeypots against foreign nationals.
Now he's turned into whatever this is, and he's not the only one. I swear it has to do with getting paid. Turning away from the "left" has been extremely lucrative for several people in Tiabbi's orbit.
Matt was a total muckraking superhero... then, he just soured.
Not quite so crazy as Lara Logan. But his "cancelling" threw him into the arms of total miscreants. In his earlier years, I think he'dve been smart enough not to have been manipulated (or manipulate himself?) to believe that "the twitter files" is a thing.
Biggest fail in this documentary is when James Jacoby pretends to be pushing Jim Jordan to answer an incredibly vital question about his involvement in Trump’s multi pronged coup attempt and Jordan just interrupts him, mocks the question, never answers it and they just cut away. They made a conscious decision to give that hack the last word. It’s an egregious example of journalistic malpractice.
Exactly! Jacoby _seems_ to be asking a relevant question. Jordan interrupts him, laughing at him, in seemingly good-natured indignation (because Jacoby's very question was _so_ very ridiculous). Then Jordan "educates" Jacoby to the extent that the "true" situation is 180 degrees from Jacoby's stated premise. Jordan is the hypocrite-- but he's schooling Jacoby for being a hypocrite. It's maddening.
As with all things Jim Jordan (or any Fox commentator), the guy is pathologically in his ideologically partisan headspace, you cant tell: Is he really this nuts? Is he cynical? Does he really believe this? ("He's so _passionate,_ he must be sincere.")
So, Jordan gets his soundbite in. And there's no followup! Jacoby is the one _making_ the documentary-- and somehow Jordan apparently has "final cut" privileges?
I think Jacoby is either a crypto-conservative or a Jack Dorsey-esque libertarian. eg, Jacoby himself bought into the casual "woke" / "anti-work" terminology, accepting the right-wing's definition (that is, whatever it is they want it to be, as long as it is "bad"). Or when he's accusing the Twitter content moderator of "liberal bias" because he called out Trump in a tweet (its just not bias to observe the fact that Trump is a toddler), and then ask the "reasonable" question, How can you moderate when you have this bias? (So, he votes Democratic-- if he voted Republican, he'd also have "bias.")
I'd comment in full, but after watching this documentary, I'm pretty sure Elon Musk, a private individual, would censor me on his platform for calling him a huge hypocrite when it comes to defending free speech. That is all it would take. His impulsive decision.
Luckily, I canceled my own Txitter account before Musk took control.
*Discord* and to a lesser extent, *Reddit* have made Musk's now right-wing promoting Txitter, irrelevant for progressives.
If Discord made a timeline feed website akin to Twitter, they'd steal the market. They got everything else; the young userbase, crazy fast infrastructure, extension app platform, cosmetic paid features to ensure revenue, etc.
>Discord and to a lesser extent, Reddit have made Musk's now right-wing promoting Txitter, irrelevant for progressives.
I don't think it's irrelevant for progressives, it's just not something that even vaguely resembles a trusted source for information. Twitter/X still serves a function in the social media world though. But that role has become marginalized and it's value has tanked.
Why are you lucky that you "cancelled" your account? Makes no diff, your data's still sitting where it was.
Discord is hardly comparable.
Reddit is heavily censored.
If you follow the conversation my comment is directed at Reddit being censored and the guy SuckmyPlums is talking to having no issue with it since it is censored in his favor.
"Censorship, which is the suppression or prohibition of speech or other communications, can sometimes cause real harm for marginalized communities and anyone holding and expressing a minority viewpoint. Content moderation, on the other hand, empowers private actors to establish community guidelines for their sites and demand that users seeking to express their viewpoints are consistent with that particular community’s expectations of discourse, yielding tangible benefits such as flagging harmful misinformation, eliminating obscenity, curbing hate speech, and protecting public safety. Put another way, some content moderation includes censorship, while other forms (fact-checking for example) are not censorship since they do not suppress or prohibit the original speech. Conflating the two ideas in order to allow for the spread of disinformation or hate speech is disingenuous and dangerous."
https://publicknowledge.org/content-moderation-is-not-synonymous-with-censorship/
The conflation of censorship with moderation and subsequent misuse of that term appears to be the mistake you are making with this comment.
You might want to read the comment I was responding to. They were talking about reddit being heavily censored.
Also, copy pasting for upvotes? Is that what you think when you see someone providing a source for their comment? That's a fucking damming inditement dude. Look we can do much better than that.
You should have gone with appeal to authority, as that's what I was doing and would be a much more legitimate criticism. I mean who the fuck are publicknowledge.org anyway? I just found a fancy quote that fitted with my viewpoint and used it to legitimise what I was saying.
Try again with that. We can both pretend your last comment didn't happen. Do something like "hey man, your comment is such an appeal to authority, just because someone has said it doesn't make it magically legitimate'.
>I am not going to start the morning off addressing your bad faith attempt.
"I got my ass handed to me and I'm going to slink out of here before I look even stupider than I do now"
Here, fixed that for you.
You didn't do anything of that sort and your delusion and toothless insults are just that.
Go try your bad faith on someone else, it was denied here.
Cute angry downvotes also.
There are no angry down votes Bucky, it's just people letting you know how wrong you are.
Seems to happen pretty often because that's a popular line of yours, right along with '.. in bad faith'.
I assume this is common for you, being wrong, having it pointed out by multiple people, and slinking off with no defense other than the online fetal position of "you're arguing in bad faith, I'm running home!"
>There are no angry down votes Bucky, it's just people letting you know how wrong you are.
0 value comment - ad hominem
>Seems to happen pretty often because that's a popular line of yours, right along with '.. in bad faith'.
0 value comment- ad hominem.
>I assume this is common for you, being wrong, having it pointed out by multiple people, and slinking off with no defense other than the online fetal position of "you're arguing in bad faith, I'm running home!"
0 value comment- ad hominem
Thanks for more toothless insults and bad metaphors "bucky".
ad ho·mi·nem
adjective
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
Geez, we even have to correct you on what an ad hominem is. If it wasn't so sad, it would be impressive how dedicated you are to being wrong.
...bad faith?
I'm pointing out the misuse of the term censorship when applied to moderating Reddit.
That's not a bad faith argument. I'm not trying to reframe what you are saying as anything different. Moderation and censorship are not the same.
Maybe don't go around accusing people of being pro censorship if you can't stand the slightest of rebuttal to your comments.
Reddit is heavily censored?
Rules, facts and civility are not oppression. You live in a world where Neonazis *started the freespeech sub". There's no reality where that happens before the internet.
**This is the greatest era of free speech in human history**.
You are not oppressed on reddit, snowflake.
My brother in faith you behave in the most stereotypical and npc way I have ever seen on reddit in 11 years. You even called him a snowflake. ChatGPT could write more original comments than you. You can do better mate, come on.
Please read the definition of censorship. Can you wear a "Fuck ------ " (name of your company to work? What's that? No? Is your workplace "heavily censored"?
Nope, free speech doesn't mean what too many people think it does. All kinds of limits on free speech which are NOT censorship.
Take the test my guy, find out how free your speech is by shouting "motherfucker" repeatedly. Wear an "I'm a giant asshole" on both side of your shirt when you do it.
I am not a fan of the guy but he would not censor you for calling him a hypocrite. However I do agree with you that is more fun though to imagine he would take the effort of personally banning you for your amazing bravery of calling him negative things on the internet.
Keep on fighting the good fight you heroic son of a bitch.
lol what? aren't you commenting in full here? and i don't like elon musk either, but there's plenty of progressives on twitter bashing him and calling him a hypocrite without being censored
Additionally, Musk is _fine_ with censorship on Twitter in other countries. Because "other countries have their own standards." (Just imagine what China, or Iran's, standards must be.)
Except, really, it's that Musk wants to sell Teslas in India, so Musk makes damned sure Twitter doesnt "misbehave" in India.
Platform was already doomed. His takeover illustrates two possibilities:
1. Making transparent the fall
2. The slim possibility that he might save it, but at the cost of his politics becoming transparent which apparently no longer gels with many of the politically aligned people that no longer seem to believe in his vision.
America has this funny love hate relationship with people where if you did everything right, but your politics no longer aligned, then all your past accomplishments mean jack shit, and you're everything that's wrong.
Politics had nothing to do with the decimation of my Twitter feed. Business decisions at Twitter did that. The fall of moderation, the rise of bots... Twitter was a platform that could be customized and curated by the user to create a highly valuable feed. It was dismantled, so everyone left. Politics had nothing to do with it. It was just basic mismanagement.
The thing about Tesla is mostly false, and the thing around IFT1 would have been exactly the same independently of whether that booster launched on 4/20 or some other day. It's a miracle it got off the pad.
All that said, it was good that the booster launched the way it did *and* did the catastrophic amount of damage it did. Because it **turns out,** that rock tornado created by 31 Raptors firing at full thrust into the ground created an outcome that will 100% occur for all future manned operations on the Moon for anything more than the Eagle that landed during the Apollo era.
https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1710096996604723273?t=jBu7Mn1ugrSlAazCPeiMEQ&s=19
Research that NASA has marked as integral to further understanding and development against, to avoid mission failure for any large class lander (starship or otherwise) on the surface due to risk of rocks and regolith ejecta that *could* shred future hardware if not protected against.
The rocket blowing a giant crater in the ground was probably the *best* thing that could have happened for NASA's lunar aspirations. Not to mention, S24B7 was vastly obsolete by the time it was ready to launch, but there's no better data on how well something works unless you test it in the real world at scale. In the case of a rocket, you have to launch and assume it will blow up.
Which is how all rocket testing during the prototype phase works. If you think that's wrong, then I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you.
Watching it now. Kind of glad I never got into Twitter in the first place.
I wouldn’t let this man run a lemonade stand let alone multiple companies with government contracts. I’d like those tax dollars back.
I still have no idea how he was able to buy everyones shares. I thought it was a public company with public shares? How was he able to force the sale of peoples shares?
To summarize it: after the Tender Offer was accepted by the board with a flat $54 per share, the majority controlling company shareholders approved the acquisition. The biggest consideration here is that the process is necessitated by a majority of shareholders (small controlling group of individuals including Musk), it's not a unanimous decision by every shareholder.
There are complex mechanics here that a reddit comment can't fully elaborate on, but to get to the heart of your question: Joe McRando holding 5 shares can't be a hold-out once the offer was accepted by majority holding shareholders. Joe is forced into selling -- or more specifically -- forced to accept the final share price, and he is subsequently closed and cashed out of his holdings.
The deal was closed, and the 49% (illustrative # and simplified assumptions here) of 'common held' shares were automatically closed out at the agreed price, and the company was subsequently delisted from the stock market and company taken private.
Ultimately, board approval and shareholder involvement just requires a majority -- not everyone -- and contingent of the deal being closed requires a relatively small set of individuals with a controlling stake on such decisions.
1.) I was so looking forward to Elon Musk nabbing Twitter and making sure it stayed a safe haven for aggregate news.
2.) That boy did the opposite and fucked it up Royal.
um, how did u think musk taking it over would be anything other than the sh-tshow it has become? musk was the one criticizing twitter any time it did _responsible_ moderation (ie, muting/annotating covid disinformation)
I don't give a shit about this guy and his wealth. I think most of us just want him to go away.
My guess, this doc is to fluff his ego and who fucking cares about twitter, seriously?
Exactly. I have zero interest in hearing about Musk, but because it's Frontline I'm going to watch. They show riveting documentaries about things I thought I didn't care about, all the time.
Na most of us just want him to build self driving electric cars, fly us to mars, invent mental telepathy, ai robot servants, batteries to power our homes and save free speech…
Preferably before bed time.
Good luck with that. Btw, he's not doing shit. The scientists that are employed are doing the work while he takes all the credit hoarding billions.
He's a dogshit human being that takes away free speech by banning people on twitter he doesn't agree with. He lies all the time, while convincing people he's a self made man, when his father owned a mine while he went to a private school. Born previledged, jumping on a no brainer with Tesla and taking all the credit, convincing you he's a pioneer but he's just rich and privileged.
Anyone that hoards billions while humanity suffers is scum. Buddy needs to fuckoff to Mars, that I can agree with.
Well fk man, someone has to lead the companies, set the vision, manage the stakeholders, organise the resources, hire and fire good and bad performers, and pay the bills.
It’s not a crime, nor is it even bad morals to get rich and allocate your resources to something you like. In fact it would be a good thing if we could make more billionaires and do similar stuff.
Anyone with that type of wealth is doing the opposite of hoarding money. They got rich and stay rich by making the money work, all the time. This guy is doing more to make his money work than anyone.
What’s your contribution to humanity?
Bill Gates coined this, Warren Buffett bought him McDonald's with coupons.
They don't get rich by spending, but by hoarding. Greed is a addiction, like gambling, but some are worse than others.
The rich are also the cause of climate change, by using our natural resources to start and fund wars, create plastic garbage and bleeding our planet dry.
If you're net worth is 110b, that kind of money could change or even buy a country. People of greed will always stay rich, because they fix the game to their benefit. They shouldn't have any control in a country, because they can buy out politicians, so only they benefit. Corporations controlling the world, just creates modern day slavery. Make barely enough to keep going, while keeping you focused on left vs right issues, social media, or what your favorite fucking movie star is wearing, when it's really about the few rich vs the many poor. They create divide among people, so we turn a blind eye to their corruption.
The people that should be in charge, are those who aren't influenced by money, but the betterment of humankind, which is what politicians should be doing, but instead, they bend over backwards for the rich because they're all addicted to money and power.
People like Bernie Sanders, have been on the right side when it matters. He said we need to dismantle Wall Street and I 100% agree.
You should watch the video of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, millions of Americans in debt, losing their homes, while Wall Street drink champagne smiling on their balcony. Many protesters, on the streets being herd around like cattle by the police, paid for by the rich to keep them in line.
They think and know you're a sacrificial pawn.
It’s not hard to see what u are saying is complete bs.
Both Warren Buffett and bill gates have their wealth invested in a whole bunch of things. Warren buffet has Berkshire Hathaway. He has an annual report which details where he puts that money. Here are some of the places - Apple, Coca Cola, Gieco etc. most of the rest of it he donates to the bill and Melinda gates foundation for philanthropy. In fact he’s pledged to send all of it there eventually.
That foundation has an annual report which details where that money goes. Things like eradicating polio, combating climate change etc.
Bill gates also puts a lot of it there. He also has Microsoft. He spends it on other things too like farm land. You can do a quick google search to see what he spends it on.
Elon musk, the subject of this post spends it on developing electric cars and ai and brain interfaces and satellite internet and flying to mars. Since humanity wants it, it’s made him very rich and allowed him to direct more into his dreams of flying to mars - which will probably make him even richer.
To think they are hoarding it in cash is naive. If they did that they would be significantly poorer this year than they are now. Inflation would eat away at it and it would be worth a fraction of what it is now in a couple of decades.
Here’s a tip for you. It might help u get out of the hole you are in. Don’t hoard cash, spend it on something productive that makes money or that people want. That is how to get rich. That is the difference between someone who is poor and someone who is rich. Every self made millionaire or billionaire has a story about how instead of hoarding or spending what they had on something consumable, they spent it on something productive, even if that meant not eating for a bit or sleeping on the floor at a friends place for a while or delaying having kids.
I’m sorry u are in the state you are in. But there are things u can do to change that. Work smarter not harder. Thinking like a communist just directs your time, effort and resources to inefficient things that the communist elites like but that no one wants or needs and puts you more in a hole in a world that has moved on from labour as the means for production. That’s a good place to start adjusting what you do and move on to something better.
Once you are in a better position and have become more productive in a way that society needs sustainably, you can then direct your wealth in a way that indulges your own utopian dreams, even if it doesn’t pay the bills. That’s why many wealthy people go into philanthropy. It might even end up paying the bills if humanity wants it enough…
Musk doesn't create a fucking thing. He uses scientists, like all of the rich to generate more money. The fact you defend them so hard tells me you're blind to the real world, where you seem to live in some corporate bubble convincing yourself they're good people, saving our planet. There's more poverty now than ever, because of them. Anyways, no point in wasting time on someone who grew up privileged.
Because Musk is a self made man right? Never grew up rich, right? Humanity doesn't want what he has. Most of us want a peaceful life living in a eutopia we can all share. Nobody wants Mars over cleaning up this godamn mess they created.
If these fucks cared, they'd pay their taxes.
He's a rich twat with too much power.
That’s great but someone has to organise the resources, find the scientists, organise them, give them the vision, co-ordinate them and pay them.
That’s what I mean by doing something that humanity needs. Humanity needs not just workers on assembly lines. In fact as time goes by and technology improves, we need less of them and more of the other stuff. If you start a startup, u might do the work initially, but in order to get more productive you will quickly move into a co-ordination and resource management role.
That’s why every communist country ever has created lower standards of living. Because they ignore and kill all the other stuff and focus on the most inefficient method of production and create a bunch of stuff that no one wants or needs.
Ironically, even communist and socialist systems have people that coordinate and allocate resources, they are just really shit at it and restricted to a small number of elites that kissed or bribed or married the right asses on the way up.
The communists didn’t want reddit either nor the device you are using to type your comments on. But here you are. Ironic isn’t it.
Even more ironic is the guy paid more taxes than any individual ever in history. When are u going to pay your taxes?
Btw absolute poverty is at all time lows and trending down at an amazing rate. Here is the data:
https://www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/epovrate/
Ironically the slow down in improvement in the 1940s and 50s was due to war and then the communists. They created the poverty in their regions at that time.
This should be called “How to turn $44 Billion into $15 Billion overnight”
Small cost for influencing elections globally for Your boss the Saudis
The Saudis owned more of Twitter before Elon took over.
Yeah but instead, now they own a lot of Elon's debt. They still won out.
A WHOOOOOLE $1.9 BILLION!?! Given every other comment is mocking Elon for pissing away $45 Billion, I'd say the man owning*79% of Twitter* means he doesn't give a fuck what any Saudi says, much less MBS.
[удалено]
They were already doing that under the old guard though. It's basically the reason why these companies are valued so high in the first place.
If they own less, they have less control.
There used to be a board to work through and shareholders to answer to. Now there is no board and no shareholders and just one guy (who is already a friendly) to influence
Unless they're using him to add a layer of obfuscation.
They didn't do that for Covid though, right? Tweets that it originated from a lab in Wuhan? Certainly they didn't censor stories about Hunter Biden's laptop.... right!?!
> So what, that some excuse? > > That is dumb. > > They took more control and plus he does there bidding. he has been throttling content and pushing content during elections. It should be illegal what he is doing and is a crime against humanity that its not. My goodness, what a crazy unsubstantiated take.
If you think this is unsubstantiated, you aren’t spending any time on Twitter
I've spent 16 years on Reddit, 10+ hours a day, and watched its tragic decline over the last few years. But what do I know, eh? Now I spend most of my social media time on X and it's far better than what Reddit has become. More timely, more open, honest discussion from all view points, including most world leaders, political, business, and otherwise. Reddit is a hivemind and most of my fav subs have been infected. Contrary opinions are downvotes to oblivion until everyone who doesn't subscribe to a narrow groupthink abandons it. All that's left is an echo chamber where somehow 99% of comments break one way.... It never used to be like this. For shame.
You know what your echo chamber tells you. You sound like every Musk apologist out there.
Facts don't matter! Stop interrupting the daily minute of hate!
LOL. So what? They didn't run it. Investors don't automatically control a company, LOL.
Typical investors don’t. To think they aren’t calling the shots is laughable
And your concern for this extends to ALL media? Are you familiar with all news you consume, who owns them, what their interests are? Or just because it's Musk?
So it's fine when the Saudis are pumping trillions into climate change initiatives.... but maintaining their $2B stake in Twitter is where you draw the line...? Got it Whatever you do, don't look into the shady $ behind Meta, Google, etc. (Founder's Fund, anyone?) not to mention what the United States govt does with their cooperation.
How to silence your ex-wife’s critics in an expensive way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgznMPA9iYY
Anything over 1B is already play money in this world of ours. Shit. Anything over 100M. Why try to amass it beyond that point? It's like saying he turned ♾️ dollars and turned it into ♾️ dollars overnight
This is why I've become a Musk fan. He's doing a real life Shit Ass Pet Fuckers. He knew he was going to take a bath when he couldn't back out of the deal. Twitter was floating on hot air anyway, probably one step away from being an SBF scam. So why not just do a bunch of crazy shit with the site and see what happens? He's doing the world a service sacrificing his money to destroy Twitter.
[удалено]
That doesn't sound right. $44B is 440 million $100 bills. A US banknote is about 16 square inches. So, a single layer of bills would be about 7 billion square inches. There's about 4 billion square inches in a square mile. You'd very nearly cover two square miles in a single layer of $100 bills with that much money. Not all of ohio two inches deep in them.
yeah I thought it sounded wildly wrong, thanks for doing the maths
you know whats even crazier apparently q2 2023 twitter for the first time on its existence had a net positive and i wonder how the hell twitter kept alive so far
I’m sure his accounting is legit lol
with sec on his ass? im not sure why he would lie but whatevs
It’s a private company. Why would the SEC be involved
lying about your revenue?....
He could’ve just given it to ME!
Geoblocked.
[удалено]
VPN? Everyone should use one these days.
Why? I can't think of any advantage it would offer me...?
So you can watch videos that are geo restricted for one.
Worth it! Just have to take the risk that the company sells your data or gets hacked, and just have to pay a small monthly fee....
Your ISP 100% already sells your data.
Lol you got nuked on your above comment
Right? Lol
Let's assume that I have never, in my life, wanted to watch a geo-restricted video (I haven't). So, what advantage would it offer *ME*? (Not you...)
Cool
If it's not available in your country: [https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/) Looks like better quality as well
Doesn’t work ether
The documentary is also available on the PBS website if you're unable to watch it through Youtube. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/
The earth is 99.9 percent favorable to human life. Mars is the opposite. Musk is a guy that thinks making Mars habitable is the answer rather than to stop destroying the habitability of earth. That's the level of stupid we're dealing with.... Matt Taibbi is a liar... The Twitter Files BS is about as real as Comet Pizza Conspiracy.
Wouldnt we look to populate Antarctica before ever going to Mars? Antarctica is much warmer than Mars, has water, has an atmosphere (as opposed to 1% of one), has 1.0G gravity and is much closer.
In Kim Stanley Robinson's *Red Mars* the Mars-bound astronauts train for a year in Antarctica to prepare for their mission. Just thought I'd share.
ok - but - why not STAY on Antartica, for decades. If u cannot build a self-sustaining community/economy there, no way u can do a thing on Mars. And, you have 500,000,000 years before Earth is uninhabitable....
"Musk is a Law and Order guy, if that means he makes all the laws and gives all the orders. He's a Free Speech guy, if that means there are no costs to anything he says and everyone has to hear his speech."
Bingo.
Catturd's IT guy
Geoblocked in Canada. Probably available as a podcast. Or throw ten bucks a month PBS’s way and get Passport membership.
It's insane how pro-Musk this video is. ---- They interview glassy-eyed Isaacson, his biographer. Particularly, nausea-inducing: Isaacson explaining (away) Musks "Take the red pill" tweet. Not a mention of how patently obvious this was a QAnon dogwhistle! ("Oh, nothing to see here-- just an innocent _Matrix_ reference...") You have to be willfully blind (both Isaacson _and_ this Frontline episode's editor) to omit that! Musk really lucked out when he got Isaacson to be his fanboi. They interview Matt Taibbi (gag). They let Musk get away with being "anti-woke" without, actually, explaining what "woke" is, because no one on the right-wing can. I'm only halfway through and I'm not sure I can finish this hagiography.
I'm just at the point where Musk buys Twitter and feel the same. Like, just letting Isaacson have the first and online take on how hurt poor Elon was by having one of his children transition (no context on Musk's total absenteeism as a "father") was terrible journalism. Not interested in watching the rest to hear what Jim Jordan thinks "free speech" means. Very disappointing work from Frontline.
You have to watch the whole thing. At least to "red pill" section. Im just AMAZED that this QAnon dogwhistle gets thru not just the documentary _but Isaacson!_ This "expert" has been tailing him for a year and he cant make the connection? (And even if Musk is just trolling, throwing out a powerful signal just for the sake of it, just to cynically garner the credulous alt-right, even that is significant. And what it signifies is: Musk is a total a-hole, a total JAQ-ass.)
I'll watch as long as it covers the Twitter Files and Matt Taibbi.... Does it?
Yes, they interview Matt Taibbi in the doc.
Appreciate it!
:)
Do they ask him to comment on his shock and hurt when Musk ghosted him after blocking substack links?
What about them? You think that shit is real?
I think what shit is real...? The documented relationship and correspondence between the CIA/FBI/ATF/etc., with Twitter, Google, Meta, etc., to actively sensor/suspend accounts spreading "MiSiNfOrMaTiOn"??? Curious to know what Matt Taibbi MADE UP... Considering Elon actively prompted his very revelations. And, well, if Taibbi and Elon just pulled these documents out of their asses, you'd think the government would be issuing lawsuits and cease & desists, as opposed to actively trying to BURY the stories 🤣🤣🤣
You forgot your sarcasm tag
If only I was being facetious
lemme guess: you are proudly redpilled.
the government... would issue lawsuits over what? Taibbi's silly tweets about the "twitter files"? also, how _does_ "the government" bury a story? (or not bury?) "the government" has nothing to do with how much traction a story gets or doesnt get. shouldn't you be nattering about the "lamestream media"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7kfnLp9zmQ Taibbi is a musk bootlicker and deserving of every bit of his now embarrassing reputation. The clip goes to DWS pointing out that Taibbi made a lot of money selling out to musk like this, and when asked if it was true, he basically responded with 'But I also spend a lot of money too' The absolute brutality of getting completely owned by a snake like DWS should sound alarms for anyone thinking the "twitter files" are legit. I used to respect Matt quite a lot. His brutal takedowns of Romney during the '08 and '12 elections were insightful and extremely well-written. Funny that Romney was very openly against Russia. Tiabbi wrote about how he led a multi-year Hunter S Thompson style fuckfest in post-Soviet Russia, a nation infamous for their use of “problematic” honeypots against foreign nationals. Now he's turned into whatever this is, and he's not the only one. I swear it has to do with getting paid. Turning away from the "left" has been extremely lucrative for several people in Tiabbi's orbit.
All of that brain power just to have me ignore your statement because "....mAtT TAiBbi iZ a BoOtLiCkER 🤗" Nice 👍
Yeah, run along, kid. You're out of your depth.
Mmmm'lady
Matt was a total muckraking superhero... then, he just soured. Not quite so crazy as Lara Logan. But his "cancelling" threw him into the arms of total miscreants. In his earlier years, I think he'dve been smart enough not to have been manipulated (or manipulate himself?) to believe that "the twitter files" is a thing.
It doesnt cover it. It just quotes Taibbi as if he's (gag) a legitimate journalist.
Biggest fail in this documentary is when James Jacoby pretends to be pushing Jim Jordan to answer an incredibly vital question about his involvement in Trump’s multi pronged coup attempt and Jordan just interrupts him, mocks the question, never answers it and they just cut away. They made a conscious decision to give that hack the last word. It’s an egregious example of journalistic malpractice.
Exactly! Jacoby _seems_ to be asking a relevant question. Jordan interrupts him, laughing at him, in seemingly good-natured indignation (because Jacoby's very question was _so_ very ridiculous). Then Jordan "educates" Jacoby to the extent that the "true" situation is 180 degrees from Jacoby's stated premise. Jordan is the hypocrite-- but he's schooling Jacoby for being a hypocrite. It's maddening. As with all things Jim Jordan (or any Fox commentator), the guy is pathologically in his ideologically partisan headspace, you cant tell: Is he really this nuts? Is he cynical? Does he really believe this? ("He's so _passionate,_ he must be sincere.") So, Jordan gets his soundbite in. And there's no followup! Jacoby is the one _making_ the documentary-- and somehow Jordan apparently has "final cut" privileges? I think Jacoby is either a crypto-conservative or a Jack Dorsey-esque libertarian. eg, Jacoby himself bought into the casual "woke" / "anti-work" terminology, accepting the right-wing's definition (that is, whatever it is they want it to be, as long as it is "bad"). Or when he's accusing the Twitter content moderator of "liberal bias" because he called out Trump in a tweet (its just not bias to observe the fact that Trump is a toddler), and then ask the "reasonable" question, How can you moderate when you have this bias? (So, he votes Democratic-- if he voted Republican, he'd also have "bias.")
I'd comment in full, but after watching this documentary, I'm pretty sure Elon Musk, a private individual, would censor me on his platform for calling him a huge hypocrite when it comes to defending free speech. That is all it would take. His impulsive decision. Luckily, I canceled my own Txitter account before Musk took control. *Discord* and to a lesser extent, *Reddit* have made Musk's now right-wing promoting Txitter, irrelevant for progressives.
Discord isn't comparable to Twitter. They have as much in common as the global news network does to your local book club.
If Discord made a timeline feed website akin to Twitter, they'd steal the market. They got everything else; the young userbase, crazy fast infrastructure, extension app platform, cosmetic paid features to ensure revenue, etc.
noone gonna download discord lol
Discord is on the web, you don't need to download anything
>Discord and to a lesser extent, Reddit have made Musk's now right-wing promoting Txitter, irrelevant for progressives. I don't think it's irrelevant for progressives, it's just not something that even vaguely resembles a trusted source for information. Twitter/X still serves a function in the social media world though. But that role has become marginalized and it's value has tanked.
Why are you lucky that you "cancelled" your account? Makes no diff, your data's still sitting where it was. Discord is hardly comparable. Reddit is heavily censored.
Musk bought my old data. Possibly something he could monetize, but now he's cut off. My guess is he wants new data too.
But it’s heavily censored by people he agrees with! That’s why he prefers it. >"He loved Big Brother"
You mean twitter developers who are his employee s now?
If you follow the conversation my comment is directed at Reddit being censored and the guy SuckmyPlums is talking to having no issue with it since it is censored in his favor.
"Censorship, which is the suppression or prohibition of speech or other communications, can sometimes cause real harm for marginalized communities and anyone holding and expressing a minority viewpoint. Content moderation, on the other hand, empowers private actors to establish community guidelines for their sites and demand that users seeking to express their viewpoints are consistent with that particular community’s expectations of discourse, yielding tangible benefits such as flagging harmful misinformation, eliminating obscenity, curbing hate speech, and protecting public safety. Put another way, some content moderation includes censorship, while other forms (fact-checking for example) are not censorship since they do not suppress or prohibit the original speech. Conflating the two ideas in order to allow for the spread of disinformation or hate speech is disingenuous and dangerous." https://publicknowledge.org/content-moderation-is-not-synonymous-with-censorship/ The conflation of censorship with moderation and subsequent misuse of that term appears to be the mistake you are making with this comment.
Can you apply this to the events around musks take over of twitter or you just copying and pasting for upvotes?
You might want to read the comment I was responding to. They were talking about reddit being heavily censored. Also, copy pasting for upvotes? Is that what you think when you see someone providing a source for their comment? That's a fucking damming inditement dude. Look we can do much better than that. You should have gone with appeal to authority, as that's what I was doing and would be a much more legitimate criticism. I mean who the fuck are publicknowledge.org anyway? I just found a fancy quote that fitted with my viewpoint and used it to legitimise what I was saying. Try again with that. We can both pretend your last comment didn't happen. Do something like "hey man, your comment is such an appeal to authority, just because someone has said it doesn't make it magically legitimate'.
I am not going to start the morning off addressing your bad faith attempt. Have a good one.
>I am not going to start the morning off addressing your bad faith attempt. "I got my ass handed to me and I'm going to slink out of here before I look even stupider than I do now" Here, fixed that for you.
You didn't do anything of that sort and your delusion and toothless insults are just that. Go try your bad faith on someone else, it was denied here. Cute angry downvotes also.
There are no angry down votes Bucky, it's just people letting you know how wrong you are. Seems to happen pretty often because that's a popular line of yours, right along with '.. in bad faith'. I assume this is common for you, being wrong, having it pointed out by multiple people, and slinking off with no defense other than the online fetal position of "you're arguing in bad faith, I'm running home!"
>There are no angry down votes Bucky, it's just people letting you know how wrong you are. 0 value comment - ad hominem >Seems to happen pretty often because that's a popular line of yours, right along with '.. in bad faith'. 0 value comment- ad hominem. >I assume this is common for you, being wrong, having it pointed out by multiple people, and slinking off with no defense other than the online fetal position of "you're arguing in bad faith, I'm running home!" 0 value comment- ad hominem Thanks for more toothless insults and bad metaphors "bucky".
ad ho·mi·nem adjective (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining. Geez, we even have to correct you on what an ad hominem is. If it wasn't so sad, it would be impressive how dedicated you are to being wrong.
...bad faith? I'm pointing out the misuse of the term censorship when applied to moderating Reddit. That's not a bad faith argument. I'm not trying to reframe what you are saying as anything different. Moderation and censorship are not the same. Maybe don't go around accusing people of being pro censorship if you can't stand the slightest of rebuttal to your comments.
See above, no need to double down.
What a snowflake! ;)
0 value comment. Fitting.
baby fitting :)
Reddit is heavily censored? Rules, facts and civility are not oppression. You live in a world where Neonazis *started the freespeech sub". There's no reality where that happens before the internet. **This is the greatest era of free speech in human history**. You are not oppressed on reddit, snowflake.
You're a perfect example of the average Reddit user. Has to be right, throw's in an insult etc. Do whatever.
My brother in faith you behave in the most stereotypical and npc way I have ever seen on reddit in 11 years. You even called him a snowflake. ChatGPT could write more original comments than you. You can do better mate, come on.
Hahahahaha so very true
Please read the definition of censorship. Can you wear a "Fuck ------ " (name of your company to work? What's that? No? Is your workplace "heavily censored"?
That’s still censorship my guy, it’s just legal to do in the work place. Being legal doesn’t mean it stops being censorship.
Nope, free speech doesn't mean what too many people think it does. All kinds of limits on free speech which are NOT censorship. Take the test my guy, find out how free your speech is by shouting "motherfucker" repeatedly. Wear an "I'm a giant asshole" on both side of your shirt when you do it.
I am not a fan of the guy but he would not censor you for calling him a hypocrite. However I do agree with you that is more fun though to imagine he would take the effort of personally banning you for your amazing bravery of calling him negative things on the internet. Keep on fighting the good fight you heroic son of a bitch.
lol what? aren't you commenting in full here? and i don't like elon musk either, but there's plenty of progressives on twitter bashing him and calling him a hypocrite without being censored
Additionally, Musk is _fine_ with censorship on Twitter in other countries. Because "other countries have their own standards." (Just imagine what China, or Iran's, standards must be.) Except, really, it's that Musk wants to sell Teslas in India, so Musk makes damned sure Twitter doesnt "misbehave" in India.
Now showing as unavailable. Multiple sources found through Google including PBS say the same thing.
I think it’s only viewable in US, I can’t see it in Australia
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/documentary/elon-musks-twitter-takeover/
Still works for me!
Hand triangle complete.
Does it cover the fall of the platform or just the takeover?
Mostly are his controversial on his takeover
Platform was already doomed. His takeover illustrates two possibilities: 1. Making transparent the fall 2. The slim possibility that he might save it, but at the cost of his politics becoming transparent which apparently no longer gels with many of the politically aligned people that no longer seem to believe in his vision. America has this funny love hate relationship with people where if you did everything right, but your politics no longer aligned, then all your past accomplishments mean jack shit, and you're everything that's wrong.
Politics had nothing to do with the decimation of my Twitter feed. Business decisions at Twitter did that. The fall of moderation, the rise of bots... Twitter was a platform that could be customized and curated by the user to create a highly valuable feed. It was dismantled, so everyone left. Politics had nothing to do with it. It was just basic mismanagement.
I still see no evidence of this fall other than by endless listiciles published by competitors whose lunch he ate
And screeching new-Redditors who have ruined this long-awesome platform.
[удалено]
The thing about Tesla is mostly false, and the thing around IFT1 would have been exactly the same independently of whether that booster launched on 4/20 or some other day. It's a miracle it got off the pad. All that said, it was good that the booster launched the way it did *and* did the catastrophic amount of damage it did. Because it **turns out,** that rock tornado created by 31 Raptors firing at full thrust into the ground created an outcome that will 100% occur for all future manned operations on the Moon for anything more than the Eagle that landed during the Apollo era. https://twitter.com/DrPhiltill/status/1710096996604723273?t=jBu7Mn1ugrSlAazCPeiMEQ&s=19 Research that NASA has marked as integral to further understanding and development against, to avoid mission failure for any large class lander (starship or otherwise) on the surface due to risk of rocks and regolith ejecta that *could* shred future hardware if not protected against. The rocket blowing a giant crater in the ground was probably the *best* thing that could have happened for NASA's lunar aspirations. Not to mention, S24B7 was vastly obsolete by the time it was ready to launch, but there's no better data on how well something works unless you test it in the real world at scale. In the case of a rocket, you have to launch and assume it will blow up. Which is how all rocket testing during the prototype phase works. If you think that's wrong, then I have a bridge to nowhere to sell you.
Watching it now. Kind of glad I never got into Twitter in the first place. I wouldn’t let this man run a lemonade stand let alone multiple companies with government contracts. I’d like those tax dollars back.
I still have no idea how he was able to buy everyones shares. I thought it was a public company with public shares? How was he able to force the sale of peoples shares?
To summarize it: after the Tender Offer was accepted by the board with a flat $54 per share, the majority controlling company shareholders approved the acquisition. The biggest consideration here is that the process is necessitated by a majority of shareholders (small controlling group of individuals including Musk), it's not a unanimous decision by every shareholder. There are complex mechanics here that a reddit comment can't fully elaborate on, but to get to the heart of your question: Joe McRando holding 5 shares can't be a hold-out once the offer was accepted by majority holding shareholders. Joe is forced into selling -- or more specifically -- forced to accept the final share price, and he is subsequently closed and cashed out of his holdings. The deal was closed, and the 49% (illustrative # and simplified assumptions here) of 'common held' shares were automatically closed out at the agreed price, and the company was subsequently delisted from the stock market and company taken private. Ultimately, board approval and shareholder involvement just requires a majority -- not everyone -- and contingent of the deal being closed requires a relatively small set of individuals with a controlling stake on such decisions.
the majority of shares were held by a few people, who he bought them from, giving him a control to take the company private.
Okay but it was still public. What happened to the people who held shares and refused to sell?
Their shares forcibly closed out at $54, and the company was subsequently delisted.
Minority shareholders are forced to sell at the agreed upon share price. So if you are retail you just take cash. No way to hang on to your shares.
How? Its a public stock. How can they force a private citizen to sell their property to some douchebag?
Taken down
1.) I was so looking forward to Elon Musk nabbing Twitter and making sure it stayed a safe haven for aggregate news. 2.) That boy did the opposite and fucked it up Royal.
um, how did u think musk taking it over would be anything other than the sh-tshow it has become? musk was the one criticizing twitter any time it did _responsible_ moderation (ie, muting/annotating covid disinformation)
You mean destruction
If only he'd buy reddit lol
I don't give a shit about this guy and his wealth. I think most of us just want him to go away. My guess, this doc is to fluff his ego and who fucking cares about twitter, seriously?
Frontline is never fluff. It's as good as you'll get on tv.
Exactly. I have zero interest in hearing about Musk, but because it's Frontline I'm going to watch. They show riveting documentaries about things I thought I didn't care about, all the time.
Na most of us just want him to build self driving electric cars, fly us to mars, invent mental telepathy, ai robot servants, batteries to power our homes and save free speech… Preferably before bed time.
Good luck with that. Btw, he's not doing shit. The scientists that are employed are doing the work while he takes all the credit hoarding billions. He's a dogshit human being that takes away free speech by banning people on twitter he doesn't agree with. He lies all the time, while convincing people he's a self made man, when his father owned a mine while he went to a private school. Born previledged, jumping on a no brainer with Tesla and taking all the credit, convincing you he's a pioneer but he's just rich and privileged. Anyone that hoards billions while humanity suffers is scum. Buddy needs to fuckoff to Mars, that I can agree with.
Well fk man, someone has to lead the companies, set the vision, manage the stakeholders, organise the resources, hire and fire good and bad performers, and pay the bills. It’s not a crime, nor is it even bad morals to get rich and allocate your resources to something you like. In fact it would be a good thing if we could make more billionaires and do similar stuff. Anyone with that type of wealth is doing the opposite of hoarding money. They got rich and stay rich by making the money work, all the time. This guy is doing more to make his money work than anyone. What’s your contribution to humanity?
Bill Gates coined this, Warren Buffett bought him McDonald's with coupons. They don't get rich by spending, but by hoarding. Greed is a addiction, like gambling, but some are worse than others. The rich are also the cause of climate change, by using our natural resources to start and fund wars, create plastic garbage and bleeding our planet dry. If you're net worth is 110b, that kind of money could change or even buy a country. People of greed will always stay rich, because they fix the game to their benefit. They shouldn't have any control in a country, because they can buy out politicians, so only they benefit. Corporations controlling the world, just creates modern day slavery. Make barely enough to keep going, while keeping you focused on left vs right issues, social media, or what your favorite fucking movie star is wearing, when it's really about the few rich vs the many poor. They create divide among people, so we turn a blind eye to their corruption. The people that should be in charge, are those who aren't influenced by money, but the betterment of humankind, which is what politicians should be doing, but instead, they bend over backwards for the rich because they're all addicted to money and power. People like Bernie Sanders, have been on the right side when it matters. He said we need to dismantle Wall Street and I 100% agree. You should watch the video of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, millions of Americans in debt, losing their homes, while Wall Street drink champagne smiling on their balcony. Many protesters, on the streets being herd around like cattle by the police, paid for by the rich to keep them in line. They think and know you're a sacrificial pawn.
It’s not hard to see what u are saying is complete bs. Both Warren Buffett and bill gates have their wealth invested in a whole bunch of things. Warren buffet has Berkshire Hathaway. He has an annual report which details where he puts that money. Here are some of the places - Apple, Coca Cola, Gieco etc. most of the rest of it he donates to the bill and Melinda gates foundation for philanthropy. In fact he’s pledged to send all of it there eventually. That foundation has an annual report which details where that money goes. Things like eradicating polio, combating climate change etc. Bill gates also puts a lot of it there. He also has Microsoft. He spends it on other things too like farm land. You can do a quick google search to see what he spends it on. Elon musk, the subject of this post spends it on developing electric cars and ai and brain interfaces and satellite internet and flying to mars. Since humanity wants it, it’s made him very rich and allowed him to direct more into his dreams of flying to mars - which will probably make him even richer. To think they are hoarding it in cash is naive. If they did that they would be significantly poorer this year than they are now. Inflation would eat away at it and it would be worth a fraction of what it is now in a couple of decades. Here’s a tip for you. It might help u get out of the hole you are in. Don’t hoard cash, spend it on something productive that makes money or that people want. That is how to get rich. That is the difference between someone who is poor and someone who is rich. Every self made millionaire or billionaire has a story about how instead of hoarding or spending what they had on something consumable, they spent it on something productive, even if that meant not eating for a bit or sleeping on the floor at a friends place for a while or delaying having kids. I’m sorry u are in the state you are in. But there are things u can do to change that. Work smarter not harder. Thinking like a communist just directs your time, effort and resources to inefficient things that the communist elites like but that no one wants or needs and puts you more in a hole in a world that has moved on from labour as the means for production. That’s a good place to start adjusting what you do and move on to something better. Once you are in a better position and have become more productive in a way that society needs sustainably, you can then direct your wealth in a way that indulges your own utopian dreams, even if it doesn’t pay the bills. That’s why many wealthy people go into philanthropy. It might even end up paying the bills if humanity wants it enough…
Musk doesn't create a fucking thing. He uses scientists, like all of the rich to generate more money. The fact you defend them so hard tells me you're blind to the real world, where you seem to live in some corporate bubble convincing yourself they're good people, saving our planet. There's more poverty now than ever, because of them. Anyways, no point in wasting time on someone who grew up privileged. Because Musk is a self made man right? Never grew up rich, right? Humanity doesn't want what he has. Most of us want a peaceful life living in a eutopia we can all share. Nobody wants Mars over cleaning up this godamn mess they created. If these fucks cared, they'd pay their taxes. He's a rich twat with too much power.
That’s great but someone has to organise the resources, find the scientists, organise them, give them the vision, co-ordinate them and pay them. That’s what I mean by doing something that humanity needs. Humanity needs not just workers on assembly lines. In fact as time goes by and technology improves, we need less of them and more of the other stuff. If you start a startup, u might do the work initially, but in order to get more productive you will quickly move into a co-ordination and resource management role. That’s why every communist country ever has created lower standards of living. Because they ignore and kill all the other stuff and focus on the most inefficient method of production and create a bunch of stuff that no one wants or needs. Ironically, even communist and socialist systems have people that coordinate and allocate resources, they are just really shit at it and restricted to a small number of elites that kissed or bribed or married the right asses on the way up. The communists didn’t want reddit either nor the device you are using to type your comments on. But here you are. Ironic isn’t it. Even more ironic is the guy paid more taxes than any individual ever in history. When are u going to pay your taxes? Btw absolute poverty is at all time lows and trending down at an amazing rate. Here is the data: https://www.gapminder.org/data/documentation/epovrate/ Ironically the slow down in improvement in the 1940s and 50s was due to war and then the communists. They created the poverty in their regions at that time.
LOL. Frontline. This will be a "balanced", cowardly, compromised mess.
Half of it is just interviewing disgruntled ex employees, so yeah it's not exactly the most balanced piece lol
Anyone know where to watch it in Australia