Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sun Jan 29 06:58:35 PST 2023

Utopia Talk / Politics / Twitter 2.0
habebe
Member
Sun Nov 27 11:53:13
blah blah.

asdf, The video speaks for itself.

Also, all major news outlets are well known liars and deceivers.
Seb
Member
Sun Nov 27 13:09:36
Habebe:

The difference is that when the FT data e they have spoken to multiple advertisers etc. you can be reasonably sure that they have done due diligence to ensure that's not a minority view, because they rely on being credible to their readers, who buy it because it is reliably objective.

When project Veritas - an openly partisan body that sees itself as a corrective "right wing" source of news dedicated to exposing left wing bias in public and private institutions - finds a few people willing to say Twitter is left wing, you know they have hunted to find some people who will say that; and that they won't care in the slightest if that's a credible representative view. Because they see themselves as part of a culture war and all that matters is prosecuting it.

And when you cite that to be representative we know you are just using any straw to cling to to try and frame all of this as part of the culture war, rather than objectively bad business decisions.
habebe
Member
Sun Nov 27 15:30:52
"Multiple advertisers"

Like their "Online harassment expert"

These people hide their identity, but again we have Jack Dorsey himself the founder and the longest running CEO and board member, nobody embodies Twitter more than Dorsey and HE admitted it was a left wing.

If companies have problems buying ads why hide their identity? Seems odd.

Further I don't know who owns FT.I just found out Sam Bankman fried was funding Business insider for example, notice the puff pieces.Bezos owning WAPO, also favorable treatment.

Now I see the left try to claim journalistic integrity and claim that when they are funded by someone it doesn't impact said integrity.

FT has random anonymous people that had trouble buying ads.

http://youtu.be/TexDrY6AlAw

Here is the video, unblurred it jas his name and labels him as "Senior engineer"

Dorsey and Musk both claim very similar things. Juat by who and what they censored we can guess.

Again, what evidence do you have that Twitter's workforce was anything but leftwing by US standards?

Not surprising, since most silicon valley is.


Its funny you will call project veritas right wing , but Twitter wasn't left wing.
habebe
Member
Sun Nov 27 15:35:47
http://the...bias-is-more-left-leaning/amp/

Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey: I ‘fully admit’ our bias is ‘more left-leaning’
habebe
Member
Sun Nov 27 15:39:43
Twitter boss Jack Dorsey has claimed that “conservative-leaning” employees “don’t feel safe to express their opinions” while working at the Silicon Valley social media company.

Mr Dorsey, who appeared in front of US politicians to testify during a hearing about political bias at Twitter last week, admitted that he “had not tended to have conversations with many people in a more conservative end of the spectrum or right end of the spectrum".

-------

http://www...-silenced-left-wing-workforce/


Maybe in your circle you had not realized Twitter was largely a left wing based company. But its as well known as FOX is Rightwing.
Seb
Member
Sun Nov 27 16:31:07
Habebe:

"Dorsey himself the founder and the longest running CEO and board member, nobody embodies Twitter more than Dorsey and HE admitted it was a left wing"

He said "left leaning" in context he's talking about management, and he also said he didn't think that it affected decisions.

"what evidence do you have that Twitter's workforce was anything but leftwing by US standards"
Can't prove a negative.


"Further I don't know who owns FT."
Nikkei, a Japanese employee owned company.

habebe
Member
Sun Nov 27 17:08:17
"He said "left leaning" in context he's talking about management, and he also said he didn't think that it affected decisions."

His quotes seemed to go deeper than management, but still. Now does that affect their decisions? that's an entire seperate talk and goalpost.

tge argument was whether or not the workforce wad largely left of the US.


"what evidence do you have that Twitter's workforce was anything but leftwing by US standards"
Can't prove a negative"

You dont have to, what evidence do you have that FOX is NOT leftwing? Well plenty of evidence that FOX (I think you agree) is RW, again using US standards.

We can even go and look at political donations for twitter employees over $200, 99% went to Democrats this year.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/twitter/totals?id=D000067113

In general it was run by lefties and even the ussr base as you pointed out was previously left wing generally.

Not surprising being a Silicon Valley company.
williamthebastard
Member
Sun Nov 27 17:10:54
Its killing trump that he cant post there without finally killing troth sential dead lol
Habebe
Member
Sun Nov 27 19:40:54
Yeah I suspect he will finally kill TS.

Its a tough call. It isn't just $ V fame. He would choose fame/attention everytime.

Going back to Twitter would be him admitting Truth was inferior.

From what I hear its a cheap clone app.


Seb
Member
Mon Nov 28 08:02:17
Habebe:

"what evidence do you have that Twitter's workforce was anything but leftwing by US standards"

Proving fox news has a right wing editorial position is very different to proving the workforce of company has a coherent political view.

I don't think it even makes sense to say its workforce is left wing.

"We can even go and look at political donations for twitter employees over $200, 99% went to Democrats this year"

That just tells you that of Twitter employees donating to political parties via payroll, 99% of those donations went democrat. It does not tell you anything about the proportion of the workforce that support democrats.



Habebe
Member
Mon Nov 28 15:23:01
Ok, Im done arguing with a brick wall.Seb I cant help you, clearly the preponderance of evidence

FYI Meta was fined $275 Million today in EU courts. But oh yeah Elon/Twitter somehow stick out as uniquely badly run companies.Because he rushed through firing employees that despite a vast preponderance of evidence are in no way left leaning.

Seb is sad his marxist Twitter is now run by a center left moderate.


Fun news, Elon is now at war with Apple.
Seb
Member
Mon Nov 28 16:27:28
http://www...r-child-sexual-abuse-material/

So, abput how he's cleaning up all the CSM.

Like I said, deliberately giving European regulators a case is a fucking terrible idea given their desire to levy big fines. Illegally sacking the teams that do content moderation demonstrates reckless negligence so likely to attract higher funds.

I'm not sure pointing out how regulators come down hard on these issues is supposed to help your care here that this was a sagacious and canny move. It shows how important it is to minimise legal risk, not good you should instead maximise it.

"Seb is sad his marxist Twitter is now run by a center left moderate."

Nobody cares about your stupid culture war right now, habebe. This is conversation about business.

williamthebastard
Member
Mon Nov 28 16:50:39
"“Twitter cannot accurately detect child sexual exploitation and nonconsensual nudity at scale,” read an internal April 2022 report "

Whew, lucky Eliza Bleu can though!
Habebe
Member
Mon Nov 28 16:51:25
"Like I said, deliberately giving European regulators a case is a fucking terrible idea given their desire to levy big fines. Illegally sacking the teams that do content moderation demonstrates reckless negligence so likely to attract higher funds."

Maybe yes, maybe no. You seem to assume they were good at their job.

" Nobody cares about your stupid culture war right now, habebe. This is conversation about business."

Well again, there are two different conversations. The product VS the business.

Apparently pro child porn comoanies like Balenciaga quit Twitter when Elon bought Twitter in protest.

Long term sounds like a good thing to scare away pedophiles.
Paramount
Member
Mon Nov 28 17:06:27
” Going back to Twitter would be him admitting Truth was inferior.”


Can’t Trump be on both Twitter and Truth Social at the same time? He doesn’t have to abandon one for the other.



” Fun news, Elon is now at war with Apple”


And with Google. But he supposedly said that he will make a new phone if they ban Twitter. It would be cool. Or he can just buy Apple and rename it Elon. That would be even more cool.
Habebe
Member
Mon Nov 28 17:19:50
Paramount, I don't know the details about his truth contractnother than currently he has tonpost on truth first and wait 6 hrs to post it elsewhere.

The draw of Trump on Twitter was the spontaneous nature and well he was funny.

I guess google too but he had.like 12 posts today that were all anti Apple.

I will say apple and twitter have too much power with the app stores , something needs to be done to allow 3rd party app stores to have greater reach.

There has been talk for a bit about limiting the abikity of Apple/Google from pushing their own apps and banning/limiting others as monopolistic.
williamthebastard
Member
Mon Nov 28 18:28:28
Twitter being deluged in unseen levels of porn to shut down Chinese protests for freedom.

williamthebastard
Member
Mon Nov 28 18:41:04
jesus christ, I never use Twitter, logged on to have a look, the top threads are fucking Elons personal threads and disgusting Breitbart. I have zero history to indicate that would target me personally.
williamthebastard
Member
Mon Nov 28 18:42:54
*Elons whiny threads about how Apple etc hate free speech because they dont want to give him billions of dollars any more
williamthebastard
Member
Mon Nov 28 18:50:18
IS he stickying his whiny threads about apple? lol
williamthebastard
Member
Mon Nov 28 18:51:52
threads by Dinesh D'Souza on my page? Ar you fucking kidding me? lol
murder
Member
Mon Nov 28 19:20:26

Twitter is now having trouble paying some employees on time

Employees hit with overdraft fees after paychecks fail to show up on schedule.

http://ars...ome-european-staff-this-month/

===================

Like father, like son. ;o)


Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 01:00:16
Habebe:

"Maybe yes, maybe no. You seem to assume they were good at their job."

Explain the maybe no case. As I've explained a number of times, if they are bad at their job, you can fire them. You just need to go through a process that takes a few weeks (in any case these are redundancies not performance related with their entire dept shut down so we can assume they were fine at their jobs). You tell me how it makes sense to have them out of the building in the short term in exchange for having to pay out up to 34 weeks of salary, possibly more, compensation, fines from govt on employment law, and exposing yourself to extremely high data protection and other fines through the regulator being and to point to reckless negligence as a contributing factor to other regulatory beaches.

Christ you are stupid.
Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 01:01:14
"Well again, there are two different conversations"

No. There's one conversation, an an idiot mumbling about leftwinger Marxists.
Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 01:02:48
"Long term sounds like a good thing to scare away pedophiles"

Nothing scares away pedophiles looks (checks notes) ... sacking all but one of the people tasked with taking down cold porn.
habebe
Member
Tue Nov 29 01:32:32
"Explain the maybe no case. As I've explained a number of times, if they are bad at their job, you can fire them. You just need to go through a process that takes a few weeks"

1. We dont know this will cost Twitter more. We will see.

2. Time literally is money.

3. Good/bad employees, if they are viewed as opposed to leadership should be fired immediately anyway before they damage the company.Better safe than sorry.

Apparently the same sort of people/companies who like chuld rape/porn are the same type that have been moping and pissy that Musk bought Twitter. Win win.

And again the comment went over your head. There are two distinct ways to look at the acquisition.

1. Purely financial, is the company profitable.

2. Is it a better town square.
Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 02:53:57
Habebe:

We do know it costs more. I posted the links in another thread.

For at fault firing, negligence/gross misconduct etc the costs are negligible

For redundancy, a few weeks.

Illegal firing costs around 34 weeks pay before regulatory fines and/or compensation.

So it's vastly more expensive.

2. Yes. That's my point.

3. They weren't sacked for poor performance. They were made redundant. But if it was performance, then they could have followed that process and saved even more. And if you are worried about them being in the building, that's what gardening leave is for (go through the process but tell them not to come in).

As for CSAM, Elon is the guy that sacked the entire team tasked with stopping it. Judge him on his actions rather than his words. The regulator will.

It's not a better town Square if it goes bust and is only frequented by child abusers, crypto scammers and angry magas looking for a fight.

Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 02:56:51
Maintenance of Town Squares in the real world are paid for by taxes mostly.

I don't see anyone giving Elon a bailout.

Picking a fight with apple (4% of last quarters annualised 4.8bn revenue) was dumb. If he breaks Apples monopoly that's a good thing, but in advertising revenue alone (let alone loss of in app sales and growth) it's going to cost him.

Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 03:00:07
The degree to which you've imprinted on this guy is baffling.

You can try and redefine success as some kind of asthetic/political outcome.

But Twitter is ultimately a business.

So if you want a Town square, who is going to pay for it?

Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 03:07:14
More importantly, who is going to service the enormous debt he ran up to buy it?

This looks far less like a political project to me.

He bought Twitter for way more than he would like due to stupid business decisions.

He engaged in a panicky downsizing to try and cut costs, and some ad-hoc publicity r thought would drive engagement and hence revenue.

But he didn't understand that he was in a bubble and that what the people asking for "free speech and kick out the lefties" wanted was not what advertisers wanted.

And now he's trying to threaten advertisers by using his platform to attack their reputation directly (very Trumpy) to intimidate them into giving him revenue and reduce licensing costs.

This will scare other advertisers away. If you need to pull an ad campaign but risk being shaken down that's not a relationship you enter into.

Meanwhile there is no credible plan for brand security.

williamthebastard
Member
Tue Nov 29 05:35:05
It is thoughtful of the owner of Free Speech™ to ban well-known LGBT accounts days after a mass murder at an LGBT club, though.

williamthebastard
Member
Tue Nov 29 05:38:37
I see a glorious neoliberal future where everyone has the right to free speech - they just have to buy a licence from the owner first
Habebe
Member
Tue Nov 29 14:25:32
"We do know it costs more. I posted the links in another thread.
"

And they have not even decided on a legal charge, let alone decide guilt.

"As for CSAM, Elon is the guy that sacked the entire team tasked with stopping it. Judge him on his actions rather than his words. The regulator will."


If he loses the case.

Meh, very good chance you are right. Maybe not, EU often IMHO** disregards leverage though like "What your not playing fair!".

Example when they wanted to set a price cap for russian petrol. To Americans this is sort of baffling. We proudly dont fight fair.

But regardless Twitter may lose a few million. Maybe those workers can take that settlement and start a comoeting company, something I genuinely would support.

"You can try and redefine success as some kind of asthetic/political outcome.

But Twitter is ultimately a business.

So if you want a Town square, who is going to pay for it?"

Its common practice for the super wealthy to buy media companies like.news papers that lose money.

My personal take? I think it's plausible for Twitter to become very profitable, in the ways I laid out before. Elon has beenngoing the right direction I think but success is not guaranteed and its an uphill climb.

For any stakes that I have, twitter doesn't have to make money (like it usually has) Twitter had always been a shitty business, common knowledge.

If he posts all the internal company stuff and exposes old Twitter, maybe pressure other companies to be more transparent, that is a win for me, Id think for.you as well.

"He bought Twitter for way more than he would like due to stupid business decisions."

Yeah, $44 billion is alot. But on scale for a guy whonhas had his net worth jump 36 billion in one day, meh. He could file bankruptcy on Twitter and still be the richest man in the world.

Spacex/Starlink seem to be exploding and Tesla is worth more than every European car.company combined.

"And now he's trying to threaten advertisers by using his platform to attack their reputation directly (very Trumpy) to intimidate them into giving him revenue and reduce licensing costs."

I have no idea if this is a good business decision directly for twitter or not, however thhis is awesome. Google and Apple playstores are scams. There is bipartisan legislation in the US aimed to block these companies from using such monopolistic authority, I hope it passes.


You keep pushing the old style advertising model which to me seems like a bad model since it almost always lost money, Twitter was never a good business.

I think more targeted modeling is a better mode personally. Twitter should just platform creators and have ads linked directly to the creators while Twitter takes a cut.

Apple seems to have gotten salty when Trumps account was reinstated.Thats when their executive shut down his account.

Apppe is a big company, one thing it cant do is launch satellites, that's leverage alone.
Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 15:05:22
Habebe:

"And they have not even decided on a legal charge, let alone decide guilt"

You don't understand. It's not a crime with a trial. It's just a simple employment tribunal case and it is already clear that they have broken the rules, so they are already liable for 34 weeks pay.

So they are already at least 20 weeks worth of pay over the baseline.

"Its common practice for the super wealthy to buy media companies like news papers that lose money."

You know if he fails to make the interest payments he loses control of Tesla right?

"Tesla is worth more than every European car.company combined."

No, the marginal price of tesla shares at todays prices is more than European car company combined. But if you have to sell a whole lot of them at the same time, the price will crash.

"You keep pushing the old style advertising model which to me seems like a bad model since it almost always lost money"

Yeah you keep saying this but it's not at all clear it is true. I don't think Twitter's operating costs are 5bn a year. I think you are confusing Twitter investing heavily with making an operating cost.
Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 15:06:48
"one thing it cant do is launch satellites"

Yeah but other people can, and one thing Twitter doesn't have is access to the pattents needed to build and sell a phone.
nhill
Member
Tue Nov 29 15:35:42
Man it's going to be tough for you when you see the numbers of how successful Twitter is now relative to before. Hope you'll be man enough to admit when you're wrong, unlike the COVID thread where you just disappeared from it when Sam Adams embarrassed your ass.
Habebe
Member
Tue Nov 29 15:57:32
"You don't understand. It's not a crime with a trial. It's just a simple employment tribunal case and it is already clear that they have broken the rules, so they are already liable for 34 weeks pay."

Have they decided on a charge? Last I seen they said they would look into it but no specific charges.

So what are we talking about? $300 million? Coulsnt he just up the cost the EU pays fornsowce launches and make it up quickly? Haha

"You know if he fails to make the interest payments he loses control of Tesla right?"

Do you think he wont pay interest payments? How much are the payments?

"
No, the marginal price of tesla shares at todays prices is more than European car company combined."

That's a weird way to say "Yes Habebe, you are right"

"Yeah you keep saying this but it's not at all clear it is true. I don't think Twitter's operating costs are 5bn a year. I think you are confusing Twitter investing heavily with making an operating cost."

What did they invest in that they could not turn a profit?
murder
Member
Tue Nov 29 17:26:41

Fact Check: Did Twitter Scrap Its Covid-19 Misinformation Restrictions?

The ruling: True

http://www...formation-restrictions-1763022

Seb
Member
Tue Nov 29 17:36:54
Habebe:

$1.2bn a year.

"That's a weird way to say "Yes Habebe, you are right""

I think you are missing the point. Possibly because you haven't clocked the full situation re the finance deal he was forced into when he was sued into making good his offer for Twitter.

"What did they invest in that they could not turn a profit?"
Well it looks like that were on track for profit this year if Elon hadn't scared of the advertisers
habebe
Member
Tue Nov 29 21:48:28
1.2 doesn't seem that difficult.

"Well it looks like that were on track for profit this year if Elon hadn't scared of the advertisers"

Hahaha
habebe
Member
Tue Nov 29 22:04:21
Murder, Yeah I read that. Considering the amount of misinformation ans intentional disinformation put out by our government and "experts" I'm not really concerned with policing people to only listen to their false narratives.
Seb
Member
Wed Nov 30 00:40:24
Habebe:

Why do you think it's not difficult, given you've been pointing out that Twitter regularly fails to make a profit?

Last quarter they were on track for 5bn revenues.
Seb
Member
Wed Nov 30 00:44:43
So your position is:

A business model based around advertising is bad because it doesn't cover costs, so a subscription based model that brings in orders of magnitude less revenue is a better idea, and adding 1.2 BN additional costs doesn't seem to create difficulties?

Have I got that right Habebe?
murder
Member
Wed Nov 30 07:36:36

He probably figures that Elon is so rich that he'll just eat the losses. But he won't. Other people will.

Habebe
Member
Wed Nov 30 15:56:23
I must be clairvoyant....OR stocks follow rough patterns, Tesla was up 8.53% today! Large caps dont normally gain THAT much in one day.

"Why do you think it's not difficult, given you've been pointing out that Twitter regularly fails to make a profit?

Last quarter they were on track for 5bn revenues."

1.2 B doesn't seem very much money for a guy who likely gained more than that JUST TODAY.

Now you claim they were "on track to male 5 bn" but that seems hopeful at best.Stock price was way down UNTIL Musk said he wanted to buy it, than it followed his whims.

Again, rich guys lose money on newspapers all the time. Why is this so different?

Will he lose $? Maybe, we have a year to find out.

"A business model based around advertising is bad because it doesn't cover costs, so a subscription based model that brings in orders of magnitude less revenue is a better idea, and adding 1.2 BN additional costs doesn't seem to create difficulties?

Have I got that right Habebe?"

No, not at all. What thread are you reading?! Ive explained my idea for a better model numerous times and it has a mix of advertisements and subscription type models, focusing in direct to creator ads.
Seb
Member
Wed Nov 30 16:28:07
Habebe:

"1.2 B doesn't seem very much money for a guy who likely gained more than that JUST TODAY."

Liquidating $1.2bn of his shares in Tesla or SpaceX each year is going to cost him a lot.

Because selling that much will push the price down.

"but that seems hopeful at best."

No, that's what Elon has released in his claim on Apple. And yeah, twitter stock was way way overvalued (kinda dumb to buy it at that price eh?)

"Again, rich guys lose money on newspapers all the time. Why is this so different?"

The scale of the losses and potential consequences.

"I've explained my idea for a better model numerous times and it has a mix of advertisements and subscription type models, focusing in direct to creator ads."

How do you deal with the fact that what subscribers want and what advertisers want are opposite here? There is - at least how Elon is pursuing it to date - a trade-off. What he is doing is scaring of the advertisers and any way you cut it, the advertisers will provide the lion share of the revenue.






nhill
Member
Wed Nov 30 16:52:22
>Liquidating $1.2bn of his shares in Tesla or SpaceX each year is going to cost him a lot.

That's not how it works though. At Elon's level you never have to liquidate because banks will give you a low interest loan on the equity, which preserves their value, and you can keep going ad infinitum as the stock price increases.

This is how the highly wealthy operate so they don't have to crash markets when they want to spend a billion dollars.

Granted, there's always a liquidation risk when you put up volatile collateral that could force the selling. But if you print the shares, you can keep meeting the margin call.

I do this too with my funds, take out a loan for any big purchases, then pay it off with the interest I make in DeFi.
nhill
Member
Wed Nov 30 16:54:05
The cool thing about DeFi is you can also make interest on your loan by taking your collateralized token and putting it in a yield bearing instrument. One of the many magics of crypto and another thing not in traditional finance that elucidates why it's the future of our financial infrastructure.
Habebe
Member
Wed Nov 30 16:56:47
"Liquidating $1.2bn of his shares in Tesla or SpaceX each year is going to cost him a lot.

Because selling that much will push the price down."

Your assuming Twitter will make no money? 1.2 B still sounds like peanuts. Year after year? You think Twitter will continue to lose money? Im not daying it won't but Musk changes thibgs so much, who knows what it will look like 3-6 months from now. I have zero predictions myself for that time other than push comes to shove it seems extremely unlikely he wont be able to scrounge up 100 Million/Month.

"No, that's what Elon has released in his claim on Apple. And yeah, twitter stock was way way overvalued (kinda dumb to buy it at that price eh?)"

He over paid, yeah. But Im specifically reffering to your assertion that they were "on track" to make 5 Bn, considering marjet conditions for the year.

"The scale of the losses and potential consequences."

Well, in proportion to their net worth. Newspapers get worse every year, SM often increases in both users and earnings.

Elon is clearly a fan of pissing contests. Bezos buys WAPO? Hold my diet caffeine free coke *buys Twitter*

"How do you deal with the fact that what subscribers want and what advertisers want are opposite here?"

1. To clarify, Im not sure this is the direction Musk plans to take, Ive seen hints at this with his comments and added my own conjecture.

But advertiser's buy specific targeted ads with creators all the time, Adam Ragusea has ads constantly he is ticking regardless of YouTube's deals, they just earn a cut.

The problem with Twitter before eas things like they thought tiktoks short video clips like Vine were something not valuable (dumb move, eh?)

I think it's too soon to write the book ending on Elon and Twitter. He has a tendency to do horribly....until he strikes gold.

But its clearly a risk he is willing to take.That could prove fatal considering the market, look at conoarable companies like Meta losing obscene amounts of cash with way more users.
Habebe
Member
Wed Nov 30 16:58:04
I think Twitter local would be a cool function as well to work with local news and local ads as well.


Would it be profitable? I have no idea.
nhill
Member
Wed Nov 30 17:01:00
Btw before Seb pulls a Seb, I know Elon and others have sold stock before. Nowhere in my previous posts did I say they don't. I said they don't have to do so.
Seb
Member
Wed Nov 30 17:19:22
http://m.i...-high-court-told-42185817.html

Habebe, this is what happens. All those people deemed "fired" just get reinstated, and it's harder now to fire them through any process because now it looks contrived. So all in all it costs you a lot more than just doing a propper redundancy.

Nhill:
That's what he's already done. The loans to Twitter have Tesla stock at 1/4 of the share value allocated as collateral so he needs to pay 1.2bn in cash or lose the collateral. The whole scheme is set up to try and get the lenders a huge slice of tesla.

Habebe:

"You think Twitter will continue to lose money?"

I'm saying he needs a credible plan to make money out of Twitter. Scaring off the main source of revenue seems highly risky.




Seb
Member
Wed Nov 30 17:37:18
Nhill:

"Btw before Seb pulls a Seb, I know Elon and others have sold stock before"

Please, that's not my style of argument. I can handle the conditional. That's more *your* style!
habebe
Member
Wed Nov 30 17:56:56
Seb, One lady who was not fired, she accidentally quit.

Meh.
murder
Member
Wed Nov 30 18:25:13

EU warns Musk to beef up Twitter controls ahead of new rules

LONDON (AP) — A top European Union official warned Elon Musk on Wednesday that Twitter needs to beef up measures to protect users from hate speech, misinformation and other harmful content to avoid violating new rules that threaten tech giants with big fines or even a ban in the 27-nation bloc.

Thierry Breton, the EU’s commissioner for digital policy, told the billionaire Tesla CEO that the social media platform will have to significantly increase efforts to comply with the new rules, known as the Digital Services Act, set to take effect next year.

The two held a video call to discuss Twitter’s preparedness for the law, which will require tech companies to better police their platforms for material that, for instance, promotes terrorism, child sexual abuse, hate speech and commercial scams.

It’s part of a new digital rulebook that has made Europe the global leader in the push to rein in the power of social media companies, potentially setting up a clash with Musk’s vision for a more unfettered Twitter. U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen also said Wednesday that an investigation into Musk’s $44 billion purchase was not off the table.

Breton said he was pleased to hear that Musk considers the EU rules “a sensible approach to implement on a worldwide basis.”

“But let’s also be clear that there is still huge work ahead,” Musk said, according to a readout of the call released by Breton’s office. “Twitter will have to implement transparent user policies, significantly reinforce content moderation and protect freedom of speech, tackle disinformation with resolve, and limit targeted advertising.”

After Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” bought Twitter a month ago, groups that monitor the platform for racist, antisemitic and other toxic speech, such the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, say it’s been on the rise on the world’s de facto digital public square.

Musk has signaled an interest in rolling back many of Twitter’s previous rules meant to combat misinformation, most recently by abandoning enforcement of its COVID-19 misinformation policy. He already reinstated some high-profile accounts that had violated Twitter’s content rules and had promised a “general amnesty” restoring most suspended accounts starting this week.

Twitter didn’t respond to an email request for comment. In a separate blog post Wednesday, the company said “human safety” is its top priority and that its trust and safety team “continues its diligent work to keep the platform safe from hateful conduct, abusive behavior, and any violation of Twitter’s rules.”

Musk, however, has laid off half the company’s 7,500-person workforce, along with an untold number of contractors responsible for content moderation. Many others have resigned, including the company’s head of trust and safety.

In the call Wednesday, Musk agreed to let the EU’s executive Commission carry out a “stress test” at Twitter’s headquarters early next year to help the platform comply with the new rules ahead of schedule, the readout said.

That will also help the company prepare for an “extensive independent audit” as required by the new law, which is aimed at protecting internet users from illegal content and reducing the spread of harmful but legal material.

Violations could result in huge fines of up to 6% of a company’s annual global revenue or even a ban on operating in the European Union’s single market.

Along with European regulators, Musk risks running afoul of Apple and Google, which power most of the world’s smartphones. Both have stringent policies against misinformation, hate speech and other misconduct, previously enforced to boot apps like the social media platform Parler from their devices. Apps must also meet certain data security, privacy and performance standards.

Musk tweeted without providing evidence this week that Apple “threatened to withhold Twitter from its App Store, but won’t tell us why.” Apple hasn’t commented.

Meanwhile, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen walked back her statements about whether Musk’s purchase of Twitter warrants government review.

“I misspoke,” she said at The New York Times’ DealBook Summit on Wednesday, referring to a CBS interview this month where she said there was “no basis” to review the Twitter purchase.

The Treasury secretary oversees the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an interagency committee that investigates the national security risks from foreign investments in American firms.

“If there are such risks, it would be appropriate for the Treasury to have a look,” Yellen told The New York Times.

She declined to confirm whether CFIUS is currently investigating Musk’s Twitter purchase.

Billionaire Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is, through his investment company, Twitter’s biggest shareholder after Musk.

http://apn...4227b138878a5b0e5129a4bdd5bac0

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Nov 30 19:09:41
"Good conversation. Among other things, we resolved the misunderstanding about Twitter potentially being removed from the App Store. Tim was clear that Apple never considered doing so."
~ Elon Musk
http://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1598090996281413638

that's two days after Elon Musk apparently completely made up the claim & the Right went wild about it

seems there was never any indication of it whatsoever, Elon was source of the rumor
habebe
Member
Wed Nov 30 19:18:59
Murder, On an unrelated note he increased the price of European Starlink terminals from $385/ea to $700.....

Tumbleweed, Maybe just for publicity? He still seems content to negotiate the 30% fee.Or could have been a way to ore emptively silence critics who kept calling for it led by none other than the queen SJW Taylor Lorenz.

That said, Congress really should breakup the app store mafia
habebe
Member
Wed Nov 30 22:06:55
Apparently Musk hit a nerve with the Apple App store bit.

The CEO of Epic games (think fortnight)

Spotify CEO, someone else I forget and

Zuckerburg

http://for...criticize-apple-app-store/amp/

This apple war was a brilliant move.

He comes off looking like the good guy, good chance he will end up getting a better rate with public leverage and now it all but garauntees that Apple wont ban it.

It may habe helped that GOP house members and Desantis were calling for investigations into Apple's app store practices.
murder
Member
Wed Nov 30 22:15:38

"Murder, On an unrelated note he increased the price of European Starlink terminals from $385/ea to $700..... "

Cool. Maybe they'll regulate Starlink right our of Europe too. ;o)

Seb
Member
Thu Dec 01 01:26:38
Habebe:

Nope. That's got quitting, that's being fired: contract terminated for not agreeing to a unilateral change of contract commitments. Like I explained to you already.

"On an unrelated note he increased the price of European Starlink terminals from $385/ea to $700."

Oh gosh. However shall we have internet now. I have gigabit fibre into my house.

"He comes off looking like the good guy,"
In politics this would be very useful. In business, there's a limit to the upside.

"good chance he will end up getting a better rate with public leverage"
How? Why would apple give him a discount because he's popular? What's he doing to b do if he doesn't get a discount? Realistically, what leverage can he get "the public" to apply here?

" and now it all but garauntees that Apple wont ban it."

Not really. If he ever did something that merited banning, they'd probably still BSB him. Because they could then point to that thing.
Seb
Member
Thu Dec 01 01:33:58
Murder:

"Cool. Maybe they'll regulate Starlink right our of Europe too. ;o)"

They won't need to if he's priced it out.

I'm not sure starlink will find a place in the EU. EU market is focused on unbundling and price/service competition.

habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 02:07:36
Murder, "Cool. Maybe they'll regulate Starlink right our of Europe too. ;o)"

Its in high demand since Ukraine is living in the dark.

Seb, She accidentally quit, but whatever, not that deep.


Starlink is largely important for military use.

"How? Why would apple give him a discount because he's popular?"

No, your missing what's important. Leverage. With a few tweets he was able to not only bring apples monopolistic (Google's is worse) app store scam to headkine news but multiple calls for congressional investigations/actions.

Other powerful supporters agree the app store is a scam.

Apple could give him a sweetheart deal like Netflix or other large apps get.

Or we could (and should, really should) take away the gross power they wield over the app stores.Legislation already exists but hasnt been brought to the floor yet. Doubt it, but I wish this would happen.

"Realistically, what leverage can he get "the public" to apply here?"

Bad press and congressional investigations/acts.

"Not really. If he ever did something that merited banning, they'd probably still BSB him. Because they could then point to that thing."

My god your seething that he owns Twitter now. You can claim otherwise, but it comes across in all your posts and how tonhave these wierd fantasies that he will be stopped or he will fuck up somehow so bad it will destroy the company etc etc.

You are hoping he fails more than a fat kid loves cake.

Henis your new Trump. Haha
Seb
Member
Thu Dec 01 05:38:32
habebe:

"Seb, She accidentally quit, but whatever, not that deep."

No. She did not accidentally quit. You cannot "accidentally" quit. When your boss says "I am making a unilateral change to your contract and if you do not agree to it, I am going to treat you as if your served notice" - that is not a lawful action. What is happening is your contract is being illegally terminated by your boss. It is called "wrongful dismissal", and it is an actionable civil claim.

This is the point you seem to not be understanding - ALL the people let go by this process, or indeed being what you call fired - all of them have similar claims on Twitter. All of them will likely wind up getting settlements equivalent to many more months of pay than if they had used a sensible redundancy process.

And that is before regulatory fines.
Seb
Member
Thu Dec 01 05:40:18
You can call it what you like Habebe - whatever you need to maintain your faith in St Elon of Musk - the substantive content is the same.

It is a breach of contract by Twitter in respect of its obligations to employees in Europe, and will result in far higher costs for Twitter than if they had used redundancy. End of.
Seb
Member
Thu Dec 01 05:46:13
Habebe:

"Starlink is largely important for military use."

There are military communications satellites already.

The UK bought a Satellite Constellation that is looking at broadband to customers also (OneWeb).

"Leverage. With a few tweets he was able to not only bring apples monopolistic (Google's is worse) app store scam to headkine news but multiple calls for congressional investigations/actions."

He was pushing at an open door - plenty of lobbying and attention against this already. Again, what Leverage? He can't actually stop a congressional investigation once started - so that's a sunk cost for Apple.

The EU was already investigating these fees and the Commission is a far more effective body in this respect than congress.






Seb
Member
Thu Dec 01 05:49:46
Habebe:

" You can claim otherwise, but it comes across in all your posts"

I think that is your projection again. I'm simply saying that you are creating this narrative here that when you look at it doesn't hold water.

You can't threaten someone with a one shot gun after you have fired the gun.

Like I said, I'm pretty sure he will wind up bending the knee to advertisers and regulators in the end. Too much riding on it not to.
habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 12:18:11
Ok Seb. It will be ok. Where did Elon hurt you on the doll?
habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 12:18:50
EU regulators are now threatening to ban Twitter unless they censor more.

Haha
murder
Member
Thu Dec 01 12:36:04

"EU regulators are now threatening to ban Twitter unless they censor more."

Not to worry, I'm sure than Elon will threaten to form his own European union and promise that it will have 10 times the population and 1000 times the wealth.

McKobb
Member
Thu Dec 01 15:06:08
all welcome the new founding member of Twitter
Paramount
Member
Thu Dec 01 17:16:55
Elon should just stop offering Twitter to the EU. If the EU don’t like Twitter they can build their own Twitter service where they can censor people who has different views and opinions than themselves.
Paramount
Member
Thu Dec 01 17:29:56
Maybe Elon can sell Twitter to the EU Commision? It would benefit both parties. 1) Elon would get rid of the damnation and get his moneys back and can focus on space exploration instead, 2) the EU gets its own Twitter service that they can control.
McKobb
Member
Thu Dec 01 18:04:13
why would they want to buy that mess?
murder
Member
Thu Dec 01 18:13:54

"all welcome the new founding member of Twitter"

If he thought he could get away with it I'm sure he'd make the claim.

habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 19:13:32
"Not to worry, I'm sure than Elon will threaten to form his own European union and promise that it will have 10 times the population and 1000 times the wealth."

Didn't you just post how poor Europe is becoming?

Paramount, Can the EU commission afford that?

"If he thought he could get away with it I'm sure he'd make the claim."

Salty leftists are mad because he is legally a cofounder of Tesla even though he didn't join until the company was 6 months old with no factory or even plans for a car, let alone a car.

They claim those other two guys were the real brains behind the company even though they could have easily started another company to compete and never did.
murder
Member
Thu Dec 01 20:29:42

"Didn't you just post how poor Europe is becoming?"

No I don't think I did.

habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 20:35:51
http://www...hread=90891&time=1668778688819

Looks poor.
murder
Member
Thu Dec 01 20:36:36

"... he is legally a cofounder ..."

No one is legally a co-founder. You either are or you're not, and he ain't.

habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 20:43:43
He is officially listed as a cofounder, I dont know the details but that was decided out of court.

But again, doesnt really matter, he IS Tesla. Before he bought in it was an unfunded idea.with noncars or even factories, now its worth more than than all the major car companies in the world.That The rest is semantics.
Y2A
Member
Thu Dec 01 22:09:56
they just censored ye!
habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 23:35:49
That's probably for his own good.

Kanye is crazy.Like legit bipolar+.
habebe
Member
Thu Dec 01 23:46:12
But hey, atleast its transparent with the exact post that was too much and why.
murder
Member
Fri Dec 02 05:33:42

The cause: Costing Elon money.

murder
Member
Fri Dec 02 05:36:54

Pretty funny that Kanye is saying that pornography destroyed his family ... as if pornography wasn't why he married into that family in the first place.

Seb
Member
Fri Dec 02 06:00:59
habebe:

Yeah, it was the one where he mocked Musk after his other post was deleted.
murder
Member
Fri Dec 02 06:06:17

Yeah, Space Karen is extremely sensitive to mocking.

He's all about free speech until you say something he doesn't like or post a picture he doesn't like or try to link people to a site he doesn't like.

williamthebastard
Member
Fri Dec 02 06:21:31
He's a multibillionaire Hot Rod who bought it just to get hold of the mod hammer
Average Ameriacn
Member
Fri Dec 02 06:40:08
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kanye. Elon. Trump.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MAGA!

The twitter employee who blocked Kanye should be fired!

FREE SPEECH!

MAGA!
Seb
Member
Fri Dec 02 07:47:09
http://www...ising-losses-2022-11?r=US&IR=T

I think it is a reasonable question for anyone to ask - what's the plan for the revenue to pay of Twitters opex, fund capex, and service the very large debt it took out to finance it's own purchase?

Does subscriptions seem a viable approach, and if not how does he plan to bring advertisers back or generate new funding streams?


I know Habebe thinks these are questions that can only be asked if you hate Musk - but they seem reasonable ones anyone would be asking to me.

Fat Fag
Member
Fri Dec 02 08:43:26
http://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1598353379993976834

Still blows my mind how many conservatives are praising a man whose profile pic is of him in an outfit with a satanic symbol and he wants to put microchips in people's heads. This is prime conspiracy theory material right here.
habebe
Member
Fri Dec 02 11:52:50
"Yeah, it was the one where he mocked Musk after his other post was deleted"

Seb, No, that was clarified.

"I know Habebe thinks these are questions that can only be asked if you hate Musk - but they seem reasonable ones anyone would be asking to me."

No, these are reasonable questions to ask. You prefer to argue against positions that you fabricate.

You clearly have a laundry lists of complaints ONLY since Musk took over.On day 5 you were ready to call it a failure but said nothing at 12 years of mounting debt and no profit which youbclaim they invested into something, maybe magic beans?

You somehow think a company that almost never made profit was a good business.

You claim they were investing, but you don't know what they invested in, what do they have to show for it?

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Dec 02 12:03:47
Kanye:Elon::Joker:HarveyDent

he got him to censor by arbitrarily applying an incitement of violence claim
williamthebastard
Member
Fri Dec 02 12:08:27
Oh come on!

Kanye:Alfred. Elon:Bruce Wayne
murder
Member
Fri Dec 02 12:49:31

"Still blows my mind how many conservatives are praising a man whose profile pic is of him in an outfit with a satanic symbol and he wants to put microchips in people's heads. This is prime conspiracy theory material right here."

It should have been clear with the Trump support that "christian conservatives" don't really give a shit about anything besides white supremacy and low taxes.
Habebe
Member
Fri Dec 02 15:55:58
http://twi...?t=INVD7Hk3jcsCJWAc_VSZxA&s=19

Elon is publishingnthe first set of Twitter files detailing the Hunter biden laptop fiasco (AKA The big lie)

At 5 pm civilized time.
Seb
Member
Fri Dec 02 15:58:56
Habebe:

Excuse me but I have explained several times that drawing a parallel with Truss does not constitute "failure" in the binary sense you appear to be claiming.

I've said this a number of times now. You are extending your fabrications to buttress your own inexplicable belief that trashing the main revenue stream to pursue a revenue stream that very obviously will not compensate for the lost revenue is a brilliant business decision that can only be questioned by someone motivated by personal hatred of Musk.

We really ought to be asking you to show us where on the doll the lIb3rAlz touched you, and if they are in the room with us now.
Habebe
Member
Fri Dec 02 17:07:13
Seb, Yes I get that Musk wont ve fired, I also get that you and I disagree that it was a good revenue stream going forward considering all but 2 years it was insufficient to keep them out of the red.

But you continue to push the claim that Ive said questioning his business decisions can only be done by someone with AC to grind.

You, Sebastian come off as someone with an ax to grind against maybe not Musk but Musk buying Twitter atleast. Europe in general seems pissy about it.


Now again back to what I was asking earlier. You claim tge reason advertising actually was a good model to make money in the manner it was before and still could not turn a profit was because they heavily invested.

But invested in what? I get that for years they were growing users, you need eyes in order to sell ads, right?

But for 3 years now users have been stagnant too, so why were ads still insufficient to make this a profitable company if it is such a good source of income?


My stance is they never adopted a quality profitable model, they only profited when Trump was both in the WH and on Twitter (being the largest draw of eyes)

So this is a flawed model for Twitter.
Seb
Member
Sun Dec 04 05:25:09
Habebe:

It is the best revenue stream Twitter has. Subscriptions will never raise billions.

"But you continue to push the claim that Ive said questioning his business decisions can only be done by someone with AC to grind."

Your entire basis for claiming I have an axe to grind against musk is because I've criticised his Twitter decisions.

Have I criticised SpaceX? Nope. Tesla? Not much (I do think it's overvalued, but that's not really a criticism of musk). Boring company - yup - but then he basically has come out on record and said his objective with all the hyperloop crap was to try and make it harder for public high speed rail to get funded.

Have I criticised Musk's behaviour? At times- I thought the paedo thing about the diver was pretty shitty behaviour.

This "axe to grind" thing is ridiculous reflection and just speaks to your total inability to even conceive that something can be judged on merits Vs primarily through a manichean take on your culture war.

"But for 3 years now users have been stagnant too, so why were ads still insufficient to make this a profitable company if it is such a good source of income?"

Features. E.g. of the kind musk prematurely pushed into prod.

You are equating growing eyeballs with growing revenues.

But that's not how it works. Advertisers will pay more to put an add for a product on someone's phone at the point they are going to walk past the shop they are advertising than they will when they are at home on the toilet.

So a lot of time and money on advertising based platform goes on trying to measure and then maximise the value of add placement in order to charge higher fees.

Of course the other problem with social media platforms, especially Twitter given it's role in news reporting, is content moderation. Shitty content scares off advertisers. It's also illegal. So huge amounts of money go into trying to solve that problem also: tweaks to algo etc. Better tooling for content moderation, attempts to automate filters too.

All this stuff costs money. Also, it's stuff you don't see as a user. You are the product. The customer is advertisers and they have a wole suite of features for catering to advertisers you don't see.

Now, whether Twitter was doing well or badly, I am not clear on. I think it finds itself in a much more difficult space than Facebook in some respects given the niche it has evolved into.

However, simply quacking out "it hasn't made a net profit" over and over again doesn't mean very much.

And saying "because it didn't make net profit, the business model is wrong" is also an argument full of holes. E.g. if your cost base is too high, you can slash it like musk has in ways that aren't fundamentally scary to the customer (advertisers).

Your argument: no net profit, therefore and revenues don't work as a business model, therefore sensible to damage that revenue stream in pursuit of a revenue stream that doesn't look like it can remotely compensate - well it literally makes no sense.

It's like saying "whelp, I jumped out of the plane with this parachute, but I'm still falling and I want to be flying, so I'm going to cut myself free of the pack and start flapping my arms".

It's not a plan for success, it's a rhetorical device to get you through a conversation.

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share