• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Elon Musk and the Twitter acquisition saga

Status
Not open for further replies.

///PATRIOT

Banned
What exactly would make you think they wouldn't publish this? The Washington Post is one of the best news publications still going today. One of the few that still adheres to proper journalistic standards like having multiple sources.
LOL. Are you a regular reader? Honest Question.
Does running hit pieces and doxxing people is what you call "adheres to proper journalistic standards"?
Does refusing to investigate, follow up and cover certain news (Biden's son) is what you call "adheres to proper journalistic standards"?
"Mainstream media not trustworthy, blablablablablablaahblah..." and then linking to media that have next to no, terrible/unreliable, or even no sources. Usually YouTube videos or Twitter posts.

Scepticism on steroids basically.
Why are you like this? Didn't you oppose to Musk acquisition just because billionaire bad! And happy with the current twitter admins banning and silencing conservatives opinions. Really dude?

The WAPO also had a few articles attacking Musk, criticizing his acquisition as a danger and threat to blablablablablablaahblah missinformation blablablablablablaahblah democracy.
 
Last edited:

MastaKiiLA

Member
LOL. Are you a regular reader? Honest Question.
Does running hit pieces and doxxing people is what you call "adheres to proper journalistic standards"?
Does refusing to investigate, follow up and cover certain news (Biden's son) is what you call "adheres to proper journalistic standards"?
I read a few articles each week. I see you mentioned Hunter Biden. I immediately regret asking.
 

Tams

Member
LOL. Are you a regular reader? Honest Question.
Does running hit pieces and doxxing people is what you call "adheres to proper journalistic standards"?
Does refusing to investigate, follow up and cover certain news (Biden's son) is what you call "adheres to proper journalistic standards"?

Why are you like this? Didn't you oppose to Musk acquisition just because billionaire bad! And happy with the current twitter admins banning and silencing conservatives opinions. Really dude?

The WAPO also had a few articles attacking Musk, criticizing his acquisition as a danger and threat to blablablablablablaahblah missinformation blablablablablablaahblah democracy.

I never said anything about Musk being bad because he's a billionaire, let alone its relation to the acquisition. And I've made it quite clear that I have no love for Twitter.

Also, if you actually bothered to read my comment, you'd know that I was absolutely not criticising the Washington Post. I was agreeing with someone else that they do a great job a lot of the time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

///PATRIOT

Banned
I never said anything about Musk being bad because he's a billionaire, let alone its relation to the acquisition. And I've made it quite clear that I have no love for Twitter.

Also, if you actually bothered to read my comment, you'd know that I was absolutely not criticising the Washington Post. I was agreeing with someone else that they do a great job a lot of the time.
You were mocking the people questioning the journalism of the WAPO in a comment replaying to me for questioning their journalism. Can you see how I connected the dots?. I appreciate the edits btw.
 
Last edited:

Kraz

Banned
The complaint of a fired employee being known could be helpful. All factors regarding their opinion will be taken into account.
 

Tams

Member
You were mocking the people questioning the journalism of the WAPO in a comment replaying to me for questioning their journalism. Can you see how I connected the dots?. I appreciate the edits btw.
I was because they mock the Washington Post for using sources.

They have bad opinions and takes, but can you provide even a single article in which they practiced bad journalism?

The edits were not me. I think everyone should know that.
 
Last edited:
I was because they mock the Washington Post for using sources.

They have bad opinions and takes, but can you provide even a single article in which they practiced bad journalism?

The edits were not me. I think everyone should know that.


I'd suggest starting with the legalbytes video. That was some especially horrible journalism. Unlike some of the other videos in that list, it can also be discussed without violating the no politics rule.
 
Last edited:

cormack12

Gold Member

Updated on 25 August 2022 at 22:42 BST

Twitter Inc. was ordered to hand over more information about spam and bot accounts to Elon Musk as part of its legal fight to make the billionaire complete his $44 billion acquisition of the social-media platform.

Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen St. J. McCormick Thursday ruled Twitter must turn over information about 9,000 accounts it surveyed last year in hopes of identifying which had human beings attached to them. Twitter sought to deny Musk access to this “historical snapshot” on privacy and other grounds.

Twitter also “must produce documents sufficient to show how those 9,000 accounts were selected for review,” McCormick said in her ruling. At a hearing on Wednesday, Musk’s lawyers accused their Twitter counterparts of stonewalling them on the bots information in pre-trial information exchanges.
 

ManaByte

Member


shades of blue GIF
 
Last edited:

MastaKiiLA

Member
Seems like a long shot. He'd have to provide testimony that either invalidates the numerical data provided by Twitter, or suggests an alternate method of corroboration. I just don't see how he can provide any information that'll let Musk worm his way out of this deal. Musk has to eat at least a billion dollars for being a dumbass here. Preferably, force him to buy the entire platform, and then marvel as he physically shits out of his mouth to explain why he actually won't be unbanning a man poised to be indicted for illegally possessing state secrets, and at this rate, probably selling them too.

I want Elon Musk to have to acknowledge the reality that all social media platforms (at least the ones that wanted to remain financially solvent) had to wrestle with. Some users of these platforms are fucking liabilities, and all the free speech posturing for social media likes will suddenly disappear because your 40 billion dollar investment faces growing scrutiny thanks to the swarm of reckless cunts you let back onto the platform.

Talk all that shit when you're holding the bag, bitch!
 

BadBurger

Many “Whelps”! Handle It!


That's old news, see my post from a few weeks back. It's one of the guys Twitter had to let go early this year due to his allegations. As has been mentioned by experts opining on the case over the past few weeks, it's unlikely they are able to offer any information that Twitter hasn't already disclosed.

As a purely theatrical stunt by Musk's defense, however, it's something. An appeal to the public's emotion. We'll see if it sways the judge. No need for cheerleading histrionics. Maybe he'll drop some crazy bombshell like we're living in some adaptation of a Grisham novel, which would be wild, but this is a boring trade dispute. I wouldn't hold my breath.
 

Amiga

Member

That rate could only mean Twitter is allowing some groups to run bot farms and others are not.

If Musk takes over I hope he tags bot accounts with a tag like this🤖 in place of the blue checkmark.

Would also love to see if some bluechecked accounts turn out to be bots.
 

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member
That rate could only mean Twitter is allowing some groups to run bot farms and others are not.

If Musk takes over I hope he tags bot accounts with a tag like this🤖 in place of the blue checkmark.

Would also love to see if some bluechecked accounts turn out to be bots.
I would presume the verification process to get a blue checkmark would indicate that someone or someone on their behalf, is running the account.
 

Amiga

Member
I would presume the verification process to get a blue checkmark would indicate that someone or someone on their behalf, is running the account.
The accounts could be handed over to automated system. Seeing to many blue check popular figures making very similar comments on subjects they very likely have no clue about. And these accounts have little actual back and forth conversations with people.
 

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member
The accounts could be handed over to automated system. Seeing to many blue check popular figures making very similar comments on subjects they very likely have no clue about. And these accounts have little actual back and forth conversations with people.
For sure. I don't know that I would consider these the same level as a random user meant to get hashtags trending or whatnot. PR is PR at the end of the day and Twitter is another platform to post PR.
 

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member

Twitter’s roughly $7 million payment to Peiter Zatko violates terms of April merger agreement, lawyer argues

A lawyer for Elon Musk argued in a letter Friday to Twitter Inc. that a roughly $7 million payment the company made to a whistleblower gives the billionaire more ammunition to walk away from a $44 billion deal to buy the social-media business.

Twitter agreed in June to pay a settlement to Peiter Zatko, who served as the company’s security head before being fired in January. The settlement was completed days before Mr. Zatko filed his whistleblower complaint in July, in which he accuses the company of failing to protect sensitive user data and lying about security problems, The Wall Street Journal first reported.

Twitter has denied the allegations and said Mr. Zatko was fired “for ineffective leadership and poor performance.”

Twitter didn’t reach out to Mr. Musk for consent before making the $7.75 million in payments to Mr. Zatko and his counsel, said Mr. Musk’s lawyer Mike Ringler, of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. He also said Mr. Musk first learned of the payment when Twitter filed the separation agreement with Mr. Zatko in court last week where he is fighting with Twitter over his effort to abandon the deal.

That payment, according to the letter Friday, violated terms of the merger agreement related to payments the company can make to employees.

Twitter didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Twitter’s confidential settlement was related to Mr. Zatko’s lost compensation and followed monthslong mediation over tens of millions of dollars in potential pay, the Journal has reported, citing people familiar with the matter. Such compensation agreements aren’t unusual when an executive departs a company prematurely and leaves behind potential stock options and other money.

Mr. Zatko agreed to a nondisclosure agreement that forbids him from speaking publicly about his time at Twitter or disparaging the company, the people said. Congressional hearings and governmental whistleblower complaints are two of the few venues in which he is permitted to speak openly, they said, and such exemptions are typical in compensation settlements.

Mr. Zatko is scheduled to testify Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee to discuss his allegations of security failures at Twitter. The same day, Twitter shareholders are being asked to vote on Mr. Musk’s proposed takeover of the social-media company.

Mr. Musk first tried to abandon the Twitter takeover in July. He has been arguing that Twitter misrepresented its business and information about spam or bot accounts on the platform. Twitter has denied the allegations and is suing Mr. Musk to enforce the deal on agreed terms. A five-day nonjury trial is scheduled to start Oct. 17 in Delaware Chancery Court.
 

HoodWinked

Member
Hehe

I'm not joining the board. This is a waste of my time.

This is my favorite thing. There is so much bullshit speak these days. Where someone talks but very little is actually being said. It's the stuff students did to fill 10 pages for a written assignment. It seems like this is the product of that in the education system.
 

BadBurger

Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
I lost track of where this case was going a few weeks ago. Been kind of a lukewarm story. That said:

Did Musk or Twitter get any kind of traction in the case lately? Last I remember Musk's team wanted an old Twitter exec's severance package investigated because it might lead to a possible violation of the agreement regarding how ex Twitter employees are compensated.

I've literally seen zero news about it since then.
 

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member
I lost track of where this case was going a few weeks ago. Been kind of a lukewarm story. That said:

Did Musk or Twitter get any kind of traction in the case lately? Last I remember Musk's team wanted an old Twitter exec's severance package investigated because it might lead to a possible violation of the agreement regarding how ex Twitter employees are compensated.

I've literally seen zero news about it since then.
There won't be anything major until the actual hearing this month.
 

Vestal

Junior Member
The new October surprise.

Considering his takes lately.....

Well good luck to Twitter :)

 
Last edited:

Rat Rage

Member
I don't like the idea of one person owning twitter, one of the most popular social networks and news sources, while at the same time owning most of the world's capabilities for satellite internet. Starlink is gonna occupy most of the earth's viable altitude for satellite internet, which would create a huge and IMHO pretty dangerous monopoly said technology.
 
I don't like the idea of one person owning twitter, one of the most popular social networks and news sources, while at the same time owning most of the world's capabilities for satellite internet. Starlink is gonna occupy most of the earth's viable altitude for satellite internet, which would create a huge and IMHO pretty dangerous monopoly said technology.
I've always said it's a bad idea. And said he was full of shit on his claims for trying to get out of his deal. I was right on both, and never changed my mind.

Trump fans couldn't wait for him to buy it, before celebrating that he wasn't buying it, and now happy that he is buying it. Liberals didn't want him to buy it before celebrating that he was being forced, and will now again realize it's a bad idea. Dumb shit from everyone.
 

ntropy

Member
I don't like the idea of one person owning twitter, one of the most popular social networks and news sources, while at the same time owning most of the world's capabilities for satellite internet. Starlink is gonna occupy most of the earth's viable altitude for satellite internet, which would create a huge and IMHO pretty dangerous monopoly said technology.
why do you think a multitude of people would necessarily be better than one?
in this particular case, Elon > Twitter board
 
Last edited:
8/10 accounts being fake would explain why Twitter trends translate so badly into real life products. The general opinions touted on that platform do not represent the actual population. The real issue is that journalists and politicians are trapped in that eco system without realizing that they are essentially gauging bot created thought bubbles.

This only leads to a further alienation between politicians and journalists on one side and the people on the other side. Corporations who rely on Twitter to measure public interest are falling into the same trap hence why so many of their products fail to find an audience.

Turns out, social media trends are the biggest fake news.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom