Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
He had a beef with spacex based on some government contracts and used wapo to publish an oped that furthered arguments that favored him.
-
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
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
- Status
He had a beef with spacex based on some government contracts and used wapo to publish an oped that furthered arguments that favored him.
Punished Miku
Banned
The biggest thing is also a lack of critical coverage of Amazon. And that extends across the entire media. Any professional journalist will not casually burn bridges with a potential employer, even if they don't currently work for the Post.
But this is the world we live in now with dying media. The Intercept is also funded by a billionaire. Most print media is not that profitable so this is how it's probably going to be.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
I live in America. I have no idea what's going on over there.
I just think it's odd to see people attempt to dunk on a guy who proposes a plan to get the war to end.
Vestal
Junior Member
Well if you have no idea what’s going on over there, maybe you should get an idea before making judgement on those that do.
CharmingCharlie
Member
Seriously did you even see Elon's "plan" to get the war to end. Basically Ukraine surrenders and Russia gets everything it wants and gets rewarded for being the aggressor. That was Elon's great plan it was beyond moronic and betrays the real life suffering Ukrainians have incurred under Russia's aggression. All Elon's plan would do is give us a short term peace whilst it would embolden Russia and show Russia that they can indeed get away with raping, murdering and invading anyone they like.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
How do you "get an idea" about war? What Tweets should I follow and what networks should I watch?
akimbo009
Gold Member
We got a whole thread on it, right here on GAF...
01011001
Banned
what precedent does it set when people just give in every time some maniac dictator tries to attack and take over a peaceful neighbor?
FunkMiller
Member
It wasn't a plan to end the war in Ukraine's favour. He was coming at it from a position of ending the war, just so the world can go back to normal again. That's the problem. I understand the sentiment - we all want that - but the war can't end with Putin achieving any of his ambitions. Most people appreciate this - hence the backlash. Musk isn't an idiot. Hopefully he'll educate himself a bit more about the situation now this has happened. Frankly, I wish he'd drop all this Twitter nonsense, and concentrate on stuff that's far more worthwhile. He clearly has both the power and the intelligence to do it. The fact he's wasting all this time on a grotty social media platform in one way or another isn't good. The market will punish him if he continues to play silly buggers.
Last edited:
Punished Miku
Banned
Why Is No One Talking About Elon Musk's Ties to China?
With Musk's history of using bullying tactics to silence critics, it's certainly not out of the question that he would comply with Chinese censorship demands.
www.newsweek.com
Yeah, sure. Any day now he'll educate himself.
FunkMiller
Member
Why Is No One Talking About Elon Musk's Ties to China?
With Musk's history of using bullying tactics to silence critics, it's certainly not out of the question that he would comply with Chinese censorship demands.
Yeah, sure. Any day now he'll educate himself.
Yeah. When Bezos can dunk on you hard, you know you must be doing something wrong.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Irony so thick.
Flatline
Banned
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/RIQO5EQCRVKGJIDWSM4D5FABVA.jpg)
Amazon partnered with China propaganda arm
Amazon.com Inc was marketing a collection of President Xi Jinping's speeches and writings on its Chinese website about two years ago, when Beijing delivered an edict, according to two people familiar with the incident. The American e-commerce giant must stop allowing any customer ratings and...
www.reuters.com
Dr. Samuel Hayden
Member
If I were in Musk's shoes I would immediately chuck Twitter into Mount Doom as soon as the deal is complete. Quite possibly the most cancerous website in the internet's history.
But obviously that won't happen, so good luck to him "improving" it... assuming it actually happens this time.
But obviously that won't happen, so good luck to him "improving" it... assuming it actually happens this time.
Vestal
Junior Member
Not so fast.
www.pbs.org
Twitter says it wants trial against Elon Musk to proceed
Twitter is asking a Delaware court to proceed with an upcoming trial against Elon Musk. The social media platform says the billionaire refuses to accept the contractual obligations of his April agreement to buy the company for $44 billion.
www.pbs.org
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Well, they've been purging "users" heavily the last few days since his purchase filing, which looks like sabotage to his legal team, so they wanted certain terms of agreement.Not so fast.
Twitter says it wants trial against Elon Musk to proceed
Twitter is asking a Delaware court to proceed with an upcoming trial against Elon Musk. The social media platform says the billionaire refuses to accept the contractual obligations of his April agreement to buy the company for $44 billion.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Not so fast.
Twitter says it wants trial against Elon Musk to proceed
Twitter is asking a Delaware court to proceed with an upcoming trial against Elon Musk. The social media platform says the billionaire refuses to accept the contractual obligations of his April agreement to buy the company for $44 billion.
This is the song that never ends.....
Tams
Member
Once they take back all their territory, yes. Every other country to Russia's west, bwr Belarus, has, as they know how untrustworthy Russia are.
And if the people of Belarus had their way, they would join too.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
But it was a plan to end the war in the soldiers and civilians who are about to be killed and mutilated's favor.
FunkMiller
Member
You think Ukrainians living under the Russian regime would fair well, do you? And what stops Putin deciding to invade other nations if he gets what he wants now? And the Ukrainian soldiers want to keep fighting, so unless you care about the Russian soldiers, that doesn't really matter either?
The person responsible for all that mutilation and death is Vladimir Putin and he has to be stopped. That's what the Ukrainian soldiers and civilians want. If anyone advocates for an 'end' to this war that results in him keeping any gains, then that's a pro-Russian end to the war that they 're talking about.
That's why Musk's remarks were so stupid. He's advocating for Russia to get what it wants.
Last edited:
CharmingCharlie
Member
yeah I get the feeling you haven't been following the war all that closely. You do know that areas that have been liberated from Russian control have like a ton of mass graves where Ukrainians, men, women and CHILDREN have been tortured, murdered and by some reports actually buried afucking live. The Ukrainian people are literally fighting for their right to EXIST. As the popular saying goes "If Russia stops fighting the war ends. if Ukrainians stop fighting they cease to exist". If we followed Elon Musks "plan" it would lead to the eradication of the Ukrainian people. Now do you get why people are bagging on that fuckwit Elon ?
InverseAgonist
Banned
In a way, it's already happening. Twitter is making progress on bots and there will likely be a wholesale clean-up of the moderation and policies. I would expect them to open-up about the algorithmic side of the content moderation in due time. Long-term, Twitter will likely serve as a central piece in a much larger app that integrates banking, communications and food ordering, initially.
Flatline
Banned
Not so fast.
Twitter says it wants trial against Elon Musk to proceed
Twitter is asking a Delaware court to proceed with an upcoming trial against Elon Musk. The social media platform says the billionaire refuses to accept the contractual obligations of his April agreement to buy the company for $44 billion.
Gee, I wonder if there's some political event coming that would motivate them to drag this so that they can keep controlling the narrative...
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
They are just using the trial as assurance that Elon wont pull out of the deal again. There is no reason why they cant continue to hash out a deal behind the scenes while the trial plays out in court.
Vestal
Junior Member
Controlling what narrative?!?!
Not everything is about politics. Sometimes it’s just some good old fashioned Court enforced contractual obligations.
ManaByte
Member
Unfamiliar with Twitter I see.
Vestal
Junior Member
So you truly think that within 2 weeks what you believe is some controlled narrative from the boardroom of twitter will somehow be disolved immediately under Musk just in time for the primaries too.
Somehow he gets control within days and everything in twitter will change in an instant.
Gotcha
ManaByte
Member
Pretty sure Musk will disable Birdwatch as soon as he gets control of the platform. Twitter doesn’t want that.
Twitter is making its crowdsourced fact-checks visible to all US users with Birdwatch expansion | TechCrunch
The idea with Birdwatch is to add a layer of fact-checking and context to tweets that don't necessarily violate Twitter's rules.
techcrunch.com
Vestal
Junior Member
Has he said so? Also one thing is saying it another is going ahead and doing it.Pretty sure Musk will disable Birdwatch as soon as he gets control of the platform. Twitter doesn’t want that.
Twitter is making its crowdsourced fact-checks visible to all US users with Birdwatch expansion | TechCrunch
The idea with Birdwatch is to add a layer of fact-checking and context to tweets that don't necessarily violate Twitter's rules.
Kinda like this purchase deal.
ManaByte
Member
It’s a tool for the mob to control the narrative. It’s dead the second the deal closes.
Vestal
Junior Member
How do you know?
I am not trying to be difficult, but I get a feeling a lot of people are taking Musks crazy talk and musings at face value.. Its one thing to trash a company and talk big when you are on the outside looking in.. Its a much different beast when you got the hands on the reigns and its your money on the line.
LongestLine
Neo Member
This is what I don't understand. If you reward Putin for invading another country, won't he be more likely to invade other areas? He'll still have the same nuclear weapons he has now, why would appeasement work?
ManaByte
Member
A tool made to suppress a narrative the mob doesn’t like goes directly against his stated reasons for buying the platform.
Vestal
Junior Member
Honestly, good luck with that.. I feel people are putting too much stock on what he has raved or mused about all the while not giving any stock to his actions through out this saga.
I would caution, to prepare to be disappointed.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Again I ask, how do you "follow the war closely"?
How do you know the information your getting is reliable? How do you distinguish wartime propaganda from reality?
Last edited:
akimbo009
Gold Member
Again I ask, how do you "follow the war closely"?
How do you know the information your getting is reliable? How do you distinguish wartime propaganda from reality?
I should show you the love story that goes boom
Anyway - there's tons of visual and other evidence around this war it's pretty easy to get a sense of what's happening (and certainly who's been outright evil (hint: it's the pig fuckers)).
Vestal
Junior Member
The line in the sand is pretty well defined.Again I ask, how do you "follow the war closely"?
How do you know the information your getting is reliable? How do you distinguish wartime propaganda from reality?
Democracy vs Authoritarianism. There is zero ambiguity.
DeaDPo0L84
Member
All I know is the second this deal is finalized I'm going to spend the first day misgendering everyone, even friends and family.
Ogbert
Member
This ‘fact checking’ nonsense needs to get fucked. It’s quite obviously an insufferable way for the usual suspects to assert their cultural dominance.
For example, if the concept of defending objective truth was being applied uniformly, then at the very least I would expect the statement ‘Trans women are women’ to carry a challenge. It’s empirical (and literal) bollocks.
Instead, it is chanted like a mantra.
Fact checking outfits are a disingenuous vehicle to avoid scrutiny.
For example, if the concept of defending objective truth was being applied uniformly, then at the very least I would expect the statement ‘Trans women are women’ to carry a challenge. It’s empirical (and literal) bollocks.
Instead, it is chanted like a mantra.
Fact checking outfits are a disingenuous vehicle to avoid scrutiny.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
If anyone tries to tell you that fact checking is some kind of sinister method to "control the narrative" or "socially dominate" others you can safely ignore anything else they have to say on the topic. One could only imagine the cesspools of disinformation and misinformation they must have succumbed to.
Ogbert
Member
That’s handy. Keep things nice and simple.
It’s perfectly obvious that the veil of fact checking ‘can’ be used for little more than PR purposes. Simply look at who funds the organisation and the ‘facts’ that they concentrate on checking.
It’s also used as a tool to imply there is an objective status to moral questions that are fundamentally subjective.
It’s a silly practise for our silly times.
MastaKiiLA
Member
Or maybe people who intend on lying to you are conditioning you to doubt sources of information that have proven reliable for literally centuries.
Anyone who tells you that fact checking is part of a conspiracy to silence you wants you to stop checking your facts, so that they can lie to you. Let's be real, just look at the band of thieves, liars and weirdos who continuously push this narrative. Alarm bells should be ringing.
Brazen
Member
Care to give us all some examples on this?
I know even that our top longest going news organizations have omitted/lied to the American people in the past.
Now if you're referring to methods of sources, such as a bunch of different independently/unaffiliated journalist or scientist or whatever's research all coming to similar or same conclusions then that I would have no problem agreeing with. But when an entity from top-down or an organization (that has all kinds of bias incorporated) fact checks I put it on hold and do my own fact checking of the checkers.
MastaKiiLA
Member
NYT, WaPo, PBS, Reuters, AP, etc... I'm missing a ton, as the NE is flush with long-running new publications (not to mention all the quality international pubs) that are reliable, whether some doofus on Twitter says so or not. There are basic journalistic standards that many TV and radio networks don't observe, but the old papers still do. Once upon a time, your local paper was your only window into the world, and you learned to differentiate between reliable and unreliable sources. It's generally why the long-running papers have been running so long, because they've built up trust.
Trust is super-critical for newspapers, and they enforce quality standards in order to preserve that trust. No paper has a 100% record, but no one hits 1.000 anyway. It's impossible. But if you want to dismiss these long-running publications because of past errors, then you can write off any other source that you'd want to recommend, because track record means a lot, and you're not going to find news sources with better track records than some of the publications I noted.
FFS, these newspapers are considered acceptable sources on term and research papers. I think before we discard proven sources, it makes more sense to review the pasts and accuracy of statements from the people who are calling these sources into question. Seems there are an awful lot of bald-faced liars pushing the narrative, and I question their claims long before the source.
Last edited:
CharmingCharlie
Member
Oh god you are one of those are you ? Let me guess the moon landing didn't happen, the earth is flat and down is actually up. You know it is actually pretty easy to "filter" propoganda out and get a fairly factual reading of what is happening in Ukraine. We FACTUALLY KNOW that Putin wants to end Ukrainian existence, how do we factually know ? because putin said it in his speech right before he sent his tanks charging into the battlefield and ran out of fuel. We FACTUALLY KNOW that the Russian army is guilty of horrific war crimes in Ukraine, how do we factually know ? because aside from the fact it has been independantly verified by neutral organisations and the UN (or is that an evil we want to run the world organisation in your book). Aside from all that the Russian Army proudly declare they consider rape and murdering citizens are "useful" tools of warfare. The Russian Army has a reputation as the red nazi's for a reason what they did during the end of the 2nd world war would make even a Nazi go "woah hang on that is a bit much".Again I ask, how do you "follow the war closely"?
How do you know the information your getting is reliable? How do you distinguish wartime propaganda from reality?
There is no question about the important big details of the war they have all been verified and anyone still going "oh oh oh but how do you really know" is not arguing in good faith. Oh and Mark Twain was an absolute insufferable arsehole that probably liked the smell of his own farts.
Brazen
Member
I never questioned proven(verified) sources; I even gave an example of such. This isn't about credibility this is about fact checking and being 1 off a million is still not a fact. I agree with most of what is said here. But nothing is 100% and that's what I was getting at. Thank you for the long reply though.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Yea, we live in a world where countries like Russia, China, and Saudi Arabia have meticulously crafted disinformation and state-backed media apparatuses to spread lies and conspiracy theories, or hide and distort facts from its citizens. It has been a known part of reality for decades now.
So to me anyone who suggests that fact checking is "bad" is admitting that they're OK with the kinds of things those countries and other bad actors do, that people should be allowed to freely lie and spread misinformation on platforms that fact check. They're transparent as glass and have sadly been corrupted by the very disinformation and misinformation the fact checkers tried to protect them from. They're simply not worth engaging with on that topic once they let their mask drop.
Flatline
Banned
Reliable sources of information like the New York Times, a historic, celebrated newspaper that lied in support of the Iraq war and was subsequently partly responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people. Anyone who tells you that fact checking is part of a conspiracy to silence you wants you to stop getting your facts checked by fine upstanding citizens like that.
- Status