Rran
Member
But doesn't the change mean blocked users can still read blocking users' posts, not vice-versa? Even under the new rules, if someone blocks Musk, they cannot see his posts anymore, right?
-
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.
- Status
AJUMP23
Parody of actual AJUMP23
Yes you can curate your feed. I think that may change if there is money (Advertising) involved in the future.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
I disagree with everyone who says SM should go away.
I primarily use FB and I never see unwanted posts from accounts I don't follow. Same for IG except for the ads on the feed (like FB).
Every post I see is from someone I follow. I've unfollowed some because they said something racist or extreme that I can't get behind ... But that's been a RARE occasion.
FB lets me see my friends and family I don't get to interact with much... Especially because of "out of sight, out of mind". It's how I found my biological father (long story.. he wasn't a deadbeat, btw)
My Twitter is also curated and rarely, if ever, see posts from users I don't follow.
I primarily use FB and I never see unwanted posts from accounts I don't follow. Same for IG except for the ads on the feed (like FB).
Every post I see is from someone I follow. I've unfollowed some because they said something racist or extreme that I can't get behind ... But that's been a RARE occasion.
FB lets me see my friends and family I don't get to interact with much... Especially because of "out of sight, out of mind". It's how I found my biological father (long story.. he wasn't a deadbeat, btw)
My Twitter is also curated and rarely, if ever, see posts from users I don't follow.
Dr.Morris79
Member
Wow, so that's 9.5 billion more than me.
Good all round I guess
Good all round I guess
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Let me add to this.
I'm guessing that that guy from X when he says "users" means logged in users, whereas X themselves and everyone attempting to measure it, has reported that actual usage is declining.
Why would logged in users go up? Well.. they required you to be a logged in user to do just about anything on Xitter in June 2023.
That's also right when Musk started talking about "user minutes" endlessly saying the numbers were way up.
Imagine that.. requiring a login makes the "user" count jump, despite actual usage being down.
Twitter compared to all social media probably had the most "not logged in usage" considering it was and still is endlessly linked to from web sites, and creating your own account was never needed to just view the front page/do a search or view a "thread" you are linked to. They made it a pain to even view someone's account, as the tweets are no longer sorted chronologically if you aren't logged in.
TLDR: Twitter may have more logged in users than before due to changes in site policy, but their usage is down as reported by them and all the monitoring sites because of those same policy changes. They also do have more competition now, and while none of them are totally blowing Twitter out of the water, they are certainly chipping away at Twitter usage.
In the end as the 3rd world becomes more and more "online" all social media is supposed to be growing.
Last edited:
Vicetrailia
Banned
Elon Musk is so dependent on the federal government that he can’t have his companies without it. They are his biggest customers, as well as his biggest bosses.
He’s so dependent on trump winning that he acts like the dudes lapdog.
And yet this timeline can get even more ridiculous still if trump wins.
He’s so dependent on trump winning that he acts like the dudes lapdog.
And yet this timeline can get even more ridiculous still if trump wins.
AJUMP23
Parody of actual AJUMP23
The federal government is really the only group that needs a lot of rocket launches. There are private industry satellites but not as many as Government. And government tried using Boeing for launching people and that has turned into a disaster. But certainly without gov contracts Space X would dry up. As would many other industries like the Defense industry and the airline industry being subsidized. Farming being subsidized and others.
If I was in government I would work to remove all of the subsidies. Let the actual free market work even if it hurts the population for awhile.
Kraz
Member
Losing $34.6Billion. Measuring in Concords that's almost 100 Concords. And every 3 months almost another Concord due to interest on the loans($300M). Adding another half dozen Concord loss since buying Twitter.
Since he lost his mind in 2022, with the way he's sinking X and Tesla by firing departments and hiring back, SpaceX must be praying those businesses keep him busy and far away so it doesn't suffer from his reactions to the delusions of his mind virus.
Since he lost his mind in 2022, with the way he's sinking X and Tesla by firing departments and hiring back, SpaceX must be praying those businesses keep him busy and far away so it doesn't suffer from his reactions to the delusions of his mind virus.
Melon Husk
Member
Toons
Member
Thats also equivalent to Disney having a fiscal year like 2023, for nesrly 40 years straight.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
Me personally, my user experience hasn't changed much, if anything it's gotten slightly better under Elon. Though I've seen others who have. They will say something and they have 80 people calling them a Jew in the replies. I stand by that those accounts should be banned. Free speech hardcoreists will argue you can just block them. Who wants to spend time blocking countless accounts? Or something who has a million followers, they probably get hundreds of people calling them vile things everyday if they're active on there.
But also, some accounts of people I like to follow who were banned on old Twitter for absolutely nothing are back again. And that's cool in my book. And I remember on old Twitter, if I was going to criticize something deemed a "protected class" I'd have to think twice about doing it out of fear I'd be kicked off. I think the odds were against me being kicked off, but the chances definitely weren't zero. Now, I don't have to worry about it. I can criticize a religion or mock ideologies I think are stupid without any fear of being suspended.
So just for me, my user experience isn't much different.
I will say this though. Since there's a no politics policy on here, I won't go into details about what I'm referring to, but there's a certain thing that is making its way to the courts in the coming weeks/months about a very controversial topic, and I don't think it would have ever gotten to the point where it could be challenged in the courts if not for Elon's Twitter. The discourse on there was a significant driving force for it, and old Twitter would have snuffed out these conversations immediately.
And I'm sure stuff posted on there has led to real life negative outcomes as well, that would have been banned under old Twitter. There's always a yin and yang to everything.
But also, some accounts of people I like to follow who were banned on old Twitter for absolutely nothing are back again. And that's cool in my book. And I remember on old Twitter, if I was going to criticize something deemed a "protected class" I'd have to think twice about doing it out of fear I'd be kicked off. I think the odds were against me being kicked off, but the chances definitely weren't zero. Now, I don't have to worry about it. I can criticize a religion or mock ideologies I think are stupid without any fear of being suspended.
So just for me, my user experience isn't much different.
I will say this though. Since there's a no politics policy on here, I won't go into details about what I'm referring to, but there's a certain thing that is making its way to the courts in the coming weeks/months about a very controversial topic, and I don't think it would have ever gotten to the point where it could be challenged in the courts if not for Elon's Twitter. The discourse on there was a significant driving force for it, and old Twitter would have snuffed out these conversations immediately.
And I'm sure stuff posted on there has led to real life negative outcomes as well, that would have been banned under old Twitter. There's always a yin and yang to everything.
HoodWinked
Member
this line of criticism about SpaceX subsidies is mostly just mostly wrong.
NASA didn't have the capability to get crew to the ISS and were paying billions to Russia, and was costing $90 million per seat, while the cost from subsidies to SpaceX is $55 million per seat.
The fact that it's much cheaper is already good enough but that money also gets circulated back into the US economy and also doesn't help foreign adversaries.
These are the few subsidies that actually make sense and cost to taxpayers far less than a public funded equivalent.
Then you have the Boeing contract which cost even more than SpaceX, and stranded two astronauts, and now SpaceX has to go and rescue them.
NASA didn't have the capability to get crew to the ISS and were paying billions to Russia, and was costing $90 million per seat, while the cost from subsidies to SpaceX is $55 million per seat.
The fact that it's much cheaper is already good enough but that money also gets circulated back into the US economy and also doesn't help foreign adversaries.
These are the few subsidies that actually make sense and cost to taxpayers far less than a public funded equivalent.
Then you have the Boeing contract which cost even more than SpaceX, and stranded two astronauts, and now SpaceX has to go and rescue them.
chokotoureiki
Member
He could lose $34 billion and still be worth more than the entirety of Nintendo and Sony combined.
Then he fired everyone and sued the advertisers begging them to come back. Look sometimes yall need to be more savy than swallowing nonsense from billionaires.
Dirk Benedict
Member
Versus Twitter Worth, ask if his Personal Wealth went down...
Kraz
Member
For now, but he's on his way down. His savior delusions against an imagined threat have him making destructive decisions as he lashes out blindly. He's already lost 15% more than the $34B on twitter with the interest from the loans for the purchase and that will continue. As his rationale spirals further and further from reality.
In the past he financially had the benefit of the doubt from others for his futurism ideas, but, as shown with the Tesla robot and taxi recently he's used up all that capital to the point only the gullible and personality cultists unquestioningly take him at his word.
winjer
Gold Member
One thing to consider is that those 44B he spent buying Twitter, were not only his.
Several investors also put in a lot of money.
Kraz
Member
Wonder how the bank loans would play out if X went bankrupt. That could go some interesting ways.
chokotoureiki
Member
He's on track to become the world's first trillionaire by 2027. His wealth was only $28.5 billion during COVID, and then shot up to $167 billion by the end of 2020. His futurism ideas yield far more promise and are infinitely more practical for society than Nintendo's "innovations".
Last edited:
chokotoureiki
Member
Right, but that's cuz he wants to focus most of his investing into space exploration and robotics.
winjer
Gold Member
That is not the point.
People trusted him with their money. And he lost most of it.
ResurrectedContrarian
Suffers with mild autism
Again, enormously simplistic; even though his reasons at every step were very loudly stated in public, you're ignoring every part of the story. There's no contradiction at all between "he bought Twitter for reasons of his beliefs in democracy, not to turn a profit" and "while owning it, he wants enough advertising to remain to keep the thing afloat."
The "swallowing nonsense from billionaires" is particularly amusing; your thin grasp of the situation is 100% aligned with the favored view of every other cynical billionaire running the media empires who opposes him on opposite ideological grounds, without even a tiny apparent remainder of your own input to suggest you're more than an automaton.
You can't extrapolate like that. The huge windfall he got was from Tesla stock options maturing after he met some long time goals.
chokotoureiki
Member
I guess they were against censorship and cancel culture too. Well, it was money well spent.
chokotoureiki
Member
Physiognomonics
Member
Usually people who bet against Musk are the one losing money in the long term. This is what happened with Tesla and SpaceX.
winjer
Gold Member
There are a few problems with that statement.
For one, that people don't care bout their money. But the reality is that several people lost hundreds of millions of dollars.
Considering they paid 44B for Twitter, they could have made their own social network, with coke and hookers, and it would have been much cheaper.
The other problem was and is that twitter is a private company. So it does not have to follow any rules of independent political leaning. Only governmental institutions have to be bound by that.
So any complaint, for whatever side of the political aisle, regarding censorship is of no consequence. Be it before Musk, with Twitter being left leaning, or now, with X being right leaning. Simply, because it's a private company.
And finally, Musk also censors other people's opinions. Especially if they criticize him. So it's a bit hypocritical. Though, the fact remains, that it's a private company.
chokotoureiki
Member
He censors other ppl's opinions....using progressive dirty tactics. Giving them a taste of their own medicine basically. All the major social media sites did the same thing too. Facebook esp during COVID. He made it privatized so its off limits to govt control. Not many ppl trust the govt anyway. Musk remains in control, which is a good thing, bc before then it was a giant wellspring of misinformation and gaslighting, as well as hurting free speech. As for investors losing money, well they should've known what they were getting into, so that was their fault.
Last edited:
He could definitely be the world's first trillionaire. But saying he is on pace to make $750 billion in a little over 2 years because his net worth quadrupled 4 years ago due to the culmination of many years of work at Tesla is a massive stretch. He has made around 25 billion a year since then.
Both those articles are quoting some random at Informa Tech Academy. It makes for a good for a good headline. Not a Musk hater btw.
chokotoureiki
Member
Could be. Might possibly take longer, but I won't be surprised if he actually made that milestone.
Halo is Back
Member
You say that as if it's a negative like a mark of shame to do good business with the government. Our entire defense industry is dependent on the federal government's funding and many social engineering projects were funded by the federal treasury. Elon Musk has been doing fine without Trump in office and he isn't going anywhere even if Harris is elected president.
Kraz
Member
Those were using old trends that didn't take the cost of his mental decline into irrational outbursts that hurt his businesses into consideration. Any base valuable ideas, he's not discovering them, like Twitter was, are more reliably handled by others.
That is an aspect of his irrational behavior and how he justifies it. It's predicated on many mistaken ideas, one being that the moderation standards created people's opinions and weren't a response to the Twitter community. Town squares in advanced progressing societies need to be secular, clean, safe and well maintained or, as has been shown by X, they become dilapidated and corrupted.
The reason for mentioning the loans was that if X goes bankrupt the banks and their shareholders stand to lose a ton of money. How much of an affect that has on the economy is one thing, but more directly, it's usually when other rich people lose money due to the actions of one that the one gets hammered out.
chokotoureiki
Member
I take it English isn't your first language? I'm sorry but judging from how you write, it strikes me as a lot of word salad so I'll try my best to address your points as how I interpret them.
For the first point, well he's the CEO so whenever their company brings an idea to fruition, normally its whoever calls the shots that gets credited. I mean, if a country is being ran well or poorly, who do you usually attribute its performance to? The president, prime minister, lord, king, or whoever....right?
As to the second point....there's a fine line between proper moderation versus reprimanding or canceling someone's opinions bc you don't agree with them which is largely unfair and violates free speech, and Twitter was largely guilty of that before Musk took over. It was already a cesspool of trolls and bots to begin before he cleaned house.
For the last point, well investing is risky. If someone puts up money, there's no guaranteed ROI. If they lose money, then that's on them. Nothings going to happen to Musk and even if he gets sued, its gonna get thrown out, dismissed, or settled out bc its irrelevant.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Wonder how the bank loans would play out if X went bankrupt. That could go some interesting ways.
They very well might cut their losses and sell their position to Elon for a fraction of what they payed.
Going private changes nothing when it comes to any government regulation.
Which has barely happened; there is that dumb “office” that was created to report misinformation to social media companies but there was no legal requirement to follow those recommendations.
chokotoureiki
Member
Yes it does. He doesn't have to file disclosures to the SEC or answer to the board that may affect share price.
It was a great thing he took over Twitter, as it was already getting out of hand and creating all sorts of false narratives as to mislead the public.
Kraz
Member
Yes, but judging by your spelling and use of ellipses you are aren't in a position to make an informed opinion of someone's use of language. You're just upset and lashing out. I don't take it personally.
If the moderation of past Twitter had hurt it as claimed, than it would be worth more than $44Billion now. The moderation may not have been perfect, but it was more successful than it is now and reflected the users, not the users reflecting the moderation.
And the losses due to his poor decisions, which do appear to be part of a mental decline, have hurt his business rep. It's not only about being sued, it's about reliability and trust.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Sure I almost mentioned the SEC but that had nothing to do with the topic of your post.
Going private in and of itself doesn’t mean there’s no board. He has $20 billion or so in investors to appease.
He can technically ignore them because he has the majority of “shares” but good luck with that.
Last edited:
chokotoureiki
Member
No I'm not upset at all. In fact I was trying to be polite esp when I said, "I'm sorry" and that "I'll try my best to interpret your points" bc I honestly had to re-read your post a few times as it was very wordy. I wasn't trying to be offensive at all, and if I did, I do apologize.
Yes, it was successful, that is successful in spreading misinformation and deceit, that's why it had to be taken down which was a good thing. I don't think it matters much to Elon how much its making. That was never his intention anyway. All he cared about was restoring free speech which is infinitely more important than making billions of dollars.
If he was in any mental decline, surely he would've gone through a psych eval? He's actually doing very well, yeah there's a few bumps but nothing serious enough to where his credibility is shot down like say, P Diddy.
chokotoureiki
Member
How do you know they were doing it to make money and not necessarily to take down Twitter also? That could also be their intention like Musk.
Last edited:
Kraz
Member
If you really believe that all was on twitter was misinformation then you're going to draw the wrong conclusions because that wasn't the reality. It was becoming pretty reliable and easy to curate with practice. The blue checks were going to be certain types of people, etc.
Free Speech is obviously not the case and was just told to the gullible that believed it and those that continue to promulgate it. In denial of the contradiction like personality cult behavior excusing a savior icon with delusions of grandeur.
If you want to speculate about self-care, he may be in denial, self-awareness isn't the strong suit of anyone that thinks there's such a thing as woke mind virus and bases their decisions from it.
His credibility may not be that low but the losses and erraticness it's very likely he's looking like a money pinata about to break.
Toons
Member
Are you seriously arguing that musk got a bunch of billionaires to give him hundreds of millions of dollars on the shared agreement that they'd all be lighting that money on fire just so they could spite Twitter?
Do you seriously believe that is how the world works? None of these billionaires would be billionaires if they operated like this.
finalflame
Banned
Incinerating $34bn in valuation to own the libs, all hail Muskrat, king of the chuds 
chokotoureiki
Member
You do realize that some billionaires have reached the point where money is no longer the primary goal right? Like why do you think a lot of them are philanthropists? Oftentimes going into charitable causes yield little to no monetary return, and yet they do so.
Rich ppl can have motivations that aren't always money driven. Trump can easily make far more as a real estate tycoon and live a better life than being a president, and yet he chose the latter.
chokotoureiki
Member
No Twitter was super unreliable. Half of the accounts were fake or bots, which was why Musk realized that Twitter wasn't worth it's asking price. It was already plagued with corruption that had to be eliminated.
And we'll, he was able to successfully bring back free speech to an extent and some are even finding it useful for learning tech.
If he's truly in denial like you claimed, then let me know when he gets checked into a looney bin. Not happening.
This is all just ad homs on his character without any verifiable evidence.He's not losing money. In fact he makes money much faster than losing it it's insane.
Kraz
Member
When the $44Billion price for Twitter was being contested his study said it was 11% bots and Twitter claimed it was 5%. Where did you get the misinformation that half the accounts were bots? There might be that many bots now considering if the ratio of complaints is an indication.No Twitter was super unreliable. Half of the accounts were fake or bots, which was why Musk realized that Twitter wasn't worth it's asking price. It was already plagued with corruption that had to be eliminated.
And we'll, he was able to successfully bring back free speech to an extent and some are even finding it useful for learning tech.
If he's truly in denial like you claimed, then let me know when he gets checked into a looney bin. Not happening.
He's not losing money. In fact he makes money much faster than losing it it's insane.
Unknown Soldier
Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked