• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Elon Musk buys twitter

Rorschach said:
I read a bit about BlueSky and it turns out Musk and Dorsey may not really be competitors, now or in the future. They are more collaborators.
https://davetroy.medium.com/no-elon-and-jack-are-not-competitors-theyre-collaborating-3e88cde5267d
Click to expand...

Interesting read. I thought I’d read that they’d fallen out as well though? I also can’t get my head around how the solution to amplified ‘wokeness’ on the platform is to reshare QAnon gonads and attract the deepest, darkest dirges of 4Chan and the like onto it.
 
AuroRaman said:
Interesting read. I thought I’d read that they’d fallen out as well though? I also can’t get my head around how the solution to amplified ‘wokeness’ on the platform is to reshare QAnon gonad*s and attract the deepest, darkest dirges of 4Chan and the like onto it.
Click to expand...
I can see a few holes in their plan too.

What really makes me uncomfortable is the power for fudgery that their wealth has brought them. They have too much influence and not enough in the way guardrails to stop them from acting out their childish impulses. It is like having a bunch of Bond villains all at the same time and most of them never matured beyond puberty. Dangerous doesn't begin to describe it.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1587268198809931776

I think he might kill the whole thing quicker than anyone thought possible. All it would take is an alternative that can do more or less the same thing. I only use it as a newsfeed and to keep up with the activities of my favourite bands. Most of those I've followed simply because they were funny or would post some interesting stuff eventually lose interest and disappear.
 
Jordinho said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1587268198809931776

I think he might kill the whole thing quicker than anyone thought possible. All it would take is an alternative that can do more or less the same thing. I only use it as a newsfeed and to keep up with the activities of my favourite bands. Most of those I've followed simply because they were funny or would post some interesting stuff eventually lose interest and disappear.
Click to expand...
FgdvoPTWIAI4dCU
 
Rorschach said:
Old musky pants doesn't realise that the people using Twitter are the product.
Click to expand...

A one off service charge for verification would be reasonable - if you already have the seal then it should not be held hostage for a few dollars.

$100 for installing it seems reasonable. If he’s overpaid for twitter then that is his fault - the commercial intrusion will only be tolerated so far. At the moment ads are relatively unobtrusive and generally irrelevant.
 
johnola said:
A one off service charge for verification would be reasonable - if you already have the seal then it should not be held hostage for a few dollars.

$100 for installing it seems reasonable. If he’s overpaid for twitter then that is his fault - the commercial intrusion will only be tolerated so far. At the moment ads are relatively unobtrusive and generally irrelevant.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't agree with any charge but if there was to be a one-off fee it would probably be something many could stomach, especially journos/politicians/celebs/etc who need this as a safety feature. Of course this idea will never happen as the purpose is to make revenue and a once-off fee wouldn't do that. Let's do a little maths here. 400k blue tick users. Say a participation rate of say 50%, so 200k x $100 = 20mil which is chicken feed really. It is dwarfed by ad revenue, so these advertisers are the people he needs to keep onside.
 
Rorschach said:
I wouldn't agree with any charge but if there was to be a one-off fee it would probably be something many could stomach, especially journos/politicians/celebs/etc who need this as a safety feature. Of course this idea will never happen as the purpose is to make revenue and a once-off fee wouldn't do that. Let's do a little maths here. 400k blue tick users. Say a participation rate of say 50%, so 200k x $100 = 20mil which is chicken feed really. It is dwarfed by ad revenue, so these advertisers are the people he needs to keep onside.
Click to expand...

Yeah - hard to argue against those points.
 
Rorschach said:
Some left-leaning billionaire should buy Truth Social, kick all the right-wing trolls off it and then make a play for all of twitters customers and advertisers.
Click to expand...

I use twitter, but I wouldn’t miss it if died tomorrow. Depends what you use it for, but I find it’s just a vehicle for a load of angry and unreasonable people on both sides of the political spectrum to shout each other down and not listen to each other. Whether it’s people racially abusing footballers or sending death threats to JK Rowling because she doesn’t subscribe to the totalitarian view of a very vocal lobby. Ricky Gervais summed up the platform perfectly, people take his tweets personally when he’s not aiming at them anyone. It’s like going into a town square and seeing a sign for guitar lessons and saying “I don’t fudging want guitar lessons”. Fine, it’s not for you then.

The first step which is long overdue should be to remove the anonymity aspect of it. There’s no consequences to threatening someone online like there would be if you did it to someone’s face.
 
Jurgen the German said:
I use twitter, but I wouldn’t miss it if died tomorrow. Depends what you use it for, but I find it’s just a vehicle for a load of angry and unreasonable people on both sides of the political spectrum to shout each other down and not listen to each other. Whether it’s people racially abusing footballers or sending death threats to JK Rowling because she doesn’t subscribe to the totalitarian view of a very vocal lobby. Ricky Gervais summed up the platform perfectly, people take his tweets personally when he’s not aiming at them anyone. It’s like going into a town square and seeing a sign for guitar lessons and saying “I don’t fudging want guitar lessons”. Fine, it’s not for you then.

The first step which is long overdue should be to remove the anonymity aspect of it. There’s no consequences to threatening someone online like there would be if you did it to someone’s face.
Click to expand...
I think I would miss it but not for the interactions/comments. I'm not interested in that side of it as it gets too messy. If you are after conflict then that is what you will get though there are other ways to use Twitter. Even at that the moderation keeps it just about civil most of the time. I'm reading that that may have already changed since Musk has taken over, in that some users are feeling emboldened to post their bile to test the new limits of moderation. A few other posts I have seen led me to believe the moderation rules may have already changed. We'll see what happens I guess.

Do you think Gervais is not looking for a reaction to his posts? Course he is.
 
Rorschach said:
Some left-leaning billionaire should buy Truth Social, kick all the right-wing trolls off it and then make a play for all of twitters customers and advertisers.
Click to expand...


Why would they bother, its not that long ago that musk and rowling were held up as shining examples by the left, look at them now.
Thats assuming of course that there is actually a left leaning billionaire, not two phrases that naturally go together.
 
Rorschach said:
I think I would miss it but not for the interactions/comments. I'm not interested in that side of it as it gets too messy. If you are after conflict then that is what you will get though there are other ways to use Twitter. Even at that the moderation keeps it just about civil most of the time. I'm reading that that may have already changed since Musk has taken over, in that some users are feeling emboldened to post their bile to test the new limits of moderation. A few other posts I have seen led me to believe the moderation rules may have already changed. We'll see what happens I guess.

Do you think Gervais is not looking for a reaction to his posts? Course he is.
Click to expand...

Sometimes most definitely. Other times he’s just tweeting, not aiming for or at anyone. Taking offence has turned into a sport, especially on twitter. People say “I’m offended” as if it gives them sort of right or privilege. They should say “I found that offensive” rather than “that’s offensive”. Own the emotion. Ultimately he’s right IMO. If something isn’t for you then just move on and let everyone else enjoy it.
 
glasgowspur said:
Why would they bother, its not that long ago that musk and rowling were held up as shining examples by the left, look at them now.
Thats assuming of course that there is actually a left leaning billionaire, not two phrases that naturally go together.
Click to expand...
Were they? I always thought Musk was a bell end. He liked to promise things, bask in the glow of the positive PR (get the bump to the stock price), and then not deliver. He got kudos for Tesla (from me too) which kickstarted the switch to electric cars but even that venture has plenty of aspects to it you could criticise him for. I have zero opinion on Rowling. I have avoided that story entirely. I never thought she was held up as a left-leaning icon before, though maybe I missed all that.

There are plenty of left-leaning billionaires but they generally don't take over media companies and rather target their efforts at more worthwhile causes. Maybe one of them should take one over before the entire information arena is owned by wingnuts.
 
Jurgen the German said:
Sometimes most definitely. Other times he’s just tweeting, not aiming for or at anyone. Taking offence has turned into a sport, especially on twitter. People say “I’m offended” as if it gives them sort of right or privilege. They should say “I found that offensive” rather than “that’s offensive”. Own the emotion. Ultimately he’s right IMO. If something isn’t for you then just move on and let everyone else enjoy it.
Click to expand...
It is a funny observation. I laughed when I heard it first too, but anything he posts on Twitter is for reaction otherwise he wouldn't do it. Some are offended, and some not. That is the point I would think.
Do people get offended too easily? Oh fudge yes, but being a comedian with his style is to push the boundary of what is acceptable. That is his shtick. Hardly surprising that some are offended by some of his tweets.
 
Last edited:
Rorschach said:
Were they? I always thought Musk was a bell end. He liked to promise things, bask in the glow of the positive PR (get the bump to the stock price), and then not deliver. He got kudos for Tesla (from me too) which kickstarted the switch to electric cars but even that venture has plenty of aspects to it you could criticise him for. I have zero opinion on Rowling. I have avoided that story entirely. I never thought she was held up as a left-leaning icon before, though maybe I missed all that.

There are plenty of left-leaning billionaires but they generally don't take over media companies and rather target their efforts at more worthwhile causes. Maybe one of them should take one over before the entire information arena is owned by wingnuts.
Click to expand...

Musk is a knob, I've never trusted him, something just doesn't sit right for me.
He trolled some on the right and was hailed, i always thought it would be a matter of time before he trolled some on the left and got his comeuppance. I doubt he has any firm political beliefs, he's just a troll and a bully.
Purely my take btw.

Rowling and harry potter was held up as models of inclusiveness, diversity and encouraging children to not be judgemental.
Lots of trans saying how disappointed they are in her because the books were very helpful to them in their journey.
I've never read them and have no interest in her as a person so can't comment on the validity of that, i suspect there was a lot band wagon jumping on both sides.
Must admit i avoid the trans debate, i don't know enough about it to get involved and when i see the vitriol thrown about by both sides thats hassle i can do without to be honest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back