Scrutable

There's a side game to all this, which is that the Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is allowing Texas's law essentially banning blocking and algorithmic promotion and demotion of social media posts to stand while it is appealed.

https://www.vox.com/2022/5/12/23068017/ ... xton-texas

This means that user bans, spam filters, and maybe even paid for promoted tweets, are possibly illegal on social media in Texas. And it probably applies to email spam filters as well.

Probably SCOTUS will overrule the 5th Circuit if it ruled in Texas's favor (most of the current Justices ruled opposite to this in the recent past), but this is right wing bug bear, so who knows. (this is a very low probability, very high damage risk)

If this law did stand, every social media network would likely either have to block Texas IPs, or turn into 4Chan, destroying their value to corporations for marketing and advertising, and possibly destroying their advertising set ups.

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri May 13, 2022 11:53 am

Oh dear.

You are James O’Brian and I claim my five pounds.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri May 13, 2022 1:02 pm

There's a side game to all this, which is that the Federal 5th Circuit Court of Appeals is allowing Texas's law essentially banning blocking and algorithmic promotion and demotion of social media posts to stand while it is appealed.

https://www.vox.com/2022/5/12/23068017/ ... xton-texas

This means that user bans, spam filters, and maybe even paid for promoted tweets, are possibly illegal on social media in Texas. And it probably applies to email spam filters as well.

Probably SCOTUS will overrule the 5th Circuit if it ruled in Texas's favor (most of the current Justices ruled opposite to this in the recent past), but this is right wing bug bear, so who knows. (this is a very low probability, very high damage risk)

If this law did stand, every social media network would likely either have to block Texas IPs, or turn into 4Chan, destroying their value to corporations for marketing and advertising, and possibly destroying their advertising set ups.

This Texas law, incidentally, would likely make Twitch's decision to cut the livestream of an ongoing white supremacist mass shooting illegal.

Prediction : Elon Musk will become Donald Trump 2.0 and be a future a..hole US President for the GOP.

Prediction: he won't be. He wasn't born in the USA or of USAian parents. He'll still be on track to be an a..eh.le.

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:18 am

Prediction : Elon Musk will become Donald Trump 2.0 and be a future a..hole US President for the GOP.

I think the 'natural born citizen' requirement will make that difficult.

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:21 am

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:18 am

Prediction : Elon Musk will become Donald Trump 2.0 and be a future a..hole US President for the GOP.

I think the 'natural born citizen' requirement will make that difficult.

He's a white rich privileged male - they'll find a way.

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:56 am

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:21 am

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:18 am

Prediction : Elon Musk will become Donald Trump 2.0 and be a future a..hole US President for the GOP.

I think the 'natural born citizen' requirement will make that difficult.

He's a white rich privileged male - they'll find a way.

So was Arnie

TopBadger wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 9:18 am

Prediction : Elon Musk will become Donald Trump 2.0 and be a future a..hole US President for the GOP.

I did wonder what revelation Musk was trying to get in front of when he said he'd vote Republican and to expect political attacks.

Honestly not that surprised that it's sexual harassment and flashing.

It also puts his plan to buy Twitter and thus be able to suppress stories on the most popular social media network among journalists in a certain light.

</Tinfoil hat>

Typical Dumbocrat Libtards!

You are just unhappy that Elon Musk is going to finally stand up to all the wealthy metropolitan elites and poor people. If you like billionaire elitists, islamic terrorists and Jewish bankers so much, why don't you just move to North Korea! Anyway if you euro-communazis hate babies so much you want to legalise abortion why do you spend so much time demanding the government gives them formula to drink. Hitler was right, your* the real fascists!


There you go, I've just saved you reading the next 10 years worth of Republican social media posting. You're welcome!

Little waster wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 3:33 pm

Typical Dumbocrat Libtards!

You are just unhappy that Elon Musk is going to finally stand up to all the wealthy metropolitan elites and poor people. If you like billionaire elitists, islamic terrorists and Jewish bankers so much, why don't you just move to North Korea! Anyway if you euro-communazis hate babies so much you want to legalise abortion why do you spend so much time demanding the government gives them formula to drink. Hitler was right, your* the real fascists!


There you go, I've just saved you reading the next 10 years worth of Republican social media posting. You're welcome!

A good effort, but you didn't say "the woke elite", didn't say anything transphobic, and didn't mention CRT.

7/10

If it is true (I mean, it is Business Insider, but his weird twitter behaviour and response to the story do not inspire confidence), this could be very bad news for Tesla. People buy them because they want to be part of the transition away from fossil fuels, but who is going to feel virtuous giving money to such a person? Even if he quit as leader, potential car buyers would be put off because of his share ownership*.

This is the downside of having your companies too closely associated with their founder.



* i don't know much about shares and stuff, but I presume that even if he wanted to shed his Tesla shares, divesting such a large amount would cause share prices to slide even more.

monkey wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 3:47 pm

Little waster wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 3:33 pm

Typical Dumbocrat Libtards!

You are just unhappy that Elon Musk is going to finally stand up to all the wealthy metropolitan elites and poor people. If you like billionaire elitists, islamic terrorists and Jewish bankers so much, why don't you just move to North Korea! Anyway if you euro-communazis hate babies so much you want to legalise abortion why do you spend so much time demanding the government gives them formula to drink. Hitler was right, your* the real fascists!


There you go, I've just saved you reading the next 10 years worth of Republican social media posting. You're welcome!

A good effort, but you didn't say "the woke elite", didn't say anything transphobic, and didn't mention CRT.

7/10

Damn-it! So close.

Will I get any additional credit if I now post a lengthy rant about how homosexuality is forbidden by the Bible, before sending unsolicited nudes to a 15-yo quarter-back?

I'm pretty sure I can also knock out several thousand words on the topic "Why Jesus would have been pro-gun" but I'd probably have to first drink this litre of Bosnian grappa that an ex-flatmate's grandmother made for me in her bath, that I've been saving for no particular reason.

Pishwish wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 3:50 pm

If it is true (I mean, it is Business Insider, but his weird twitter behaviour and response to the story do not inspire confidence), this could be very bad news for Tesla. People buy them because they want to be part of the transition away from fossil fuels, but who is going to feel virtuous giving money to such a person? Even if he quit as leader, potential car buyers would be put off because of his share ownership*.

This is the downside of having your companies too closely associated with their founder.



* i don't know much about shares and stuff, but I presume that even if he wanted to shed his Tesla shares, divesting such a large amount would cause share prices to slide even more.

Musk didn't actually found Tesla.

I don't know all the details of the allegation, and will add my usual position, which is it's ok not to know and not to insist something is true or not, and be open to the idea that it might be or might not be.

That said, the NDA is a sign that something iffy probably did happen, and Musk is exactly the sort of person who thinks he is above rules and standards of behaviour that apply to everyone else.

Further evidence of that, wrt to Tesla, is in this Twitter thread (referencing a published book, by an author who didn't get sued for it)

https://twitter.com/Tweetermeyer/status ... 4kYiw&s=19

People buy them because they want to be part of the transition away from fossil fuels, but who is going to feel virtuous giving money to such a person?

Personally I went for one (among EV choices( because they are a really good EV with a better charging network. The Supercharger network is progressively being opened to other brands (although they'll pay more), which might make it hard to tell what if anything is affecting sales.

Expecting virtue from business leaders might be a bit of a fools game anyway. Off the top of my head the main EV rivals are
1. VW Group - dodgy emmissions scandal
2. Renault/Nissan - Ex chairman still a fugitive from Japanese justice, with suggestion that the company helped him flee
3. Kia - one of the main owning family was in prison a while back, and I think there was some sort of bribery scandal.

Having said that, Musks personal reputation might drag the company down - who knows. My guess is that they've largely moved out of the "enthusiast owner" stage and into being a slightly premium mainstream offering.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 4:51 pm

Further evidence of that, wrt to Tesla, is in this Twitter thread (referencing a published book, by an author who didn't get sued for it)

https://twitter.com/Tweetermeyer/status ... 4kYiw&s=19

Niedemeyer's a good source on Musk/Tesla. A couple that feel notable regarding sense of impunity/being above the rules that didn't make it into the thread, and further show that, to Musk, appearance is far more important than reality.

Filed false police reports regarding a whistleblower falsely accusing him of being dangerous. This behaviour is known as SWATing, and it has got people killed before.

Pretended to be helping with the cave rescue in Thailand because he's an attention seeker, though his suggestions were all utterly and profoundly stupid. When called out on this by one of the people actually involved in the rescue, he sought to smear him with false accusations.

Note the time on this message - he was apparently contacted for comment on the indecent exposure story ca. 9 am.

Imrael wrote: ↑

Fri May 20, 2022 5:08 pm

People buy them because they want to be part of the transition away from fossil fuels, but who is going to feel virtuous giving money to such a person?

Personally I went for one (among EV choices( because they are a really good EV with a better charging network. The Supercharger network is progressively being opened to other brands (although they'll pay more), which might make it hard to tell what if anything is affecting sales.

Expecting virtue from business leaders might be a bit of a fools game anyway. Off the top of my head the main EV rivals are
1. VW Group - dodgy emmissions scandal
2. Renault/Nissan - Ex chairman still a fugitive from Japanese justice, with suggestion that the company helped him flee
3. Kia - one of the main owning family was in prison a while back, and I think there was some sort of bribery scandal.

Having said that, Musks personal reputation might drag the company down - who knows. My guess is that they've largely moved out of the "enthusiast owner" stage and into being a slightly premium mainstream offering.

The other big electric options here aside from Tesla are Polestar, Subaru, Chevrolet and Ford.

Dyqik: The other big electric options here aside from Tesla are Polestar, Subaru, Chevrolet and Ford.

Didnt know there was an EV Subaru. When I chose just over a year ago the Mustang was just appearing (and had some slightly marginal initial reviews on range and UI). Polestar might have been an option but cost more and was very new to market.

My main point though was that choosing your car on the basis of the company management ethics might well result in deciding to walk. I'm not going to disappear down a google rathole trying to rank companies by ethicalness, and I doubt anyone else will either.

In general, I think making prominent people into heroes or villains, (or quite often heroes then villains) isn't great thinking. Mostly IABMCTT. To say the least I'm not a major fan of Elon Musk, but his commitment to EV etc is significant and has shifted the market IMO. Possibly, like a lot of people, he's done a mixture of good and bad things in his life.

Imrael wrote: ↑

Sat May 21, 2022 11:36 am

My main point though was that choosing your car on the basis of the company management ethics might well result in deciding to walk. I'm not going to disappear down a google rathole trying to rank companies by ethicalness, and I doubt anyone else will either.

Fortunately someone's done that for you - https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/transpo ... ctric-cars

They rank everything by ethicalness. By default it's their own sense of what's worthy, but as a member you can adjust the priorities so eg. nuclear does or doesn't effect the score.

Twitter lawsuit against Musk https://twitter.com/katiephang/status/1 ... iJW5WaR2ww

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 12, 2022 9:27 pm

Twitter lawsuit against Musk https://twitter.com/katiephang/status/1 ... iJW5WaR2ww

Lawyers will be licking their lips over this.

An enormous amount of money was wiped off Tesla shares recently. It has recently lost 30-40% of its market value in the last few months, depending which dates you measure it between. Musk himself is reported to have lost around $100bn in net worth just recently. I'm not aware of other reverses in Tesla's fortunes that can explain such a large change. So he, and his co-investors in Tesla, have apparently lost more money than the total $42bn he agreed to pay for Twitter. So it would now be better for them, it would seem, to pay Twitter $42bn to not buy them. Though he won't be paying anything like that much. If he had to pay $42bn, he may as well buy it and immediately sell it again. I would imagine Twittter's opening claim would be related to the $10bn or so that I think was reckoned to be the premium Musk's offer implied over Twitter's value before the offer.

An important reminder to investors why it's risky investing in companies with powerful leaders such as him, who can make such perverse decisions with little check on them.

Ok which of you bastards broke twitter?

Was just wondering that too!!!