Elon Musk Bought 9.2% of Twiter

See, I like this news because Twitter as an organization does not support my politics, but Elon Musk does. Kind of. It's complicated.

Anyway, here's the problem: while I fully support Elon Musk buying out Twitter and turning it into something that better serves my political interests (or at least doesn't ban me when I post something it doesn't like), I would resent it if the shoe were on the other foot and... I don't know George Soros ended up buying Fox News or something. Of course I think one might also argue that most major social media is almost completely dominated by hard core leftists, so this is an effort at leveling the playing field.

At any rate, it's concerning to me how a handful of uber wealthy people--dare I say "oligarchs"--have such an outsized influence on our military, economy, diplomacy, and information exchange. I'm not sure how I feel about this particular move just yet.
 
"For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less,"

Remember the Facebook whistleblower from some months back? I was one who cheered her until I dug a little deeper into her message. She's upset they don't have MORE control over their message on FB.

More moderation is the key to freedom? Merriam Webster and other dictionaries would like a word...if it wasn't moderated first.

This is something we need to guard against, regardless of the political party involved or pushing for x amount of control. The best way to preserve our society is through censorship? Yeah, nah, not how that works. Ever.
 
Moderation is needed. It's just a matter of *how* that's done that it doesn't impact legitimate points of view (of any "side" before anyone gets wound up) but doesn't help encourage illegal actions (which is another hard one because what's legal in one country isn't in another).

It's a shit sandwhich for these companies. I don't envy trying to solve this problem because, at least for Facebook, it's not working well.

Although everyone complaining about Facebook on Facebook is the kind of meta shit I enjoy so there's that.
 
SpitfireV said:
Moderation is needed. It's just a matter of *how* that's done that it doesn't impact legitimate points of view (of any "side" before anyone gets wound up) but doesn't help encourage illegal actions (which is another hard one because what's legal in one country isn't in another).

It's a shit sandwhich for these companies. I don't envy trying to solve this problem because, at least for Facebook, it's not working well.

Although everyone complaining about Facebook on Facebook is the kind of meta shit I enjoy so there's that.
Click to expand...

Boomers complaining about Facebook, on Facebook, is one of my favorite things to see.
 
AWP said:
"For democracy to survive, we need more content moderation, not less,"

Remember the Facebook whistleblower from some months back? I was one who cheered her until I dug a little deeper into her message. She's upset they don't have MORE control over their message on FB.

More moderation is the key to freedom? Merriam Webster and other dictionaries would like a word...if it wasn't moderated first.

This is something we need to guard against, regardless of the political party involved or pushing for x amount of control. The best way to preserve our society is through censorship? Yeah, nah, not how that works. Ever.
Click to expand...

So would you call social media platforms a commodity, and want them regulated as such? You would advocate for the removal of private intellectual property from private companies and control of them by the state?

For real, what is the solution. It is a conundrum. I’m not being facetious, and I’m not trying to be a butthole.
 
OK, so he bought a bunch of shares, which make the stock price rise. Now he wants to buy the company, for what seems to me to be a fairly generous price. If Twitter won't sell, will he sell off all of his stock, and if so, will that trigger a mass sale which could negatively affect Twitter's stock price / value?
 
TLDR20 said:
So would you call social media platforms a commodity, and want them regulated as such? You would advocate for the removal of private intellectual property from private companies and control of them by the state?

For real, what is the solution. It is a conundrum. I’m not being facetious, and I’m not trying to be a butthole.
Click to expand...

The problem is I don't know of the solution, only that there is a problem with the existing model. Or at least the philosophy behind some of its arguments.

Do you have gov't regulation? Self regulation? Let public opinion and the market decide how to run that platform? Honestly, I don't know because they all have merit...and they all have grave consequences too if handled poorly.

There's no true precedent for this type of mass media, certainly not on this scale. This is one of the few areas where history isn't a great deal of help, because there's very little we can use for background.

I'm a pessimist at heart, so I really don't see an ending for social media where society benefits.
 
Marauder06 said:
OK, so he bought a bunch of shares, which make the stock price rise. Now he wants to buy the company, for what seems to me to be a fairly generous price. If Twitter won't sell, will he sell off all of his stock, and if so, will that trigger a mass sale which could negatively affect Twitter's stock price / value?
Click to expand...
This is exactly correct. Win-win for Musk.

Musk's announcement drove the stock price up - good for him. Yesterday, another investment firm, Vanguard Group, reportedly overtook Musk to become the largest shareholder of Twitter at 10+% stake. Interesting thing is they bought in at a premium. For the reasons you mention, Vanguard risks a big loss if Musk pulls the chute and bails. On they flip side, they could gain a quick buck if Musk buys out shares at his stated price. Seems their best move is to support the buyout.

Will be interesting to see what happens next.
 
Last edited:
BTW, I'm not huge on Musk's jock like some people I know. I'm just here for the popcorn and the show. So, far it hasn't disappointed.

It's fascinating to see the meltdown taking place in some corners. If I had Musk's money, I'd like to think I'd do some of the same things he does in terms of calling out things he sees as b.s.

Remember a year or so ago when some nitwit from the UN claimed if Musk contributed $6B, we could wipe out hunger? Musk called him out. Guess what, we still have world hunger. 😉

This Twitter thing is along the same lines from the perspective that I don't think he really cares that much about Twitter per se. He sees some things that may bug him a bit but moreso he also sees opportunity. Since he has the means, he'll fuck with them a bit - and do so publicly. If it works out great, if not, well, it was fun. Overall, pretty entertaining.
 
Twitter really doesn't want Elon taking over...or at least the current board doesn't want him taking over.

Twitter adopts 'poison pill' to prevent Elon Musk takeover

It's a drastic move to make. The board now gets to arbitrarily decide who can own large shares of the company. In this case, large enough % to exact control. Elon can still put the screws to the company, which I believe he will.
 
Hahahaha...I can't help myself. I actually had to chuckle. People like Elon Musk don't care about "the board" and their decisions at this point. People like him don't worry about those "boards". He has already done more to make Twitter have to "worry" than has been done in years. Keep stirring those waters, Elon, stir away.....
 

Similar threads

Bypass
  • Locked
Yeah, it's all a coincidence.
Replies
16
Views
2K
Salt USMC
Salt USMC
Marauder06
Combined/Joint SOF Panel at West Point--Your Thoughts?
Replies
5
Views
3K
Gunz
Gunz
RackMaster
INSIDE THE PAINSTAKING RECOVERY PROCESS OF A MEDAL OF HONOR MARINE
Replies
10
Views
3K
Xenophon
Xenophon
Red Ryder
Kony 2013: U.S. quietly intensifies effort to help African troops capture infamous warlord
Replies
16
Views
3K
pardus
pardus
Red-Dot
Interesting article on JTAC's
Replies
2
Views
4K
Grunt
Grunt
Back
Top