Elon Musk (yet another authoritarian)

[MDlaxfan76]

Sounds like a a great sell on the man. You can be sure when liberals put others down, it's b/c they see much the same in themselves.

When you don't have a credible argument invoke "liberals" labeling people with whom you disagree with some sort of pejorative - like you know any detail about others here. I thought you better than this.



No doubt Musk is a very smart man. In other ways, he leaves a lot to be desired to some people (and not all of them are "liberals")

I've made my argument quite clear, on many occasion; feel free to search for it.

I disagree with all the backseat driving of Musks' character, vision, and how he goes about it, etc. Especially, knowing he is on the spectrum. But hey.....ignore that hate-talk from your peers.

We've been over this. His being on spectrum doesn't give him a pass...it may well explain some of his behavior, some of the challenges he has in recognizing other's feelings, but he's plenty smart enough to figure this out given feedback.

What matters are his actions and what he says he wants to do. Lots to like, but definitely big problems in the offing as well.

His genius, as well as his spectrum issues, don't make him a good or bad person, nor do they make him immune to ego and hubris...and I don't really care one way or the other except insofar as it impacts society...and there are areas where his works has proven to be quite good for society...but this may well not play out that way.

[jhu72]

So Musks $8/mo scam is seen as embarrassing by the Faux News daytime crew:

During Thursday’s broadcast of Fox News’ America’s Newsroom, co-anchors Bill Hemmer and Dana Perino spoke with Fox News contributor Kat Timpf about the latest back-and-forth between AOC and Musk, as well as the billionaire’s demand that all Twitter workers return to the office.

Towards the end of the discussion, however, Perino brought up the Twitter chief’s new subscription plan and whether Timpf would plunk down her cash for it.

“Would you pay $8 for it?” Perino wondered.

“I think it’s embarrassing to pay $8 for it,” Timpf replied, prompting Perino to shoot back: “I do too! I don’t think I’m gonna do it.”

Perino added that she’s “been looking for a reason to get off Twitter” and this could give her a reason to leave. Timpf, meanwhile, reiterated her belief that paying to remain verified on the site would be cringeworthy.

“I don’t think I would pay for it,” she concluded. “If this company [Fox News] paid for it for me, then sure. I think it’s still—I think It’s embarrassing to say, yes, Twitter is so important to me that I spent this money.”

[jhu72]

This doesn't sound like "free speech" for the masses.

[Seacoaster(1)]

The layoffs are your neighbors; read and scroll:

https://twitter.com/hashtag/LoveWhereYo ... htag_click

[elonmuskrockefeller]

This doesn't sound like "free speech" for the masses.

That article raises a good point about the economics of the deal. $1 billion in annual interest, but the company never made close to that in operating cash flow...the deal at first blush sounds (obviously) dicey.

But, you have to assume there was a rational business case model for the loans. If not, lenders will have egg on their face. I suspect that with co-investors like Kingdom Holdings and Larry Ellison, even if the company failed to generate sufficient cash flow, just between those three (Kingdom, Ellison, and Musk), they would be able to refinance on their own without assistance from other lenders, again if they were forced to refinance.

There will be changes to the Twitter business model of course; some of those changes will be tested and fail, while other tweaks will be tested and succeed. I'd simply say: never bet against his guy. There were a ton of hedge funds that shorted Tesla for the longest time, and they lost a spectacular amount of capital doing so.

Finally, I know that a few of you here at Fanlax claim to *not* hate Musk, but your writing belies your true feelings. This guy's dedication to speech, anti-censorship, humor, and success drives his haters crazy....a similar feat to what Trump used to do, with the same antagonists. It's really intriguing.

[elonmuskrockefeller]

The layoffs are your neighbors; read and scroll:

https://twitter.com/hashtag/LoveWhereYo ... htag_click

I pored through maybe 100 of these tweets and accounts from the fired employees. Reading their bios firmly supports the claim that Twitter had become a hostile speech environment for any account that didn't embrace leftist ideas. So many Ukraine/BLM/LGBTQIA+/Latinx/Resist hashtags and virtue signaling in these employee accounts....man. It's absolutely not surprising that conservatives were throttled by this crowd. No it's not a "first amendment" issue, but yes it is a censorship issue, perniciously driven by a statist revolving door of government and corporate interests.

On the other hand, it doesn't make me happy when anyone loses a job. I've been canned twice in my life. It stinks regardless of the reason. So I do have empathy for these people, but life has a way of handing you opportunities you never knew existed when new unanticipated hurdles are thrown your way. I have no doubt most of these fired employees will thrive at whatever new role they find, especially if they manage to leave the virtue signaling at home.

[jhu72]

Musk fires Rumman Chowdhury. Rumman Chowdhury, the director of machine learning ethics, transparency, and accountability who reported in 2021 that the platform amplified right-wing posts over content from the political left.

[jhu72]

This doesn't sound like "free speech" for the masses.

That article raises a good point about the economics of the deal. $1 billion in annual interest, but the company never made close to that in operating cash flow...the deal at first blush sounds (obviously) dicey.

But, you have to assume there was a rational business case model for the loans. If not, lenders will have egg on their face. I suspect that with co-investors like Kingdom Holdings and Larry Ellison, even if the company failed to generate sufficient cash flow, just between those three (Kingdom, Ellison, and Musk), they would be able to refinance on their own without assistance from other lenders, again if they were forced to refinance.

There will be changes to the Twitter business model of course; some of those changes will be tested and fail, while other tweaks will be tested and succeed. I'd simply say: never bet against his guy. There were a ton of hedge funds that shorted Tesla for the longest time, and they lost a spectacular amount of capital doing so.

Finally, I know that a few of you here at Fanlax claim to *not* hate Musk, but your writing belies your true feelings. This guy's dedication to speech, anti-censorship, humor, and success drives his haters crazy....a similar feat to what Trump used to do, with the same antagonists. It's really intriguing.

^^^ Know nothing blowhard. Musk got rolled because he thought he could bluff his way through.

[MDlaxfan76]

This doesn't sound like "free speech" for the masses.

That article raises a good point about the economics of the deal. $1 billion in annual interest, but the company never made close to that in operating cash flow...the deal at first blush sounds (obviously) dicey.

But, you have to assume there was a rational business case model for the loans. If not, lenders will have egg on their face. I suspect that with co-investors like Kingdom Holdings and Larry Ellison, even if the company failed to generate sufficient cash flow, just between those three (Kingdom, Ellison, and Musk), they would be able to refinance on their own without assistance from other lenders, again if they were forced to refinance.

There will be changes to the Twitter business model of course; some of those changes will be tested and fail, while other tweaks will be tested and succeed. I'd simply say: never bet against his guy. There were a ton of hedge funds that shorted Tesla for the longest time, and they lost a spectacular amount of capital doing so.

Finally, I know that a few of you here at Fanlax claim to *not* hate Musk, but your writing belies your true feelings. This guy's dedication to speech, anti-censorship, humor, and success drives his haters crazy....a similar feat to what Trump used to do, with the same antagonists. It's really intriguing.

^^^ Know nothing blowhard.

Musk is commanding employees to not speak to the press about the acquisition, about the layoffs..."free speech"? well...

[elonmuskrockefeller]

This doesn't sound like "free speech" for the masses.

That article raises a good point about the economics of the deal. $1 billion in annual interest, but the company never made close to that in operating cash flow...the deal at first blush sounds (obviously) dicey.

But, you have to assume there was a rational business case model for the loans. If not, lenders will have egg on their face. I suspect that with co-investors like Kingdom Holdings and Larry Ellison, even if the company failed to generate sufficient cash flow, just between those three (Kingdom, Ellison, and Musk), they would be able to refinance on their own without assistance from other lenders, again if they were forced to refinance.

There will be changes to the Twitter business model of course; some of those changes will be tested and fail, while other tweaks will be tested and succeed. I'd simply say: never bet against his guy. There were a ton of hedge funds that shorted Tesla for the longest time, and they lost a spectacular amount of capital doing so.

Finally, I know that a few of you here at Fanlax claim to *not* hate Musk, but your writing belies your true feelings. This guy's dedication to speech, anti-censorship, humor, and success drives his haters crazy....a similar feat to what Trump used to do, with the same antagonists. It's really intriguing.

^^^ Know nothing blowhard.

Musk is commanding employees to not speak to the press about the acquisition, about the layoffs..."free speech"? well...

If you owned a company and your employees regularly communicated with media to say how awful a boss you were, would you keep them employed?

[jhu72]

KellyAnne tolds us Musk's employees loved him, now those employees are seen not to love him.

Very curious.

[smoova]

If you owned a company and your employees regularly communicated with media to say how awful a boss you were, would you keep them employed?

Only if I'd spent a lot of time braying about how much I value "free speech."

[elonmuskrockefeller]

If you owned a company and your employees regularly communicated with media to say how awful a boss you were, would you keep them employed?

Only if I'd spent a lot of time braying about how much I value "free speech."

Those employees remain free to speak on Twitter about any topic. Even after they are fired.

[youthathletics]

So I suppose its all settled, b/c according to Kismet there is an affidavit, we should just question nothing.

I've saw the affidavit and it still does not explain why Pelosi chose not to stay in the bathroom. Furthermore, why would Pelosi go after the guy with the hammer when the friggen police are coming in the very door that he just opened for them.



c. While talking with each other, Pelosi went into a bathroom, where Pelosi grabbed
a phone to call 9-1-1. DEPAPE stated he felt like Pelosi’s actions compelled him
to respond

e. DEPAPE stated that they went downstairs to the front door. The police arrived
and knocked on the door, and Pelosi ran over and opened it. Pelosi grabbed onto
DEPAPE’s hammer, which was in DEPAPE’s hand. At this point in the
interview, DEPAPE repeated that DEPAPE did not plan to surrender and that he
would go “through” Pelosi.

f. DEPAPE stated that he pulled the hammer away from Pelosi and swung the
hammer towards Pelosi. DEPAPE explained that Pelosi’s actions resulted in
Pelosi “taking the punishment instead.”

Pelosi probably grabbed at the hammer in a defensive action to keep DePape from swinging it at him. Didn't work. You are assuming that what DePape said was actually what happened instead of DePape excusing why he hit Pelosi.

Nope. Seems Paul opened the door and walked back to DePape, while DePape said all is good. Still makes no sense why Paul did not walk outside after opening the door....speculation that fear set in?

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status ... du2GoPx1Gg

[jhu72]

If you owned a company and your employees regularly communicated with media to say how awful a boss you were, would you keep them employed?

Only if I'd spent a lot of time braying about how much I value "free speech."

Those employees remain free to speak on Twitter about any topic. Even after they are fired. ...EXCEPT THEIR ACCOUNTS ARE LOCKED.

[smoova]

If you owned a company and your employees regularly communicated with media to say how awful a boss you were, would you keep them employed?

Only if I'd spent a lot of time braying about how much I value "free speech."

Those employees remain free to speak on Twitter about any topic. Even after they are fired.

Heh - nice try.

[elonmuskrockefeller]

If you owned a company and your employees regularly communicated with media to say how awful a boss you were, would you keep them employed?

Only if I'd spent a lot of time braying about how much I value "free speech."

Those employees remain free to speak on Twitter about any topic. Even after they are fired. ...EXCEPT THEIR ACCOUNTS ARE LOCKED.

Their personal Twitter accounts are not locked; they are as free today as they were yesterday to complain all day about DEI and ESG.

Only their access to Twitter admin rights are locked. Can't censor conservatives any longer.

[MDlaxfan76]

Petey is flailing on this one, as he does with most everything.

Unfortunately, a whole lot of folks listen to trolls like Petey and to other right wing BS sources who care only about partisan benefit, with principles, much less integrity of those principles, meaning nothing to them.

The threatening with firing of anyone who dares to speak to the press about how they feel about their colleagues being fired so summarily and so callously is incredibly ironic for someone purportedly wanting people to be able to speak openly about how they feel, right or wrong...

Not that I would say that a company doesn't have a right to want to have unhappy employees leave, but don't tell us that you believe in 'free speech' on your privately owned for profit platform that amplifies the most angry and distasteful speech the most...yeah, profit is all that matters, not actual free speech.

If you want to say that there are consequences for 'speech' that you don't like coming from employees, ok, but then don't claim you should be free of consequences, of liability, for the profits you are making from harmful speech...consequences...

[NattyBohChamps04]

A common occurrence when new leadership comes in. Get rid of the dead wood.

Looks like he's getting rid of the dead wood, the healthy wood and most of the roots at this point.

[a fan]

This doesn't sound like "free speech" for the masses.

That article raises a good point about the economics of the deal. $1 billion in annual interest, but the company never made close to that in operating cash flow...the deal at first blush sounds (obviously) dicey.

But, you have to assume there was a rational business case model for the loans. If not, lenders will have egg on their face. I suspect that with co-investors like Kingdom Holdings and Larry Ellison, even if the company failed to generate sufficient cash flow, just between those three (Kingdom, Ellison, and Musk), they would be able to refinance on their own without assistance from other lenders, again if they were forced to refinance.

There will be changes to the Twitter business model of course; some of those changes will be tested and fail, while other tweaks will be tested and succeed. I'd simply say: never bet against his guy. There were a ton of hedge funds that shorted Tesla for the longest time, and they lost a spectacular amount of capital doing so.

Finally, I know that a few of you here at Fanlax claim to *not* hate Musk, but your writing belies your true feelings. This guy's dedication to speech, anti-censorship, humor, and success drives his haters crazy....a similar feat to what Trump used to do, with the same antagonists. It's really intriguing.

Dedication to free speech? How come Trump isn't allowed back on? Or anyone else that was banned?

Why would Musk POSSIBLY need a committee if he believed in unfettered speech as the Fake-Right alleges? Reinstate EVERYONE, and let them post what they want.

You guys will believe ANYTHING someone tells you if you think they are on your team. It's both hilarious and terrifying.

Wanna know why Musk did all this? Because competition is on its way from companies who REALLY know how to run factories....... and Musk needs to make sure that Republicans don't get in , and turn the government subsidies off. Remember those? 10 minutes ago, every Republican on the board was complaining about subsidized electric cars.

And lo and behold on this very Musk thread, NOT ONE OF YOU is talking about subsidies anymore. Poof. Complaints are allllll gone.


Why? Because Musk (snicker) has managed to convince you that a card carrying lib that owns an electric car company is "one of you",. It's spectacular. So sure, he'll "vote for DeSantis", who isn't even running for anything yet.

All so he can get Republican voters to subsidize his company (and this is the best part) with THEIR MONEY.

So please, by all means, change your mind about electric cars and paying for them with YOUR MONEY, Pete (and others, for that matter).

All because you don't actually have values like your grandparents did. You'll allow our leaders and 1%er to do ANYTHING so long as you're convinced they're "one of you".

Why do you all think I keep bringing up Trump making government 66% larger in just four years? Because all the supposed conservatives on the board, save cradle (gotta love him) watched as Trump blew out the size of Federal government AND SAID NOTHING.

But sure. You guys are "conservatives".




Who needs to operate an efficient Car company when you fool a bunch of fake conservatives to talk about (snicker) twitter, as if it's PBS......and while they are fixated on yet another stupid, pointless, FoxNation fake issue...........simply run to Congress for more taxpayer money, fellas!