Speculation on why Musk wants twitter…

[KuruPrionz]

4 hours ago, RABid said:

In my 60+ years I have never seen censorship at such a high level. From Amazon refusing the purchase of hosting services to groups that the owner does not agree with to Disney going all out on seasonal celebrations and marketing yet not allowing employees to utter the words Merry Christmas. It is really crazy out there right now. Shut them down or shout them down, but don't let them speak. If he is truly going to enforce free speah I will start using Twitter.

The First Amendment of the Constitution does not require privately held business like Amazon or Disney to adhere to any sort of "free speech". Note that private property is not mentioned and cannot be assumed under these terms:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

The First Amendment makes it possible for US citizens on US soil to say what they think to Government officials and to the Press (although the Press has the right to not repeat your statement and/or to edit it for brevity, which can result in misunderstanding so be succinct).

 

If you come over to my house and say stuff I don't like, I don't have to listen to it. If you come to my business and say stuff I don't like, I don't have to listen to it. 

And vice versa, you are not required to hear me spew nonsense in your home or place of work. 

 

If i worked for the US Government then I would have to listen to you (but I don't have to take you seriously, nor do you me).

We should never conflate the First Amendment to mean anything other than what it says. 

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

The First Amendment of the Constitution does not require privately held business like Amazon or Disney to adhere to any sort of "free speech". Note that private property is not mentioned and cannot be assumed under these terms:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

I don't think RAbid was referring to the first amendment, but to censorship initiated by private companies that inhibits free speech. 

 

But be that as it may, though, there are indeed way too many people who fail to understand that "free speech" has various moving parts. One of those is the first amendment, but that's only one of the parts.

[KuruPrionz]

2 minutes ago, Anderton said:

 

I don't think RAbid was referring to the first amendment, but to censorship initiated by private companies that inhibits free speech. 

 

But be that as it may, though, there are indeed way too many people who fail to understand that "free speech" has various moving parts. One of those is the first amendment, but that's only one of the parts.

True but it's the only "mandatory" one that I know of, a company can make policy regarding what employees can say or do when working for said company. This includes policy that dictates how customer satisfaction is handled- for better or worse. 

 

I've worked for a few companies who had policies regarding what was and was not appropriate and that is their choice and no one else's. 

 

That said, most companies will try to please their customers, to do otherwise is very poor customer service policy and does not pay off in the long run. I hope it didn't sound like I was defending people's right to be assholes. I know good customer service skills and using them has paid off again and again. If you take good care of others (and that includes what you say) they will tend to take good care of you as well. Even if you never see them again they may well give you a great referral to a friend. 

[Steve Force]

On 4/26/2022 at 7:02 PM, Anderton said:

 

The interwebz are fickle. I'm thankful that Musicplayer.com is not only here, but growing, and with a roadmap for the future. Amazing.

..... And getting better all of the time!  👍

 

[ajstan]

12 hours ago, RABid said:

When hotels start providing charging stations so you can charge your car overnight I think electric cars will take off.

Yes, the Destination Charging network is another example of why Tesla sold more than 10x the number of cars in the US in 2021 vs. its closest competitor.  There is still a long way to go to start approaching the ubiquity of gas stations, but general EV charging at hotels and other destinations may in some ways follow the path of WiFi where it started as a novelty/differentiator for a few, to now become a standard.

Destination Charging | Tesla

 

Also, charging on the road at a Supercharger for 15-20 minutes every 200 miles isn't really a hassle for me.  Stop and use the rest room, get something to eat, and walk around and stretch the legs while the car charges.  In the few trips I've made so far, I've found out that the car is usually done charging to the level I want more quickly than it takes to complete the aforementioned activities.  If you're hell bent on driving 85mph+ and getting to your destination ASAP, then it may not be for you, otherwise, it's quite the calming, relaxing experience - especially with the included Autopilot.  

Find Us | Tesla

[ajstan]

8 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

The First Amendment of the Constitution does not require privately held business like Amazon or Disney to adhere to any sort of "free speech". Note that private property is not mentioned and cannot be assumed under these terms:

Nor does it prevent people, other organizations, or even government entities from saying they don't like a company's policies/activities and taking whatever legal steps they wish, including information campaigns, boycotts, changing laws, or even acquiring control of a business.  

 

"Hey, it's legal" works both ways.  "If you don't like it, build your own" works both ways.  "You're a _______-ist / _____-phobe / groomer" works both ways.  Propaganda works both ways.

 

It's been said that Side 1 thinks that Side 2 has bad ideas, but Side 2 thinks that Side 1 are bad people and Side 2 has been acting accordingly for decades.  Give Side 2 credit as they currently control the schools/children, the vast majority of the media, government agencies, and the language/narrative.  Side 1 is finally realizing that Side 2 is at war with them and "going along to get along" was a terrible strategy, so Side 1 is now responding in kind, and Side 2 doesn't like it. 

 

The pendulum is always going to keep moving back and forth, and a correction is in-process.  Hopefully our constitution - and the people who we elect that take an oath to "protect and defend" it - keep that pendulum from moving to a point of no return on either side, and those in the middle (who can still agreeably and vehemently disagree with each other) will stand up and hold the government accountable and move discourse to a more productive place.

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, ajstan said:

...and those in the middle (who can still agreeably and vehemently disagree with each other) will stand up and hold the government accountable and move discourse to a more productive place.

 

It's anecdotal, but what I'm finding more and more is that people who should on paper be on different sides of any political divide have more similarities than differences. They both want to do the right thing, they just have different ideas of what the right thing is. If they talk to each other and find the areas of common ground, that makes figuring out a compromise much easier.

 

The biggest problem is see is a lack of willingness to compromise, because one side doesn't see the other side as having any validity. It's all "my way or the highway." I remember a time in politics when is was common for the two parties to negotiate on various laws. There wasn't this "we have to get 100% of what we want" mentality. Instead, the goal was to come up with a compromise that started by defining what the two sides had in common, so those issues weren't of concern. Of what remained, no one got exactly what they wanted, but both sides got at least some, or even hopefully most, of what they wanted.

[KuruPrionz]

23 minutes ago, Anderton said:

 

It's anecdotal, but what I'm finding more and more is that people who should on paper be on different sides of any political divide have more similarities than differences. They both want to do the right thing, they just have different ideas of what the right thing is. If they talk to each other and find the areas of common ground, that makes figuring out a compromise much easier.

 

The biggest problem is see is a lack of willingness to compromise, because one side doesn't see the other side as having any validity. It's all "my way or the highway." I remember a time in politics when is was common for the two parties to negotiate on various laws. There wasn't this "we have to get 100% of what we want" mentality. Instead, the goal was to come up with a compromise that started by defining what the two sides had in common, so those issues weren't of concern. Of what remained, no one got exactly what they wanted, but both sides got at least some, or even hopefully most, of what they wanted.

The biggest problem we have by far in this country is the current 2 party system. 

It was not long ago at all that both Libertarians and Green Party were relevant in the sense that they could draw enough votes to field candidates, participate in the debates and to change the election results. A short time later we have one of two parties boycotting the debates, which makes them completely irrelevant since one person cannot have a meaningful discourse with themselves regarding policy that may be divisive and need thoughtful compromise to move forward. 

 

Which means the Rs and Ds used to have to work things out with those who could draw enough votes away from them to cause them to lose an election, but now there is nobody to keep things somewhat in balance so it's all "Us vs Them" (whoever Us and Them are...). 

 

Not sure about other states but in the last couple of elections in WA there have only been 2 parties represented with a third option of a Write-In vote. 

We need at least 3 or 4 more viable parties, which means splitting the Big 2 up into sub-parties. That would force rational discourse/negotiatiions onto our political bi-opoly for the betterment of We, The American People. Neither party wants to be the first to do it so nothing will change any time soon. 

 

As it stands now, it's "This way only, or That way only" and that doesn't engender any sort of meaningful, thoughtful progress. 

It's great for name-calling and other pointless blatherspew though...

 

I have a simple solution for all of this but it's not legal or acceptable so I won't mention it. 😇

[David Emm]

>> I have a simple solution for all of this but it's not legal or acceptable so I won't mention it. 😇

 

I have my own ideas in this area, but I don't want to compare them over lunch. We might agree and that would be awful. 🤨

No one really wants to be caught agreeing with Thanos.

[Anderton]

Let's face it, the real issue is that not enough billionaires own prominent media outlets. Oh, wait...

[KuruPrionz]

3 hours ago, David Emm said:

>> I have a simple solution for all of this but it's not legal or acceptable so I won't mention it. 😇

 

I have my own ideas in this area, but I don't want to compare them over lunch. We might agree and that would be awful. 🤨

No one really wants to be caught agreeing with Thanos.

Empirically speaking, "we" deny everything, categorically and empirically. There is no evidence and it proves nothinig anyway...

[Anderton]

I just realized something: I don't care what happens with Twitter. If it attracts idiots, they were idiots before Twitter came along. If it attracts brilliant and insightful comments, those people were brilliant and insightful before Twitter came along.

 

Twitter is a mirror of society. The problem is society, Twitter just reflects it. Let's see how well Musk's "free speech" goes over in a world with countries that put endless effort into controlling speech. 

 

Prediction: In 5 years, Twitter will be the punchline for jokes that used to use MySpace. 

[KuruPrionz]

9 minutes ago, Anderton said:

I just realized something: I don't care what happens with Twitter. If it attracts idiots, they were idiots before Twitter came along. If it attracts brilliant and insightful comments, those people were brilliant and insightful before Twitter came along.

 

Twitter is a mirror of society. The problem is society, Twitter just reflects it. Let's see how well Musk's "free speech" goes over in a world with countries that put endless effort into controlling speech. 

 

Prediction: In 5 years, Twitter will be the punchline for jokes that used to use MySpace. 

Yep.

And something even better and way worse will come along.

[KuruPrionz]

From what I've been skimming, Musk is looking for a way to finance the purchase. 

He is also considering monetizing Twitter. His only hope there is to provide a more effective platform for advertising.

 

If he tries to charge tweeters for tweeting or quoting tweets, they will leave in droves. 

Time will tell. 

[Anderton]

27 minutes ago, KuruPrionz said:

He is also considering monetizing Twitter. His only hope there is to provide a more effective platform for advertising.

 

I think Only Fans beat him to it 

[KuruPrionz]

1 minute ago, Anderton said:

 

I think Only Fans beat him to it 

Probably, skin will win.

[KuruPrionz]

On 5/2/2022 at 8:02 PM, KuruPrionz said:

From what I've been skimming, Musk is looking for a way to finance the purchase. 

He is also considering monetizing Twitter. His only hope there is to provide a more effective platform for advertising.

 

If he tries to charge tweeters for tweeting or quoting tweets, they will leave in droves. 

Time will tell. 

Well, that didn't take long... he's already floating ideas...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/elon-musk-floated-idea-making-001832096.html

[Anderton]

Why pay money to boost someone else's web presence? Does Twitter really move the needle in terms of helping a company be profitable?

[KuruPrionz]

8 hours ago, Anderton said:

Why pay money to boost someone else's web presence? Does Twitter really move the needle in terms of helping a company be profitable?

 

I suspect Elon is over-estimating his plan for Twitter. Not sure if he's actually bought it yet anyway. 

I won't be surprised if he bails. 

[Anderton]

Y'know, if your cesspool is too small or the concrete has cracked, you can put in a bigger and better cesspool. But at the end of the day, it's still a cesspool.

[RABid]

Don't confuse freedom of speech with right to deny speech. And don't confuse letter of the law with good business practice. Disney suffered some major backlash over the years and finally had to backtrack on their "market Christmas as much as possible but don't utter the word" policy. Word got out and got around. People were insulted at the double standard. When numbers started going down marketing finally got the message to management, don't insult the customers. And Amazon's move was equivalent to a stationary store asking customers what they were going to write before selling them paper. Like some others they took the opportunity after the White House invasion to label all right wing organizations as dangerous and used that as the reason they removed web sites that hosted right wing views. A large portion of the population saw this as an attack on their belief. Not a good move for a business who's primary source of income is selling goods to the public. A lot of the left wing were already anti-Amazon because of hiring and business practices. Strange that they would then alienate the right wing.

[Anderton]

Frankly, I think people take all of this stuff way too seriously. I don't think I've ever met one Jewish person who flipped out upon seeing "Merry Christmas" on a store's sign. It seems to me like the self-appointed "protectors of correctness" get bothered more than the people they're trying to "protect." 

 

Case in point: One time I cracked a joke while I was with a group of black and white people. The black people couldn't stop laughing and high-fiving, but the white people were concerned that maybe the joke was racist. I said it was racist to assume black people don't have a sense of humor

 

Everyone needs to lighten up. Really. 

[KuruPrionz]

On 5/4/2022 at 8:48 AM, Anderton said:

Y'know, if your cesspool is too small or the concrete has cracked, you can put in a bigger and better cesspool. But at the end of the day, it's still a cesspool.

 

Cesspool or not, here come the lawyers!!!!

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/musk-twitter-sued-shareholder-over-154209396.html

[David Emm]

Who was it who said "The problem with the poor is poverty. The problem with the rich is uselessness"? There is a curve to most things, but it seems as if many of the more public billionaires are what we in the trenches call "jackoffs." If Bezos had blown up in one of his "Ode To My Penis" tourist rockets, I would have cringed as I laughed. Elon is bored. When one of the jackoff billionaires gets bored, watch out. They'll either physically create a major crater somewhere or go into politics and spread the Stupid around. They lack better imaginations.

 

The smart ones stay very quiet and sometimes do a lot more damage. In astronomy-speak, they know its much easier to lightly nudge an asteroid out by the Van Allen Belt so it casually bypasses us than it is to stop it once you can see it behind the next full moon.

 

I don't think its unfair to say that Twitter does very, very little good for anyone. If Elon "frees it up," it will simply mean that the volume of monkey screams will go through your noise-canceling headphones like a steel spike. Oh, I hate when that happens! 😱

[KuruPrionz]

1 hour ago, David Emm said:

Who was it who said "The problem with the poor is poverty. The problem with the rich is uselessness"? There is a curve to most things, but it seems as if many of the more public billionaires are what we in the trenches call "jackoffs." If Bezos had blown up in one of his "Ode To My Penis" tourist rockets, I would have cringed as I laughed. Elon is bored. When one of the jackoff billionaires gets bored, watch out. They'll either physically create a major crater somewhere or go into politics and spread the Stupid around. They lack better imaginations.

 

The smart ones stay very quiet and sometimes do a lot more damage. In astronomy-speak, they know its much easier to lightly nudge an asteroid out by the Van Allen Belt so it casually bypasses us than it is to stop it once you can see it behind the next full moon.

 

I don't think its unfair to say that Twitter does very, very little good for anyone. If Elon "frees it up," it will simply mean that the volume of monkey screams will go through your noise-canceling headphones like a steel spike. Oh, I hate when that happens! 😱

Well put. I am not nice enough to say what I think on MPN, which is a nice place. 

I've read maybe 15 tweets that made it to the regular news, so far that's it. It won't change much, the last time I cared was the last time and this is just a magnet for stupidity for the most part. 

An intelligent statement would be wasted, pearls before swine. 

 

Lett the lawsuits begin, send Lawyers, Guns and Money.

[Anderton]

3 hours ago, David Emm said:

I don't think its unfair to say that Twitter does very, very little good for anyone.

 

What needle does it move? Nothing, unless the people who get my monthly nag to back up their data go "Oh, wow, I forgot...thanks for the reminder!"

[David Emm]

13 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

What needle does it move? Nothing, unless the people who get my monthly nag to back up their data go "Oh, wow, I forgot...thanks for the reminder!"

 

 Hey Craig! Thanks for etc. etc.!! 😛 I just received a 1 TB SSD for backups and another I'm going to TRY to use for my sound libraries. I don't have any petabyte-sized orchestras, which IIRC are 2 to the 50th power bytes, yikes. Talk about detailed cellos! I'm a bit unnerved about having vital sounds on an outboard drive, so clearly, its already time for two more, no, three more SSDs.

 

Its still better than my massive old shelf of floppies that could have killed my dog if it fell on her. Hell, it got so big, if it had fallen on me, I would have forgotten my middle name. The road to Hell is paved with old Radio Shack floppies. Perfect for skeet shooting. There must have been a spitting noise in my old Mirage's ROM, because I heard it every time I tried to insert one of those things.   

[RABid]

I signed up for Twitter again. Had not been on in years and my old account does not seem to exists. Wow, Musk does a lot of tweeting.  I mostly signed up for space and science channels.

[Joe Muscara]

I find that Twitter is much more tolerable when using lists (a feature they once touted and now seem to almost hide) and not reading the comments or replies. Sometimes I do, but I often have to stop after a while. This allows me to follow the accounts I'm interested in, grouped by topic (Beatles, Stones, Jazz, etc.) and usually not get in too deep.

 

That being said, I almost left Twitter permanently a few months ago. Most people don't seem to reply to tweets as much as quote tweet them. I made a sort of dumb reply to a celebrity (I wasn't trying to be dumb nor controversial, but the way I said something seemed insensitive. It wasn't insensitive about him, it was about the person who he was talking about, who wasn't even tagged by either of us) and then tons of people were piling on me. Of course, I have my Twitter client set up to notify me when someone tags me, because people never tag me. Then I'm getting all these alerts with people saying crap to me as if I was the biggest POS on Earth. I finally found where I could delete the tweet so it would stop.

 

[I know I'm being abstract about what happened, but I obviously don't want to get into it. Hopefully what I wrote makes sense. What's screwy is that I still don't think I'm completely wrong, but since I could take it back by deleting it, I did. Even friends of mine were like, "whoa dude" so I guess I was clueless. And still am?  ]

 

So that dropped my enjoyment of Twitter a bit. If Musky allows more crap and misinformation on the platform in the name of free speech, it's going to be hard to stick around (he claims that he will allow what the law allows). The problem is, different people choose what social media platforms to be on, and if you want to see what they're up to, you have to use the one they use. I get a lot out of FB, Twitter, and IG, but I don't love any of them because of the other crap. There are other Twitter-like platforms I like such as micro.blog and Counter Social, but there's few, if any people I know on those yet. Both claim to be well-moderated and not tolerant of trolls, etc., but they're new and don't have tons of traffic. I wonder if they be able to keep that up.

[KenElevenShadows]

On 5/7/2022 at 6:24 PM, David Emm said:

 

 

I don't think its unfair to say that Twitter does very, very little good for anyone. 

 

Twitter is at its most powerful when people need to disseminate information quickly or coordinate large groups of people. Think Arab Spring or wartime. It does quite a lot of good for people then, as it's an extremely fluid, fast-moving medium.

 

Twitter is also good in that you can often communicate directly with people in a way that doesn't seem to occur with FB or IG. I mean, I get to exchange sentences with some huge photographers once in a while, so I think it's cool for that.

 

Apart from that, either I'm just not using the medium very well or not putting enough time into it or I'm not sure what. But I wouldn't ever say that it does "very very little good for anyone."