I just wanted to say I think elon musk is the most successful conman, vaporware peddler, advertiser and scammer in history.
Anyone want to express their own view on the wunderkind?
I've only been peripherally following his recent escapades and since I've never used twitter, that whole mess has passed me by without involvement. I hear that Tesla's share place has nosedived despite increasing the number of vehicles it has sold. Guessing that gaining twitter hasn't increased his fortunes any.
Just another guy with too much money.
He's creepy.
All billionaires are creepy, with the possible exception of Warren Buffet.
We're both South Africans (although I wasn't born here) but he is a bit strange. So am I but that's beside the point. :wink:
More of a successful conman than Trump?
Don't really know the full story, but I used to hear a lot about how Tesla was subsidized by the government....
Of course, I recall Obama subsidizing several Wind, Solar & EV companies that went belly up....
And of course, Musk has proven that Twitter was getting government subsidies before he took it over....
hundreds of companies get government subsidies, including others owned by musk. what's your point?
Quote from: chefzombie on January 03, 2023, 10:19:06 PM
hundreds of companies get government subsidies, including others owned by musk. what's your point?
If that's the case, then he's no more a con man than any other entrepreneur....
Conman? Entrepreneur?
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/271/921/3a8.gif)
Creepy? Yes, but a dubious billionaire.
Quote from: Allhallowsday on January 04, 2023, 01:52:22 AM
Conman? Entrepreneur?
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/271/921/3a8.gif)
Creepy? Yes, but a dubious billionaire.
I thought that was an ant on my screen 😀😀🐢
I don't understand why people dislike him.
Teslas are cool cars, SpaceX is a rocket company these are good businesses
What he's accomplished on twitter is incredible. he broke the back of Silicon valley woke culture you can already see the change in the way people discuss issues
This is when I started to dislike him.
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/fOvKhSSfjdY0hKNl87WG5zNN6KNsRdqWF8EQTvQBnlawsDNjN3NNJQqUb5lUJzYaySzPsknNr6j1Uifrz_h7yDD8KBnilodnWaJazBd9OQXRnZ_nPC_H5xbOP230px5hpJbt1H6o7MQXpKRnZA)
(https://miro.medium.com/max/833/0*_CxSnOz-wN_L_nw-.png)
(https://d2u3dcdbebyaiu.cloudfront.net/uploads/atch_img/648/b555c23d760347dcce13b14c0ab121bd_res.jpeg)
Really had no idea who he was before these crypto scams. Wouldn't know a Tesla if I ran into it.
^Still not as bad as what Sam Bankman-Fried did with his investors' money...^
Quote from: LilCerberus on January 03, 2023, 10:32:49 PM
Quote from: chefzombie on January 03, 2023, 10:19:06 PM
hundreds of companies get government subsidies, including others owned by musk. what's your point?
If that's the case, then he's no more a con man than any other entrepreneur....
I DIDN'T SAY HE WAS EITHER, AND YOU DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION. i won't waste my time any longer.
He can't be all bad, he works at a homeless shelter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGR5HP3KSBk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGR5HP3KSBk)
Quote from: ER on January 05, 2023, 10:09:07 AM
He can't be all bad, he works at a homeless shelter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGR5HP3KSBk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGR5HP3KSBk)
I believe a lot of serial killers do that to allay suspicions.
Hey wait a second....
:bouncegiggle:
Quote from: chefzombie on January 05, 2023, 02:24:53 AM
Quote from: LilCerberus on January 03, 2023, 10:32:49 PM
Quote from: chefzombie on January 03, 2023, 10:19:06 PM
hundreds of companies get government subsidies, including others owned by musk. what's your point?
If that's the case, then he's no more a con man than any other entrepreneur....
I DIDN'T SAY HE WAS EITHER, AND YOU DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION. i won't waste my time any longer.
In Twitter's case, the government was paying for what people were & weren't allowed to say, and trying to control what people thought or felt about it....
prove it. you can't, and you know it. :thumbdown:
^ he absolutely can. the "twitter files" have been top story on twitter since musk took over
Quote from: lester1/2jr on January 07, 2023, 01:54:34 AM
^ he absolutely can. the "twitter files" have been top story on twitter since musk took over
Well, I wouldn't blame chefzombie for not knowing...
The mainstream press is trying real hard to bury this story, & the right wing press is apathetically saying that musk is confirming what they already knew & moving on to something more current...
https://www.theblaze.com/shows/the-glenn-beck-program/adam-schiff-journalist-ban?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202023-01-05&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM (https://www.theblaze.com/shows/the-glenn-beck-program/adam-schiff-journalist-ban?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202023-01-05&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM)
Quote from: lester1/2jr on January 07, 2023, 01:54:34 AM
^ he absolutely can. the "twitter files" have been top story on twitter since musk took over
sorry, les, but the magic files are a nothingburger. they prove nothing, and do nothing but add to the BS on twitter.
now tell me, how do you feel about musk allowing and encouraging the planners of the insurrection in brazil to do their planning on twitter? how do you feel about him encouraging the destruction of democracy?
Quote from: LilCerberus on January 07, 2023, 12:29:30 PM
Quote from: lester1/2jr on January 07, 2023, 01:54:34 AM
^ he absolutely can. the "twitter files" have been top story on twitter since musk took over
Well, I wouldn't blame chefzombie for not knowing...
The mainstream press is trying real hard to bury this story, & the right wing press is apathetically saying that musk is confirming what they already knew & moving on to something more current...
https://www.theblaze.com/shows/the-glenn-beck-program/adam-schiff-journalist-ban?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202023-01-05&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM (https://www.theblaze.com/shows/the-glenn-beck-program/adam-schiff-journalist-ban?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202023-01-05&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM)
trying to condescend to me makes you look even sillier than you already did, cerb. but it's good to kniw that you support a man who is helping destroy democracy in another culture.
chef - can you give an example of how it's a nothing burger? it seemed pretty straightforward in it's claims to me
Quote from: chefzombie on January 07, 2023, 01:25:09 AM
prove it. you can't, and you know it. :thumbdown:
First, there's no proof, then the proof is
"a nothingburger"???Yeah, I'm trying to find evidence that musk is responsible for Brazil (and I can't deny there's evidence of that), but there's also evidence that the old Twitter controllers helped Lula da Silva & suppressed support for Jair Bolsonaro.
And of course, the rioters in brazil, like anyone else, didn't use just one social network.
And keep in mind, the government tried to shut down Parlor over just a few users, when the j6 rioters really using the usual establishment social networks.
I don't know much about the guy-except he's real creepy looking, and seems like a blowhard.
just off the top of my head i recall reading in the first twitter files that the memo was they didn't want to repeat "the mistake of 2016" which refers to the DNC leaks which threw a wrench in Hillary's doomed campaign. that would tend to indicate they saw that result as a bad thing?
IN other words they wanted to make sure the absolutely true Hinter Biden story went away the same way the DNC's absolutely true emails showing how Hilary's people undermined the Sanders campaign at the expense of democracy.
Meanwhile, Hunter Biden is a well known screw up and no one would have cared abuot the story otherwise.
It's not the crime it's the cover up! some of the older posters might remember that phrase
i think when it comes to politics and those who don't get it, i'll post elsewhere for that. i don't need the hassle here. later taters! see you in other threads! :cheers:
Quote from: chefzombie on January 10, 2023, 02:12:48 AM
i think when it comes to politics and those who don't get it, i'll post elsewhere for that. i don't need the hassle here. later taters! see you in other threads! :cheers:
:bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle:
I aint on Tweeter, nor could I afford his cars- so I pay him no mind. And he always looks like if he grinned his face would crack.
Wasn't Hyperloop a scam to get people not interested in high speed rail?
Quote from: El Misfit on January 10, 2023, 04:07:03 PM
Wasn't Hyperloop a scam to get people not interested in high speed rail?
(https://scontent-iad3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/322234894_882590253088066_3563212137365424811_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=M281kP5WPq8AX-CtYY4&_nc_oc=AQmX9lyi5-oBsfYjIIWifCHjdw17H0CF_0cS3o0vM2h-k_3gquif9i4uuHBfz2lJJ8g&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-2.xx&oh=00_AfAOBDTugh83lHEd10-G6Mctr6SL_eNgzJZdCr18BMLsKw&oe=63C2D1FA)
Hyperloop lasted nine years, & still may see a future in Europe...
California's High Speed Rail project went on for fourteen years, & didn't work
Quote from: Rev. Powell on January 04, 2023, 07:09:10 PM
This is when I started to dislike him.
(https://miro.medium.com/max/833/0*_CxSnOz-wN_L_nw-.png)
He looks like Alfred E. Newman in this picture.
The richest people in the world and their opponents are essentially con men. That's because the bulk of wealth worldwide consists of numbers in hard drives whose values go up and down based on speculation. That's why Musk lost $200 billion while Bezos at one point saw his wealth grow by $10 billion in a single day.
It's not because they worked harder or less, or that they did something wrong or right. Rather, financial gambling takes places, with losers selling too late and winners buying when everyone is losing.
What about those nothingburgers? Most of mainstream and social media are controlled by only a few corporations:
https://pwestpathfinder.com/2022/05/09/the-big-sixs-big-media-game/ (https://pwestpathfinder.com/2022/05/09/the-big-sixs-big-media-game/)
The global economy itself is controlled by only a few corporations, too, and mostly in financing:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354-500-revealed-the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world/ (https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228354-500-revealed-the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world/)
In countries like the U.S., the bulk of that wealth is managed by a few corporations, too:
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-to-know-about-blackrock-larry-fink-biden-cabinet-facts-2020-12 (https://www.businessinsider.com/what-to-know-about-blackrock-larry-fink-biden-cabinet-facts-2020-12)
Guess who funds the same mainstream and social media, not to mention retail companies, pharma, food processing, and the defense industry? The same.
And not just pharma but even food processing is controlled by a few, too:
https://www.businessinsider.com/10-companies-control-the-food-industry-2016-9 (https://www.businessinsider.com/10-companies-control-the-food-industry-2016-9)
And those deals extend even to the political realm, where economies are even essentially privatized, i.e., basically sold off to the same asset managers:
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/28/zelenskyy-blackrock-ceo-fink-agree-to-coordinate-ukraine-investment.html (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/28/zelenskyy-blackrock-ceo-fink-agree-to-coordinate-ukraine-investment.html)
Given that, you shouldn't be surprised if the same corporations censor news that they don't want you to hear and push others that they think you do, or say one thing:
https://twitter.com/wef/status/813869325635424256 (https://twitter.com/wef/status/813869325635424256)
and then argue that that's not what they meant:
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wef-idUSKBN2AP2T0 (https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-wef-idUSKBN2AP2T0)
Why? Because not only is anything you say against them a nothingburger, so are you.
Then you better be careful exposing them, ralfy, they might come for you.....
Every point I gave is common knowledge (at least to those who bother to investigate) and several even come straight from the horse's mouth. For example,
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/world/europe/ukraine-weapons.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/world/europe/ukraine-weapons.html)
They can't even keep a straight face about these issues:
https://nypost.com/2022/04/01/new-york-times-finally-admit-hunters-laptop-is-real-but-only-to-protect-joe-biden/ (https://nypost.com/2022/04/01/new-york-times-finally-admit-hunters-laptop-is-real-but-only-to-protect-joe-biden/)
Now everything is connected to racism:
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/27/opinions/tyre-nichols-memphis-police-department-jones/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/27/opinions/tyre-nichols-memphis-police-department-jones/index.html)
https://twitter.com/Frank94147822/status/1619371035324993544 (https://twitter.com/Frank94147822/status/1619371035324993544)
Or turn news into what are essentially press releases:
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64402102 (https://www.bbc.com/news/health-64402102)
We're looking at a new Golden Age of Comedy. LOL.
I know you're a fan of Russia, mate, maybe you'd like it better there? They won't let you complain as openly, but on the plus side, you would be closer to Putin, and you've expressed support for him. Might be a good move, never know. :thumbup:
Not a fan of Russia. More important, not a fan of disinformation. Finally, not a fan of either-or views, e.g., either you're with us, or you're pro-Russian.
Quote from: ralfy on January 29, 2023, 10:37:47 AM
Not a fan of Russia. More important, not a fan of disinformation. Finally, not a fan of either-or views, e.g., either you're with us, or you're pro-Russian.
Somebody hold my skirts and grab the smelling salts, he's knocked me over with a feather! :bouncegiggle:
Quote from: ER on January 29, 2023, 11:57:27 AM
Quote from: ralfy on January 29, 2023, 10:37:47 AM
Not a fan of Russia. More important, not a fan of disinformation. Finally, not a fan of either-or views, e.g., either you're with us, or you're pro-Russian.
Somebody hold my skirts and grab the smelling salts, he's knocked me over with a feather! :bouncegiggle:
Guess he didn't read his own posts before. Fair enough, I mostly skipped them too.
Quote from: ER on January 29, 2023, 11:57:27 AM
Somebody hold my skirts and grab the smelling salts, he's knocked me over with a feather! :bouncegiggle:
You did that to yourself.
Why are you trying to derail this thread by making it an issue about me? My point is that Elon Musk's business and political rivals are also conmen, and I think I was able to prove that by supplying evidence.
Given such, why are you not responding to those points and instead resort to personal attacks?
Quote from: Alex on January 29, 2023, 02:19:36 PM
Guess he didn't read his own posts before. Fair enough, I mostly skipped them too.
What an absurd claim! Obviously, I read my posts and stated my argument clearly, and it's not pro-Russian. You need to work on your reading comprehension.
Back to our topic? What do you think of what I said about Musk's opponents? Are they con men, too?
Finally, I'd like to add the ff:
https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/
So, it turns out that Twitter was $3 billion in the hole, and for some reason this "con man" comes in and saves it, but had to make major cuts in costs, including firing up to half of employees, many of whom were being paid something like $170k a year to moderate content.
The latter came out because many of them protested, arguing that Twitter operations would fall apart without them. Instead, the platform continued to operate smoothly, which implied that they were not necessary. It also turns out that there were several problems with the code and algorithms, which Musk wants to fix, and explains why he wants to step down as CEO and let others take over non-technical aspects of the firm.
Other news: so those who complained moved to Mastodon, and I'm told that for many of them there's very little engagement in various self-hosted groups there, so they've been moving back to Twitter to attack Musk in his own platform. Worse, the same migrants turn out to be moderating tyrants, such that they're cancelling each other out, as if they they're getting a taste of their own medicine.
Meanwhile, many who were banned or suspended multiple times have now been freed and have started attacking those who ran the platform previously. Nothingburgers, says the mainstream media, even though they end up admitting things that they deny months or years later, from the contents of Biden's laptop to issues concerning vaccines.
If that's the work of con men for several in this thread, then I wonder what non-con men would be for them.
Here's where it gets weirder:
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/how-will-elon-musk-pay-twitter-2022-10-07/ (https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/how-will-elon-musk-pay-twitter-2022-10-07/)
A con man would bring in others and then, as CEO, pretend that he calls the shots. That's what happened to Twitter BEFORE Musk came in.
But now, Musks soaks up all outstanding common stock using equity financing and debt financing, which means the CEO is also owner and calls the shots, but takes full responsibility for any outcome. And he wants greater transparency, which is why he's letting others expose what happened to Twitter execs.
That's a con man?
Hey, sorry, ralfy, I'm not really attacking you personally, I don't dislike you, just find your posts and opinions wrong, tedious, and an active encapsulation of why academics who rarely set foot in the real world ought never to be allowed to influence government policy. People like you get people like....people like friends of mine killed. I didn't mean to make you feel under assault, and refer you to the (I thought rather kind and supportive) personal email I sent you when you took your marbles and stomped off went away for a month, saying I hoped you'd not had your feelings hurt by the locking of the threads you'd hogged.
I actually have taken up for you several times and noted that you seem a decent sort, just haughty and naively inexperienced in life, and quick to tell other people you have the only answer and the views of those others don't matter. That is arrogance of the least sexy sort, and will never ever get you a blowjob.
For the record, up there I was just busting your chops a bit by gently satirizing the non-stop negativity of your pedantic, nonsensical, blathering, seemingly pro-Putin, anti-US/anti-UK/anti-EU/anti-capitalistic/anti-western/anti-reality armchair mansplaining. I don't think you realize how annoying your views and the way you present them can be. If I hurt your feelings, it was not intentional, though I was messing with you a little. You need thick skin in life and especially online, and sometimes when others sense you being weak, they bite all the harder.
Also, can I take it you're not moving to Russia then?
PS: For the love of Bog, Sven, lock this thread!
Quote from: ralfy on January 29, 2023, 09:50:25 PM
Quote from: Alex on January 29, 2023, 02:19:36 PM
Guess he didn't read his own posts before. Fair enough, I mostly skipped them too.
What an absurd claim! Obviously, I read my posts and stated my argument clearly, and it's not pro-Russian. You need to work on your reading comprehension.
Hmm, how many times did I point out to you that you'd made a claim I'd said something that I hadn't? I didn't even pull you up on all of them there were so many. Pot, kettle, colour check.
I don't mean to sound rude, ralfy, but if people are constantly misinterpreting your opinions, might you think about how you can change your style of discourse so your message comes across more clearly?
Quote from: ER on January 29, 2023, 11:01:24 PM
Hey, sorry, ralfy, I'm not really attacking you personally, I don't dislike you, just find your posts and opinions wrong, tedious, and an active encapsulation of why academics who rarely set foot in the real world ought never to be allowed to influence government policy. People like you get people like....people like friends of mine killed. I didn't mean to make you feel under assault, and refer you to the (I thought rather kind and supportive) personal email I sent you when you took your marbles and stomped off went away for a month, saying I hoped you'd not had your feelings hurt by the locking of the threads you'd hogged.
I actually have taken up for you several times and noted that you seem a decent sort, just haughty and naively inexperienced in life, and quick to tell other people you have the only answer and the views of those others don't matter. That is arrogance of the least sexy sort, and will never ever get you a blowjob.
For the record, up there I was just busting your chops a bit by gently satirizing the non-stop negativity of your pedantic, nonsensical, blathering, seemingly pro-Putin, anti-US/anti-UK/anti-EU/anti-capitalistic/anti-western/anti-reality armchair mansplaining. I don't think you realize how annoying your views and the way you present them can be. If I hurt your feelings, it was not intentional, though I was messing with you a little. You need thick skin in life and especially online, and sometimes when others sense you being weak, they bite all the harder.
Also, can I take it you're not moving to Russia then?
PS: For the love of Bog, Sven, lock this thread!
See, that's what I mean? This thread is about Musk being a con man, and I countered that. But you change the topic, attack me instead, then apologize, then engage in more labeling, then raise some woke crap about mansplaining, and then ask the OP to lock the thread. LOL.
BTW, where'd you get the idea that I'm an academic? For all you know, I could have been making that up.
So, what do we get so far about Musk the "con man"? He risks his own wealth plus equity financing to take over a company that's $3 billion in the hole, and now manages to cut down its losses to $270 million in less than a year.
Advertising goes down but starting in the month before he took over and made the company private because Twitter was posting promotions alongside tweets about child porn, and those involved ex-Twitter offficials who were later fired by Musk.
After that, several birds were set free, and now they start tweeting about the same officials meeting with the feds and posting naughty bits about grooming kids. Meanwhile, operations run smoothly even after firing many overpaid employees who turns out were not critical to the same operations.
They move to Mastodon, which according to one investigation is dominated (around 60 pct of its posts) by child porn groups. Two weeks ago, the Guardian reported that 30 pct of those who switched to Mastodon have returned to Twitter due to lack of engagement. Those were the same geniuses who kept arguing that with Musk in charge Twitter would fall apart quickly.
The difference is that they can no longer silence Taibbi and others. That might explain why even the NYT is now admitting that the contents of Biden's laptop are authentic after two years of claiming otherwise.
Brilliant.
Quote from: Alex on January 30, 2023, 01:50:36 AM
Hmm, how many times did I point out to you that you'd made a claim I'd said something that I hadn't? I didn't even pull you up on all of them there were so many. Pot, kettle, colour check.
Too many times, I'm afraid, and a complete waste of my time, too.
Quote from: Rev. Powell on January 30, 2023, 09:09:04 AM
I don't mean to sound rude, ralfy, but if people are constantly misinterpreting your opinions, might you think about how you can change your style of discourse so your message comes across more clearly?
OK, this is my first post in the thread:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810)
What "style of discourse" do you think I should have used so that my opinions would not be misinterpreted?
Finally, to the OP, keep in mind that I am not derailing your thread. My first post was on-topic, but some, including a moderator, has decided to make your thread about me. With that, I'll understand if you lock it.
In any event, I might as well try to remain on-topic to avoid that. My points about Musk being a con man:
Usually a con man is someone who tries to gain the trust of others, only to cheat them. Given that, who is Musk trying to fool, and what does he expect in return? I'll let others answer that. Meanwhile, what can we say about his opponents: can they be considered con men, too?
The only proof to address are the so-called "nothing burgers" maintained by mainstream media. The problem is that the same mainstream media were admitting related points in the past. To wit,
- Collusion between media and government; ironically, left progressive outlets like the
Guardian have been raising such, and I believe that my point about ownership in my first post cements that;
- Twitter losses and the proliferation of child porn; ironically, not only did that begin before Musk took over but it was no less than Reuters that investigated on the matter;
- burying reports on vaccine problems, Biden's laptop, banning Trump and others, etc; ironically, the same mainstream media are now reporting on the same and slowly reversing what they kept denying for two years.
Meanwhile, the smears against Musk and Twitter are falling apart, as Mastodon, according to the Guardian, is now experiencing membership losses, while Twitter net losses have dropped dramatically, according to Reuters.
Take note that these reports are coming from the same mainstream media outlets that worked with ex-Twitter officials. Given such, who are the con men in this issue? Musk or his opponents?
Quote from: ralfy on January 30, 2023, 10:57:19 AM
Quote from: Alex on January 30, 2023, 01:50:36 AM
Hmm, how many times did I point out to you that you'd made a claim I'd said something that I hadn't? I didn't even pull you up on all of them there were so many. Pot, kettle, colour check.
Too many times, I'm afraid, and a complete waste of my time, too.
Yes, you constantly making incorrect claims about what I'd said was indeed a waste of your time, and not just yours. For someone who said he is against false information, you sure tried putting plenty of it out there.
Quote from: Alex on January 30, 2023, 02:01:12 PM
Yes, you constantly making incorrect claims about what I'd said was indeed a waste of your time, and not just yours. For someone who said he is against false information, you sure tried putting plenty of it out there.
My claims are found here:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693977.html#msg693977 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693977.html#msg693977)
and the evidence here:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810)
Let me know what's wrong with them and what false information is involved.
Some additional points to consider:
The Twitter $3 billion shortfall:
https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/ (https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/)
How the deal was funded:
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/how-will-elon-musk-pay-twitter-2022-10-07/ (https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/how-will-elon-musk-pay-twitter-2022-10-07/)
Why advertisers were pulling out of Twitter:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-brands-blast-twitter-ads-next-child-pornography-accounts-2022-09-28/ (https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-brands-blast-twitter-ads-next-child-pornography-accounts-2022-09-28/)
The identity of the top owners before Musk took over:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/060916/top-3-twitter-shareholders-twtr.asp (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/060916/top-3-twitter-shareholders-twtr.asp)
Note Nos. 1, 3-5, especially in light of ESG scores:
https://fortune.com/2022/11/01/elon-musk-twitter-esg/ (https://fortune.com/2022/11/01/elon-musk-twitter-esg/)
For an example, here's an example of how ESG scores affect companies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKX5PW2cZwo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKX5PW2cZwo)
Quote from: ralfy on February 02, 2023, 02:55:56 AM
Quote from: Alex on January 30, 2023, 02:01:12 PM
Yes, you constantly making incorrect claims about what I'd said was indeed a waste of your time, and not just yours. For someone who said he is against false information, you sure tried putting plenty of it out there.
My claims are found here:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693977.html#msg693977 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693977.html#msg693977)
and the evidence here:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810)
Let me know what's wrong with them and what false information is involved.
Some additional points to consider:
The Twitter $3 billion shortfall:
https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/ (https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/)
How the deal was funded:
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/how-will-elon-musk-pay-twitter-2022-10-07/ (https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/how-will-elon-musk-pay-twitter-2022-10-07/)
Why advertisers were pulling out of Twitter:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-brands-blast-twitter-ads-next-child-pornography-accounts-2022-09-28/ (https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-brands-blast-twitter-ads-next-child-pornography-accounts-2022-09-28/)
The identity of the top owners before Musk took over:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/060916/top-3-twitter-shareholders-twtr.asp (https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/060916/top-3-twitter-shareholders-twtr.asp)
Note Nos. 1, 3-5, especially in light of ESG scores:
https://fortune.com/2022/11/01/elon-musk-twitter-esg/ (https://fortune.com/2022/11/01/elon-musk-twitter-esg/)
For an example, here's an example of how ESG scores affect companies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKX5PW2cZwo (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKX5PW2cZwo)
Where did I mention your claims about Elon Musk? Yet again, you are replying to something that hasn't been said. As I said, disinformation.
Quote from: ralfy on January 30, 2023, 11:10:34 AM
Quote from: Rev. Powell on January 30, 2023, 09:09:04 AM
I don't mean to sound rude, ralfy, but if people are constantly misinterpreting your opinions, might you think about how you can change your style of discourse so your message comes across more clearly?
What "style of discourse" do you think I should have used so that my opinions would not be misinterpreted?
If you're happy with the results you're getting, no self-reflection is needed.
Quote from: Alex on February 02, 2023, 03:27:52 AM
Where did I mention your claims about Elon Musk? Yet again, you are replying to something that hasn't been said. As I said, disinformation.
Wait: you're talking about something else? Isn't this a thread about Elon Musk?
Elon Musk can suck my dick. I don't think he will, but he can! He's welcome to it! :twirl:
Quote from: Rev. Powell on February 02, 2023, 09:32:22 AM
If you're happy with the results you're getting, no self-reflection is needed.
You need to be clear about your explanation. Here's the first post:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810)
What style of discourse do you think is necessary for that, and what results do you have in mind?
You know, this is weird: almost all of my posts are on-topic, and yet you're a mod that's going off-topic. I don't get that.
Anyway, here's a summary about my points concerning Musk:
The OP argues that Musk is the most successful conman, followed by a reference to Twitter:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692248.html#msg692248 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692248.html#msg692248)
and the point that he's "creepy", except for Buffett (!):
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692249.html#msg692249 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692249.html#msg692249)
plus a reference to renewable energy efforts which failed:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692254.html#msg692254 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692254.html#msg692254)
Thus, he's a con man because he promotes things that are not important, that are less valuable than they're advertised, etc. These are actually all true (LOL), but the catch is that his opponents do the same thing.
For example, who's been pushing for the use of renewable energy? The Democrats and liberals. Who's been pushing for some "green deal" while driving around in an overpriced Tesla? AOC. The same one who was fawned over by Twitter woke execs and now being trolled by Musk (OK, but that's $8 a month, please; LOL). Who started the borrowing and spending gig that led to the rise of billionaires like not just Musk but even Buffett? Reagan and his voodoo economics.
Who's the main financier of renewable energy? Climate deniers like the Kochs and the oil industry. Who thrives on voodoo economics? Musk, with his space exploration and green energy dreams, shared by the same liberals and even conservatives who see bright times ahead thanks to game changers.
Who's gained and lost from that voodoo economics? Just Musk?
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692297.html#msg692297 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg692297.html#msg692297)
Buffett and others, too.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rethinking-reaganomics-wh_b_749839 (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rethinking-reaganomics-wh_b_749839)
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-home-capital-buffett-investment/bailout-buffett-burnishes-lender-of-last-resort-image-idUSKBN19D2IA (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-home-capital-buffett-investment/bailout-buffett-burnishes-lender-of-last-resort-image-idUSKBN19D2IA)
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffett-berkshire-hathaway-goldman-sachs-sale-billions-return-bailout-2020-5-1029212109 (https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffett-berkshire-hathaway-goldman-sachs-sale-billions-return-bailout-2020-5-1029212109)
Just in case you're now lost and think I'm jumping from point to point, just keep in mind that I'm responding to points that you and others raised in this thread. In any event, here's what ties them together:
The world that Musk the "con man" lives in is essentially based on Reaganomics, which involves increasing consumer spending coupled with increasing financial gambling. That's why his billionaire rivals are also con men. That's also why both political parties and various pinkos, like AOC and even Bernie Sanders, are part of the same economic system. In short, they're all con men or dependent on the same.
Much of the wealth that they're talking about essentially refers to numbers in hard drives, and driven primarily by speculation. That's why Musk lost $200 billion in a year while Bezos earned $10 billion in a day. That's why the five richest men in the states saw their net worth growing significantly even during a war and a pandemic, and no additional work is needed. As Buffett would put it, and quoted from the article cited above:
Quote"Every day that goes by that Goldman does not call our preferred is money in the bank," he said, referring to Goldman's having to pay Berkshire a $500 million yearly dividend until it bought back the company's shares.
"It's been pointed out that our preferred is paying us $15 a second," Buffett continued. "So as we sit here, tick, tick, tick, tick, that's $15 every tick."
His last point is fascinating:
Quote"I don't want those ticks to go away," he added. "I just love them. They go on at night when I sleep.
I'm certain the other billionaires think the same way.
It's that high level of borrowing and spending thanks to cheap credit that also allowed Twitter execs to spend lavishly on gym equipment, designer chairs, and other luxuries for their HQ:
https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/18/23560375/twitter-auction-company-assets-headquarters-bird-statue-coffee-machines (https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/18/23560375/twitter-auction-company-assets-headquarters-bird-statue-coffee-machines)
even when they were $3 billion in the hole:
https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/ (https://nypost.com/2022/12/21/elon-musk-says-he-saved-twitter-from-3-billion-shortfall/)
Quote from: RCMerchant on February 02, 2023, 08:38:20 PM
Elon Musk can suck my dick. I don't think he will, but he can! He's welcome to it! :twirl:
According to one UNDR (UN Dev't Report) the gap between rich and poor worldwide increased two hundredfold the last two centuries, and it has reached a point where only 200 people in the world have more wealth than the bottom half of the world population.
At that rate, the average Joe can laugh it off and say that Musk can s*** m* d***, but it might go the other way round.
As the WEF, which they control, put it:
https://twitter.com/wef/status/813869325635424256 (https://twitter.com/wef/status/813869325635424256)
and as cited here,
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810)
"Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better."
OK, he can toss my salad any day! :twirl:
Quote from: ralfy on February 02, 2023, 08:31:15 PM
Quote from: Alex on February 02, 2023, 03:27:52 AM
Where did I mention your claims about Elon Musk? Yet again, you are replying to something that hasn't been said. As I said, disinformation.
Wait: you're talking about something else? Isn't this a thread about Elon Musk?
I was originally referring to your earlier non-Elon Musk related comment in this thread.
Quote from: Alex on February 03, 2023, 02:43:41 AM
I was originally referring to your earlier non-Elon Musk related comment in this thread.
I did not post non-Elon Musk related comments in this thread. Here's the first post:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693810.html#msg693810)
To recap,
The richest people in the world (which includes Musk) and their opponents (which includes billionaires who are not seen as con men) are alll con men because much of their wealth is gained and even lost due to financial speculation and increasing consumer spending.
That financial speculation and consumer spending involve deregulation and cooperation from governments that need funding from the rich. The rich also own media and social platforms which inform and entertain the public, which in turn vote for one group of politicians or another.
In order to maintain that wealth, the rich need to promote policies that are in their favor. That involves the ff:
1. arguing that people need to be vaccinated through emergency authorization using products provided by for-profit drug companies owned by the rich and that profit from such, with authorization exempting them from liabilities;
2. grifting for conflict against other countries so that the defense industry, which is also funded by the rich, can profit, while corrupt politicians get their cuts through deals made with the same rich in other countries and through aid that they authorize and sent to their corrupt counterparts in other countries;
3. promote postmodern liberalism, which includes creating the impression that the same corporations owned by the rich should show greater corporate responsibility towards those affected by social injustice, which in industrialization nations is equated with political correctness and identity politics.
That's why Twitter involved overpaid wokes engaged in content management, which consisted of banning anyone who reported on gays grooming children, and pushed things like child porn. That's also why advertisers started pulling out of Twitter, as their promoted tweets existed alongside others advocating child porn and promoted by the same content managers.
That's also why Twitter was banning, shadowbanning, restricting, demonetizing, etc., users who questioned what the U.S. government and the rich were doing.
That's why when Musk took over, the same mainstream media which was owned by the rich kept pushing the agenda that Twitter will be losing money because of Musk. It turns out that the opposite is taking place, and that Twitter was losing money because they were overpaying useless employees and buying expensive products not needed for work for their offices, including expensive gym equipment and designer chairs.
They also reported that more users will move to Mastodon. It turns out that the opposite is also taking place. Someone pointed out that those who kept arguing and calling for that included con men who were running Twitter before Musk took over and have returned to Twitter to continue criticizing Musk there because they're not getting enough engagement in Mastodon.
Meanwhile, several were arguing that Musk was grifting via Tesla while politicians like AOC were buying overpriced Teslas and selling "green energy" ideas.
They also reported that Musk is losing heavily. It turns out that many tech and media companies are also losing heavily.
Finally, many of those "birds" were have been set free from their cages because the content managers are gone include Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald, Edward Snowden, Project Veritas, The Intercept, The Grayzone, Syrian Girl, Andy Ngo, and more who are now exposing shenanigans committed by the same content managers who were donating to Biden and co. and meeting with the FBI.
Not surprisingly, the mainstream media that's being attacked by this and are experiencing not only decreasing viewer and readership numbers but even decreasing trust ratings are referring to them as nothingburgers. Meanwhile, slowly they begin to acknowledge that all of these "fake" news is turning out to be true, which should not be surprising because they were doing that before.
Quote from: RCMerchant on February 02, 2023, 09:58:51 PM
OK, he can toss my salad any day! :twirl:
No need to desire what's already taking place.
Quote from: ralfy on February 03, 2023, 09:37:46 PM
I did not post non-Elon Musk related comments in this thread. Here's the first post:
In this thread and non Elon Musk related. I guess you really don't read your own posts huh?
Quote from: ralfy on January 29, 2023, 10:37:47 AM
Not a fan of Russia. More important, not a fan of disinformation. Finally, not a fan of either-or views, e.g., either you're with us, or you're pro-Russian.
Quote from: Alex on February 04, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: ralfy on February 03, 2023, 09:37:46 PM
I did not post non-Elon Musk related comments in this thread. Here's the first post:
In this thread and non Elon Musk related. I guess you really don't read your own posts huh?
Quote from: ralfy on January 29, 2023, 10:37:47 AM
Not a fan of Russia. More important, not a fan of disinformation. Finally, not a fan of either-or views, e.g., either you're with us, or you're pro-Russian.
You need to work on your reading comprehension. That was in response to this post:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693848.html#msg693848 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693848.html#msg693848)
That was followed by this attempt to derail the thread further:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693873.html#msg693873 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693873.html#msg693873)
In short, I've been trying to remain on-topic from the start, but ER and you don't seem to be interested in that.
Back to the topic thread: check out this editorial that makes fun of Musk:
EDITORIAL: Twitter How to burn $44 billion
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/editorial-twitter-burn-44-billion-233600586.html (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/editorial-twitter-burn-44-billion-233600586.html)
Here's the notable point:
QuoteTwitter, as a financial concern, was never worth $44 billion. In 2021, Twitter had $5 billion in revenue — and more than $220 billion in net losses. No wonder Twitter's management and board were so determined to force Musk to cash them out.
In short, Musk is supposed to be a "con man" but turns out to be the victim of con men who ran the company to the ground and then threatened to sue him from backing out of a deal to buy the company way about its worth!
https://www.engadget.com/twitter-sues-elon-musk-212213001.html (https://www.engadget.com/twitter-sues-elon-musk-212213001.html)
Why is the last point important? Because Musk wanted to back out of the deal because he argued that up to half of the users consisted of 'bots.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/10/tech/elon-musk-twitter-bot-analysis-cyabra/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2022/10/10/tech/elon-musk-twitter-bot-analysis-cyabra/index.html)
That's why every measure he's taken so far is intended to cut down over $3 billion in losses and the same platform abuse allowed by the magnificent geniuses who opposed him, including
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/twitter-to-stop-free-api-access-what-does-this-mean-and-will-it-affect-users-11675516987841.html (https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/twitter-to-stop-free-api-access-what-does-this-mean-and-will-it-affect-users-11675516987841.html)
What has he done so far?
- fired up to half of these geniuses who were mostly overpaid and practically useless to company operations and auctioned off millions of dollars worth of items involving waste, from gym equipment to designer chairs in the office HQ;
- realized that the real reason advertisers were backing away even before he took over isn't because the same geniuses were allowing child porn advocacy to flood the platform but because the promoted tweets were being read by large numbers of automated users;
- imposed a subscription deal and other for-pay features, such as access to APIs, because various entities were using them for abuse, etc.
Results so far have included losses decreasing dramatically from $3 billion to $270 million, and subscription models that are now also being planned by Meta and other companies.
Quote from: ralfy on February 03, 2023, 09:38:43 PM
Quote from: RCMerchant on February 02, 2023, 09:58:51 PM
OK, he can toss my salad any day! :twirl:
No need to desire what's already taking place.
You don't know what that is slang for, do you? :lookingup:
Quote from: ralfy on February 07, 2023, 04:06:09 AM
Quote from: Alex on February 04, 2023, 07:47:13 AM
Quote from: ralfy on February 03, 2023, 09:37:46 PM
I did not post non-Elon Musk related comments in this thread. Here's the first post:
In this thread and non Elon Musk related. I guess you really don't read your own posts huh?
Quote from: ralfy on January 29, 2023, 10:37:47 AM
Not a fan of Russia. More important, not a fan of disinformation. Finally, not a fan of either-or views, e.g., either you're with us, or you're pro-Russian.
You need to work on your reading comprehension. That was in response to this post:
http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693848.html#msg693848 (http://www.badmovies.org/forum/index.php/topic,158014.msg693848.html#msg693848)
I am aware it was a response to that. I am also aware it was in this thread and that it was off-topic, so no need to work on my reading comprehension. Yours however...
Quote from: RCMerchant on February 07, 2023, 06:07:48 AM
You don't know what that is slang for, do you? :lookingup:
I know what it means, but it's the other way round. I'll let you figure out why.
Quote from: Alex on February 07, 2023, 07:25:14 AM
I am aware it was a response to that. I am also aware it was in this thread and that it was off-topic, so no need to work on my reading comprehension. Yours however...
Apparently, not only do you need to work on your reading comprehension, you need to work on basic critical thinking, too. Here's what happened:
ER goes off-topic, and starts engaging in personal attacks against me.
You join ER.
I respond because I need to defend myself, but I try to remain on-topic throughout because I don't want the OP to lock this thread because of that.
You read that response, and then criticize me for going off-topic.
So, you side with ER who goes off-topic, and then attack me for doing the same. Get it, now?
So, let's go back to the topic thread: what do you think of the point about the former owners and employees of Twitter sinking it into a $3 billion-hole, threatening Musk for backing off from a deal involving a company that isn't worth $44 billion because of the previous owners' shenanigans (which includes allowing child porn advocates to post tweets about that alongside advertisers who were very much against it, and allowing 'bots to populate much of the platform, going against what advertisers assume is populated by mostly potential customers), and then critics attacking him after, e.g., claiming that he will cause failure for a company that was failing even before he bought it, even though he managed at great costs to cut down losses from $3 billion to $270 million several months later?
Quote from: ralfy on February 07, 2023, 10:42:06 PM
Quote from: Alex on February 07, 2023, 07:25:14 AM
I am aware it was a response to that. I am also aware it was in this thread and that it was off-topic, so no need to work on my reading comprehension. Yours however...
Apparently, not only do you need to work on your reading comprehension, you need to work on basic critical thinking, too. Here's what happened:
I am aware and understand everything going on in the thread. Both my reading comprehension and critical thinking skills are fine. None of this changes that you said you hadn't gone off topic and I pointed out that you had.
When I start constantly telling you things you've said that you haven't then I'd worry about my comprehension. You, know like the thing you kept on doing in a previous thread. Until then I am pretty sure I am fine. I do think it's funny that you are insisting that you haven't posted off-topic while all of this is in fact, off-topic.
Quote from: Alex on February 08, 2023, 01:57:24 AM
I am aware and understand everything going on in the thread. Both my reading comprehension and critical thinking skills are fine. None of this changes that you said you hadn't gone off topic and I pointed out that you had.
When I start constantly telling you things you've said that you haven't then I'd worry about my comprehension. You, know like the thing you kept on doing in a previous thread. Until then I am pretty sure I am fine. I do think it's funny that you are insisting that you haven't posted off-topic while all of this is in fact, off-topic.
What is wrong with you? ER goes off-topic by attacking me personally, and you join in. I defend myself, and you accuse me of going off-topic. I've been trying to remain on-topic, and you're still talking about me!
Should I still bother asking you about Musk?
I am merely pointing out that your assertation that you hadn't posted anything off-topic was incorrect. There was nothing more to it than that. You could ask me about Musk if you wanted, but I've already given my view on him in this thread. It wouldn't really matter either way though. I mean look what happened when I actually agreed with you about something previously.
So apparently Musck just fired one of his top engineers. Musk asked why his tweets had been getting less views lately and it was pointed out that the public simply wasn't as interested in him as it used to be.
Apparently that was enough for Musk to fire the guy on the spot.
Quote from: Alex on February 10, 2023, 06:52:20 AM
I am merely pointing out that your assertation that you hadn't posted anything off-topic was incorrect. There was nothing more to it than that. You could ask me about Musk if you wanted, but I've already given my view on him in this thread. It wouldn't really matter either way though. I mean look what happened when I actually agreed with you about something previously.
You joined ER in going off-topic by personally attacking me. Did you expect me to keep quiet about that?
BTW, about asking you about Musk, what do you think I've been doing during this discussion?
So, let's see if you are going to go on-topic:
1. It turns out that contrary to claims that he would be running the company to the ground, it turns out that it was being run to the ground before he took over. If any, he actually saved the company by decreasing losses by over 90 pct: from $3 billion to $270 million.
2. Contrary to claims that advertisers would be turned away given his ownership, it turns out that they were moving away before he took over because their ads were being shown alongside tweets advocating child porn and allowed by content managers.
3. Contrary to claims that operations would fall apart after he fired many of those content managers, it turned out that not only did it continue, it turns out that overpaid employees (something like $167K a year) was the main reason why the company was being bled try. Add to that wasteful spending, like gym equipment and designer chairs, which Musk also had to auction off to cut down losses.
4. Contrary to claims that most would move to Mastodon, it turns out that only a few move, and more of those are returning to Twitter due to lack of engagement. To attack Musk. In his own platform. To which he doesn't care, but that'll be $8 for the blue check, plox. LOL. (It's from a wisecrack he issued to Tesla customer AOC.)
5. Contrary to claims that he's some sort of con man, about to finish off Twitter, one editorial unwittingly admitted that he wanted to back out because the whole platform was populated by 'bots, which might have been the other reason why advertisers were pulling out. The ones who were responsible for that and for running the company to the ground threated to sue him if he did, which implied that they were desperate to cash out due to losses that they caused.
Makes you wonder who are real con men are.
Quote from: chainsaw midget on February 10, 2023, 11:23:44 AM
So apparently Musck just fired one of his top engineers. Musk asked why his tweets had been getting less views lately and it was pointed out that the public simply wasn't as interested in him as it used to be.
Apparently that was enough for Musk to fire the guy on the spot.
Reminds me of what happened before that, when one employee tweeted to Musk and questioned the latter's policies publicly, and when Musk responded, got even angrier because Musk should have replied in private.
Good grief.
LOL
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1625248292006424576
Quote from: ralfy on February 13, 2023, 10:52:05 PM
LOL
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1625248292006424576
:bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle:
Quote from: ralfy on February 11, 2023, 09:00:16 PM
Quote from: Alex on February 10, 2023, 06:52:20 AM
I am merely pointing out that your assertation that you hadn't posted anything off-topic was incorrect. There was nothing more to it than that. You could ask me about Musk if you wanted, but I've already given my view on him in this thread. It wouldn't really matter either way though. I mean look what happened when I actually agreed with you about something previously.
You joined ER in going off-topic by personally attacking me. Did you expect me to keep quiet about that?
BTW, about asking you about Musk, what do you think I've been doing during this discussion?
I don't really care if you defend yourself or not. This is all just a consequence of you repeatedly trying to tell me I'd said something different from what I had. If you don't like this, then you shouldn't have done it. Simple.
As I said I've given my opinion on him. Back when I used to have more spare time, I'd have looked into his background, how he made his money and so forth. I can say that in the few times I've seen him talking he has the tells of a practised and comfortable liar, but no different than I'd see from anyone else in a similar position (senior businessmen, politicians and journalists tend to have the same reactions) and I wouldn't read too much into that by itself. His body language screams attention seeking, again nothing out of the ordinary, although his seems to tend toward wanting notoriety. Watch interviews with him and watch the eyes. How they move tells you a lot. If they move up and to the right, the chances are you are hearing a lie (not always totally foolproof, but it is one of those things that can give you hints on where to dig when you are getting information from someone). If you have the time to sit and watch a lot of footage, you can always measure the blink rate as a stress indicator associated with someone lying or running a con. Another good way of picking out con men is simply to run claims they make through a few fact-checkers...
Quote from: Alex on February 14, 2023, 08:03:25 AM
I don't really care if you defend yourself or not. This is all just a consequence of you repeatedly trying to tell me I'd said something different from what I had. If you don't like this, then you shouldn't have done it. Simple.
As I said I've given my opinion on him. Back when I used to have more spare time, I'd have looked into his background, how he made his money and so forth. I can say that in the few times I've seen him talking he has the tells of a practised and comfortable liar, but no different than I'd see from anyone else in a similar position (senior businessmen, politicians and journalists tend to have the same reactions) and I wouldn't read too much into that by itself. His body language screams attention seeking, again nothing out of the ordinary, although his seems to tend toward wanting notoriety. Watch interviews with him and watch the eyes. How they move tells you a lot. If they move up and to the right, the chances are you are hearing a lie (not always totally foolproof, but it is one of those things that can give you hints on where to dig when you are getting information from someone). If you have the time to sit and watch a lot of footage, you can always measure the blink rate as a stress indicator associated with someone lying or running a con. Another good way of picking out con men is simply to run claims they make through a few fact-checkers...
In terms of talking, he reminds me of his critics. For example,
https://twitter.com/alx/status/1625734305447088128 (https://twitter.com/alx/status/1625734305447088128)
What interests me, though, is the manner by which he is using their own tools against them; in this case, a platform that they were using to manipulate the populace.
They've actually been doing that for some time using both mainstream and social media, but now they are being outed by their own peers:
https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.php (https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.php)
In short, the outlets that are supposed to be working in the best interest of the people were not, and social media platforms were doing similar.
What makes the situation even more compelling is that Musk supports Biden and works readily with the likes of Murdoch:
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1624986889391407106 (https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1624986889391407106)
which means that if he's a con man, then he's working in favor of those who refer to him as such. Oh, the irony!
Ralph- is their a happy day in your life? :question:
Quote from: RCMerchant on February 15, 2023, 06:37:43 AM
Ralph- is their a happy day in your life? :question:
Of course!
https://twitter.com/ChickThang/status/1625435933251338241
However,
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1625368108461613057
Kidding aside,
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1624660886572126209
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1626705448954114060
Taibbi's back:
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1627098945359867904
TWITTER FILES #16
Comic Interlude: A Media Experiment
"Instagram and Facebook to get paid-for verification"
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64697560 (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64697560)
QuoteMeta Verified will cost $11.99 (£9.96) a month on web, or $14.99 for iPhone users.
...
The move comes after Elon Musk, owner of Twitter, implemented the premium Twitter Blue subscription in November 2022.
Wat
"Elon Musk is the richest person in the world again"
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/27/tech/elon-musk-richest-man-again/index.html (https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/27/tech/elon-musk-richest-man-again/index.html)