Elon goes to war
-
Quote:
Don't read it if you are even slightly down. It takes a lot of mental strength to handle this story. It is black.
I had the same with Count of Monte Cristo. People see the movie and think it's an uplifting revenge story. It's not. The full story by Dumas is bleak. I feel it nearly sent me into a depression. It's a story about revenge allright. But in the old-testamental sense: I will not only destroy you, but I will destroy everything in your life: your reputation, your business, your children, your children's children, and when everyone is dead and everything has turned to ashes you will finally know why and weep for the destruction of everything good in your life. I kid you not it affected me really bad and took time to get out of it.
Bruno van Dooren wrote:
It's a story about revenge allright. But in the old-testamental sense:
Have you seen "old Boy?" (the original corean version, not the late try of blockbuster) It is a bit easier to handle but it still forced a " :omg: :wtf: :~" of mine when I saw it.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
My take is this is simply hilarious. Watching so-called liberals fall all over themselves predicting the end of civilization because free speech is back is amusing to say the very least. Wait until some sideways talking Lib gets cutoff from Twitter. Liberal heads exploding across the USA in 3.2... BTW, I am NOT a Twitter-er.
James G 2021 wrote:
because free speech is back
Free speech ends, when law limits are crossed. (And yes, I know that law limits change a lot depending on where you are and what you say, but the definition still is valid, other aspects would require another kind of discussion). If you still want to say it... do it, I don't care, just accept the consequences when you cross the line. The positive side of not having a moderation team and account bans and all those "free speech" extremist fans... their comments remain longer online so eventually the authors can be found and / or other possible connections to illegal activities can be traced down.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
First, what's true? Hunter Bidens Laptop? The FBI (That would be our government). Told Social Media Companies to HIDE the story, bury the story, etc. And they did. And they shut down the accounts that pushed a TRUE story. That's Proof #1. Proof 2 is the NEW revelation, that these companies have been PAID by our government, to give access (portals), so they can indicate WHO should have their speech silenced. This has come out in a few lawsuits... NOT covered by the mainstream media. Include Dr. Shiva who showed that there were special contacts his LOCAL officials had, that used to have his reach REDUCED by Twitter, etc. And I hope it all gets exposed. But go back and Read the old Trump Tweets. The media said he called for violence. NEVER happened. The tweets are visible again. And Joe Biden himself said they would work with these companies to silence voices... funny how many tech companies, seem to be BIG GOVT supporters... Many of them have contracts to give access... But you keep on believing OUR government doesn't silence people by contacting social media companies. [Facebook Has a Portal for Government Officials to Request Content Be Suppressed: Report](https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-has-portal-government-officials-to-request-content-be-suppressed-2022-11)
I am not supporting nor against your claims. I am just objectivelly telling you (both of you), you are really close to the limits of the lounge content guidelines. Please stop before it ends in a soapbox thread and CP Staff has to jump in and block it.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
He mus have had very bad lawyers. At 44 billion, his lawyers should have told him not to by this crock of vaporware...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
You assume he'd've listened to them when it could have mattered. Elon :elephant:ed himself, because early on when he wanted the deal and Twitter's management was opposed he forced the issue by offering well over the current market price and agreed to waive all due diligence - which otherwise would have allowed him opportunities to find an excuse to say no and make it stick.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius
-
dandy72 wrote:
I like war movies, especially anything that hasn't been produced in the last 20+ years.
Note that Johnny Got His Gun has been described as the most ANTI-war movie ever.
Makes sense. A "war movie" can be anti-war, and a large portion of them do exactly that. When I said I liked war movies, I wasn't suggesting I like those that glorify it. The fact that I said I particularly liked those made more than 20 years ago probably has something to do with that also...
-
Gerry Schmitz wrote:
The fact that the "Twitter app" is now "Musk's app", is a good enough reason to stay away from it. (IMO).
What has he done that you have this attitude? Space-X, Tesla, Starlink, Boring? I personally think Space-X is elephanting amazing and on that alone I admire the guy. Has he done dickish business moves over the years - yeah. Pretty much de rigueur for the billionaire class. I don't stop using Apple products because Jobs was an ass, I don't stop using Windows because Gates use monopolistic business tactics. What is about this guy that drives everyone crazy? Is it simply his politics? :confused:
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
DRHuff wrote:
What is about this guy that drives everyone crazy? Is it simply his politics?
The vast majority of people are sheep that are swayed by the media. They'll deny it. They'll get angry. But, they're still sheep that think what the media tells them to think.
Jeremy Falcon
-
DRHuff wrote:
What is about this guy that drives everyone crazy? Is it simply his politics?
I don't think Gates or Jobs fired dozens of people for using an internal account that was specifically set up to encourage free speech. I don't think Gates or Jobs claimed that they could save children trapped in a cave with rising water using robots. And then insulting the leader of the team that would in fact go on to rescue those children. Now Jobs probably did make promised claims for new products that never showed up. But perhaps not as much. The only 'politics' that I have seen from Musk that matter are his attempts to rationalize his behavior for what is obviously his personal agenda by claiming that it is the fault of others because of their politics.
I hesitate to write this because I already know your angst too well...
jschell wrote:
I don't think Gates or Jobs fired dozens of people for using an internal account that was specifically set up to encourage free speech.
Clearly you've never ready any documentaries about Jobs or studied anything about business. But that's ok, in this hateful world we live in now, blindly believing the media is all we need to go on.
jschell wrote:
I don't think Gates or Jobs claimed that they could save children trapped in a cave with rising water using robots. And then insulting the leader of the team that would in fact go on to rescue those children.
I don't think you ever ready anything at all about Jobs or Gates and just how much of an arsehole both of them were. But as long as the media didn't command you to think that way, I guess the truth doesn't matter.
jschell wrote:
The only 'politics' that I have seen from Musk that matter are his attempts to rationalize his behavior for what is obviously his personal agenda by claiming that it is the fault of others because of their politics.
Which could be said of every last human on the planet. At least be fair in your hate. You won't be. You'll argue. But whatever... This is the part where I regret replying to you now.
Jeremy Falcon
-
DRHuff wrote:
What has he done that you have this attitude? ... Has he done dickish business moves over the years - yeah. Pretty much de rigueur for the billionaire class.
And there you have answered your own question. Why the fuck would we want to be ruled by a**holes? I sure don't.
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++ | Wordle solver
And yet you are...
Jeremy Falcon
-
Society is being rubber-necked by Elon's train wreck with mental illness; I can't help but wish him some intervention, seeing him implode does not fill me with joy.
I'll bet good money he's smarter than you.
Jeremy Falcon
-
He seems quite determined to self-destruct This is more-of-the same, but IMO at a new levels
"If we don't change direction, we'll end up where we're going"
People are fickle sheep. How quickly they hate then the media that controls their minds tells them to.
Jeremy Falcon
-
And yet you are...
Jeremy Falcon
Sadly, yes. Many of us are trying to change that. Wish us well...
Our Forgotten Astronomy | Object Oriented Programming with C++ | Wordle solver
-
I hesitate to write this because I already know your angst too well...
jschell wrote:
I don't think Gates or Jobs fired dozens of people for using an internal account that was specifically set up to encourage free speech.
Clearly you've never ready any documentaries about Jobs or studied anything about business. But that's ok, in this hateful world we live in now, blindly believing the media is all we need to go on.
jschell wrote:
I don't think Gates or Jobs claimed that they could save children trapped in a cave with rising water using robots. And then insulting the leader of the team that would in fact go on to rescue those children.
I don't think you ever ready anything at all about Jobs or Gates and just how much of an arsehole both of them were. But as long as the media didn't command you to think that way, I guess the truth doesn't matter.
jschell wrote:
The only 'politics' that I have seen from Musk that matter are his attempts to rationalize his behavior for what is obviously his personal agenda by claiming that it is the fault of others because of their politics.
Which could be said of every last human on the planet. At least be fair in your hate. You won't be. You'll argue. But whatever... This is the part where I regret replying to you now.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Clearly you've never ready any documentaries about Jobs or studied anything about business
Your assumption is incorrect. He was an a**hole. But at the time he wasn't bringing that to the public table.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I don't think you ever ready anything at all about Jobs or Gates and just how much of an a***hole both of them were.
Not sure what that means. I definitely have read and seen reports about Jobs and the work environment he created. You are correct I have not seen the same about Gates. But what I did read suggested perhaps at least some incompetence. However neither are comparable to what Musk is doing.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Which could be said of every last human on the planet.
Based on that comment of course then presumably you would claim that no one ever is responsible for their personal or public behavior? Or perhaps that no one could be compared to another because they are all the same?
-
jschell wrote:
they did it repeatedly and ignored the warnings that twitter sent to them.
So? Twitter and Facebook have already admitted that the US DOJ pressured them to advance the official government narratives that COVID did not come from a Chinese lab, masks and social distancing were very effective, lockdowns were essential and safe, children would not be harmed by missing in-person instruction and that Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation. Pretty much every one of these narratives has proven to be false yet anyone (including scientists, doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers, etc...) who questioned any of these narratives and didn't cow to the US DOJ / Twitter insane censorship was kicked off. Nobody should be OK with this scenario. Nobody!
-
fgs1963 wrote:
Twitter and Facebook have already admitted that the US DOJ...
Even if true none of what you said has anything to do with what I said.
-
Sure it does. When social media (directed by the government and/or political parties) censor public discourse in the US the public will rebel. As they should...
fgs1963 wrote:
censor public discourse in the US
Twitter is not "public discourse". It is a company. If someone wants to carry a sign up and down on a public sidewalk then they can. But they don't get to do the same thing inside a store because the store is a company. The company is free to decide what and who has access the store. That isn't new. Read up on how Hearst used his newspapers.
-
fgs1963 wrote:
censor public discourse in the US
Twitter is not "public discourse". It is a company. If someone wants to carry a sign up and down on a public sidewalk then they can. But they don't get to do the same thing inside a store because the store is a company. The company is free to decide what and who has access the store. That isn't new. Read up on how Hearst used his newspapers.
jschell wrote:
Twitter is not "public discourse". It is a company.
You're wrong for 3 reasons: First, and most importantly, as you see in the "Twitter Files" being released over the last few weeks and as I mentioned in my post - the US government (DOJ and others), the DNC and the Biden campaign all had their hands in the process of Twitter's censorship. It wasn't just a company... Second, due to the scope and ubiquity of modern social media it can easily be argued that their moderation cannot be political in nature. Imagine if cell phone systems (AT&T, Verizon, etc...) decided they would only carry traffic for specific political parties or refused service to specific candidates. Whether you like it or not there are rules in place to stop this and Twitter is not above those rules. Lastly, all I said was that "people will rebel". Surely you don't think Twitter is some kind of official institution that the general public MUST accept and use... right? We're still allowed to make our own choices... right?
-
jschell wrote:
Twitter is not "public discourse". It is a company.
You're wrong for 3 reasons: First, and most importantly, as you see in the "Twitter Files" being released over the last few weeks and as I mentioned in my post - the US government (DOJ and others), the DNC and the Biden campaign all had their hands in the process of Twitter's censorship. It wasn't just a company... Second, due to the scope and ubiquity of modern social media it can easily be argued that their moderation cannot be political in nature. Imagine if cell phone systems (AT&T, Verizon, etc...) decided they would only carry traffic for specific political parties or refused service to specific candidates. Whether you like it or not there are rules in place to stop this and Twitter is not above those rules. Lastly, all I said was that "people will rebel". Surely you don't think Twitter is some kind of official institution that the general public MUST accept and use... right? We're still allowed to make our own choices... right?
fgs1963 wrote:
First, and most importantly, as you see in the "Twitter Files"
Sigh...and a retail store must a have business license. And they cannot advertise graphic porn in the window even if they want to. And there are many other things they must follow as well.
fgs1963 wrote:
Second, due to the scope and ubiquity of modern social media it can easily be argued that their moderation cannot be political in nature
You can desire that. But it is not part of the US Constitution. There is however a way to modify the Constitution so get busy if you feel that is viable. And it still ignores that my original comment that they were banned after ignoring the policies of the company whose service they were using.
fgs1963 wrote:
Lastly, all I said was that "people will rebel"
No you said the following
censor public discourse in the US the public will rebel.
And as I said and continue to say it is not "public".