First of all, for the x-th time, Musk wanted to get the price down, not to back out. So he was wrong about that, too. Aside from that, we are all wrong sometimes (well, not me, but y'all). The particular issue with Minor is that he is especially pompous about it, while being especially wrong. He is the Swaggy-P of the BBS.
(don't have any bone in this, but...) Musk didn't sue Twitter. Twitter sued Musk after he tried to back out of the contract. Musk wanted to walk away after the tech market crash, along with Twitter's value.
Fair, my mistake. See, even I am wrong sometimes (very rarely ). Anyway - he wanted to get the price down - he clearly wanted Twitter, and he ended up owning Twitter. At the time, he overpaid, but whether he overpaid in the longer term depends on what he wants to get out of it and what he makes of it. Minor's assertion was that he never actually wanted Twitter, and that was wrong from the start.
He overpaid because he was going to lose the lawsuit. He didn't want Twitter. He wanted to manipulate the market, like he has done repeatedly. See dogecoin. He thought he could get out of it. He got his ass sued. He cut his losses and bought it because he would have been forced to buy it via lawsuit. Plus his lawyer fees, Twitter lawyer fees, damages, etc.
If he didn't want Twitter, he wouldn't have made an offer in the first place. That's just a non-sensical argument, and it was proven wrong afterwards.
I think the real motivation to make his Tweets mandatory to see is more for the ability to manipulate the market like dogecoin or Tesla stock and less so his shitty memes.
Its good you recognize the short comings of peoples predictions. I made bad calls all the time. If I could just average 51%, I would be very wealthy. I feel its @Major who holds the grudges. He is quick to dig up someones past thoughts (in bulk) and painstakingly take them out of context or twist the words to suit his narrative. Ive said this before, Major is a sharp enough guy however he very often comes across in a demeaning manner and freely insults peoples intelligence. Sometimes I do that and I am trying to be better about that. However he is very difficult to converse with as he is very binary in his thinking, as many others here. He completely hedged the Twitter drama from start to finish, sitting up on his high horse quick to tell anyone "i told you so" when any one of his 10 predictions came to pass. He recently did the same thing with DeSantis/Disney/Reedy Creek. Sometimes I wonder if he has ever negotiated in his life.
But how and why he owns it is due to Musk's poor evaluation of the market and literally signing away his "due diligence". 4D chess.
Likewise some posters get blinded by hero worship so they can't view reality appropriately. Remember when this was all about "free speech" and not the ego of a man? Baffling folks actually believed that. Bottomline, Elon most certainly didn't want to pay $44 billion for Twitter once the market shifted but had to due to his own mistakes. He was already Twitter's largest shareholder (at an inflated price) by the time he initiated the purchase in 4/22.
That all still doesn't mean he didn't want Twitter. The market changed and he didn't lawyer up before signing the agreement. You could call it buyer's remorse, but he chose Twitter rather than getting wrapped up in a multiyear multibillion dollar lawsuit from an absolute refusal. Even if you argue he didn't want Twitter "at 44B", it is neither proven nor factual that he was "forced to pay for it" at 44B. I'm fully willing to admit relishing in schadenfreude over Elon's mistakes. Call me romantic for holding Victorian values of noble aristocracy upon billionaires. Thought Elon was pure, but he turned into Lindsay Lohan before our very eyes...
Not necessarily the true or sole intention of Elon, but certainly from the perspective of conservatives and people who are not in line with official Government Covid policies, they feel like they have more free speech than they used to have.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/15/nyregion/nj-ap-african-american-studies-high-schools.html Good to see some states not trying to eliminate African American studies.
Covid is over dude. The concept of free speech has been violated more by nationalists who want a fabalized version of their history. Usually that's the side that oppressed speech.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/de...t-floridians-big-tech-surveillance-censorship Gov. DeSantis announces Digital Bill of Rights to protect Floridians from Big Tech surveillance, censorship DeSantis said the proposal will block the collection of real-time information about a user, including GPS location and biometric data Gov. Ron DeSantis announced on Wednesday new digital rights that the state government will recognize to better protect Floridians against Big Tech surveillance and censorship. The new "Digital Bill of Rights" will enshrine rights for those who use certain online platforms to better "protect Floridians from Big Tech harm and Big Tech overreaches," DeSantis said during a press conference in West Palm Beach. "We want to protect your right as a Floridian to have private, in-person conversations without Big Tech surveilling you," DeSantis said at an event on Wednesday. "If you want to consent to let them have this information so they can fashion advertising based off of it, it’s your right to consent to do so but it should only be if you consent." "We are also going to protect the right to participate in online platforms without unfair censorship," the Republican governor continued. "We want free speech." "We want to protect the right to know how these internet search engines are manipulating search results [and have] transparency in terms of what they’re doing so you can evaluate if that’s a search engine that you want to use or maybe you want to take your business elsewhere." "We want the right to protect all of your personal on the largest and most common platforms," he continued, mentioning Google and Facebook by name. "They take that data and make a fortune. They should get authorization from you before they are able to monetize that or use it in any way." "And, finally, the Digital Bill of Rights aims to protect children from various online harms and, as we that’s a huge issue," DeSantis said, drawing applause from the crowd. The Sunshine State leader further broke down each point, specifying that Florida's government would no longer allow tech companies to collect information from personal conversations — as many devices randomly collect information after being prompted by certain words and phrases. DeSantis also explained the difference between the federal government listening in on these devices via wiretap, which legally requires a court warrant to do so, but "for private companies, if you use their product they can just do it." "So, we’re going to put in a roadblock that says they can’t do that without your expressed authorization," he added. "We’re also going to prohibit the unauthorized data collection and retention of real-time information about a user through cell phones such as GPS location, biometric data and other personally identified information," the governor said. DeSantis noted that the new Digital Bill of Rights comes amid a larger push by his administration against Big Tech and the control they have to censor users and control the content they promote, or the content they see on their platforms. DeSantis reminded the crowd that Florida currently has legislation pending in the courts that would allow consumers to take action against tech companies that unfairly discriminate. "A couple of years ago, we were the first state to take the lead to protect Floridians against Big Tech censorship and we passed legislation that did a couple of things," he said. "We knew there would be litigation and would have to be decided by the Supreme Court but we decided some provisions of law that said these tech platforms and these social media companies are not — by their own admission — publishers." The Florida governor said companies like Facebook and Twitter claim to be public forums but operate heavy-handedly to censor certain political views or accounts of conservative figures. "They are not publishers, because if they were publishers, they would not get Section 230 liability from lawsuits so they hide under Section 230, saying they are not publishers, saying they are open forums, and yet, as we know with what has come out without a shadow of a doubt they are not functioning truly as open platforms," he continued. "They have terms and conditions and they have certain rules, but those rules are applied with a thumb on the scale against the people they disagree with politically. So you have seen people who have conservative views marginalized entirely, banned, de-platformed, shadowbanned and all these different things," the Republican said. This legislation is pending in the courts and is awaiting consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court. "If you’re an open platform, you can set whatever rules you want, but if you’re setting rules and not enforcing them equally, based on viewpoint, you are committing fraud on the public and there should be a way for people to hold you accountable." DeSantis further summarized the Digital Bill of Rights in a post on Twitter. "Floridians have the right to: Private conversations without surveillance by Big Tech, participate online without unfair censorship, see internet search engines manipulation, control personal data, [and] protect children from online harms," he wrote after the press conference. DeSantis has served as Florida’s 46th governor since he was elected in 2019. He is widely supported but has not yet said one way or the other if he intends to run for the White House in 2024. He added: "So, what we have said is in the state of Florida we have consumer protection and unfair trade practice laws. If you are advertising as being an open platform, you are taking that liability that says you are not a publisher, you’re monetizing by taking people’s data who join your services and then if you turn around and de-platform someone based on viewpoint, you’re committing a fraud on the consumer. So, we wanted the Floridians who have been affected to be able to bring consumer fraud actions against Big Tech. We also empowered the attorney general of Florida to be able to police Big Tech if they were doing this. We also have protections for political candidates so they could not de-platform a political candidate." ------------- Leftist D&D friends: What do you think about this "Digital Bill of Rights" initiative by your favourite governor? Are you or is this
