5 ms·

Imo, he's taking responsibility. If as an individual you can deploy the most money in the world, what do you do with it? Twitter became a negative-sum game of

Imo, he's taking responsibility. If as an individual you can deploy the most money in the world, what do you do with it? Twitter became a negative-sum game of people competing to debase themselves in service of narrative in exchange for nothing but the approval of others who had already done the same. Unlocking that negative cycle can release a lot of captive value for everyone. The best way to do that is to connect great minds and scale them based on their revealed desires. I remember Musk offered to solve world hunger but the NGO people who said they could do it flaked when (pen in hand) he offered to cut them a cheque. The next best thing is to provide a platform for discourse so that smart people indexed on truth and reality can thrive and wield influence. The opportunity is that Twitter just isn't funny, and as a signal of alignment to truth, that's a pretty honest sign it has become oppressive and that it has become a thing that most people just do not want. The controversial censorship on Twitter has been against humour, which makes Musk's play such an obvious win. As an activist target, Twitter has spent almost a decade contorting itself and spending a lot of effort to make itself suck, and it just needs to suck slightly less to be a benefit to humanity. Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US.

shmageggy 5y ago
> I remember Musk offered to solve world hunger but the NGO people who said they could do it flaked when (pen in hand) he offered to cut them a cheque. I hadn't heard about this, but looking it up now, it seems that your account isn't accurate. According to these articles he asked the UN to detail how they would spend the money and they did. https://mashable.com/article/elon-musk-solve-world-hunger https://mashable.com/article/elon-musk-solve-world-hunger https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donation-weeks-after-asking-un-world-hunger/ https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donatio...
- motohagiography 5y ago
  According to the mashable link, the world food program people just said, "it's complicated, let's meet," to shift responsibility, and then said went around saying he didn't follow through.
  - compiler-guy 5y ago
    It is complicated and although money can help, many of the problems have to do with corruption and graft, rather than a lack of resources. The United States alone gives 3.7 billion dollars a year in aid [1]. And the sum total of world aid is much greater. But if the dictators and juntas on the ground aren’t willing to help, and if the logistics companies and war lords redirect it to their friends, more money doesn’t really help. And nor does a clever plan from the UN, which is already trying to avoid the grifters, but also has its share of internal corruption. 1. https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/faq#:~:text=In%20fiscal%20year%202018%2C%20USAID,cash%20transfers%20and%20food%20vouchers https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/faq#:~:text=In%20fisca....
- goodluckchuck 5y ago
  > U.N. World Food Program executive director David Beasley did respond to Musk's original tweet last month, clarifying that "$6B will not solve world hunger..."
memish 5y ago
Not long before Elon bought a 9% stake, one of the largest satire accounts on twitter was suspended for a joke. They are literally censoring humor and that may have been the final straw. Also worth noting that he was one of the ACLU's biggest donors when they were still focused on protecting free speech and liberty.
- alphabettsy 5y ago
  They still do.
  - parineum 5y ago
    They protect free speech they agree with.
- colordrops 5y ago
  My account got banned for an obvious joke. I feel this personally.
  - darkwater 5y ago
    Mind to share the joke here?
    - colordrops 5y ago
      Would prefer not to reveal my identity - it could be searched. I can paraphrase though. It was a thread a couple years ago on how nazis can be punched, but it was spreading to anyone who was perceived as right wing, such as Andy Ngo, with the excuse that they are all nazis. Being a pacifist, I replied with something sarcastic along the lines of "As long as we are punching nazis, why don't we also punch the taliban, ISIS, MS13, Zionists, north koreans, evangelicals, trump supporters, and puppies?" Obviously not serious, but I was banned for promoting violence. Ironic considering the thread I was replying to was all about unironic support of real world violence. My joke wasn't a good one, but it was a joke.
- 5y ago
oldstrangers 5y ago
"Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US." Yikes. A more realistic take: this is a petty reaction on par with Peter Thiel suing Gawker into oblivion. Musk doesn't really care about Twitter's role as a tool for good, he cares about his ego.
- ecf 5y ago
  Now you understand why Musk followers are a cult.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 5y ago
    It's cultish when people say it's good just because they want to think it's good. It's cultish when people say it's bad just because they want to think it's bad. When the person you're responding to makes a strong assertion about a person's intentions[1] and you respond suggesting that anybody who might not think this way is part of a cult, it comes off very much that you want the assertion to be true. Unless your belief is truly, "Anybody who might possibly agree with {{some specific person}} is part of a cult," then this comment does not do your thoughts justice. There's more to be said and you did not bother to say it. [1] > Musk doesn't really care about Twitter's role as a tool for good, he cares about his ego.
    - oldstrangers 5y ago
      Just to help your reading comprehension, he's suggesting that anyone who says stuff like "Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US" might have drank too much of the Kool-Aid. Hope that helps your argument.
      - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 5y ago
        Ah, yeah, thanks!
- nonameking2026 5y ago
  Why does Musk have some go reaction with twitter that would call for this ?
wwweston 5y ago
> Twitter became a negative-sum game of people competing to debase themselves in service of narrative in exchange for nothing but the approval of others who had already done the same. I'm trying to imagine this statement actually both having meaning and corresponding to reality and failing.
sohdas 5y ago
> Twitter became a negative-sum game of people competing to debase themselves in service of narrative in exchange for nothing but the approval of others who had already done the same. Unlocking that negative cycle can release a lot of captive value for everyone. The best way to do that is to connect great minds and scale them based on their revealed desires. What are you even saying here?
- oldstrangers 5y ago
  He's trying to intellectualize his disapproval of "cancel culture" I imagine.
hackernewds 5y ago
You posit that if Twitter pursued financial goals like Facebook it would be a better platform. Hard disagree.
newbamboo 5y ago
This is obviously the right take. But people won’t hear it. Which further underscores why this is good for society, not just the platform.
nobody9999 5y ago
>Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US. That seems unlikely. USD$43 billion could buy ~1,150,000 homes[0], which is double the number of homeless people in the US[1]. Getting a 1/2 million people into stable living situations could boost the economy by adding a couple hundred thousand to the work force (it's really hard to hold a decent job if you have no place to store your stuff or take a shower), with the median income for all workers over the age of 15 at ~USD40,000 [2] would add ~US$8,000,000,000 to the economy, as well as reducing dependence on public programs to help support them. Of course, buying whole houses for half a million people isn't actually necessary. A reasonably sized apartment (based on household size) for each set of homeless folks would cost significantly less than that. What's more, the children who could be helped by something like this are more likely to have good school experiences and improve their education -- boosting their lifetime earnings potential as well. Not to mention the economic boosts to local communities hit hard by homelessness. So, no. Buying Twitter isn't anywhere close to the best use of US$43B. In fact, I suspect we could end homelessness in the US for significantly less than that. That seems a lot more useful than a payout to TWTR shareholders and making it one of Musk's vanity hobbies. [0] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-home-price-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-home... [1] https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report-legacy/ https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homeless... [2] https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-273.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-27...

shmageggy 5y ago

> I remember Musk offered to solve world hunger but the NGO people who said they could do it flaked when (pen in hand) he offered to cut them a cheque. I hadn't heard about this, but looking it up now, it seems that your account isn't accurate. According to these articles he asked the UN to detail how they would spend the money and they did. https://mashable.com/article/elon-musk-solve-world-hunger https://mashable.com/article/elon-musk-solve-world-hunger https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donation-weeks-after-asking-un-world-hunger/ https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donatio...

motohagiography 5y ago
According to the mashable link, the world food program people just said, "it's complicated, let's meet," to shift responsibility, and then said went around saying he didn't follow through.
- compiler-guy 5y ago
  It is complicated and although money can help, many of the problems have to do with corruption and graft, rather than a lack of resources. The United States alone gives 3.7 billion dollars a year in aid [1]. And the sum total of world aid is much greater. But if the dictators and juntas on the ground aren’t willing to help, and if the logistics companies and war lords redirect it to their friends, more money doesn’t really help. And nor does a clever plan from the UN, which is already trying to avoid the grifters, but also has its share of internal corruption. 1. https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/faq#:~:text=In%20fiscal%20year%202018%2C%20USAID,cash%20transfers%20and%20food%20vouchers https://www.usaid.gov/food-assistance/faq#:~:text=In%20fisca....
goodluckchuck 5y ago
> U.N. World Food Program executive director David Beasley did respond to Musk's original tweet last month, clarifying that "$6B will not solve world hunger..."

memish 5y ago

Not long before Elon bought a 9% stake, one of the largest satire accounts on twitter was suspended for a joke. They are literally censoring humor and that may have been the final straw. Also worth noting that he was one of the ACLU's biggest donors when they were still focused on protecting free speech and liberty.

alphabettsy 5y ago
They still do.
- parineum 5y ago
  They protect free speech they agree with.
colordrops 5y ago
My account got banned for an obvious joke. I feel this personally.
- darkwater 5y ago
  Mind to share the joke here?
  - colordrops 5y ago
    Would prefer not to reveal my identity - it could be searched. I can paraphrase though. It was a thread a couple years ago on how nazis can be punched, but it was spreading to anyone who was perceived as right wing, such as Andy Ngo, with the excuse that they are all nazis. Being a pacifist, I replied with something sarcastic along the lines of "As long as we are punching nazis, why don't we also punch the taliban, ISIS, MS13, Zionists, north koreans, evangelicals, trump supporters, and puppies?" Obviously not serious, but I was banned for promoting violence. Ironic considering the thread I was replying to was all about unironic support of real world violence. My joke wasn't a good one, but it was a joke.
5y ago

oldstrangers 5y ago

"Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US." Yikes. A more realistic take: this is a petty reaction on par with Peter Thiel suing Gawker into oblivion. Musk doesn't really care about Twitter's role as a tool for good, he cares about his ego.

ecf 5y ago
Now you understand why Musk followers are a cult.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 5y ago
  It's cultish when people say it's good just because they want to think it's good. It's cultish when people say it's bad just because they want to think it's bad. When the person you're responding to makes a strong assertion about a person's intentions[1] and you respond suggesting that anybody who might not think this way is part of a cult, it comes off very much that you want the assertion to be true. Unless your belief is truly, "Anybody who might possibly agree with {{some specific person}} is part of a cult," then this comment does not do your thoughts justice. There's more to be said and you did not bother to say it. [1] > Musk doesn't really care about Twitter's role as a tool for good, he cares about his ego.
  - oldstrangers 5y ago
    Just to help your reading comprehension, he's suggesting that anyone who says stuff like "Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US" might have drank too much of the Kool-Aid. Hope that helps your argument.
    - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 5y ago
      Ah, yeah, thanks!
nonameking2026 5y ago
Why does Musk have some go reaction with twitter that would call for this ?

wwweston 5y ago

> Twitter became a negative-sum game of people competing to debase themselves in service of narrative in exchange for nothing but the approval of others who had already done the same. I'm trying to imagine this statement actually both having meaning and corresponding to reality and failing.

sohdas 5y ago

> Twitter became a negative-sum game of people competing to debase themselves in service of narrative in exchange for nothing but the approval of others who had already done the same. Unlocking that negative cycle can release a lot of captive value for everyone. The best way to do that is to connect great minds and scale them based on their revealed desires. What are you even saying here?

oldstrangers 5y ago
He's trying to intellectualize his disapproval of "cancel culture" I imagine.

hackernewds 5y ago

You posit that if Twitter pursued financial goals like Facebook it would be a better platform. Hard disagree.

newbamboo 5y ago

This is obviously the right take. But people won’t hear it. Which further underscores why this is good for society, not just the platform.

nobody9999 5y ago

>Value for money, it's probably the most effective $43B anyone has spent in the US. That seems unlikely. USD$43 billion could buy ~1,150,000 homes[0], which is double the number of homeless people in the US[1]. Getting a 1/2 million people into stable living situations could boost the economy by adding a couple hundred thousand to the work force (it's really hard to hold a decent job if you have no place to store your stuff or take a shower), with the median income for all workers over the age of 15 at ~USD40,000 [2] would add ~US$8,000,000,000 to the economy, as well as reducing dependence on public programs to help support them. Of course, buying whole houses for half a million people isn't actually necessary. A reasonably sized apartment (based on household size) for each set of homeless folks would cost significantly less than that. What's more, the children who could be helped by something like this are more likely to have good school experiences and improve their education -- boosting their lifetime earnings potential as well. Not to mention the economic boosts to local communities hit hard by homelessness. So, no. Buying Twitter isn't anywhere close to the best use of US$43B. In fact, I suspect we could end homelessness in the US for significantly less than that. That seems a lot more useful than a payout to TWTR shareholders and making it one of Musk's vanity hobbies. [0] https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-home-price-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/median-home... [1] https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report-legacy/ https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homeless... [2] https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-273.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-27...