10 ms·

1. Improve the product (make Tweets editable for a period of time and things like that). 2. Run the service as if it was bound by the First Amendment (i.e. onl

1. Improve the product (make Tweets editable for a period of time and things like that). 2. Run the service as if it was bound by the First Amendment (i.e. only illegal content should be removed, basically how every social network ran prior to a few years ago.) 3. Open source the ranking/spam code on GitHub and accept PRs. He explicitly stated that he does not view it as a money-making opportunity. His goals are altruistic. It may be hard for some (cynical people) to believe that someone would do such a thing but I believe he's completely sincere. He's got the $40 billion to spare and thinks it's important to humanity's ability to progress. I agree. The only reason Zuckerberg gave up on free speech for Facebook was that he was scared of losing revenue. Musk isn't worried about losing the money, which means he can act out of principles rather than fear.

Jcowell 4y ago
Am Ithe only one who see’s value in Twitter’s uneditablity? To me it allows for only two class of tweets: Real & Fake. With the real one easily verifiable against a fake one (archive cross comparisons)
- staunch 4y ago
  A limited edit window with a changelog seems reasonable to me but yeah I think immutability is elegant, if somewhat inconvenient.
  - extheat 4y ago
    Editing tweets I think has value, even if for a short period of time. The biggest complaints people have are the meaning could change. Which is a fair point, but this is only a problem if you view it in the context of deception. People might write a very strongly worded statement in the moment, then decide to tone down what they’ve written. I don’t view this inherently as a bad thing.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nradov 4y ago
  Facebook posts can be edited. It's not a problem. Everything on social media is fake anyway, so who cares.
  - notyourwork 4y ago
    Facebook is not the gold standard example of a social media platform in 2022 is it?
    - bastardoperator 4y ago
      Is twitter?
    - nradov 4y ago
      There is no "gold standard" example of a social media platform, and never has been. They're all pretty crappy due to misaligned incentives between users and customers (advertisers). But despite that, some of them still manage to be useful and entertaining.
encryptluks2 4y ago
Ah yes, Twitter, a centralized solution that will the bastion of free speech. Seriously, is this like the same as QAnon fanfic?
ausbah 4y ago
you'll take the word of a man who routinely sues ex-employees who criticize his companies?
- staunch 4y ago
  I simply believe he's being honest and sincere in this case. That doesn't mean I condone anything and everything he's done or will do. He admits himself that he's a "mixed bag". Which is of course true of all of us.
  - JaimeThompson 4y ago
    Given his history of making statements which, if I am being generous, are wildly optimistic year after year while not allowing experience to impact what he is saying I have less faith that he will actually do what he says. Value wise his other states goals would be far better advanced if he used that money to speed them along instead of buying Twitter.
  - ausbah 4y ago
    how can you be both honest / sincere and a "mixed bag"? it honestly reads to me like you're overlooking some big inconsistencies in his behavior "just because he's human". I would normally agree with - but considering his status as the world's richest man makes me think he should be held to a much higher standard
    - staunch 4y ago
      > how can you be both honest / sincere and a "mixed bag"? Because people can be both honest and dishonest about different things or at different times. No one is perfectly honest and even the worst person is probably honest some of the time. > ...considering his status as the world's richest man makes me think he should be held to a much higher standard This makes sense in some ways and absolutely none at all in other ways. The richest man should be judged harshly for displaying greed, for example, but not for making mistakes that money doesn't help prevent.
themitigating 4y ago
Services didn't allow racism and the like from the start not just a few years ago.
- extheat 4y ago
  Hate speech (racism, bullying, threatening, harassment) might as well be thought of as illegal. It may not be illegal by the literal word of the law, but in the interpretation most people in practice treat these as illegal.
  - themitigating 4y ago
    This is what the parent said ." Run the service as if it was bound by the First Amendment (i.e. only illegal content should be removed, basically how every social network ran prior to a few years ago.)" Hate speech is legal
    - AvocadoPanic 4y ago
      This is very jurisdiction dependent.
      - themitigating 4y ago
        Can you provide an example? I'm assuming we are talking about the US
        AvocadoPanic 4y ago
        No, in Europe there are laws against various sorts of speech. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43864133 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43864133 https://www.thelocal.de/20180803/freedom-of-speech-doesnt-cover-holocaust-denial-germanys-top-court-rules/ https://www.thelocal.de/20180803/freedom-of-speech-doesnt-co...
  - philipkglass 4y ago
phphphphp 4y ago
> He explicitly stated that he does not view it as a money-making opportunity. His goals are altruistic. A few hours ago he tweeted out an article that celebrates Musk as a great person for growing shareholder value: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1516057871108165637 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1516057871108165637 > The Tesla CEO’s track record proves he’s a pre-eminent builder of businesses and maximizer of shareholder value. That's not the article you'd tweet to support altruistic intentions, is it?
- staunch 4y ago
  1. He needs Tesla to be highly profitable to achieve his ambitious goals of renewable energy. It's expensive to build factories, etc. 2. He needs SpaceX to be highly profitable to achieve his ambitious goals of multi-planetary life. It's expensive to build rockets, etc. 3. He doesn't need Twitter to highly profitable to achieve his ambitious goals of making it a global free speech platform. It's relatively cheap to run an internet service. This is an entirely consistent point of view.
  - phphphphp 4y ago
    The article is about shareholder value, not profitability. Anyway, that aside, the article was specifically written to address the people writing Elon Musk's off as "...a self-absorbed corporate carnival barker..." which is a conversation happening within the context of the Twitter takeover attempt; hence, "managerial excellence". Musk's choice to share the article clearly demonstrates that he believes his ability to drive shareholder value to be a defence of his "managerial" credentials. Whether his intentions for taking over Twitter are altruistic or not, I don't know, personally I don't think it's profit driven (but definitely wouldn't describe it as altruistic...) but defending your managerial ability on the basis that you're a producer of shareholder value in a conversation about the ability to run a "global free speech platform" is nonsensical and undermines any proclamation he makes about his intentions.
  - id 4y ago
    So he only really became a billionaire because it was necessary in order to save the world? Is that what his fans actually believe?
rurp 4y ago
Maybe I'm too cynical but I really don't think Elon is doing this for some high minded free speech principles. > He's got the $40 billion to spare He really doesn't though, which is part of why I think this is all a big joke. The vast majority of his fortune is tied up in his ownership of several companies. The Tesla shares are the most liquid, but he's already borrowing a lot against them. Is he really going to sell a large portion of his SpaceX or Tesla ownership to fund a Twitter lark? I doubt it. No institutional investor is going to commit billions of dollars to an investment that is explicitly not about making money. The only way he raises third party money for the purchase is if those investors understand that Elon is lying. > Musk isn't worried about losing the money, which means he can act out of principles rather than fear. Musk talks a lot about pursuing projects out of principle rather than for profit, while his actions have lead to becoming the richest person in the world. Color me jaded, but I don't think one becomes the richest person in the world without trying really hard to make money. Disguising it as magnanimous behavior only helps.
- hackerfromthefu 4y ago
  Your assertion that he doesn't have 40 billion to spare seems unfounded. Let's look at some actual maths. His net worth has soared in the last 2 years. Forbes (1) has a historical chart with his 2020 NW at 20 Billion, and current at 269 Billion. Is there any indication that his borrowings against his shares has increased in ratio with their appreciation. I can't find info on that but the forbes articles notes the borrowings were subtracted from that NW. As to what his borrowings were, there's a few articles I found that he had .5 Billion of personal loans in 2020. Since then he sold a lot/all of his houses. His NW also increase by 500 times that amount. Just can't credit your assertion that he couldn't borrow $40 Billion at the drop of a hat with some of his increased 250B share value as collateral. 1 https://www.forbes.com/profile/elon-musk/?list=rtb/&sh=35da44a07999 https://www.forbes.com/profile/elon-musk/?list=rtb/&sh=35da4...

Jcowell 4y ago

Am Ithe only one who see’s value in Twitter’s uneditablity? To me it allows for only two class of tweets: Real & Fake. With the real one easily verifiable against a fake one (archive cross comparisons)

staunch 4y ago
A limited edit window with a changelog seems reasonable to me but yeah I think immutability is elegant, if somewhat inconvenient.
- extheat 4y ago
  Editing tweets I think has value, even if for a short period of time. The biggest complaints people have are the meaning could change. Which is a fair point, but this is only a problem if you view it in the context of deception. People might write a very strongly worded statement in the moment, then decide to tone down what they’ve written. I don’t view this inherently as a bad thing.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nradov 4y ago
Facebook posts can be edited. It's not a problem. Everything on social media is fake anyway, so who cares.
- notyourwork 4y ago
  Facebook is not the gold standard example of a social media platform in 2022 is it?
  - bastardoperator 4y ago
    Is twitter?
  - nradov 4y ago
    There is no "gold standard" example of a social media platform, and never has been. They're all pretty crappy due to misaligned incentives between users and customers (advertisers). But despite that, some of them still manage to be useful and entertaining.

encryptluks2 4y ago

Ah yes, Twitter, a centralized solution that will the bastion of free speech. Seriously, is this like the same as QAnon fanfic?

ausbah 4y ago

you'll take the word of a man who routinely sues ex-employees who criticize his companies?

staunch 4y ago
I simply believe he's being honest and sincere in this case. That doesn't mean I condone anything and everything he's done or will do. He admits himself that he's a "mixed bag". Which is of course true of all of us.
- JaimeThompson 4y ago
  Given his history of making statements which, if I am being generous, are wildly optimistic year after year while not allowing experience to impact what he is saying I have less faith that he will actually do what he says. Value wise his other states goals would be far better advanced if he used that money to speed them along instead of buying Twitter.
- ausbah 4y ago
  how can you be both honest / sincere and a "mixed bag"? it honestly reads to me like you're overlooking some big inconsistencies in his behavior "just because he's human". I would normally agree with - but considering his status as the world's richest man makes me think he should be held to a much higher standard
  - staunch 4y ago
    > how can you be both honest / sincere and a "mixed bag"? Because people can be both honest and dishonest about different things or at different times. No one is perfectly honest and even the worst person is probably honest some of the time. > ...considering his status as the world's richest man makes me think he should be held to a much higher standard This makes sense in some ways and absolutely none at all in other ways. The richest man should be judged harshly for displaying greed, for example, but not for making mistakes that money doesn't help prevent.

themitigating 4y ago

Services didn't allow racism and the like from the start not just a few years ago.

extheat 4y ago
Hate speech (racism, bullying, threatening, harassment) might as well be thought of as illegal. It may not be illegal by the literal word of the law, but in the interpretation most people in practice treat these as illegal.
- themitigating 4y ago
  This is what the parent said ." Run the service as if it was bound by the First Amendment (i.e. only illegal content should be removed, basically how every social network ran prior to a few years ago.)" Hate speech is legal
  - AvocadoPanic 4y ago
    This is very jurisdiction dependent.
    - themitigating 4y ago
      Can you provide an example? I'm assuming we are talking about the US
      - AvocadoPanic 4y ago
        No, in Europe there are laws against various sorts of speech. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43864133 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43864133 https://www.thelocal.de/20180803/freedom-of-speech-doesnt-cover-holocaust-denial-germanys-top-court-rules/ https://www.thelocal.de/20180803/freedom-of-speech-doesnt-co...
- philipkglass 4y ago

phphphphp 4y ago

> He explicitly stated that he does not view it as a money-making opportunity. His goals are altruistic. A few hours ago he tweeted out an article that celebrates Musk as a great person for growing shareholder value: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1516057871108165637 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1516057871108165637 > The Tesla CEO’s track record proves he’s a pre-eminent builder of businesses and maximizer of shareholder value. That's not the article you'd tweet to support altruistic intentions, is it?

staunch 4y ago
1. He needs Tesla to be highly profitable to achieve his ambitious goals of renewable energy. It's expensive to build factories, etc. 2. He needs SpaceX to be highly profitable to achieve his ambitious goals of multi-planetary life. It's expensive to build rockets, etc. 3. He doesn't need Twitter to highly profitable to achieve his ambitious goals of making it a global free speech platform. It's relatively cheap to run an internet service. This is an entirely consistent point of view.
- phphphphp 4y ago
  The article is about shareholder value, not profitability. Anyway, that aside, the article was specifically written to address the people writing Elon Musk's off as "...a self-absorbed corporate carnival barker..." which is a conversation happening within the context of the Twitter takeover attempt; hence, "managerial excellence". Musk's choice to share the article clearly demonstrates that he believes his ability to drive shareholder value to be a defence of his "managerial" credentials. Whether his intentions for taking over Twitter are altruistic or not, I don't know, personally I don't think it's profit driven (but definitely wouldn't describe it as altruistic...) but defending your managerial ability on the basis that you're a producer of shareholder value in a conversation about the ability to run a "global free speech platform" is nonsensical and undermines any proclamation he makes about his intentions.
- id 4y ago
  So he only really became a billionaire because it was necessary in order to save the world? Is that what his fans actually believe?

rurp 4y ago

Maybe I'm too cynical but I really don't think Elon is doing this for some high minded free speech principles. > He's got the $40 billion to spare He really doesn't though, which is part of why I think this is all a big joke. The vast majority of his fortune is tied up in his ownership of several companies. The Tesla shares are the most liquid, but he's already borrowing a lot against them. Is he really going to sell a large portion of his SpaceX or Tesla ownership to fund a Twitter lark? I doubt it. No institutional investor is going to commit billions of dollars to an investment that is explicitly not about making money. The only way he raises third party money for the purchase is if those investors understand that Elon is lying. > Musk isn't worried about losing the money, which means he can act out of principles rather than fear. Musk talks a lot about pursuing projects out of principle rather than for profit, while his actions have lead to becoming the richest person in the world. Color me jaded, but I don't think one becomes the richest person in the world without trying really hard to make money. Disguising it as magnanimous behavior only helps.

hackerfromthefu 4y ago
Your assertion that he doesn't have 40 billion to spare seems unfounded. Let's look at some actual maths. His net worth has soared in the last 2 years. Forbes (1) has a historical chart with his 2020 NW at 20 Billion, and current at 269 Billion. Is there any indication that his borrowings against his shares has increased in ratio with their appreciation. I can't find info on that but the forbes articles notes the borrowings were subtracted from that NW. As to what his borrowings were, there's a few articles I found that he had .5 Billion of personal loans in 2020. Since then he sold a lot/all of his houses. His NW also increase by 500 times that amount. Just can't credit your assertion that he couldn't borrow $40 Billion at the drop of a hat with some of his increased 250B share value as collateral. 1 https://www.forbes.com/profile/elon-musk/?list=rtb/&sh=35da44a07999 https://www.forbes.com/profile/elon-musk/?list=rtb/&sh=35da4...