8 ms·

> Who could possibly be on the side of the buyer? Except you can just buy up supporters by gaslighting huge masses of people on Twitter. The house in question.

> Who could possibly be on the side of the buyer? Except you can just buy up supporters by gaslighting huge masses of people on Twitter. The house in question. Its so ridiculous. Musk's popularity is largely *BECAUSE* of his Twitter antics. So this "buyer" is basically someone who has come to house-parties / benefited from the house in question for the last decade. And the people arguing against the (current owners) of the house are also the party-guests of that very same house.

iasay 4y ago
If his popularity is due to what he posts on twitter it would appear that a large proportion of the human race are deranged morons.
- HeXetic 4y ago
  With everything that's happened in the past decade, don't we know that already by know?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ctvo 4y ago
  He can be popular due to Twitter and people can also not be deranged morons. Twitter is very popular with a few niche groups: Journalists and people in tech for example. The former is influenced by Elon's antics on Twitter and end up writing news stories or making documentaries [1] about him. People learn about Musk through these respectable publications. The latter group spreads the gospel of Elon's TED talks and press conferences to their friends and family. Being subject matter experts, they're more likely to be believed. Previously the coverage was mostly positive, but Musk's antics on Twitter have caused both the former and some of the latter to turn slightly negative from what I can tell. For example, it's now a common joke that Elon's wealth is partially due to being born wealthy. His family owned emerald mines. I didn't notice that in the popular consciousness until very recently. Phoney Starks is also making it's way into popular usage. 1 - https://www.nytimes.com/video/NYT-Presents/100000008464087/the-new-york-times-presents-elon-musks-crash-course.html https://www.nytimes.com/video/NYT-Presents/100000008464087/t...
  - TapWaterBandit 4y ago
    The emerald mine stuff is super overblown and only matters to people who don't like Musk for other reasons. If owning some natural resource like a mine or two was all it took to become a trailblazing entrepreneur who played a key role in Paypal/Tesla/SpaceX then Musk wouldn't be as popular as he is with many because there would be so many more like him around. Musk is clearly an extraordinary individual even if he sometimes acts like a dickhead and had a small boost from owning emerald mines. But like I mentioned above if owning a profitable mine of some type was all it took to be an entrepreneur at Musk's level we would be drowning in them and he wouldn't be such a big deal in the first place. But in the case of Twitter, Musk clearly seems to be in the wrong here legally.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - sixQuarks 4y ago
      Wow, even being critical of Musk can’t prevent the downvotes if you dare mention some of his accomplishments.
    - ctvo 4y ago
      > But like I mentioned above if owning a profitable mine of some type was all it took to be an entrepreneur at Musk's level we would be drowning in them and he wouldn't be such a big deal in the first place. I don't have an opinion on how big being born wealthy plays in his success. Just curious though -- how many profitable mines do you think are in operation and how many people do you think own them as a percentage of total global population?
      - TigeriusKirk 4y ago
        What level of profit did the mine bring in? That's the real question that I've never seen an answer to. You can own a gold mine in the California mountains and come out of it with nothing but debt. It would sound like you're rich in the newspaper stories, though.
- whack 4y ago
  Yes
- percentcer 4y ago
  got bad news for you
- vkou 4y ago
  It would definitely appear that our monkey brains aren't very good at reasoning through social interactions that happen through mass media. Whether or not this makes most of us deranged morons or not is in the eye of the beholder.
- bilsbie 4y ago
  Welcome to earth?
- dragontamer 4y ago
  A hundred years ago, you just traveled from city-to-city with your posse of 20-guys. Those 20 guys would pretend to be an interested crowd (which draws in / astroturfs fake interest) Real people then start to join the crowd. You then show off your snake oil product working ("guest#1 from the crowd", who is of course your buddy), and then the real people will get excited, and buy your snake oil. Today, you just buy a bunch of likes / retweets to perform the same astroturfing on a larger scale. Bonus points if you "meme" it and "go viral". You want all those people out there to be spreading your message at no cost to you. A little bit of astroturfing goes a long way. People want to feel as part of a community. So a bit of fake-generated content and fake-interest helps at seeding the crowd and popularity. --------- Stage magicians still do this today for entertainment purposes, rather than illegitimately hawking fake snake oil. Its a very good bit of entertainment. It does take some practice but once you get the technique, its quite repeatable. Turns out that human psychology / group dynamics are in fact, predictable and consistent.
  - lupire 4y ago
    On TV it's the Laugh Track
- jollybean 4y ago
  Most people don't pay that much attention. They like the 'vibe' and that's that. They may not specifically clue into the mapping of 'vaccine hesitation / conspiracy' to 'health outcomes', they might just view it as 'opinion' - which it is of course, but most responsible people understand the 'dots have to be connected'. I think it's a bit part of the reason why a place like HN won't grasp populism: we are almost by definition 'anti populist' by our very outlook. Even smart young people are usually busy with school, partying, social things, they don't all have time to parse all of the shifting nonsense, and those that do are more often than not trapped down rabbit holes, I think searching for 'an identity' more than they realize it. This is populism. We (the crowd) make decisions on rough statements, headlines, a few words here and there, prejudices, assumptions etc.. Some of use a bit smarter than others, almost none of us see our blindspots.
moralestapia 4y ago
- Volundr 4y ago
  I don't think anyone is confused on this point.
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  Your comment implies that there was a time when he was actually trying to buy the "house" in good faith. I'm not convinced that is true... It gave him a great excuse to liquidate Tesla stock without the market responding as strongly as it normally would when a CEO unloads billions of dollars of shares in a company
  - shapefrog 4y ago
    I think it is actually worse than that, I think he was buying it in good faith. He believed he had "bought the dip" in stocks. He had bought 3bn worth, announced that he had bought some stock and made 1bn in a day on it - worlds smartest man everyone. I know, if I buy 44bn worth then at this rate I will make many many billions ... Once he realised he wasnt buying the dip but was actually holding the bag, deal cancelled. Best guess is he is down 10bn on where he bid so his loss-porn on this one is pretty sexy.
    - dragontamer 4y ago
      > I think he was buying it in good faith. My personal theory, which more or less matches Matt Levine's theory from his Bloomberg opinion column... Musk wanted special features on his Twitter account. He made a stink on Twitter about it, hoping to get more features as one of its most popular users. When that wasn't working, he tried to join the Board of Directors to lean heavily onto the CEO to grant special features on his Twitter account. Upon realizing that the board position doesn't come with those kinds of benefits, Musk quit the board, bought 9% of Twitter, and tried to push these "special features on my account" proposal that way. Board still didn't budge. Elon Musk, realizing he has to buy the company to actually get what he wants, starts to buy the company. Then the stock price collapses and its turning out to be a horrible loss. So Musk then starts to throw another tantrum to get out of this one. ------------ The benefits of this theory, is that this "story" proposed by Matt Levine makes every single decision of Elon Musk reasonable (albeit sociopathic, but reasonable and self-serving). From his tantrum in early March 2022 on Twitter, to his 9% buyout, to his flirting as a board member (and then quitting), to the eventual buyout. It also doesn't require "4d chess thinking genius". Each decision, while reasonable, isn't really that advanced or difficult to follow individually. Elon Musk just want special treatment on Twitter. I don't know what that "special treatment" is (maybe a bigger, bluer checkmark. Maybe guarantees on the global Twitter Timeline. Etc. etc. Something along those lines...), but special nonetheless. And as a billionaire, Musk has a number of strategies at his disposal that you or I wouldn't have. Musk is willing to pursue those strategies because he's so rich, and its really not a big deal to his finances. -------- It just fits so neatly to what has happened, that its the most reasonable proposal of his behavior for the past 6 months so far.
joenot443 4y ago
> Musk's popularity is largely BECAUSE of his Twitter antics I don't really buy this. I knew loads of Musk fanboys who were crazy about him before Teslas even become available. The 50+ folks that I'm friends with have mostly never used Twitter or read a Musk tweet, but they think Teslas are cool and are reminded that StarLink brought rural Ontario better internet than our own government tried to do for decades. Obviously Musk is an ass on Twitter (and probably in person), but like a lot of neuroatypicals, their talent seemingly makes up for their abrasiveness.
- wahern 4y ago
  > I don't really buy this. I think you're both correct. My experience is as you described, but Musk has also developed a following among political conservatives attracted to his abrasive, thumb-nosing antics.
  - jollybean 4y ago
    It's not 'conservatives' as 1/2 of them loath that stuff - and 'agitation' is traditionally an artifact of leftist populism (with traditional conservatives usually being small-c, establishment, older etc.) - it's more a bit of a businessy libertarianism, with hints of anti establishmentism that's in many ways more popular among the youth. Also, it's a hugely populist and international appeal, spreading his 'Noisy Tweets' around the globe. See how much more popular he is now that he makes 'controversial' statements [1] It's as PR trick as old as time. Edit: but yes, technically he has taken a public shift to the 'Current American Right' in the mysterious political situation we are in, that's fair to say. Just wanted to indicate it's a 'new and kind of specific normal'. [1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=CA&q=%2Fm%2F03nzf1 https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=CA&q=%...
    - cycomanic 4y ago
      I appreciate your analysis, but would like to add that I feel that "traditional conservatives" seem to have largely disappeared or become voiceless not only in the US but also in other places like e.g. the UK. I imagine in decades prior traditional conservatives would have found people like Trump or Boris Johnson obscene and distasteful. However, I don't see many of that old guard speak out against them. It seems with the reducing success projections due to changing demographics, many see winning as more important than values. Or at least that is my only explanation.
viraptor 4y ago
> Except you can just buy up supporters by gaslighting huge masses of people on Twitter. The house in question. What's the path from the masses on twitter and courts which will hear the case? Public opinion doesn't matter here. The case over the contract doesn't even have a jury if I understand correctly.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  > Public opinion doesn't matter here. Public opinion doesn't matter with regards to winners/losers of the case. But public opinion matters from the perspective of Elon Musk continuing to build his brand and grow his fanbase. Even if Elon Musk loses the court case, he still want to turn this whole charade into a positive for himself. IE: Fail upwards, etc. etc.

iasay 4y ago

If his popularity is due to what he posts on twitter it would appear that a large proportion of the human race are deranged morons.

HeXetic 4y ago
With everything that's happened in the past decade, don't we know that already by know?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ctvo 4y ago
He can be popular due to Twitter and people can also not be deranged morons. Twitter is very popular with a few niche groups: Journalists and people in tech for example. The former is influenced by Elon's antics on Twitter and end up writing news stories or making documentaries [1] about him. People learn about Musk through these respectable publications. The latter group spreads the gospel of Elon's TED talks and press conferences to their friends and family. Being subject matter experts, they're more likely to be believed. Previously the coverage was mostly positive, but Musk's antics on Twitter have caused both the former and some of the latter to turn slightly negative from what I can tell. For example, it's now a common joke that Elon's wealth is partially due to being born wealthy. His family owned emerald mines. I didn't notice that in the popular consciousness until very recently. Phoney Starks is also making it's way into popular usage. 1 - https://www.nytimes.com/video/NYT-Presents/100000008464087/the-new-york-times-presents-elon-musks-crash-course.html https://www.nytimes.com/video/NYT-Presents/100000008464087/t...
- TapWaterBandit 4y ago
  The emerald mine stuff is super overblown and only matters to people who don't like Musk for other reasons. If owning some natural resource like a mine or two was all it took to become a trailblazing entrepreneur who played a key role in Paypal/Tesla/SpaceX then Musk wouldn't be as popular as he is with many because there would be so many more like him around. Musk is clearly an extraordinary individual even if he sometimes acts like a dickhead and had a small boost from owning emerald mines. But like I mentioned above if owning a profitable mine of some type was all it took to be an entrepreneur at Musk's level we would be drowning in them and he wouldn't be such a big deal in the first place. But in the case of Twitter, Musk clearly seems to be in the wrong here legally.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - sixQuarks 4y ago
    Wow, even being critical of Musk can’t prevent the downvotes if you dare mention some of his accomplishments.
  - ctvo 4y ago
    > But like I mentioned above if owning a profitable mine of some type was all it took to be an entrepreneur at Musk's level we would be drowning in them and he wouldn't be such a big deal in the first place. I don't have an opinion on how big being born wealthy plays in his success. Just curious though -- how many profitable mines do you think are in operation and how many people do you think own them as a percentage of total global population?
    - TigeriusKirk 4y ago
      What level of profit did the mine bring in? That's the real question that I've never seen an answer to. You can own a gold mine in the California mountains and come out of it with nothing but debt. It would sound like you're rich in the newspaper stories, though.
whack 4y ago
Yes
percentcer 4y ago
got bad news for you
vkou 4y ago
It would definitely appear that our monkey brains aren't very good at reasoning through social interactions that happen through mass media. Whether or not this makes most of us deranged morons or not is in the eye of the beholder.
bilsbie 4y ago
Welcome to earth?
dragontamer 4y ago
A hundred years ago, you just traveled from city-to-city with your posse of 20-guys. Those 20 guys would pretend to be an interested crowd (which draws in / astroturfs fake interest) Real people then start to join the crowd. You then show off your snake oil product working ("guest#1 from the crowd", who is of course your buddy), and then the real people will get excited, and buy your snake oil. Today, you just buy a bunch of likes / retweets to perform the same astroturfing on a larger scale. Bonus points if you "meme" it and "go viral". You want all those people out there to be spreading your message at no cost to you. A little bit of astroturfing goes a long way. People want to feel as part of a community. So a bit of fake-generated content and fake-interest helps at seeding the crowd and popularity. --------- Stage magicians still do this today for entertainment purposes, rather than illegitimately hawking fake snake oil. Its a very good bit of entertainment. It does take some practice but once you get the technique, its quite repeatable. Turns out that human psychology / group dynamics are in fact, predictable and consistent.
- lupire 4y ago
  On TV it's the Laugh Track
jollybean 4y ago
Most people don't pay that much attention. They like the 'vibe' and that's that. They may not specifically clue into the mapping of 'vaccine hesitation / conspiracy' to 'health outcomes', they might just view it as 'opinion' - which it is of course, but most responsible people understand the 'dots have to be connected'. I think it's a bit part of the reason why a place like HN won't grasp populism: we are almost by definition 'anti populist' by our very outlook. Even smart young people are usually busy with school, partying, social things, they don't all have time to parse all of the shifting nonsense, and those that do are more often than not trapped down rabbit holes, I think searching for 'an identity' more than they realize it. This is populism. We (the crowd) make decisions on rough statements, headlines, a few words here and there, prejudices, assumptions etc.. Some of use a bit smarter than others, almost none of us see our blindspots.

moralestapia 4y ago

Volundr 4y ago
I don't think anyone is confused on this point.
Rebelgecko 4y ago
Your comment implies that there was a time when he was actually trying to buy the "house" in good faith. I'm not convinced that is true... It gave him a great excuse to liquidate Tesla stock without the market responding as strongly as it normally would when a CEO unloads billions of dollars of shares in a company
- shapefrog 4y ago
  I think it is actually worse than that, I think he was buying it in good faith. He believed he had "bought the dip" in stocks. He had bought 3bn worth, announced that he had bought some stock and made 1bn in a day on it - worlds smartest man everyone. I know, if I buy 44bn worth then at this rate I will make many many billions ... Once he realised he wasnt buying the dip but was actually holding the bag, deal cancelled. Best guess is he is down 10bn on where he bid so his loss-porn on this one is pretty sexy.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > I think he was buying it in good faith. My personal theory, which more or less matches Matt Levine's theory from his Bloomberg opinion column... Musk wanted special features on his Twitter account. He made a stink on Twitter about it, hoping to get more features as one of its most popular users. When that wasn't working, he tried to join the Board of Directors to lean heavily onto the CEO to grant special features on his Twitter account. Upon realizing that the board position doesn't come with those kinds of benefits, Musk quit the board, bought 9% of Twitter, and tried to push these "special features on my account" proposal that way. Board still didn't budge. Elon Musk, realizing he has to buy the company to actually get what he wants, starts to buy the company. Then the stock price collapses and its turning out to be a horrible loss. So Musk then starts to throw another tantrum to get out of this one. ------------ The benefits of this theory, is that this "story" proposed by Matt Levine makes every single decision of Elon Musk reasonable (albeit sociopathic, but reasonable and self-serving). From his tantrum in early March 2022 on Twitter, to his 9% buyout, to his flirting as a board member (and then quitting), to the eventual buyout. It also doesn't require "4d chess thinking genius". Each decision, while reasonable, isn't really that advanced or difficult to follow individually. Elon Musk just want special treatment on Twitter. I don't know what that "special treatment" is (maybe a bigger, bluer checkmark. Maybe guarantees on the global Twitter Timeline. Etc. etc. Something along those lines...), but special nonetheless. And as a billionaire, Musk has a number of strategies at his disposal that you or I wouldn't have. Musk is willing to pursue those strategies because he's so rich, and its really not a big deal to his finances. -------- It just fits so neatly to what has happened, that its the most reasonable proposal of his behavior for the past 6 months so far.

joenot443 4y ago

> Musk's popularity is largely BECAUSE of his Twitter antics I don't really buy this. I knew loads of Musk fanboys who were crazy about him before Teslas even become available. The 50+ folks that I'm friends with have mostly never used Twitter or read a Musk tweet, but they think Teslas are cool and are reminded that StarLink brought rural Ontario better internet than our own government tried to do for decades. Obviously Musk is an ass on Twitter (and probably in person), but like a lot of neuroatypicals, their talent seemingly makes up for their abrasiveness.

wahern 4y ago
> I don't really buy this. I think you're both correct. My experience is as you described, but Musk has also developed a following among political conservatives attracted to his abrasive, thumb-nosing antics.
- jollybean 4y ago
  It's not 'conservatives' as 1/2 of them loath that stuff - and 'agitation' is traditionally an artifact of leftist populism (with traditional conservatives usually being small-c, establishment, older etc.) - it's more a bit of a businessy libertarianism, with hints of anti establishmentism that's in many ways more popular among the youth. Also, it's a hugely populist and international appeal, spreading his 'Noisy Tweets' around the globe. See how much more popular he is now that he makes 'controversial' statements [1] It's as PR trick as old as time. Edit: but yes, technically he has taken a public shift to the 'Current American Right' in the mysterious political situation we are in, that's fair to say. Just wanted to indicate it's a 'new and kind of specific normal'. [1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=CA&q=%2Fm%2F03nzf1 https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=CA&q=%...
  - cycomanic 4y ago
    I appreciate your analysis, but would like to add that I feel that "traditional conservatives" seem to have largely disappeared or become voiceless not only in the US but also in other places like e.g. the UK. I imagine in decades prior traditional conservatives would have found people like Trump or Boris Johnson obscene and distasteful. However, I don't see many of that old guard speak out against them. It seems with the reducing success projections due to changing demographics, many see winning as more important than values. Or at least that is my only explanation.

viraptor 4y ago

> Except you can just buy up supporters by gaslighting huge masses of people on Twitter. The house in question. What's the path from the masses on twitter and courts which will hear the case? Public opinion doesn't matter here. The case over the contract doesn't even have a jury if I understand correctly.

dragontamer 4y ago
> Public opinion doesn't matter here. Public opinion doesn't matter with regards to winners/losers of the case. But public opinion matters from the perspective of Elon Musk continuing to build his brand and grow his fanbase. Even if Elon Musk loses the court case, he still want to turn this whole charade into a positive for himself. IE: Fail upwards, etc. etc.