Twitter's always hedged their bot stats with the MDAU caveat (e.g., "we're not estimating all the bots who log into Twitter, just the ones that are meaningful f

Twitter's always hedged their bot stats with the MDAU caveat (e.g., "we're not estimating all the bots who log into Twitter, just the ones that are meaningful for advertising and revenue purposes"), so while these allegations are not at all helpful, they're not necessarily a serious blow to Twitter's position (Mudge is a hacker, not a contracts attorney, and a lot of the allegations he makes regarding regulatory law aren't necessarily supported by his evidence). However, there's enough here, provided by a highly-credible technical expert, and under consideration by the US Congress, that Musk's litigation team has a strong opportunity to find at least something that holds up as a material misrepresentation, even if relatively minor, and then link it to the broader effect of this document, which could very well rise to the level of a material adverse effect. So, where bots are concerned, bad but not disastrous; for everything else -- well, let's just say that Musk's litigation team are burning incense to the gods this morning, while a whole bunch of Twitter execs are going to be spending the next few weeks getting grilled by their own retained counsel, at an even more exorbitant hourly rate than they were paying before.