3 ms·
There's effectively zero chance that CFIUS[1] would allow the KSA to purchase Twitter. [1]: https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/the-committee
by __derek__ 4y ago
There's effectively zero chance that CFIUS[1] would allow the KSA to purchase Twitter.
[1]: https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/the-committee-on-foreign-investment-in-the-united-states-cfius https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/the-co...
- outside1234 4y agoWhat if he sells an API to Saudi and Russia and beyond to essentially hide criticism? Censorship as a service...
- __derek__ 4y agoAs I understand it, MBS and Co. prefer to drown out the criticism rather than censor it, so they already have that API, and a crusade against bots would put it at risk. Granted, it's possible that Elon isn't committed to shutting down bots so much as shutting down non-friendly bots.
- matthewdgreen 4y agoYou appear to understand wrong: “Ex-Twitter employee found guilty of spying on Saudi dissidents.” Happened in 2018, verdict this year. https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/09/twitter-saudi-arabia-dissident-spying https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/09/twitter-saud...
- __derek__ 4y agoThis doesn't contradict what I wrote.
- matthewdgreen 4y agoThey already are a major shareholder. And I presume they can (or could in the future) have stakes in other Musk companies. That might predispose a private Musk Twitter to offer access (for example, provide access to private customer information on dissidents, something Saudi Arabia is very interested in [1]) in ways that a public Twitter might not. [1] https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/09/twitter-saudi-arabia-dissident-spying https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/09/twitter-saud...
- __derek__ 4y agoBeing a major shareholder is different than having a controlling stake, which is implied by your comment that Musk "can offload most of the expenditure by selling it to Saudi Arabia."