5 ms·

As a relatively disinterested observer (don’t tweet, don’t own a Tesla, don’t feel particularly strongly about Mr Musk), I’ve found the media/commentariat rever

As a relatively disinterested observer (don’t tweet, don’t own a Tesla, don’t feel particularly strongly about Mr Musk), I’ve found the media/commentariat reversals of position on this funny. Musk’s initial Twitter takeover talk was met with general opprobrium, to put it mildly. I must have read more than one take that it was a threat to democracy itself. Then, after a stock market downturn, and when the Twitter acquisition looked more like an impulsive decision that Musk might regret, the prevailing mood was gleeful. He was stuck with a white elephant. Schadenfreude. And since he clearly no longer wanted it, the consensus now he was legally and morally obligated to buy. Twitter itself demanded it. They weren’t going to let him weasel out of that one. Now that he seems to have accepted his obligation and the sale has gone through, we’re back to opprobrium. It’s callous to laugh when so many people have lost their livelihoods (although I’m confident any former Twitter employee has plenty of employment options). But the commentariat consistently outdoes what a satirist could invent.

tushonka 4y ago
The image of Elon Musk turned sour after he decided to play geo-politcs and play the Putin's peacekeeper puppet. That event, at least for me showed the true colors of Musky
- RobertRoberts 4y ago
  Wanting peace is now a bad thing? Does it matter that his method wasn't ideal, at least he wasn't pushing for nuclear war like many politicians.
  - saryant 4y ago
    Wanting peace is a good thing. Wanted Ukraine to capitulate to genocide is not.
    - RobertRoberts 4y ago
      Looking back on history should give us clarity for today. The genocides that I know of were not the same as military invasions. And in light of past civil wars, what is the best solution for neighboring nation? I am fairly certain every country has taken land this way, so maybe we should give Texas and California back to Mexico? Russia is NOT in the right, but Russia's actions don't change how we should be pushing for peace. Where have all the hippies gone?
    - yonaguska 4y ago
      ISIS went on a genocidal rampage, and they were clear about this. Western forces supported their expansion. The American invasion of Iraq, that was kicked off with a night of bombing destroying nearly everything, that was much more than anything Putin opened with I don't agree at all with Putin's actions, but could you please explain how they are genocidal? The Ukrainian treatment of ethnic Russians, the incessant shelling of civilians in the separatist regions, the widespread embrace of actually Nazi ideology, and the cutting off of freshwater supply to those areas seems a bit closer to genocidal to me. Just a bit.
  - sylens 4y ago
    That's an intellectually dishonest argument. Everybody wants peace. Peace is a good thing. But what most people agree on is that you don't give an autocrat anything they want just for the promise of peace. Most people remember that lesson from 1938.
    - RobertRoberts 4y ago
      You are just arguing methods, I am arguing absolutes. I have no idea what the best way to achieve peace on an international scale, so my argument is pure because I don't pretend to know.
      - parrellel 4y ago
        You're arguing in defense of Musk's proposed peace, others are arguing that his suggestion was not peace, but rather appeasement. We generally know how Chamberlain's whole deal turned out.
        RobertRoberts 4y ago
        All conflict is resolved by appeasement, read up on history. Germany could have kept fighting to the last man, but eventually they appeased the allies in WWII. All war ends in appeasement.
  - yusefnapora 4y ago
    “I say, Théoden King: shall we have peace and friendship, you and I? It is ours to command." "We will have peace," said Théoden at last thickly and with an effort. Several of the Riders cried out gladly. Théoden held up his hand. "Yes, we will have peace," he said now in a clear voice, "we will have peace, when you and all your works have perished--and the works of your dark master to whom you would deliver us. You are a liar, Saruman, and a corrupter a men's hearts. You hold out your hand it to me, and I perceive only a finger of the claw of Mordor. Cruel and cold! Even if your war on me was just--as it was not, for were you ten times as wise you would have no right to rule me and mine for your own profit as you desired--even so, what will you say of your torches in Westfold and the children that lie dead there? And they hewed Háma's body before the gates of the Hornburg, after he was dead. When you hang from a gibbet at your window for the sport of your own crows, I will have peace with you and Orthanic. So much for the house of Eorl. A lesser son of great sires am I, but I do not need to lick your fingers. Turn elsewhither. But I fear your voice has lost its charm.” ― J. R. R. Tolkien
  - jakewins 4y ago
    I think the split around that is that people like me didn’t see his appeal as wanting peace. Russia was de-facto allowed to annex huge swathes of Ukrainian territory in 2014 - what did we learn from that? To me, Musks calls are equivalent to saying “ok, now freeze the frontline until Russia has had time to rearm and rebuild for the next push”. We tried the “peace” proposal Elon put forth in 2014, thousands of young Ukrainians and Russians are now dead as a result.
  - buildsjets 4y ago
    Elon did not want or advocate for peace, he wants and advocates for Russian victory.
  - forkLding 4y ago
    Putin won't stop though, the war with the Georgians in 2008, 2014 Ukraine invasion and now this Ukraine war. Is it really peace when one side calls for peace? Don't forget WW2, when Nazi Germany under Hitler annexed Czechslovakia in 1938, invaded and split up Poland in 1939 and all the Great Powers did not do anything due to either appeasement or isolationism. We need to learn from history, expansionist dictators do not stop and conceding to them only leads to further war and likely world war.
- mistermann 4y ago
  If science had demonstrated that telepathy is possible even on one-to-one basis let alone at massive scale, it would be far easier to take this popular meme (and the hundreds of others like it) more seriously. Maybe that's a bit too much to ask of humanity at this stage of its development, but a person can always dream!
- yonaguska 4y ago
  I wouldn't call it "playing" geopolitics when his company is sinking money into the conflict via starlink, and he presumably has no choice in the matter. Peace is always better than war, I'm not sure when we started valuing life so cheaply. Or is it just Ukrainian lives we'll happily write off? Overwhelmingly men, and not the children of the oligarchs that are funnelling money out of the country. Ultimately, every one will pay the price for this war, except for the political elite that are profiting from it.
  - sackbut 4y ago
    Ceding territories in a forced negotiation to only set the stage for the next conflict is not peace, it's appeasement.
skybrian 4y ago
One running theme here is Musk trying to ignore contracts and discovering that they're binding. Being the wealthiest didn't make him above the law. That's bad for him and so far it seems bad for Twitter, but it was good for the shareholders, and it's good generally that contracts get enforced.
wnevets 4y ago
That is because most Twitter users knew Musk would ruin what made Twitter Twitter. Twitter users just assumed the process of "muskifying" Twitter would be subtle and over the course of years. Watching him speed run the destruction of a $44 Billion company in a matter weeks has been absolutely shocking.
- pb7 4y ago
  Twitter is a cesspool so ruining what it is is a positive thing. It cannot get worse from here. At worst, it dies; at best, it returns to its former glory circa 2012. Both sound like wins to me.
  - wnevets 4y ago
    If what you say is true then paying $44 Billion sounds like a huge mistake.
    - pb7 4y ago
      It's a huge undertaking, that's for sure, which is probably why Musk wanted to back out. But $44B may seem like pocket change if it can get Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok level engagement and monetization. Twitter has been stagnant for a decade and the rot has set in.
- throwaway82388 4y ago
  That may or may not be true, it's all unclear. All I know for certain is that the people commenting have no idea either.
  - wnevets 4y ago
    > That may or may not be true, it's all unclear. It has already been proven Twitter will stop being the Twitter its users have enjoyed for the past decade. You are free to argue Twitter will be better for it but there is absolutely no disputing the old Twitter is dead.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
thedrbrian 4y ago
>Then, after a stock market downturn, and when the Twitter acquisition looked more like an impulsive decision that Musk might regret, the prevailing mood was gleeful. He was stuck with a white elephant. Schadenfreude. And since he clearly no longer wanted it, the consensus now he was legally and morally obligated to buy. Twitter itself demanded it. They weren’t going to let him weasel out of that one. Now that he seems to have accepted his obligation and the sale has gone through, we’re back to opprobrium. Could be part of a pump of the stock. Something he's done in the past, see FSD,coast to coast trip with no driver, battery swaps, the Cybertruck roadster and Semi, whatever that robot was,4680 batteries..........

tushonka 4y ago

The image of Elon Musk turned sour after he decided to play geo-politcs and play the Putin's peacekeeper puppet. That event, at least for me showed the true colors of Musky

RobertRoberts 4y ago
Wanting peace is now a bad thing? Does it matter that his method wasn't ideal, at least he wasn't pushing for nuclear war like many politicians.
- saryant 4y ago
  Wanting peace is a good thing. Wanted Ukraine to capitulate to genocide is not.
  - RobertRoberts 4y ago
    Looking back on history should give us clarity for today. The genocides that I know of were not the same as military invasions. And in light of past civil wars, what is the best solution for neighboring nation? I am fairly certain every country has taken land this way, so maybe we should give Texas and California back to Mexico? Russia is NOT in the right, but Russia's actions don't change how we should be pushing for peace. Where have all the hippies gone?
  - yonaguska 4y ago
    ISIS went on a genocidal rampage, and they were clear about this. Western forces supported their expansion. The American invasion of Iraq, that was kicked off with a night of bombing destroying nearly everything, that was much more than anything Putin opened with I don't agree at all with Putin's actions, but could you please explain how they are genocidal? The Ukrainian treatment of ethnic Russians, the incessant shelling of civilians in the separatist regions, the widespread embrace of actually Nazi ideology, and the cutting off of freshwater supply to those areas seems a bit closer to genocidal to me. Just a bit.
- sylens 4y ago
  That's an intellectually dishonest argument. Everybody wants peace. Peace is a good thing. But what most people agree on is that you don't give an autocrat anything they want just for the promise of peace. Most people remember that lesson from 1938.
  - RobertRoberts 4y ago
    You are just arguing methods, I am arguing absolutes. I have no idea what the best way to achieve peace on an international scale, so my argument is pure because I don't pretend to know.
    - parrellel 4y ago
      You're arguing in defense of Musk's proposed peace, others are arguing that his suggestion was not peace, but rather appeasement. We generally know how Chamberlain's whole deal turned out.
      - RobertRoberts 4y ago
        All conflict is resolved by appeasement, read up on history. Germany could have kept fighting to the last man, but eventually they appeased the allies in WWII. All war ends in appeasement.
- yusefnapora 4y ago
  “I say, Théoden King: shall we have peace and friendship, you and I? It is ours to command." "We will have peace," said Théoden at last thickly and with an effort. Several of the Riders cried out gladly. Théoden held up his hand. "Yes, we will have peace," he said now in a clear voice, "we will have peace, when you and all your works have perished--and the works of your dark master to whom you would deliver us. You are a liar, Saruman, and a corrupter a men's hearts. You hold out your hand it to me, and I perceive only a finger of the claw of Mordor. Cruel and cold! Even if your war on me was just--as it was not, for were you ten times as wise you would have no right to rule me and mine for your own profit as you desired--even so, what will you say of your torches in Westfold and the children that lie dead there? And they hewed Háma's body before the gates of the Hornburg, after he was dead. When you hang from a gibbet at your window for the sport of your own crows, I will have peace with you and Orthanic. So much for the house of Eorl. A lesser son of great sires am I, but I do not need to lick your fingers. Turn elsewhither. But I fear your voice has lost its charm.” ― J. R. R. Tolkien
- jakewins 4y ago
  I think the split around that is that people like me didn’t see his appeal as wanting peace. Russia was de-facto allowed to annex huge swathes of Ukrainian territory in 2014 - what did we learn from that? To me, Musks calls are equivalent to saying “ok, now freeze the frontline until Russia has had time to rearm and rebuild for the next push”. We tried the “peace” proposal Elon put forth in 2014, thousands of young Ukrainians and Russians are now dead as a result.
- buildsjets 4y ago
  Elon did not want or advocate for peace, he wants and advocates for Russian victory.
- forkLding 4y ago
  Putin won't stop though, the war with the Georgians in 2008, 2014 Ukraine invasion and now this Ukraine war. Is it really peace when one side calls for peace? Don't forget WW2, when Nazi Germany under Hitler annexed Czechslovakia in 1938, invaded and split up Poland in 1939 and all the Great Powers did not do anything due to either appeasement or isolationism. We need to learn from history, expansionist dictators do not stop and conceding to them only leads to further war and likely world war.
mistermann 4y ago
If science had demonstrated that telepathy is possible even on one-to-one basis let alone at massive scale, it would be far easier to take this popular meme (and the hundreds of others like it) more seriously. Maybe that's a bit too much to ask of humanity at this stage of its development, but a person can always dream!
yonaguska 4y ago
I wouldn't call it "playing" geopolitics when his company is sinking money into the conflict via starlink, and he presumably has no choice in the matter. Peace is always better than war, I'm not sure when we started valuing life so cheaply. Or is it just Ukrainian lives we'll happily write off? Overwhelmingly men, and not the children of the oligarchs that are funnelling money out of the country. Ultimately, every one will pay the price for this war, except for the political elite that are profiting from it.
- sackbut 4y ago
  Ceding territories in a forced negotiation to only set the stage for the next conflict is not peace, it's appeasement.

skybrian 4y ago

One running theme here is Musk trying to ignore contracts and discovering that they're binding. Being the wealthiest didn't make him above the law. That's bad for him and so far it seems bad for Twitter, but it was good for the shareholders, and it's good generally that contracts get enforced.

wnevets 4y ago

That is because most Twitter users knew Musk would ruin what made Twitter Twitter. Twitter users just assumed the process of "muskifying" Twitter would be subtle and over the course of years. Watching him speed run the destruction of a $44 Billion company in a matter weeks has been absolutely shocking.

pb7 4y ago
Twitter is a cesspool so ruining what it is is a positive thing. It cannot get worse from here. At worst, it dies; at best, it returns to its former glory circa 2012. Both sound like wins to me.
- wnevets 4y ago
  If what you say is true then paying $44 Billion sounds like a huge mistake.
  - pb7 4y ago
    It's a huge undertaking, that's for sure, which is probably why Musk wanted to back out. But $44B may seem like pocket change if it can get Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok level engagement and monetization. Twitter has been stagnant for a decade and the rot has set in.
throwaway82388 4y ago
That may or may not be true, it's all unclear. All I know for certain is that the people commenting have no idea either.
- wnevets 4y ago
  > That may or may not be true, it's all unclear. It has already been proven Twitter will stop being the Twitter its users have enjoyed for the past decade. You are free to argue Twitter will be better for it but there is absolutely no disputing the old Twitter is dead.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

thedrbrian 4y ago

>Then, after a stock market downturn, and when the Twitter acquisition looked more like an impulsive decision that Musk might regret, the prevailing mood was gleeful. He was stuck with a white elephant. Schadenfreude. And since he clearly no longer wanted it, the consensus now he was legally and morally obligated to buy. Twitter itself demanded it. They weren’t going to let him weasel out of that one. Now that he seems to have accepted his obligation and the sale has gone through, we’re back to opprobrium. Could be part of a pump of the stock. Something he's done in the past, see FSD,coast to coast trip with no driver, battery swaps, the Cybertruck roadster and Semi, whatever that robot was,4680 batteries..........