3 ms·
> have very heavy toll on his persona His supporters are fanatical - none of his previous abhorrent actions have had a heavy toll, so it's unclear why this one
by lucideer 4y ago
> have very heavy toll on his persona
His supporters are fanatical - none of his previous abhorrent actions have had a heavy toll, so it's unclear why this one should.
He is certainly receiving a large backlash to his recent actions, but I think that's more a case of people (outside of tech) who would've paid little attention to him before being forced to be more fully aware of his existence, than anyone who previously supported him thinking less of him.
- rootusrootus 4y agoThere's a very real argument to be made now that remaining publicly in control of Tesla is bad for TSLA shareholders. The brand is going to suffer if he doesn't at least put a plausible puppet at the head of the company. Twitter is already a lost cause. He wanted to create a more popular Parler. Probably it'll just end up in the same place with the same niche user base. At least SpaceX has Gwynn.
- ceejayoz 4y ago> At least SpaceX has Gwynn. This also seems to be reassuring to NASA. "'I hugged her with a smile on my face, because I know she is running that thing. She’s running SpaceX,' Nelson said." https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/spacex-leader-reassured-nasa-chief-elson-musk-rcna61189 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/spacex-leader...
- creato 4y agoThe bigger issue for TSLA is that Musk owns a lot of its stock and might be forced to sell it. A puppet won’t fix that.
- halfjoking 4y agoSo let me list Musk’s abhorrent censorship actions: -Bans people impersonating him like Kathy Griffin -Bans people who share internal communications at Twitter -Bans people who post sensitive information like his address, phone number or private jet location -Bans a few militant Antifa groups Is there anything else? Because I’m not seeing the abhorrent part, especially compared to pre-Musk censorship. Why should I be outraged now? When epidemiologists were censored leading to unvaccinated being banned from society last winter, no one made a fuss about it. https://reclaimthenet.org/twitter-reverses-censorship-andrew-bostom/ https://reclaimthenet.org/twitter-reverses-censorship-andrew...
- a_shovel 4y ago> sensitive information like his address, phone number or private jet location One of these things is not like the others, one of these things doesn't belong...
- notpachet 4y agoI appreciate that I'm not the only one out there with this song branded permanently into my psyche. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZci3eOafK0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZci3eOafK0
- ben_w 4y agoYeah, but IMO it's not that, that's all fairly easy to get at, it's this: > Bans people who share internal communications at Twitter Which I expect is covered by an NDA between the leaker and the company blocking the sharing of the leaks. I'd expect the same if someone at, purely for the sake of example, Blizzard started sharing internal content via World of Warcraft public chat.
- a_shovel 4y agoI think my joke's been misinterpreted. Sharing personal information isn't the thing that different, it's the private jet location that's different from address and phone number. Having your private jet tracked is not a problem that a normal person can have. I don't think there's a reasonable expectation of privacy in regards to that.
- ben_w 4y agoOh! Well, in that case yes, I totally agree. And I did indeed misinterpret.
- halfjoking 4y agoYeah one of the things on my list almost ruined my life last winter. As in lose my job and be unable to socialize because I need a vaccine passport to enter a restaurant. All based on fraudulent lies that I couldn’t expose because I was censored.