4 ms·
You bring up a fair point. In my mind, Musk has taken so much control over X that it's more of a direct relationship than Tesla or SpaceX would be. For this fi
by unsnap_biceps 2y ago
You bring up a fair point. In my mind, Musk has taken so much control over X that it's more of a direct relationship than Tesla or SpaceX would be.
For this filing, IIRC It was reported that Musk instructed X to step in on Jone's request for help. That feels different to me than GM shutting down a project. It feels politically motivated by Musk's personal beliefs then a decision being made on the company's behalf for the benefit of the company.
But I do accept the criticism that it was X that filed, not Musk and I mis-spoke in my original comment
- trollbridge 2y agoX does have a vested interested in ensuring its usernames and accounts do not legally become alienable property that can be auctioned in a bankruptcy auction. They don’t technically allow accounts or usernames to be sold at all (or follows, engagement and so forth), although I’m sure this happens quite often under the radar. X can and has taken any username they want away from a user for any or no reason. Filing a brief in a bankruptcy auction that “this property is ours, not the debtor’s, and may not be auctioned or also” is an obvious way for them to publicly assert their rights and ownership.
- davidw 2y agoEven the other companies basically just do his bidding. Remember when he 'shared' engineers around between different companies? https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/31/elon-musk-has-pulled-more-than-50-tesla-engineers-into-twitter.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/31/elon-musk-has-pulled-more-th... These are not places you want to invest in if you think there are any sorts of checks and balances on him.