Yes, Twitter is so “successful” Musk had to write off 50% of his “investment” out of the gate, and had to come up with an AI-hyped merger with SpaceX to compens

Yes, Twitter is so “successful” Musk had to write off 50% of his “investment” out of the gate, and had to come up with an AI-hyped merger with SpaceX to compensate the banks that went in with him. The only reason Twitter has more active users is that it removed some of the protections for bots, in particular broad filtering coming from certain country involved in a war. You don’t think Musk is any close to the Oceangate guy? Let’s review some interesting decisions by his companies then: - Musk mucking around with the blue checks and the bot filters in Twitter skyrocketed the amount of scams in the platform. - Tesla uses very strict NDAs and settlement to silence the reporting of accidents - The infamous electric door handle that locks up Teslas when power goes out was an obvious point of failure, it was ignored, people died, and now several countries have legislation against it - Reportedly Musk had safety lines and other safety features in the factories removed for serious reasons like “not liking yellow” - Any understanding of how to parse public insurance data will show you Tesla’s have accident rates that are multiples of other brands - The Starship, a vessel that is intended for human transport, has no safe abort system, no way to fit one in its current state, and no plans to modify that. Just a reminder that even a very SpaceX-friendly count (in which flights that did not attempt to land are considered “good”) puts the current reliability rate at <40%. As a naive boundary, for clearing the 97.5% predicted crew survival, SpaceX would need to fly in the order of 300 good Starship launches. Those are just of the top of my head.