Look, I'm not arguing with any of you for the rest of this evening. It's clear I'm right and you've got till tomorrow to get up to speed.
Hasta la vista
It’s now tomorrow and you gone quiet. Has he forgotten to recharge you. Mind he does look like he needs recharging himself, does he need infusions of virgins blood. Or does need to wait for a lightening strike or is the reality he’s a lizard wearing a human skin cover.
I do hope he totally tanks it purely for the entertainment value.
I don't. It provides something really useful. And gratifying as it is to see a planetary ego fall on his face, lots of people will lose an ability to connect with others that other platforms don't really provide. Not to mention lots of people losing their jobs.
I can’t help but feel the Maggieism will ring true, the market will provide.
It’s a fair rebuff to my flippant point but, I’d counter with the following.
A lot of different interests in western democracies have recently tried to pervert and influence public discourse in manners not previously possible. e.g. Trump and the Tories extensively promoting lies and misinformation through platforms like Twitter. Musk seems keen to facilitate this (presumably for financial gain) and his potential failure may be a bigger service to democracy than the short term pain of the demise of Twitter.
Twitter has a very privileged position given how it grew to dominate a certain space purely through timing. It’s replacement by multiple, smaller alternatives may serve the public better than one giant with market distorting strength.
It’s certainly too powerful a medium to be controlled by one ego maniac.
Oh, he should definitely stick to building rockets and possibly cars. If he could make a fool of himself without taking lots of others' livelihoods with him, please.
There have also been plenty of people showing how stupid the $8 verified thing is.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
That’s good to hear. I’d hate to think you you actually believed anything you were posting and therefore might take a fence. Or gate or even someone’s hedge.
That’s good to hear. I’d hate to think you you actually believed anything you were posting and therefore might take a fence. Or gate or even someone’s hedge.
I do (with a pinch of salt, with everything in life). I know it seems completely in flux at the moment at Twitter and I'd probably be agreeing with everybody, if and it's a bloody big if, he didn't have two occasions where he and the companies were on the brink, hit the limit, and he managed to turn it around, he never quit, no matter what.
Like I said before, I think he had enough plates to spin as it was.
The employees now know a bloated, loss making company has to start evolving quickly or it's toast and remember as I quoted (I'm good like that), he was endorsed by Jack Dorsey.
That’s good to hear. I’d hate to think you you actually believed anything you were posting and therefore might take a fence. Or gate or even someone’s hedge.
I do (with a pinch of salt, with everything in life). I know it seems completely in flux at the moment at Twitter and I'd probably be agreeing with everybody, if and it's a bloody big if, he didn't have two occasions where he and the companies were on the brink, hit the limit, and he managed to turn it around, he never quit, no matter what.
Like I said before, I think he had enough plates to spin as it was.
The employees now know a bloated, loss making company has to start evolving quickly or it's toast and remember as I quoted (I'm good like that), he was endorsed by Jack Dorsey.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
I don'tthink that is a good example as I am convinced that the Ukraine propaganda machine has had an outstanding war. Whilst we will all thoroughy approve it is still false information
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
I don'tthink that is a good example as I am convinced that the Ukraine propaganda machine has had an outstanding war. Whilst we will all thoroughy approve it is still false information
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
I don'tthink that is a good example as I am convinced that the Ukraine propaganda machine has had an outstanding war. Whilst we will all thoroughy approve it is still false information
All is fair in love and war.
Until somebody does something you don't like. I'm sure you can come up with some examples yourself.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
I think you are looking at this far too much through the lens of one man being a d***head.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Musk offering to buy it for a laugh, being forced to buy it and losing billions because he doesn't understand what he bought is funny. Tweeting through it and making things worse is funny.
Musk offering to buy it for a laugh, being forced to buy it and losing billions because he doesn't understand what he bought is funny. Tweeting through it and making things worse is funny.
It is, albeit with the caveats noted by RJS. That there still isn't a viable alternative that has appeared that can perform Twitter's useful functions still surprises me, given the possible financial rewards opening up.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
I think you are looking at this far too much through the lens of one man being a d***head.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
Surely this makes the point that it's too big and too powerful. Especially to be in the hands of an agenda peddler (of any persuasion). It is a commercial entity with excessive global dominance of communication. I can't mourn the loss of such a thing.
Crikey, this is exactly the sort of thing anti monopoly legislation is designed to do within a nations markets and yet here is a global entity able to exert enormous influence.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
I think you are looking at this far too much through the lens of one man being a d***head.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
Surely this makes the point that it's too big and too powerful. Especially to be in the hands of an agenda peddler (of any persuasion). It is a commercial entity with excessive global dominance of communication. I can't mourn the loss of such a thing.
Crikey, this is exactly the sort of thing anti monopoly legislation is designed to do within a nations markets and yet here is a global entity able to exert enormous influence.
Anti-monopoly laws seem not to be able to cope with modern tech giants: Amazon, eBay, Twitter, Facebook, Spotify...
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
I think you are looking at this far too much through the lens of one man being a d***head.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
Surely this makes the point that it's too big and too powerful. Especially to be in the hands of an agenda peddler (of any persuasion). It is a commercial entity with excessive global dominance of communication. I can't mourn the loss of such a thing.
Crikey, this is exactly the sort of thing anti monopoly legislation is designed to do within a nations markets and yet here is a global entity able to exert enormous influence.
I'm not sure Twitter itself (even less Musk, who I don't think is capable of anything as coherent as an agenda for more than 48hrs) exert enormous influence, at least not in a way that could be easily directed towards a desired outcome. Twitter is full of a multitude of agendas across the full spectrum of political thought. That is its strength. In contrast, avowedly political platforms like Parler or Truth Social are never going to reach the scale of Twitter because they are almost by definition exclusionary.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
I think you are looking at this far too much through the lens of one man being a d***head.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
Surely this makes the point that it's too big and too powerful. Especially to be in the hands of an agenda peddler (of any persuasion). It is a commercial entity with excessive global dominance of communication. I can't mourn the loss of such a thing.
Crikey, this is exactly the sort of thing anti monopoly legislation is designed to do within a nations markets and yet here is a global entity able to exert enormous influence.
Anti-monopoly laws seem not to be able to cope with modern tech giants: Amazon, eBay, Twitter, Facebook, Spotify...
There are other platforms that provide a similar service, so difficult to describe Twitter as a monopoly. Mastodon seems to be the alternative most popular at the moment, but seems to be struggling to cope with the influx. There are multiple music streaming services. Amazon is big but not a monopoly.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Elon Musk has announced the end of remote working at Twitter.
Musk, who took over Twitter on October 27, sent an email to his employees Wednesday for the first time. The email was sent at 2:39 a.m. ET, according to a time stamp on the email reviewed by Insider.
The billionaire wrote in the email that employees would no longer be permitted to work remotely. He said Twitter expected staff to be in the office for at least 40 hours a week unless they're given approval to work elsewhere, which he'd review.
Musk told Twitter employees, "The road ahead is arduous and will require intense work to succeed."
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats. (as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
But apparently it will all be a great laugh if it all falls.
Global behemoth potentially collapsing is obviously going to have some negative impacts.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
I think you are looking at this far too much through the lens of one man being a d***head.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
Surely this makes the point that it's too big and too powerful. Especially to be in the hands of an agenda peddler (of any persuasion). It is a commercial entity with excessive global dominance of communication. I can't mourn the loss of such a thing.
Crikey, this is exactly the sort of thing anti monopoly legislation is designed to do within a nations markets and yet here is a global entity able to exert enormous influence.
Anti-monopoly laws seem not to be able to cope with modern tech giants: Amazon, eBay, Twitter, Facebook, Spotify...
There are other platforms that provide a similar service, so difficult to describe Twitter as a monopoly. Mastodon seems to be the alternative most popular at the moment, but seems to be struggling to cope with the influx. There are multiple music streaming services. Amazon is big but not a monopoly.
You’ve a foot in two camps here.
It’s so big it’s a public utility but it’s not a monopoly.
This is exactly the scenario that anti competition bodies tackle, it doesn’t mean there is no competition, it means there is risk of no effective competition due to the size of the leading player, that is the case with Twitter.
The loss of Twitter remains unlikely imho. But it’s loss won’t leave us short of communication methods so it is not something I fear. A fracturing of communication channels, whilst in some ways more inconvenient still brings many advantages such as effective competition.
Posts
It’s a fair rebuff to my flippant point but, I’d counter with the following.
A lot of different interests in western democracies have recently tried to pervert and influence public discourse in manners not previously possible. e.g. Trump and the Tories extensively promoting lies and misinformation through platforms like Twitter. Musk seems keen to facilitate this (presumably for financial gain) and his potential failure may be a bigger service to democracy than the short term pain of the demise of Twitter.
Twitter has a very privileged position given how it grew to dominate a certain space purely through timing. It’s replacement by multiple, smaller alternatives may serve the public better than one giant with market distorting strength.
Long live the revolution.
There have also been plenty of people showing how stupid the $8 verified thing is.
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition
(Properly verified account.)
Like I said before, I think he had enough plates to spin as it was.
The employees now know a bloated, loss making company has to start evolving quickly or it's toast and remember as I quoted (I'm good like that), he was endorsed by Jack Dorsey.
Popcorn time.
Twitters demise would be great for Democrats.
(as said before).
Just been having a look around the OSINT stuff for Ukraine, and they are actively trying to guard against the distinct possibility of an early demise of Twitter, but worried that their activities aren't easily replicated on other channels.
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition
I'm sure you can come up with some examples yourself.
I am not sure. You have no chance.
That does not automatically mean it is overall a bad outcome. Given the global behemoth is capable of huge factual distortion (and the owner has a clearly radical agenda) I still see its potential failure as a potentially good outcome.
That does not mean I dismiss people losing their jobs or other negative impacts as meaningless. But that happens all the time when any business folds or shrinks.
Innumerable organisations and individuals use Twitter to communicate with the public. Twitter has become more akin to a public utility.
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition
Musk offering to buy it for a laugh, being forced to buy it and losing billions because he doesn't understand what he bought is funny. Tweeting through it and making things worse is funny.
It is, albeit with the caveats noted by RJS. That there still isn't a viable alternative that has appeared that can perform Twitter's useful functions still surprises me, given the possible financial rewards opening up.
Crikey, this is exactly the sort of thing anti monopoly legislation is designed to do within a nations markets and yet here is a global entity able to exert enormous influence.
Anti-monopoly laws seem not to be able to cope with modern tech giants: Amazon, eBay, Twitter, Facebook, Spotify...
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition
Musk, who took over Twitter on October 27, sent an email to his employees Wednesday for the first time. The email was sent at 2:39 a.m. ET, according to a time stamp on the email reviewed by Insider.
The billionaire wrote in the email that employees would no longer be permitted to work remotely. He said Twitter expected staff to be in the office for at least 40 hours a week unless they're given approval to work elsewhere, which he'd review.
Musk told Twitter employees, "The road ahead is arduous and will require intense work to succeed."
https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-email-ends-remote-work-twitter-staff-office-2022-11?r=US&IR=T
The little blue bird is definitely in fight mode now.
I sense greatness.
It’s so big it’s a public utility but it’s not a monopoly.
This is exactly the scenario that anti competition bodies tackle, it doesn’t mean there is no competition, it means there is risk of no effective competition due to the size of the leading player, that is the case with Twitter.
The loss of Twitter remains unlikely imho. But it’s loss won’t leave us short of communication methods so it is not something I fear. A fracturing of communication channels, whilst in some ways more inconvenient still brings many advantages such as effective competition.