Elon Musk - the world's "greatest" spiv?

[JohnMcL7]

I find the idea of monetizing the blue ticks a bit odd as it seems the opposite way round to how it normally works for content creators, if they're bringing large numbers of followers to the site and those followers are seeing adverts which generate revenue. I guess there are some people using Twitter more for personal promotion (particularly Musk himself) although it's still drawing people to the site.

I do wonder how people use Twitter though because these days I find between the adverts, the suggested topics, the posts people I follow have liked and the posts from others who are followed by people I follow it's almost impossible now to actually see the content from people I follow with up to 20 posts in a row that aren't content I've chosen or want to see. I've spent a while trying to keep blocking users that I'm only seeing because people I follow interact with them and closing the suggested topics but it just keeps on going generating more and more obscure topics. I did wonder if it's so bad because I don't follow many people so I did briefly try following more but that made the whole problem ten times worse.

I think the comments above about it being a right wing echo chamber sound about right at the moment.

 

[jon0844]

I tried some time ago to get verified, when I was very well known at a media publication and elsewhere - and it was rejected (I haven't tried again after two failed attempts). I expect that with a charge brought in, I'd find myself verified no issue. Indeed, I suspect anyone willing to pay will magically qualify, which will somewhat reduce the usefulness of the whole thing.

Then again, given how many people who are quite well known and trusted, and didn't qualify either, it has never really meant that much anyway.

Jimmy Kimmel had some choice words for Twitter's new owner Elon Musk this past weekend, after Musk shared a bogus story pushing a conspiracy theory about the attack on Paul Pelosi. Kimmel tweeted that it was amazing watching Musk devolve into a "piece of sh*t" in real time on the social media site, a criticism that is as biting as it is accurate. Farron Cousins explains what happened. Link - https://twitter.com/jimmykimmel/statu...

 

[Busaholic]

I tried some time ago to get verified, when I was very well known at a media publication and elsewhere - and it was rejected (I haven't tried again after two failed attempts). I expect that with a charge brought in, I'd find myself verified no issue. Indeed, I suspect anyone willing to pay will magically qualify, which will somewhat reduce the usefulness of the whole thing.

Then again, given how many people who are quite well known and trusted, and didn't qualify either, it has never really meant that much anyway.

The tweet by Musk mysteriously disappeared not very long after it was posted, but by then had been seen by how many thousands in the USA. He and Trump are an existential threat to democracy, in the USA first, then the rest of what might once have been known as the 'free world.'

 

[Tetchytyke]

Musk is like a lot of the tech wide boys from his generation, and a long way to the right politically.

The only difference between Musk and, say, Peter Thiel or Travis Kalanick, is that Musk just loves to blow his own trumpet.

I'd say the quiet ones like Thiel are much more dangerous. Thiel terrifies me, to be quite honest.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Musk is like a lot of the tech wide boys from his generation, and a long way to the right politically.

This is something that I think has been missed by a lot of political commentators: the tech industry is very right wing beneath it all. I work on the edges of the tech industry, and you don't have to dig very deep to discover that there's a nasty combination of money and entitlement there. Musk is by no means alone on this, and his views are very commonly repeated by people at all levels. There are some other issues at play, but for instance, it's not a big secret that women are openly and routinely discriminated against in tech companies and in tech-orientated courses/degrees.

I don't think Musk owning Twitter is a major threat, as there's a clear trend of users abandoning sites that go too far to the right. If, as predicted, he allows Twitter to become a cess pit, then 'the libs' will abandon it and it will collapse very quickly. While right wing echo chambers can work on a small level, a site the size of Twitter needs users, and anyone on the centre/left will quickly stop using a site if all they see is 'haha f**k the libs' in response to school shootings.

What Musk doesn't seem to understand is that he's also dangerously reliant on governments and government hand-outs. If he goes too far, he might find that the concessions suddenly dry up. We can see this with Starlink: when he tried to play a strong hand against the Pentagon, he was quite obviously told at a very high level that either he supported Ukraine or that he would face problems, as they very quickly turned round and accepted that Ukraine could continue to use Starlink for free.

 

[takno]

This is something that I think has been missed by a lot of political commentators: the tech industry is very right wing beneath it all. I work on the edges of the tech industry, and you don't have to dig very deep to discover that there's a nasty combination of money and entitlement there. Musk is by no means alone on this, and his views are very commonly repeated by people at all levels. There are some other issues at play, but for instance, it's not a big secret that women are openly and routinely discriminated against in tech companies and in tech-orientated courses/degrees

This isn't a fair characterisation of the industry in general, and painting such a broad-strokes picture of any entire industry just looks like a grim and lazy form of prejudice.

It's probably fair to say that there is a tendency towards authoritarianism, which is led by a tendency to underthink hard problems and jump to obvious-but-wrong conclusions outside of people's field of expertise. I'm not convinced that is actually worse in tech circles than it is in other academic and professional areas though tbh - doctors can be absolutely terrible for it for example.

Again in the field of people not understanding things outside their own experience, there are a lot of well-paid people in tech who don't really realise how lucky they are, and plenty of the tendency you see across the economy of moderately rich people thinking that basically everybody has the same opportunities available to them.

In terms of social media giants, the first thing to acknowledge is that they are American, which inevitably puts them to the right in any European political context. Within that, they've tended to start off as a free-for-all. As they've developed moderation policies, they have mostly drifted into this weird "left liberal" authoritarianism which treats slight niche concepts of identity politics and respecting a rather fascistic notion of "the science" as primary, and lets any concepts of society and getting on with people go to hell. Meanwhile they've developed algorithms which surface similarly simplistic content which people respond to enough to click on, but probably not enough to enjoy or learn from, quite a lot of which is right wing.

Musk's main problem is that he doesn't really seem to understand any of the problems he's buying into, and hasn't got the first clue how to respond to them for better or worse

 

[Tetchytyke]

This isn't a fair characterisation of the industry in general, and painting such a broad-strokes picture of any entire industry just looks like a grim and lazy form of prejudice.

I suppose it depends what we mean by the "tech industry".

Most tech companies seem to operate from a position of hard-nosed libertarianism. The big boys all got there by trampling everyone else underfoot- Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon all have very very dubious business practices, before we even consider exploitative abominations like Uber and Deliveroo. The likes of EA selling gambling products to kids, also.

No CEO gets where they are by being cuddly, but tech seems to have its fair share of actual sociopaths- Thiel, Kalanick, Bezos, Gates. But are they any worse than the big boys in finance? Probably not.

From the outside, it does look like tech- like finance, to be fair- has a big problem with amoral libertarians swinging their willies around.

 

[takno]

I suppose it depends what we mean by the "tech industry".

Most tech companies seem to operate from a position of hard-nosed libertarianism. The big boys all got there by trampling everyone else underfoot- Microsoft, Google, Apple, Amazon all have very very dubious business practices, before we even consider exploitative abominations like Uber and Deliveroo. The likes of EA selling gambling products to kids, also.

No CEO gets where they are by being cuddly, but tech seems to have its fair share of actual sociopaths- Thiel, Kalanick, Bezos, Gates. But are they any worse than the big boys in finance? Probably not.

From the outside, it does look like tech- like finance, to be fair- has a big problem with amoral libertarians swinging their willies around.

I can get on board with lots of criticism of many of the large consumer-facing internet companies, but that's very different from attacking the wider tech industry and by extension the people in it. In general the larger companies are just a reflection of the extremist immoral capitalism that has been foisted on so many industries over the past 30 years.

The gambling and kids thing is a quite specific problem brought to you by America's historical hard-line on gambling. As with most prohibition of things people want to do it just puts the entire industry outside of sensible regulation. People end up doing things which are like gambling but don't meet the technical definition, and it turns out at that point that instead of being able to regulate it to adults-only and provide some amount of support for problem gamblers, you just have an unregulated thing that somebody somewhere will realise can be legally offered to kids.

 

[Cloud Strife]

From the outside, it does look like tech- like finance, to be fair- has a big problem with amoral libertarians swinging their willies around.

The worst are actually the smaller companies in my experience. I once had some awful dealings with an SME run by some terrible libertarian types who genuinely believed that they were some kind of God's Gift to tech. I brought them down to size by telling them to sit down and shut up while I went over the contract point by point, and it was only then that it dawned on them that their 'we will do what we want' attitude was likely to cost them a substantial amount of money.

But yes, tech is very much the 2020s version of 1980s yuppies in finance in my opinion. There are a lot of people who are getting rich quickly from it, and their attitudes are often loathesome. I have nothing against making money, but don't try and act like you're some kind of saviour to mankind while selling your SAAS.

but that's very different from attacking the wider tech industry and by extension the people in it.

Unfortunately, the term 'techbro' was coined for a reason. A lot of these companies are unbelievably toxic at heart.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The gambling and kids thing is a quite specific problem brought to you by America's historical hard-line on gambling.

I'm not sure I agree there. I think it's more they saw a gap in the regulatory framework and a loophole in how most countries define online gambling, and decided to pile in. Lootboxes are surprisingly difficult to define as gambling, even though they are clearly analogous.

 

[takno]

The worst are actually the smaller companies in my experience. I once had some awful dealings with an SME run by some terrible libertarian types who genuinely believed that they were some kind of God's Gift to tech. I brought them down to size by telling them to sit down and shut up while I went over the contract point by point, and it was only then that it dawned on them that their 'we will do what we want' attitude was likely to cost them a substantial amount of money.

But yes, tech is very much the 2020s version of 1980s yuppies in finance in my opinion. There are a lot of people who are getting rich quickly from it, and their attitudes are often loathesome. I have nothing against making money, but don't try and act like you're some kind of saviour to mankind while selling your SAAS.

Unfortunately, the term 'techbro' was coined for a reason. A lot of these companies are unbelievably toxic at heart.

There are lots of SMEs run by pretty terrible people across all of industry, and it's extremely common not to want to listen to the lawyers and other professionals they employ. I've worked in and around a fair number of tech organisations of various sizes and types, and the vast majority of both them and the people they employ are absolutely fine. Sorry you haven't had the same experience but please, put away the prejudice.

 

[jon0844]

OnePlus will be selling physical loot boxes this month, ahead of Black Friday. £9.95 a pop. They say some will contain phones (or a voucher for one), or money-off vouchers and other goods worth £1000. They don't say what the other 'prizes' are, which could be something worth £5 or £10 (and in those cases, vouchers for money off only if spending lots more).

How some Governments have not seen this as gambling I do not know! Oh, wait, I am sure they know absolutely but just choose not to act.

 

[Bletchleyite]

OnePlus will be selling physical loot boxes this month, ahead of Black Friday. £9.95 a pop. They say some will contain phones (or a voucher for one), or money-off vouchers and other goods worth £1000. They don't say what the other 'prizes' are, which could be something worth £5 or £10 (and in those cases, vouchers for money off only if spending lots more).

How some Governments have not seen this as gambling I do not know! Oh, wait, I am sure they know absolutely but just choose not to act.

It's quite clearly a raffle, a bit like a tombola. Is it not being done under those laws?

 

[Tetchytyke]

How some Governments have not seen this as gambling I do not know! Oh, wait, I am sure they know absolutely but just choose not to act.

It's surprisingly difficult to define as gambling. You're purchasing a box, not what is inside it, and each box does have something inside it. Legally it's almost impossible to draw a distinction between that and, say, Panini football stickers.

We define gambling as "playing a game of chance for money or money's worth", and even then it doesn't neatly fit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's surprisingly difficult to define as gambling. You're purchasing a box, not what is inside it, and each box does have something inside it. Legally it's almost impossible to draw a distinction between that and, say, Panini football stickers.

We define gambling as "playing a game of chance for money or money's worth", and even then it doesn't neatly fit.

Hmm. It's probably similar in a way to those "returns pallets" you can buy, but then they aren't really gambling. But also a tombola, which is.

 

[Busaholic]

Musk is like a lot of the tech wide boys from his generation, and a long way to the right politically.

The only difference between Musk and, say, Peter Thiel or Travis Kalanick, is that Musk just loves to blow his own trumpet.

I'd say the quiet ones like Thiel are much more dangerous. Thiel terrifies me, to be quite honest.

I think you're right to be terrified, but a Faustian pact between the three named here, plus Trump because of the supporters he brings, would definitely pave an end to Western democracy, if it hasn't already happened in effect. If the Republicans succeed in the mid term elections, however tainted the process may be in two or three crucial states by thuggish tactics or suspect counting, then the Biden government may not be able to govern in a meaningful way, especially as the Supreme Court under Clarence Thomas will have all the impartiality of a Russian court.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Hmm. It's probably similar in a way to those "returns pallets" you can buy, but then they aren't really gambling. But also a tombola, which is.

It's a tough one to legislate for if you want to catch lootboxes but without also catching things like Panini stickers or things like the McDonald's Monopoly promotion.

And I hate lootboxes.

I think you're right to be terrified, but a Faustian pact between the three named here, plus Trump because of the supporters he brings, would definitely pave an end to Western democracy

Between Thiel and the Koch brothers, I think we're well heading in that direction.

 

[Busaholic]

I feel so allergic to Musk that I can't bear to see him on TV, so I only recognise him from 'still' shots. It's been bugging me that he looks quite similar to someone I've seen on television, but up until now I couldn't quite place who it was. Now I've got it - Harry Enfield! Has anyone ever seen them both in the same room? Hmm, me neither. Actually, no wish to libel Enfield, I think it's one of his comic creations he resembles, but I'm not sufficiently au fait with them to nail it down. Any suggestions?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I feel so allergic to Musk that I can't bear to see him on TV, so I only recognise him from 'still' shots. It's been bugging me that he looks quite similar to someone I've seen on television, but up until now I couldn't quite place who it was. Now I've got it - Harry Enfield! Has anyone ever seen them both in the same room? Hmm, me neither. Actually, no wish to libel Enfield, I think it's one of his comic creations he resembles, but I'm not sufficiently au fait with them to nail it down. Any suggestions?

Tory Boy?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Tory Boy?

Nah, "I am considerably richer than yew" bloke.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nah, "I am considerably richer than yew" bloke.

I thought that originally but he has too much hair. He does act a bit like that person, though.

 

[birchesgreen]

He reminds me of that chief in one of those 80s comedies (can't remember the title) where he would tell a terrible joke then bark "LAUGH!" and all his flunkies would laugh hysterically.

 

[LUYMun]

Several Twitter staff members have filed a lawsuit as Elon Musk begins another round of mass firing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/business-63511430

Twitter staff locked out of work accounts as mass sackings begin

1. Some Twitter staff say they are already being locked out of email and Slack accounts as mass sackings at the company begin
2. New owner Elon Musk is expected to reduce the platform's workforce of 8,000 by as much as half
3. An internal email said the cuts were designed to put Twitter on a "healthy path" - the platform struggles to make a profit
4. All staff are set to receive an email with the subject "Your Role at Twitter" by 09:00 Pacific time on Friday (16:00 GMT)
5. A class action lawsuit has already been filed against the company over the mass job cuts and the amount of notice given

 

[Cloud Strife]

Several Twitter staff members have filed a lawsuit as Elon Musk begins another round of mass firing.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/business-63511430

And now the advertisers are calling a halt to advertising until they can evaluate the situation.

It's very, very predictable. Musk's ego got the better of him, and with people feeling empowered to post whatever they want, it's going to discourage advertisers further.

 

[birchesgreen]

The only really surprising aspect of this is how fast it is unravelling.

 

[jon0844]

Elon is now showing himself to be even more like Trump, and perfectly demonstrating how he isn't some genius.

In the last seven days, it seems he's been awake almost 24/7 to mostly troll people and act like Twitter is his own personal playground (which of course it now is) but clearly he has zero idea how to run a business - as his actions will likely run it into the ground.

He's always posted stupid things, but now he's pushing the boundaries because - hey - it's HIS platform. It has effectively become all about him and nothing else.

The fact he can spend so much time on this makes you wonder what is happening to his other businesses, although I suspect it shows that they can operate without him. Indeed, they may run better without him.

 

[Cloud Strife]

He's always posted stupid things, but now he's pushing the boundaries because - hey - it's HIS platform. It has effectively become all about him and nothing else.

I think there's also the point that Musk doesn't necessarily understand the business. His relentless pursuit of technical innovation works with businesses like Starlink, SpaceX and Tesla, because they rely heavily on such innovation. It won't work with a mature social networking site, because there's not that much to innovate with. He needs to find a way to keep users engaged with the site, but they're not going to stay engaged if it becomes a 'muh free speech' cesspit filled with racism, sexism and other hatred. The people that will stay engaged on such a platform won't buy from advertisements, so it's a lose-lose scenario.

With the other businesses, he's apparently forcing people from Tesla to work (unpaid!) on Twitter-related duties on top of their normal duties. I can easily imagine Tesla losing some very, very good people that way.

 

[brad465]

The only really surprising aspect of this is how fast it is unravelling.

I wonder if Liz Truss' rise and fall foreshadowed Musk's time running Twitter?

There were many who expected her to fail too, but not within 50 days.

 

[birchesgreen]

I wonder if Liz Truss' rise and fall foreshadowed Musk's time running Twitter?

There were many who expected her to fail too, but not within 50 days.

Kids today, always in a rush

 

[jon0844]

I think there's also the point that Musk doesn't necessarily understand the business. His relentless pursuit of technical innovation works with businesses like Starlink, SpaceX and Tesla, because they rely heavily on such innovation.

In most cases a lot of the innovation is vapourware. Tesla is many years away from full level 5 autonomous self-driving (if it ever manages it), years behind delivering vehicles Elon has launched and said 'isn't that hard', was way off with his ideas on Hyperloop and underground road tunnels (ending up narrow road tunnels with a pathetic through capacity, and every vehicle manually driven), had a laughable launch of AI/robots two years in a row now, has talked up many other things that haven't happened (and don't look like happening) and seems like one massive grifter.

Tesla really is just an ordinary EV manufacturer. Sure, they're ahead of the rest, but others are quickly catching up. There's very little in a Tesla to make it stand out.

Starlink is likely also financially unviable, and will rely on further investment and tax breaks, and even SpaceX with reusable rockets isn't considered that big a deal, especially as the promises made years ago haven't yet come to fruition.

I think in the last year or two, people are seeing through Elon and his big boasts - and playing on being compared to Iron Man - and realising he's full of it.

Twitter is almost certainly going to alert more people to this, and he can't rely on the sycophantic fanboys forever. Not least because they presumably aren't in a position to give him loads of money.