From a stock price perspective they launched their IPO almost 10 years ago at around $41, and it immediately almost went to $70. Since then it has fluctuated as low as $15 and as high as $77. It's currently in the mid-$40s.
From a stock price perspective they launched their IPO almost 10 years ago at around $41, and it immediately almost went to $70. Since then it has fluctuated as low as $15 and as high as $77. It's currently in the mid-$40s.
The mass unban wave of shithead conservatives who will then be able to tweet literally whatever they want with zero repercussion sure will be a sight to behold. 😒😒😒
And you know the first thing that childish troll Elon will do is give Trump a nice "Welcome back Mr President!" tweet.
Fucking hell, I hope this doesn't happen.
I agree, and it is massive in news media and politics for good reason. You will reliably find breaking news on twitter faster than anywhere else.Also for what it's worth, Twitter punches well above its weight in terms of discourse vs actual usage. It's a massive social media platform but also the *least* massive (against FB and YouTube, at least) by quite a bit. It's basically all Millennials.
A big reason it gets so much traction is because the entire news media is on it and addicted to it.
Do you really believe that Musk and these other dipshits think that way? In their minds they are the oppressed and marginalized by us "liberal elites". They absolutely believe that conservatives on Twitter like Trump were banned simply for being conservatives.That would sink Twitter and all the people in charge know it.
Trump wasn't banned because of his politics
TWTR is where it was in late 2013. There are probably few time-frames where it has outperformed the market, and going back five years conveniently compares the current buyout boosted price with a near all-time low, which is cherry picking.
The twitter board announced a 'poison pill' option that they could vote on if Musk (or anyone) purchased more than 15% of the stock without board permission and this could be used to inflate the price but I do not think it could stop him if he had enough purchasing power to swallow it.
Thankfully it looks like Twitter are going to make this impossible.
Last thing the world needs is Elon having any more influence.
[he[ railed against what he saw as a lack of free speech on Twitter, and said Twitter should open-source its algorithm to increase transparency in the company's content moderation decisions. That would reflect a major shift in how Twitter operates.
"The code should be on Github so people can look through it and say, 'I see a problem here,' 'I don't agree with this,' they can highlight issues, suggest changes," said Musk.
Asked how he would change Twitter's content moderation, Musk explained that his test for whether a platform adheres to free speech principles is simple: "Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? And if that is the case, then we have free speech."
Musk mused that if a tweet were particularly controversial, perhaps the company should not promote that tweet, but added, "I think we want to be very reluctant to delete things and just be very cautious with permanent bans; timeouts are better."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this but was t the idea of the "poison pill" supposed to be the thing that prevents this? Like why would all of the sudden Elon going "I'm serious and I have the funding" change the original idea to prevent this exact thing from happening?Not only is it "possible", but the structure of the tender offer probably makes it all-but-inevitable that it will happen.
Notice he thinks his personal takeover and privatization is 'important to the future of civilization', he is a neo-fash accelerationist and cares nothing for democracy.🤮Elon Musk says his offer to buy Twitter is about 'the future of civilization,' not making money
Elon Musk defended his offer to purchase Twitter on Thursday, saying during an on-stage interview at the TED conference that he sees the acquisition as nothing less than a turning point for civilization.edition.cnn.com
He's really going to go for it isn't he.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this but was t the idea of the "poison pill" supposed to be the thing that prevents this? Like why would all of the sudden Elon going "I'm serious and I have the funding" change the original idea to prevent this exact thing from happening?
Poison Pill is a very dangerous move activated after Musk purchases more than 15% of the company , that allows anyone who wishes to purchase Twitter stock to get 2 stocks for the price for one. So, trading volume will skyrocket, but current stock owners will have trouble selling, and Twitter could end up really messing up their financials.Maybe I'm misunderstanding this but was t the idea of the "poison pill" supposed to be the thing that prevents this? Like why would all of the sudden Elon going "I'm serious and I have the funding" change the original idea to prevent this exact thing from happening?
Lol this shit is complete nonsense. What productive good would possibly come from open-sourcing a moderation algorithm for a multi-million user site? You would just have thousands of chuds throwing out pull requests to get the green-light to use every slur, death threat tactic, and other clown shit under the sun. I would not envy whatever poor sap whose job it would be to actually comb through that shit lol.Elon Musk says his offer to buy Twitter is about 'the future of civilization,' not making money
Elon Musk defended his offer to purchase Twitter on Thursday, saying during an on-stage interview at the TED conference that he sees the acquisition as nothing less than a turning point for civilization.edition.cnn.com
lol.
🤮
He's really going to go for it isn't he.
Probably not--at least not in the US. Historically, anti-trust law is only used against businesses, not the humans who own the business as shareholders. For example, back in the early days of the Sherman Antitrust Act, there were several huge conglomerates that were basically controlled by 1 human each. After antitrust enforcement, the US government broke up the companies into many pieces, but share ownership remained with the same humans as before.Is there anything the government can do to prevent the buyout?
The federal government could nationalize Twitter and buy it themselves, at a discount too by claiming imminent domain.Probably not--at least not in the US. Historically, anti-trust law is only used against businesses, not the humans who own the business as shareholders. For example, back in the early days of the Sherman Antitrust Act, there were several huge conglomerates that were basically controlled by 1 human each. After antitrust enforcement, the US government broke up the companies into many pieces, but share ownership remained with the same humans as before.
Another difficulty is that Musk does not own significant parts of social media companies, or anything that would vertically integrate with them in a meaningful way.
Musk owning 100% of Twitter may get the US government to scrutinize the monopoly social media companies have, and they may break up the tech giants. That would be a good outcome. But I am not aware of anything that suggests they can stop Musk from owning Twitter.
The federal government could nationalize Twitter and buy it themselves, at a discount too by claiming imminent domain.
Oh of course. I actually think Twitter would actually have to move closer to Musk's version of free speech if the government owned it too, ironically.
Aka I want to bring back Trump and delete any evidence with me and Epsteins wife.Elon Musk says his offer to buy Twitter is about 'the future of civilization,' not making money
Elon Musk defended his offer to purchase Twitter on Thursday, saying during an on-stage interview at the TED conference that he sees the acquisition as nothing less than a turning point for civilization.edition.cnn.com
lol.
🤮
He's really going to go for it isn't he.
Just like the WHO, I presume that ACLU will side step their morals for money.
The ACLU only cares about free speech being absolute in these cases. They'll gladly represent white supremacists.
Keep in mind, the ACLU thinks Citizens United is a good thing. It's why I stopped giving money to them.
The ACLU does a lot of work defending trans youths and access to abortion. Their free speech absolutism may be wrong in certain situations, but they're certainly not worth writing off entirely.
The ACLU does a lot of work defending trans youths and access to abortion. Their free speech absolutism may be wrong in certain situations, but they're certainly not worth writing off entirely.
How so?Thankfully it looks like Twitter are going to make this impossible.
How so? I feel like they've been on it with the number of bills related to those issues I mentioned popping up lately.It really feels like they've been missing the forest for the trees recently.
I wonder how quickly someone will get banned for saying negative things about Tesla or SpaceX.If this happens I guess I'll stop using Twitter. Sucks that all social media is owned by complete jackasses but I think Twitter will become the worst one with musk in charge
Yep me too. Will be the kick I need to finish off twitter for good. I don't want musk verifying my humanity.If this happens I guess I'll stop using Twitter. Sucks that all social media is owned by complete jackasses but I think Twitter will become the worst one with musk in charge
Yep me too. Will be the kick I need to finish off twitter for good. I don't want musk verifying my humanity.
I wonder how quickly someone will get banned for saying negative things about Tesla or SpaceX.
Yep me too. Will be the kick I need to finish off twitter for good. I don't want musk verifying my humanity.