• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Twitter likely to take idiots offer to buy them for $43 billion

Twitter executives say they aren’t playing Elon Musk’s games.

At a company town hall on Thursday, the execs told employees they will not renegotiate the price of his $44 billion takeover agreement—a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Daily Beast—even as Musk tries to stir up doubt about the number of fake accounts on the platform.

Twitter’s share price is currently hovering around $38 per share, well below the $54.20 per share Musk committed to last month.

The terms of the buyout agreement will make it hard for him to weasel out of the deal. It includes a $1 billion breakup fee, and the company could sue to try to force Musk to follow through on the transaction.
It would be pretty funny if Musk is ruined because he got duped into overextending himself by right wing rage bait.
 
Twitter executives say they aren’t playing Elon Musk’s games.

At a company town hall on Thursday, the execs told employees they will not renegotiate the price of his $44 billion takeover agreement—a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Daily Beast—even as Musk tries to stir up doubt about the number of fake accounts on the platform.

Twitter’s share price is currently hovering around $38 per share, well below the $54.20 per share Musk committed to last month.

The terms of the buyout agreement will make it hard for him to weasel out of the deal. It includes a $1 billion breakup fee, and the company could sue to try to force Musk to follow through on the transaction.
It would be pretty funny if Musk is ruined because he got duped into overextending himself by right wing rage bait.
Schadenfreude is delicious.
Tom
 
Schadenfreude is delicious.
Tom
Truly.
But the ease with which billionaires - even fake billionaires like Trump - get away with ignoring rules and laws, makes me wonder who is going to taste it in the end.
 
Twitter executives say they aren’t playing Elon Musk’s games.

At a company town hall on Thursday, the execs told employees they will not renegotiate the price of his $44 billion takeover agreement—a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Daily Beast—even as Musk tries to stir up doubt about the number of fake accounts on the platform.

Twitter’s share price is currently hovering around $38 per share, well below the $54.20 per share Musk committed to last month.

The terms of the buyout agreement will make it hard for him to weasel out of the deal. It includes a $1 billion breakup fee, and the company could sue to try to force Musk to follow through on the transaction.
It would be pretty funny if Musk is ruined because he got duped into overextending himself by right wing rage bait.
Musk is worth US$210b. How would overpaying for Twitter 'overextend' him let alone 'ruin' him?
 
Twitter executives say they aren’t playing Elon Musk’s games.

At a company town hall on Thursday, the execs told employees they will not renegotiate the price of his $44 billion takeover agreement—a source familiar with the matter confirmed to The Daily Beast—even as Musk tries to stir up doubt about the number of fake accounts on the platform.

Twitter’s share price is currently hovering around $38 per share, well below the $54.20 per share Musk committed to last month.

The terms of the buyout agreement will make it hard for him to weasel out of the deal. It includes a $1 billion breakup fee, and the company could sue to try to force Musk to follow through on the transaction.
It would be pretty funny if Musk is ruined because he got duped into overextending himself by right wing rage bait.
Musk is worth US$210b. How would overpaying for Twitter 'overextend' him let alone 'ruin' him?
There's already talk of booting him from Tesla. His antics are hurting the company.
 
Twitter employees inadvertently shed light on the current culture at Twitter:

Elon Musk called out a Twitter executive who was caught mocking the billionaire's Asperger's in a newly-released video from Project Veritas.

Alex Martinez, identified by Project Veritas as Twitter's Lead Client Partner, was recorded knocking his incoming boss, decrying the Tesla CEO's mission to reform the platform's policies in favor of free speech.

"He has Asperger's. So he's special!" Martinez told an undercover Project Veritas journalist in a video released Tuesday. "You're special needs! You're literally special needs."

"So I can't even take what you're saying seriously," Martinez added.

Musk did not seem to take those comments lightly, tweeting, "Twitter exec trashing free speech & mocking people with Asperger’s …"

The billionaire pinned that tweet to his Twitter page.

Musk also separately tweeted a frown emoji in response to the video.

Elon Musk reacts to a video of a Twitter executive caught mocking his Asperger's.

Martinez's comments came just one day after Project Veritas released another video featuring Twitter senior engineer Siru Murugesan, who was caught saying Twitter "does not believe in free speech" and how a "capitalist" like Musk may come into conflict with Murugesan's fellow colleagues, who he described as being "socialist" and "commie as f---."

"Ideologically, it does not make sense, like, because we're actually censoring the right and not the left," Murugesan told an undercover Project Veritas journalist in Monday's video. "So everyone on the right will be like, ‘Bro, it’s okay to say it, just gotta tolerate it.' The left will be like, ‘No, I’m not gonna tolerate it. I need it censored or else I'm not gonna be on the platform.' So it does that on the right. It's true. There is bias."

When asked what his colleagues think of Musk becoming their new boss, Murugesan said "they hate it" though he himself is "at least okay with it."

"Some of my colleagues are like super left, left, left, left, left… They're like, ‘This would be my last day,’" the senior engineer said. "We did all we could to, like, revolt against it. A lot of the employees revolted against it, but at the end of the day, the board of directors have the say and then they acted on their best interests because they didn't wanna get sued."

Following the leak of Murugesan's comments, internal memos to Twitter staff were leaked to Project Veritas warning "increased targeting" of employees, referred to within the company as "Tweeps."

"Groups like Project Veritas are active right now," Twitter's security team told staff. "These groups use social engineering tactics to get close to employees and obtain videos and recordings of employees discussing internal company matters and often selectively edit those recordings to misrepresent conversations to further their own political or ideological agendas."

"Given the interest in Twitter at the moment, we expect for this targeting to continue and possibly increase, and it's more important than ever that we remain vigilant," the memo read before urging staff, "Do not disclose confidential, proprietary information, or discuss internal conversations, policies or products outside of the office."

In Tuesday's leaked footage, Martinez unwittingly showed the undercover Project Veritas journalist the memo.

"It's like some group that's just trying to out the employees," Martinez told the Project Veritas journalist. "Like they're trying to go on dates with them, like this, and record them… and say, ‘This is what a Twitter employee just said.’"

Martinez added, "You're lucky that you met me organically cause I would be questioning everything about you."

Twitter did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment.
 
Nothing. There was only one attempt at overthrowing a democratically elected government in Australia, and it succeeded. The perpetrators were the leader of the conservative opposition, Malcolm Fraser, the Chief Justice of Australia, Sir Garfield Barwick and the Governor-General of Australia, Sir John Kerr. The event, popularly known as The Dismissal, occurred in 1975 and involved no physical violence whatsoever.
Oh please. Whitlam was elected to the prime ministership of a Westminster parliamentary democracy with the customary uncertain duration of office, not to a fixed-term presidency. He knew the rules* going in. Kerr didn't exceed his authority; he did his job. You might as well call losing a no-confidence vote "overthrowing a democratically elected government".

(* Including that Kerr could fire him. If Whitlam didn't want Kerr to fire him he should have appointed somebody else.)
 
Nothing. There was only one attempt at overthrowing a democratically elected government in Australia, and it succeeded. The perpetrators were the leader of the conservative opposition, Malcolm Fraser, the Chief Justice of Australia, Sir Garfield Barwick and the Governor-General of Australia, Sir John Kerr. The event, popularly known as The Dismissal, occurred in 1975 and involved no physical violence whatsoever.
Oh please. Whitlam was elected to the prime ministership of a Westminster parliamentary democracy with the customary uncertain duration of office, not to a fixed-term presidency. He knew the rules* going in. Kerr didn't exceed his authority; he did his job. You might as well call losing a no-confidence vote "overthrowing a democratically elected government".

(* Including that Kerr could fire him. If Whitlam didn't want Kerr to fire him he should have appointed somebody else.)
Whitlam was not elected to the prime ministership, Australia is not a Westminster style parliamentary democracy and the Labor government was not terminated by a no-confidence vote.
 
Nothing. There was only one attempt at overthrowing a democratically elected government in Australia, and it succeeded. The perpetrators were the leader of the conservative opposition, Malcolm Fraser, the Chief Justice of Australia, Sir Garfield Barwick and the Governor-General of Australia, Sir John Kerr. The event, popularly known as The Dismissal, occurred in 1975 and involved no physical violence whatsoever.
Oh please. Whitlam was elected to the prime ministership of a Westminster parliamentary democracy with the customary uncertain duration of office, not to a fixed-term presidency. He knew the rules* going in. Kerr didn't exceed his authority; he did his job. You might as well call losing a no-confidence vote "overthrowing a democratically elected government".

(* Including that Kerr could fire him. If Whitlam didn't want Kerr to fire him he should have appointed somebody else.)
Whitlam was not elected to the prime ministership,
He was the leader of the party that won the lower house, who is the prime minister.

Australia is not a Westminster style parliamentary democracy
Yes, it is.

and the Labor government was not terminated by a no-confidence vote.
Bomb didn't claim it was.
 
I'm a Twitter user and I like that I can follow my fave journalists - it's the platform of choice for many journalists, scientists, doctors, politicians, etc.... It's pretty free speech as it is, the moderation just seems to focus on useless garbage, like you might see on 4 chan.

If it just becomes a free-for-all filled with pepe memes, porn, and incels, then it's value will be zero.

Hearing him talk about how he would moderate the platform is laughable. He has no clue what he's getting himself into.
 
I'm a Twitter user and I like that I can follow my fave journalists - it's the platform of choice for many journalists, scientists, doctors, politicians, etc.... It's pretty free speech as it is,

Of course, it is not. Otherwise, the threat that it would become more free would not hold any water.
the moderation just seems to focus on useless garbage, like you might see on 4 chan.

How would you know? If content is censored before you see it, how would you know it was all useless?
If it just becomes a free-for-all filled with pepe memes, porn, and incels, then it's value will be zero.
Its value to you may be zero. Why do you think its overall value would be zero?

Hearing him talk about how he would moderate the platform is laughable. He has no clue what he's getting himself into.
I suspect he had no idea the extent of either how deep and wide the left-wing bias is at Twitter, nor how utterly censorious the employees are, but he is no doubt becoming well aware.
 
Oh please. Whitlam was elected to the prime ministership of a Westminster parliamentary democracy with the customary uncertain duration of office, not to a fixed-term presidency. He knew the rules* going in. Kerr didn't exceed his authority; he did his job. You might as well call losing a no-confidence vote "overthrowing a democratically elected government".

(* Including that Kerr could fire him. If Whitlam didn't want Kerr to fire him he should have appointed somebody else.)
Whitlam was not elected to the prime ministership,
Sorry, you're perfectly right, my bad. Whitlam was appointed to the prime ministership by Kerr's predecessor, after the Labor MPs elected Whitlam to the person whom the Governor General will appoint to the prime ministership when Labor wins the electionship. An important distinction.
 
(CNN)Elon Musk issued his most direct threat yet to walk away from his purchase of Twitter (TWTR) on Monday, openly accusing the social media company of breaching the merger agreement by not providing the data he has requested on spam and fake accounts.

In a letter to Twitter's head of legal, policy and trust, Vijaya Gadde, Musk alleged that Twitter is "actively resisting and thwarting his information rights" as outlined by the deal.

"This is a clear material breach of Twitter's obligations under the merger agreement and Mr. Musk reserves all rights resulting therefrom, including his right not to consummate the transaction and his right to terminate the merger agreement," an attorney representing Musk wrote to the company.
 


What part of any of this is the business of a state attorney general? Is it illegal to have bots on your social media platform?
 
This is great. People can just make baseless accusations and that is enough to stir an Attorney General into a litigious frenzy.
(CNN)Elon Musk issued his most direct threat yet to walk away from his purchase of Twitter (TWTR) on Monday, openly accusing the social media company of breaching the merger agreement by not providing the data he has requested on spam and fake accounts.

In a letter to Twitter's head of legal, policy and trust, Vijaya Gadde, Musk alleged that Twitter is "actively resisting and thwarting his information rights" as outlined by the deal.

"This is a clear material breach of Twitter's obligations under the merger agreement and Mr. Musk reserves all rights resulting therefrom, including his right not to consummate the transaction and his right to terminate the merger agreement," an attorney representing Musk wrote to the company.
And the Elon Musk devotees actually think Musk is right, despite not providing any evidence of his claim. Sound familiar?
 
It's. obvious why he wants out. He offered 54.20 per share. Twitter shares were in the 30s when the market opened today. Looks like poor baby made a big mistake. I think he's smoking something stronger than weed. Can he weasel out? We should find out soon.
 


What part of any of this is the business of a state attorney general?


Did you read your own link?

Today Attorney General Ken Paxton launched an investigation against Twitter for potentially false reporting over its fake bot accounts in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
 
This is great. People can just make baseless accusations and that is enough to stir an Attorney General into a litigious frenzy.
"Litigious frenzy"

To address this concern, Attorney General Paxton issued a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) to investigate whether Twitter’s reporting on real versus fake users is “false, misleading, or deceptive” under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The CID requires Twitter to turn over documents related to how it calculates and manages its user data and how these numbers relate to Twitter’s advertising businesses. Twitter has until June 27 to respond to Attorney General Paxton’s Demand.
 


What part of any of this is the business of a state attorney general?


Did you read your own link?

Today Attorney General Ken Paxton launched an investigation against Twitter for potentially false reporting over its fake bot accounts in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

But with absolutely zero evidence of any deception.

Twitter is reporting one number for the bot % of active accounts, the supposed refutation of this is total bot percent. If an account doesn't do much of anything it's much harder to tell if it's a bot, of course the bot % of total accounts is higher than the bot % of active accounts that give them more information to identify bots.
 


What part of any of this is the business of a state attorney general?


Did you read your own link?

Today Attorney General Ken Paxton launched an investigation against Twitter for potentially false reporting over its fake bot accounts in violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Here's the act. Please find where it might apply. And explain how bot reports violate it.
 
Back
Top Bottom