twitter Linus's remarks on Twitter in the past couple months couldn't be more wrong

[zetlexdk]

On 7/18/2023 at 1:13 PM, RevGAM said:

I don't think I understand what you mean by threads. I've been online since the late '80s when BBSes were the only way most people communicated until newsgroups and email lists came into being. The term "thread" has been around most, if not all, of that time, and there is no direct dis/connection to freedom. What do you mean??

Are you living under a rock? Google Threads by Meta

 

On 7/18/2023 at 9:28 AM, Lomac said:

 

Free speech for all!  Except you and you and you and you and you and you and (heartbreakingly) you.

 

/facepalm

It's still 100x better than Threads...

 

On 7/18/2023 at 4:30 AM, emosun said:

 

I don't use Twitter nor social media, but out of all the popular platforms Twitter is the most free speech.

[RevGAM]

13 minutes ago, zetlexdk said:

Are you living under a rock? Google Threads by Meta

Yes, that's how I met you. I ignore social media for the most part. 

[Lomac]

3 hours ago, zetlexdk said:

It's still 100x better than Threads...

Never said Threads is better. Haven't even looked at it, much less used it. I'm just countering your claim that Twitter is some free speech haven.

[Sarra]

Waste of Oxygen.

[emosun]

6 hours ago, zetlexdk said:

Are you living under a rock?

 

6 hours ago, zetlexdk said:

I don't use Twitter nor social media

 

[rcmaehl]

17 hours ago, emosun said:

 

LTT is a free speech platform. I can use racist terms on here with no issue:

Apron

Gas N Go

Marbles

Pole Position

 

 

[Vilacom]

On 7/13/2023 at 8:35 PM, Visulg said:

I have been a big fan of Linus and the team since the begining. Even before the Langly house. I remember the day Linus painted his home garage as a set  background. I even go back and watch old LTT and CSF videos for fun and it's also pretty nostalgic for me. 

 

I have adored Linus's takes on pretty much anything and he has been right most of the time or have been transparent/logical about his remarks otherwise.

 

Although i have to argue the recent remarks that linus had been delivering in the past few months about Elon and the twitter acquisition has made me realise that Linus has changed his approach when covering main stream news events. He has become a product of the media propaganda machine that he despised at the early days. 

 

Its funny that i first discovered Tesla/Elon from wan show back in the day around 2012 or so, when WAN show covered the model S safety demonstration video where it showcased that the roof of the car was so strong that you could stack 5 model s on top of each other before the roof of the bottom most models collapses. And I am forever great full for Linus and LMG for all the entertainment and information that its brought to me over the years. 

 

But the way Linus has become an Elon hater or Twitter hater without seeking beyond what mainstream media has put out has been shocking to me. It begs the question if Linus is wrong about this what else is he wrong about. 

 

It has been heartbreaking for me to part ways with one of my favourite creators and see them follow the mainstream media propaganda. And I have tried to forget about the whole thing and just keep an open mind and give linus the benifit of the doubt about what he is saying. But Linus keeps digging and he doesn't seem to stop or try to understand whats really going on. 

 

I sincerely hope linus would open his eyes sooner than later and realise he has been wrong about the whole twitter/elon saga and make things right. 

 

This is my first post ever and hope i have not stepped out of my bounds or the forum post guidelines and whatnot. Have a great day guys. 

 

Will respond to meaningful and constructive comments. Thanks  

Elon Musk is currently suing the law firm that represented twitter when he attempted to get out of the contract he signed to buy twitter in his current role as the CEO of twitter because he thinks twitter paid them too much to force him to honor the contract that he signed. 

His primary argument for the idea that they were paid too much is that the lawsuit didn't require any special skills, knowledge, or infrastructure that would mandate hiring one of if not the top mergers and acquisitions firms in the world.

So Elon Musk's argument that Twitter paid too much to this law firm is that his case to try to get out of buying twitter was so flawed any random lawyer with basic business sense could have represented Twitter to the exact same result.

Don't get me wrong "My case was so stupid literally anyone could have forced me to buy the platform" is an interesting defense, but perhaps while you question what Linus might be wrong about, and that's always a valid thing to do, also question both your opinion about Elon Musk, and your own opinion about how you disseminate and absorb information about people.

[ImorallySourcedElectrons]

On 7/14/2023 at 2:45 AM, LeapFrogMasterRace said:

Wait till you find out about how many bailouts Elon needed he keeps making mistake after mistake and his cars have bad panel gaps, bad paint, bad reliability bad service. Took him 1000 tries to land a rocket. Bud you need a new hero. 

As someone who previously worked on space hardware, the rocket landing thing is kind of difficult, and it took a giant team of experienced folks (that were in it long before Elon got enough $$$ to do such things) to get it to work. 

 

But also, Elon is a massive twat.

[Erioch]

On 7/17/2023 at 5:51 PM, zetlexdk said:

Elon is trying to convert twitter into a free speech platform and threads is the direct opposit of that.

Please tell me you write for The Onion.

 

Sycophants are so sad.

[wanderingfool2]

10 hours ago, Vilacom said:

Elon Musk is currently suing the law firm that represented twitter when he attempted to get out of the contract he signed to buy twitter in his current role as the CEO of twitter because he thinks twitter paid them too much to force him to honor the contract that he signed. 

His primary argument for the idea that they were paid too much is that the lawsuit didn't require any special skills, knowledge, or infrastructure that would mandate hiring one of if not the top mergers and acquisitions firms in the world.

So Elon Musk's argument that Twitter paid too much to this law firm is that his case to try to get out of buying twitter was so flawed any random lawyer with basic business sense could have represented Twitter to the exact same result.

Don't get me wrong "My case was so stupid literally anyone could have forced me to buy the platform" is an interesting defense, but perhaps while you question what Linus might be wrong about, and that's always a valid thing to do, also question both your opinion about Elon Musk, and your own opinion about how you disseminate and absorb information about people.

And this is the type of thing that annoys me, is people who just jump on the "easy target" without any consideration of the details behind what's going on.

 

To start, there is more to this than what you just said:

1) The contract was for hourly fee, and the Twitter board AFTER Elon conceded to buy Twitter again decided to agree to the restructured contract for a fee for "winning".

2) The billing, until after the trial was only $18m as per the lawsuit...which means the agreement that was signed according to the lawsuit Oct 27 hours before closing essentially 5x the cost.

3) The omission that it was a simple contract case doesn't mean that his case was "stupid"...had he found any additional details during discovery process he could very well have had a very valid case.  (Which I mean ironically, if he had learned about this prior to the close he actually might have used this as a way to void the buyout).

[Vilacom]

1 hour ago, wanderingfool2 said:

And this is the type of thing that annoys me, is people who just jump on the "easy target" without any consideration of the details behind what's going on.

 

To start, there is more to this than what you just said:

1) The contract was for hourly fee, and the Twitter board AFTER Elon conceded to buy Twitter again decided to agree to the restructured contract for a fee for "winning".

2) The billing, until after the trial was only $18m as per the lawsuit...which means the agreement that was signed according to the lawsuit Oct 27 hours before closing essentially 5x the cost.

3) The omission that it was a simple contract case doesn't mean that his case was "stupid"...had he found any additional details during discovery process he could very well have had a very valid case.  (Which I mean ironically, if he had learned about this prior to the close he actually might have used this as a way to void the buyout).

1)Which is extremely common in these kinds of deals, it’s literally called a success fee.  They are a very popular way to structure payment because it incentivizes the firm to win the lawsuit with the minimum amount of work as opposed to hourly billing which can incentivize make work type practices to run up a law firms profits, so the hourly fee is where a contract starts but then with a win it could shift to a success fee.  None of the contracts of communications between the old twitter board and the firm have been released yet so neither you nor I have any idea if that switch would be suspect in the slightest, but given how common it is among M&A firms including this one AND the one Musk had hired to represent him in the case this really shouldn’t be something suspect for anyone.  

2)The billing was actually literally paid 10 minutes before the official closing, which is not surprising that the firm would want to be paid before Elon was actually in a position to approve or disapprove expenditures since he’s already shown a proclivity to not pay people he owes money to in two different lawsuits since taking possession of twitter, and you know…all that money and benefits people who were terminated/quit were supposed to receive that hadn’t.  Yeah if i were the firm who forced him to honor his contract I’d want my money before he was the one who was going to approve my payment too.

3) Omission?  You mean admission?  Like him admitting that it was an incredibly simple case for anyone to win isn’t stupid?  Yes, it’s incredibly stupid, and you’re correct again had he actually been careful and paying any attention at all he could have delayed closing and opened a new suit to attempt to get out of the purchase, though that would have likely gotten them hired again and required more money be paid out, but he wasn’t paying attention, he wasn’t doing due diligence, which is how he got himself into this mess in the first place.  No, this lawsuit is well beyond stupid and is just another case of a crybaby billionaire screaming into the void because he wanted attention and sometimes, very very rarely, but sometimes there are actual consequences.

[Kisai]

On 7/17/2023 at 4:51 PM, zetlexdk said:

I completely agree with this.

With threads being a thing now everybody seems to love that and is calling Twitter dead and useless.

I don't think people should transition to threads, Elon is trying to convert twitter into a free speech platform and threads is the direct opposit of that.

I'm not an Elon musk fanboy, but this is just the mainstream media trying to take down one of the only free speech platforms.

 

There is only one Elon fanboy and he's posted in this thread. Everyone else is just being honest about the situation and not really saying anything else that hasn't already been said. Musk is a fool, a clown, a rent seeker, an idiot. We know that, you aren't informing anyone who didn't know. At one point Musk was pretty much loved by the public because he didn't do anything wrong or stupid (enough) to be called out for it. But there was a turning point in 2018 with the British cave explorer. Then he introduced the Cybertruck in 2019, made an outrageous claim about it, and it wasn't true... and it still hasn't come out. Every time he opened his mouth on twitter since, it became a debacle.

 

Twitter has not, nor ever been a free speech platform. The only thing "Free" about it before the Musk takeover was that you could generally post anything you wanted on it that wasn't copyrighted material. After the Musk takeover, it's become even less of a free speech platform. Musk completely misunderstands what Twitter was before, and has tried to turn it into something that it was never supposed to be. Repeating the mistakes of Fox with Myspace and Verizon with Yahoo and Tumblr, and Patreon, and Onlyfans, and the list goes on.

 

Every time one of these companies success is owed to it's liberal free speech, some conservatives get uppity, the banks don't want to take the risk anymore, and eventually the "free speech" has to be curbed, otherwise any ability for people to pay for things on it goes away.

 

A platform is not free-speech unless:

- You can post anonymously

- You can post without verifying anything (though the platform can incentivize verification with various carrots)

- You can read anything without subscribing

- Postings can't be removed by government (law enforcement, politicians, etc) without a legal warrant to do so. Postings that are libel, slander, satire, parody, deepfaked, etc can only be removed by a legal complaint compelling the platform to remove information that invades the privacy of someone. So people's private photos are not "free speech", and neither are "fanfictions" of real people (to which AI impersonations might fall under.)

 

Entertainment is disconnected from news. There are television channels that are not, by any definition news, because they editorialize, most of their content are talking heads, rather than reporting. There are youtube channels that simply parrot whatever some other editorialized source without any critical thinking.

 

Elon does none of that. Buying Twitter for him was a way to do the same thing that Bezo's owning WaPo or News Corp owning the New York Post and Fox News, Billionaires want to control people because that earns them more money by being selective about what to show them. Even in the case of Fox, that editorializing for entertainment eventually burned them didn't it? Elon has made it pretty clear what editorializing he wants by which influencers he decided to pay on it.

 

So many of the things Elon has done recently, from paying outrage farmers on twitter, to making twitter inaccessible without logging in, has done nothing but make the twitter experience worse. Quit pleading poverty when all the blood is coming from killing it with the stab wounds you're inflicting on the platform.

[tkitch]

To the guys in here with fewer than 10 posts on this entire forum who loooooove their twitter:

 

You realize, no matter how much you love Mr. Musk, he will *never* know you exist, right?  And kissing his ass on the LTT forum is *never* gonna get him to notice you, right?

 

I'm just sayin'

[Vilacom]

1 hour ago, tkitch said:

To the guys in here with fewer than 10 posts on this entire forum who loooooove their twitter:

 

You realize, no matter how much you love Mr. Musk, he will *never* know you exist, right?  And kissing his ass on the LTT forum is *never* gonna get him to notice you, right?

 

I'm just sayin'

Hey now, let’s not discount the possibility that those accounts actually are Elon musk trying to make himself feel better.  It’s quite unlikely don’t get me wrong, but would anyone be even remotely surprised if you found out it was him trying to defend himself on a random forum online?

[tkitch]

29 minutes ago, Vilacom said:

Hey now, let’s not discount the possibility that those accounts actually are Elon musk trying to make himself feel better.  It’s quite unlikely don’t get me wrong, but would anyone be even remotely surprised if you found out it was him trying to defend himself on a random forum online?

I mean, if I was worth 200 billion fuckin' dollars, I'm pretty sure I could find better peop...  I mean ways...  to occupy my time.

[AlwaysFSX]

On 7/18/2023 at 6:08 AM, zetlexdk said:

It's still 100x better than Threads...

Hmm

On 7/18/2023 at 6:11 AM, zetlexdk said:

I don't use Twitter nor social media

Hmm

 

I need to frame this

[wanderingfool2]

8 hours ago, Vilacom said:

1)Which is extremely common in these kinds of deals, it’s literally called a success fee.  They are a very popular way to structure payment because it incentivizes the firm to win the lawsuit with the minimum amount of work as opposed to hourly billing which can incentivize make work type practices to run up a law firms profits, so the hourly fee is where a contract starts but then with a win it could shift to a success fee.  None of the contracts of communications between the old twitter board and the firm have been released yet so neither you nor I have any idea if that switch would be suspect in the slightest, but given how common it is among M&A firms including this one AND the one Musk had hired to represent him in the case this really shouldn’t be something suspect for anyone.  

In the literal lawsuit it's stating the original contract was by hourly fee.  If there were other contracts stating otherwise, then fine that will be presented, BUT the allegations in the suit state that it wasn't switched to a success fee until the final moments.

 

Success fees need to be clearly defined in the contract, do you seriously think the lawyers who filed this case would have filed the lawsuit without reading the contract...as in this case it could be their legal careers on the line if they were stupid enough to file a law where the chief argument is that it wasn't in writing until the last moment.  It's literally a single document would eliminate the entire argument they are fighting.

 

8 hours ago, Vilacom said:

2)The billing was actually literally paid 10 minutes before the official closing, which is not surprising that the firm would want to be paid before Elon was actually in a position to approve or disapprove expenditures since he’s already shown a proclivity to not pay people he owes money to in two different lawsuits since taking possession of twitter, and you know…all that money and benefits people who were terminated/quit were supposed to receive that hadn’t.  Yeah if i were the firm who forced him to honor his contract I’d want my money before he was the one who was going to approve my payment too.

From my recollection, the board was mostly let go with cause (which would mean their entitled benefits would not be allowed).  If they pushed through a $90 million payment within minutes of closing as well then yes that would justify fired with just cause as well.

 

Also the agreement for success fee was allegedly negotiated in those final days...at the point of closing...you know after their work had been done.

 

8 hours ago, Vilacom said:

3) Omission?  You mean admission?  Like him admitting that it was an incredibly simple case for anyone to win isn’t stupid?  Yes, it’s incredibly stupid, and you’re correct again had he actually been careful and paying any attention at all he could have delayed closing and opened a new suit to attempt to get out of the purchase, though that would have likely gotten them hired again and required more money be paid out, but he wasn’t paying attention, he wasn’t doing due diligence, which is how he got himself into this mess in the first place.  No, this lawsuit is well beyond stupid and is just another case of a crybaby billionaire screaming into the void because he wanted attention and sometimes, very very rarely, but sometimes there are actual consequences.

You are only looking at the surface and what you want to see though without taking consideration into arguments they made.

 

The question in regards to the first lawsuit was how much Twitter lied on SEC reports (as they did), and while he signed away the rights to due diligence there was clauses stating that the statements that had been filed were correct.  If he had been allowed to submit the Mudge documents, instead of being barred from it, it might have changed things up as well...but either way he wasn't allowed submitting it.  Essentially it's to what extent Twitter had lied, at which point it really  is a pretty simple contract dispute.

 

Do you seriously think it's okay for a company to sign a contract switching from hourly to success fee AFTER the court case is over?

 

5 hours ago, Kisai said:

A platform is not free-speech unless:

- You can post anonymously

- You can post without verifying anything (though the platform can incentivize verification with various carrots)

- You can read anything without subscribing

- Postings can't be removed by government (law enforcement, politicians, etc) without a legal warrant to do so. Postings that are libel, slander, satire, parody, deepfaked, etc can only be removed by a legal complaint compelling the platform to remove information that invades the privacy of someone. So people's private photos are not "free speech", and neither are "fanfictions" of real people (to which AI impersonations might fall under.)

Do I think Twitter is a free-speech platform?  No, not by a long shot...BUT free-speech as you listed isn't correct either

free-speech does not mean anonymously posting. 

free-speech doesn't mean posting without verifying (though Twitter does allow this anyways)

free-speech doesn't mean the right to be heard/right to see everything without subscribing.

 

The last one, it's trickier than what you imply.  There are a bunch of laws surrounding it and what companies legally have to do (even without legal complaints, or rather legal complaints could be considered as someone reporting it).

 

So while I don't think Twitter is a free-speech platform, it's at least a platform of which I find the least amount of things are censored.  People have already found that Threads has been taking down posts (and the collection of data on individuals)

[Erioch]

9 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Success fees need to be clearly defined in the contract

I'm not sure where you went to law school but I'd rather take legal advice from an actual attorney.

 

 

[Vilacom]

6 minutes ago, Erioch said:

I'm not sure where you went to law school but I'd rather take legal advice from an actual attorney.

 

 

There it is! Yup, great breakdown.  I’m sure @wanderingfool2 knows much better though

[Vilacom]

1 hour ago, tkitch said:

I mean, if I was worth 200 billion fuckin' dollars, I'm pretty sure I could find better peop...  I mean ways...  to occupy my time.

NGL if i was worth 200 billion dollars there’s a solid chance i would do almost nothing but argue with people online, i don’t even know what about, but goddamnit i would be super invested in things

[wanderingfool2]

1 minute ago, Vilacom said:

There it is! Yup, great breakdown.  I’m sure @wanderingfool2 knows much better though

And goes to show that you didn't watch it.

 

Or too dense to realize that at 10:16 that he covers what essentially I was saying.

 

And while paying $90m might have let him get out of the deal...if it happened minutes before closing then there wouldn't have been proper adequate time to review.

[SimplyChunk]

On 7/14/2023 at 2:06 AM, ToboRobot said:

or will the people who hate him cause a critical mass exodus?

Why does it have to be "The people that hate him's" fault?  He's causing enough bad blood and mass exodus from twitter all by himself.  it's not anything to do with any outside force

[tkitch]

5 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

And goes to show that you didn't watch it.

 

Or too dense to realize that at 10:16 that he covers what essentially I was saying.

 

And while paying $90m might have let him get out of the deal...if it happened minutes before closing then there wouldn't have been proper adequate time to review.

it's a more than 7 minute video, and you posted 7 minutes before him lol.

 

So...  I'm calling it sus.

[wanderingfool2]

3 minutes ago, tkitch said:

it's a more than 7 minute video, and you posted 7 minutes before him lol.

 

So...  I'm calling it sus.

And yet I posted the correct spot...did it not occur to you that I could have already watched that; or that I did a bit more looking into things than apparently most of people who just mindlessly repeat what is said by people.

[Vilacom]

26 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

And goes to show that you didn't watch it.

 

Or too dense to realize that at 10:16 that he covers what essentially I was saying.

 

And while paying $90m might have let him get out of the deal...if it happened minutes before closing then there wouldn't have been proper adequate time to review.

Watched it all the way through thanks! He covers what you’re saying and says it might be suspect, there might be something that comes out that shows there was some bad back room dealing.  

He also covers and affirms basically everything I said, agrees it’s absolutely ridiculous, and rates Musk’s chances quite low. But hey, he does mention your point and address it in a short section of the video, and as long as we ignore the fact that his conclusions are mostly that Musk’s lawsuit is kind of ridiculous, you are making some good points.