this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
692 points (86.1% liked)

Technology

59525 readers
3127 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
692
Elon Musk gives X employees one year to replace your bank - ‘You won’t need a bank account... it would blow my mind if we don’t have that rolled out by the end of next year.’ (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
333 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“If it involves money. It’ll be on our platform. Money or securities or whatever. So, it’s not just like send $20 to my friend. I’m talking about, like, you won’t need a bank account.”

Well that sounds terrifying!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 85 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Just today there was a great comment by @[email protected] on why this does not make any sense.

  1. When you factor in the incredible damage done to the Tesla share price by the amount of stock he had to liquidate to finance the deal, and the almost billion a year in interest and operating costs the company is pulling out of him, the deal has, altogether, cost Musk about half of his net worth. No amount of petty childishness is worth that.
  1. He literally went to court to try to get out of the deal. What was his play here? To sue with the intention of failing? For what possible reason?
  2. If his plan was to kill Twitter, why would he attach his beloved X name to it? Musk has spent his entire life trying to make X happen. It is dearer to him than his own children. Why would he attach that brand to a company he’s intentionally sabotaging?
  3. If his goal is to kill Twitter, why is it still here? He owns the company outright. He took it private. There’s no board. There’s no shareholders. He doesn’t have a fiduciary responsibility. If he wanted Twitter dead, all he had to do was shut the doors, turn off the lights, and send everyone home.

Anyone who buys into this “He’s trying to kill Twitter” nonsense, please, I am begging you, try to get your head around the fact that Elon Musk is not a smart man. This isn’t some incredible 4D chess play. Twitter isn’t failing because of intentional sabotage; it’s failing because Musk is genuinely trying his best, and his best absolutely sucks. He’s a bad businessman who lucked into a fortune he never deserved.

https://sh.itjust.works/comment/4855307

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Big chunk of the funding is from the Saudis though - and they have a very vested interest in trashing twitter.

It's also entirely possible the truth is somewhere in between - people who knew he couldn't manage his way out a paper bag working ego boy into buying twitter and ketting the inevitable happen. He's not exactly hard to manipulate.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could have been both, twitter gets messed with enough to drive off normal people and musk gets to rebuild it from the ground up afterwards using what ever is left or they knew musk would be poison to twitter and let him just have fun with it

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

"I'm sorry but i just sacrificed a very expensive social media just to get some quet time"

I have no idea why the idea of twitter being the meat-filled pumpkin they threw into Musk's enclosure to keep him busy cracks me up so hard, it just does

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Big chunk of the funding is from the Saudis though - and they have a very vested interest in trashing twitter.

This does not address any of the points above though. The Saudis could have just bought it for half the money and closed the doors.

It’s also entirely possible the truth is somewhere in between - people who knew he couldn’t manage his way out a paper bag working ego boy into buying twitter and ketting the inevitable happen. He’s not exactly hard to manipulate.

Manipulate into doing what? Buying twitter? I think it is very likely that he just attempted market manipulation and failed. Now he is trying to make the best out of the situation and transform Twitter into the company he actually wants. Except he is absolutely incompetent. I don't see where anybody manipulated him into doing anything. Everything that happened seems very much like him.

[–] blackstampede 2 points 1 year ago

Oh yeah, neither of us were assuming he was intelligent- just a flailing asshole with a grudge. But you're probably right.