Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[SoulForge]

I'm not even going to read the rest of your post because this is indeed starting to piss me off.

Every single definition of doxxing that anyone has posted in this thread says that the act of doxxing specifically refers to releasing the collected information. Yet you guys have this pathological need to try to force your own definition that allows you to shit on Musk, even when there are thousands of better ways to shit on Musk.

So, in conclusion: I have far better use for my infraction point budget than to continue arguing about semantics with people that I normally agree about everything on, since at this point there is nothing left to say except personal attacks after logic has gone out of the windows at the point where people started to claim that surely it is every goddamn definition available on the internet that is wrong, and not the consensus of this thread.

dox
verb
ˈdäks
variants or doxx
doxed or doxxed; doxing or doxxing; doxes or doxxes

transitive verb
informal
: to publicly identify or publish private information about (someone) especially as a form of punishment or revenge

Not Doxxing.

Hell Musk Dox'd himself when he told everyone on Twitter he'd be at Twitter HQ for the day not too long ago.

[Muzjhath]

I'm not even going to read the rest of your post because this is indeed starting to piss me off.

Every single definition of doxxing that anyone has posted in this thread says that the act of doxxing specifically refers to releasing the collected information. Yet you guys have this pathological need to try to force your own definition that allows you to shit on Musk, even when there are thousands of better ways to shit on Musk.

So, in conclusion: I have far better use for my infraction point budget than to continue arguing about semantics with people that I normally agree about everything on, since at this point there is nothing left to say except personal attacks after logic has gone out of the windows at the point where people started to claim that surely it is every goddamn definition available on the internet that is wrong, and not the consensus of this thread.

And had elonjet had to find non public information you'd be right.
It doesn't, all it does is in practice tge equivalent of linking a YouTube video to twitter with some extra steps

[Huehuecoyotl]

And had elonjet had to find non public information you'd be right.
It doesn't, all it does is in practice tge equivalent of linking a YouTube video to twitter with some extra steps

And that's the point. If @Gabriel wanted to argue that the original publishers of that data were doxxing, you could at least have a discussion about it. And some of the definitions of doxxing that I've seen could be argued to support that stance. There is definitely a debate to be had about that. The fact that they are legally allowed to publish it undermines that, of course, but we could still talk about it.

But using that data, after it has been published? There isn't a single definition of doxxing that supports the stance that is doxxing, and I don't understand why they are getting so hot under the collar trying to defend it. Apart from apparently being terrified of admitting that you are wrong on the internet.

[Elder Millennial]

And that's the point. If @Gabriel wanted to argue that the original publishers of that data were doxxing, you could at least have a discussion about it. And some of the definitions of doxxing that I've seen could be argued to support that stance. There is definitely a debate to be had about that. The fact that they are legally allowed to publish it undermines that, of course, but we could still talk about it.

But using that data, after it has been published? There isn't a single definition of doxxing that supports the stance that is doxxing, and I don't understand why they are getting so hot under the collar trying to defend it. Apart from apparently being terrified of admitting that you are wrong on the internet.

As I have pointed out to Gabriel about 5 times now, this matter has already been litigated in the courts in the past which have firmly established the public interest nature of this type of information.

It's legally and definitionally not under any imaginable scenario doxxing to publish the public information of the whereabouts of an airplane.

It is literally, public interest information and defined as such by the courts.

He also consistently refuses to actually address this point, instead going in circles around dictionary definitions.

[Orange Joe]

Just because it is public doesn't mean jack. The intent of releasing collecting information is what matters. Did Elonjet do it to publicly shame Musky? If yes, it is doxxing.

The answer is no. So glad now that we got this all figured out that he isn't being doxxed

[Milchshake]

Ongoing In: Elon was a Republican all along.
Week1: No more lords or peasants!
Week 6: Only lords can vote now.



"Conservatism believes the government should weild power that free them from laws, but should also encumber their opponents..."
Conservatism is just "Restore the Monarchy and put me near the top."

[Draco-Onis]

Ongoing In: Elon was a Republican all along.
Week1: No more lords or peasants!
Week 6: Only lords can vote now.



"Conservatism believes the government should weild power that free them from laws, but should also encumber their opponents..."
Conservatism is just "Restore the Monarchy and put me near the top."

Very consistent with GOP ideology if you don't like the results restrict who can vote and if all else fails deny the vote was legitimate.

[Endus]

It is you guys who are trying to define doxxing as something else than what it is. The entire term is derived from "dropping docs", i. e. releasing gathered information. It does not refer to the act of gathering said info. This is something that you ignore completely because for whatever reason it is more convenient for your argument to insist that it is the act of gathering the information via illegal means that would qualify something as doxxing.


Just because it is public doesn't mean jack. The intent of releasing collecting information is what matters. Did Elonjet do it to publicly shame Musky? If yes, it is doxxing.

Whether or not this sort of doxxing is illegal is up to the law. Personally I'd like it if this sort of stuff wasn't legal.

What you've just described means that "doxxing", by itself, can't be considered a "bad thing". It can often be a "good thing". You'd have to judge the specifics of any given incident to figure that out. Elonjet, by example, clearly is not doing a "bad thing".

It's like "saying terrible things about someone". Maybe that's slander. Maybe it's actually true and a legitimate warning to others. Can't tell unless we get the specifics of that incident.

That's why I have an issue with the way you interpret the word; by your argument, "doxxing" is totally fine and we probably need more whistleblowers doing it. The phone book being delivered to your door (do they still deliver phone books) is massive city-wide "doxxing". You've defanged the word and it doesn't have negative connotations.

If you go through someone's facebook page and mark down all the dates they've been on holidays, where they stop to get their coffee, what kind of car they drive, make a web illustration of their social relationships, and then write it all in a single document and post it on your facebook page, that is doxxing.

But not a violation of that person's privacy in any way whatsoever. Just creepily obsessive, in this particular case.

Technically if you do it with the intention shaming him or targeting him for other people, yes, you are doxxing when you post a link following his specific plane.

You've completely skipped over explaining how this is automatically a "bad thing". Some people deserve shaming, and shaming them is an ethically good act.

[Poopymonster]

Ongoing In: Elon was a Republican all along.
Week1: No more lords or peasants!
Week 6: Only lords can vote now.



"Conservatism believes the government should weild power that free them from laws, but should also encumber their opponents..."
Conservatism is just "Restore the Monarchy and put me near the top."

Conservatism is just atavism with more syllables and a necktie.

[Milchshake]

Conservatism is just atavism with more syllables and a necktie.

Sounds meta, but there is still a lot to be mined from monarchism. I think we're just a few weeks away from Elon twitter polling for "Should Elon invoke ius primae noctis for all employees".

[Edge-]

I'm trying to figure out why you call him "Elom," and the best guess I have is that it's "mole" spelled backwards??

Don't overthink it, it's literally because "m" is next to "n" and I don't think he deserves to have his name spelled correctly.

Also because "elom" sounds like a funny word, which was just an unintended bonus.

[Shadowferal]

I always see Elam...

[Paranoid Android]

So Musk lost the poll to stay CEO of twitter and says it was all a honey pot trap to catch bots. This has mad "I lost the election/poll so I'm going to try to overthrow the election/claim it was some 5D chess move" vibes.

Can we say "Oh the Irony". Any poll such as the Trump poll by Elon is weighted with his followers, stans and D riders. Now I guess I'm with Elon here that the Trump poll was getting botted, no doubt. This CEO one is getting botted heavily? Umm, possibly but admitting my bias here I think many Twitter users are annoyed, but maybe the numbers don't add up.

Also funny that Elon now owner can manipulate bots anyways he wants and we have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. Hey, to be fair could have said that on old Twitter about bots. So my crazy theory here is this a true vote that he wanted to go through with and if he really wanted to be diabolical, could have botted or actually just flat out manipulated it.

I want Elon to stay. Didn't vote but Elon needs to stay and do stupid tweets, keep replying to white supremacist, make policies that contradict him every time, ban people wildly and hope advertisers leave.

[Forogil]

It's amazing all the hypocrisy that happens with these "free speech" bros. Also, between this guy, and Trump, and Epstein, etc....can we as a society agree to stop worshipping billionaires and maybe start making it so there...aren't any?

We can both stop worshipping billionaires and them.

Whether Trump is a billionaire is unclear. Epstein wasn't.

As for Elon I wonder if he's 1/3 happy today as Tesla share price hits 420/3 (the peak was around 407).

[Edge-]

We can both stop worshipping billionaires and them.

Whether Trump is a billionaire is unclear. Epstein wasn't.

As for Elon I wonder if he's 1/3 happy today as Tesla share price hits 420/3 (the peak was around 407).

Down 65% or so since he made the offer to buy Twitter.

Truly, none of us are the kinds of entrepreneurial geniuses with the kinds of business smarts that Elon has.

[Paranoid Android]

Down 65% or so since he made the offer to buy Twitter.

Truly, none of us are the kinds of entrepreneurial geniuses with the kinds of business smarts that Elon has.

Whatever number it should tank harder. Tesla a company based all on that the glorious leader, most brilliant man ever is going to cure the world of everything, even take us to far off planets. Well, Elmo is an effin idiot and with that the stock should collapse if the value was almost all based on that. Yet, along with billionaires are the most brilliant people ever; hyper-capitalism of company valuation and stocks show people will still hold water for some pie in the sky. Oh do I need to mention the crypto speculation and where that has landed. At least crypto possibly has collapsed.

Story from Yahoo:

The poll closed on Monday morning, with 57.5% of the 17.5 million votes choosing "Yes" — though Musk hasn't disclosed whether he would, in fact, step down.

Tesla stock opened higher on Monday amid hopes that Musk would leave his post at Twitter, but shares ended Monday's session down slightly, mirroring the broader market.

Once more didn't last but stock went up on Monday after announcing Elmo might leave. Likely just the day traders and what not but shows how simps will overreact to just announcement and rarely actual performance.

The oh btw, is Elon kept making these great promises such as truck, hyperlink tunnel, mars, robot, etc., and that's how stock kept rising. Basically bullshitting his way to creating a stock increase.

[BrokenRavens]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-mu...etter-twitter/

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is questioning whether Tesla's board is protecting the electric car company's shareholders in the aftermath of CEO Elon Musk's $44 billion purchase of Twitter.

Tesla directors are legally bound to look after the interests of the company, workers and shareholders, the Democratic lawmaker wrote Monday in a letter to Robyn Denholm, chairman of the Tesla board. Yet Musk's steps as the new Twitter CEO raise "questions about possible violations of securities or other laws," Warren added.

Tesla, worth $1.2 trillion at the start of 2022, has shed about $700 billion in market value this year amid questions about Musk's judgement and commitment to the electric-vehicle maker. The billionaire's attention has been consumed by Twitter since its purchase in October, which has prompted him to sell almost $40 billion in Tesla stock to shore up investment in the money-losing social media network.

The senator called on the board to account for how it was "dealing with conflicts of interest, misappropriation of corporate assets and other actions by Mr. Musk that appear not to be in the best interest of Tesla and its shareholders."

Those steps include pulling Tesla engineers and other key staff at the automaker to work at Twitter, Warren noted. She also cited the potential for conflicts of interest, given that Twitter relies on ad revenue from Tesla competitors such as Audi and Ford.

"Musk may decide to run the company to maximize badly-needed revenue, even if that includes great deals for Tesla's competitors and potential injury to Tesla," she stated. "Musk could decide he is personally better served if Tesla overpays Twitter for advertising or pays up front to give Twitter access to much-needed cash."

I did not hear before that he pulled software engineers from a publicly traded company to work for a private one.

That’s ah,… That is a serious conflict of interest issue.

[Paranoid Android]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-mu...etter-twitter/

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren is questioning whether Tesla's board is protecting the electric car company's shareholders in the aftermath of CEO Elon Musk's $44 billion purchase of Twitter.

Tesla directors are legally bound to look after the interests of the company, workers and shareholders, the Democratic lawmaker wrote Monday in a letter to Robyn Denholm, chairman of the Tesla board. Yet Musk's steps as the new Twitter CEO raise "questions about possible violations of securities or other laws," Warren added.

Tesla, worth $1.2 trillion at the start of 2022, has shed about $700 billion in market value this year amid questions about Musk's judgement and commitment to the electric-vehicle maker. The billionaire's attention has been consumed by Twitter since its purchase in October, which has prompted him to sell almost $40 billion in Tesla stock to shore up investment in the money-losing social media network.

The senator called on the board to account for how it was "dealing with conflicts of interest, misappropriation of corporate assets and other actions by Mr. Musk that appear not to be in the best interest of Tesla and its shareholders."

Those steps include pulling Tesla engineers and other key staff at the automaker to work at Twitter, Warren noted. She also cited the potential for conflicts of interest, given that Twitter relies on ad revenue from Tesla competitors such as Audi and Ford.

"Musk may decide to run the company to maximize badly-needed revenue, even if that includes great deals for Tesla's competitors and potential injury to Tesla," she stated. "Musk could decide he is personally better served if Tesla overpays Twitter for advertising or pays up front to give Twitter access to much-needed cash."

I did not hear before that he pulled software engineers from a publicly traded company to work for a private one.

That’s ah,… That is a serious conflict of interest issue.

Umm yeah I don't care and looking at right now don't care about Warren's opinion and concern. Let Elmo eff this up on his own and if he destroys 2 companies oh well. Elmo taking engineers from the public company to private is I'm sure wrong. That's up to Tesla shareholders more than Twitter. So of course there is abuse it seems. My point is I don't like this attack that much from Warren, the least of my worries.

Of course I'm adding here I don't want companies to fail cause of this idiot and cause job losses to the people who just trying to make a living. I just don't want to hold Elmo's hand while he eff's up, once more people thinking this guy is brilliant when he just just fail. He dug the hole.

[Shadowferal]

This first-of-its-kind ‘solar car’ can drive for months without needing to charge — and it’s finally available to buy

...ooo the political ramifications could be enormous if this is real.

[Milchshake]

Just a theory, but shitty PR pieces posing as "tech jounralism" is the primary feeder for billionaire worship.

This first-of-its-kind ‘solar car’ can drive for months without needing to charge — and it’s finally available to buy

...ooo the political ramifications could be enormous if this is real.

We can both stop worshipping billionaires and them.