Scrutable

Today he's doing constructive dismissal of anyone who doesn't go into the office tomorrow (which is Veteran's Day, a Federal holiday).

No idea how long it’ll take but it looks like this may end with Apple, Google or Facebook agreeing to buy what’s left of Twitter at a steep discount.

Woodchopper wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 10:11 pm No idea how long it’ll take but it looks like this may end with Apple, Google or Facebook agreeing to buy what’s left of Twitter at a steep discount.

If it goes that way, it won't be Facebook, they're too busy spending all their spare money on the metaverse. They've just announced a bunch of redundancies and everything. Also, as they're primarily being a social media company, anti-trust laws might prevent it happening.

Google's a possibility, they've tried a couple of times to do social media, they might think they can do better buying a broken but established one.

Amazon?

Murdoch?

Saudi?

I’ve got a few quid down the back of the sofa.

monkey wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 10:23 pm

Woodchopper wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 10:11 pm No idea how long it’ll take but it looks like this may end with Apple, Google or Facebook agreeing to buy what’s left of Twitter at a steep discount.

If it goes that way, it won't be Facebook, they're too busy spending all their spare money on the metaverse. They've just announced a bunch of redundancies and everything. Also, as they're primarily being a social media company, anti-trust laws might prevent it happening.

Google's a possibility, they've tried a couple of times to do social media, they might think they can do better buying a broken but established one.

I feel like there's some commonality between the reaction to musk's takeover of Twitter, and the widespread revulsion at the very concept of a "metaverse".

Billionaires' visions for the future are sh.t, not least because their visions involve milking us dry while hijacking our psyches a la Wachowski. The metaverse sounds like a freemium Philip K Dick interactive tribute. Twitter getting bought by a man who, I feel confident to speculate based on my evidence-based axiom that right-wingers are always projecting, is almost certainly a "paedo guy", just makes the place seem inherently lame, like your local community centre just started playing exclusively Gary Glitter records over the tannoy. Having our discourse owned by a lizard parasite is wack af.

#eattherich

https://twitter.com/ZoeSchiffer/status/ ... 3787518977

ZoeSchiffer wrote:Wow. Elon Musk just told Twitter employees he’s not sure how much run rate the company has and “bankruptcy isn’t out of the question.”

shpalman wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 7:24 pm eef5b84c31e7b1a6.jpg

Awesome.

Bird on a Fire wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 11:15 pm

shpalman wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 7:24 pm eef5b84c31e7b1a6.jpg

Awesome.

Nice avatar

lpm wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 10:47 am "Fraser Nelson" then posts that the Barclay Brothers are launching a bitcoin investment fund and for one hour only are giving free bitcoin to all Telegraph readers and supporters. "Allison Pearson" then endorses the message. The entire group talk about it, support it, cross-post. Get a bunch of stooge accounts to describe how they've taken up the offer and they're now rich. A few suckers be caught.

Fraser Nelson and Allison Pearson both have L's in their name, so you can make @FraserNeIson and @AlIisonPearson (if you look carefully, or copy/paste with a serif font, you'll see that each of those has an uppercase i in it), and then the profile will be indistinguishable apart from the follower count. And it's easy to buy an existing account with almost any number of followers. The i/L trick has already been used a couple of times in the past 48 hours, once to impersonate Apple (@AppleTVpius [sic]) and once to pretend that @EliLiilyandCo [sic] was giving away free insulin.

Report that an ex of Musk had texted him in March to ask "Can you buy Twitter and then delete it, please!? xx" - 'coz she hated stuff.

jimbob wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 11:52 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 11:15 pm

shpalman wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 7:24 pm eef5b84c31e7b1a6.jpg

Awesome.

Nice avatar

Thanks. Pixel limit really did me dirty there

Always liked dubya

Nice summary

https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/11/234 ... cation-ftc

Woodchopper wrote: Thu Nov 10, 2022 10:11 pm No idea how long it’ll take but it looks like this may end with Apple, Google or Facebook agreeing to buy what’s left of Twitter at a steep discount.

Which will of course further ruin the internet. What’s needed to save it is the big companies being broken up.

You are going to see big countries and places like the EU start regulating the internet more. China shows how it can be done.
Australia, Canada, India, are all trying to figure put how to do it. I don't know about America, but it will be regulated by lawyers and litigation risk there, probably not by legislation.
Labour needs to have a comprehensive social media regulation strategy in its back pocket for when it takes power, assuming we continue to have elections and there isn't some kind of right wing putsch.

Herainestold wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:14 pm You are going to see big countries and places like the EU start regulating the internet more. China shows how it can be done.
Australia, Canada, India, are all trying to figure put how to do it. I don't know about America, but it will be regulated by lawyers and litigation risk there, probably not by legislation.
Labour needs to have a comprehensive social media regulation strategy in its back pocket for when it takes power, assuming we continue to have elections and there isn't some kind of right wing putsch.

pffft the big firms are far too powerful, plus moderation is difficult enough without trying to codify it in law. What specific sorts of regulation would you propose?

I'd insist social media is held to the same standards as traditional media. That ought to cheer things up a bit.

plodder wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:22 pm

Herainestold wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:14 pm You are going to see big countries and places like the EU start regulating the internet more. China shows how it can be done.
Australia, Canada, India, are all trying to figure put how to do it. I don't know about America, but it will be regulated by lawyers and litigation risk there, probably not by legislation.
Labour needs to have a comprehensive social media regulation strategy in its back pocket for when it takes power, assuming we continue to have elections and there isn't some kind of right wing putsch.

pffft the big firms are far too powerful, plus moderation is difficult enough without trying to codify it in law. What specific sorts of regulation would you propose?

I'd insist social media is held to the same standards as traditional media. That ought to cheer things up a bit.

It already is in the US.

Which is why it's indistinguishable from Fox News.

Don't know what the media law is in the US but presumably Fox can be forced to publish retractions, apologies, sued for slander/libel etc. AFAIK twitter / facebook etc would just pass any legal jeopardy onto the individual users. This would be like a Fox journalist being sued, rather than Fox itself.

Reverse ferret!

As one commenter says, "Up to Four Seasons Total Cat Lawyer level now".

plodder wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:42 pm Don't know what the media law is in the US but presumably Fox can be forced to publish retractions, apologies, sued for slander/libel etc. AFAIK twitter / facebook etc would just pass any legal jeopardy onto the individual users. This would be like a Fox journalist being sued, rather than Fox itself.

Media law as applies to Cable TV in the US is the First Amendment, and a much harder to prove defamation law.

Section 230 protects common carrier publishers from liability for defamatory user posts, in the same way that the cable company is protected from defamatory broadcasts by Fox News.

Fox News journalists are employees of Fox News, and so acting within the scope of their employment on behalf of the company. Twitter users are not employees of Twitter.

sTeamTraen wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:45 pm Reverse ferret!

As one commenter says, "Up to Four Seasons Total Cat Lawyer level now".

And the fake accounts that had already paid for "verification" blue ticks are now showing up as properly verified users, verified because they are notable people.

Including one pretending to be my senator.

https://twitter.com/SenMarkey/status/15 ... m6anw&s=19

Section 230 does protect Twitter from the defamatory contents of posts, but it may not protect them from saying that an impersonator posting defamatory content has been verified as the real person.

sTeamTraen wrote: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:45 pm Reverse ferret!

As one commenter says, "Up to Four Seasons Total Cat Lawyer level now".

JFC and FSM help me. It's a $44 billion amateur hour. What the f.ck goes through that guy's head?