Support NeoGAF

[BlackTron]

you can quiz me on it.

Yes, Elon Musk had to "do a lot for Ukraine" in order to stop doing it when he didn't feel like it, only for the Pentagon to beg him back. No shit, Sherlock. Would you like to add anything else to the conversation thinly veiled as some sort of "gotcha" answer?

So which paragraph of the text has the part where Musk bragged about phone calls with Putin? Or do you need a code wheel for that?

If you had actually read the first handful of paragraphs of this piece you would know how silly your stance is. You probably see a wall of text instead of babi's first Youtube video and go back to playing Genshin Impact

 

[HoodWinked]

Yes, Elon Musk had to "do a lot for Ukraine" in order to stop doing it when he didn't feel like it, only for the Pentagon to beg him back. No shit, Sherlock. Would you like to add anything else to the conversation thinly veiled as some sort of "gotcha" answer?

So which paragraph of the text has the part where Musk bragged about phone calls with Putin? Or do you need a code wheel for that?

If you had actually read the first handful of paragraphs of this piece you would know how silly your stance is. You probably see a wall of text instead of babi's first Youtube video and go back to playing Genshin Impact

You're completely delusional, Ukraine without Starlink would be in a terrible situation, you invented this narrative of soldiers in a hole somewhere as Musk maniacally laughing, In fact it was revealed recently that even the secretary of state Blinken reiterates its importance. And also with great timing just a couple hours ago Musk spoke further on it.

And man you're way off, on your assessment of me I've never even installed Genshin Impact I'm repulsed by that shitty studio because their close ties to China and their self censorship back during HK protests.

 

[BlackTron]

You're completely delusional, Ukraine without Starlink would be in a terrible situation, you invented this narrative of soldiers in a hole somewhere as Musk maniacally laughing, In fact it was revealed recently that even the secretary of state Blinken reiterates its importance. And also with great timing just a couple hours ago Musk spoke further on it.

And man you're way off, on your assessment of me I've never even installed Genshin Impact I'm repulsed by that shitty studio because their close ties to China and their self censorship back during HK protests.

You continue to intentionally skirt around the point. Imagine if I complained that the brakes in my Toyota didn't work, but I survived and made it to work anyway that day. You say "Toyota has made millions of cars are helped millions of people get to work". You are not wrong. And you have proved nothing about whether their failures are legitimate or not, just stating random facts to try and stave off the real point of the discussion.

You still act like someone who has has staunchly not read the piece that you originally replied to and just posting random googled content that seems to support your stance without a clue what you are even responding to.

 

[SJRB]

EviLore can you add x.com to the list of approved media sites for embedding?

X share links now default to x.com, even when taken from the twitter.com domain. So we can't embed X posts unless we manually change the url back from x.com to twitter.com.

 

[HoodWinked]

You continue to intentionally skirt around the point. Imagine if I complained that the brakes in my Toyota didn't work, but I survived and made it to work anyway that day. You say "Toyota has made millions of cars are helped millions of people get to work". You are not wrong. And you have proved nothing about whether their failures are legitimate or not, just stating random facts to try and stave off the real point of the discussion.

You still act like someone who has has staunchly not read the piece that you originally replied to and just posting random googled content that seems to support your stance without a clue what you are even responding to.

It only looks like google because you have a massive blindspot when it comes to the matter.

even in your analogy you realize there wouldn't even be a car at all because Russians have effectively jammed and taken away most front line communications. It's so important that Russians directly have jammed and launched sophisticated attacks on Starlink but SpaceX deployed countermeasures to keep it operational.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/04/18/discord-leaks-starlink-ukraine/

Also offensive use of Starlink isn't some passive thing Ukrainians are mounting the receivers directly on attack vehicles. Credit to Ukrainian ingenuity but It's directly being used as Military arms, you see how complex this is becoming? There's also a matter of how service is geofenced, and this means the service is barred from operating in Russia/Crimea due to sanctions. But also Musk has stated if the US military/President ordered him to he'd comply, but he is put into the position of trying to be passive because there is a failure of leadership at the state level and likely intentional so they can't be blamed.

 

[BlackTron]

HoodWinked I can't be arsed to have a discussion with someone who can't be bothered to read the content that he/she originally replied to. When you want to talk about it, read the article, and then we can talk about it. You even quipped "you can quiz me on it" and when I asked you the easiest question that you could have answered with 10 seconds of skimming and Ctrl+F to mislead us that you actually got even a few paragraphs in, you ignored it.

"Elon Musk gave a country at war access to Internet and they used that Internet for military purposes. I will post pictures that prove Ukraine was doing these terrible things and that Blaktron was wrong"

Dude you need to read the OG linked article before you embarrass yourself any further

 

[SlimySnake]

EviLore can you add x.com to the list of approved media sites for embedding?

X share links now default to x.com, even when taken from the twitter.com domain. So we can't embed X posts unless we manually change the url back from x.com to twitter.com.

Came to post this.

 

[HoodWinked]

HoodWinked I can't be arsed to have a discussion with someone who can't be bothered to read the content that he/she originally replied to. When you want to talk about it, read the article, and then we can talk about it. You even quipped "you can quiz me on it" and when I asked you the easiest question that you could have answered with 10 seconds of skimming and Ctrl+F to mislead us that you actually got even a few paragraphs in, you ignored it.

"Elon Musk gave a country at war access to Internet and they used that Internet for military purposes. I will post pictures that prove Ukraine was doing these terrible things and that Blaktron was wrong"

Dude you need to read the OG linked article before you embarrass yourself any further

How is this the case when you cite a single article ominously titled "Elon Musk's Shadow Rule" which was specifically written as a hit piece then proclaim it as gospel, a headline like that would be laughed at if it were written in any other partisan rag. Then when I provided numerous accounts and articles ranging from WaPo, CBS, CNN and his own words that give more context, you dismiss it and just call it embarrassing. That is some wild levels of arrogance.

 

[BlackTron]

How is this the case when you cite a single article ominously titled "Elon Musk's Shadow Rule" which was specifically written as a hit piece then proclaim it as gospel, a headline like that would be laughed at if it were written in any other partisan rag. Then when I provided numerous accounts and articles ranging from WaPo, CBS, CNN and his own words that give more context, you dismiss it and just call it embarrassing. That is some wild levels of arrogance.

How is what the case? That I should expect that you read the article after you claim to have done so and said we could quiz you on it? And now insinuate that it was never worth reading anyway to cover that you are a liar?

The "hit piece" has quotes of real named people direct from the Pentagon and all the juiciest stuff is near the beginning. So taken at face value you are suggesting that the New Yorker is reporting untrue statements from the Pentagon. Had you read it as you claimed you would know what a bold claim you were making here but nah, just more embarrassment.

The thing about all your links is that they don't even make a difference, that's what goes over your head, that was the point of my Toyota analogy. You proved nothing by showing "proof" of Starlink being used for war, even my Grandma's dog knew Ukraine would use Starlink for war the day they started giving them out, the impetus from the guys at the company itself was "We didn't have time to think about it, people were dying". Since you refuse to read it there's a teaser trailer for you.

Since this is getting spicy and I don't want to get banned in a pointless argument with someone who won't even read what he's talking about

Edit: Just wanna say this. I'm not exactly what you would call a die-hard fan of the New Yorker. Every time I see the name I think of the "nobody here has one" joke in family guy. But this isn't a one side vs other side thing. It's just a one guy being a bad dude thing and what you might have expected to be an inflationary headline happened to align with reality. Sorry but they have the receipts from the Pentagon. And I don't really care who reports it, a crime is a crime

 

[HoodWinked]

How is what the case? That I should expect that you read the article after you claim to have done so and said we could quiz you on it? And now insinuate that it was never worth reading anyway to cover that you are a liar?

The "hit piece" has quotes of real named people direct from the Pentagon and all the juiciest stuff is near the beginning. So taken at face value you are suggesting that the New Yorker is reporting untrue statements from the Pentagon. Had you read it as you claimed you would know what a bold claim you were making here but nah, just more embarrassment.

The thing about all your links is that they don't even make a difference, that's what goes over your head, that was the point of my Toyota analogy. You proved nothing by showing "proof" of Starlink being used for war, even my Grandma's dog knew Ukraine would use Starlink for war the day they started giving them out, the impetus from the guys at the company itself was "We didn't have time to think about it, people were dying". Since you refuse to read it there's a teaser trailer for you.

Since this is getting spicy and I don't want to get banned in a pointless argument with someone who won't even read what he's talking about

Edit: Just wanna say this. I'm not exactly what you would call a die-hard fan of the New Yorker. Every time I see the name I think of the "nobody here has one" joke in family guy. But this isn't a one side vs other side thing. It's just a one guy being a bad dude thing and what you might have expected to be an inflationary headline happened to align with reality. Sorry but they have the receipts from the Pentagon. And I don't really care who reports it, a crime is a crime

What exactly make's Kahl's communications some kind of smoking gun? You're being completely unserious right now. Yes that was in October of last year which has to do with the offensive operations in Sevastopol. Starlink was never operational in those territories, Ukraine and the Pentagon didn't properly coordinate their offensive efforts and essentially sent their vehicles where there was no coverage, but rather than say that was a failure on their end it would be easier to pass the blame.

Also not everything in a particular publication is bad but you have to be skeptical when they are written where the partisanship is so forthright.

 

[BlackTron]

What exactly make's Kahl's communications some kind of smoking gun? You're being completely unserious right now. Yes that was in October of last year which has to do with the offensive operations in Sevastopol. Starlink was never operational in those territories, Ukraine and the Pentagon didn't properly coordinate their offensive efforts and essentially sent their vehicles where there was no coverage, but rather than say that was a failure on their end it would be easier to pass the blame.

Also not everything in a particular publication is bad but you have to be skeptical when they are written where the partisanship is so forthright.

I have utterly nothing to say to you except "read it". Being skeptical is ok, but confirm or deny your own skepticism before insulting multiple forum members by reading it, not dismissing it out of hand and then saying "quiz me on it".

Not my job to write you a cliff notes version of this by responding to your questions that reveal you never read it. Already linked the necessary text and everything you need to know is in the first 20% of reading so you have been given everything needed to be equipped for this discussion that you decided to walk into. You probably think "how does he know I didn't read it because I'm asking this, my reasoning would be valid no matter what they say in that piece." Trust me, once you read it, you'll realize the entire context of your challenges is broken and reveals everything. Even if you still wanted to defend Mr. Musk, you would do so in a smarter fashion being aware of the actual conversation taking place.

But now that I know you a little bit the opportunity for a real discussion is gone, you would probably skim *just* enough to make a bigger problem or flaunt some fake credibility, so this is my last post in this thread. Can't wait for you to post a reply where you pat yourself on the back for "getting the last word in" making a bunch of random possibly true or proven statements that glosses over the real topic which would be painfully obvious if you practiced some reading comprehension.

 

[HoodWinked]

I have utterly nothing to say to you except "read it". Being skeptical is ok, but confirm or deny your own skepticism before insulting multiple forum members by reading it, not dismissing it out of hand and then saying "quiz me on it".

Not my job to write you a cliff notes version of this by responding to your questions that reveal you never read it. Already linked the necessary text and everything you need to know is in the first 20% of reading so you have been given everything needed to be equipped for this discussion that you decided to walk into. You probably think "how does he know I didn't read it because I'm asking this, my reasoning would be valid no matter what they say in that piece." Trust me, once you read it, you'll realize the entire context of your challenges is broken and reveals everything. Even if you still wanted to defend Mr. Musk, you would do so in a smarter fashion being aware of the actual conversation taking place.

But now that I know you a little bit the opportunity for a real discussion is gone, you would probably skim *just* enough to make a bigger problem or flaunt some fake credibility, so this is my last post in this thread. Can't wait for you to post a reply where you pat yourself on the back for "getting the last word in" making a bunch of random possibly true or proven statements that glosses over the real topic which would be painfully obvious if you practiced some reading comprehension.

What a disappointing turn, I directly respond to the portion that you're pointing out about Kahl's communications and the timeline of events but now you're simply doubling down on a single article because it validates your preconceived notions and you put up blinders when there are other counterfactuals.

You don't even feel a bit guilty that you mislead people because I point this out I'm somehow now a shill. Be a serious person, nearly everything in your original post which was the basis of my response was just fanfiction and your senseless disdain is blinding you from being rational. But somehow you believe the New Yorker piece substantiates what you've posted when even that doesn't. Think critically for a second your own claim for it to happen the way you think it did, he would have to been at SpaceX watching the hundreds of Starlink receivers location pings in some small window of the offensive and somehow figured out from the bunch of dots what was happening as it was unfolding then shuts off just the ones individually? And that's if such an interface even exists, what would that interface even look like? like an RTS game?

If you read this article, you can see that Musk literally turned off Starlink while Ukrainian forces were pushing the front line in real time, resulting in chaos. People died because of it.

He may as well be Lex Luther at that point. I hope all his businesses fail and he loses every penny he has.

Edit: Imagine you are just a guy, a soldier fighting to the death, and actually making a difference at the front line of the enemy that killed your countries kids. Just when things are looking hopeful, chaos breaks out and you are shot, because a billionaire watching from far away decided something and pushed a button.

That's Elon Musk guys. If it were a movie or a game, we would be waiting for his inevitable death by Arnold or Rambo.

 

[BlackTron]

What a disappointing turn, I directly respond to the portion that you're pointing out about Kahl's communications and the timeline of events but now you're simply doubling down on a single article because it validates your preconceived notions and you put up blinders when there are other counterfactuals.

You don't even feel a bit guilty that you mislead people because I point this out I'm somehow now a shill. Be a serious person, nearly everything in your original post which was the basis of my response was just fanfiction and your senseless disdain is blinding you from being rational. But somehow you believe the New Yorker piece substantiates what you've posted when even that doesn't. Think critically for a second your own claim for it to happen the way you think it did, he would have to been at SpaceX watching the hundreds of Starlink receivers location pings in some small window of the offensive and somehow figured out from the bunch of dots what was happening as it was unfolding then shuts off just the ones individually? And that's if such an interface even exists, what would that interface even look like? like an RTS game?

Elon Musk literally bragged that he could see the war unfolding before him on his laptop, it's right there in the article. I know I said I wouldn't post again, but I have to one more time just out of pity, to beg you to read it before you embarrass yourself any more.

To the dismay of Pentagon officials, Musk volunteered that he had spoken with Putin personally. Another individual told me that Musk had made the same assertion in the weeks before he tweeted his pro-Russia peace plan, and had said that his consultations with the Kremlin were regular. (Musk later denied having spoken with Putin about Ukraine.) On the phone, Musk said that he was looking at his laptop and could see “the entire war unfolding” through a map of Starlink activity. “This was, like, three minutes before he said, ‘Well, I had this great conversation with Putin,’ ” the senior defense official told me. “And we were, like, ‘Oh, dear, this is not good.’ ”

 

[HoodWinked]

Elon Musk literally bragged that he could see the war unfolding before him on his laptop, it's right there in the article. I know I said I wouldn't post again, but I have to one more time just out of pity, to beg you to read it before you embarrass yourself any more.

I'm not talking about activity heatmaps, this was in response to the claims you were making in your original post where you're claiming he pushed a button to turn off the Starlink when it was never enabled in the first place in sanctioned territories.

 

[BlackTron]

I'm not talking about activity heatmaps, this was in response to the claims you were making in your original post where you're claiming he pushed a button to turn off the Starlink when it was never enabled in the first place in sanctioned territories.

By then, Musk’s sympathies appeared to be manifesting on the battlefield. One day, Ukrainian forces advancing into contested areas in the south found themselves suddenly unable to communicate. “We were very close to the front line,” Mykola, the signal-corps soldier, told me. “We crossed this border and the Starlink stopped working.” The consequences were immediate. “Communications became dead, units were isolated. When you’re on offense, especially for commanders, you need a constant stream of information from battalions. Commanders had to drive to the battlefield to be in radio range, risking themselves,” Mykola said. “It was chaos.” Ukrainian expats who had raised funds for the Starlink units began receiving frantic calls. The tech executive recalls a Ukrainian military official telling him, “We need Elon now.” “How now?” he replied. “Like fucking now,” the official said. “People are dying.” Another Ukrainian involved told me that he was “awoken by a dozen calls saying they’d lost connectivity and had to retreat.” The Financial Times reported that outages affected units in Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Kharkiv, Donetsk, and Luhansk. American and Ukrainian officials told me they believed that SpaceX had cut the connectivity via geofencing, cordoning off areas of access.

The senior defense official said, “We had a whole series of meetings internal to the department to try to figure out what we could do about this.” Musk’s singular role presented unfamiliar challenges, as did the government’s role as intermediary. “It wasn’t like we could hold him in breach of contract or something,” the official continued. The Pentagon would need to reach a contractual arrangement with SpaceX so that, at the very least, Musk “couldn’t wake up one morning and just decide, like, he didn’t want to do this anymore.” Kahl added, “It was kind of a way for us to lock in services across Ukraine. It could at least prevent Musk from turning off the switch altogether.”

So Starlink was turned off in select territories in compliance with government sanctions, so that the government could try to convince him to turn it on. Ok. Sounds like he was in compliance with Russian sanctions.

 

[Toons]

So Starlink was turned off in select territories in compliance with government sanctions, so that the government could try to convince him to turn it on. Ok. Sounds like he was in compliance with Russian sanctions.

Theres no version of the events where Elons decisions regarding starlink are even remotely defensible.

It continues to baffle me how far some of these guys will go to absolve him of ANY responsibility for a bad decision. Far as I'm concerned he's mere steps away from being classified as a Russian agent after these revelations.

 

[Mistake]

Just to update you guys here, the starlink crimea rumor was retracted

Elon Musk ordered Starlink to be turned off during Ukraine offensive, book says

Biography alleges Musk told engineers to turn off communications network to hobble Ukraine drone attack on Russian warships

www.theguardian.com

 

[funkygunther]

Just to update you guys here, the starlink crimea rumor was retracted

Elon Musk ordered Starlink to be turned off during Ukraine offensive, book says

Biography alleges Musk told engineers to turn off communications network to hobble Ukraine drone attack on Russian warships

www.theguardian.com

Calling it a rumor is some dishonest shit

 

[DrFigs]

Just to update you guys here, the starlink crimea rumor was retracted

Elon Musk ordered Starlink to be turned off during Ukraine offensive, book says

Biography alleges Musk told engineers to turn off communications network to hobble Ukraine drone attack on Russian warships

www.theguardian.com

Yeah i think we should be more skeptical of things people save for books. if it was really such a big deal, you'd think they'd be running to print about it in the papers.

 

[Mistake]

Calling it a rumor is some dishonest shit

What would you call it? A lie? Untruth? Oopsie daisy?

 

[funkygunther]

What would you call it? A lie? Untruth? Oopsie daisy?

If it was any of those it would be a lie, untruth or oppsie daisy, or even a mistake, then it was from one of the most prolific biographers writing an authorized biography that would have had to go through rounds of agent, publisher, editor and subject approval. If it was a lie or mistake then it was one that not only slipped by an entire publishing process but also one that would put a working author's, not known for these kinds of lies or mistakes, entire reputation on the line.

 

[Mistake]

If it was any of those it would be a lie, untruth or oppsie daisy, or even a mistake, then it was from one of the most prolific biographers writing an authorized biography that would have had to go through rounds of agent, publisher, editor and subject approval. If it was a lie or mistake then it was one that not only slipped by an entire publishing process but also one that would put a working author's, not known for these kinds of lies or mistakes, entire reputation on the line.

Well...they retracted it, so...you have to call it something my man. It just isn't true

 

[funkygunther]

Well...they retracted it, so...you have to call it something my man. It just isn't true

Just because they retracted it does not make it untrue, that's why you don't have to call it anything.

Edit: actually that's a lie, the retraction is true so we can call it that

 

[Mistake]

Just because they retracted it does not make it untrue, that's why you don't have to call it anything.

Edit: actually that's a lie, the retraction is true so we can call it that

The source said it was based on mistaken information. We now know it is not true, and that's why it got retracted. If you view it as unverified, that would make it a rumor

 

[funkygunther]

The source said it was based on mistaken information. We now know it is not true, and that's why it got retracted. If you view it as "unverified," that would make it a rumor

No we don't know that. As explained that would mean the biographer chose or was given, but either way didn't vet properly, the sources he had. It would also mean no-one picked up on it until AFTER a sample was in the hands of journalists.

 

[Mistake]

No we don't know that. As explained that would mean the biographer chose or was given, but either way didn't vet properly, the sources he had. It would also mean no-one picked up on it until AFTER a sample was in the hands of journalists.

I'm really struggling to get your angle here. I mean, the story got out and spread. People were talking about it. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Sorry

 

[funkygunther]

I'm really struggling to get your angle here. I mean, the story got out and spread. People were talking about it. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Sorry

My angle is that it's just as, and arguably more, likely a posthoc retraction based on the calculation that a temporary hit to the reputation is a better outcome than going into a litigation battle with the subject on the eve of a book you need to sell. Especially when a bone was thrown on the Amber Heard cosplay, shall we say, rumor.

So where that is a possibility I wouldn't label the initial printing of the information as anything definitive.

 

[adamsapple]

 

[Pejo]

It's very meta that the article is also paywalled.

 

[IFireflyl]

EviLore can you add x.com to the list of approved media sites for embedding?

X share links now default to x.com, even when taken from the twitter.com domain. So we can't embed X posts unless we manually change the url back from x.com to twitter.com.

I know this is a month-old post, but I can imagine EviLore going to add this and fat-fingering the X key. All of a sudden NeoGAF is an entirely different site.

 

[EviLore]

I know this is a month-old post, but I can imagine EviLore going to add this and fat-fingering the X key. All of a sudden NeoGAF is an entirely different site.

On it.

 

[Chittagong]

The book explains this, it is to create an identification system. A phone number is required as well in Elon's master plan to turn X into Paypal/WeChat. He sees the benefit as dual fold - not being able to be anonymous will reduce bad actors, and enables payment services.

It's a massive gamble, but if I learned something from the book, is that massive gambles are oxygen for Elon.

 

[BadBurger]

With his intentions on transforming Twitter into a multi-service platform that includes some form of online banking and/or payment system, this is the most direct way to start collecting banking information from users and correlate that to human data that can be leveraged, marketed, or sold. Like any of the other changes he has made to the platform (either permanently or temporarily) because it was "the only way he could imagine to combat bots", this is not about bots. The people running bot networks already expend money to do so, an extra dollar an account ain't gonna matter. Various forms of payment can conceal their identity.

(I didn't see it in the linked article, maybe I missed it, but this seems to be live as a test in New Zealand and the Philippines)

On the topic of Twitter, Frontline released an episode summarizing the purchase and many of the events that followed:

FRONTLINE | Elon Musk's Twitter Takeover | Season 2023 | Episode 17 | PBS

Elon Musk’s long and often troubled relationship with Twitter.

www.pbs.org

 

[FunkMiller]

Well, that’ll kill it good and proper.

”Hey! Please give your financial details to a platform that is now stuffed with bots, inappropriate advertising, and has a reputation for being run chaotically!”

 

[SJRB]

Well, that’ll kill it good and proper.

”Hey! Please give your financial details to a platform that is now stuffed with bots, inappropriate advertising, and has a reputation for being run chaotically!”

So dramatic, lol.

 

[Toons]

The one dollar a year charge is basically saying "we just want your financial info primarily"

 

[norm9]

Twitter already sucks in that you have to log in to see people dunking on bad tweets. They should pay me a dollar for using it.

 

[Chittagong]

The one dollar a year charge is basically saying "we just want your financial info primarily"

Yep. Elon has been open about this being the case. It gives them identity (which Apple in app purchases don’t).

He said in the book that each credit card and phone number will be allowed only a single account, and accounts without credit card will be deboosted. So will be more work to bot.

I personally can’t imagine that very many would pay even a buck to see all that shitposting, but am excited to see how it plays out.

 

[Kenpachii]

Musk considers removing X platform from Europe over EU law - Insider​

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...atform-europe-over-eu-law-insider-2023-10-18/

 

[winjer]

Musk considers removing X platform from Europe over EU law - Insider​

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...atform-europe-over-eu-law-insider-2023-10-18/

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

Musk considers removing X platform from Europe over EU law - Insider​

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...atform-europe-over-eu-law-insider-2023-10-18/

Oh no,...anyway. - likely common response

The CEO should be the one on point with this message. Selling long term advertising has got to be challenging already. But, sustainability and profitability hasn't appeared to be a primary objective of the service since acquisition from what they do.

Regardless, it seems safe to say that since Muskva brought his limited vision to the responsibilities of the pluralistic platform that many people don't expect it to be around the next day. This possible removal just backs that up. Its presence shrinking is expected as part of a slow demise of self-inflicted wounds from overplaying its position.

For users, it also raises and reinforces concerns over the way the service could fight against any potential oversight and future regulation with handling of financial data.

It could be for the best for the EU to be rid of the current service before it could insinuate itself further.

 

[Kenpachii]

Oh no,...anyway. - likely common response

The CEO should be the one on point with this message. Selling long term advertising has got to be challenging already. But, sustainability and profitability hasn't appeared to be a primary objective of the service since acquisition from what they do.

Regardless, it seems safe to say that since Muskva brought his limited vision to the responsibilities of the pluralistic platform that many people don't expect it to be around the next day. This possible removal just backs that up. Its presence shrinking is expected as part of a slow demise of self-inflicted wounds from overplaying its position.

For users, it also raises and reinforces concerns over the way the service could fight against any potential oversight and future regulation with handling of financial data.

It could be for the best for the EU to be rid of the current service before it could insinuate itself further.

The fact he even suggests this makes x/twitter already pointless to focus on for europeans to start with. I would not be shocked that most major outlets will sideline the platform more and more because of it.

 

[Chittagong]

Elon Musk wants your “entire financial life” on X by 2024

X's success as an everything app will "exceed" China's WeChat, Musk says.

arstechnica.com

 

[Nobody_Important]

Elon Musk wants your “entire financial life” on X by 2024

X's success as an everything app will "exceed" China's WeChat, Musk says.

arstechnica.com

lol


Lmao even

 

[Cyberpunkd]

Musk considers removing X platform from Europe over EU law - Insider​

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...atform-europe-over-eu-law-insider-2023-10-18/

TikTok next.

 

[winjer]

Elon Musk wants your “entire financial life” on X by 2024

X's success as an everything app will "exceed" China's WeChat, Musk says.

arstechnica.com

 

[DeafTourette]

It seems he never had any actual vision for the company... I don't think he's TRYING to tank it intentionally but that's the direction he's going.

 

[Toons]

Everything app?

Nah I'm good buddy haha

 

[BadBurger]

Musk considers removing X platform from Europe over EU law - Insider​

https://www.reuters.com/technology/...atform-europe-over-eu-law-insider-2023-10-18/

It's not like he'll have a choice. If he refuses to stop making twitter a safe harbor for the things the EU law prohibits then they'll ban the platform anyways.

 

[Go_Ly_Dow]