IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags elon musk , twitter

Reply
Old 7th June 2022, 06:59 AM   #241
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 22,503
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
This is at odds with what has been explained on Opening Arguments. The billion dollars is the penalty for breaking the contract, which either side can get out of if they show the other was acting in bad faith. So twitter not providing accurate information during the negotiation phase would be an arguement to get out of paying the billion.

I would not think there is any reasonable way he can negotiate a different price outside of something like breaking the deal and paying the billion and starting over if Twitter is willing. Fighting over the billion seems unlikely to be doable if you are trying to negotiate a new deal.
If you wander over to some of the discussions taking place elsewhere on the Internet, particularly those with "lawyers" posting, you'll see posts like: "Musk waived business due diligence in making his offer, and the Twitter board quite clearly relied on that waiver in accepting it." You'll then see arguments as to whether the waiver actually applies for all sorts of legal reasons. It appears to be pretty much of a "rabbit hole" and, unless the original deal is consummated by both parties in mutual agreement, one or more courts will try to decide.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 07:32 AM   #242
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
It's pretty obviously prompted by Musk's grandstanding. Perhaps it's just a wild coincidence.
Musk made the problem high profile, so I don't doubt that it was prompted by him in the sense that the Texas AG noticed it because of him. But that doesn't mean the AG is acting on his behalf. That doesn't automatically follow, because again, other people have a direct interest in this too.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 07:57 AM   #243
SuburbanTurkey
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Null
Posts: 15,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Musk made the problem high profile, so I don't doubt that it was prompted by him in the sense that the Texas AG noticed it because of him. But that doesn't mean the AG is acting on his behalf. That doesn't automatically follow, because again, other people have a direct interest in this too.
I don't think the AG is acting on Musk's behalf, I think he's just chasing right wing clout by going after one of their favorite boogiemen, social media companies.

I'd say the odds of them finding anything actionable are quite low.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 08:39 AM   #244
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,543
Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto View Post
If you wander over to some of the discussions taking place elsewhere on the Internet, particularly those with "lawyers" posting, you'll see posts like: "Musk waived business due diligence in making his offer, and the Twitter board quite clearly relied on that waiver in accepting it." You'll then see arguments as to whether the waiver actually applies for all sorts of legal reasons. It appears to be pretty much of a "rabbit hole" and, unless the original deal is consummated by both parties in mutual agreement, one or more courts will try to decide.
Oh this will put many lawyers kids through college if it does not go through.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 08:59 AM   #245
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I'd say the odds of them finding anything actionable are quite low.
Quite possibly. That still doesn't mean that Twitter is correct about its bot estimate. I'm assuming it isn't. This is one of those problems where it's in Twitter's interest to not solve it. So it very well may be true that their measurements only find 5% of accounts are bots (though they are rather secretive about how they measure this), and that they arrived at this number honestly (in the legal sense). But the actual number of bots could still be much higher. It probably is.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:06 AM   #246
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,506
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Quite possibly. That still doesn't mean that Twitter is correct about its bot estimate. I'm assuming it isn't. This is one of those problems where it's in Twitter's interest to not solve it. So it very well may be true that their measurements only find 5% of accounts are bots (though they are rather secretive about how they measure this), and that they arrived at this number honestly (in the legal sense). But the actual number of bots could still be much higher. It probably is.
Say, the mods here are pretty secretive about how they check for sock-puppets, and it's in the best interest of the ISF to appear to have more users than it does. Guess that means that we have a lot of sock puppets accounts here, too! Or, and I know this might be a stretch, but maybe your logic is faulty?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:09 AM   #247
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 12,716
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Quite possibly. That still doesn't mean that Twitter is correct about its bot estimate. I'm assuming it isn't. This is one of those problems where it's in Twitter's interest to not solve it. So it very well may be true that their measurements only find 5% of accounts are bots (though they are rather secretive about how they measure this), and that they arrived at this number honestly (in the legal sense). But the actual number of bots could still be much higher. It probably is.
I just can't imagine what difference it would make to the acquisition of the company by Musk. I mean, I'm not a dumb **** I get that bot accounts aren't real people so it skews the numbers for Twitter, but this shouldn't have been some sort of shock to Musk. How does it change things from Musk's perspective or is it just a cop-out? I'm assuming the latter.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:18 AM   #248
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I just can't imagine what difference it would make to the acquisition of the company by Musk. I mean, I'm not a dumb **** I get that bot accounts aren't real people so it skews the numbers for Twitter, but this shouldn't have been some sort of shock to Musk. How does it change things from Musk's perspective or is it just a cop-out? I'm assuming the latter.
The problem, from a financial perspective, is the uncertainty. Yeah, there are bots, everyone knows that. But is it 5%? 10%? 50%? We don't all know. And the difference matters, because advertisers are going to find out eventually (you have to plan like they will, anyways), and when they do, the ad revenues are going to be very different under those different scenarios.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:19 AM   #249
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 63,196
I'll never understand why people try to follow two paths at once. Either be a businessman or be a celebrity. Musk could probably do either one of those things well if he didn't also try to do the other at the same time.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:23 AM   #250
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Say, the mods here are pretty secretive about how they check for sock-puppets, and it's in the best interest of the ISF to appear to have more users than it does.
Is it in their interest to inflate the numbers? I don't think so. This isn't a money-making venture, and the mods certainly don't get paid. I don't think anyone really cares all that much. Nor is there a financial incentive to create sock puppet accounts here, as there is for creating bot accounts on Twitter. And as far as I know, the mods here have never claimed to have measured the number of sock puppet accounts, nor can I think of any reason why anyone would depend upon an accurate representation of the number of accounts for anything that matters.

Quote:
Guess that means that we have a lot of sock puppets accounts here, too! Or, and I know this might be a stretch, but maybe your logic is faulty?
Or, maybe you came up with a really bad comparison that simply isn't equivalent.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:24 AM   #251
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 12,716
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The problem, from a financial perspective, is the uncertainty. Yeah, there are bots, everyone knows that. But is it 5%? 10%? 50%? We don't all know. And the difference matters, because advertisers are going to find out eventually (you have to plan like they will, anyways), and when they do, the ad revenues are going to be very different under those different scenarios.
Ok....Twitter was founded in 2006. If they've been reporting their numbers using the same means for >15 years then there should be significant historical numbers to go off of in order to get a clear view of the numbers, yes?

As you said, the advertisers are best served to have as close to an exact number as possible, and I'd bet dimes to donuts that they've spent more time than Musk looking into these stats.

So if the ad revenue for Twitter hasn't significantly changed +/- over the last few years, and that information is available, then Musk should have had all of the information he could possibly need to make the decision to buy the company before saying he would.

I'm sure I'm wrong, and I'm sure someone will take the opportunity to explain why, but this seems like Musk is having buyers remorse. Nothing more, nothing less.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

Last edited by plague311; 7th June 2022 at 09:26 AM.
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 09:26 AM   #252
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,543
Wait bots are bad now? I thought getting rid of bots was bad from this

https://arstechnica.com/information-...ost-followers/
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 10:20 AM   #253
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Ok....Twitter was founded in 2006. If they've been reporting their numbers using the same means for >15 years
Have they? Who the hell knows. They're opaque about how they determine the number of bot accounts. We have no way of determining whether they've been doing it the same way for the entire time.

And if they have, then that's a really bad sign. They should be adapting how they discover bots, because bot makers are not going to sit still and keep using the same methods to create and run bot accounts. They are going to innovate, so Twitter should be innovating as well to try to keep pace.

Quote:
As you said, the advertisers are best served to have as close to an exact number as possible, and I'd bet dimes to donuts that they've spent more time than Musk looking into these stats.
If Twitter isn't detailing their methods or giving access to the raw data (hint: they aren't), then it doesn't matter how much time you spend looking at it, you won't make a lot of headway. Musk's advantage isn't that he's more brilliant or that he's spent more time, but that he has more leverage to get Twitter to open up.

Quote:
I'm sure I'm wrong, and I'm sure someone will take the opportunity to explain why, but this seems like Musk is having buyers remorse. Nothing more, nothing less.
That might be a factor, but the issue is still quite genuine.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 10:25 AM   #254
SuburbanTurkey
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Null
Posts: 15,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post


Musk's advantage isn't that he's more brilliant or that he's spent more time, but that he has more leverage to get Twitter to open up.

That very much remains to be seen. You seem to be giving his "bots" complaint a lot of credence, while it strikes me as a pretext to try and back out of the deal.

I don't see any reason to assume that this stunt is going to lead to Twitter publishing or disclosing any of its proprietary data around how they detect and deal with bots.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 10:36 AM   #255
Donal
Illuminator
 
Donal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,704
He made the offer without confirming this information. That's his foul-up. Let's be honest, he just ran his mouth, got egged on by his fanbois, and bit off more than he can chew. Unfortunately, he had to batter the stock of 2 different companies (that we know of) to get his ego checked and hurt a lot of people. I hope the SEC and FTC give him a colonoscopy.
__________________
SuburbanNerd A blog for making tech make sense
Donal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 10:47 AM   #256
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 12,716
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Have they? Who the hell knows. They're opaque about how they determine the number of bot accounts. We have no way of determining whether they've been doing it the same way for the entire time.

And if they have, then that's a really bad sign. They should be adapting how they discover bots, because bot makers are not going to sit still and keep using the same methods to create and run bot accounts. They are going to innovate, so Twitter should be innovating as well to try to keep pace.

If Twitter isn't detailing their methods or giving access to the raw data (hint: they aren't), then it doesn't matter how much time you spend looking at it, you won't make a lot of headway. Musk's advantage isn't that he's more brilliant or that he's spent more time, but that he has more leverage to get Twitter to open up.

That might be a factor, but the issue is still quite genuine.
If all you say is true, and this has been well-known for a long time, then why the **** did he bid on it in the first place? I mean, you're basically saying that we can't trust twitter about anything they say and that it's been known for a long time that we can't trust them.

The entire point I was making is if that's true then nothing has changed especially previous to Musk's proposal. Anyone that offered 40 ******* billion should have the knowledge that you're implying is known to everyone from advertisers to, well, you. That's my point.

ETA: As to the "twitter opening up because for Musk", that's giving credit where it sure as hell isn't due. Do you seriously think they're going to change anything now? That's a pipe dream. They owe Musk nothing, and it's Musk that's trying to pull out. I'm assuming if Twitter had a lot to hide then they wouldn't have wanted to hand over the keys to a loud-mouthed dip **** like Musk in the first place, just for him to air out their dirty laundry. Then again, at that point they might not care.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

Last edited by plague311; 7th June 2022 at 10:49 AM.
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 11:11 AM   #257
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
That very much remains to be seen. You seem to be giving his "bots" complaint a lot of credence, while it strikes me as a pretext to try and back out of the deal.
It really is the perfect scapegoat. If Musk tried to complain that the Marketing Director lied about last year's ad revenue, then we could just compare the e-mail to the actual numbers, and see whether or not the complaint was true. But when Musk says, "They're not counting the bots right," then that is effectively unfalsifiable. Whatever data Twitter produces, if it doesn't show more bots than initially stated, then that just proves that they are hiding the truth. It's Obama's real birth certificate all over again.

This, of course, is not a good factual or legal argument. It's damage control manufactured for unskeptical rubes. It's no surprise that the Texas AG is playing his part with the alley-oop (assuming, of course, that he hasn't fallen for it himself).
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 11:17 AM   #258
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
If all you say is true, and this has been well-known for a long time, then why the **** did he bid on it in the first place? I mean, you're basically saying that we can't trust twitter about anything they say and that it's been known for a long time that we can't trust them.
In his first PR appearance after losing the billion dollar penalty, Musk will state that exposing the evil liars within Twitter was his true plan all along.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 11:46 AM   #259
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 25,050
Texas AG would lick Musk’s balls to distract from his own problems and make good with the fanbois.

Musk knew of the bot issues prior to his bid and I’m wondering how his “no due diligence” clause will actually function if that is the reason he uses to bail on the deal.

If you try to buy XOM you can’t then claim to not know anything about how many environmental issues there are with their business. But you can promise to fix healthcare and then claim nobody knew how complex it was. I’m just not sure where this falls on that spectrum.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 11:53 AM   #260
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,506
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Is it in their interest to inflate the numbers? I don't think so. This isn't a money-making venture, and the mods certainly don't get paid. I don't think anyone really cares all that much. Nor is there a financial incentive to create sock puppet accounts here, as there is for creating bot accounts on Twitter.
Ok, walk me through how you think there is a financial incentive to create bots on Twitter. Granted, I don't have an account so I'm sure you're much more knowledgable about it than I am. That said, Twitter isn't the one creating bots. Twitter accounts who are followed by bots also aren't being paid for how many followers they have. So....what's the financial incentive to create Twitter bots?


Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
And as far as I know, the mods here have never claimed to have measured the number of sock puppet accounts, nor can I think of any reason why anyone would depend upon an accurate representation of the number of accounts for anything that matters.


Or, maybe you came up with a really bad comparison that simply isn't equivalent.
The equivalence depends on applying your own standards equally, but I do understand how that can be difficult when you start from a politically motivated position with regard to Twitter, then work backwards from that.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 02:58 PM   #261
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Ok, walk me through how you think there is a financial incentive to create bots on Twitter.
You can buy followers. I thought everyone knew that.

Quote:
That said, Twitter isn't the one creating bots.
I'm sure that's true, and I never claimed otherwise. Nevertheless, they still benefit from it.

Quote:
Twitter accounts who are followed by bots also aren't being paid for how many followers they have.
True. It's the other way around: you pay for the bots to follow you. And the motivation is probably that accounts with more followers get higher visibility in search results, etc. But it kind of doesn't really matter what the motivation is, because people are doing that. We know they are doing it. There isn't any uncertainty about that.

Quote:
So....what's the financial incentive to create Twitter bots?
The bot creators get paid, not by Twitter, but by the accounts who hire them to create followers.

Yes, it's ridiculous to pay for fake followers. But people do it anyways. That's just a fact.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 03:09 PM   #262
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 9,654
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Wait bots are bad now? I thought getting rid of bots was bad from this

https://arstechnica.com/information-...ost-followers/
Putin-bots are freedom fighters. They get a pass.
__________________
"To me, Hitler is the greatest man who ever lived. He truly is without fault, so simple and at the same time possessed of masculine strength"
-Leni Riefenstahl
Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th June 2022, 08:33 PM   #263
Solitaire
Neoclinus blanchardi
 
Solitaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,706
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
Putin-bots are freedom fighters. They get a pass.

No they go directly to Bot Hell, north of Seattle.
__________________
Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
Solitaire is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 05:21 AM   #264
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 9,506
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You can buy followers. I thought everyone knew that.



I'm sure that's true, and I never claimed otherwise. Nevertheless, they still benefit from it.



True. It's the other way around: you pay for the bots to follow you. And the motivation is probably that accounts with more followers get higher visibility in search results, etc. But it kind of doesn't really matter what the motivation is, because people are doing that. We know they are doing it. There isn't any uncertainty about that.



The bot creators get paid, not by Twitter, but by the accounts who hire them to create followers.

Yes, it's ridiculous to pay for fake followers. But people do it anyways. That's just a fact.
Well, I was unaware that you could buy fake followers, so everyone didn't know that. It hadn't even occurred to me that people would.

Although if it's that easy to buy fake followers, surely it's also that easy to track those fake followers.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 06:10 AM   #265
mumblethrax
Species traitor
 
mumblethrax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,264
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Well, I was unaware that you could buy fake followers, so everyone didn't know that. It hadn't even occurred to me that people would.
People do it to create the illusion of clout.

Quote:
Although if it's that easy to buy fake followers, surely it's also that easy to track those fake followers.
Depends on how sophisticated these services are, I suppose. And also on how much Twitter bothers to combat the problem.

Twitter's advertisers, interestingly, don't particularly seem to care how many fake accounts there are, so Musk's claim that this question is "fundamental to the financial health of Twitter" is largely ********.
mumblethrax is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 06:18 AM   #266
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Well, I was unaware that you could buy fake followers, so everyone didn't know that. It hadn't even occurred to me that people would.
It's quite strange, I certainly grant you that, and in a sensible society no one would do something so silly.

Alas, we do not live in a sensible society.

Quote:
Although if it's that easy to buy fake followers, surely it's also that easy to track those fake followers.
It's not necessarily that easy, because some of those companies try hard to make those fake accounts look not fake. From the "High-Quality Profiles" blurb at that link:
All of the profiles we use have profile pictures, posts, and bio information. Therefore, there is no risk that someone would figure out that you’re using our service.
Making these fake accounts look real is a selling point, precisely because people buying fake followers don't want anyone to know that they are fake.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 11:24 AM   #267
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 51,665
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
ETA: As to the "twitter opening up because for Musk", that's giving credit where it sure as hell isn't due. Do you seriously think they're going to change anything now? That's a pipe dream. They owe Musk nothing, and it's Musk that's trying to pull out. I'm assuming if Twitter had a lot to hide then they wouldn't have wanted to hand over the keys to a loud-mouthed dip **** like Musk in the first place, just for him to air out their dirty laundry. Then again, at that point they might not care.
Washington Post headline:
In reversal, Twitter plans to comply with Musk’s demands for data

We shall see.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2022, 11:41 AM   #268
SuburbanTurkey
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Null
Posts: 15,479
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Sounds like Twitter is calling his bluff, giving Musk the firehose of raw data and giving him an opportunity to back any of his claims.

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 8th June 2022 at 11:44 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2022, 07:41 AM   #269
Donal
Illuminator
 
Donal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,704
They probably just wanted to make sure that everything in there is covered by an NDA. You know his ego is going to make him start blurting things out.
__________________
SuburbanNerd A blog for making tech make sense
Donal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2022, 07:43 AM   #270
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,957
At this point the "**** or Get Off the Pot" clause of "Everything, Everywhere" should be invoked and Musk should be given 48 hours to either buy Twitter or shut up about it.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2022, 07:47 AM   #271
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,713
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
At this point the "**** or Get Off the Pot" clause of "Everything, Everywhere" should be invoked and Musk should be given 48 hours to either buy Twitter or shut up about it.
Nah, keep it going up until the point where he has to write a rubber check. It's like that episode of Seinfeld where Susan's parents made George drive them up to a house in the Hamptons that they knew he didn't have.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2022, 07:48 AM   #272
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,957
I just don't want to spend another 83 weeks or however long this is going to go on watching Elon Musk (and Twitter to a much smaller degree) edge each other anymore.

90% of America is out there rolling pennies for gas money and a spectacle of someone deciding whether or not to spend 47 quadrillion dollars buying... nothing is just... well it's gonna make the big vein in my head pop.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 14th June 2022 at 07:50 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2022, 08:23 AM   #273
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 32,920
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
Nah, keep it going up until the point where he has to write a rubber check. It's like that episode of Seinfeld where Susan's parents made George drive them up to a house in the Hamptons that they knew he didn't have.
So, is Tesla's stock price still falling and is Twitter still valued way less than Elon said he would buy it for? And now Bitcoin is tanking which must be bad for him as didn't he buy a heap of that junk when it was highly valued? Now there is some dispute about how many bots there are on Twitter, and some guy from Google thinks his bot is alive.

Weird planet we live on.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2022, 08:25 AM   #274
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,957
Headline: "Bitcoin become sentient, buys Twitter and reveals Elon Musk is a bot."
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2022, 12:32 PM   #275
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 26,062
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Headline: "Bitcoin become sentient, buys Twitter and reveals Elon Musk is a bot."
Not quite

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...pyramid-scheme

Quote:
Elon Musk, SpaceX and Tesla Inc. were sued for $258 billion over claims they are part of a racketeering scheme to back the cryptocurrency Dogecoin
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2022, 01:54 PM   #276
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 55,448
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I'll never understand why people try to follow two paths at once. Either be a businessman or be a celebrity. Musk could probably do either one of those things well if he didn't also try to do the other at the same time.
If you are in showbiz doing both at the same time is part of the job, but IMHO it's pretty hard to people in other inidstries to pull it off.
I actually think part of Musk's problem is he tries too hard; it's obvious he is trying to grab headlines. It actully works better if it's not as obvoious as it is for Musk.
I think he turn to the right polirically is losing him a lot of support he had among Liberals and the Greens because of Tesla.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2022, 08:51 PM   #277
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 27,084
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
So, is Tesla's stock price still falling and is Twitter still valued way less than Elon said he would buy it for? And now Bitcoin is tanking which must be bad for him as didn't he buy a heap of that junk when it was highly valued? Now there is some dispute about how many bots there are on Twitter, and some guy from Google thinks his bot is alive.

Weird planet we live on.
I read something recently about that:

Tesla's Bitcoin Bet Turns into a Nightmare

As far as Tesla's share price, I googled that and it is down by 46% YTD (since January 1st). On the other hand, compared to this time last year, it is actually up about 4%.

Still higher than the $420/share that he joked about taking the company private at.

My personal opinion is that the company is grossly overvalued, but what do I know, right?

Let's compare Tesla to Toyota, just for ships and giggles.

Tesla market cap: $662.32 Billion
Toyota market cap: $213.36 Billion

Hmmm, Tesla worth 3 times more than Toyota.

Top 10 Biggest Car Manufacturers by Revenue (2021)

Toyota was No. 2 after Volkswagon, with $249.4 billion in revenue. Tesla was not in the top 10. Apparently they had $53.8 billion in revenue last year. Fair enough, but not enough to make the top 10 car companies in the world.

In terms of number of vehicles sold, Tesla didn't make the top 15 in the world last year:

https://www.factorywarrantylist.com/...ufacturer.html

Profits?

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles...0m/0bu/039000c

Quote:
Toyota's FY 2021 operating profit soars 36% to record $23 bil.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/26/b...-earnings.html

Quote:
Tesla said Wednesday that its profit leapt more than sixfold last year to $5.5 billion, the highest total in its 19-year history, as sales soared further, especially in Europe and China.
OK, so I guess people are betting that in the long term Tesla will be able to consistently generate 3 times the profit that Toyota does. Personally, I wouldn't take that bet (I'd bet on Toyota).
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:09 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.