So, Elon Musk has made an offer to buy 100% of Twitter, rather than just the ~10% that he owns now. He wants to turn it into a bastion of free speech. Predictably, the left is freaking out.
I love it!
Printable View
So, Elon Musk has made an offer to buy 100% of Twitter, rather than just the ~10% that he owns now. He wants to turn it into a bastion of free speech. Predictably, the left is freaking out.
I love it!
This is gonna be awesome. The meltdown of the left is so entertaining.
The board will likely decline the offer
Can you say HOSTILE takeover?
I wonder how the liberals will like people quoting "If you don't like it, get your own platform!" back to them.
O2
Ps. Predictions:
Twitter won't sell "because reasons".
Stock owners will sue because Twitter mismanaged the company by not selling.
The suit won't go anywhere because it's a liberal cause.
Musk: "Given that Twitter serves as the de facto public town square, failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines democracy,"
Love it
That's what I'm hoping for. In a hostile takeover, he won't have to agree to any namby-pamby conditions set by the board.Quote:
Originally Posted by 20X11
It's funny (sad funny) to watch the libs lose their minds and call Elon Musk a right winger when he's pretty well entrenched as a Libertarian that likes to smoke weed and support the Constitution.
Anyone notice the stock price he offered is $54.20 Coincidence?
I don't think Twitter is worth 40 billion. I'd stay with Starlink, Spacex & Tesla. Put the money in lithium mining.
When you're worth over $270 billion, it's no longer about making the best return on investment, it's about getting your message out.
I've never paid much attention to Musk until recently. I'm impressed. Dude puts his money where his mouth is. I respect that.
If I had that much money, I'd be building nuclear powered space craft that can do C+. It is called break through propulsion physics. If you can build starships, you could own this planet.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by hollohas
I hope he pops that little bubble and cleans house.
I dont know if its true or not, but I heard that 10% of twitter accounts are responsible for 80% of the tweets.
And some of the top accounts with the most followers hardly tweet (Obama, Bieber)Quote:
Originally Posted by OtterbatHellcat
So, are you going to look into buying a Tesla now?Quote:
Originally Posted by hollohas
Inquiring minds want to know.
Meh.Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1970
If he makes a legit full size SUV, I might. 3 kids and 2 dogs, we need a man sized SUV ;)
Any other software types have to spend time correctly interpreting that statement? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy
O2
I was referring to photo fission propulsion that is capable of faster than light travel. Not sure if this covered by laws governing nuclear technology. Building this technology would probably be insanely expensive, but not impossible. Admittedly it is an exotic materials problem and uncharted territory.
Kravis style hostile takeover or launching a competitive company are the next stepsQuote:
Originally Posted by 00tec
He can buy the holdings of individual stockholders without the boards' approval. He'll control enough of it that the board won't really have a choice.
...or he cashes out and does something different.
It is funny watching the true interests of those at the heart of Twitter having a complete meltdown. Like Musk is some die-hard conservative that's going to set the Twitter home page to the Bible.
http://youtu.be/WrH-CTRrj_I
Full TED Talk:
http://youtu.be/cdZZpaB2kDM
FWIW, Vanguard now holds more than Musk.
Rumor was the Saudi's were making a play as well.
Interesting times we're in folks.
I don’t do Twitter but am having fun watching the drama. [Pop]
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy
More than insanely expensive, what you're talking about requires new physics. Not just new engineering, new physics. Even getting close to c requires changing paradigms (like Robert Forward's laser pulsed lightsails) to get around the mass of storing on-board propellant. The nice thing about Robert Forward's stories was that he explained the physics behind them in the appendices to the stories. As much as I would love it, I haven't seen any credible physics for FTL travel.Quote:
Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy
Musk is already putting significant sums towards pushing space technology. He can do that and still bait the totalitarian demagogues at Twitter. In fact, it looks like he's baiting them AND going to make a huge profit at the same time. I've heard someone else has put forth an offer to buy Twitter and if it competes with his, he'll be able to nearly double his investment and then watch them go down the tubes. Musk right now seems to be the closest contemporary analog to Heinlein's fictitious characters of D.D. Harriman and Shipstone and our best bet for really pushing outside Earth's gravity well.
If he bought Area 51, he'd then have that technology!
It is quite possible to travel C+ in relation to earth without breaking any physics at all.
Consider this: In the early days of the universe it expanded faster than light speed by many orders of magnitude.
That's because spacetime (and the expansion thereof) is independent to C. By working with spacetime instead of "throwing shit out the back (rocket engines), e.g. compressing spacetime in one direction and expanding it in another, you can transit distance without the problem of time dilation as well, and exceed C to an award observer without actually moving much at all.
And there's evidence of it on earth. Impressive sensory data collected by US, and confirmed by the US Gov to exhibit methods of propulsion that are impossible under standard physics.
June 2021 ODNP report of the US Gov.Quote:
The report came to no conclusion about what the UAPs were, based on a lack of evidence, though in a limited number of incidents, UAP reportedly appeared to exhibit unusual flight characteristics, including high velocity, breaking the sound barrier without producing a sonic boom, high maneuverability not able to be replicated otherwise, long duration flight, and an ability to submerge into the water. Some of the UAPs appeared to move with no discernable means of propulsion, and it was noted that the alleged high speeds and maneuvers would normally destroy any craft.
Note that the encounters were repeatedly witnessed by dozens of airmen and sailors across multiple carrier groups over the last 18 years, and visual, video, and sensor data all correlated. There are two main ways this kind of flight is possible: 1) Spacetime manipulation or 2) Magic is real, and Gandalf is trying to get a ring to Hawaii.
No suggested conclusion as to what they are, but I think it's silly to say we don't know they are something, that utilizes physics outside of our kinetics.
Um, whut?Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
42, the answer's 42.Quote:
Originally Posted by rondog
ignore everything else you've been told.
Universal Number 6
No Sasquatch references yet?
It might be a really good investment to buy a information platform to gather business intelligence and influence people to a positive outcome. Having a social media platform, a space based internet provider, electric transportation company and a space launch platform could be really good for his bottom line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX1Y2JMK6g8
Writing this down.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
No. The speed of light is a defined limit in your locality. You can have a velocity > c relative to a receding reference frame (e.g, 2 points in space-time each traveling 0.75c in their own reference frames will have a relative velocity of 1.5c * cos (angle between their respective velocity vectors) but there is nothing in known physics that allows anything to travel faster than light in the local reference frame. That doesn't mean it's impossible but it does mean it requires new physics.Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxtArt
Once again, even our understanding of physics permit the apparent violation of C it exclusively when you are dealing with spacetime compression/expansion. The early universe inflated well in excess of C in relation to a fixed reference point. So in other words, if we imagine two fixed, imaginary objects in the early universe, they were spreading apart faster than even C - often by large margins. But, all the while, they were not breaking light speed. It is important to understand that the distances between objects can be changed/dilated/expanded in spacetime which does not run afoul of the constant itself. It is akin to saying we can get from NYC to India in six hours. Not by incredible speed, but instead by shortening the distance by going through the earth. Likewise if the earth is inflating, the distances between us and India increase. If the earth inflates fast enough, that distance increases faster than light speed, but neither India or NYC has moved. This is also how something can make impossible movements (right angle turns for instance) without destructing. If you aren't moving through spacetime, but instead moving spacetime, your movement is minimal while your apparent movement is substantial.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aloha_Shooter
These physics are well understood by scientists on earth. And there is some progress towards the theoretical warp bubbles here (spacetime manipulation like I described), they are just, so far, on a microscopic level. So we do understand it, it is not currently possible for us purely from a technological perspective. If we don't wipe ourselves out, there is a 99% chance it will be, someday.
WTF does this have to do with Elon and Twitter again?
Elon to spaceX to long distance space travel to speed limitations to physics discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by 00tec
Pretty conventional sidetrack.
Word.Quote:
Originally Posted by 00tec
He should buy Facebook too and clean THAT shithole up.
Twitter is a big rabbit holeQuote:
Originally Posted by 00tec
Just proved by this trip chasing the rabbit
https://i.imgur.com/ldqMz6h.jpg
This article is claiming Starlink is keeping Ukraine connected despite Russian attempts to jam the satellites. It is my understanding that the board of directors of Twitter does not want Mr. Musk airing the dirty laundry of its past actions. Unfair censorship tactics per se.
https://news.yahoo.com/spacex-shut-d...190254556.html