Amarna Forum

Full Version: Elon Musk buys 9% stake in Twitter, wants it to be less censorious
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
A thread of solid advice for Mr. Musk:

Quote:Some advice for

1. Move extremely fast. Don’t give them time to plan and react. They are still shell-shocked and won’t be thinking clearly.

2. Put pressure on not only leadership, but lower-level employees as well. Woke companies are more autonomous than most might initially think. Their employees are there because they already ‘know what to do’. Get as many of ‘those who will be a problem’ to quit as possible.

3. Restore DJT immediately, or at least publicly vocalize your willingness to do so. This will help with the previous suggestion. Bring back Malone, McCollough, and some of the more well-known banned accounts.

4. Increase your stake every time the leadership publicly counter-signals you. With only 9%, you will be a pariah to them. But if you show a willingness to increase it, you will be able to leverage it.

5. Apply pressure to the NGO’s involved in ‘fact-checking’ and ‘hate-speech’ classification. Keep in mind that this isn’t just one company. What we perceive as ‘Twitter’ is a vast network of NGO’s, state department operatives, and advertisers coordinating to drive The Narrative.

6. Signal intent to move away from the legal defense shield of ‘AI/ML’ and towards a more human content mediation approach. Twitter (and FB) hide behind this defense to avoid legal accountability for obviously politically-targeted aggression.

7. Market this as a pivotal piece of a greater cultural movement to ‘Restore America’. There are people who can still be reached that desperately want something positive to latch on to after what they’ve been subjected to over the last few years.

8. Put people you trust in there immediately to start to figure out how their internal processes work. They will try to adapt by shielding what they really do to ‘outsiders’, but this again highlights why it is so important to move quickly. (I volunteer.)

9. There’s not even a chance that they’re going to treat you fairly. Don’t expect it. Do not give them the benefit of the doubt. They fully understand the severity of the situation.

10. Strike while they are emotional. Let the changes you cause become the story. They will literally write it for you, and the public will cheer for what you’re doing. The liberal media is one of the most universally hated ‘entities’ in the United States.

11. Remove 'verified status' for most journos, commentators, and media outlets. These individuals /companies do not deserve to have their signal amplified. The decision to grandfather in legacy media single-handedly preserved their control over The Narrative.
Do you actually get the impression he cares and isn't just jerking himself off here?
He's no John Galt, but he's also no fagotjew. He's somewhere near the halfway point and I think that has merit.
Elon Musk shows a baseline level of disgust for the most heinous of leftist social mores. He also makes them very, very angry because of this. I have no idea if he actually intends to do anything with his share, but him buying in can only improve the website, at the very least by causing some tranny jannies to quit.
Elon Musk knows Peter Theil knows Mencius Moldbug ... trust the plan #nRX
On the other hand, he is the brain chips guy...
Watch, he will make twitter even worse for anons.
Elon is an interesting case, he behaves like the typical pre-Gamergate redditor, when atheism was still on vogue. A dead tribe which I'm partly sympathetic to. He doesn't particularly care about the white race, but I'm sure he knows that we make the most contributions to human civilization.

He claims to be a free speech absolutist, and I think he's quite sincere in this, but in practice as expected he has his limits: according to Bantu Luke Smith he has fired a Tesla employee for critizing Tesla's autonomous driving tech. I just think he only makes exceptions when his mission is threatened, rather than social pressure.

Now, about his influence on twitter, I think he will start by toying around and implementing useless, but harmless stuff like the famous edit button. Expect some quirky easter eggs too. He won't probably relax banning, but he won't make it worse, and won't slash mildly conservative blue-checks as it has happened in the last two years. I'm certainly sure he will bring Trump back and that's enough for me.
(04-11-2022, 10:46 AM)kevin Wrote: [ -> ]Watch, he will make twitter even worse for anons.

[img][Image: B4-EC31-C0-83-B2-4-B16-B8-B2-ED3-FF74-F43-EE.jpg][/img]
Was interested to see news that Elon has turned down the Board Seating. From what I understand, he was offered a seat on the board that came with an agreement he wouldn't buy more than 15% of Twitter stocks.\

He's still there largest shareholder with 9% of stocks, but it always seemed foolish to me that he thought he could 'change' anything major about how the Corp. runs with a single board seat. It's too soon for me to tell if he really cares about free-speech on the platform or anything else, it way well all just be a publicity stunt. This article floats the idea that he may try to buy even more stock and attempt a hostile-takeover scenario. Could be very interesting, something to look out for going forward.

Responding to the image posted, I think it's always worrisome to see powerful figures come out against anonymity online, though it isn't surprising. Maybe I'm an optimistic fool, but I've never seen it as all that likely. The reason being that 'bots' are basically needed by online platforms to inflate clicks, views, visits, etc. As stated in this lovely thread,
a large proportion of online traffic is entirely the result of bots. Now when you factor in both bots and anon accounts, I would imagine such accounts might even contain the majority of posts or users on a site like Twitter. Any real attempt to limit anonymity and bots will see visits and posts plummet, which is simply bad for business.
That’s a great point and I hope you’re right. I imagine a lot of the bots help boost leftist posts which they wouldn’t want to stop.
As I'm sure we've all heard, Musk offered to buy Twitter today:
Twitter Board has hired Goldman Sachs to help advise them on the sell, seems like they're up to some minor jewery if what this guy is saying is true


The fact parag and co don't want to sell twitter and make massive profit just proves twitter only exists for astroturfing libshit ideological views.


"We didn't give any more of a shit about animal's welfare than anyone else did until the 60s"? Aren't you forgetting about someone?

[Image: adolfhitler.jpg]


(04-25-2022, 09:20 PM)cats Wrote: [ -> ]"We didn't give any more of a shit about animal's welfare than anyone else did until the 60s"? Aren't you forgetting about someone?

[Image: adolfhitler.jpg]

"Perhaps it was the only thing that Hitler was ever wrong about."
Hitler? Wrong? Impossible. Ethnic breakdowns of who commits animal abuse prove he is right (as always).


(04-25-2022, 09:51 PM)cats Wrote: [ -> ]Hitler? Wrong? Impossible. Ethnic breakdowns of who commits animal abuse prove he is right (as always).

If you have seen even one of the Chungusfags getting into performative hysterics about the "monkeys tortured for Neuralink" you would not be saying this
(04-25-2022, 10:54 PM)Opossum Wrote: [ -> ]
Quote:Sorry eco-whatsits: Rocks, trees, ducks, and the rest of the non-human external environment aren't "nature". They don't fully realize their nature just by existing, but only when they are rendered useful to Man, which is the true telos or purpose for which they were made. It is the nature of the animals to become the protein in my body and the clothes I wear, of the forest, to provide wood, waterfalls, to be harnessed for hydro-electric juice, etc. Absent that destiny, they are so much unrealized potentiality, an abortion of sorts.
This is not an "argument", it's a theological position (specifically wherein industry is your God). And not an uncommon one, perhaps even the majority among supposed religionists, who will say this exact thing pretty often.
Formatting was fucked with the links, should be better now.

I don't understand why bespokecommie's post "isn't an argument," it's also not really a theological position, it's just a (partially flawed) teleological argument. If I make a knife, its nature is realized in its use as a cutting instrument, just as the nature of a violin is realized in its being played (by a masterful violinist). That's a very basic teleological argument, and it has little to do with theology. You can make it about theology, as you seem to do with every single post no what the topic, but that's on you. I think he's wrong to say "rocks, trees, and ducks" aren't nature, they obviously are. Animals are regularly realizing their nature on their own, in fact it's really all they can do unless they're malformed and physically incapable. But there's a number of domesticated animals we have literally bread for eating or for providing us with resources. Modern day cows are a pretty good example. Pretty much any dog breed as well: a hunting dog is just a dog that's been bred again and again by us, purposefully, for specific traits.

On the topic of 'Animal Cruelty.' I'm personally against cruelty against animals for cruelty's sake, but I disagree with Uncle Adolf on veganism/vegetarianism. As for animal testing, it's no issue to me; I'm even fine with human testing so long as we do it on prisoners. It's not something we do much now, but there's historical precedent:
If we're going to be housing these people for life and give them room and board, we should make use of them. Whether that be forced labor or scientific experiments, it doesn't really matter to me.
Pages: 1 2