X -Where Twitter goes to die.

[Kriselda Gray]

I've muted several people here, not because they don't often have beneficial information to contribute, but because they INSIST upon only providing a link to a Twitter post, sometimes several links to Twitter in a row. Then the post goes 'poof' and it's no longer valuable information, but simply a drag on load time.

Good luck on that. I've been trying to get people to stop using the highlighter, and even passed on a suggestion that takes no more work for them to use (click the "sun" button next to the "T₂" button instead of the "highlighter" button) and only a couple have tried that.

Getting people to stop posting Twitter videos (instead of clicking through to YouTube and getting the URL from there) is gonna be a lot harder than that...

[Suranis]

I’ve come to believe his mission is to burn it to the ground. He’s making good progress so far.

Yeah, I think he's just really pissed he was forced to buy Twitter even after he'd changed his mind about doing so. I can't see Musk liking being put in the position of having to do something he doesn't want to, so now, rather than trying to capitalize on his $44B investment, he's throwing it away in a petty temper tantrum.

Someone devastatingly handsome, and galactic-ally intelligent, said that a Month ago. Page 30 of this very thread. Quoting me this shockingly sexy genius....

https://thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 54#p150154

Honestly, I can only suggest that Musk has done this deliberately, out of sheer spite for forcing him to actually go through with his promise. He wanted to run in, stir shit, an dance away cackling, but Twitter was actually powerful enough to nail his hand to the wall.

So, revenge time.

[neonzx]

Good luck on that. I've been trying to get people to stop using the highlighter, and even passed on a suggestion that takes no more work for them to use (click the "sun" button next to the "T₂" button instead of the "highlighter" button) and only a couple have tried that.

The "sun" button doesn't look at all good on my style/theme. I always have to mouse over to see the text.
When I highlight, I black ink the text and then yellow highlight. Everyone should see that fine.

[Azastan]

Good luck on that. I've been trying to get people to stop using the highlighter, and even passed on a suggestion that takes no more work for them to use (click the "sun" button next to the "T₂" button instead of the "highlighter" button) and only a couple have tried that.

Getting people to stop posting Twitter videos (instead of clicking through to YouTube and getting the URL from there) is gonna be a lot harder than that...

The birdie site is already dying, so what is the point of posting videos which will disappear? That place is no longer stable. Find somewhere else.

Either do a screenshot (which loads up the database), or do a URL link to the post with some cut and paste comments from the post, or at the very least, describe what the post is about if someone thinks it's important enough to post about it.

[Foggy]

When I highlight, I black ink the text and then yellow highlight. Everyone should see that fine.

Yeah, that's what I do. I highlight, and then with two additional clicks I turn the text black so others can see it.

Click one: the color wheel
Click two: the black square, you're done

It's not a lot of work, and it's considerate to other people. It's probably just me, but glow text (the "sun" button) looks silly.

[Sam the Centipede]

It's probably just me, but glow text (the "sun" button) looks silly.

It's not just you!

From the point of view of Twitter's possible death and the desirability of linking: first, I always appreciate people copying through the plain text of tweets because my Firefox browsers doesn't automatically show tweets, and I don't know why - and the copied text persists even if the original tweet is lost. Second, does it matter? This (the Fogworld) is a social site for ongoing discussion and chat rather than an archive of wisdom and knowledge to be cherished until our sun fades. It was annoying when Foggy a vengeful god zeroed Fogbow 1.0 but the world continued to revolve. A few contributors have dived into the resurrected version to recover odds and ends, but we'd have happily bumbled on without it.

But then I'm relaxed. I rarely watch linked videos, never if they are posted without at least a sentence indicating why they might be view-worthy, but so what? Unglossed videos are simply another of the many things on the web I ignore each day, along with long posts here, right-wing tweets on Twitter, most news articles on news sites, etc.

[AndyinPA]

It's probably just me, but glow text (the "sun" button) looks silly.

It's not just you!

From the point of view of Twitter's possible death and the desirability of linking: first, I always appreciate people copying through the plain text of tweets because my Firefox browsers doesn't automatically show tweets, and I don't know why - and the copied text persists even if the original tweet is lost. Second, does it matter? This (the Fogworld) is a social site for ongoing discussion and chat rather than an archive of wisdom and knowledge to be cherished until our sun fades. It was annoying when Foggy a vengeful god zeroed Fogbow 1.0 but the world continued to revolve. A few contributors have dived into the resurrected version to recover odds and ends, but we'd have happily bumbled on without it.

But then I'm relaxed. I rarely watch linked videos, never if they are posted without at least a sentence indicating why they might be view-worthy, but so what? Unglossed videos are simply another of the many things on the web I ignore each day, along with long posts here, right-wing tweets on Twitter, most news articles on news sites, etc.

Good attitude!

[raison de arizona]

Who's a big ol' baby? Elon's a big ol' baby!

From a case I am following...
https://twitter.com/arizonaslaw/status/ ... 6661896192

For those of you looking to diversify your social media platform diet, we are also going to (try to) live-report this over on that Mastodon thingy.

Bwahahahaha, Twitter will not permit me to tweet out the link. Suffice it to say that you can look at my pinned Tweet for the address.

Or, you can fill in the blank spaces: https:// newsie.
social/ @ArizonasLaw
/109524368119040753

[Gregg]

Giving where one’s private jet is does not give real time assassination info. It is the jet. It’s publicly available (because FAA is open to see).

You can also see this info for private yachts. BFD…

Because people with guided anti aircraft capability can't use track a plane.

[Suranis]

Because people with guided anti aircraft capability can't use track a plane.

I think his (sort of) point is that if they know where his plane is then they can guess where he is at any given time so they can stage an attack.

Of course the man tells everyone where he is 5 times a day anyway, so its a moot point.

[RTH10260]

Giving where one’s private jet is does not give real time assassination info. It is the jet. It’s publicly available (because FAA is open to see).

You can also see this info for private yachts. BFD…

Because people with guided anti aircraft capability can't use track a plane.

The realtime data is subscription only. I am not sure, but maybe limited to bonafide players in the airline industry. Other clients get the data with a timelag of about 4 minutes iirc.

[noblepa]

I’ve come to believe his mission is to burn it to the ground. He’s making good progress so far.

Yeah, I think he's just really pissed he was forced to buy Twitter even after he'd changed his mind about doing so. I can't see Musk liking being put in the position of having to do something he doesn't want to, so now, rather than trying to capitalize on his $44B investment, he's throwing it away in a petty temper tantrum.

How much of that $44B is actually his money and how much comes from investors? If he were to deliberately burn Twitter to the ground, couldn't the investors step in and vote him out as CEO?

Even if the investors don't have enough stock to vote him out, they can always bring a stockholders' suit, arguing that he is deliberately squandering their money.

I have no idea how much Twitter stock he owns.

[Phoenix520]

About 14% I read yesterday* but that was followed by a story saying he’d sold more shares (contra FCC rules?) so I dunno.

About $13B of the purchase was financed thru a margin loan bwahahaha. Genius that he is he managed to muck that up almost immediately, as share prices fell BELOW the margin et voila - now he owes mores than $13B.



* My bad, that’s Tesla not Twitter stock he owns. Still funny.

[Slarti the White]

I’ve come to believe his mission is to burn it to the ground. He’s making good progress so far.

Yeah, I think he's just really pissed he was forced to buy Twitter even after he'd changed his mind about doing so. I can't see Musk liking being put in the position of having to do something he doesn't want to, so now, rather than trying to capitalize on his $44B investment, he's throwing it away in a petty temper tantrum.

How much of that $44B is actually his money and how much comes from investors? If he were to deliberately burn Twitter to the ground, couldn't the investors step in and vote him out as CEO?

Even if the investors don't have enough stock to vote him out, they can always bring a stockholders' suit, arguing that he is deliberately squandering their money.

I have no idea how much Twitter stock he owns.

That assumes that the other investors are interested in making money, which I highly doubt. In particular, I never figured that the Saudis wanted a piece of Twitter as an investment. I know one of the other investors is Larry Ellison of Oracle -- don't know what his motive is, but it seems unlikely to be making money. I think that it is much more likely that Tesla stockholders revolt against Musk given they have lost over half of their value since the Twitter saga began.

[raison de arizona]

I’ve come to believe his mission is to burn it to the ground. He’s making good progress so far.

Yeah, I think he's just really pissed he was forced to buy Twitter even after he'd changed his mind about doing so. I can't see Musk liking being put in the position of having to do something he doesn't want to, so now, rather than trying to capitalize on his $44B investment, he's throwing it away in a petty temper tantrum.

How much of that $44B is actually his money and how much comes from investors? If he were to deliberately burn Twitter to the ground, couldn't the investors step in and vote him out as CEO?

Even if the investors don't have enough stock to vote him out, they can always bring a stockholders' suit, arguing that he is deliberately squandering their money.

I have no idea how much Twitter stock he owns.

He took Twitter private as soon as he got his grubby little hands on it. It's his.

[Slarti the White]

He took Twitter private as soon as he got his grubby little hands on it. It's his.

No, he isn't the only stockholder -- there were other investors involved in the $44 billion, including the Saudis and Larry Ellison as I said above.

[raison de arizona]

He took Twitter private as soon as he got his grubby little hands on it. It's his.

No, he isn't the only stockholder -- there were other investors involved in the $44 billion, including the Saudis and Larry Ellison as I said above.

Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, or I don't understand the deal, but Twitter was delisted from the stock market and all stock bought out as part of the acquisition. He still has investors though, of course. I suppose I don't really understand the semantics here, sorry about that.

[Foggy]

As much as I defended Jack's right to clamp down on disinformation by right-wingnuts, I have to defend Musk's right to do what he's doing.

Not saying he's making wise decisions. Just saying he has the right to break his new toy.

If he can buy a toy for $44 billion and then break it, that's life. If it happens to be something I really use and value, that's too bad but it's the way our system works, and I'm not going to advocate for government interference. The government did interfere in this thing -- the judge in Delaware was going to force him to go through with the sale, so he did.

I didn't want the government to interfere when Jack owned it, and I don't want the government to interfere while Elon owns it. Something will emerge to replace it.

Bet he can't do it again, though. He doesn't have $44 billion left to spend on toys any more.

[Slarti the White]

He took Twitter private as soon as he got his grubby little hands on it. It's his.

No, he isn't the only stockholder -- there were other investors involved in the $44 billion, including the Saudis and Larry Ellison as I said above.

Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, or I don't understand the deal, but Twitter was delisted from the stock market and all stock bought out as part of the acquisition. He still has investors though, of course. I suppose I don't really understand the semantics here, sorry about that.

Right, Twitter is no longer publicly traded, but Elon Musk is not the only shareholder (and I don't think the shareholders are a matter of public record anymore). The details would be spelled out in agreements between Elon and the other investors, but I'm guessing that that are essentially silent partners -- no one else seems involved in the day-to-day running of the company. So either they can't speak out against Musk (for whatever reason) or they are satisfied with how he is running the company (again, for whatever reason).

[raison de arizona]

No, he isn't the only stockholder -- there were other investors involved in the $44 billion, including the Saudis and Larry Ellison as I said above.

Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, or I don't understand the deal, but Twitter was delisted from the stock market and all stock bought out as part of the acquisition. He still has investors though, of course. I suppose I don't really understand the semantics here, sorry about that.

Right, Twitter is no longer publicly traded, but Elon Musk is not the only shareholder (and I don't think the shareholders are a matter of public record anymore). The details would be spelled out in agreements between Elon and the other investors, but I'm guessing that that are essentially silent partners -- no one else seems involved in the day-to-day running of the company. So either they can't speak out against Musk (for whatever reason) or they are satisfied with how he is running the company (again, for whatever reason).

Right, got it.

[Gregg]

I’ve come to believe his mission is to burn it to the ground. He’s making good progress so far.

Yeah, I think he's just really pissed he was forced to buy Twitter even after he'd changed his mind about doing so. I can't see Musk liking being put in the position of having to do something he doesn't want to, so now, rather than trying to capitalize on his $44B investment, he's throwing it away in a petty temper tantrum.

How much of that $44B is actually his money and how much comes from investors? If he were to deliberately burn Twitter to the ground, couldn't the investors step in and vote him out as CEO?

No, he personally owns Twitter, no shareholders. He can burn it all he wants. He does have lenders, but their collateral is Tesla Stock, because they knew that he was hopelessly overpaying for Twitter and didn't want to be holding the bag when, not if, but when, he declared bankruptcy.

Even if the investors don't have enough stock to vote him out, they can always bring a stockholders' suit, arguing that he is deliberately squandering their money.

It's not anybody's money but his, see above.

I have no idea how much Twitter stock he owns.

All of it

[Gregg]

Maybe I'm remembering incorrectly, or I don't understand the deal, but Twitter was delisted from the stock market and all stock bought out as part of the acquisition. He still has investors though, of course. I suppose I don't really understand the semantics here, sorry about that.

Right, Twitter is no longer publicly traded, but Elon Musk is not the only shareholder (and I don't think the shareholders are a matter of public record anymore). The details would be spelled out in agreements between Elon and the other investors, but I'm guessing that that are essentially silent partners -- no one else seems involved in the day-to-day running of the company. So either they can't speak out against Musk (for whatever reason) or they are satisfied with how he is running the company (again, for whatever reason).

Right, got it.

Elmo owns 100% of Twitter, or he told the SEC he does, some people think there is more to it than that. He doesn't have partners but he does have lenders none of whom are known to have accepted Twitter stock as collateral, choosing to instead take Tesla stock, which is only worth half what it was when the Twitter deal closed. This has a very good chance of turning into the rare and satisfying "Fuck Everybody" scenario where everyone even close to it gets a stank on them they will never wash off, as well as getting fincancially hosed by the event. See: Trump

[Greatgrey]

Giving where one’s private jet is does not give real time assassination info. It is the jet. It’s publicly available (because FAA is open to see).

You can also see this info for private yachts. BFD…

Because people with guided anti aircraft capability can't use track a plane.

The realtime data is subscription only. I am not sure, but maybe limited to bonafide players in the airline industry. Other clients get the data with a timelag of about 4 minutes iirc.

The FAA delays radar data, ADSB data is real time.

[realist]

FWIW

Top 5 Twitter Shareholders
By Nathan Reiff
Updated October 23, 2022
Reviewed by Margaret James
Peggy James

Fact checked by Pete Rathburn

Institutional investors dominated the list of Twitter's top shareholders until April 2022, when Tesla (TSLA) Chief Executive Elon Musk disclosed he had accumulated a 9% stake in the social media company.1 Musk's purchase briefly made him Twitter's largest shareholder—at least according to public sources—until mutual fund giant The Vanguard Group disclosed in a filing with the SEC that its funds held 82.4 million shares, accounting for 10.3% of Twitter's common stock, as of March 31, 2022.2 [...]
Key Takeaways

Tesla CEO Elon Musk accumulated a 9.2% stake in Twitter in April 2022, making him the second-largest shareholder behind Vanguard.
The other top shareholders of the social media company were asset managers Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, and State Street.
Collectively, the top five Twitter shareholders own more than 37% of the compan

[humblescribe]

Elmo really should change his notification of suspended accounts. I think this would be more appropriate: