Eh, with Elon devoting less time to Tesla, perhaps they can actually work on making better transportation with sustainable energy rather than BS like robotaxis.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon & Twitter
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
- Status
adiggs
Well-Known Member
The core problem I see with the desire to regulate speech, or clarify the 1st Amendment (freedom to speak one's mind, free from government interference), is who / how / why / what / when decides what is free speech, and what is lie / misinformation / ..
About the only thing I've come up with is something like Pravda (which could mean Twitter in the future) with sort of a voting mechanism for truth / falsehood, where the voting is restricted to verified users. By verified user, I mean a single account that is tied to a single human being, where the purpose of verification is to eliminate bot farms and fake accounts from overwhelming votes by real people.
Of course verified user also means that we've provided our government with another mechanism to track and police us, so we get to make a trade - lower privacy for better information.
And I suppose the bot farms / fake accounts ARE votes by real people
Best I've got is something that is closer to the ideal of the scientific method and the publishing of papers in the world of science. The characteristics that I see as desirable and needed is some kind of social media speech regulation:
- needs to be able to discern a broad consensus on a topic, while recognizing that the broad consensus itself can be wrong. Hopefully this is pretty easy to do.
Maybe an end result effect like Wikipedia where one can get a quick introduction to a topic and awareness of the broad idea as well as (when appropriate) different areas where experts disagree, and what / why / how.
- needs to be able to discern conflicting views of the consensus. partly to explore the details of the conflict - there can be a lot to learning those conflicts
- it would be nice to be able to readily identify truth / facts. The problem here is that you don't need to go very far into this world to discover that there are any number of ways that truth / facts are deficient.
- needs to be able to account for when the consensus is just plain wrong, and be able for that to be updated to be right
The vector I'm thinking of here is most consistent with the TQDM 9 dimensions of data quality.
First on the list is completeness - is something wrong / misinformation if it is incomplete? Maybe yes - we know that this is a pretty common form of argument designed to slant belief in some direction by failing to mention something germane. But usually not - its hard to be complete and still be understandable.
The point is that this stuff is muddy, and this all comes back (for me) to the idea of who decides?
The dynamic I would be looking for in this hypothetical marketplace of ideas is for the incentives to drive people towards the middle ground. Not because the middle ground is necessarily right, or even mostly right, but because the current marketplace of ideas has incentives in place that drives people to the fringe (in every direction).
Incentives that drive people to find and evolve that middle ground sounds like an improvement to me.
Which is what gets me to publishing peer reviewed research as the best mental model I have for how this might work, fully realizing that getting peer reviewed and published is also laden with its problems.
About the only thing I've come up with is something like Pravda (which could mean Twitter in the future) with sort of a voting mechanism for truth / falsehood, where the voting is restricted to verified users. By verified user, I mean a single account that is tied to a single human being, where the purpose of verification is to eliminate bot farms and fake accounts from overwhelming votes by real people.
Of course verified user also means that we've provided our government with another mechanism to track and police us, so we get to make a trade - lower privacy for better information.
And I suppose the bot farms / fake accounts ARE votes by real people
Best I've got is something that is closer to the ideal of the scientific method and the publishing of papers in the world of science. The characteristics that I see as desirable and needed is some kind of social media speech regulation:
- needs to be able to discern a broad consensus on a topic, while recognizing that the broad consensus itself can be wrong. Hopefully this is pretty easy to do.
Maybe an end result effect like Wikipedia where one can get a quick introduction to a topic and awareness of the broad idea as well as (when appropriate) different areas where experts disagree, and what / why / how.
- needs to be able to discern conflicting views of the consensus. partly to explore the details of the conflict - there can be a lot to learning those conflicts
- it would be nice to be able to readily identify truth / facts. The problem here is that you don't need to go very far into this world to discover that there are any number of ways that truth / facts are deficient.
- needs to be able to account for when the consensus is just plain wrong, and be able for that to be updated to be right
The vector I'm thinking of here is most consistent with the TQDM 9 dimensions of data quality.
First on the list is completeness - is something wrong / misinformation if it is incomplete? Maybe yes - we know that this is a pretty common form of argument designed to slant belief in some direction by failing to mention something germane. But usually not - its hard to be complete and still be understandable.
The point is that this stuff is muddy, and this all comes back (for me) to the idea of who decides?
The dynamic I would be looking for in this hypothetical marketplace of ideas is for the incentives to drive people towards the middle ground. Not because the middle ground is necessarily right, or even mostly right, but because the current marketplace of ideas has incentives in place that drives people to the fringe (in every direction).
Incentives that drive people to find and evolve that middle ground sounds like an improvement to me.
Which is what gets me to publishing peer reviewed research as the best mental model I have for how this might work, fully realizing that getting peer reviewed and published is also laden with its problems.
Unfortunately wikipedia can be pretty biased too. Some people apparently sit on certain pages, add their opinions, and remove any edit that does not fit with their agenda/world view.
One possible approach to this is to have your own customized Twitter feed -- you decide what you want to see. As I understand it, Jack was suggesting this. The current customization is broken badly.
Normally, I want a Twitter feed that filters out most of the things that Twitter wants to put in. Sometimes I look at the firehose for certain subjects on Tweetdeck. But then I fall into a pattern of spending all of my time blocking people, reporting spam, reporting fakes, etc.
I recognize that this is a very rigid approach not conducive to discovery, but most of the time I can't handle the firehose. If I didn't have to fight all of the nonsense, I might have more stamina to wade into discovery.
Or maybe Twitter is just toxic and should be avoided by all, especially Elon. Often I think that.
Normally, I want a Twitter feed that filters out most of the things that Twitter wants to put in. Sometimes I look at the firehose for certain subjects on Tweetdeck. But then I fall into a pattern of spending all of my time blocking people, reporting spam, reporting fakes, etc.
I recognize that this is a very rigid approach not conducive to discovery, but most of the time I can't handle the firehose. If I didn't have to fight all of the nonsense, I might have more stamina to wade into discovery.
Or maybe Twitter is just toxic and should be avoided by all, especially Elon. Often I think that.
Last edited:
adiggs
Well-Known Member
I think what we're looking for is mostly orthogonal from managing the firehose.
More of an input (5 star quality truthiness rating to make something up) on stuff that you encounter, however you encounter it. Those that want to can live in a bubble, but we'll maybe have something that comes along for the ride regarding the truthiness of the stuff we encounter in the bubble.
To some degree I think that what we're all looking for is some ability to trust what we read and see. And to some degree breaking down that trust is the purpose of the big lie and misinformation campaigns - they also succeed when people throw up their hands and decide that nothing can be trusted.
And related to this topic - if Elon has an idea of how to get there from here, I'm eager to see what he's got. I do believe that he spouts off on topics that he really doesn't know or understand. I also believe that he routinely accomplishes the impossible. And as I tell people regularly, you can't have one without the other. Elon is a package deal
.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I don't know why but my Twitter experience has been pretty good overall. I think I've only had to mute one person and I don't see much stuff I would consider spam in a while. I mostly use it for Tesla info and since the TSLAQ nutters use block lists maybe that's why I'm spared the worst of it. Guess I should thank them.
Free speech is neither wrong nor right.
There is no wrong or right except for the laws of physics.
Wrongly or rightly (haha), Elon is my moral compass because I enjoy life more not having to choose between two human constructed mistruths.
Humans are weak and like being on a team. Got to feed the chimp.
Apologies for offending you all.
There is no wrong or right except for the laws of physics.
Wrongly or rightly (haha), Elon is my moral compass because I enjoy life more not having to choose between two human constructed mistruths.
Humans are weak and like being on a team. Got to feed the chimp.
Apologies for offending you all.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Elon's 13D was filed on Apr 5, 2022 (one day following his 13G).
The document includes a daily summary of his share purchase campaign, which ran 43 consecutive days from Jan 31, 2022 until complete on Apr 1, 2022.
Here's a summary table: (only 3 days shown from beginning and end of period; Summary stats provided)
Per his 13G, Elon purchased 73,115,038 TWTR shares for ~$2.64B at a dollar cost average (DCA) of $36.16
These shares had a market value of $3.71B as of Apr 06, 2022 ($50.77), for a gain of $1.07B.
Note: Elon tweeted yesterday that the no. of shares purchased was misreported in the initial 13G filing (1 day before this 13D).
Elon also explained what it meme'd for him to have an 'Edit' button on twitter:
I think a "Dr. Evil / Dr. Edit" meme would have worked here too, but that's just me... "1 Million Dollars"
Cheers!
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Re Elon and Twitter, the Bluesky project, just announced by Twitter's (now Square/ Block) Jack Dorsey: this may trace back to the Pravduh period, when Elon was complaining about the lack of trustworthy objective news organizations.
Turns out to be a side project of Twitter, funded separately, which has to do with establishing a new kind of social network discussion that is less problematic than all the ones we've seen so far.
Meld that with Tesla's mission, to accelerate the advent of renewable energy, with SpaceX, leading to a better future for humanity - what would be better than improving the news, information and general knowledge space everyone on this planet is inextricably wedded (welded?) into, and which really guides all our decisions/ opinions, from voting, acting and purchasing, regardless of any rational thinking?
Too ambitious and out there to be part of Elon's forthcoming Tesla' Master Plan part Trois?
From
How It Started: Three Phases - Bluesky
Bluesky was announced in 2019 but the legal entity itself was only recently set up. In the meantime, the bluesky community took shape and has taken on a life of its own.blueskyweb.xyz
...
Phase 1: The idea
The bluesky project began with a tweet by Jack Dorsey announcing Twitter’s intentions to fund the development of an open protocol for decentralized social media. .."Jack wrote “The biggest and long term goal is to build a durable and open protocol for public conversation. That it not be owned by any one organization but contributed by as many as possible. And that it is born and evolved on the internet with the same principles.” ...
...
Phase 2: The community
Sometime in 2020, Twitter put out a request for proposals to the community group. Several of us wrote technical proposals on how we thought a novel decentralized social protocol could work, either building on existing protocols or starting from scratch. In 2021, ...
Phase 3: The company
In the last few weeks of 2021, we got the Bluesky PBLLC established and funded. We decided to keep the community as a separate organization, funded through grants from the Bluesky company, so it can function as an inclusive forum while the company pursues more focused research and development. At the Bluesky company we want to start being more public, having more conversations with companies besides Twitter, and engaging with other protocols, but first we need to finish hiring and articulate the technical vision for our proposed direction. In the meantime, the community continues to be a place for discussion and debate, where we participate but do not drive conversations.
....
Bluesky-community
by Golda Velez
" ..When I saw the announcement about bluesky I felt this effort was tremendously important, but also could be really hard to get right. My perspective on it was shaped by work in risk, where we have organized attackers, and human rights work, where we can see the effect on people of both authoritarian control of networks and the real dangers of disinformation tactics. If Bluesky can enable open public conversation that is resistant to manipulation, yet in which players can innovate and evolve rapidly, then we really have something. "
...
=====
For completeness, adding here a summary of Elon's Master Plan part 1 and 2 from Electrek :
" On August 2, 2006, Musk published a blog post titled “The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between you and me).” ( Part 1)
The post is worth a read, but it ends in a summary with the core principle being laid out in four steps:
It didn’t happen smoothly, but Tesla managed that for the most part with the Roadster, Model S, and then Model 3.
- Build sports car.
- Use that money to build an affordable car.
- Use that money to build an even more affordable car.
- While doing above, also provide zero emission electric power generation options.
In 2016, Musk followed up with the “Tesla Master Plan Part 2.”
Part 2 came as Tesla was delivering the Model 3 and acquiring Solar City, which are basically the last two steps of the original plans.
In Part 2, Musk emphasized the integration of energy storage with renewable energy generation under the new “Tesla Energy” division. The creation of the solar roof was also announced in the plan.
...
Musk summarized the Master Plan Part 2 at the end:
Among the other segments mentioned in the plan, Musk mentioned “a new kind of pickup,” which ended up being the Cybertruck; a compact SUV, the Model Y; a “heavy-duty truck, which became the Tesla Semi; and finally “high passenger-density urban transport.”
- Create stunning solar roofs with seamlessly integrated battery storage.
- Expand the electric vehicle product line to address all major segments.
- Develop a self-driving capability that is 10X safer than manual via massive fleet learning.
- Enable your car to make money for you when you aren’t using it.
..... "
Elon once said "the Universe maximizes irony". So how ironic is this? (everything Elon tweets about turns to gold)
Remedy Entertainment on Twitter: "We are pleased to announce that we will remake the iconic Max Payne and Max Payne 2: The Fall of Max Payne, in a new development agreement with Rockstar Games. Read the full press release here: https://t.co/gx9tuH425j" / Twitter
Here's an alternate link to the full press release: https://t.co/vrWYFftsQl" / Twitter
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Elon's 13D was filed on Apr 5, 2022 (one day following his 13G).
The document includes a daily summary of his share purchase campaign, which ran 43 consecutive days from Jan 31, 2022 until complete on Apr 1, 2022.
Here's a summary table: (only 3 days shown from beginning and end of period; Summary stats provided)
View attachment 790900
Per his 13G, Elon purchased 73,115,038 TWTR shares for ~$2.64B at a dollar cost average (DCA) of $36.16
These shares had a market value of $3.71B as of Apr 06, 2022 ($50.77), for a gain of $1.07B.
Note: Elon tweeted yesterday that the no. of shares purchased was misreported in the initial 13G filing (1 day before this 13D).
Elon also explained what it meme'd for him to have an 'Edit' button on twitter:
I think a "Dr. Evil / Dr. Edit" meme would have worked here too, but that's just me... "1 Million Dollars"
Cheers!
I'd have voted informative and helpful if the forum would have allowed. Thanks for the follow up, I haven't had time to keep up on this.
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Lol, can Elon actually win over some shortzes with a twitter charm offensive? (Note: this tweet is from Michael J. Burry of "the Big Short" fame, who famously shorted TSLA in Jan 2021)
" / Twitter
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Elon's latest Twitter poll has over 1.2M votes already:
SilverString
Member
My favorite is the poll on removing the "w" from Twitter...
Two choices: Yes and Of Course
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
In typical weasel-style, roto-REUTERS gins up their headline, making it uncertain that it was Twitter warning about 'distractions ahead', not Elon (most people only read the headlines)
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/IEQGBW4F6BJKLARP23N4HUXJGU.jpg)
www.reuters.com
EDIT:
Here's the src tweet from Twitter's CEO @ paraga (with his attached note to Twitter employees)
Striping out bed-time emotions is helpful. Focus on the data. Fresh eyes in the morning.
Cheers!
Elon Musk drops Twitter board seat in new U-turn
Tesla Inc Chief Executive Elon Musk disclosed on Monday he had abandoned a plan to join Twitter Inc's board just as his tenure was about to start, the latest move by the world's richest man that defied corporate America's norms.
www.reuters.com
EDIT:
Here's the src tweet from Twitter's CEO @ paraga (with his attached note to Twitter employees)
Striping out bed-time emotions is helpful. Focus on the data. Fresh eyes in the morning.
Cheers!
Last edited:
Artful Dodger
"Neko no me"
Dan Ives of Wedbush explains that since Elon will not join the Twitter BoD, he is now unrestrained from purchasing > 14.9% of shares, or leading a takeover (which Dan expects would lead to a SP in the $55-60 range):
Elon Musk could go hostile against Twitter after abandoning board plan, says Wedbush's Dan Ives | CNBC on Youtube
Elon Musk could go hostile against Twitter after abandoning board plan, says Wedbush's Dan Ives | CNBC on Youtube
I'm not super creative, so I can only think of a few reasons why Elon backtracked from the Twitter board:
1) Elon is planning a hostile takeover. Being on the board would limit his ownership to below 15% and maybe that was unacceptable to him.
2) Being on the board he could no longer bash Twitter and it is too much fun for him to bash it
3) Too much of a distraction for him and not worth his time
1) Elon is planning a hostile takeover. Being on the board would limit his ownership to below 15% and maybe that was unacceptable to him.
2) Being on the board he could no longer bash Twitter and it is too much fun for him to bash it
3) Too much of a distraction for him and not worth his time
- Status
