'Chief Twit' Musk delivers bathroom furniture to Twitter HQ ... but not Tesla results Instead of delivering Tesla's expected quarterly revenue, CEO Elon Musk decided to take a bathroom sink to the headquarters of Twitter, the social media platform he bid for in April. The hamfisted prank coincided with the eve of the deadline to complete the $44 billion takeover of the popular social media platform, which at …
As used in this context in the English Language, it was probably a contraction of the American "nitwit", as brought over to England by the Yanks in WWI, and then shortened to "twit" in Blighty between the wars, which then returned to America following WWII. But as with most slang, nobody knows for sure.
Whatever the actual origin, It's a handy, short descriptive word that does the job.
Beers all around.
But what is a "fact" and who decides? The past few years have shown that "fact checkers" just spew out the orthodox government line
We have a situation where some anonymous "fact checker" can claim that a highly credentialed academic speaking on their specialist subject is giving "misinformation" simply because the academic doesn't agree with the official line. This is dangerous.
Time will tell what Musk delivers, but his criticism of the censorship on Twitter is valid.
It's a de-facto public forum, so needs regulating to stop it censoring anything its moderators don't happen to agree with. Ditto all other such platforms.
If you disagree with a point of view, post an alternative. If you think something is bollocks, debunk it. Censorship should only be acceptable in a very small number of categories, such as direct and specific incitement to violence.
"If you disagree with a point of view, post an alternative."
OK. I'll bite. How about "My server, my rules.".
Or do you also think that your garage door, being a de-facto public canvas, should be subject to any and all graffiti?
Is it censorship if you ban political graffiti, but allow sports or religious graffiti on your garage door? How about if your immediate neighbor, the other half of your duplex, allows political graffiti but bans sports and religious graffiti on his garage door? Where is the censorship if the artists(??) can get their message across to the exact same passers by, even if you or your neighbor bans that particular communication?
Irrelevant comparison - these platforms are for the purpose of public communication, and have become so big that they are now de facto public utilities. Therefore they need regulating - if they are left free to censor whatever they like then that is extremely dangerous for democracy generally.
I find it interesting that sites like this (which are mostly leftist) think it's fine, generally because at the moment it's mainly the right getting censored. I'm fairly leftist too, but I do not believe that things should be censored just because I don't happen to agree with them.
I am confident that if one of these platforms started censoring the left, many of those who have been saying 'private business, they can do what they want' would suddenly change their view on that!
"these platforms are for the purpose of public communication"
No, they are not. They are built for the specific purpose of gathering the personal details of the people using them, in order to sell that information in aggregate to any advertising company who can pony up. The fact that you might be able to communicate with somebody else using the system is purely to entice you to provide that info. It worked, too ... but note that NOWHERE does that service promise to provide that capability to you for eternity. Quite the opposite, in fact ... most (all?) say that they are free to terminate their service to anyone, at any time, for any reason (including no reason). It's in the fine print of the Terms Of Service you agreed to when you signed up. You DID read that fine print, and understood it before agreeing to it, right?
"generally because at the moment it's mainly the right getting censored."
Nobody is getting censored. Only a government can be a censor. The opinions of those who get kicked out of any online service[0] can easily be found wherever they wind up, they are not shut up, they are still freely allowed to voice their views. In extreme cases, they can even buy their own platform if they like, and talk away about anything, whenever they like ... see the former orange idiot-in-chief, the idiot formerly known as Kanye, and the stoner.
"I am confident that if one of these platforms started censoring the left, many of those who have been saying 'private business, they can do what they want' would suddenly change their view on that!"
I am absolutely certain that you are quite correct. I am not one of those people.
To me this isn't a freedom of speech issue. It's a freedom of the press issue. And as we all know, freedom of the press belongs to those who own one.[1]
I own a printing press (two, actually). I am allowed to take contracts to print anything I like, for anybody I like (obvious exceptions exist: kitty pR0n, national secrets, etc.). But it's my press, so I am allowed to reject any contract if I don't agree with the message I am asked to print.
However, I am ALSO allowed to accept a contract I do not agree with, if I need/want the money. And I am free to reject a reprint of that contract, or further work from that party, if I no longer need the money. Or simply because I don't want to. Completely capriciously.
It's my press. My power over its output is absolute. If I refuse to print xtian or nazi or MyLittlePony propaganda, it is not censorship. The person requesting it can go elsewhere to get it printed. Or they can purchase their own press and print it for themselves.
Anybody who doesn't like this is free to not contract with me to do their printing. They can even ask their friends to not use my services. But they can NOT force me to print for them. The law doesn't work that way.
Only a government can attempt censorship. Even they usually fail.
[0] For values of "service" roughly equivalent to "I turned out the ram to service my sheep".
[1] In 1941, Norman Woelfel published a work called “The Fourth and Fifth Estate” which included the following quote: "It is foolish to assume, because in America we do not have an official propaganda agency dictating what shall be broadcast, that American radio is free. Like the press which is free for those who own and control it, the radio is free for those who can buy equipment, hire technicians and talent, and secure profitable advertising contracts.". Today, I rather suspect he would have included "Internet Servers" in that sentiment.
Let me try an experiment:
"The proper role of government is just to guard the coastlines, and let UPS deliver the mail"
Now, if that get's censored I will have proven what a hot-bed of leftist sentiment El Reg is. On the other hand, I suspect it won't because it's a perfectly reasonable piece of discourse representing a generally right wing view point.
Or how about:
"Probably it is true enough that the great majority are rarely capable of thinking independently, that on most questions they accept views which they find ready-made, and that they will be equally content if born or coaxed into one set of beliefs or another. In any society freedom of thought will probably be of direct significance only for a small minority. But this does not mean that anyone is competent, or ought to have power, to select those to whom this freedom is to be reserved. It certainly does not justify the presumption of any group of people to claim the right to determine what people ought to think or believe" - F A Hayek
MyffyW - independent lefty
Musk has just retweeted a debunked hit piece, from a known far right lie-spreading news site, implying Paul Pelosi was attacked by someone due to a gay encounter.
That has been spreading like wildfire amongst the MAGA morons.
That is the sort of thing that should be censored.
I'm sure you'd be the first screaming for something to be removed if it posted your picture and address and was accusing you of being a paedophile.
It would be great if we lived in a world where people could ignore lies, but as you (and Fox, and OAN, and Newsweek, and politicians) know, people believe this shit.
'"Entering Twitter HQ – let that sink in!" Mr Musk wrote on Twitter, somewhat inexplicably.'
He's making a pun relating to a tactic called, in business, "kitchen sinking", meaning to throw everything possible at something to get it done. Hence the phrase "everything but the kitchen sink".
He's saying that he'll do what he's trying to, no matter what.
There's also a variant of "kitchen sinking" meaning to throw everything in to deliberately confuse, or hide something. Given how Musk operates, either meaning could work here.
No, a wash basin has no drain. He means a sink. The word was first recorded in the early 1400s, meaning what we would now call a muck pond. Later, in the mid 1400s it was the name of the drain that carried waste water to said pond. The modern meaning, as in "kitchen sink", the basin with a drain that carrries away used water, is from the mid 1500s.
Yes, that. To know what something means, you have look at it in the correct context. US sayings won't make sense using UK meanings. Say "and Bob's yer uncle" to one of my fellow USians and they'll say "I don't have an uncle Bob."
Not sure why all the downvotes though. Everything happened in the US, so US terms.
In British English, "overtook" can have the sense of "to grow, develop, or progress more quickly than something else" (source: Cambridge). So not so much taking over as taking the lead. Which I guess is a sort of take over if one is the kind of person who bends history to suit the narrative...
"Also don't forget to mention that he was fired from PayPal."
There was X.com which sold to Cofinity who fired Musk and then eventually rebranded itself as Paypal after another acquisition. Elon didn't have any input into PayPal but owned stock from payments for X.com. There are some better tellings of the story, but the gist is that Elon didn't have anything to do with the Paypal that was sold to eBay. There are people from the chain of companies that Elon was directly involved in that have excised any mention of working at those companies from their resumes on LinkedIn.
Mark Tarppening and Martin Eberhard founded Tesla. Martin was supposed to get the first production Tesla Roadster off the production line, but Elon took it and eventually launched it into space perhaps as a final rude gesture to Martin. The car that Martin finally did get was a rebuilt wreck. A few of Elon's 'friends' got the first Roadsters. That gives one a keen insight into Elon.
"He went on to co-found Tesla, famed for improving the electric vehicle, a concept that has been around for more than 100 years. He also sends hardware into space, which Russia began doing 65 years ago."
Pity you weren't around for James Watt. "Famed for improving the steam engine, a concept demonstrated by Hero of Alexandra 1700 years before."
No, the cases really aren't comparable. But he seems to have done OK with SpaceX, Russian priority or not.
"But he seems to have done OK with SpaceX, Russian priority or not."
That remains to be seen. Since SpaceX is private their books aren't readily available. The Raptor engines for Starship have had some serious issues making pretty green lights before going poof on the test stands. Without Raptor engines, there is no Starship, without Starship, Elon is saying they can't deploy the Starlink v2 satellites which means Starlink is in real trouble (it might never NOT be in trouble). SpaceX is betting the company on Starlink being a grand success. It's even more dire now as Elon made the biggest buy of a non-profit the world has ever seen which depletes his coffers. That's money that could have been reinvested into SpaceX and/or Tesla at crucial times.
Perhaps. I'm not a fan of twitter and it's role in helping divide people. However, I'm sure that not everyone who works there is ultra sensorious. At least I hope not.
Another side of this is just simple professionalism and courtesy. I'd hate for my boss to just announce to the world that he's going to dump 75% of staff in the company that I work for.
Don't take this as a dump on Elon Musk, btw: It's just that I think there are better ways of handling this kind of thing.
"As much as a dislike twitter and what it represents, Elon should have kept his mouth shut with regards letting anyone go at this time. Announcing it like he has seems a tad cruel."
It's exceptionally stupid to announce any cuts. People with nice resumes they've been honing since April have been looking for new places to go and have left. Some have as they don't like Elon, but others to make sure they continue to have employment. Twitter has offices in some of the most expensive areas to be located so the people working there need a nice high paying job to live indoors. Elon is also well known for wholesale firings even if his fans say it's just getting rid of the lowest performing staff. Rumors were circulated that there would be a bunch of working groups being dissolved and the people dismissed so that would net a bunch of dolphins with the tuna since a group is likely to contain both top notch people and others that might only do just enough to keep their jobs.
When people leave a company, they take a certain portion of institutional knowledge with them. Lot's of people leaving over a short period of time will mean fewer people that understand why something is done a certain way and many of the ways of doing something that had been tried but didn't work. It will all have to be learned again and Elon will need to hope that lessons are learned fast enough to prevent the whole thing going down the drain. A government that's already had a chat with Twitter about what's permissible and what's not could have been amiable the first time, but if they have to have the same chat once again about the topic, fines could be involved. Bans are a possibility and even jail time for some sacrificial executive. Wasn't it India that chased after a bunch of local Twitter execs one time for something?
> When people leave a company [...]
Don't forget Musk has a huge ego to feed and shareholders to placate. In a time where the average business plan doesn't seem to look past the next quarter, long term consequences are irrelevant. By then anyone smart will have dumped the shares I guess, and that's the only thing which is important: Making/not losing money.
Someone mention Cupid Stunt?
(very mildly NSFW)
The bias in the article is plain to see
New here? Welcome.
The Register is a mix of reporting and commentary, and always has been. It is not your typical "tech news" site, that takes marketing palaver at face value and never calls bullshit on anyone or anything. If you interpret that as "bias," you probably won't enjoy the site.
""Entering Twitter HQ – let that sink in!" Mr Musk wrote on Twitter, somewhat inexplicably."
I like a good and even a bad joke, but this one was terrible. Is this jocker genuinely amused by this ridicule setup ?
""A beautiful thing about Twitter is how it empowers citizen journalism – people are able to disseminate news without an establishment bias,"'
Citizen journalism ? God. What next ? Citizen justice ? People getting lynched because "they pactise with Satan" like in the middle age ?
This would certainly work if every citizen was a just and sound person, but such is so much not true ...
With the cuts he has announced it reminded me of that line in the brilliant juicemedia's Honest Government Ads (in that case about the former OZ government):
"Putting the 'n' into cuts"
Pretty much applies here.
yesterday's Twitter is tomorrow's Titanic
a fool with a tool... albeit one with a brain and the intelligence of EM doesn't make him a tool with a tool.
If he knew half of what was possible with the people he hires, he'd be twice as far as he is > as it stands he is not.
Not because of who or what he is... sadly because he is slightly of course enough on so many occasions to be close to sinking far too often.
I wish him luck... and kind of think this is not going to end well.
.. for the staff , the team , the culture.. that made it what it was... It's now off to <another horizon>.. another future.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
