Elon Musk's Ego Threatens To Drive Twitter off a Cliff

I personally would never bet against musk.

 

You clearly do not "understand" things, which are nothing but utter B.S. Your replies are sounding ever more like those of a child. There were the petty insults, and now we have you saying, I don't hafta prove what I'm saying! And I don't wanna!

Yes, it is only my, highly idiosyncratic, way "of looking at things," that would expect a person, saying that he'd just read something, to be able, if asked, to produce that thing, of which he'd made his claim...
Or, is it strictly a matter of anyone-- having not even a drop, but merely the scent of common sense-- understanding that if a person says that they know something, based on what another person wrote, in an easily accessible location, yet want to assert it, without providing that written evidence, there can only be one reason for that: the alleger is full of crap, and he cannot produce the thing, which he had only spun from his imagination, in the first place.




Here, I ran across one of your nuggets of wisdom, that might do you some good:

Because that's what all your arguments come down to, whenever you can't respond to another's point: you just start faking it. So why not make a break, from that shameful behavior, and just admit that you'd made up the stuff about what I'd written, which proves how out of my depth, I am, but which, for no explicable reason, you are not going to produce?

 

All you're doing here is proving my point. You do not understand what I've said, because you are using a different parameter of thinking and can't get outside it.
I understand that pointing that out will be seen as a challenge to your credibility of accuracy of belief- because you believe it. You keep fighting it because you see disagreement as an attack instead of a difference.
That would be.... insecurity in your own self-confidence. In my humble opinion, of course.

I say your assumptions about Musk are subject to the same problem, you are assuming he is making mistakes because if you were in his place you would have done differently.
I say you don't have the capacity to be in his place, or you would be in similar circumstances now, at some scale- which puts you and Musk on vastly different planes, and for you to assume they are similar and your thought superior makes a very clear statement. About- you. your viewpoint. It's not a convincing one.

You can lead a horse to water, and you can lead a man toward knowledge- but you can't make him think differently.

What if Musk bought Twitter in order to expose it's hypocrisy, because he can afford to and doesn't give a damn if it's profitable or even survives?
That possibility never crossed you mind. Outside your box.

Now tell yourself you have won PF Victory points. Tell yourself you already know everything, so no need to consider otherwise. Give yourself a little trophy like they give every kid who shows up at some events.
Maybe have a satin cape made up to wear as you type. Celebrate whatever you think you have won.

 

You conveniently fail to include in your "analysis" what we know about Operation Mockingbird decades ago. The CIA controls the media, including social media and Google. It's a safe bet that Twitter, Google, Facebook and many others are replete with CIA assets. That's how it works. Ask Jesse Ventura.

 

I haven't ever said that entrepreneurs don't make mistakes. Perhaps he made one here and perhaps he didn't. I am not enamored of Musk. I just understand and respect his talent and bringing Putin into the thread is ridiculous.

 

I don't suppose there are any links, and snips, that you can post, to undergird your assertion? In a debate forum, the argument that a person needs to embark on a long path of research into the secret truth, revealed in various books, seems an impractical one (even if it turned out to be true). IOW, are there any, more quickly accessed, indications, at least, of what you allege? That the CIA has ever been involved in media operations, is a far, far cry, from the assumption that they currently impregnate all media, or that they even run Google & Apple, if that was meant to be your implication. Can you not show some connection, for example, between Tim Cook or Steve Jobs, and our intelligence community? Otherwise, how is what you are asserting, not just wild speculation?

 

Apple app store is owned by Apple.......obviously. They decide what it contains.

 

Many people bet their money on him (Tesla stock) and have and have lost about half of their money (42% this year). You can't bet on Twitter because its not a publicly traded company, so it doesn't have value, but if it did, it would have dropped significantly.

 

So then you are not predicting Musk's success? Your other posts, had given me a distinctly different sense, than of your neutrality, on the matter:

fmw said: ↑
I've been an entrepreneur for only 30 years but I have managed to make a decent living from it. Musk is something special.


fmw said: ↑
I was thinking the same thing. I'm fully aware that Musk is smarter than I am and a better entrepreneur. I wouldn't have done what he did with Twitter but that just underscores the difference between him and the rest of us.


So, then, just to clarify the obvious (for those who have trouble perceiving it), I was in no way suggesting that I possess the equal of Musk's business acumen, when I cited all the indications of his rocky start, as the new Twitter King. Like you, I would not be confident in making a prediction of how all this ends up, especially as Twitter is not anything with which I have any real acquaintance. My main point was that Musk seemed to be shooting from the hip, in a field in which he could not be expected to be especially knowledgeable, despite his previous successes, in other fields. Nor did Elon seem to be trying to counter his ignorance, by assembling expert counselors. So this all gives the impression, of one's overinflated Ego, getting the better of him. And I don't think one can reasonably contend that it has all been only to Twitter's benefit, so far.

I wonder why that opinion, would make you feel either that I was "angry," or that I was "partisan."

 

I haven't predicted his success like you have predicted his failure. I have only expressed my respect for the man's brain and entrepreneurial saavy. I think he is very special. You can view me a fan if you like. You look angry and partisan when I read your posts. Sorry for the misinterpretation.

 

Of course. How does that relate to my post?

 

You wondered why he didn't just write an app for Iphone users and let people download it. While its possible to add apps which are not available in the Apple Store, its difficult to do (its called 'jailbreaking'), and voids the warranty on your phone. I seriously doubt Musk would ask Twitter users to do that to their phones. Besides, Apple has not removed Twitter. I just checked and its still there.

 

I wasn't aware of that. So it requires Apple's permission to load an app? Whew! One more reason I don't allow apple products in my home.

 

I like to support US companies, but to each his own

 

I think your misinterpretation, is due to your own mental processes, including biases-- not due to anything that is objectively in my posts. In fact, there is an example of this, in this very quote of yours. You had read some idea which was not there, in order to feel that, "you have predicted his failure." My saying, in the thread title, that Musk's Ego Threatens to drive Twitter over a cliff, is not the same as saying that it will. That is sloppy comprehension, on your part.

But your apology is accepted, provided you will make some effort, to not leap to unsupported conclusions, in the future.

 

Defense of your post noted.

 

Good Christ, even I can find that on the internet. Are you lazy, or just trying to avoid unpleasant facts?

Inside Operation Mockingbird – The CIA's Plan To Infiltrate The Media (allthatsinteresting.com)

Jesse Ventura serving as Minnesota governor had a few things to say about it. Udo Ulfkotte, deceased, was a European journalist who wrote a book about CIA influence in the European press. Maybe that's why he died?

Avoid Wikipedia in your search for knowledge. It is more about defending official narratives and propaganda than in delivering the truth.

Bill Casey, head of the CIA in 1981, stated that "when everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation efforts"

Wake up and smell the napalm sir, you've been duped along with the rest of us.

 

I will read your link, but no story about something that happened in the 1980s, could possibly prove that the CIA controls current day media. In fact, I'm sure it will not prove that they completely, or even predominantly, controlled the media, back then. But, after I read it, if I find that it somehow does accomplish that amazing feat, be assured I will post my apology, and acknowledgement, of the truth of your claim.

 

And they defending the government wonder why we don't trust the government. Operation Mockingbird was just the tip of the iceberg. J. E. Hoover was probably the most feared man in the intelligence community. Even presidents feared him. Schumer knows.

 

Since it's been proven that twitter had been obviously influenced and manipulated by the DNC I would say it's a safe guess that those two companies are also actively active in bias policies towards the left considering their actions.

 

That's funny: you are considering this recent Twitter P. R. stunt, to prove that Twitter "has been... influenced and manipulated by the DNC? " No such thing, has been proven-- to the contrary, the person curating the release, stated that there was no evidence of the involvement of the Biden campaign, and had attributed all, to the unilateral decision of some individuals at Twitter.

Even more preposterous, you consider this first, non proof, about Twitter, to be sufficient to make it, "a safe guess," that the DNC also controls GOOGLE-- too funny!


This is a safe guess: both Parties try and, to some degree succeed, in getting the media to adopt their "spin." Of course, in some cases-- like Fox News, or MSNBC-- the networks actively cooperate with those narratives. But you have no factual basis-- nor, certainly, have you shown any-- for setting Democrats apart from Republicans, in this regard.

 

Common sense!

Some here seem to be deficient in common sense.

 

Some of the Left assured us that if the Left couldn't continue censoring Conservatives and Rigging elections that Twitter would be destroyed.

 

Purchasing a company is one thing, but saying that he is right shows your ignorance and arrogance. That being said, a lot of the problems that Twitter is having is on Musk, and no one else. It is part of the modern conservative culture to blame everyone else but you, and that is never right in any circumstance.

Was Musk right in proposing $8 a month for its blue chipper users? Nearly all of them rejected the idea, including the ones who are on his side. Then you have the other things Was he right to suspend Keyne West? Was he right to allow racial slurs and other derogatory remarks and misinformation to continue on Twitter?

 

With 4 releases of the Twitter Files its very clear Twitter cooperated with the FBI, the DNC, the Biden White House. Lawsuits are already being prepared.

It was not some rogue individual in Twitter deciding to ban people and information and banning high profile issues (like Libs of TikTok, Trump, Hunters laptop, etc) were made at the highest levels of Twitter management.

Events have proven you so incredibly wrong your credibility is less than zero.