Though the counterargument is that Tesla has massively invested in crypto for no apparent reason other than Musk commanded it, and crypto's tanking, which might impact his ability to actually pay for Twitter.
Have we finaly figured out what crypto is good for?
Absolutely Nothing.
Can it still be used to buy drugs through the mail? I always thought that was its one legitimate and noble use.
Kaputa on
+1
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
Offering a lower price (which Musk apparently did earlier yesterday before the literal shit post) is also illegal btw
What's a consequence? A fine?
I've read that attempts to weasel out of mergers in bad faith can lead to a judge ordering you to complete the purchase as stipulated; giving the plaintiff leverage to settle for an increased cancelation fee in exchange for letting you walk away.
So this may get more interesting for twitter as a company. And then maybe the possibility of suits by twitter or it's stockholders against Musk for lying in a way that effected the stock price. Or maybe not. And all because Musk had a mid-life crisis.
Offering a lower price (which Musk apparently did earlier yesterday before the literal shit post) is also illegal btw
What's a consequence? A fine?
I've read that attempts to weasel out of mergers in bad faith can lead to a judge ordering you to complete the purchase as stipulated; giving the plaintiff leverage to settle for an increased cancelation fee in exchange for letting you walk away.
We don't do consequences for people like Elon Musk.
So wait am I reading that right, Elon knew their evaluation was incorrect but went to purchase it anyway to prove that? What? Also someone saying 'twitter commies' does not exactly inspire confidence in their analysis.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Could Musk be playing a long game? Expose Twitter's fraud, force out management and cause the stock price to plummet so he can then buy it on the cheap?
EDIT: I don't think this is likely, personally. But that's because I think everyone involved are idiots.
John Rich in his analysis said "big trouble for the twitter commies" which I have no idea what the fuck that means if he thinks a billion dollar corporation is all communist or he just uses commies for "people I don't like."
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
John Rich is half of that god awful drinking music for fascist white morons who are too scared of black people to listen to rap music pop country music duo Big and Rich
Good fucking grief this is dumb as hell, fucking christ
John Rich in his analysis said "big trouble for the twitter commies" which I have no idea what the fuck that means if he thinks a billion dollar corporation is all communist or he just uses commies for "people I don't like."
I assume he means that communists that run Twitter who are selling it to Musk. Because it makes them look bad? Except that if it nixes the deal, then they don't get their Elon paradise. I have to assume that they're just high on the recent Project Veritas dumbfuckery of some random Twitter engineer saying "Twitter would totes be better under Musk because FREE SPEECH." Stupidity and inconsistency are par for the course.
Could Musk be playing a long game? Expose Twitter's fraud, force out management and cause the stock price to plummet so he can then buy it on the cheap?
EDIT: I don't think this is likely, personally. But that's because I think everyone involved are idiots.
Yes, but this tends not to work if you're telling everyone that's what you're doing the whole time. It means the initial offering was in bad faith and is fraud.
I have no idea if that has real consequences though.
So this may get more interesting for twitter as a company. And then maybe the possibility of suits by twitter or it's stockholders against Musk for lying in a way that effected the stock price. Or maybe not. And all because Musk had a mid-life crisis.
Elon Funding secured 420! Yeah Baby! SEC what? don't do that, that's illegal. Elon Hey! SEC! SEC Yes? Elon Su.... SEC Su? Elon SUCK ON THESE NUTS! SEC Don't do that either, here's a nanny. Elon THAI PEDOPHILES! FREEDOM! SPACE-DICK! SEC I guess that's not market manipulation, so ok. Elon Twitter Funding SECured! High-rolling Life! SEC Really? No due dilligence? not checking the books? Elon Real Billionaires RAW DAG IT! FUCK OFF COPPER! Twitter Yes... we totally have 5% bots. Elon Radical! Crypto 💩 Elon Euhm.... Twitter No backsies! Elon SEC HELP! FRAUD! INVESTIGATE! MY MONEY! SEC Please start typing your reply here _____
Legality is academic at best. We simply do not punish these types of crimes
It does make you really hate the mega rich when you can blatantly see how they are protected because rich people never want to face punishment for crimes and make damn sure every politician of every stripe makes sure they dont.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
People wrote the SEC novels about how his operation was an obvious scam like a decade before he got arrested. The SEC never did a damn thing until people started pulling their money out and the ponzi scheme collapsed.
Madoff only got fucked when he screwed with rich peoples money. I don't think Musk is doing that enough to get the same treatment. And Madoff is like the one time a white person felt racism, he's the guy people point to because its so rare.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
I actually stumbled across the "twitter commies" thing. One of the quotes the rightwing is shrieking about from the Veritas nonsense is the dude saying "we're commie as fuck."
Ergo, expect to hear that everywhere from the shrieking cacophony for a while.
It would make my day if events fall out like this:
1) Musk offers to buy Twitter for $46B
2) Discovery reveals that Twitter has been lying about the size of their user base.
3) Musk backs out of the deal with no penalties.
4) The SEC fines Twitter into oblivion for falsifying information in their legally required annual reports.
5) Musk loses the main tool for his hyping due to his efforts to protect his main tool for hyping.
Steps 1 and 2 are complete and Step 3 appears to be on track. I feel like I'm getting Christmas in July.
Also, Musk absolutely knows how many bots are on Twitter. Someone posted in the past couple of pages showing that his followers are around 70% bots.
Offering a lower price (which Musk apparently did earlier yesterday before the literal shit post) is also illegal btw
What's a consequence? A fine?
I've read that attempts to weasel out of mergers in bad faith can lead to a judge ordering you to complete the purchase as stipulated; giving the plaintiff leverage to settle for an increased cancelation fee in exchange for letting you walk away.
We don't do consequences for people like Elon Musk.
My post refers to the consequences of being found in breach of a $44b contract with a tech-giant. We do that kind.
You know, regardless of the legality of Elon's recent behavior, they show just how ill-suited he is to the role of Twitter ownership. He hasn't even bought the company yet, and he's already causing headaches and bad press for management.
+4
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
edited May 2022
By waiving due diligence, does it even matter if Twitter is full of shit? You're supposed to figure this shit out before you make the bid, let alone demanding the other guy do it once they've already accepted his offer.
* NAL, but if he pulls out and eats the billion break fee (plus damages according to the agreement), and Tesla's stock tanks, Tesla shareholders might have a cause for action.
What's weird is he wants his cake and eat it too. Like he wants to pretend their evaluation was off so he bought at a bad price, while also claiming he knew in advance it was a bad bid?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
What's weird is he wants his cake and eat it too. Like he wants to pretend their evaluation was off so he bought at a bad price, while also claiming he knew in advance it was a bad bid?
And, even more than that, he personally bought almost $3 billion worth of shares when it was trading at ~40, then a week later offered 54.20 for all the rest of the shares.
Like, he's already holding the bag, not even accounting for the $1 billion if he breaks his deal.
Burtletoy on
+2
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
His bullshit artistry might fool crypto bros and Rogan stans, but if I have to choose a fighter between Twitter's lawyers and the guy throwing out poop emojis like against the advice of his own consel, I have a pretty clear idea of who is going to win.
Texas's HB20 author argues that his law doesn't prevent moderation decisions to block active shooter videos by citing section 230's protection from liability regarding moderation decisions to block any content the provider considers objectionable.
Cain says that “HB20 specifically authorizes social media platforms to censor that kind of content.” Then he posts a screenshot of two laws. First he posts the part of HB20 (Section 143A.006) that says:
This chapter does not prohibit a social media platform from censoring expression that:
(1) the social media platform is specifically authorized to censor by federal law;
And he highlights the “federal law” part. Then he, somewhat amazingly, posts a screen shot of the Good Samaritan section of Section 230, and specifically highlights the “excessively violent” part of 230(c)(2).
No provider or user of an interactive computer services shall be held liable on account of–
(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protect.
(Emphasis: original / mine)
Granted this is just the shitpost of a public official, not what the TX lawyers are arguing in court: but if Cain is being honest about the law's intent, it seems like that would mean that, by design, no relief could ever be granted under the nuisance suits it encourages.
Not to say people don't get randomly insulted garbage on twitter, but like people like Jordan Peterson don't just get it out of the blue. So he's more upset about the fuck around and find out variety of twitter discourse than random hateful assholes who he probably supports.
It's gross because you look at all the fucked up hate female/gay/trans/PoC people get on Twitter just for existing and he comes along coopting the problem as his own because of all the hate he gets for the vile shit he spouts, despite the circumstances of the hate being completely different than from the other problem.
Posts
Evergreen:
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
What's a consequence? A fine?
The SEC could also force Musk out of power at Tesla
Or give him another babysitter
Or nothing, especially now that he’s a cause celebre for the dumb information control project the Right has going
I've read that attempts to weasel out of mergers in bad faith can lead to a judge ordering you to complete the purchase as stipulated; giving the plaintiff leverage to settle for an increased cancelation fee in exchange for letting you walk away.
then you look at his public persona and political views and the alt-right reactionary underpinning becomes completely transparent.
The more amusing thing is what this guy points out:
Which Musk even responded to:
So this may get more interesting for twitter as a company. And then maybe the possibility of suits by twitter or it's stockholders against Musk for lying in a way that effected the stock price. Or maybe not. And all because Musk had a mid-life crisis.
We don't do consequences for people like Elon Musk.
pleasepaypreacher.net
EDIT: I don't think this is likely, personally. But that's because I think everyone involved are idiots.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Good fucking grief this is dumb as hell, fucking christ
I assume he means that communists that run Twitter who are selling it to Musk. Because it makes them look bad? Except that if it nixes the deal, then they don't get their Elon paradise. I have to assume that they're just high on the recent Project Veritas dumbfuckery of some random Twitter engineer saying "Twitter would totes be better under Musk because FREE SPEECH." Stupidity and inconsistency are par for the course.
Yes, but this tends not to work if you're telling everyone that's what you're doing the whole time. It means the initial offering was in bad faith and is fraud.
I have no idea if that has real consequences though.
Elon Funding secured 420! Yeah Baby!
SEC what? don't do that, that's illegal.
Elon Hey! SEC!
SEC Yes?
Elon Su....
SEC Su?
Elon SUCK ON THESE NUTS!
SEC Don't do that either, here's a nanny.
Elon THAI PEDOPHILES! FREEDOM! SPACE-DICK!
SEC I guess that's not market manipulation, so ok.
Elon Twitter Funding SECured! High-rolling Life!
SEC Really? No due dilligence? not checking the books?
Elon Real Billionaires RAW DAG IT! FUCK OFF COPPER!
Twitter Yes... we totally have 5% bots.
Elon Radical!
Crypto 💩
Elon Euhm....
Twitter No backsies!
Elon SEC HELP! FRAUD! INVESTIGATE! MY MONEY!
SEC Please start typing your reply here _____
We go absolutely stupid when rich people’s money gets fucked with
Even then only rarely. Everyone knew Bernie Madfoff was a fraud but no one cared till the gravy train stopped
It does make you really hate the mega rich when you can blatantly see how they are protected because rich people never want to face punishment for crimes and make damn sure every politician of every stripe makes sure they dont.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I’m lost
People wrote the SEC novels about how his operation was an obvious scam like a decade before he got arrested. The SEC never did a damn thing until people started pulling their money out and the ponzi scheme collapsed.
pleasepaypreacher.net
I do think there are going to be lawsuits
There’s a very public paper trail of his activity…so there will be a settlement at some point, I’d expect
Ergo, expect to hear that everywhere from the shrieking cacophony for a while.
Steps 1 and 2 are complete and Step 3 appears to be on track. I feel like I'm getting Christmas in July.
Also, Musk absolutely knows how many bots are on Twitter. Someone posted in the past couple of pages showing that his followers are around 70% bots.
Yeah, I think the biggest share holders besides musk are Vanguard, Morgan Stanley, Blackrock, and the House of Saud, iirc.
My post refers to the consequences of being found in breach of a $44b contract with a tech-giant. We do that kind.
* NAL, but if he pulls out and eats the billion break fee (plus damages according to the agreement), and Tesla's stock tanks, Tesla shareholders might have a cause for action.
pleasepaypreacher.net
And, even more than that, he personally bought almost $3 billion worth of shares when it was trading at ~40, then a week later offered 54.20 for all the rest of the shares.
Like, he's already holding the bag, not even accounting for the $1 billion if he breaks his deal.
Texas's HB20 author argues that his law doesn't prevent moderation decisions to block active shooter videos by citing section 230's protection from liability regarding moderation decisions to block any content the provider considers objectionable.
(Emphasis: original / mine)
Granted this is just the shitpost of a public official, not what the TX lawyers are arguing in court: but if Cain is being honest about the law's intent, it seems like that would mean that, by design, no relief could ever be granted under the nuisance suits it encourages.
It's gross because you look at all the fucked up hate female/gay/trans/PoC people get on Twitter just for existing and he comes along coopting the problem as his own because of all the hate he gets for the vile shit he spouts, despite the circumstances of the hate being completely different than from the other problem.