Beep boop - this is a robot. A new show has been posted to TWiT…
What are your thoughts about today’s show? We’d love to hear from you!
1 Like
You guys spoke at great lengths why you think Elon is such a troll but didn’t discuss why he’s bailing on the deal (unless I missed it when I went in to get my coffee). Many comments about why you think he wants to bail but no data or facts.
I listen to Twit to learn the facts and should not have to post them myself:
Clearly something is “off” with Twitters user numbers. I would love to hear opinions on this.
Also would like to hear about why Twitter gave the X holdings team a rate limited API that prevented them from performing a real analysis. Far better to trash Musk, make fun of white men, and bring up excepts from “tell all” books written about Musk. If I wanted that stuff I can pick up the National Enquirer (BTW they are claiming Elon’s mom was abducted by reptillians and his odd speaking patterns are a result of that. 
).
2 Likes
I fully agreed that the troll numbers are higher than Twitter admits to, so I agree with Musk on that.
With that said, Musk waived a due diligence process. He can’t change his mind now.
2 Likes
We did in fact talk about this at length.
I read the real reason for bailing from his law firm verbatim on the show. It has nothing to do with his public reason (remember I mentioned it’s not illegal to lie in a tweet). It has everything to do with Twitter not giving him all the access he requested. In fact, they don’t have to give him that access. He agreed to buy it “as is.” Their reluctance is explained in the most recent Opening Arguments podcast on the subject:
The courts will decide if Elon’s argument has merit. Most legal experts seem to believe it does not.
5 Likes
I don’t see anything off in that table. All I can see from the tweet thread you linked is someone who is comparing data Twitter provided in SEC filings, and a random table of unsourced numbers.
1 Like
A few more thoughts:
I was in college when Jack Welch retired from GE. There was a lot of reverence for him in the business school, including praise for his practice of eliminating a significant fraction of the workforce each year. GE will essentially cease to exist in 2023 when it divides into three separate companies. Whether that was directly due to Welch’s leadership is a matter for debate.
Amy mentions the prospect of other billionaires pulling similar stunts. Of course, that’s nothing new. Think of T. Boone Pickens, who accelerated the demise of Citgo and Gulf Oil in the 1980s.
Interesting discussion. There was such a heavy emphasis on Amy’s views this week, however, that it felt a bit like a single-panelist show.
And who can forget “Chainsaw” Al Dunlap?
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2025898_2025900_2026107,00.html
During his stint atop Scott Paper, a tenure that began in 1994, Dunlap engineered a corporate restructuring that put 35% of the workforce (or 11,000 people) out of a job. The move simultaneously brought a rise in share value of 225%, and resulted in Kimberly-Clark buying out Scott Paper the year after Dunlap took the helm.
The thing about elites spreading their seed because the “dumb people” are breeding too much is not just crypto-racism, it’s the thinking that led to eugenics. Which led, if I understand it correctly, to the concept that some races were “degenerate” and shouldn’t breed, and later to the idea that they should be eliminated… and we all know where that led. So anyone who starts down that path is potentially heading for a very dark destination.
Apologies for bringing up something that strays into Godwin’s Law territory, but I felt it shouldn’t be glossed over.
1 Like
Thanks for a great discussion. This is my first time listening to your podcast, and I’m already a fan. Regarding the Elon/Twitter debacle, Twitter’s 5% bot user estimate is only against its monetized user base, not its entire user base. Obviously, there are a ton more bots globally.
Besides that, if Elon was truly concerned about the 5% estimate, he would have asked for an audit BEFORE signing the contract. He is basically someone who waived home inspection and offered 15% above market (at the time) for a home that he is now regretting after signing the deal but before money changed hands. Most lawyers agree that Elon doesn’t have a leg to stand on in this legal dispute. But that wouldn’t stop Elon Musk, for sure.
Regarding the discussion about privacy and Apple. Apple’s business model isn’t about offering a free service while monetizing the user data. Apple’s business model is making over-priced, expertly marketed, marginally improved products that basically lock the user into its walled garden with no way to exist without completely abandoning everything Apple.
You want an iOS device? Apple is the only game in town. You want an Android device, there are numerous phone manufacturers with dozens of devices to pick from. You want an App on your iPhone, you must use the App Store. You want an app on your android phone, you can bypass Google Play Store and side load it.
I recognize that Apple is ahead of the pack on privacy, but that’s because it doesn’t make its money on customer data. Apple is also more ruthless than others in killing competition. Remember when Apple copied the flashlight app without paying the original company any royalty and put it out of business? If Apple had complete market dominance, innovation would slow to a crawl and just die.
The last note I’d make is that would people pay a subscription fee to Google in exchange for not having any data be tracked/sold? I happily pay for YouTube Premium and I never have to worry about ads. I might be willing to also pay a subscription fee for Google Search or Gmail or Chrome if that means my privacy is protected. Smaller browsers like Firefox or Brave or DDG claim that they will never sell user data, but that is impossible. It is expensive to run a tech company and set up servers all over the world and to index the web and to build a great browser. If anybody says they are providing the service for free and are NOT turning customer searches into revenue streams, the company is either lying or the company will run out of investment money and shut down sooner rather than later.
2 Likes
As a long time listener, I’ve heard many times where there have been questions about Huawei, and if they should be considered a threat. I’d love to hear this discussed today!
1 Like