I don't really have an opinion about mr Musk or his intentions, but I truly fail to see any downside with this deal. Either he does in fact make the twitter platform a generally more positive/useful/pleasant/... experience, or twitter's function will eventually be filled by other apps, maybe even new ideas.
For one, Trump seems to finally be receding into the background, and I can guarantee he gets his account back when Musk takes over. That alone is enough to view this as a net negative.
Worst case, he runs it into the ground and we live in a world without Twitter. Win win.
I have a tough time imagining the other worst case not prompting regulation.
Maybe it overthrows our political system! I don’t know, there are certainly some politicians who command from Twitter and will be hurt or helped by Musk. (Probably, invariably, helped.) But that seems less likely than Congress creating a rule book and regulator for social media.
Why would it? People have been complaining about facebook/twitter/etc for ages and competitors haven't turned out to be less harmful. Why is the idea that Musk forces his values into Twitter and that this makes the platform worse not a possibility?
Who cares. He delivers.
I’ll take the guy who delivers, with possible ulterior motives, over someone who really cares, but uselessly. The latter describes most of our leadership to date on EVs and Mars.
Would it be nice if the genius came without the bullshit? Sure. Am I convinced those are inseparable? No. Is this relevant if you don’t care about EVs or Mars? No. But a lot of people do, and for us, he’s worth the tradeoff.
You act like Musk is some kind of genocide dictator. Oh my god, he fights with the SEC therefore he must be shot in the head.
> Musk has shown time and time again that his ideals of climate change or whatever are not genuine.
Literally based on what? He has been consistent for 20+ years. Given tons of talks and has literally changed one of the most conservatives industry in the world to a much, much greener industry.
Why did he do Tesla? Do you think he thought 'What a great businesses idea?'.
> He wants to get to play with cool toys, make bold but undeliverable promises, and get as much attention as possible.
When he started SpaceX he was not famous. You can go back to inteview where he was a mostly unknown (at least by people who don't follow Silicon Vally startups). And he already talks about all those things.
The idea that he build a rocket company because he wants to 'play with toys' is just nonsense.
And even if it was, so what? SpaceX achieved what it did, no matter the reason.
> And yet, people look up to him as if he’s some saint bestowed upon us.
He is a successful entrepreneur and engineer. I defend him from people who just make up a bunch of nonsense because they don't like him as a person.
> I truly feel letting a billionaire like him take one of the biggest megaphones in the world private as a personal playground is one of the worst things that could have happened.
Sound like you lived a really privileged life if you think that.
And he already did use it as a megaphone, that is literally what Twitter is.
What exactly are you suggesting would happen?
> And it’s all because he wants to say what he wants to say when he wants to say it, even though he has a history of bullying and trying to shut up people who disagree with him.
Twitter not being owned by him has not prevented him from saying anything. The SEC doesn't care who owns twitter.