Elon Musk completes $44bn Twitter takeover

[Andrew_C]

to make the one way trip to Mars.

I wonder what he'd pay a bag-packer? And how many hours a day?

[Theblacksheep]

Seeing Blue Tick George W blue tick Tony Blair tweeting each other "I miss killing Iraqi's" was entertaining, but Elon has banned comedy.

 

Elon is 100% wrong that $8 will fix spam. He said that they will keep the $8 of people impersonating brands "and they can keep doing that". It will amplify spam.

 

Companies that spend millions a month are not going to be happy with their accounts being impersonated, mocked before being taken down. They can keep doing that, the advertising companies will just not bother.

[mavhc]

Why do you think they won't fix the problem? It's software, it's not static.

 

There's 2 types of fake accounts, spam, easy fix, charge them more to be a spammer than they make as profit, then they'll move elsewhere.

 

And actual human trolls, it'll take about 10 lots of $8 before they get bored wasting money.

[Dan2025]

Why do you think they won't fix the problem? It's software, it's not static.

 

There's 2 types of fake accounts, spam, easy fix, charge them more to be a spammer than they make as profit, then they'll move elsewhere.

 

And actual human trolls, it'll take about 10 lots of $8 before they get bored wasting money.

It's a change that makes little sense, actually causes more harm than good. As proven beautifully by the trolls.

 

It will fool people, the blue tick for genuine verified accounts has been around for years. People will return or only use twitter to try to find these verified accounts unaware of their ignorance on the update only to be fooled by impersonators.

Perfect time for it seeing as most of the content moderation teams out the door.

 

End of work from home for Twitter employees.. I thought Musk was forward thinking?

Edited November 10, 2022 by Danwinchelsea

[6Foot2]

Link: Musk warns of Twitter bankruptcy as more senior executives quit | Reuters

 

Twitter Inc's new owner Elon Musk on Thursday raised the possibility of the social media platform going bankrupt, capping a chaotic day that included a warning from a U.S. privacy regulator and the exit of the company's trust and safety leader.

 

The billionaire on his first mass call with employees said that he could not rule out bankruptcy, Bloomberg News reported, two weeks after buying it for $44 billion - a deal that credit experts say has left Twitter's finances in a precarious position.

 

Earlier in the day, in his first company-wide email, Musk warned that Twitter would not be able to "survive the upcoming economic downturn" if it fails to boost subscription revenue to offset falling advertising income, three people who have seen the message told Reuters.

 

Yoel Roth, who has overseen Twitter's response to combat hate speech, misinformation and spam on the service, resigned on Thursday, two people familiar with the matter told Reuters.

 

In his Twitter profile on Thursday, Roth described himself as "Former Head of Trust & Safety" at the company.

 

Roth did not respond to requests for comment. Bloomberg and tech site Platformer reported his exit first.

 

Earlier on Thursday, Twitter's Chief Information Security Officer Lea Kissner tweeted that she had quit.

 

Chief Privacy Officer Damien Kieran and Chief Compliance Officer Marianne Fogarty also resigned, according to an internal message posted to Twitter's Slack messaging system on Thursday by an attorney on its privacy team and seen by Reuters.

 

Robin Wheeler, the company's top ad sales executive, told employees in a memo that she was staying at the company, a person who had seen the message said, diverging from earlier media reports that she too would be leaving.

 

"I'm still here," Wheeler tweeted late on Thursday.

 

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission said it was watching Twitter with "deep concern" after the three privacy and compliance officers quit. These resignations potentially put Twitter at risk of violating regulatory orders.

 

Musk attorney Alex Spiro told some employees in an email late on Thursday that Twitter would remain in compliance.

 

"We spoke to the FTC today about our continuing obligations and have a constructive ongoing dialogue," Spiro wrote.

 

He stated that only Twitter, not individual employees, could be held liable against the orders.

 

"I understand that there have been employees at Twitter who do not even work on the FTC matter commenting that they could (go) to jail if we were not in compliance - that is simply not how this works," he wrote.

 

In his first meeting with many employees at Twitter on Thursday afternoon, Musk warned that the company may lose billions of dollars next year, the Information reported.

 

Musk added in the email to workers that remote work would no longer be allowed and that they would be expected in the office for at least 40 hours per week.

 

Twitter, Musk and Spiro did not respond to requests for comment on a potential bankruptcy, the FTC warning, or the departures.

 

Musk ruthlessly moved to clean house after taking over on Oct. 27 and has said the company was losing more than $4 million a day, largely because advertisers started fleeing once he took over.

 

Twitter has $13 billion in debt after the deal and faces interest payments totaling close to $1.2 billion in the next 12 months. The payments exceed Twitter's most recently disclosed cash flow, which amounted to $1.1 billion as of the end of June.

 

Musk has begun charging $8 a month for the Twitter Blue service that will include a blue check verification.

 

WARNING

 

"We are tracking recent developments at Twitter with deep concern," Douglas Farrar, the FTC's director of public affairs, told Reuters.

 

"No CEO or company is above the law, and companies must follow our consent decrees. Our revised consent order gives us new tools to ensure compliance, and we are prepared to use them," Farrar said.

 

In May, Twitter agreed to pay $150 million to settle allegations by the FTC it misused private information, like phone numbers, to target advertising to users after telling them the information was collected only for security reasons.

 

Twitter's privacy attorney on Thursday mentioned in the internal memo that Spiro had said that Musk was willing to take a "huge amount of risk" with the company. "Elon puts rockets into space, he's not afraid of the FTC," the attorney quoted Spiro as saying.

 

Twitter's buyout has sparked concerns that Musk, who has often waded into political debates, could face pressure from countries trying to control online speech.

 

It prompted U.S. President Joe Biden to say on Wednesday that Musk's "cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries is worthy of being looked at."

 

ADVERTISERS NOT REASSURED

 

Musk told advertisers on Wednesday, speaking on Twitter's Spaces feature, that he aimed to turn the platform into a force for truth and stop fake accounts.

 

His assurances may not be enough.

 

Chipotle Mexican Grill said on Thursday it had pulled back its paid and owned content on Twitter "while we gain a better understanding on the direction of the platform under its new leadership."

 

It joined other brands including General Motors that have paused advertising on Twitter since Musk took over, concerned that he will loosen content moderation rules.

[Theblacksheep]

Why do you think they won't fix the problem? It's software, it's not static.

 

There's 2 types of fake accounts, spam, easy fix, charge them more to be a spammer than they make as profit, then they'll move elsewhere.

 

And actual human trolls, it'll take about 10 lots of $8 before they get bored wasting money.

 

There are more than 2 types of fake accounts and many are state backed with infinite money and armies of people. TENGOP had thousands of followers pushing election rubbish in 2016, influence with politicians, printed in newspapers, it was only before they were outed as Russian Military Intelligence did they get banned.

 

Already there are hundreds of AI generated face on profiles pretending to be journalists with blue ticks. $8 for perceived authority, priority replies, greater reach.

 

You think he sees this as a problem that need fixing?

 

 

Heads of safety, privacy and legal resigned yesterday. Engineers are being asked to self certify against FTC regulations, not the company, this is a problem.

Edited November 11, 2022 by Theblacksheep

[mavhc]

Yes, he's not going to sit around changing nothing when it's broken. Why do you think he warned of bankruptcy? To impart on the employees that they need to make money.

 

Spam bots will now be profitable, pay $8 to be a spam bot, get banned, $8 profit, repeat every day. The faster they detect spam bots the more money they make.

 

Previously: Free spam bot, get banned, free spam bot, it was costing them money.

[LeMarchand]

Yes, he's not going to sit around changing nothing when it's broken. Why do you think he warned of bankruptcy? To impart on the employees that they need to make money.

 

Spam bots will now be profitable, pay $8 to be a spam bot, get banned, $8 profit, repeat every day. The faster they detect spam bots the more money they make.

 

Previously: Free spam bot, get banned, free spam bot, it was costing them money.

 

Whilst this business model seems legal (IANAL) surely profiting off the spread of disinformation is immoral? Plus disinformation has caused deaths.

[mavhc]

Isn't charging $8 rather than letting bots sign up for free going to reduce disinformation?

[Jaan]

I think he's going let it go "bankrupt" clean slate it and rebrand to compete with likes of "WEChat"........ or rather make a western equivalent to it.

[LeMarchand]

Isn't charging $8 rather than letting bots sign up for free going to reduce disinformation?

 

Without straying into "P" territory, disinformation isn't solely spread by nutters acting alone. Various factions and even states use it. $8/pop will be peanuts to such entities.

[mavhc]

But they were doing it anyway, charging $8 will still reduce the number.

 

Can't make it perfect without assigning everyone 1 internet account at birth and making sure no one is even pseudonymous

[Dan2025]

Thinking of small business & schools etc.

The majority are unlikely to be verified on Twitter but many will be used as a point of contact.

 

Currently, fake profiles could be created that now look more trustworthy than genuine school profiles. You don't even have to do stuff like 'goegle' Oxforduni = OxfordUniv UniofOxford etcetc.

 

Twitter has decimated content moderation teams, so it's a perfect storm.

[Theblacksheep]

But they were doing it anyway, charging $8 will still reduce the number.

 

It just monetises them, legitimises them and amplifies them.

 

While it maybe funny to have Lockheed Martin have to say they are stopping arms sales to Sauid, or Eli Lilly saying they are giving away insulin for free, $8 isnt going to make up the millions in advertising or enough to pay for the defamation lawsuits.

Edited November 11, 2022 by Theblacksheep

[Dan2025]

But they were doing it anyway, charging $8 will still reduce the number.

 

Can't make it perfect without assigning everyone 1 internet account at birth and making sure no one is even pseudonymous

 

Yes but they weren't getting verified. You now have a situation where bad actors can become verified for $8, it was reserved for media/celebrities/governments etc.

 

Now, you have the same system in place but anyone can obtain it.

 

Instead, they could have took their time & adopted a new system which can't be mistaken for the old. Tested it properly & it wouldn't of been half as comical or dangerous.

Edited November 11, 2022 by Danwinchelsea

[Theblacksheep]

he doesnt know what he is doing

 

[mavhc]

Yes but they weren't getting verified. You now have a situation where bad actors can become verified for $8, it was reserved for media/celebrities/governments etc.

 

Now, you have the same system in place but anyone can obtain it.

 

Instead, they could have took their time & adopted a new system which can't be mistaken for the old. Tested it properly & it wouldn't of been half as comical or dangerous.

 

Doesn't mean verified any more, means subscription account. If people want to pay to make jokes, that seems fine. If idiots can't tell the difference, whose problem is that?

 

Not as if verified people never spread misinformation.

 

Weren't some bad actors already verified?

[elsiegee40]

Thread being locked as this has again drifted into political forum territory