[ExI] what would any of us have done differently?

[spike at rainier66.com]

...> On Behalf Of John Klos via extropy-chat
Subject: Re: [ExI] what would any of us have done differently?

>> ...An asshole like Elon can't be trusted to not lie, to not 
>> fabricate, to
> not do whatever he wants even when it's unambiguously wrong and hope 
> to not get caught.  John


> OK well we already caught Jack Dorsey.  My guess is they won't prosecute:
> Jack already bought enough retail politicians to cover it.


>...It's discussions like this that are why I generally refrain from
participating in online discussions. The discussion was originally about how
Elon is somehow a champion of "free speech"...

John I didn't get the free speech part.  Elon didn't say he wouldn't ban
posters.  What he said was he wouldn't shadowban posters.  He would be up
front about who he was banning, and make everything visible.  This he did.
He added a feature which shows a post's reach.  This seems perfectly
reasonable to me.

>...In reality, he's an asshole...

I care not what kind of person he is.  I care about openness.  I also wanted
to see Twitter saved, because none of the alternatives appear to be
suitable.  Rumbl?  Truth Social?  Jack was about to drive Twitter into the
ground.  Losing 4 million bucks a day, well how long can that be sustained?
With their cash reserves, not very long.

John you questioned my assertion that Twitter couldn't pay its rent.  Well,
it couldn't.  It couldn't even pay its own employees without dipping into
its cash reserves.  If they are drawing those down at that rate, they can't
afford what they are trying to do.

I had asked what would any of us do any differently.  I had one idea: get
that HQ out of San Francisco, out to the central valley north of Stockton,
in the Lodi area where the rent on office space is a quarter what it is in
SF.  They could even have a catchy theme song:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0VDnQv-rLA

Half of the employees would leave voluntarily, so that reduces the number of
necessary layoffs dramatically.  I was out there recently: there is
available office space.

>... wants to platform white supremacists, anti-Semitics, people with a
history of hateful behavior and more. He does so by claiming it's in the
interest of "free speech"...

I didn't see anything in there which suggested anything of the kind.

>...You, Spike, are optimistic about this and appear to take Elon at his
word, whereas I, and many others, look at his actions and therefore don't
believe him...

John, had not Elon made the attempt, Twitter was finished.  Then where?
Truth Central?  Jack Dorsey wasn't even trying to save the site.

>...An important point was brought up: a Twitter account that tracked his
plane was terminated. He said, quite literally, that he wouldn't do that...

What I heard is that he said he wouldn't terminate accounts secretly.  He
was open about that, and I would do the same thing if some creep was
tracking my movements.  That is a scaled-up version of stalking.  You and I
would do the same thing.

>...Here, you do the same: who cares about Jack Dorsey?...

Jack was running Twitter into the ground, with no plan to pull out of the
power dive.  He lied to congress.  That is (technically) a crime.

>...The fact that Elon is an asshole and therefore we expect him to behave
like one has nothing to do with Jack Dorsey...

I care not what kind of people either of these guys are.

...

>...If you want to posit that Elon is for "free speech"... John

What I heard is openness, not necessarily free speech.  That charging 8
bucks for a blue check sounded like a good idea to me, even though it would
end the notion of "free" speech.

I advocate openness on the part of Twitter.  Jack did not.  Elon does.    

spike