zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
So this is how Twitter goes out: not with a bang but with a seemingly endless stream of stories about the little ways Elon is ruining the service each day.

Just staggers me that Elon could have just… not done any of this. And yet here we are. He’s had to sell billions in Tesla stock to finance this ongoing mayhem, this is surely going to be up there as one of the greatest examples of hubris in modern business.

>>afavou+n6
pg thread on the topic: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1603572959758663680?s=61&t=...

You can practically see the switch flip. I’m not sure he’s openly said Musk has made bad decisions until this moment.

>>sillys+qb
Check out the follow up, he immediately pivots to accusing the journalists of a “coordinated campaign”.

>>shrimp+6g
I read it that way at first too, but I think he’s saying that’s why he originally suspected the bans were due to an algorithm gone awry. And that’s a reasonable worry — it was possible that a particular url was causing the accounts to be banned, e.g. if Musk added ElonJet to some kind of internal ban list, that’d do it.

pg’s still on the side of journalism.

>>sillys+Eh
No, he's claiming the journalists "coordinated" a campaign to share external links to the jet tracker. Some of them admit that they did (not "coordinated" -- alternate sites of this public data has been very widely shared), but others are at a loss and claim they did no such thing. One had reported on an LAPD statement -- that despite the imminent harm Elon claimed, they hadn't gotten a crime report and actually had to reach out to Elon's people -- and shortly after got suspended.

Elon is constantly leveraging the "for the children" cover for his petulance.

>>bfgood+6j
After re-reading the tweet, I’m honestly not sure anymore. What a strange situation.