Hey, there! Log in / Register
MIT says it didn't lower itself to pay for a Twitter 'verification'
By adamg on Sun, 04/23/2023 - 2:10pm
See that blue checkmark at the top of that tweet? Twitter now charges $8 a month for that ($1,000 a month for organizations), and removed them last week from most of the previously checkmarked people and groups who got them for free by proving they were somehow notable.
Over the last few days, Twitter's been putting the checkmark back on some accounts (including some for dead celebrities), but MIT wanted people to know it was not helping Elon Musk recoup his $44 billion investment, no matter what it says when you hover over the blue tick.
Neighborhoods:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
It's pretty wild how quickly
It's pretty wild how quickly Elon is flushing Twitter down the toilet. I'm glad this is finally opening a lot of people's eyes to the fact that he is not the genius that he likes to portray himself as. He's not an engineer or a scientist. He didn't cofound Tesla. He's just an absolute moron who inherited a bunch of money from an emerald mine.
True
I wouldn't peg him as a moron, more as someone who is only interested in himself. He bought Twitter so he could have a platform to support his views.
It's important because he's shown he'll support totalitarian dictators if that's what it takes for his companies to be successful. It's not good for democracy if he and his corporate kin are the gatekeepers of news and discussion.
He bought Twitter because
He bought Twitter because he was literally forced to. He was too stupid to know that he couldn't back out of the contracts he signed.
Sure
And to elaborate further, he used a lot of Saudi money to buy Twitter.
He's too stupid to know partnering with dictators isn't a good business decision in the long term.
Which makes it even more disgusting
That he gave a checkmark to that reporter that was killed by them.
Im gonna say this was probably an oversight (as this was done to any account that had more than 1M followers) but still, a few clicks and it can go away just that easy.
Granted he was forced to
because he couldn't back out of the deal, but what was his impetus to make the offer in the first place?
Hubris
His impetus was hubris.
He was not forced to
sign the legal argument that bound him to complete the purchase.
He's supposed to be an intelligent, capable (neither I'm convinced of) founder of several companies that make high quality mechanical and technological equipment. To me, that mean's he's not some random guy on the street being conned into giving a scammer 5 bucks. His experience should have been sufficient to guide him into making wise business decisions.
He is rather wealthy, he surely has access to good lawyers and advisors. If he chose not to engage with or listen to such people, he's still an adult with the mental capacity to make decisions on their own.
So he was not forced to buy Twitter. He legally agreed to buy Twitter and that legal agreement included binding statements. He forced himself to buy Twitter.
high quality
That's a judgement call.
Rockets exploding … and I'm going to be interested in how the shoddily-built Teslas are all holding up in 5 or 10 years of jolting over potholes.
Time will tell
I'm no fan of Musk nor do I trust any company that is under is control. But if we are going to judge spacecraft by catastrophic failures, our government funded products have failed too and with human lives lost in the process. I'd much rather see them blow up without humans aboard if it means they can keep that from happening when they are used for crewed missions.
And when I said "high quality" I think I really meant to say perceived as high quality. I don't actually know if they are as good as they want us to think they are or as good as the price tag.
Teslas right now have issues.
Teslas right now have issues. Like when they randomly stop working on freeways and auto-lock to prevent people from getting out. Or veer suddenly and cause accidents.
Yup
Imagine being a large investor in one of his other companies right now. They must look down in shame looking at his antics over at Twitter. Especially in such a public manner.
In the end, it's going to cost him his brand. His school antics just further proves he's just a face, not the brains behind any organization he 'owns'. And not a good face at that (PR wise).
I think his intent was to drive the site into the ground all because he got his feelings hurt. And he has the money to be vindictive about it. He thinks he'll make some sort of fanboi base out of it, but in the end, it's just going to cost him a ton of money.
I'm really waiting for the legalities of his actions will catch up with him. "rich play by other rules' may work in the United States, but not in other countries such as Germany and a lesser extent, the EU. They will have his ass for lunch once they are done with him.
But if we're keeping track, I think.. in a quick jog of my memory of his infractions legally.. he's up to at least 40 or so very large and involved legal issues that won't go away with opening a checkbook. People are mad, and won't let him give him a pass b/c he wrote a check to shut them up.
And let's be fair.. he purchased Twitter for 40b. Its worth 20b now.. in a year of ownership. With advertisers pulling out (Microsoft being the latest), and now forcing them to pay thousands to advertise WITH TWITTER, he won't have a pot to pss to write that check from.
And of course, those Saudi's are gonna want their money back eventually....... I give him another year before he's forced to sell, or the entire site goes away forever. He's driving it to the ground that fast.
"I'm really waiting for the
"I'm really waiting for the legalities of his actions will catch up with him."
who else does that remind me of?
yup
it does but a couple of things
1) Musk was not president
2) Musk's crimes are not an issue of national security
3) Musk's crimes also include jurisdictions outside the united states. (this is key and part of my point above)
I'm really waiting for the
Yes, AND, that rule only works in the US if by playing by your own rules, you only hurt the proles. Rich people are not to go after other rich people - THAT is where consequences happen, and there's plenty of very wealthy people whose other investments, etc, will be affected as this crashes and burns. Look at that Eli-Lily thing when Elon started messing with Checkmarks. Millions of dollars in stock disruptions over an idiotic decision.
Forget E.M., Twitter is still a good place
Because of the millions of people who post interesting and useful things there every day.
Too bad it couldn't be taken away from the moneymen and made a public utility.
Moved to Mastodon
After EM attacked an employee who quit, outing him as gay and Jewish and siccing his followers on him to the point that the ex-employee has had to move out of his house for his safety, I left Twitter for good (just didn't deactivate my account so no one else could use my handle) and moved to Mastodon. A lot of the people I find of interest have also moved there, including UnivHub, with more each month.
Blue Check
The original intent of the blue checkmark was simply to confirm that the account was legit and not in any way a parody which was helpful to followers. It was never intended as a sign of notability that posters sought.
Blue check now meaningless
And now the blue checkmark doesn't fill it's original intent, since anyone can buy one whether or not they're legit.
Strewing blue checks among those who don't want them
Elon Musk slaps free Twitter Blue checks on critics, whether they want it or not
https://boingboing.net/2023/04/23/elon-musk-slaps-free-twitter-blue-chec...