Elon Musk $41B offer for Twitter
Discussion
Byker28i said:
Musk has given an interview in which he says his use of Katamine is fine, saying he takes prescribed ketamine to treat his "negative frame of mind."
https://nordot.app/1142559017884025156?c=592622757...
Given the hugely negative effects of SSRI's, of which I'm sure Elon is more than aware, Ketamine has proved a suitable treatment in many cases. Ketamine was a taboo treatment for depression because of clinical study regulations. Same stigma as psilocybin, LSD and other alternative medicines that are proving far healthier for people than "traditional" medicines. https://nordot.app/1142559017884025156?c=592622757...
But if that was the only worrying thing you took from the Lemon interview then I'm not surprised. He's so low IQ he struggles to comprehend conditional hypothetical arguments. He's on par with Karine Jean-Pierre. It was such a disparity in cognitive ability it was like watching Cathy Newman interview Jordan Peterson all over again.
Byker28i said:
I've been in some remote locations, Islands, where the internet access is provided by a single company with a satellite link, hence the cost is extortionate, try almost £150 a month for 1.5mbps download 512kbps upload and 15Mb of data
or another, you pay as you use the data, so stuff like lumps of 85mb of data for £110, use it up, buy another lump with 7mb download speed.
Starlink at £80-85 looks a bargain
Hence I'm skeptical about it's long term viability as a business. Historically most satellite ISPs were set up by or in part by governments, when they get sold off or funding pulled they to flounder.or another, you pay as you use the data, so stuff like lumps of 85mb of data for £110, use it up, buy another lump with 7mb download speed.
Starlink at £80-85 looks a bargain
Also with speed, it's less the burst speed (the MBps figure) and more latency (measured in milliseconds) that holds you back. With any TCP connection you're dependent on the round trip time on each packet.
RichTT said:
But if that was the only worrying thing you took from the Lemon interview then I'm not surprised.He's so low IQ he struggles to comprehend conditional hypothetical arguments. He's on par with Karine Jean-Pierre. It was such a disparity in cognitive ability it was like watching Cathy Newman interview Jordan Peterson all over again.
You're referring to Musk, right?The interview proved what a shallow, mushy level of understanding he has on, well, anything but especially political and social matters. Not to mention his famous thin-skinned testiness.
Why does he say CNN is left wing? Everyone knows it is.
How was old Twitter a far-left organisation? They all voted Democrat.
What evidence is there that DEI programmes lower standards and make organisations less competitive? People on X will provide the evidence.
[This then led into a tedious circular dance where Musk repeatedly said that his worry was that if standards for surgeons and pilots were lowered that could lead to deaths. Lemon asked what evidence he had that this was happening, and that the research he had to hand did not show that it was happening, Musk would say that people would provide evidence on X but refused to say that it was happening, but was worried about people dieing if it did, Lemon asking what evidence he had that it was even something to be worried about [repeat]. Musk then back-slaps himself about how it's great that they're having a discussion about the issue...when really it's someone insisting that a hypothetical situation that there's no evidence for is dangerous 'debating' someone with actual facts.]
Why isn’t a matter of free speech for companies to choose not to advertise on X? Choose your questions carefully.
Why do you quote tweets containing antisemitic conspiracy theories if you don't belive them? I don’t have to answer questions from reporters.
The guy couldn't even really handle the initial softball questions about Tesla in an articulate and insightful way. All those answers I've collated above should be peppered with long UMMMs and UHHHHs and stutters.
He clearly thought he was going to get the usual fawning adulation sort of interview that he usually gets from the tech sector press and his circle of acolytes that tell him how wonderful he is on Twitter/X all day. And he ran up against the softest sort of probing journalism possible, couldn't give meaningful answers and then got pissy about it...before pulling the guy's show.
Also liked the 'I can't be abusing ketamine because I work 16 hours a day, seven days a week' defence.
Yes - I'm sure posting dozens of times per hour on X, looking for conspiracy theories to boost, photoshoping CNN logos onto photos of dog testicles and replying "!!" and "Concerning" to everything Ian Miles Cheong says must really take it out of you...not to mention getting in the way of personally designing rockets and sleeping on the Cybertruck production line...
Edited by 2xChevrons on Tuesday 19th March 11:14
2xChevrons said:
You're referring to Musk, right?
The only thing shallow and mushy is between Don's ears. Especially for his absolutely hilarious contract demands to produce a show on X. .2xChevrons said:
What evidence is there that DEI programmes lower standards and make organisations less competitive?
Genuine laugh out loud at that. Unless you were serious. You're not serious are you?The second order effects of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs are written in the papers every single day. The great levelling down. It's a seductive ideology, one that aims to make everyone equal. It's only when it applied practically that it shows itself to be disastrous, not only for those it aims to help, but everyone else as well. As Sowell said, socialism has a history of failure so great only an intellectual could ignore it or evade it.
RichTT said:
Genuine laugh out loud at that. Unless you were serious. You're not serious are you?
The second order effects of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs are written in the papers every single day. The great levelling down. It's a seductive ideology, one that aims to make everyone equal. It's only when it applied practically that it shows itself to be disastrous, not only for those it aims to help, but everyone else as well. As Sowell said, socialism has a history of failure so great only an intellectual could ignore it or evade it.
I wasn't the one asking the question - Lemon asked it. Asking for evidence is part of a discussion. "It's just so obvious" isn't how intellectual or scientific enquiry works. The second order effects of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs are written in the papers every single day. The great levelling down. It's a seductive ideology, one that aims to make everyone equal. It's only when it applied practically that it shows itself to be disastrous, not only for those it aims to help, but everyone else as well. As Sowell said, socialism has a history of failure so great only an intellectual could ignore it or evade it.
If the answers are so blazingly obvious and easy to find and elucidate, why didn't Musk The Genius provide any of it? Or paraphrase a conclusion from it? Or even give a rhetorical response like yours? Because he has no understanding of the issue beyond what passes his K-fuelled eyeballs when he's scrolling the website he paid $44bn for to radicalise himself.
The actual evidence from metastudies - actual 'papers', not newspapers - suggests that, like a lot of things, DEI (and similar programmes) can, when done well and properly implemented lead to higher performance, innovation, decision making, problem solving, and more significant market share. When implemented badly or non-holistically they often have a negative effect.
In that regard it is no different to 'lean management' or Six Sigma or outsourcing or WFH or virtually any other strategy. Basically it has to be meaningful diversity, meaningfully applied. Not an annual half-day powerpoint delivered by someone reading off as script, pronouns in the email signature and a rainbow cake in June. Just as trying to implement JIT logistics by selling off your warehouse won't actually make your business more efficient.
Anyway, this is all beside the point - Musk was claiming that standards for surgeons and pilots were being lowered. Then he switched to claiming to be worried that they could be lowered. He provided no evidence of these concerns, and dismissed even the lightest suggestion that investigations had failed to confirm the rumours spun-up by the right-wing rumour mill that this had ever happened or was likely to. He didn't even do the Alex Jones response and just make up some evidence. He just umm-ed and uhh-ed and spun his wheels like a Cybertruck on a beach.
2xChevrons said:
"It's just so obvious" isn't how intellectual or scientific enquiry works.
I agree that diversity of opinion, experience, outlook, are all very important to a business. No issues there. In that respect I believe very much that companies should hire to have a level of diversity. But that's not how it's worked out. Socialism in practice versus in theory. It's quotas and percentages, people getting passed over because they're the wrong color, or sex, not because they're unqualified, but that they don't fit the mandate. It's obvious because the data and the examples are overwhelming, and if you can't see it, you're either willfully ignorant, or deliberately ignoring it. Here's an article that examines three studies that show that despite record levels of 'diversity' in healthcare, the removal of the "gold standard test" from 40 institutions in order to enable the inclusion of minority students from predominantly minority colleges, things are getting worse.
"The U.S. Medical Licensing Exam, which residencies rely on when picking trainees, recently abandoned objective grading for a pass/fail system, largely on diversity grounds. And calls are growing for post-graduate resident evaluations to be weakened as well. That would let potentially unqualified individuals enter medical practice and endanger patient well being."
https://www.newsweek.com/diversity-delusion-comes-...
Repeat the above sentiment for liberal college entrance metrics, DEI incentives at Boeing, sanctuary cities, etc etc. Along with the proponents of such schemes that believe in systemic racism, or that in order to combat it, racism and exclusionary practices against other races is not only necessary, but desirable.
captain_cynic said:
shakotan said:
captain_cynic said:
shakotan said:
The booster stage impacted into the ocean at ~2x the speed of sound, and the orbiter burned up on re-entry as its wasn't stabilised and was rotating on its axis. Since only one side of the orbiter only has heat tiles on, it wasn't properly protected from the heat generated.
Given the timescale and amount of money ploughed into the project they are miles behind where they should be.
Turns out space travel is hard. Given the timescale and amount of money ploughed into the project they are miles behind where they should be.
You can't just shout Huzzah, throw a few million at it and expect a reusable space vehicle.
Maybe there is more to it that people who work or worked at NASA understand.
RichTT said:
I agree that diversity of opinion, experience, outlook, are all very important to a business. No issues there. In that respect I believe very much that companies should hire to have a level of diversity. But that's not how it's worked out. Socialism in practice versus in theory. It's quotas and percentages, people getting passed over because they're the wrong color, or sex, not because they're unqualified, but that they don't fit the mandate.
It's obvious because the data and the examples are overwhelming, and if you can't see it, you're either willfully ignorant, or deliberately ignoring it. Here's an article that examines three studies that show that despite record levels of 'diversity' in healthcare, the removal of the "gold standard test" from 40 institutions in order to enable the inclusion of minority students from predominantly minority colleges, things are getting worse.
"The U.S. Medical Licensing Exam, which residencies rely on when picking trainees, recently abandoned objective grading for a pass/fail system, largely on diversity grounds. And calls are growing for post-graduate resident evaluations to be weakened as well. That would let potentially unqualified individuals enter medical practice and endanger patient well being."
https://www.newsweek.com/diversity-delusion-comes-...
Repeat the above sentiment for liberal college entrance metrics, DEI incentives at Boeing, sanctuary cities, etc etc. Along with the proponents of such schemes that believe in systemic racism, or that in order to combat it, racism and exclusionary practices against other races is not only necessary, but desirable.
You haven't even tried to defend the central point here; Musk was not able to speak to any of this.It's obvious because the data and the examples are overwhelming, and if you can't see it, you're either willfully ignorant, or deliberately ignoring it. Here's an article that examines three studies that show that despite record levels of 'diversity' in healthcare, the removal of the "gold standard test" from 40 institutions in order to enable the inclusion of minority students from predominantly minority colleges, things are getting worse.
"The U.S. Medical Licensing Exam, which residencies rely on when picking trainees, recently abandoned objective grading for a pass/fail system, largely on diversity grounds. And calls are growing for post-graduate resident evaluations to be weakened as well. That would let potentially unqualified individuals enter medical practice and endanger patient well being."
https://www.newsweek.com/diversity-delusion-comes-...
Repeat the above sentiment for liberal college entrance metrics, DEI incentives at Boeing, sanctuary cities, etc etc. Along with the proponents of such schemes that believe in systemic racism, or that in order to combat it, racism and exclusionary practices against other races is not only necessary, but desirable.
gregs656 said:
You haven't even tried to defend the central point here; Musk was not able to speak to any of this.
I don't have to defend Musk for anything, he's his own man (with mild Asperger's which affects his speech / dialogue). However ineloquently he puts across the point doesn't change that it's happening in various degrees across a lot of aspects of our daily lives. captain_cynic said:
Byker28i said:
I've been in some remote locations, Islands, where the internet access is provided by a single company with a satellite link, hence the cost is extortionate, try almost £150 a month for 1.5mbps download 512kbps upload and 15Mb of data
or another, you pay as you use the data, so stuff like lumps of 85mb of data for £110, use it up, buy another lump with 7mb download speed.
Starlink at £80-85 looks a bargain
Hence I'm skeptical about it's long term viability as a business. Historically most satellite ISPs were set up by or in part by governments, when they get sold off or funding pulled they to flounder.or another, you pay as you use the data, so stuff like lumps of 85mb of data for £110, use it up, buy another lump with 7mb download speed.
Starlink at £80-85 looks a bargain
Also with speed, it's less the burst speed (the MBps figure) and more latency (measured in milliseconds) that holds you back. With any TCP connection you're dependent on the round trip time on each packet.
This year they will be doing direct to mobile (text and voice), with data to follow, which is internet everywhere, for a reasonable cost.
Amazon have the same aims, so it will be a competitive market.
RichTT said:
gregs656 said:
You haven't even tried to defend the central point here; Musk was not able to speak to any of this.
I don't have to defend Musk for anything, he's his own man (with mild Asperger's which affects his speech / dialogue). However ineloquently he puts across the point doesn't change that it's happening in various degrees across a lot of aspects of our daily lives. If there was such a massive intellectual delta, as you claim, you would think it would be trivial for him to actually address some of the points instead of just insisting he was right.
captain_cynic said:
Byker28i said:
Thats a good offer. Starlink looks to be a great solution, especially for remote locations around the world. You do need line of sight to the satellites so slightly harder in rural locations I believe. Probably Ok for use unless you want to attack russian resources 
The big problem with satellite is cloud cover rather than terrain. Also latency... But if you can get other forms of internet you'll generally choose them over satellite for that very reason.
My concern will be worrying that Starlink would go out of business suddenly. Just like every other satellite internet provider that hasn't got loads of government money being poured into it.
I think its best to stick with the existing sloutions for now!
gregs656 said:
The whole conversation started from your defense of Musk and his performance in this interview.
If there was such a massive intellectual delta, as you claim, you would think it would be trivial for him to actually address some of the points instead of just insisting he was right.
I defended his use of Ketamine as an SSRI alternative and called Don Lemon low IQ in comparison to him. Don is a mid-rate liberal mouthpiece who even CNN didn't want. Hardly an intellectual heavyweight. Elon is brilliant in his own way and heads up several multi billion dollar companies. Regardless of how stammery or ineloquent he may be. If there was such a massive intellectual delta, as you claim, you would think it would be trivial for him to actually address some of the points instead of just insisting he was right.
Given that Don couldn't understand the basic premise that if you lower acceptance criteria for important positions that this has the potential to cause deaths, or at least the erosion of standards. This is true and is happening. The bar exam will no longer be required to become a lawyer in Washington (because that discriminates against black folk), fitness standards for police officers (because that discriminates against fat people), MCAT testing for doctors (because again, that's a racist test to have to take). Elon referenced this directly without providing specific examples.
Further to that, Don has the opinion that content moderation should be done on what he feels is right or wrong, regardless of the law. Which is not what Elon is trying to do with Xitter. Which is the lightest touch possible on outright censorship (within the confines of legality) but that the algorithm is open sourced to show what / how / when some content is reduced in reach.
gregs656 said:
Elon couldn't answer some straight forward questions. He genuinely seemed shocked he was being asked to consider what makes something right or left wing, for example, and couldn't answer the question at all - he wasn't just stuttering or ineloquent; he didn't have an answer.
TBH he is out of his depth with some of these political questions. He has 'instincts', like we all do, but if he wants to be a politician, and advocate for changing public policy, it's fair he gets asked about it. And he doesn't have good, clear explanation which make sense.gregs656 said:
Elon couldn't answer some straight forward questions. He genuinely seemed shocked he was being asked to consider what makes something right or left wing, for example, and couldn't answer the question at all - he wasn't just stuttering or ineloquent; he didn't have an answer.
The Overton window has shifted so far to the left that it's almost a meaningless question at this point.There are plenty of positions I take that would have been centrist, or at least moderate 5-10 years ago, that would now have the blue hair pronoun crowd calling me a nazi.
RichTT said:
gregs656 said:
Elon couldn't answer some straight forward questions. He genuinely seemed shocked he was being asked to consider what makes something right or left wing, for example, and couldn't answer the question at all - he wasn't just stuttering or ineloquent; he didn't have an answer.
The Overton window has shifted so far to the left that it's almost a meaningless question at this point.There are plenty of positions I take that would have been centrist, or at least moderate 5-10 years ago, that would now have the blue hair pronoun crowd calling me a nazi.
5 In a Row said:
captain_cynic said:
Byker28i said:
Thats a good offer. Starlink looks to be a great solution, especially for remote locations around the world. You do need line of sight to the satellites so slightly harder in rural locations I believe. Probably Ok for use unless you want to attack russian resources
The big problem with satellite is cloud cover rather than terrain. Also latency... But if you can get other forms of internet you'll generally choose them over satellite for that very reason.
My concern will be worrying that Starlink would go out of business suddenly. Just like every other satellite internet provider that hasn't got loads of government money being poured into it.
I think its best to stick with the existing sloutions for now!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff