Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#81

Post by oceanplexian »

krapp wrote: post #41
missedthecue wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without irony, you probably would have less censorship than should a private company own it. Is that a good thing? Not sure. Seems like spam would overtake it quickly.

Sure, until an American president decides to ban another country's account for disrespecting him, or use it for leverage in negotiations, or have the NSA bulk scan their citizens private messages for 'terrorist' communications, or have the algorithm bias other country's newsfeeds in favor of American propaganda. Twitter is a global platform and much of the world wouldn't trust the US as far as they could throw an Ame…

That ship long since sailed. Look at Russia, for example. They have basically been cut off from all forms of social media and the president didn’t even need to order them to do it (Even though the president has more or less total power over anything involving international trade). The social media companies did it voluntarily.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#82

Post by Ajay-p »

frob wrote: post #66
Overtonwindow wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More profitable, more open, and more fair to all voices. Twitter has become a liberal vacuum that, as a liberal, has gone way too far to the left in silencing voices. It's not a private company, it's a public company, and I hope Elon turns it around into a true, free speech town square, instead of just an echo chamber for blue checks.

No, it is literally a private company. Which is why we are having this discussion based off of SEC filings. Edit: sorry, I mixed up public company and public good. Twitter is a public company, but not a public good.

I don't think that means what you think it means, perhaps you are international? A Public company is one that is owned by shareholders of a public exchange. This is why Elon can buy into it and become a member of the board. If it were a private company he could not do that.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#83

Post by shkkmo »

incomingpain wrote: post #12
cloutchaser wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a silly post on first reading, but actually thinking about it, that would mean the first amendment actually applies to Twitter right? In which case it would actually mean government can't interfere with it? It's an interesting mind exercise. What happens with blatant spamming, or bots, is the government allowed to interfere with those? Or does the 1st amendment block that too?

>This seems like a silly post on first reading, but actually thinking about it, that would mean the first amendment actually applies to Twitter right? Without Section 230 Twitter would be liable for every evil thing that is said on their platform. What Section 230 does is create a category in which you are not liable for the content on the platform but they specifically setup limited rules for what can be censored. A…

You seem slightly confused about what 230 does. What it does is allow companies to do some moderation without legally liable as publishers for all content they host. Without section 230 companies have a choice to either do no moderation or to assume full liability as publishers.

Section 230 was created to encorage online moderation by removing the liability that moderation would bring in an offline context.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#84

Post by hetspookjee »

incomingpain wrote: post #33
ChicagoDave wrote: post #6

He's also agreed to never own more than 14%, so effectively agreeing only to be a voice, not a wrecking ball.

So typically 30% of a publicly traded corp is enough to be defacto owner. That's just a going rule but I just checked. 80% of twitter is held by institutions. Only 2.5% is owned by insiders. No dorsey to be seen here? No elliot management? https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/02/29/twitters-... Unless I'm missing something... Elon owns Twitter. This was a super easy hostile takeover... he doesn't need 14% Elo…

Dorsey holds 2.25% of the stock as per one authoritive dutch newspaper NRC. So 0.25% of the stock is held by other insiders, interestingly enough.

De voormalige eigenaar en mede-oprichter Jack Dorsey bezit 2,25 procent van de aandelen. [1]

[1] https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2022/04/04/elon-musk-koopt-aandele...

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#87

Post by dahfizz »

frob wrote: post #66
Overtonwindow wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More profitable, more open, and more fair to all voices. Twitter has become a liberal vacuum that, as a liberal, has gone way too far to the left in silencing voices. It's not a private company, it's a public company, and I hope Elon turns it around into a true, free speech town square, instead of just an echo chamber for blue checks.

No, it is literally a private company. Which is why we are having this discussion based off of SEC filings. Edit: sorry, I mixed up public company and public good. Twitter is a public company, but not a public good.

No, it is literally a public company. TWTR is traded on NASDAQ. Which is why we are having this discussion based off of SEC filings. Private companies are not required to file with the SEC.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#88

Post by krapp »

jdrc wrote: post #19
krapp wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because when the American government controls Twitter, you can be certain all views will be respected and treated impartially...

Does American government censor the press? Or mail?

America just had a President who explicitly declared the press to be the enemy of the people.

Ignoring the degree to which the American press voluntarily acts as a propaganda platform[0], the US government absolutely does censor the press, by revoking or controlling press credentials, arresting reporters covering protests, harassment, etc[1].

And the US has historically censored the mail, yes, usually during wartime. But the bigger problem is surveillance - the USPS tracks, photographs and logs all paper mail for government surveillance and law enforcement[2]. The USPS also has a 'covert operations' division that monitors social media posts[3].

You could (correctly) claim that this isn't nearly as bad as the surveillance and censorship regimes elsewhere, but it's difficult to see how making that easier by giving the government direct control over a primary means of global communication makes it less likely.

[0]https://www.thoughtco.com/how-media-censorship-affects-the-n...

[1]https://fair.org/home/us-censorship-is-increasingly-official...

[2]https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/monitoring-of-snail-ma...

[3]https://www.salon.com/2021/04/21/is-the-post-office-spying-o...

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#90

Post by rhacker »

snarf21 wrote: post #67
bmitc wrote: post #31

I am beyond tired of billionaires, who get to treat companies, public sentiment, and politics, and thus a fair portion of government and policy, as their personal sandbox. Greed and oligarchy are ruining America.

Agreed but I'm not sure how we can change it at this point. Our lives in the US are way too good for revolution. This move by him is strictly about not letting Twitter ever block his accounts. He can pump & dump and mislead investors for billions that will make him a lot more money than his Twitter stake cost.

I don't know. They haven't finished the homeless count for 2022. I suspect they are scared to announce it. People are probably dropping off from housed to unhoused at unprecidented levels. I wouldn't say our lives are way to good right now.
Post reply on HN