It is possible that this means Musk's spam analysis tool is defective. But, there is another logical possibility...
Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
111–120 of 585 posts
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#112Quoted post unavailable.
I have seen no credible evidence that Twitter is wrong about their numbers. Nor do I even see any possible way an outsider could figure that number out.
Have you seen credible evidence that they are right about their numbers?
Without Twitter providing more context and showing their work, the number can't be trusted, thus it isn't credible.
If you claim you have such a low number of bots (5%), you better prove it, otherwise I'll assume the worst and go with 20%.
Anyone that goes on Twitter knows it's above 5%. All 3rd party estimations are well above 5%. Prove it Twitter. Prove it.
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#113Just in case anyone isn't seeing through the bullshit of Elon Musk, let me lay this out for you:
On April 14th: Twitter stock was worth about $45. Tesla stock was worth about $985. Elon's contract said he would sell $13B worth of Tesla stock (about 13.1m stocks) as part of the plan to buy Twitter for $44B, $54.20 per share. A good deal for the Twitter shareholders even at the time. (23% higher than the market said it was worth).
On May 13th: Twitter stock is worth $40[0]. Tesla stock was worth about $769. So now Elon would have to sell 16.9m shares of Tesla, 28% more, to get a company worth 12.5% less. All signs pointed to both stocks continuing to decline along with all of tech, so the deal was getting worse and worse every day for Elon, and better and better every day for Twitter's shareholders.
Elon Musk will say or do anything he has to in order to cut his losses. There's that well-talked-about $1B get-out-of-deal fee that everyone thinks he'll be able to use. But that's actually not a valid thing- that was only if the SEC blocked the deal. He's contractually obligated to buy the company.
Elon is screwed. All the noise he is making is not going to get him out of it because the Twitter shareholders will hire lawyers just as good and expensive as his- and they are in the right.
[0]And even then $40 is only because the stock was pumped up from Elon saying he's buying it all. If not for that, it would be even lower- meaning this is an even better deal for the shareholders.
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#114" The merger agreement contained no references to false or spam accounts, and Musk didn't ask Twitter for any information to verify the number of spam accounts before signing the merger deal, Twitter said. "To the contrary, Musk forwent all due diligence—giving Twitter twenty-four hours to accept his take-it-or-leave-it offer before he would present it directly to Twitter's stockholders," Twitter wrote. " If that's t…
No, because waiving due diligence does not mean the seller is immune to claims if they knowingly provided false data.
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#115I wish this whole saga ended, and Musk buys reddit instead. This current saga is pure entertainment, which will end up in some kind of settlement and will leave the lawyers a lot richer.
I'm amazed by how reddit has turned itself around from "the place where the commenter zeitgeist involves wishing physical violence on the CEO" to "the place I append to all my searches with a site: prefix to find meaningful Web discussion and product reviews". There was a surprising and unpredictable community turnaround from about 2015-2021; don't know if it will last, but it's surprising how much better it is now.
It's also the place where the same group of moderators moderates all politics subreddits for 15 years without challenge. And international subreddits can be often worse. Moderators run the show now, and they ve become extremely vicious
What you 're observing is not some magical reddit improvement. It's because forums have become unmonetizable, and reddit has consolidated all of them in one place. There is nowhere else to go for comment-like discussions (HN, but it's limited). Their success and moat lies in their legacy userbase. It's not because of their performance
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#116Imagine this whole ordeal playing out on a house that was not listed for sale. The buyer starts harassing the homeowner to sell to them, they say no, so he buys up the mortgage lender and tries to force a sale. His antics are hurting the home's value so you relent to selling and give him an as-is sale contract, which he signs and gives you 24 hrs to respond or he will try to force a sale. All the while, this is of co…
The investors funding the buyer’s antics.
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#117I'm still convinced he's just gonna use it to suggest that a judge should meet him in the middle; make him buy the company, but use the allegations of large numbers of bots to reduce the price.
Both are probably true. There are likely more bots than Twitter admits, and Musk will likely agree to buy Twitter for a lower price (in fact, I believe he outright said that).
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#118Imagine this whole ordeal playing out on a house that was not listed for sale. The buyer starts harassing the homeowner to sell to them, they say no, so he buys up the mortgage lender and tries to force a sale. His antics are hurting the home's value so you relent to selling and give him an as-is sale contract, which he signs and gives you 24 hrs to respond or he will try to force a sale. All the while, this is of co…
> Who could possibly be on the side of the buyer?
Except you can just buy up supporters by gaslighting huge masses of people on Twitter. The house in question.
Its so ridiculous. Musk's popularity is largely *BECAUSE* of his Twitter antics. So this "buyer" is basically someone who has come to house-parties / benefited from the house in question for the last decade.
And the people arguing against the (current owners) of the house are also the party-guests of that very same house.
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#119I wish this whole saga ended, and Musk buys reddit instead. This current saga is pure entertainment, which will end up in some kind of settlement and will leave the lawyers a lot richer.
The number of bots on Reddit is likely much higher than on Twitter.
Re: Twitter says Musk’s spam analysis used tool that called his own account a bot
#120I think Musk's counterclaims are more interesting than Twitter's response. Here's the summary of the five counterclaims: * Twitter committed fraud by lying to the SEC about the mDAU numbers with the intent of inducing Musk to buy Twitter at an inflated price. No, really, this is the allegation (see paragraphs 202-206). * Count 2 is that Twitter committed [Texas fraud statute] by lying when it offered its shares. It's…
> I still can't get over the banana-pants insanity of the first count As someone who's unfamiliar with this, could you explain what's banana-pants insane about a company inflating their hard-to-discover numbers, for profit? I thought that was, unfortunately, banana-pants standard? For example, the fiction that is Twitter or Reddit's user count.
One point not mentioned (and I’m just paraphrasing Levine from Money Stuff here):
It’s crazy because it would probably be BETTER if you had more bots. Then you could say that your revenue per user was higher and you could argue that you had more room for growth. So, if anything, lying and OVERestimating the bot count would help your valuation more.