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

Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#141

Post by watwut »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #105

From observing various internet forums, including this one, I noticed that people from the "first world" countries don't know the value of free speech and often take it for granted. Sometimes even coming to such views as "free speech is dangerous" and that "we should limit free speech" (by blocking the views I don't like). Understand this: limits on free speech are far more dangerous to society than allowing fringe e…

This meme about first world countries not valuing freedom and freespeach while people from formerly authoritarian place understand it better if common on HN.

But meanwhile, first world countries are significantly less likely to slip into full on authoritarianism and generally do better in that regards.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#142

Post by ctvo »

MichaelRazum wrote: post #18

Why not. Makes totally sense. Twitter gets a better image. Right now there is a real risk that something like gettr will take off.

I don’t know what I worry about more, sinkholes swallowing my car whole on the way to work or needing to register on Gettr when it replaces Twitter.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#143

Post by cloutchaser »

snowwrestler wrote: post #94

As a Twitter shareholder I would vote against this. Musk says there is tremendous financial potential in Twitter but then offers $54 a share, which is not even 2x the IPO price. That’s not a “tremendous potential” premium. There is a lot of evidence that platforms which de-prioritize moderation have trouble attracting revenue and experience significant compliance costs. See: the sad story of Moot, who ran one of the…

You are implying that advertisers would boycott a free speech platform, and this might be true for some advertisers, when Facebook was boycotted by some activist businesses it didn't dent their bottom line.

Also - Twitter is more of a networking and influence tool in my opinion for "important people". These people are MUCH more likely to pay for Twitter, it's not like facebook where 99% of people would never pay for it. Which I think is what Musk was hinting at with blue badges for $2.

If he does that, boycotting advertisers will matter much less.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#144

Post by bluescrn »

542458 wrote: post #126

As somebody from the first world who has had the experience of moderating Internet forums… free speech in the sense of “the government generally shouldn’t control people’s speech, with limited exceptions” is good and necessary. Free speech in the sense of “everybody should be forced to platform every idea” is silly IMO. Left alone user content rapidly devolves into the most low-effort salient content - flame wars, po…

Governments don’t control these massively influential communications platforms (Maybe they should?)

In some ways, huge tech companies are more powerful than governments. So why should they have the power to essentially remove ideas from public discussion?

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#145

Post by jmull »

snowwrestler wrote: post #94

As a Twitter shareholder I would vote against this. Musk says there is tremendous financial potential in Twitter but then offers $54 a share, which is not even 2x the IPO price. That’s not a “tremendous potential” premium. There is a lot of evidence that platforms which de-prioritize moderation have trouble attracting revenue and experience significant compliance costs. See: the sad story of Moot, who ran one of the…

My first thought on hearing this was, "What a low-ball offer. This isn't really serious."

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#146

Post by suction »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #105

From observing various internet forums, including this one, I noticed that people from the "first world" countries don't know the value of free speech and often take it for granted. Sometimes even coming to such views as "free speech is dangerous" and that "we should limit free speech" (by blocking the views I don't like). Understand this: limits on free speech are far more dangerous to society than allowing fringe e…

Your personal story might colour your preference here. I still think the Western European model of "Free Speech with consequences" is the best one around.

If you have a huge following and use Twitter to say without evidence "restaurant xyz uses rat meat don't go eat there, or 'Tim Cook has AIDS and will die in 3 months'", then that would be protected by free speech like the right-wingers want it.

But in the Western European model, you could be sued for making those claims and effectively hurting the restaurant, Tim Cook, and the Apple stock price.

I'd rather live in a society where that's not possible without dire consequences for the fraudulent "free speech" abuser.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#148

Post by [deleted] »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #105

From observing various internet forums, including this one, I noticed that people from the "first world" countries don't know the value of free speech and often take it for granted. Sometimes even coming to such views as "free speech is dangerous" and that "we should limit free speech" (by blocking the views I don't like). Understand this: limits on free speech are far more dangerous to society than allowing fringe e…

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#149

Post by mc32 »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #105

From observing various internet forums, including this one, I noticed that people from the "first world" countries don't know the value of free speech and often take it for granted. Sometimes even coming to such views as "free speech is dangerous" and that "we should limit free speech" (by blocking the views I don't like). Understand this: limits on free speech are far more dangerous to society than allowing fringe e…

I expect that many of the people who used to say private companies can set policies and ban at their pleasure will begin to realize this is a bad policy and only serves to establish an echo chamber rather than a free exchange of ideas.

Of course that whole argument was a ruse and I believe that was hypocrisy that will get naturally exposed.

We'll see.

Re: Elon Musk makes $43B unsolicited bid to take Twitter private

#150

Post by poisonarena »

snowwrestler wrote: post #94

As a Twitter shareholder I would vote against this. Musk says there is tremendous financial potential in Twitter but then offers $54 a share, which is not even 2x the IPO price. That’s not a “tremendous potential” premium. There is a lot of evidence that platforms which de-prioritize moderation have trouble attracting revenue and experience significant compliance costs. See: the sad story of Moot, who ran one of the…

>Moot, who ran one of the most popular social websites in the world and ended up with absolutely nothing to show for it.

4chan? not really a 'social media' website. I think he did a good thing making it and we need more spaces like this in a more restrictive internet space

Post reply on HN