31–40 of 642 posts
The strongest evidence against Musk was Musk. His own 2017 emails supporting for-profit chats made the "betrayal" narrative very hard to sell.
Muskys problem is does things in the moment as a way to increase popularity without thinking that end up bitting him. e.g the twitter thing - forced to buy when he didn't want.
Ending a trial over a bureaucratic technicality is not good justice.
The strongest evidence against Musk was Musk. His own 2017 emails supporting for-profit chats made the "betrayal" narrative very hard to sell.
Muskys problem is does things in the moment as a way to increase popularity without thinking that end up bitting him. e.g the twitter thing - forced to buy when he didn't want.
The strongest evidence against Musk was Musk. His own 2017 emails supporting for-profit chats made the "betrayal" narrative very hard to sell.
Muskys problem is does things in the moment as a way to increase popularity without thinking that end up bitting him. e.g the twitter thing - forced to buy when he didn't want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He lost in the sense that he filed a lawsuit and that lawsuit was dismissed. It seems like a reasonable way to use the word, no?
Obviously so. You're either responding to an LLM or a badly malfunctioning human.
Sam is just too good at this game and as I said before [0] is far worse than Elon and also outsmarted him. Of course this will be appealed but, as you see the claims just don't stick. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41651664
Why do you think Sam is worse than Elon?
Ending a trial over a bureaucratic technicality is not good justice.
Reached for comment by TechCrunch, Musk’s lead counsel Marc Toberoff said, “One word: Appeal.” One wonders on what grounds? In the UK, in a civil case like this, the judge I think comments on the likelihood of an appeal avenue once the verdict has been reached.
[flagged]