X says it is worth $19B, down from $44B last year

After the bankruptcy, you’ll see what he had brewing all along.

I'm sorry for doing this, but I'm going to defer to ChatGPT 4, as it does a better job than I could at explaining why I'm not convinced by what you're saying to believe it's any better now that Musk owns Twitter.

1. Instances of deceit, irrationality, or fallacious reasoning:

- The claim "it's not working with the US Gov to censor free speech that's proven to be true after the fact" suggests that because something is proven true later, it was necessarily censored for being true. This is a post hoc fallacy.

- Labeling disapproved "disinformation" as "literally the hallmark of fascism" is a slippery slope fallacy, as it makes an extreme conclusion based on limited data.

- The claim that Twitter banned "the post for putting up The Laptop Story" and connects it with the FBI "literally lying about 'russia'" makes an assumption of causation without clear evidence.

- The comparison "scary freedom is better than the safety of slavery" is a false dichotomy, suggesting only two extreme options exist.

2. Overt emotional appeals or attempts to manipulate the reader's emotions:

- Using terms like "biggest scandals of our time," "hallmark of fascism," and "safety of slavery" are emotionally charged phrases meant to evoke strong reactions from the reader.

- The phrase "drum roll!" is an attempt to heighten anticipation and add emphasis to the subsequent statement.

- "I understand that's scary" acknowledges the emotional weight of the topic, attempting to resonate with readers who might feel the same.

3. Summary of the Overall Approach:

The text primarily employs emotional appeals and fallacious reasoning to make its points. While it presents some claims as factual, it lacks concrete evidence or logical argumentation to support them. Instead, it relies on emotionally charged phrases and extreme comparisons to drive home its perspective. The text does not align strongly with Enlightenment values of reason, evidence, and logical argumentation. Instead, it leans heavily on emotional and manipulative tactics.

Edit (to add my rational for why I'm not convinced it's any better):

Like ChatGPT points out, the arguments against the prior Twitter and for the new I don't find fully logical or evidenced.

And in my view, the transition of Twitter to private ownership under Elon Musk pose challenges to its role as a guardian of free speech, compared to its time as a publicly traded company.

This change potentially alters the checks and balances in place, as the discourse and recourse now largely rest on Elon's discretion. And possibly on Elon's creditors, which some of them are questionable.

Previously, various stakeholders could critique and influence Twitter's policies, fostering a level of transparency. Now, this dynamic is gone.

So I'm left to take Elon's personal guarantee. To believe his claim that he's a good dictator. That he won't leave his personal beliefs and interests bias his platform. And to believe that it will end up being an overall net positive to truth seeking, and not devolve into another tool that helps falsehoods spread while truth erodes.

Even if he does manage to do all that for some time, being privately held isn't a robust mechanism to protect free speech and promote truth long term. If he worked to somehow democratize, create check and bounds, and all that, I'll change my mind.

Sure.

Musk was always very 'optimistic' about Tesla goals and timeline estimates. That's fine (I guess) when you're a small company trying to achieve a major breakthrough. And they did actually deliver and started to mass produce EV cars - absolutely impressive result.

But in the process, Musk also started to promise more and more impossible things, on a bigger and bigger scale - FSD (almost 10 years ?), Robotaxis (!), Tesla's cars as 'appreciating assets', Boring Company, recently Optimus, AI, Tesla Semi, Cybertruck. Infinite demand that he claimed on investors earning call (he knew the real numbers) ?

The scale of optimism varies of course here. Tesla Semi for example ? Announced 6 years ago, officially started deliveries 1 year ago. In reality, those are prototype trucks, with specs and price being kept secret.

Another interesting one is the deal with Hertz - in October 2021, they announced a deal with Tesla, in which they supposedly bought 100k Teslas. Tesla stock skyrocketed (something like +50% in 3 weeks), to hit its all time high share price beginning of November 2021. It turns out (as announced by Hertz last week) that they only bought 35k Tesla's so far.

It's fine to say with huge optimism you're tackling a big problem when you're a 50 persons startup. It's another thing to say that you are in the process of building and close to delivering them as a huge public company, whose valuation is higher than 10 next competitors combined (when said competitors are doing >x10 sales).

And it's an entirely different thing, when the main character of the story, sells almost $40B of stock (!!!) at the peak of the hype he created. To give some perspective, $40B is the entire valuation of Ford, or GM. And he sold with excellent timing too. Remember this Hertz story - October 2021, then shares hit 400$ (all time high) beginning November 2021. Elon Musk starts selling on 8 November 2021.

Can you give an example of any of these places that get universally used and cited by news organizations and politicians the world over?

I actually saw that when finding the quote but was too lazy to go deep into it. Yeah, it's not Voltaire quoted but her paraphrase.

I think free speech is like all our other rights - absolute but your rights end where the rights of others begin. Which is a wonderful paradox in which to live.

You have the right to self defense but don't have the right to own a nuke. You have a right to speak freely but not to defame/slander/incite violence. The question isn't are those rights yours but where your right ends and the line between your rights and mine.

It's still probably my favorite quote - especially as a veteran - even if, like a lot of things, its not exactly 100% accurate lol.

I should put it as "Voltaire, misquoted by Hall"

My other favorite quote is:

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Clash of Kings