“Genius businessman” mmhm. Total grift. Idiot. In any other world he’d be living in a trailer park with trump flags all over his truck, working at Walmart yelling at brown people.
You know, I 100% agree with your assessment of Musk. It’s just that you’re saying this about something that Musk has nothing to do with except actively opposing it. The subheader:
Judge hasn’t ruled on X Corp’s preliminary injunction, but Operation Bluebird plows ahead
It’s such trivial, basic etiquette to read beyond the headline before commenting on the article you’re supposed to be discussing. I’m really sick of wading through comments by lazy assholes who’ve spent more time vomiting out their gut reaction to the headline than just sitting down and reading for 30 seconds.
Reddit was bad about this, but Lemmy is somehow fucking next-level.
The headline itself is already clear this isn’t Musk’s. Why would the new Twitter be saying Musk gave up the name if it were run by Musk?
Even if it wasn’t (it is), the subheader is abundantly clear.
Ars is a solid, well-written source with a good reputation for not wasting waste your time with churnalism or clickbait.
Just running through some common excuses people who refuse to read use to shift their profound, utter laziness onto anyone but themselves.
I read it, I know its not him. I was referring to how stupid he was for changing the name of an insanely popular household term. Absolute idiocy becuase of his ego loving the letter x.
Its like Kleenex changing their name to bleepoopy and demanding everyone now say get me a bleepoopy I have a runny nose. Utter idiocy.
I was referring to how stupid he was for changing the name of an insanely popular household term.
Okay. I un-downvoted, but I think you should consider rewriting, because right now, it reads like you’re calling the new Twitter a Musk grift. That’s not just me; the second-top comment seems to be referring to your comment but politely not mentioning it by name.
As for the grift part, it’s complicated, because on the one hand, it was a bald-faced grift going in where he meant to manipulate the stock market (his repeated attempts to back out prove that). But on the other, having to complete that deal meant he gained control of one of the largest social media networks in the world. And he’s clearly been using that to political ends that are hard to qualify but probably – given the extreme worldwide rise in right-wing authoritarianism – fairly successful.
(Assuming it made a difference getting Trump into office, that $44 billion is probably well paid off through political corruption alone.)
For context for future readers, current comment is just:
“Genius businessman” mmhm. Total grift. Idiot. In any other world he’d be living in a trailer park with trump flags all over his truck, working at Walmart yelling at brown people.
“Genius businessman” mmhm. Total grift. Idiot. In any other world he’d be living in a trailer park with trump flags all over his truck, working at Walmart yelling at brown people.
Edit: See comments below
You know, I 100% agree with your assessment of Musk. It’s just that you’re saying this about something that Musk has nothing to do with except actively opposing it. The subheader:
It’s such trivial, basic etiquette to read beyond the headline before commenting on the article you’re supposed to be discussing. I’m really sick of wading through comments by lazy assholes who’ve spent more time vomiting out their gut reaction to the headline than just sitting down and reading for 30 seconds.
Reddit was bad about this, but Lemmy is somehow fucking next-level.
Just running through some common excuses people who refuse to read use to shift their profound, utter laziness onto anyone but themselves.
I read it, I know its not him. I was referring to how stupid he was for changing the name of an insanely popular household term. Absolute idiocy becuase of his ego loving the letter x.
Its like Kleenex changing their name to bleepoopy and demanding everyone now say get me a bleepoopy I have a runny nose. Utter idiocy.
Okay. I un-downvoted, but I think you should consider rewriting, because right now, it reads like you’re calling the new Twitter a Musk grift. That’s not just me; the second-top comment seems to be referring to your comment but politely not mentioning it by name.
As for the grift part, it’s complicated, because on the one hand, it was a bald-faced grift going in where he meant to manipulate the stock market (his repeated attempts to back out prove that). But on the other, having to complete that deal meant he gained control of one of the largest social media networks in the world. And he’s clearly been using that to political ends that are hard to qualify but probably – given the extreme worldwide rise in right-wing authoritarianism – fairly successful.
(Assuming it made a difference getting Trump into office, that $44 billion is probably well paid off through political corruption alone.)
For context for future readers, current comment is just:
Ah yeah I can see that.