chasfh Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 14 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: well it's an interesting question. You'd think at 100. 200 billion, you wouldn't care about the $, but it never seems to go that way. Maybe it's just the competiveness about not being a 'loser', and Musk is potentially a huge loser on Tesla stock, which I really have a hard time believing is not going to drop another 75% before it's done. So I still tend to think that somehow he wants to turn Twitter into a win financially. Which is not to say it might not be a totally different product once he's done with it. It’s not all his money in Twitter, anyway, so I think he’s gonna be OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 Yup, it checks out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleterious Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 People have been doing that for years. You could always change your display name to anything you wanted. The @ part is the one you could never change and still cant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben9753 Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 2 hours ago, Deleterious said: People have been doing that for years. You could always change your display name to anything you wanted. The @ part is the one you could never change and still cant. I could be wrong, but I think if you were verified, you risked loosing your blue checkmark if you messed with your display name. Since it was a rare thing to get the checkmark, people didn't want to lose it for a prank. Now that anyone can get it, it's gonna be a free for all. Fun times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 4 hours ago, Deleterious said: People have been doing that for years. You could always change your display name to anything you wanted. The @ part is the one you could never change and still cant. Meaning they can change their name to a celebrity and also acquire the blue check-mark for it? Didn't know that. I wonder how come none of the stories of the past few days mention you can already do that? Also, apparently, Twitter has forced a name change back to valerie bertinelli (in all small letters on purpose?), because when I first posted that tweet (as a link), it did say Elon Musk (capitalized). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleterious Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 20 minutes ago, chasfh said: Meaning they can change their name to a celebrity and also acquire the blue check-mark for it? Didn't know that. I wonder how come none of the stories of the past few days mention you can already do that? Also, apparently, Twitter has forced a name change back to valerie bertinelli (in all small letters on purpose?), because when I first posted that tweet (as a link), it did say Elon Musk (capitalized). Because journalists suck. You don't acquire the check mark for the display name, you get it for the account name which is @elonmusk. But your display name could always be changed to anything you want as often as you wanted. Musk himself has changed his display name quite a few times. He had Elona Musk at one point for some reason. Here is a screenshot with him showing as Lorde Edge. I don't think Lorde Edge was verified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 6, 2022 Share Posted November 6, 2022 lol "Tröllheim". Yeah, no shit ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted November 8, 2022 Share Posted November 8, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted November 10, 2022 Share Posted November 10, 2022 (edited) Republicans in disarray This sounds strange coming from one of the biggest disrupters in the Senate and one of the leaders in the Jan 6 stuff Edited November 10, 2022 by CMRivdogs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted November 10, 2022 Share Posted November 10, 2022 More Republicans in disarray.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted November 11, 2022 Share Posted November 11, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motor City Sonics Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 On 11/6/2022 at 9:29 AM, chasfh said: Yup, it checks out. Repeal the 22nd ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbomb13 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 (edited) At least watching Twitter burn to the ground has been entertaining. Both are fake. Edited November 12, 2022 by Tigerbomb13 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted November 12, 2022 Author Share Posted November 12, 2022 28 minutes ago, Tigerbomb13 said: At least watching Twitter burn to the ground has been entertaining. Both are fake. You would hope that these are actionable in court. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 2 minutes ago, romad1 said: You would hope that these are actionable in court. unlikely. At least vs the poster. The argument would be that any reasonable person would know it was parody. Whether Chiquita would have a case againt Twitter might be more interesting but I would guess also difficult - besides they are going to be broke soon so blood from a turnip and all..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted November 12, 2022 Author Share Posted November 12, 2022 3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: unlikely. At least vs the poster. The argument would be that any reasonable person would know it was parody. Whether Chiquita would have a case againt Twitter might be more interesting but I would guess also difficult - besides they are going to be broke soon so blood from a turnip and all..... The latter would be what I'd hope occurs. The CEO should have known that eliminating the checks and balances against fraud wholesale on a public facing system would result in these shenanigans and he is therefore responsible for the damages to any corporation or person that resulted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 5 hours ago, Tigerbomb13 said: At least watching Twitter burn to the ground has been entertaining. Both are fake. Since 1954 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 (edited) 4 hours ago, romad1 said: The latter would be what I'd hope occurs. The CEO should have known that eliminating the checks and balances against fraud wholesale on a public facing system would result in these shenanigans and he is therefore responsible for the damages to any corporation or person that resulted. It’s a trap. Trump et al will use this as proof of concept that Section 230 must be repealed, since Democrats will be on board with prosecuting Twitter, i.e. “an interactive computer service”, for content posted by a Twitter user, i.e. “another information content provider”. Edited November 12, 2022 by chasfh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted November 12, 2022 Author Share Posted November 12, 2022 46 minutes ago, chasfh said: It’s a trap. Trump et al will use this as proof of concept that Section 230 must be repealed, since Democrats will be on board with prosecuting Twitter, i.e. “an interactive computer service”, for content posted by a Twitter user, i.e. “another information content provider”. True. The entire work serves people who want to control information Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 Oh, good God almighty ... If by any stretch the corrupt influence of the fascists is finally sufficiently on the wane, can we please do something to stop this already! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 19 minutes ago, chasfh said: Oh, good God almighty ... If by any stretch the corrupt influence of the fascists is finally sufficiently on the wane, can we please do something to stop this already! Saudi and Emirati money has been buying US pols since the 60's if anyone had ever been interested in noticing. 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted November 12, 2022 Share Posted November 12, 2022 14 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Saudi and Emirati money has been buying US pols since the 60's if anyone had ever been interested in noticing. 🤷♂️ I don't care how long it's been going on. That doesn't legitimize it. It's never the wrong time to put a stop to it. Maybe the door to do so is starting to crack open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Cowan Posted November 13, 2022 Share Posted November 13, 2022 Oh My Goodness. Dave Chappelle just did 18 minutes at the start of SNL. It's the best socio-political commentary of anyone out there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.