Elon Musk: Officially a fraud and piece of shit. Official or unofficial war criminal?

[Hanrahan 1306]

 

 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Hanrahan

[gsoda3 3251]

Subpoenaing sacks is such a waste of time.

[MrBig 5385]

On 8/21/2022 at 5:01 PM, Francisco 2.0 said:

Tesla raising the price of their self driving software by $3000 next month, to $15,000.

$15,000 for beta software that might run over people, veer your car into the other lane, etc.

I guess I'm just too old because even if I had the means, there is no way in hell I'm paying $15,000 for an option that is in beta and does not work with 100% accuracy, and probably never will.

 

 

$15000 for FSD? It’s become Elon’s version of OnlyFans. People are paying extra for something only a select few will ever experience.

[Wally Fairway 5541]

20 hours ago, MrBig said:

$15000 for FSD? It’s become Elon’s version of OnlyFans. People are paying extra for something only a select few will ever experience.

So you're telling me there's a chance

[totallynotabuttpirate 5395]

"Elon Musk texted before Twitter deal that 'drastic' action was needed to tackle bots"

 

 

 

Spoiler

Elon Musk texted before Twitter deal that 'drastic' action was needed to tackle bots

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s text messages, made public Thursday in his legal dispute with Twitter (TWTR), show he communicated about its fake account issues both before and after agreeing to buy it for $44 billion.

The revelation that he acknowledged those issues prior to the deal could be important because Musk cited the prevalence of fake accounts on Twitter as his key reason for backing out of the agreement on July 8. Twitter, for its part, claimed his stated concern about fake accounts was a pretext for ditching the deal and sued him four days later to force him to go through with it.

Fake accounts, also known as bots, can spread misinformation and scare off advertisers, who want to sell ads to real people. Musk told a Twitter board member back in April — before he agreed to buy Twitter — that "drastic" action was necessary to tackle bots, according to the newly released text messages.

“This is hard to do as a public company, as purging fake users will make the numbers look terrible, so restructuring should be done as a private company,” he said.

“This is Jack’s opinion too,” Musk said, referring to Twitter co-founder and former CEO Jack Dorsey.

In trying to back out of the deal, Musk said Twitter lied to securities regulators when it reported that bots or spam accounts make up less than 5% of its monetizable user accounts. He says Twitter refused to give him data that would let him independently calculate those figures; the company says Musk waived his right to that data.

Musk's knowledge about the platform's spam and bot account troubles, the company's lawyers argue, shows Musk had taken the issue into account before he agreed to buy Twitter. The case is scheduled for a five-day trial starting on Oct. 17 in the Delaware Chancery Court.

The text messages emerged as part of a discovery process that has made headlines.

'The bot problem is severe'

In a March 31 text, Musk wrote about crypto spam on the platform, saying that it “really needs to get crushed. It’s a major blight to the user experience and they scam so many innocent people.”

Then on April 4, Musk became Twitter’s largest shareholder by acquiring a 9% stake and the next day, Twitter said he would join the board. The day after that, the animator and "Rick and Morty" co-creator Justin Roiland texted Musk to urge him to connect with two friends whose program he said could verify Twitter users as real versus a troll farm.

On April 7, Musk wrote to Twitter CEO Parag Agarwal asking for the company’s engineering team to help him understand the platform’s underlying technology during an upcoming meeting.

“I would like to understand the technical details of the Twitter codebase,” Musk texted ahead of a proposed meeting Agarwal suggested between Musk and Twitter engineers. “This will help me calibrate the dumbness of my suggestions.”

Then in an about-face On April 9, Musk messaged Agarwal that he wasn't joining the board because it would be “a waste of time.” Instead, Musk said, he'd make an offer to buy the company. Around the same time Musk exchanged messages with his brother, Kimbal Musk, saying he thought a new blockchain-based social media company was needed.

Minutes later Musk, messaged Twitter board member Bret Taylor, saying that continued chats with Agarwal would not fix Twitter and that “drastic action is needed.”

On April 14, Musk messaged Steve Davis, president of the Musk-backed Boring Company, describing a pay-to-post backup plan to a deal with Twitter. “My Plan B is a blockchain-based version of Twitter, where the ‘tweets’ are embedded in the transaction as comments,” he wrote.

However, Musk later wrote to Morgan Stanley's Michael Grimes, saying a blockchain-based Twitter was not possible due to bandwidth and latency issues.

In another April 14 message, angel investor Jason Calacanis messaged Musk: “You could easily clean up bots and spam and make the service viable for many more users — removing bots and spam is a lot less complicated than what the Tesla self driving team is doing.”

April 25, the day Musk and Twitter entered into the merger agreement, Musk told his son, James Musk, "The bot problem is severe."

On May 8, Musk wrote again to Morgan Stanley's Grimes: "An extremely fundamental due diligence item is understanding exactly how Twitter confirms that 95% of their daily active users are both real people and not double counted.

They couldn't answer that on Friday which is insane. If that number is 50% or lower, which is what I would guess based on my feed, then they have been fundamentally misrepresenting the value of Twitter to advertisers and investors. To be super clear, this deal moves forward if it passes due diligence, but obviously not if there are massive gaping issues. True user account is a showstopper if actually much lower than the 95% claimed."

In addition to texts over bots, Musk expressed concerns over the company's financials.

On June 17, Musk wrote to a recipient whose name is redacted, "Their revenue projections seem disconnected from reality."

 

[Gengs1 2583]

25 minutes ago, totallynotabuttpirate said:

"Elon Musk texted before Twitter deal that 'drastic' action was needed to tackle bots"

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Elon Musk texted before Twitter deal that 'drastic' action was needed to tackle bots

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s text messages, made public Thursday in his legal dispute with Twitter (TWTR), show he communicated about its fake account issues both before and after agreeing to buy it for $44 billion.

The revelation that he acknowledged those issues prior to the deal could be important because Musk cited the prevalence of fake accounts on Twitter as his key reason for backing out of the agreement on July 8. Twitter, for its part, claimed his stated concern about fake accounts was a pretext for ditching the deal and sued him four days later to force him to go through with it.

Fake accounts, also known as bots, can spread misinformation and scare off advertisers, who want to sell ads to real people. Musk told a Twitter board member back in April — before he agreed to buy Twitter — that "drastic" action was necessary to tackle bots, according to the newly released text messages.

“This is hard to do as a public company, as purging fake users will make the numbers look terrible, so restructuring should be done as a private company,” he said.

“This is Jack’s opinion too,” Musk said, referring to Twitter co-founder and former CEO Jack Dorsey.

In trying to back out of the deal, Musk said Twitter lied to securities regulators when it reported that bots or spam accounts make up less than 5% of its monetizable user accounts. He says Twitter refused to give him data that would let him independently calculate those figures; the company says Musk waived his right to that data.

Musk's knowledge about the platform's spam and bot account troubles, the company's lawyers argue, shows Musk had taken the issue into account before he agreed to buy Twitter. The case is scheduled for a five-day trial starting on Oct. 17 in the Delaware Chancery Court.

The text messages emerged as part of a discovery process that has made headlines.

'The bot problem is severe'

In a March 31 text, Musk wrote about crypto spam on the platform, saying that it “really needs to get crushed. It’s a major blight to the user experience and they scam so many innocent people.”

Then on April 4, Musk became Twitter’s largest shareholder by acquiring a 9% stake and the next day, Twitter said he would join the board. The day after that, the animator and "Rick and Morty" co-creator Justin Roiland texted Musk to urge him to connect with two friends whose program he said could verify Twitter users as real versus a troll farm.

On April 7, Musk wrote to Twitter CEO Parag Agarwal asking for the company’s engineering team to help him understand the platform’s underlying technology during an upcoming meeting.

“I would like to understand the technical details of the Twitter codebase,” Musk texted ahead of a proposed meeting Agarwal suggested between Musk and Twitter engineers. “This will help me calibrate the dumbness of my suggestions.”

Then in an about-face On April 9, Musk messaged Agarwal that he wasn't joining the board because it would be “a waste of time.” Instead, Musk said, he'd make an offer to buy the company. Around the same time Musk exchanged messages with his brother, Kimbal Musk, saying he thought a new blockchain-based social media company was needed.

Minutes later Musk, messaged Twitter board member Bret Taylor, saying that continued chats with Agarwal would not fix Twitter and that “drastic action is needed.”

On April 14, Musk messaged Steve Davis, president of the Musk-backed Boring Company, describing a pay-to-post backup plan to a deal with Twitter. “My Plan B is a blockchain-based version of Twitter, where the ‘tweets’ are embedded in the transaction as comments,” he wrote.

However, Musk later wrote to Morgan Stanley's Michael Grimes, saying a blockchain-based Twitter was not possible due to bandwidth and latency issues.

In another April 14 message, angel investor Jason Calacanis messaged Musk: “You could easily clean up bots and spam and make the service viable for many more users — removing bots and spam is a lot less complicated than what the Tesla self driving team is doing.”

April 25, the day Musk and Twitter entered into the merger agreement, Musk told his son, James Musk, "The bot problem is severe."

On May 8, Musk wrote again to Morgan Stanley's Grimes: "An extremely fundamental due diligence item is understanding exactly how Twitter confirms that 95% of their daily active users are both real people and not double counted.

They couldn't answer that on Friday which is insane. If that number is 50% or lower, which is what I would guess based on my feed, then they have been fundamentally misrepresenting the value of Twitter to advertisers and investors. To be super clear, this deal moves forward if it passes due diligence, but obviously not if there are massive gaping issues. True user account is a showstopper if actually much lower than the 95% claimed."

In addition to texts over bots, Musk expressed concerns over the company's financials.

On June 17, Musk wrote to a recipient whose name is redacted, "Their revenue projections seem disconnected from reality."

 

So he

On June 17, Musk wrote to a recipient whose name is redacted, "Their revenue projections seem disconnected from reality."

 

but let’s buy the company anyway 

[Guadaloopy 10960]

On 8/10/2022 at 2:33 PM, HenryJames said:

No car stops if the driver overrides safety systems by keeping their foot on the accelerator.

 

Full Disclosure:  I own a Model 3 with FSD beta and I am pretty damned impressed with the technology during real-world usage.

[Captainant 27639]

1 hour ago, Guadaloopy said:

Full Disclosure:  I own a Model 3 with FSD beta and I am pretty damned impressed with the technology during real-world usage.

I just have a problem with it calling itself "full self driving beta". It's nowhere near close to ready for fully autonomous drive, and it's ridiculous that they're charging people five figures for the privilege of being a guinea pig

[Guadaloopy 10960]

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

I just have a problem with it calling itself "full self driving beta". It's nowhere near close to ready for fully autonomous drive, and it's ridiculous that they're charging people five figures for the privilege of being a guinea pig

Tesla is not selling it as a complete product.  I think a lot of people who have bought are looking at it as an investment, and that’s how Elon is selling it.  It’s a  near-future capability that has the potential to be exceptionally valuable.  If Tesla can get level 5 certification in the next few years, all of the people who bought FSD early will now have a source of passive income by letting their car become part of the robotaxi fleet if they choose.  Your car could earn tens of thousands per year as a robotaxi and you own that capital.  If you believe in Elon’s vision (or just want to take a flyer), then buy FSD.  If not, don’t buy it.  

[Tailgate 3021]

Tesla AI Day about to go live. 8:15 CST.

 

 

Edited October 1, 2022 by Tailgate

[HenryJames 66038]

 

[Rudiger 1160]

8 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

Does it come with the three guys it apparently takes just to keep it upright?

[TKthunder2 4985]

7 minutes ago, Rudiger said:

Does it come with the three guys it apparently takes just to keep it upright?

That will cost an additional $20k.

[ultimaton 2966]

[F250 28764]

1 hour ago, HenryJames said:

 

Honda did this a couple of decades ago.

 

[TKthunder2 4985]

11 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

So, we’ve established that Tesla’s fully automated driving safety feature works perfectly as long as the driver doesn’t put their foot on the accelerator

I’m confused by these responses.  Do you want to be locked out of controlling your car when automated driving is on?  Disconnecting the steering wheel, accelerator and break pedal from their normal operations seems like it would entail significantly more cost and headache to the end user as well both operationally and for maintenance (can you image driving down the road and turning off self driving and the brake system not being able to reengage?). All in all the user override seems like it’s working as intended/designed and haters are just trying to hate because Elon says stupid thing they don’t agree with.

The robot is just dumb.

[Francisco 2.0 32389]

 

 

[Biff Tannen 45665]

3 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

God damn Elon.  Just god damn.  You fucking nincompoop.  

[MonkeyDoughnut 10229]

[MonkeyDoughnut 10229]

 

[JMFP 1120]

 

[crash_davis 23103]

[NoName 16351]

22 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

good comments here

• "At least he didn't hit it with a sledgehammer"
• Elon "Optimus makes toast, will cost $20,000, will be available sometime between 24 and 124 months."
• Id be more stunned if he just stopped impregnating his employees
• For sure he does. Btw I just had a mid tier 6 axis robot arm with a standard a camera vision system quoted for basic palletising of parts for use at my workplace.. It was 60,000 Canadian and that's before it has been programmed to do anything. I feel quite confident now that Elon is full to the brim of shit.
• I feel like all the engineers behind this droid quiet quitted two years ago.

the last one is great.

[Chopper 17230]

Holy fuck, as if the release of all the texts between el*n and jack dorsey last week weren't proof positive, that proof now exists: el*n is a gd regard.

[Captainant 27639]

 

ol' muskey is doing his best neville chamberlain impression thinking you can appease a fascist that's prosecuting a war of aggression

[NoName 16351]

7 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Holy fuck, as if the release of all the texts between el*n and jack dorsey last week weren't proof positive, that proof now exists: el*n is a gd regard.

Russia spinning up more troll farms as we speak:

[F250 28764]

 

[MeerkatBong 115]

15 minutes ago, longhornmatt said:

I just want to reiterate that people support Tesla’s valuation by claiming that Tesla is going to be the leader in (a) solving the energy crisis, and/or (b) making all transportation fully automated.  Because, you know, they’re so way ahead of the curve.

The one thing Tesla seems to be good at is making a car people want: "Tesla delivered 343,830 cars globally in Q3, a company record but lower than forecast."

[wildcat09 29347]

 

I think this means Ukraine owns Tesla now.

[F250 28764]

27 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

 

I think this means Ukraine owns Tesla now.

 

[Chopper 17230]

1 hour ago, NoName said:

Russia spinning up more troll farms as we speak:

Yeah the russian version of fox news will be running with that tweet today and tomorrow, just like they do with Tucker Qarlson.

[Bama Chick 28596]

[F250 28764]

 

[JMFP 1120]

On 8/5/2022 at 2:36 PM, Armybrat said:

Well, A. G. Bell capitalized on others’ work, not to mention the charlatan Tommy Edison. There was a real asshole.

Yeah old quote, but I'm a few Bulliets in and this has stuck with me a while...

 

Edison stole the man's work and Elon stole the man's name. Why would you name your business after someone else? Reminds me of Nissan using Datsun to protect themselves in case they failed.

[MeerkatBong 115]

6 hours ago, JMFP said:

Yeah old quote, but I'm a few Bulliets in and this has stuck with me a while...

 

Edison stole the man's work and Elon stole the man's name. Why would you name your business after someone else? Reminds me of Nissan using Datsun to protect themselves in case they failed.

Reminds me of the mollywags naming the car the Edsel.

[52-80 19147]

14 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

We should have a referendum on whether Elon Musk gets to keep all his Tesla ownership or whether it should be distributed to the people overseeing the referendum.  Because, after all, Tesla was owned by others before (until their mistake).

That's a great idea.  All the shareholders (i.e. electorates) should get together to vote on all matters of governance of Tesla.  You could call it an "annual shareholders meeting".  They could also vote on how much ownership (i.e. equity) to bestow upon Elon, like they did in the years 2012 and 2018.

 

Have you shared this idea with Tesla's IR department?

[Storm the Field 5294]

19 hours ago, F250 said:

 

In what manner would Russia's maximum bargaining stance differ from Elon's proposal here? I think they'd be happy will all except for a re-do of their sham elections (in territories already being reclaimed). 

"We keep all the additional territories we've claimed in this invasion, you forego any claim to Crimea, and agree never to join NATO. In return, we'll quit making nuclear threats that have the Elon Musks and Clint Ehrlichs of the world crying on Twitter."

[Kringelbert Fishtybuns 943]

20 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

Oh, now he’s done it!  Because of that snarky response, Elon is about to send Russia a bunch of advanced stealth technology that makes Russian vehicles completely undetectable unless you have radar or satellite or binoculars.

Ukraine won’t be laughing when Russia rolls up in a battalion of Homers.

[Reynolds Woodcock 4739]

Apparently child king has submitted settlement to the court under seal to proceed on the original terms. Coincidently, he was scheduled to be deposed as soon as the end of this week.

Edit to add link:

 

Edited October 4, 2022 by Reynolds Woodcock

[Nivek 16923]

Just send some criminals to his house demanding a million each or they will start shooting.   I mean it would be easier for him to just give over the money rather than have his property and security guards shoot it out.  

[Reynolds Woodcock 4739]

1 minute ago, longhornmatt said:

Hardcore street fighting like … “settling” for exactly the terms Twitter is demanding in the lawsuit.

ALPHA!!

THERE WILL BE BLOOD!

[wildcat09 29347]

Shit, all of Twitter clowned him so hard yesterday he's going to buy it for full price just to delete the entire day from Twitter history.

[Brian Fantana 6681]

On 10/1/2022 at 12:19 PM, TKthunder2 said:

I’m confused by these responses.  Do you want to be locked out of controlling your car when automated driving is on?  Disconnecting the steering wheel, accelerator and break pedal from their normal operations seems like it would entail significantly more cost and headache to the end user as well both operationally and for maintenance (can you image driving down the road and turning off self driving and the brake system not being able to reengage?). All in all the user override seems like it’s working as intended/designed and haters are just trying to hate because Elon says stupid thing they don’t agree with.

The robot is just dumb.

I don't understand. Not a Tesla driver, but in my car (not fully self drive but has all the currently available driver assist features), all of those systems remain engaged (aside from adaptive cruise when you press the brake pedal) even if I override them by turning the wheel, accelerating, whatever, unless I actively switch them off. Seems to me like the Tesla self drive systems should be able to remain in operation even if the user performs some kind of correction.

[swraith 346]

What a strange 24 hours for Musk.

[52-80 19147]

1 hour ago, longhornmatt said:

Right, because voting on governance matters or to give him more stock options is obviously the same as confiscating all his vested equity - including the portion he bought - for no compensation.  That’s how property rights and corporate governance work.  Sometimes, at the annual meeting the shareholders get to vote on whether to murder the CEO, too.

Awesome post, bro.

Right, voting on governance matters is not enough, they should be able to vote for the actual group of people standing at the highest echelon of authority, kinda like a body of government, and they can appoint other folks with specific administrative duties. 
 

What would you call such people, and why hasnt this been tried before?

[TKthunder2 4985]

31 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

I don't understand. Not a Tesla driver, but in my car (not fully self drive but has all the currently available driver assist features), all of those systems remain engaged (aside from adaptive cruise when you press the brake pedal) even if I override them by turning the wheel, accelerating, whatever, unless I actively switch them off. Seems to me like the Tesla self drive systems should be able to remain in operation even if the user performs some kind of correction.

You’re in adaptive cruise with lane correction/assist.

You hit the brake, the brakes engage and the car slows.

You hit the accelerator, the car speeds up.

You turn the wheel and the car turns (at best you feel a little resistance that you can override with more pressure).

The argument here is that if you do full self drive and hit the accelerator that the car should NOT speed up. Tesla behaves the way other cars do, and that’s as designed.

Elon has stupid takes (see his recent tweets), but people attacking Tesla’s self driving technology mostly have ulterior motives.

[Brian Fantana 6681]

4 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re in adaptive cruise with lane correction/assist.

You hit the brake, the brakes engage and the car slows.

You hit the accelerator, the car speeds up.

You turn the wheel and the car turns (at best you feel a little resistance that you can override with more pressure).

The argument here is that if you do full self drive and hit the accelerator that the car should NOT speed up. Tesla behaves the way other cars do, and that’s as designed.

Elon has stupid takes (see his recent tweets), but people attacking Tesla’s self driving technology mostly have ulterior motives.

I see, yeah, that's the way it should work. There's plenty to attack wrt Tesla without making shit up for sure.

[wildcat09 29347]

14 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re in adaptive cruise with lane correction/assist.

You hit the brake, the brakes engage and the car slows.

You hit the accelerator, the car speeds up.

You turn the wheel and the car turns (at best you feel a little resistance that you can override with more pressure).

The argument here is that if you do full self drive and hit the accelerator that the car should NOT speed up. Tesla behaves the way other cars do, and that’s as designed.

Elon has stupid takes (see his recent tweets), but people attacking Tesla’s self driving technology mostly have ulterior motives.

Damned us dastardly critics for not wanting children to get run over by cars.

[chainsaw 9859]

I'll believe it when the check clears.

[crash_davis 23103]