America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 38,707 comments
  • 1,594,613 views

If I quite Twitter, that means I have quit all social media. I never did MySpace back in the day, I've quit Instagram, and Facebook. With Musk buying Twitter, I'll probably quit it, too.
 
If I quite Twitter, that means I have quit all social media. I never did MySpace back in the day, I've quit Instagram, and Facebook. With Musk buying Twitter, I'll probably quit it, too.
I find this hilarious.

Either way, as I said before, I'm only on Twitter to follow people in the space industry and the local DOT for road status updates. None of this has any effect on me.
 
I find this hilarious.

Either way, as I said before, I'm only on Twitter to follow people in the space industry and the local DOT for road status updates. None of this has any effect on me.
Why did Musk spend 44 Billion dollars to buy Twitter? Surely that is going to affect Tesla and SpaceX.
 
The compulsion to cape for one's tech daddy isn't easily stifled.

Speaking of ol' Mollusk...

 
Why did Musk spend 44 Billion dollars to buy Twitter? Surely that is going to affect Tesla and SpaceX.
Tesla maybe just because the SEC doesn't like what he has to say on there and he's been in hot water regarding Tesla before. SpaceX, highly doubt it.
 
The compulsion to cape for one's tech daddy isn't easily stifled.

Speaking of ol' Mollusk...


But isn't cancelling the order a form of free speech? No seller is obligated to sell to people they don't want to sell to, and no buyer is entitled to a seller's goods. If the seller doesn't want to do business with the buyer then that's the way it goes.

As for the ex-SEC lawyer working at a private firm, are we not almost universally against former government employees moving to work for private entities because they can use their insider knowledge to influence decisions and gain favor for their company with future government officials?

If I remember right, both of these things are hallmarks of libertarian thought in America.
 
As for the ex-SEC lawyer working at a private firm, are we not almost universally against former government employees moving to work for private entities because they can use their insider knowledge to influence decisions and gain favor for their company with future government officials?
Except that has nothing to do with why he wanted him fired.
A lawyer for Tesla asked a law firm to fire one its attorneys or risk losing its work for the electric automaker led by Elon Musk, The Wall Street Journal reported Saturday.

The lawyer that Tesla wanted Cooley LLP to fire previously worked at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The attorney interviewed Musk in the agency’s probe into the Tesla CEO’s 2018 claim that he obtained funding to take Tesla private, according to the publication. The investigation led to a settlement under which Musk and Tesla agreed to pay a $20 million fine each and Musk agreed to step down for three years as Tesla chairman.

Tesla’s lawyer late last year asked Cooley to fire the attorney who worked on the SEC investigation, the Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The firm did not remove the associate.

Tesla has moved to replace Cooley or hire additional lawyers on several cases since December, according to the Journal.
This was a scenario of, "This guy played a role in costing me money with a different party. I'm threatening to stop doing business with you if you don't fire him."
 
Last edited:
But isn't cancelling the order a form of free speech? No seller is obligated to sell to people they don't want to sell to, and no buyer is entitled to a seller's goods. If the seller doesn't want to do business with the buyer then that's the way it goes.
The action isn't inconsistent with actual real free speech, which is speech not subject to penalty or retaliation by state actors. It may be a stretch to consider the action a form of expression, but it's still a private actor exercising freedom of choice. The action is inconsistent with Musk's personal distorted view of free speech, which is itself inconsistent with actual real free speech. Musk would seemingly have any private actor other than himself constrained and unable to retaliate this way when another expresses themself in a disfavorable manner.

Counter to what Musk has alluded to, Twitter operates in a manner entirely consistent with actual real free speech...because Twitter isn't a state actor. What's more, Twitter has actually fought for the free speech rights of users when state actors have come knocking.

As for the ex-SEC lawyer working at a private firm, are we not almost universally against former government employees moving to work for private entities because they can use their insider knowledge to influence decisions and gain favor for their company with future government officials?
Are we?
 
Last edited:
Its not about the money. But then I don't expect any of his haters to think otherwise. You'll hate anything he does, even if it is truly for a good cause.
sad cry GIF
 
You are a great example of the type of people this planet would be better off without. 👌 Always against progress, no matter how good it is. Jealousy is a terrible thing.
I've been far too lenient with your utterly childish outbursts and temper tantrums, but if you ever say this to anyone here again, GTPlanet would be better off without you.

And, no, I'm not deleting your post. I'm going to leave it right where it is so everyone can see exactly the kind of person you are when you're utterly incapable of challenging anything without resorting to the lowest of insults.

There will not be another warning from me. You'll just be gone.
 
Back