Tesla cancels the CyberTruck!

[Skully]

No, this is misrepresenting the issue. What people are pointing out is that for all of Musk's claims of free speech absolutism, he clearly isn't upholding it.

People rightfully were pointing out that free speech absolutism is not a tenable position when running such a platform. None of these people are under the illusion that Twitter has to platform their opinions; they understand that it's a private company and it can do what it wants. But when that company claims to be all about free speech, yet is banning people, they point out the hypocrisy.

Of course, there is some outrage over what in particular is and isn't banned. But that isn't about free speech per se, it's just about disagreeing about the particular moderation policy.

You're talking about Musk personally being a hypocrite. He is in some ways. I'm not really a fan. The way he's handled employees at Twitter has made me blanch.

I'm talking about his overall effect on the platform and society in general. To me, that is the big issue. I think the complaints about Musk are really a covert vehicle for grievances that are hard to justify.

 

[maxvintage]

You're misrepresenting the issue. First of all, back when Musk didn't own Twitter, people defending its enforcement policies were saying, "It's a privately owned company, the First Amendment doesn't apply." And they were correct. Now that they feel that the script has flipped, they're outraged that the private company might be operating under that very philosophy. That's some hypocrisy.

On balance, I think that Musk’s purchase of Twitter is a good thing. The hysterical reactions are very revealing. I don’t think people are really afraid of racism and hate being propagated. I think they don’t like their worldview -- effectively a secular religion -- being questioned and they really hate the idea that the power to control the conversation and the culture, and in many ways effectively define reality, is being taken away from them and those they perceive to be their allies. I don’t want the other side to define it, either, and I think it’s sad and counterproductive for people to flee platform. Bubbles need to be punctured all around. But, honestly, I think the number of people jumping ship is overstated – a lot of harrumphing and departure announcements with no follow-through.

I'm not misrepresenting the issue at all! You are.

It's odd to characterize the reactions of people you disgree with as "hysterical." Earlier you mentioed the idea that people were "losing their minds," and now you think people leaving twitter because of Musk are being hypocritical.

As I mentioned before, I'm neither hysterical, nor losing my mind nor being hypocritical. Musk has the right to run it as he sees fit: I have the right not to participate. This is exactly the same argument I would make defending Twitter before he bought it. It's not even remotely hypocritical.

You don't need to sell me on the importance of fact--I've been spending most of the day fixing and checking the footnotes in a book I'm writing. I'm a historian for a living. Is this "a secular religion?" Who is charge of the church of the secular religion? Does it have a Pope?

You're on a crusade here, against "political correctness" and you've elaborated a bunch of straw enemies out to control the world. As is common, you're conflating an idea of free speech with some sort of obligation to treat all speech equally. I'm happy to learn about other points of view and engage with new ideas. You would be surprised. I'm not happy to waste my time with junk "research" done via YouTube videos or Joe Rogan. I mean sure, be entertained enjoy, whatever, let him speak, but I'm under no obligation: I can go to the work of the person he's interviewing or I can do my own actual research in the primary sources on which the guest draws. There's no definition of free speech that requires me to take Alex Jones, for example, seriously as a journalist or a moral actor.

 

[bottlenecker]

It would that a management style such as Musk's works when you have very clear objectives; like "get a rocket into space within some time frame".

www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/z2ofwk/i_was_an_intern_at_spacex_years_ago_back_it_when/

How much more capable and successful might space x have been if they hadn't needed to manage elon? I think it's a credible account in the link above. His management style is being managed by others, which explains what's going on with twitter because there's no one to do it there.

 

[Linderflomann]

I'm talking about his overall effect on the platform and society in general. To me, that is the big issue.

That's a different argument altogether. Your point was that these people were hypocrites for complaining about the current bans; yet they aren't because they never claimed Twitter should be a free speech platform. They just disagree with the moderation currently in place, and they're entirely consistent in that.

 

[maxvintage]

www.reddit.com/r/EnoughMuskSpam/comments/z2ofwk/i_was_an_intern_at_spacex_years_ago_back_it_when/

How much more capable and successful might space x have been if they hadn't needed to manage elon? I think it's a credible account in the link above. His management style is being managed by others, which explains what's going on with twitter because there's no one to do it there.

We had a neighbor who worked in DC for Tesla, as a lawyer. He owned a Tesla and admired Musk making Tesla happen, but he said Musk was a dick: mercurial and capricious. He said he was routinely fired--Musk would demand something, he would respond, Musk would tell him he was fired; he would ignore it, an then Musk would call later with a question or a demand as if nothing had ever happened. Kind of amusing from distance, but he seemed pretty worn out by it.

 

[Skully]

I'm not misrepresenting the issue at all! You are.

It's odd to characterize the reactions of people you disgree with as "hysterical." Earlier you mentioed the idea that people were "losing their minds," and now you think people leaving twitter because of Musk are being hypocritical.

As I mentioned before, I'm neither hysterical, nor losing my mind nor being hypocritical. Musk has the right to run it as he sees fit: I have the right not to participate. This is exactly the same argument I would make defending Twitter before he bought. it. It's not even remotely hypocritical.

You don't need to sell me on the importance of fact--I've been spending most of the day fixing and checking the footnotes in a book I'm writing. I'm a historian for a living. Is this "a secular religion?" Who is charge of the church of the secular religion? Does it have a Pope?

You're on a crusade here, against "political correctness" and you've elaborated a bunch of straw enemies out to control the world. As is common, you're conflating an idea of free speech with some sort of obligation to treat all speech equally. I'm happy to learn about other points of view and engage with new ideas. You would be surprised. I'm not happy to waste my time with junk "research" done via YouTube videos or Joe Rogan. I mean sure, be entertained enjoy, whatever, let him speak, but I'm under no obligation: I can go to the work of the person he's interviewing or I can do my own actual research in the primary sources on which the guest draws. There's no definition of free speech that requires me to take Alex Jones, for example, seriously as a journalist or a moral actor.

You are a very efficient builder of straw men. I'm not battling this thing you call "political correctness." I'm against feelz over facts. This lifelong Californian is also against racism, misinformation and bigotry, even the type that's against country music lovers in flyover country.

Maybe you haven't noticed the hysterical reaction to Musk's Twitter takeover. Did you observe the mass of sky-is-falling posts two weeks back, claiming with certainty that the platform was finished and wouldn't survive the night? This was really a thing. Did you not see Taylor Lorenz's article in the Washington Post with the headline ‘Opening the gates of hell’: Musk says he will revive banned accounts. Twitter is rife with hysterical posts in this spirit.

Nobody is under any obligation to treat all sources with equal respect. But... I search out primary sources, too, and find that "respectable" sources are often lying. That doesn't mean the buffoons aren't lying, too. But sometimes the buffoons do have a point amidst all the buffoonery, even when they're wrong, like their conspiracy theory may be totally whacked and off-base, but they're right to smell something there and we have good reason to be suspicious about the official story.

 

[imwjl]

Wall St. Journal just put this on front page.

Elon Musk’s Unconventional Management Style: Former Employees Share Stories

Twitter has been in turmoil since Elon Musk took over. To get a sense of what’s going on behind the scenes, The Wall Street Journal spoke with former Tesla and

www.wsj.com

 

[bottlenecker]

We had a neighbor who worked in DC for Tesla, as a lawyer. He owned a Tesla and admired Musk making Tesla happen, but he said Musk was a dick: mercurial and capricious. He said he was routinely fired--Musk would demand something, he would respond, Musk would tell him he was fired; he would ignore it, an then Musk would call later with a question or a demand as if nothing had ever happened. Kind of amusing from distance, but he seemed pretty worn out by it.

Not at all surprising. At some point I heard musk in an interview talking about when he realized he was "different", and how strange he must be to have all these ideas in his head that other people didn't have.
No, he didn't explain how he knew what was in other peoples' heads. And that's when I knew he was just another self-obsessed rich kid imbecile. Everything being revealed about him now all fits.

 

[MarkieMark]

I am shocked this discussion continues.

Personally, I have little concern over Twitter and this rabbit hole turn in the discussion. I wasn't interested before, and am less interested now.

My own opinion, since we are sharing- and hopefully without getting too far out of bounds-

A partial quote from above somewhere:

I can go to the work of the person he's interviewing or I can do my own actual research in the primary sources

The trouble as I see it- generally and going back some time, is that people dont.
All too often they hear something, sounds good to them, adopting it as a view all too easily. And there are players who not only know it, but have capitalized on it.

Absolutism on the discussed subject often overlooks that it comes with consequences. Don't whine about the consequences if you insist on absolutism.

Anyway, if you want to discuss what I do know about- vehicles, EV's, Tesla and others, I am in. Just ask the right questions. The other "stuff"... Really dont care enough to go there any further.

 

[Mjark]

Everyone else is making them.

 

[imwjl]

Everyone else is making them.

That if you mean pickup trucks along with high demand for 3 and Y have been my guess. Maybe Paccar (Kenworth, Peterbilt) delays helped move the semi along. I'm far more a fan of the Tesla semi and the practical vs vanity or niche EVs.

There were recent rumors on the low costs Tesla being alive but then came the Twitter purchase I've had enough of for now.

 

[Frodebro]

You're misrepresenting the issue. First of all, back when Musk didn't own Twitter, people defending its enforcement policies were saying, "It's a privately owned company, the First Amendment doesn't apply." And they were correct. Now that they feel that the script has flipped, they're outraged that the private company might be operating under that very philosophy. That's some hypocrisy.

The truth is the U.S. has very, very powerful free speech protections -- the most powerful in the world. You can yell fire in a crowded theater. It's very hard to win and libel or defamation cases. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 makes it so that internet providers and web hosts are not liable for libelous comments published on their platforms, although this proviso has been under threat in recent years.

The laws haven't changed, but there's been a scary pushback against free speech in American society. What it amounts to is "free speech for me, not for thee." I'm against hate speech, racism and misinformation, but none of those are illegal (unless you tie the latter to, say, product claims). And it's good they're not, because the definition of what is and isn't all of those (particularly hate speech and misinformation) sits on a slippery slope, and the definitions are often used by those in power or those looking to seize it -- not necessarily in the government -- to manipulate and control others. Totalitarian regimes love to declare things "misinformation."

I'm a journalist. I'm not at the forefront of anything; my work is generally not significant or important. But I know how the house is built, so to speak, and I can spot shoddy workmanship -- feelz over facts, lies by omission, dishonest use of statistics, logical fallacies, and statements not supported by facts presented as a given. I’ve seen it more and more in recent years.

I’m particularly offended when I see those who view themselves as so smart and honest and above-the-fray embracing lies and shoddy thinking because it aligns with their worldview. These are people I’m likely to agree with on most issues. But just because we hate this person or that person, it doesn’t make everything said about them true. Just because this or that person is a vile demagog, it doesn’t mean that a story about them being a kiddie rapist is true. Our political enemies might have a point about this or that policy, and they should be allowed to express their skepticism. They could be right; they could be wrong or mostly wrong.

There are a lot of stories that make huge headlines, sometimes inspiring social movements, that months later are debunked in the back pages, and hot takes powered by supposition that are mostly about the author or the outlet’s bias. They become cherished lies.

I’ll give an example from my beat/community that shouldn’t be too controversial here: when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences recently apologized to (now deceased) Sacheen Littlefeather for her treatment at the 1973 Oscars. Put aside discussion of whether she deserved an apology. The articles that covered this were filled with statements and “facts” that even a small amount of research – like a glance at her IMDB profile or a single watch of the video of her acceptance speech embedded in the stories – would have revealed as false. Over the years, Littlefeather lied and lied and lied and changed her story constantly. For instance, she said that she was blacklisted in Hollywood after the Oscars on the orders of FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover. Two major problems: Hoover died the year before she appeared on the Oscars and virtually all her acting work came afterwards. (She was an awful actress to boot.) People who’d been around for a while knew she was full of it, but they kept their mouths shut. Younger journos gave it their full, enthusiastic, unquestioning embrace.

Prior to the Musk era at Twitter, the rules were not enforced in a balanced and equal way. There were acceptable forms of racism, often propagated by high-profile media figures. I don’t think that’s changed. There were also acceptable forms of “hate speech.” I’ll use an example that’s hopefully not too controversial here: calling for violence or making death threats against J.K. Rowling usually got a pass. Hopefully, that’s changed and we’re closer to balance.

On balance, I think that Musk’s purchase of Twitter is a good thing. The hysterical reactions are very revealing. I don’t think people are really afraid of racism and hate being propagated. I think they don’t like their worldview -- effectively a secular religion -- being questioned and they really hate the idea that the power to control the conversation and the culture, and in many ways effectively define reality, is being taken away from them and those they perceive to be their allies. I don’t want the other side to define it, either, and I think it’s sad and counterproductive for people to flee platform. Bubbles need to be punctured all around. But, honestly, I think the number of people jumping ship is overstated – a lot of harrumphing and departure announcements with no follow-through.

You and I probably disagree on a number of things, but I am in absolute agreement with everything that you posted here. I'm seeing the same things you are across the board.

 

[maxvintage]

You are a very efficient builder of straw men. I'm not battling this thing you call "political correctness." I'm against feelz over facts. This lifelong Californian is also against racism, misinformation and bigotry, even the type that's against country music lovers in flyover country.

Maybe you haven't noticed the hysterical reaction to Musk's Twitter takeover. Did you observe the mass of sky-is-falling posts two weeks back, claiming with certainty that the platform was finished and wouldn't survive the night? This was really a thing. Did you not see Taylor Lorenz's article in the Washington Post with the headline ‘Opening the gates of hell’: Musk says he will revive banned accounts. Twitter is rife with hysterical posts in this spirit.

Nobody is under any obligation to treat all sources with equal respect. But... I search out primary sources, too, and find that "respectable" sources are often lying. That doesn't mean the buffoons aren't lying, too. But sometimes the buffoons do have a point amidst all the buffoonery, even when they're wrong, like their conspiracy theory may be totally whacked and off-base, but they're right to smell something there and we have good reason to be suspicious about the official story.

What straw men have I built?

Yeah, skepticism of any source is warranted, it's what I do for a living. It's what i teach. I don't approach any source uncritically: nobody should.

I was on twitter, and i saw lots of people I follow thinking about leaving, then either deciding to leave or not to leave. I'm sure journalists can find extreme positions: it's what they do, and extreme positions are always out there. Here you are quoting them as if they are reality while deploring the tendency to take journalism uncritically. Do you not see the irony there?

I have no idea if twitter is "rife" with "hysterical" posts--I deleted my account. I'm not inclined to take your word for it though, for the reasons given above: skepticism is always warranted.

 

[Skully]

What straw men have I built?

Yeah, skepticism of any source is warranted, it's what I do for a living. It's what i teach. I don't approach any source uncritically: nobody should.

I was on twitter, and i saw lots of people I follow thinking about leaving, then either deciding to leave or not to leave. I'm sure journalists can find extreme positions: it's what they do, and extreme positions are always out there. Here you are quoting them as if they are reality while deploring the tendency to take journalism uncritically. Do you not see the irony there?

I have no idea if twitter is "rife" with "hysterical" posts--I deleted my account. I'm not inclined to take your word for it though, for the reasons given above: skepticism is always warranted.

I used the Taylor Lorenz article from the Washington Post an example of the hysterial clucking of the anti-Musk Chicken Littles I personsally enounter in abundance on Twitter. Lorenz is a lightning rod for criticism on Twitter because she is hysterical and hypocritical. She cries about be doxxed while doxxing others and, as is common today, characterizes anyone who disagrees with her views as an extremist.

If you had been on Twitter on the evening of November 17th, it would've been hard for you to miss the flood of tweets decrying its imminent shutdown and the need to maybe find a way to download and archive tweets and photos posted. This is me relaying something I witnessed that was also covered in the press, not relying on the reporting of others. Sorry, no irony.

 

[blowtorch]

wow I've been missing all the fun over here in this thread

 

[Frodebro]

I used the Taylor Lorenz article from the Washington Post an example of the hysterial clucking of the anti-Musk Chicken Littles I personsally enounter in abundance on Twitter. Lorenz is a lightning rod for criticism on Twitter because she is hysterical and hypocritical. She cries about be doxxed while doxxing others and, as is common today, characterizes anyone who disagrees with her views as an extremist.

If you had been on Twitter on the evening of November 17th, it would've been hard for you to miss the flood of tweets decrying its imminent shutdown and the need to maybe find a way to download and archive tweets and photos posted. This is me relaying something I witnessed that was also covered in the press, not relying on the reporting of others. Sorry, no irony.

Alyssa Milano’s recent temper tantrum was good for a few chuckles, too.

 

[maxvintage]

I used the Taylor Lorenz article from the Washington Post an example of the hysterial clucking of the anti-Musk Chicken Littles I personsally enounter in abundance on Twitter. Lorenz is a lightning rod for criticism on Twitter because she is hysterical and hypocritical. She cries about be doxxed while doxxing others and, as is common today, characterizes anyone who disagrees with her views as an extremist.

If you had been on Twitter on the evening of November 17th, it would've been hard for you to miss the flood of tweets decrying its imminent shutdown and the need to maybe find a way to download and archive tweets and photos posted. This is me relaying something I witnessed that was also covered in the press, not relying on the reporting of others. Sorry, no irony.

I'm wondering if you have some sort of fact based and not at all motivated by ideology definition of hysterical? You use the word a lot, but what do you mean by it?

Someone wanting to close their account is not "hysterical," and someone wanting to download their archives isn't "hysterical" either.

It's almost as if you think people who disagree with you are hysterical, but that can't be true, because of your stated comittment to fact-based and not at all biased inquiry.

 

[Skully]

Alyssa Milano’s recent temper tantrum was good for a few chuckles, too.

Where she tweeted about returning her Tesla?

 

[burntfrijoles]

I do however think the truck is ugly and the fact that Ford is making a EV Truck that starts at $42K that is $6K cheaper than the cheapest car Tesla makes does not bode well for the T Truck.

I wonder how Tesla will fare with more competition from US, European and Asian manufacturers. Granted, Tesla‘s target market is higher end but Mercedes, BMW will take aim at the high end segment.

 

[Frodebro]

Where she tweeted about returning her Tesla?

Yes, and the responses. I don't get involved in that goofy stuff, but it's always entertaining to watch from a safe distance.