Has Elon Musk lost his mind or?…

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's what the left does. They create rules they believe "everyone" must follow, break or bend those rules when it suits them, blame the right for breaking them, deflect or ignore the issue when caught breaking the rules, and then blame you for something else they pull out of thin air. It's like a toddler tangent with these types.
Brilliant example: Everyone who does not share your opinion must be a left if not a outright communist. Following up to a ongoing conversation instead of interrupting it w/o catching up first is generally seen as a sign of politeness (but it is obvious that this word or behaviour is foreign to you). You constantly whine about being censored (without actually being censored) and complain about "rules" that "lefties" want to press on you - while at the same time you want everyone to follow the rules you set. And all you have as arguments is aggression, false claims, outright lies and insults. This is not only double standards, this is worse. Honestly: It is impossible to have a discussion with you as you are not interested in a discussion and neither able to have one. If you'd behave like that in real life you'd probably been thrown out of every location you enter.
He doesn't care if X makes money. He REALLY doesn't.
If that's the case he is a bad leader for the company and should resign as he has nullified the money of his investors.

Regarding "free speech": X has changed the algorythm - it promotes certain messages and those are right wing. Since a couple of weeks in my timeline the posts of many people I follow do not show up any more as long as they are not right wing - despite them posting messages and some of them being very active. On the other hand loads and loads of MAGA messages popped up in my timeline. I am not the only one that recognized that. That's silencing - the opposite of free speech.

Only yesterday this popped up:


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


The full text on the linked substack reads as follows:

Elon Musk's and X's Role in 2024 Election Interference

The confessions of a concerned bird.

https://substack.com/@theconcernedbird
The Concerned Bird
Jan 11, 2025


To Whom It May Concern,

I'm writing this with a heavy heart and no small amount of fear. As a former X (formerly Twitter) employee on an H1B visa, I can't reveal my identity without risking everything, but I can't stay silent any longer about what I saw and was made to do.

When Elon Musk took over, everything changed. What started as a social media company became something much darker. I was part of a team that was directly ordered to manipulate Twitter's systems to influence the 2024 US presidential election. It wasn't subtle, and it wasn't ethical.

We completely changed how the algorithm worked, pushing pro-Trump and right-wing posts to the top of people's feeds. To make it look balanced, we also boosted some left-wing critics of Democrats, but it was all carefully calculated. These changes didn't just affect Americans - they impacted users worldwide.

One of the most disturbing things we did was create thousands of fake accounts using advanced AI systems called Grok and Eliza. These accounts looked completely real and pushed political messages that spread like wildfire. Havn't you noticed they all disappeared? Like magic.

We also knowingly allowed foreign governments to manipulate the platform. State-backed groups from Israel, Iran, and Russia were running their own influence campaigns, and because their goals aligned with ours, we looked the other way. Even when they clearly broke the rules, we didn't stop them.

Perhaps the most unethical part was how we manufactured news stories. One team would write completely fake articles, while another team would artificially boost their engagement metrics to make them go viral. We specifically targeted certain groups of people, knowing exactly how to manipulate their views and emotions.

The moderation team became a tool for our agenda. We systematically silenced anyone who got in our way, enforcing the rules when it suited us and ignoring them when it didn't. Elon Musk himself was deeply involved in these decisions, often joking about being "Black Hat MAGA."

What started as US election interference has now spread to other countries. We're currently doing the same thing in Germany and other European nations. The damage we've done is immeasurable, and I don't know if it can ever be fixed. People don't know what's real anymore, and that's exactly what we wanted.

The pilot program for the Eliza AI Agent, was election interference. Eliza was release officially in October of 2024, but we had access to it before then thanks to Marc Andreessen.

I'm terrified to be writing this, but I had to speak up. I just hope that someone with the power to do something about this sees this letter. You'll know what i’m saying is the truth by Elon's actions to the news someone spoke out. For more evidence look at the docs of Eliza AI Agent software. We left bread crumbs.

Yours sincerely,

A former employee who can't sleep at night.


Obviously I cannot judge if this is true or not but it fits the observations that I and many others made independently before this popped up. If you a really a believer in free speech (and not just in amplifying MAGA messages, comfirming what you already believe) this should alarm you. Because if it is true this is the opposite of free speech but censorship with political intent by a very rich and powerful person. For the moment it does not affect you as you are on the same political side as him - but this can change any time. It possibly aready has, given that Elon does provenly support extreme right wing, fashist and Nazi parties and people throughout different countries and if you are not in the same boat.

Be careful what ya wish for, eh?
Same to you. Now you can give evidence wether you are really for free speech (as you claim) or just for promoting of MAGA-messages and uncensored hate speech as it fits your political direction.

BTW, regarding MAGA: This picture says it all:

1737652959635.webp
 
Last edited:
BTW, regarding MAGA: This picture says it all:

1737652959635.webp
Tired Britney Spears GIF


Oh, my, one image of a knockoff hat. We got a Sherlock on the case!

It's not like they weren't in such high demand that unofficial hat products popped up everywhere cause people saw money was to be made.

You show the hat, but not the shipping label. How convenient to make your argument.

Screenshot_20250124_032016_Chrome.webp
 
That (legally) makes Facebook an agent of the government, and NOW the 1st Amendment applies.
And are you sure that is the whole story? I know there were a couple of hearings, appeals and Supreme Court but don't have time to read them but it seems to me there was more to it, ie no real evidence of anything wrong, or wouldn't the Supreme Court have done something - or were they also in collusion with the White House?
 
And are you sure that is the whole story? I know there were a couple of hearings, appeals and Supreme Court but don't have time to read them but it seems to me there was more to it, ie no real evidence of anything wrong, or wouldn't the Supreme Court have done something - or were they also in collusion with the White House?
There were no SCOTUS hearings on this to my knowledge. There has been no legal action taken that I'm aware of.... at any level in court. Maybe I missed it or forgot (but I don't think so).

But there is plenty of evidence (video of news conferences) of the White House openly stating that they are telling Facebook what to censor when it comes to the covid topic. Zuck has openly admitted it, as well. Again, to my knowledge there has not been any accountability or court cases in this regard. But it remains incontrovertible fact. It was done, and it was done in the open.

They also quashed any posts about certain other topics, as well.

I was VERY active on Facebook for many years. I quit cold turkey almost exactly 4 years ago when the gov't mandated censorship began.

I quit watching legacy media news back in the summer of 2017 because at that point it had become nearly 100% propaganda, and I grew tired of yelling at the TV. ;) LOL! And now... legacy news media is dead. They blew their trust completely.

I had never been on Twitter before. But after Musk bought it, and it became the most reliable source of news and current events, I joined and became active. Yes... there is a LOT of noise to filter. A LOT. But as I submitted earlier... That is MY job. And I'm perfectly capable of doing it. I don't want gov't lackeys to be the arbiters of truth FOR me.
 
Last edited:
But there is plenty of evidence (video of news conferences) of the White House openly stating that they are telling Facebook what to censor
It’s not evidence of anything illegal until it’s tested in court so until then “telling Facebook” could mean advising, or it could mean ordering or it could just mean informing them it is misinformation and potentially endangering peoples’ lives.

I’ll wait for a legal process before just believing the media or what I read on a forum.
 
It’s not evidence of anything illegal until it’s tested in court so until then “telling Facebook” could mean advising, or it could mean ordering or it could just mean informing them it is misinformation and potentially endangering peoples’ lives.
No. A full confession (on BOTH sides of this csae) is evidence of malfeasance without the need for a trial. But I already knew it 4 years ago, long before they confessed to doing it.

The gov't told FB to delete posts about certain subjects. FB complied. That's gov't censorship. It doesn't matter if it's thinly-veiled as a "suggestion." The gov't cannot do that. The violation of the 1st Amendment is self-evident. Obviously, I can do nothing about it all by myself. But I COULD decide to walk away (from FB), and so I did.

A trial may determine actual legal liability or accountability (never going to happen). But a crime is a crime. I don't need a judge or jury to tell me when the PERPETRATOR(s) told us they did it. I don't need someone else to tell me if my Rights have been infringed.

In the South, they say, "Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining." :)

When I swore the oath to defend the Constitution, it read exactly as I quoted in a previous comment. It did not include any stipulation that in order to defend it, I had to wait for a court to tell me if it was defensible. The mere notion of that is nonsensical.

I’ll wait for a legal process before just believing the media or what I read on a forum.
Suit yourself, of course. I don't wait around for others (whether a public or gov't figure) to tell me anything. I have a brain. I can see and research things for myself. I'm an intelligent person who can draw my own conclusions. I've studied the Constitution more than most people, for sure. I understand my Constitutional Rights very well. I don't need a nanny (media or politician) to explain them to me... nor will I tolerate any limitations imposed by the same.

Your mileage may vary. ;) And with that.... I've said enough here. I fully agree with Musk's defense of Free Speech.
 
Last edited:
I just caught this thread and have only read the first page.

What Elon has done with Twitter, now X, is genius. Pure genius. And ironically revolutionary. A platform based on Free Speech.... in a world full of censorious social media. Shazam! :cool:

As has been said, "WE are now the news media." Traditional news media is DEAD. Legacy media is dead. They scuttled their own ship.

X is thriving. Other social media platforms like censorious Facebook (which admittedly colluded with the Biden administration to infringe the 1st Amendment) are properly dying. I left Facebook four years ago for that very reason after being VERY active. I left a ton of friends and family behind, since that is the ONLY way most of them communicate now. But I could not abide the state-directed censorship.
You must be getting stats from thin air, because X had lost a third of its traffic since Elon took over. Meanwhile, Facebook's traffic has grown in the same period, and has never seen a decline in its history.
 
You must be getting stats from thin air, because X had lost a third of its traffic since Elon took over.
What "stats" or data have I posted or referenced??? Where did I cite any numbers? LOL! I posted my opinion. And no need to expound on it any further.
 
Last edited:
What "stats" or data have I posted or referenced??? Where did I cite any numbers? LOL!

You said "X is thriving".
  • a 1/3rd traffic loss is decline, not thriving.
  • a $5.2 billion revenue loss is decline, not thriving.

"Other social media platforms like censorious Facebook ... are properly dying"
Yet over the same period
  • users increased, as did traffic
  • revenue has grown by $18 billion between 2022 and 2023, and the numbers for 2024 are projected to reached $147 billion, which would put it $33 billion in the same time period.
  • Facebook is the largest social media platform.

I think you're being economical with the truth.
 
No. A full confession (on BOTH sides of this csae) is evidence of malfeasance without the need for a trial. But I already knew it 4 years ago, long before they confessed to doing it.

The gov't told FB to delete posts about certain subjects. FB complied. That's gov't censorship. It doesn't matter if it's thinly-veiled as a "suggestion." The gov't cannot do that. The violation of the 1st Amendment is self-evident. Obviously, I can do nothing about it all by myself. But I COULD decide to walk away (from FB), and so I did.

A trial may determine actual legal liability or accountability (never going to happen). But a crime is a crime. I don't need a judge or jury to tell me when the PERPETRATOR(s) told us they did it. I don't need someone else to tell me if my Rights have been infringed.

In the South, they say, "Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining." :)

When I swore the oath to defend the Constitution, it read exactly as I quoted in a previous comment. It did not include any stipulation that in order to defend it, I had to wait for a court to tell me if it was defensible. The mere notion of that is nonsensical.


Suit yourself, of course. I don't wait around for others (whether a public or gov't figure) to tell me anything. I have a brain. I can see and research things for myself. I'm an intelligent person who can draw my own conclusions. I've studied the Constitution more than most people, for sure. I understand my Constitutional Rights very well. I don't need a nanny (media or politician) to explain them to me... nor will I tolerate any limitations imposed by the same.

Your mileage may vary. ;) And with that.... I've said enough here. I fully agree with Musk's defense of Free Speech.
Yeah you have a brain but it's not used smartly.
You are gullible with everything.
You believe all the crap that is on the news that has been proven to be untruthful.
Now you're being a tool on this forum.
 
You said "X is thriving".
  • a 1/3rd traffic loss is decline, not thriving.
  • a $5.2 billion revenue loss is decline, not thriving.

"Thriving" is a subjective qualitative (not quantitative) term. You're free to disagree with my qualitative statement using whichever basis you like.

I would also opine that X is "hopping," as I see it every day. It's hopping with posts about current events. I have not made any comments about the revenue generated by X. Don't know. Don't care. Even Elon doesn't care (see video above). But any and all topics can be freely discussed on X. Not so on FB. Zuck recently promised to kill the "fact checker" BS and censorship on FB. But I do not have any reason to believe or trust him. Fool me once and all that.

Facebook is busy with pictures of food and pets. Any posts about current events that diverge from the prescribed groupspeak on FB are deleted. That's why people like me have left FB. I'm sure I'm still counted as a "user," since I didn't delete my account. But I haven't posted in four years. Surely I'm the only one who has done this. ;)

Carry on.
 
Last edited:
And are you sure that is the whole story? I know there were a couple of hearings, appeals and Supreme Court but don't have time to read them but it seems to me there was more to it, ie no real evidence of anything wrong, or wouldn't the Supreme Court have done something - or were they also in collusion with the White House?
The whole story came from Zuckerberg himself. Unless they can get this interview thrown out, or it's not enough to get a subpoena for all the records that the FBI sent Meta from Meta, or they can't just get the emails themselves from the government side (directly from the FBI, though the FBI will now have a Trump appointee in charge, so it should be fairly easy, unless they deleted everything like the J6 committee did), then it's quite evident that they were in collusion with the Biden Administration and his Executive Branch.

Starting here @ 5:13 mark.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
"Thriving" is a subjective qualitative (not quantitative) term. I would also opine that X is "hopping," as I see it every day. It's hopping with posts about current events. I have not made any comments about the revenue generated by X. Don't know. Don't care. Even Elon doesn't care (see video above). But any and all topics can be freely discussed on X. Not so on FB. Zuck recently promised to kill the "fact checker" BS and censorship on FB. But I do not have any reason to believe or trust him. Fool me once and all that.

Facebook is busy with pictures of food and pets. Any posts about current events that diverge from the prescribed groupspeak on FB are deleted. That's why people like me have left FB. I'm sure I'm still counted as a "user," since I didn't delete my account. But I haven't posted in four years. Surely I'm the only one who has done this. ;)

Carry on.

Cracking Up Lol GIF by Rodney Dangerfield
The Land Of Make Believe Wow GIF
 
You said "X is thriving".
  • a 1/3rd traffic loss is decline, not thriving.
  • a $5.2 billion revenue loss is decline, not thriving.

"Other social media platforms like censorious Facebook ... are properly dying"
Yet over the same period
  • users increased, as did traffic
  • revenue has grown by $18 billion between 2022 and 2023, and the numbers for 2024 are projected to reached $147 billion, which would put it $33 billion in the same time period.
  • Facebook is the largest social media platform.

I think you're being economical with the truth.
All things considered, X seems fine to me 🤷🏼‍♂️ as we have discussed before, a lot of the “fat” has left the platform because of “Elon bad”. Yet the platform seems fine and is making tons of revenue.
IMG_4058.webp

IMG_4059.webp
 
That's what the left does. They create rules they believe "everyone" must follow, break or bend those rules when it suits them, blame the right for breaking them, deflect or ignore the issue when caught breaking the rules, and then blame you for something else they pull out of thin air. It's like a toddler tangent with these types.
If you'd behave like that in real life you'd probably been thrown out of every location you enter.
@MySiteGuy proving my point.
It's like it writes itself. 🤣
 
I think this entire thread is funny and ironic, and shows the hypocritical views of the left, all at the same time.
but some of us are not on the left.
we are moderate centrist that miss our beloved GOP.
i personally do not like musk.
but i try to not devolve into name calling.
 
All things considered, X seems fine to me 🤷🏼‍♂️ as we have discussed before, a lot of the “fat” has left the platform because of “Elon bad”. Yet the platform seems fine and is making tons of revenue.
IMG_4058.webp
That seems a bit misleading: While indeed the number of users went up over the last years it is still relatively small, compared to i.e. facebook. Plus there are many dead accounts and incredible numbers of bots an fake accounts. Twitter revenue went down dramatically: Peak was 5 billion US$ in 2021, in 2023, the year Musk bought it, it was 3,4 billion US$.

Twitter used to make profits in some years (2018 and 2019) and no profit/a loss in all the other years.

While the main revenue stream used to be advertizing (around 90%) this dramatically went down since Musk took over as the platform more and more created an environment were brands did not want to advertize any more plus saw negative consequences for their image. As you can see today: Most advertisements on Twitter are of pretty dubious character and content, to say it politely and barely any reputable brand is left. So not only the amount and the quality of the ads went down but also the price - which must have dramatic effect on the revenue situation.

The switch from verified accounts (blue hook) to paid accounts having a blue hook did only marginally compensate for that. Still those have now become the main stream of revenue - but a very, very thin stream. Which you can even see when comparing your app-store graphics to the former revenue. Third stream of income has traditionally been selling of data and data access, the financial revenue coming from that has traditionally been pretty neglecteble.

While Musk has cut down cost dramatically this cannot compensate for the loss in revenue and even less for the loss in relevance, reputation and trust. As a consequence the company lost in value dramatically:

Musk bought Twitter for 44 billion US$ in 2023. Current valuation is estimated below 10 billion US$.
 
Last edited:
That seems a bit misleading: While indeed the number of users went up over the last years it is still relatively small, compared to i.e. facebook. Plus there are many dead accounts and incredible numbers of bots an fake accounts. Twitter revenue went down dramatically: Peak was 5 billion US$ in 2021, in 2023, the year Musk bought it, it was 3,4 billion US$.

Twitter used to make profits in some years (2018 and 2019) and no profit/a loss in all the other years.

While the main revenue stream used to be advertizing (around 90%) this dramatically went down since Musk took over as the platform more and more created an environment were brands did not want to advertize any more plus saw negative consequences for their image. As you can see today: Most advertisements on Twitter are of pretty dubious character and content, to say it politely and barely any reputable brand is left. So not only the amount and the quality of the ads went down but also the price - which must have dramatic effect on the revenue situation.

The switch from verified accounts (blue hook) to paid accounts having a blue hook did only marginally compensate for that. Still those have now become the main stream of revenue - but a very, very thin stream. Which you can even see when comparing your app-store graphics to the former revenue. Third stream of income has traditionally been selling of data and data access, the financial revenue coming from that has traditionally been pretty neglecteble.

While Musk has cut down cost dramatically this cannot compensate for the loss in revenue and even less for the loss in relevance, reputation and trust. As a consequence the company lost in value dramatically:

Musk bought Twitter for 44 billion US$ in 2023. Current valuation is estimated below 10 billion US$.
Again, X still seems to be doing fine. The rhetoric that it’s “dying because of Musk” is not correct at this time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frm
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom