• varoth
      link
      fedilink
      English
      20911 months ago

      As all billionaires are. Along with unempathetic sociopathic psychopaths.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6411 months ago

        I can’t fathom having the power to save our at least change millions of lives…but instead choose to leech more wealth from the people that need it most. And systematically make the world worse. It’s a sickness.

        There are no good billionaires.

        • DominusOfMegadeus
          link
          English
          2211 months ago

          I would build SO much low income, homeless, and transition housing. I would also start my own line of bamboo products and packaging to replace plastic.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -111 months ago

            Then you’d go bankrupt and stop supporting your “so much” housing, unless you’d gift it to those people, not give as a temporary service.

            Bamboo - a nice idea. Actually I’m not sure it’s that hard for you to do even now. I’m serious, if you know the pipeline, then try to evaluate how much a start would cost (for it to be barely profitable). You need, well, bamboo itself (grows like a virus, shouldn’t be a problem), and on the process of making stuff from bamboo I’m not sure (I think it involves making some kind of pulp and then pressure?..), but humans do this kind of thing. Should probably start with dishes and cups.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -911 months ago

            The most important part of what you said is that you’d build “SO much” housing. If we’d just let the free market build all the housing it wants without letting NIMBYs get in the way, we’d have largely solved the housing crisis.

            • @ThatWeirdGuy1001
              link
              English
              2011 months ago

              Except we already have more houses than there are homeless people. The problem is the empty houses have ridiculous price tags due to corporate landlords and landlords refusing the sell and only rent (also at ridiculous prices)

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -611 months ago

                Vacancy rates in the places where people actually want to live are really low. Besides, are people not allowed to have vacation homes?

                Market price is a function of supply and demand. We’ve been under building housing for years.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  611 months ago

                  Alright but life never promised anyone these luxuries. I don’t give a fuck if someone can’t have a vacation home because it means more people without one can have one. People act like freedom to do whatever the hell they want no matter how negatively it effects everyone else is their universal right. The Universe doesn’t give a fuck about your summer home, nature doesn’t give a fuck that you worked hard to get it. It will all be swallowed all the same if our main goal still is not perpetual survival. That may be authoritarian, but it is also the truth. We never left the game of survival we just plastered concrete and asphalt on top of it and pretended we were removed.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              311 months ago

              I mean, one can build it NITBY, just with functioning public transport to TBY, so that it could function. There’s plenty of available space on the planet.

        • PrimalAnimist
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          Modern billionaires are the manifestation of the rampant consumerism of the masses. Want to do your part against the billionaires? Start with consuming less. Buy less. Move toward minimal.

      • Kantiberl
        link
        fedilink
        47
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        That may be the most tautological sentence I’ve ever read.

      • Refurbished Refurbisher
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2211 months ago

        Well yeah. If you weren’t sociopathic, you wouldn’t be holding onto all of your money, but would instead be trying to help people with it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1911 months ago

          Being a billionaire means having the means to help millions of people, and deciding to instead keep all that money for yourself.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            411 months ago

            Being a billionaire means using it to acquire more money which provides more power which provides more control. Shit floats to the top.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            211 months ago

            Not necessarily. It may be optimization between what you give now and what you keep for later to make more, with the total effect on others’ well-being being the criterion. I mean, theoretically.

            If you make a dime and immediately give it away randomly, you are making a worse decision than keeping it by this criterion. If you immediately give it away not randomly, but to somebody you think needs it, still possibly worse because you could try and make much more and then, say, open a pharmaceutical company.

            Say, with cattle you’d use some for meat and some to make more cattle to feed more people. You wouldn’t just slaughter the whole herd for meat. It’s worse.

      • @Yendor
        link
        English
        611 months ago

        You can’t be sociopathic and psychopathic - they’re different points on the same (ASPD) spectrum. Please learn what words mean before throwing them around.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    34811 months ago

    According to Hwang, the company now formerly known as Twitter did offer “an alternative handle with the history of the @x account” so that his original account, complete with its posts and followers, could live on and continue to be used.

    What short, catchy username did Musk’s company change Hwang’s handle to? @x12345678998765.

    You can’t make this shit up. God damn!

    • keeb420
      link
      fedilink
      11511 months ago

      that sounds like what an idiot would have for a password.

    • 🦥󠀠󠀠󠀠󠀠󠀠󠀠
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3611 months ago

      However, Hwang tells me, he was also offered a new handle of his choice – as long as it’s available. He just hasn’t picked one yet.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1011 months ago

      That is absolutely hilarious. They should’ve offered him @twitter in exchange, it would only be fair…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      All for the buzz I imagine.

      Or for some hyper inflated fragile ego I guess.

      Well that’s my guess.

    • fmstrat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 months ago

      Let’s be real now. That name is temporary until he chooses his new one. Read the whole article. It’s rediculous enough without making things seem even worse.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2711 months ago

        But look at that username. It definitely not randomly generated. Someone at Twitter pick that new name. They just give someone with the shortest username possible (1 character) the longest possible username (15 characters), and they do so by pressing the number row back and forth until they hit the username characters size limit. If it’s not a mockery then I don’t know what is.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          It’s not mockery, it is the logical thing to do. They don’t want to allocate a username a person would actually want, so naturally they pick the longest possible username, with arbitrary and meaningless contents. Would you have been happier if it was @xloremipsumdolo? @xtemporaryusern? Like what was the right thing for the technician who had to pick the name to do, in your mind?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I thought long and hard about this, and you’re right. If it were me, no matter what the new username is, I’m still going to be mad. But I feel like I’ll be less mad (just a little bit less) if they select a completely random username (with sensible length, like 8 characters or less), indicating it’s chosen by an impartial random number generator instead of chosen by someone who in my mind is messing with me (image of Elon Musk laughing at me coming in my mind).

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21711 months ago

    What short, catchy username did Musk’s company change Hwang’s handle to? @x12345678998765.

    It could have been worse.

    They could have named him “X Æ A-12” 😵‍💫

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14811 months ago

    Man…

    I was pretty bummed when I heard that Twitter was going to die. There are some cool moments in history that happened on Twitter. It was a hell of a ride, but the writing was on the wall well before Elon bought it. It was time to go.

    But not like this.

    It deserved a good death. Not to have it’s corpse raped on full display over and over.

    A lot of very talented people committed so much time and energy to this. When it launched, it was a novel idea and they really forged some roads in our understanding of how we communicate and receive information.

    It was clear at the end that it would never produce the kind of ROI on advertising to make investors happy, and that Nazis had clearly taken over the platform and used it to bastardize journalism further. It was time to go to pasture.

    But not like this.

    Hopefully its mutilated, humiliated and desiccated corpse will feed the growth of the federated web.

    I hope you find peace, sweet prince.

    • TWeaK
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8511 months ago

      Twitter was profitable before Musk took over.

      The purchase itself saddled Twitter with $13 billion in debt. Musk paid $26bn, other investors (including the Saudi prince) together paid $5bn, and the remaining $13bn was a loan Twitter took out to buy itself on their behalf.

      The new owners only paid tax on the $31bn they paid, not the $44bn that was paid to shareholders. (Here’s something I’m not sure about: Musk was one of the largest shareholders. Is the $44bn the total value of all shares - does that include Musk’s shares? Did he basically buy shares from himself?)

      The interest on that $13bn was comparible to Twitter’s revenue, before Musk started fucking around. Twitter could not afford that debt.

      The buyout itself was what killed Twitter. Everything since then has been nothing but a clown show to distract from the fact that was the original intention.

      • @Iteria
        link
        English
        8511 months ago

        Thank you. I hate it when people say Twitter wasn’t profitable. It was profitable. It just wasn’t an infinite money printing machine like people (investors) wanted. Twitter didn’t need investor money or loans to pay all its bills unlike say Tumblr.

        Twitter was the victim of the same financial BS as Toysrus.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1811 months ago

          I’ve had the impression for a while that Twitter upper management wanted monthly active users on the level of Facebook, Tiktok and other social media. To enrich themselves by way of ad revenue, rather than to create opportunities and experiences for the platform and its users. Then when it became apparent that such a potential opportunity had come and gone (if it was ever there in the first place), they did what was in their minds the next-best thing: They cashed out while they could still find a buyer. Elon’s idiotically freewheeling but nevertheless binding offer was basically their winning lottery ticket, so they held his feet to the fire instead of treating it like the thoughtless shitpost it was.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2211 months ago

        Wait, that sounds like a leveraged buyout. I overlooked that detail in the news. It changes everything.

        I know that some investment firms use leveraged buyouts to drain every bit of money from a company before they chop it up, sell the good bits and let the rest go bankrupt due to the massive debts left in the carcass of the old company. It’s so scummy I wonder why it’s not illegal.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        I’m not saying it wasn’t profitable. It’s a hell of an achievement that it was.

        Just that they took on a lot of investment capital and it wasn’t the kind of return that investors were expecting.

        Ultimately, the efficacy of social media advertising on the whole is in the decline. The number and types of companies that used to advertise and run their business on Facebook is so different today than it was five years ago, and business are seeing far less return for their budget.

        Twitter was riding a knife’s edge (particularly during COVID) and would have to really scramble to stay in the red in the future.

        • pitninja
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          would have to really scramble to stay in the red in the future

          Did you mean stay in the black?

      • P03 Locke
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 months ago

        the remaining $13bn was a loan Twitter took out to buy itself on their behalf.

        That’s truly some Hollywood-accounting-style bullshit. I couldn’t even imagine the paradoxical mathematics it took to make that happen.

        It would be like me paying you to buy a candy bar from me.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1211 months ago

      there was a time when twitter was the place for internet sensation. if you want to see what’s going around the world, twitter was a great place to visit. movements like #metoo wouldn’t have happened if there was no twitter. sad to see that musk just plays with it like a toy and making it’s credibility to lose everyday and giving it a slow death.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1411 months ago

        movements like #metoo wouldn’t have happened if there was no twitter.

        That’s exactly why Musk is doing what he’s doing.

  • skellener
    link
    fedilink
    13811 months ago

    Shitty social media website does shitty thing and continues enshittification full throttle.

    • pjhenry1216
      link
      fedilink
      3711 months ago

      You’d want to include your instance as part of your handle. I know, it’s not as intuitive as a centralized service, but it is a requirement, especially when sharing the name elsewhere. So, your Lemmy account is [email protected]. Folks on lemmy.world don’t need that, but folks on another instance (like me) would. I can get it from clicking your username, but there’s no way to figure it out for a different platform from here.

      • TWeaK
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        If you type it like this you’ll get an instance agnostic link (at least on instances v0.18 and above, not necessarily in apps): /u/[email protected].

        You can also select from a dropdown box on the website to send a mention, however this link goes to their instance rather than your own: @[email protected]. The code for this is [@ChamrsDeluxe@lemmy.world](https://lemmy.world/u/ChamrsDeluxe), you can type this manually and replace any link text in between the square brackets, so generally [link text](https://userinstance/u/user).

        The old pre-0.17 instance agnostic links were [link text](/c/community@instance) or [link text](/u/user@instance), but the new versions will automatically generate without link code:

        • /c/community@instance
        • !community@instance
        • /u/user@instance (does not send a mention)

        Also, kbin doesn’t federate properly. You might not even see this comment over there…

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          If I’m reading this right there are two ways to indicate a user including its instance:

          • /u/username@example.com
          • @username@example.com

          Which one is the recommended one?

          • TWeaK
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The first one will generate a link automatically with no code (on lemmy v0.18 and above, not necessarily in apps - it doesn’t seem to work in Jerboa currently). This link is instance agnostic, meaning the viewer sees a link in their own instance, rather than the example.com instance. This means you can send them a DM, or open their comments and reply to them.

            The second one isn’t enough on its own, it needs to be in the form [link text](https://example.com/u/user). However, if you start typing @user@example.com on the website, a pop up box will allow you to select the user and generate the link code for you - it will give you [@user@example.com](https://example.com/u/user). This version is not agnostic, it takes you to the user’s instance, however it does send a mention to the user’s inbox.

            Hopefully in a future update they will combine these two, so that an agnostic link will also send a mention, and so the mention link will auto-generate and be agnostic. Right now, one is for linking to a profile you want to interact with, the other is for calling that person into the thread with a mention.

            Edit: Just for a little more fun variation, it looks like Jerboa handles the @user@instance link as if it were instance agnostic. On the website it opens the user’s instance.

        • pjhenry1216
          link
          fedilink
          111 months ago

          That’s all well and good, but I was telling them to include the instance for their mastodon handle, which they’ve gone back and edited to include it now.

          • TWeaK
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Yeah I know. But we’re on lemmy here, so it’s good to know.

            Mastodon might not do that sort of thing, and kbin is different again. Tbh I’m surprised you even got my last comment (although it seems like you got it late) as most of the time kbin and lemmy don’t federate properly through threads. For example, I was unable to reply to you on my phone in Jerboa, and on the website it doesn’t work unless I specifically select English as the language.

    • TWeaK
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      You’re not done yet - you need to sign up on all the instances!! Then you’ll really not know what you’re doing!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6811 months ago

    What short, catchy username did Musk’s company change Hwang’s handle to? @x12345678998765.

    That’s some really !funnyandsad material…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      711 months ago

      Sounds like someone trying to type a random number on the keyboard, looking at it, and thinking, what ever

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        811 months ago

        It’s not even random, it’s counting 1 to 9 and then down again to 5. Seems like even less effort lol. It’s either patronising in a show off kind of way or just dumb. Either way… just wow.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6511 months ago

    I hate to say it because Fuck Elon, but this is just one of those things you sign away when you agree to the terms of service.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3711 months ago

      True, but it’s still worth criticizing because of him being so dickish about it. He even renamed the account @x12345678998765.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2311 months ago

        And he could have gone down the “Mike Row Soft” route and offered the guy some free stuff as compensation. Terms allowing them to do something doesn’t mean they have to be dicks about it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1611 months ago

      It’s still really petty - Elon is one of the richest guys on earth. Take the username, but send him a Tesla. Invite him to a SpaceX launch.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5911 months ago

    As much as this sucks, this person has no rights to their name and never did. Stop using the platform and giving it attention!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3711 months ago

      Yeah, it’s not like they ever bought that name from Twitter so there’s no real argument that they actually own it, even if they’d ever bought the checkmark BS.

      Money and a rename would have been a goodwill gesture, and expecting any goodwill from this version of twitter is insanity.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2711 months ago

      I don’t think anyone is saying they are owed money. But just taking the handle with nothing in return is really not nice.

      They could at least give the guy like Twitter Blue for life or whatever the heck premium is called now.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        411 months ago

        Is that not what the title says? Like, i’m new to Lemmy so maybe i’m confused? Didn’t OP write “He got no money from it :(” in the title?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -2911 months ago

      Haha, me calling it dumb to think they’d be owed money is getting people super angry.

      • girlfreddy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2311 months ago

        Being downvoted is not indicative of voters’ anger. It’s simply showing they don’t agree with you.

        Pulling the victim card is revealing a shit-ton about you tho.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          9
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I see why people use downvoting this way, especially since that was the norm on reddit which a good portion of the base fled from, I find the same issue I had with downvotes on reddit to apply here as well though. I try to advocate down votes to be not out of personal opinion, but a reflection that the content is either useless or harmful to the existing conversation. This allows posts that are actually useful and contribute to the discussion to exist even if they are unpopular to peoples opinion. Just because you don’t like the post, doesn’t mean the post isn’t true or useful, which is why I find that form of downvoting ideology to be harmful overall.

          That being said, I would find the parent comment you replied to as constructive to the conversation…Up until they started egging people on with “is getting people super angry” I wouldn’t call this being downvoted for not agreeing, I would call it being downvoted for not being constructive to the post at hand(as there’s no need to actively try to get people to rage at you with a post like that)

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -20
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          So what do users not agree to in my post but do with in this?

          Also, what a fucking Reddit thing to do.

  • PrimalAnimist
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4111 months ago

    To be fair, no user “owns” their account. Everything about your Twitter account, from the user name to the data you tweet belongs to Twitter. I hesitate to call it a dick move. It’s more of an Elon move.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      611 months ago

      I really hope phrases like “he got Musked” and “they Musked up” become a thing.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      Right. Although I don’t support it, but if the logic is that they can supress stories and say you don’t have a free speech on a private platform, then they can take away your handle because technically it’s theirs.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4111 months ago

    Musk is an overpaid idiot, but anyone has to expect not to have any real rights on any website.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4011 months ago

    Imagine how amazing the PR would have been if the title had been: “User gets spectator seating for a SpaceX launch in return for lost handle”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    26
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I can hear his theme song now…

    X gon’ take it from ya (uh), he gon’ take it from ya X gon’ take it from ya, he gon’ take it from ya

    First we gonna rock, then we gonna roll Then we let it pop, go, let it go