Joe on Elon Musk Being on the Board at Twitter

Elon's a fucking wizard man. Yeah. I'm really interested to see what he does with Twitter. Because he bought 9% of Twitter. Oh that's right. I read an article today though, I didn't read the article, excuse me. I read a headline today that said that he might have done something illegal by buying that stock. Oh really? Yeah but like, but what is that? What could he have done? I don't understand that. What, what was his- I wasn't interested enough to read the article. What was his motivation for that? I think it's the disclosure of the purchase. The disclosure of the purchase? That he disclosed it? That's what it's doing. It's the timing of the disclosure it says. Oh. I think, you know, when you make a giant purchase like that, not disclosing it in a certain amount of time can affect things. Oh, like affect how other people buy it? Sure. Or sell it or do whatever they do. Right, affect the stock price. Yeah, I'm interested to see because I hear they're going to put an edit button now. That was one of the things that he suggested and he made a poll. Do you think Twitter should have an edit button? And he said yes. Who edits what? You, whether you can edit it. Like if you write something and you write 1945 but you met 1965, like fuck. You have to delete the tweet and start all over again. And he wants the, he was like, made a poll, should Twitter have an edit button? And the vast majority of people said yes. So let's see if they implement that. Oh, I see. Okay. It's a 50-year-old law that requires that investors notify the Securities and Exchange Commission when they surpass a 5% stake in a company. Musk reached that benchmark on March 14th according to the filings, but he made his public disclosure only Monday. That sounds like a minor. In between, he continued to buy stock at the price of around $39 per share, bringing his total stake to 9.2%. After his disclosure, Twitter's share price rose roughly 30% and is now above $50 per share. Oh shit. So basically, if he had disclosed earlier that he was buying it, the price would have risen faster. Yes. Got it. Maybe that would have been bad for him because he wouldn't be able to get it at the same rate. Yeah, exactly. If he's actually listened to, so I don't know how much power a person who's worth 9% has over a company. Well, he's the biggest owner. Right. The biggest stakeholder, shareholder. But did they have to listen to him though? You know what I'm saying? Do they have to listen to him in terms of whether they want to ban people, whether they want to have an edit button, whether or not they want to apply the principles of the First Amendment to something like Twitter. Right. Well, maybe it's the fear that if he were to dump all the stock, it would hurt the price. So they want to keep him happy. I was having a conversation with a couple of friends yesterday about this, and one of them is dealing with comments on another social media platform. And what they were saying was that what Twitter does by banning people and censoring people is definitely bad. But there are some fucking horrible people that were banned by Twitter that are now ruining these other social media apps. And they were explaining to me what's happening and how these people comment on these other apps and about how toxic they are, and about how they have a whole group of people that have also been banned that find these new social media apps. And that's where they congregate and hang out, and that's their community now. And it's just, blah, it's just Chernobyl. It's just toxic. What are the other apps? Well, there's a shitload of them. I don't want to name the one that this person was talking to me about specifically because I don't want to fuck up. Because I believe in these other apps. I believe in all these other alternative platforms, and I think that there's great value in having competitors, whether it's to Twitter or to YouTube or to any of these Facebook. And it is giant, huge companies that have a massive pipeline to the consciousness of the world. Because the ability to distribute information on Twitter or on Facebook, that is unprecedented. There's never been a thing like that where a privately owned company has the ability to get ideas out there that can change the way elections are run, to change the way so many things are thought of in this country. I think we need alternatives, and I think we need alternatives that adhere to free speech. But the problem is when they've got these shitty people that they've kicked off of these other platforms like Twitter, because Twitter is pretty ruthless about it, then they go to these other places and they run amok. And then they're like, hey, free speech, you need free speech. But then there's the organizing harassment campaigns and fucking with people and targeting them all day long and constantly commenting on them. And you're like, I don't know if that's good either. Yeah, you know, that would make me not want to go there if I was this person. So like, but I don't like what Twitter did. I don't think Twitter should have banned Trump. I don't think I think that was a terrible idea. It's a terrible precedent to set that you can decide that you don't like a guy who's the fucking sitting president of the United States at the time and kick him off your platform because you don't like the things he's saying.