GboroRam

AI is definitely the way forward. Is it Grok? Er...

Maybe the alcohol is impairing me, but I don't understand. Sorry?

In case you didn't know, there's a very NSFW version of the puppet sex scene.

He seemed fine on X factor.

"St Peter, clear my afternoon appointments."

My wife giving lollies to the local children. Five dollars gone in 30 seconds, but despite everything they all looked so happy.

Toes instead of knees. Zanzibar.

I'm trying to get my head around this at a macro level and I'm struggling tbh. It's a complicated subject and I'm not an economist. I can see that inflation happens as a result of the capitalism ponzi scheme. Governments issue debt to banks at an interest rate, which creates money. More money creates inflation. Governments use this method of kicking the can down the road to let future generations pay for today's spending. So if you stop the money creation, you stop the inflation - but you stop governments from spending money outside of what bitcoin mining allows for the creation of. Currently governments metaphorically click their fingers and money is created. The population is growing, but if money creation is slower than the population increase, effectively your money value goes down. Unheard of with bitcoin, because it's value only goes up - because you swap it out for Fiat currency that is in plentiful supply. I'd say if you want to make money out of bitcoin, the last thing you want is to swap it out for Fiat as the basis of your country's economy.

I called the ex once and told her I was on the train, and some random bloke at the bar shouted a loud "choo choo". That took me some time to get back from.

From my memory of "7 habits of highly effective people" I learned - if you want to change something about your life, change something about your life. And by that I mean make a small change. It might be a catalyst to bigger changes. Pick a small thing and focus on making it happen.

But this was Davids thread to discuss the name change. It's turned into a bit of a discussion around the new owner, as it seems to be his idea to change the name despite it being a global brand. It's also turned into a discussion about other changes he's spearheaded. I don't think David wanted a thread to argue about the politics of social media, but there's bound to be a bit of that in a conversation about Musk and Twitter / X. So, as long as we can keep the thread title in mind, I'll let you carry on with it.

I think that's what this thread and the spacex threads are about. But the posts about Facebook/Meta don't go any way to answer that question, do they? They mostly seem to be saying "social media good or bad for humanity", but there's really not going to be much argument that they are collectively bad. The only difference is that the supporters of Musk are claiming X is good for humanity, where everyone else is saying all social media is bad for humanity.

You keep going on about stuff like this and I'm genuinely trying to give you chance to post, but I don't see any relevance regarding X/twitter. I part think I should remove it, and also don't want to dictate the content of the thread. But I don't get the relevance. Yes, the market for social media is full of firms that put profits ahead of their user base. What's that to do with Twitter?

No, that's this timeline.

In fact, he's spent $44 billion to be just as bad as Facebook. A platform I regularly contemplate removing.

I think he's arguing that it's no worse than the competition, but those people who are ex supporters of twitter but are not happy with the current offering are arguing it's worse in comparison to what it used to be. Which apparently there doesn't seem to be an any argument.

When can I start singing "forest going down with a fiver in the bank"?

Please no copying or linking to copyrighted material (other than from the original source)

I think they know they're setting a precedent. It's by design. Leniency here paves the way for a very mild punishment for Man City. I'm expecting an appeal, and a reduction, so that Man City get even less of a punishment.

It's a terrible tragedy. Such a great talent, wasted. Could have been one of England's greats.

How did the "best performing asset on the planet" do in 2022? Unfortunately until it's a bit more reliable, it's too risky for most people. And when it's less risky, those incredible gains will dry up, and it becomes a steady investment. And if it returned a steady 5% would you still be so committed? Or, it turns into the next dotcom bubble and everyone who's filled their boots will be lining up to throw themselves off the nearest tall building.

A flange seems more than appropriate.

It would have been really helpful if you'd reported that post instead of relying on someone reading your post. I will not tidy the thread up again, I'll just lock it.

Anyone fancy posting something vaguely on topic? Reminder, the topic is "Twitter Rebrand to X".

I will balance that - twitter spent an unsustainable amount of money to do that. Twitter was losing money. As long as they have stopped losing money then it's an understandable commercial decision.