• ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      They don’t. Rather, they believe that others do, so posts like this are simply signaling alliance.

  • Ech@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Those people sold it to musk. They were tech bros whose goal from the start was to get a massive buyout and bail. They don’t deserve your respect anymore than musk does.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Ok well maybe a beacon of glory is a bit out there for Twitter, but there was a time where it was actually cool and unique.

      Like back in the day where you could interact with it over plain SMS lol

      I feel old.

  • sircac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Mmh… nope, don’t care, my neurons has already a “twitter” thing in memory, devoting 0 additional effort in anything related to that thing

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Not really. It was fun to talk to people that you barely knew. It was kinda like a hybrid of a chatroom and a forum.

      But it grew to become shit.

        • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Because it’s text.

          There are more kind of letters then just our latin alphabet. Cyrillic, aboriginal Canadian and even Chinese and Japanese can be typed by just text for instance (日本語の例え)

          In the same vein, mathematical and other scientific symbols can be typed using just text, and 𝕏 is the symbol that stands in place for arbitrary distance in a formula.

          Basically, it’s just a (mathematical) letter, it can be typed.
          That’s also why their new CEO had difficulties copyrighting it; it’s just a letter, after all!

  • EndOfLine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    It’s not like it was a hostile take over. They played their part when Musk talked shit and they sued him to follow through with the purchase. They could have easily kept it, but they wanted the money instead.

    • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Not that they are blameless - far from it - but they had a fiduciary responsibility to pursue the deal because it was good for their shareholders

        • jaycifer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 minutes ago

          It’s a myth so widely pushed and accepted over the decades that just calling it a myth won’t be accepted as an argument against it at this point.

          What I think is interesting is that this sense of fiduciary duty can be used by a company to do whatever they want. Mass layoffs are part of a fiduciary duty to cut costs. Mass hirings are part of a fiduciary duty to expand operations for growth. At this point it’s less a myth and more an excuse for doing whatever.

        • originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          No, I don’t think that’s true. Twitters board had to sue for specific performance because Musk backed out of a formal offer in the late stages for fabricated reasons. It’s not like it was “sue musk or go to jail” but their job as board members comes with a fiduciary obligation, and musk was paying 38% over the share price. Twitter is FAR from blameless but sueing musk isn’t a failing https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2022/07/14/twitter-vs-musk-the-complaint/

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            That’s not what I said. I said the “Fiduciary duty to make profit” that keeps being brought up whenever corpos act like sociopaths, is a myth.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Twitter has never, even dating back to it’s inception, never ever ever turned a profit. The whole reason Elon mockingly offered to buy it was because they were looking for, and struggling to find, a buyer. They just wanted to break even and walk away.

      Instead Elon was like “Hur dur I got 43 billion for ya!” And Twitter was like “SOLD! No takesies backsies!”. And Elon was like “Wait, wut?”

      And then Elon carried a sink through the lobby in protest.

  • Rolando@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 hours ago

    We should call it “X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter.” Every time. Yes it sounds ridiculous, because it is.

  • calabast@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I mean, what you personally call it isn’t really going to make any difference, so if we’re trying to optimize your mental health, just reframe the naritive in your head. You’re still calling it Twitter to honor what it used to be, back when you respected it. You are refusing to acknowledge the nazi dumpster fire it has become, even if you still need to talk about it.

    I personally basically never have a reason to mention the site when taking to another person, but if/when I do, I’ll call it Twitter just because I think it would annoy Elon, if he somehow knew.

    • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I personally basically never have a reason to mention the site when taking to another person, but if/when I do, I’ll call it Twitter just because calling it ex was confusing in almost every context.