Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars

Victor Mildew wrote:I've seen a video of the problem and it's such a basic thing that would have been picked up with any sort of long term testing. The pedal is just a single flat piece of metal with a gaudy EDGELORD patterned cover that slips over it. It's just on with a friction fit though and because the pedal tapers it just comes loose and slips off when depressed with any force. Slips off and then jams under a lip in the internals just above it

So many of the issues I’m seeing reported about are of a similar nature - as if some moron thought he was being revolutionary when he told the people designing this catastrophe ‘forget everything you know about truck design!’, and then they took that literally.

Gideon wrote:
Victor Mildew wrote:I've seen a video of the problem and it's such a basic thing that would have been picked up with any sort of long term testing. The pedal is just a single flat piece of metal with a gaudy EDGELORD patterned cover that slips over it. It's just on with a friction fit though and because the pedal tapers it just comes loose and slips off when depressed with any force. Slips off and then jams under a lip in the internals just above it

So many of the issues I’m seeing reported about are of a similar nature - as if some moron thought he was being revolutionary when he told the people designing this catastrophe ‘forget everything you know about truck design!’, and then they took that literally.

It's pretty much proof that the Cybertruck is the only thing Musk has designed himself.

I’m reminded of the Simpsons episode where Homer designed his own car…..

jimbojango wrote:I’m reminded of the Simpsons episode where Homer designed his own car…..

Because of the gif at the top of the page?

Moggy wrote:
jimbojango wrote:I’m reminded of the Simpsons episode where Homer designed his own car…..

Because of the gif at the top of the page?

I hadn’t noticed the Homer driving by in it initially but yes. I can imagine the engineers having to accept his ill conceived ideas, being told to say the opposite of what they just said. He should do the voiceover on the advert, “All my life I’ve searched for a car that felt a certain way, powerful like a gorilla yet soft and yielding like a nerf ball. Shaped like an accident at a Toblerone factory.”

That can’t afford to develop the Model 2 affordable model but he spaffed cash on that monstrosity.

I bet homers can would have been better built.

Musk is a strawberry floating clown. :lol:

Australia’s prime minister has labelled X’s owner, Elon Musk, an “arrogant billionaire who thinks he is above the law” as the rift deepens between Australia and the tech platform over the removal of videos of a violent stabbing in a Sydney church.

On Monday evening in an urgent last-minute federal court hearing, the court ordered a two-day injunction against X to hide posts globally containing the footage of the alleged stabbing of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel on 15 April. The eSafety commissioner had previously directed X to remove the posts, but X had only blocked them from access in Australia pending a legal challenge.

Anthony Albanese on Tuesday said Musk was “a bloke who’s chosen ego and showing violence over common sense”.

“Australians will shake their head when they think that this billionaire is prepared to go to court fighting for the right to sow division and to show violent videos,” he told Sky News. “He is in social media, but he has a social responsibility in order to have that social licence.”

“What the eSafety commissioner is doing is doing her job to protect the interests of Australians. And the idea that someone would go to court for the right to put up violent content on a platform shows how out of touch Mr Musk is,” he said.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... eos-ntwnfb

Australia wants to enforce a law on the entire world rather than limited to within their own borders? Why should anyone outside of Australia have Australian legislation blocking their ability to view content that isn't hosted in a data centre in Australia?

Edit: typo.

Grumpy David wrote:Australia wants to enforce a law on the entire world rather than limited to within their own borders? Why should anyone outside of Australia have Australian legislation blocking their ability to view content that isn't hosted in a date centre in Australia?

A better question would be why would Musk want to fight a country over a video of somebody being stabbed.

Moggy wrote:Musk is a strawberry floating clown.

i don't think even the joker would want to be associated with him

Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:Australia wants to enforce a law on the entire world rather than limited to within their own borders? Why should anyone outside of Australia have Australian legislation blocking their ability to view content that isn't hosted in a date centre in Australia?

A better question would be why would Musk want to fight a country over a video of somebody being stabbed.

Because he's a free speech absolutist, except when it comes to things he doesn't personally like, obviously!

Publicly available snuff for all!

As much a dickhead as Musk is, yeah, this doesn't feel like it should be enforceable. In terms of decency it absolutely should be pulled. There's also the thing of highlighting it just leads to copycat acts. But that's not going through his head, he's just keeping it up to be edgy and to epically troll the government that doesn't like him that much, dressed up as impartiality, freedom and archival.

Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:Australia wants to enforce a law on the entire world rather than limited to within their own borders? Why should anyone outside of Australia have Australian legislation blocking their ability to view content that isn't hosted in a date centre in Australia?

A better question would be why would Musk want to fight a country over a video of somebody being stabbed.

That's not a better question. It's far less interesting. It's not the specific video that matters but the wider principle.

Australia's national legislation has huge overreach if it attempts to enforce a global effect that would censor content for people that can't vote out an Australian politician / party. No ~~Taxation~~ Censorship without representation.

Hypothetically, couldn't a country create a "Ignore Australia's request for IP addresses in our country" law and compel Musk to keep the video on twitter and then what happens? He's stuck with 2 different states demanding he does the impossible?

Grumpy David wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:Australia wants to enforce a law on the entire world rather than limited to within their own borders? Why should anyone outside of Australia have Australian legislation blocking their ability to view content that isn't hosted in a date centre in Australia?

A better question would be why would Musk want to fight a country over a video of somebody being stabbed.

That's not a better question. It's far less interesting. It's not the specific video that matters but the wider principle.

Australia's national legislation has huge overreach if it attempts to enforce a global effect that would censor content for people that can't vote out an Australian politician / party. No ~~Taxation~~ Censorship without representation.

Hypothetically, couldn't a country could create a "Ignore Australia's request for IP addresses in our country" law and compel Musk to keep the video on twitter and then what happens? He's stuck with 2 different states demanding he does the impossible?

It's less interesting to you maybe.

The case of Richard O'Dwyer comes to mind here. The US are happy to try and prosecute foreigners for website content held on servers outside of the US. Musk is a US citizen, maybe he should try fighting for "free speech" there first.

Australia legislation shouldn't be able to do what they're asking as a principle, but they shouldn't be in a position where they need to ask. strawberry floating Musk :fp:

Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:Australia wants to enforce a law on the entire world rather than limited to within their own borders? Why should anyone outside of Australia have Australian legislation blocking their ability to view content that isn't hosted in a date centre in Australia?

A better question would be why would Musk want to fight a country over a video of somebody being stabbed.

That's not a better question. It's far less interesting. It's not the specific video that matters but the wider principle.

Australia's national legislation has huge overreach if it attempts to enforce a global effect that would censor content for people that can't vote out an Australian politician / party. No ~~Taxation~~ Censorship without representation.

Hypothetically, couldn't a country could create a "Ignore Australia's request for IP addresses in our country" law and compel Musk to keep the video on twitter and then what happens? He's stuck with 2 different states demanding he does the impossible?

It's less interesting to you maybe.

The case of Richard O'Dwyer comes to mind here. The US are happy to try and prosecute foreigners for website content held on servers outside of the US. Musk is a US citizen, maybe he should try fighting for "free speech" there first.

No, I don't believe you. The wider principle is objectively more interesting than a specific example.

The USA is big enough to be a global bully (and hypocrite). That doesn't make it right as a matter of principle.

Why should the Australian government be able to decide what you can view? You don't live in Australia. You have no ability to vote in favour or against censorship legislation. It lacks democratic legitimacy.

Musk being a controversial character doesn’t undermine the principle of this.

Grumpy David wrote:
No, I don't believe you.

And yet it's what I said.

Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars

Who is online

Affiliates