Elon Musk vows ‘thermonuclear lawsuit’ as advertisers flee X over antisemitism::Tesla founder threatens to take action against media watchdog ‘the split second court opens on Monday’

  • M500@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    217
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    What is wrong with him? I think he legit needs psychiatric help.

    Maybe the people who get this rich due so at the cost of their mental health. Maybe it’s not healthy for a single person to hold so much wealth.

    Deep down, does he know what he is doing is wrong? Is his Twitter behavior an expression of some negative feelings he can’t cope with?

    • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      160
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      He’s always been a shit head like this. He just got rich enough that he thought he could get away with showing his true colors.

      The dude comes from a family of slave owners and was born with a silver spoon up his ass.

      • Subverb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Or, as former Texas governor Ann Richards said of George H. W. Bush in 1988:

        ‘He can’t help it, he was born with a silver foot in his mouth!’

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      What is wrong with him? I think he legit needs psychiatric help.

      He is a Narcissist. Yes, that is a medical condition. He is thoroughly unable to recognize other people as equal. They are mere nuisances.

          • remotelove@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            10 months ago

            I thought “narcissist” was legitimately confused with “sociopath” in this thread for a second.

            After looking over the definitions again for the distinctions, my immediate thought was “why not both?”

              • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                It’s also in the DSM, but there’s probably ranges of both and I don’t think either one precludes or excludes the other. Narcissism also shares a lot of symptoms with bipolar disorder, which the recent interviews with the biographer Walter Isaacson about Musk seems pretty clearly to be a problem. (See ‘demon mode’)

    • randomthin2332@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Eh you spend your whole life getting away with anything because you have the money, you end up starting to believe your own bullshit.

      One of the reasons so many people are rich is because they make money off the smart or the hard working. You never do the work yourself because you legitimately aren’t the best person for the job.

      I think Elon bought in too much during the wave of “I’m a tech genius who put a car in space, make electric cars and spaceships” and I think he actually believes he did that instead of the countless and thankless hours of all the real professionals.

      The problem with this thinking, is now he feels like he ^needs to do something. Just like that micromanaging boss who doesn’t help at all and just spouts random nonsense thinking it will magically make it go faster. But instead he’s just self sabotaging the process.

      This is what happens when you start to believe your own bullshit. If he was smart, he should walk away and let the professionals handle it.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Excessive wealth definitely leads to bad mental health outcomes for the wealthy.

      The wealth and power leads to their becoming detached from the rest of humanity. They start seeing others as objects instead of people.

    • eronth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think he’s just stupid and never actually had to run a company. Make insane demands and people had to figure it out

    • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      They get this way partly because they’re surrounded by yes men.

      To take an example of someone like Harvey Weinstein. They don’t typically come out of the gate asking people to get naked for a movie role.

      But they might first just be handsy with people and nobody says anything so it becomes normal, then they start caressing people and this becomes the new normal. Before you know it you’re fucking insane.

      To put it simply, people don’t normally notice incremental changes in people and over time these can become pretty outlandish.

      With Elon it’s that nobody ever tells him he’s wrong and before you know it you think you know everything.

      • Octavio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        I want him to get the help that he needs. Not because I sympathize with him to any degree (I don’t). But because I want him to stop ruining everything.

        • XTL@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Well, maybe hold off until he’s killed the failwhale.

          For greater good.

      • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Trying to explain one’s behaviour as a psychological issue isn’t automatically sympathy towards the person.

        Who is “we”?

    • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It makes perfect sense once you understand money is a hard drug.

      No one needs this much money, they could be living a quit happy fulfilling life but instead all they do is try to obtain more, at the expense of social relations, their family and their own mental health. They destroy their own lives to get the dopamine hit of the numbers going up.

      People like Elon are addicts. Greed is an illness but rather than giving these people medical help to stop hoarding excess wealth we glorify their problem like their winning.

    • daltotron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Maybe the people who get this rich due so at the cost of their mental health.

      It is not that power corrupts, but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Even the extremely rich tend to not wield power with such a kind of wild abandon as elon, they tend to offset as much responsibility as possible and ride the wave, because the level of delusional self-importance you need in order to believe yourself smarter than literally everyone under you is even too astounding to the leeches of society.

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      He is sinking the ship on purpose.

      Bankruptcy frees him from paying back the 44 billion he borrowed to buy Twitter.

      That is his only option.

      Stop underestimating him, just because he is evil does not mean he is dumb.

      • darkpanda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        How would that work? If X goes bankrupt, he’s still on the hook for buying it? He’s not the one going bankrupt, the business he bought would be. That would be like if I bought a car and crashed it and wrote it off. I still bought the car, I just drove it into a telephone pole. I still owe the money for the wreckage.

  • Additional_Prune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    166
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s not just a lawsuit, it’s thermonuclear lawsuit! His lawyers better handle it carefully, lest they be blown into itty bitty pieces. Elon stopped maturing at about the age of fourteen.

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    127
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    You can’t sue people for deciding NOT to patronize the service you sell, idiot

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      163
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      He’s not suing the advertisers, he’s suing a watchdog who’s pointing out all the antisemitism and whatnot, which causes the advertisers to flee because in his world, none of it is bad.

      • profdc9@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Unless Musk gets a hearing in front of a judge who exposes his own sympathy to fascism, I can’t see this case going anywhere. The truth is an absolute defense to libel.

      • olosta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes advertisers are only publicly insulted not sued : “Many of the largest advertisers are the greatest oppressors of your right to free speech.”

        I suppose that’s meant to inspire confidence they will not be sued, only slightly bullied if they come back.

  • eluvatar@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    This is one of those cases where even if he wins he loses. Who would want to sell ads anymore?

    • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well, even if he has no intention of winning, the simple act of filing will cost any named watchdog media group money. I doubt too many are swimming in it.

      • knotthatone@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s why there are SLAPP-back laws.

        He’s also got a habit of ignoring legal advice and running his mouth in public, so he’s likely going to end up writing another big check for that misadventure if his lawyers can’t talk him out of going through with it

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          All he has to do is file in a state without SLAPP protections. There’s no federal SLAPP statute.

        • 4lan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Planned bankruptcy. How is it that we all think he is a genius but also think he is dumb at the same time? This is all according to plan

          • usernamefactory@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            10 months ago

            There must be a better way to bankrupt a company than flushing your personal reputation down the toilet. He’s just dumb. No contradiction.

  • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    Tesla founder

    Ok look The Independent, I know that the company says he’s a founder and Wikipedia lists him as a founder, but he’s not. Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning founded the company almost a full year before Musk had anything to do with it. He had to sue them to add his name to the list officially.

    • Lianodel@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Wikipedia lists him as a founder

      Does it? I expected better of Wikipedia, so I checked, and both Musk’s page and Tesla’s avoid simply listing him as a founder by explaining the situation, i.e., that he was an early investor. Even the sidebar for Tesla, Inc. just links to a subsection rather than listing names.

      Just a note to add, addressing a related talking point that inevitably comes up:

      It’s a very common piece of misinformation that he was determined to be a founder in a court of law. That never happened. It was part of an agreement to avoid a lawsuit. It’s a lie that the relevant parties could all live with as part of a larger settlement.

      I like to ask Musk apologists, “Do you need to found a company to be that company’s founder, yes or no?” If they waffle or say “no,” there’s no point continuing in good faith, because they’re not serious people. It’s not hard to say “Okay, that’s a bit of a fib, he should be called an honorary founder, but blah blah blah…” But if they can’t even do that, then they aren’t operating based on reality.

      • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        Only here:

        A lawsuit settlement agreed to by Eberhard and Tesla in September 2009 allows all five – Eberhard, Tarpenning, Wright, Musk, and Straubel – to call themselves co-founders.

        Which I agree is sort of showing the trick and explaining how it’s done all at once. But I wanted to give the headline writer a little bit of the benefit of the doubt that they actually looked it up somewhere other than on the Tesla website.

      • weew@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        I will respond to this by asking “is registering the name of a company the only thing that counts when founding a company?”

        Because that’s what the original founders did. They registered the name. No patents, no designs, no engineering, no staff. They registered the name, then went searching for VC money.

        • MDKAOD@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          That’s a terrible argument. As if the idea and pitch aren’t relevant in any way. For a preschool example of this, check out Shark Tank. You might have heard of it?

          • Roboticide@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            No, it’s not a terrible argument. Anyone can have a pitch or idea. That does not mean it’s automatically a viable product/service or a viable business.

            It’s a valid question, how do we define “founder”? To play devil’s advocate, I’m curious if the people who think Musk didn’t co-found Tesla also agree Aaron Schwartz didn’t co-found Reddit. He joined later, after reddit was already incorporated by Hoffman and Ohanian.

            In business, “founder” is already an honorary title. It has no inherent power. Co-founders often ensure they get C-suite positions as a company grows, have stock/shares, or other legal powers, but none of those are guaranteed just by being a “founder”. So practically, there’s no difference between calling Musk a “co-founder” versus “honorary co-founder.” Let’s just focus on calling him a piece of shit for the very definitive and obvious things we can point to.

            • MDKAOD@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              If the pitch is made and a VC opts in but doesn’t negotiate a title, then they aren’t privvy to the title of co-founder only after the concept is proven sound. Either you’re a founder or you’re not.

              *edit to add visual

    • weew@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Ok, it sounds like you’re trying real hard to split hairs.

      Not just the company itself and Wikipedia say so, but legally, he is a founder. That was the outcome of the lawsuit.

      It’s true that the first 2 founders legally registered the corporate entity known as “Tesla Motors”. Then for the next year, they didn’t do jack shit involving anything automotive… they were just going around looking for investors.

      Musk was basically their first, and biggest, investor. They didn’t actually hire any engineers or, you know, actually start doing anything until Musk’s money came into play.

      • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        This is the entire argument Musk made in court, and honestly I don’t think I care. Tarpenning and Eberhard are both engineers with actual inventions and software attributed to their direct design long before the idea of Tesla; Eberhard wrote the company’s mission statement and guiding principles, and the two did the market research to discover that an electric vehicle could be a high-end consumer product. At its core, before the battery technology and stators were invented (neither of which Musk contributed to), that’s what Tesla was.

        While it’s true that Musk led development on the Roadster, I think we’ve seen very publicly over the past year what his “development leadership” looks like and I’m not entirely convinced it’s a value-add. (Even before his disastrous year with Twitter, his checkered past leading Paypal—and being forced out for his poor leadership—would give a similar impression.) He didn’t come up with the battery tech or the stators. He didn’t contribute to a single patent in the early days of Tesla. In fact, that first design of the Roadster probably owed more to Lotus Motors than to Musk himself.

        It appears that he did with the Roadster, and the early years at Tesla, what he always does when leading product development: jump into an existing idea, make wild assertions and insistences, let the actual engineers figure out how to do it, and then justify a reason to exclude stuff when it turns out to be unfeasible. He did this demonstrably with SpaceX, Hyperloop, Boring Company, PayPal/Zip2, and now Twitter, and he’s done it demonstrably at Tesla with the Cybertruck, so I don’t know why it would be a surprise that he did it twenty years ago at Tesla too. He doesn’t invent things or lead teams, he just makes noise and bluster.

        Which just leaves the money. And would you credit a really loud bank with “founding” a company?

        I wouldn’t.

  • 13617@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    So much for the free market and the ability to choose 🙄🙄🙄🙄

    • Marxism-Fennekinism@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      10 months ago

      Musk is definitely the type to say “the customer is always right” when he’s the customer yet apparently didn’t realize that same thing applies to his customers.

      • don@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Musk: The customer is always right!

        [Ad buyers stop buying ads]

        Musk: WAIT NO NOT LIKE THAT

  • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    This isn’t technology news… It’s business news, and Elon spam.

    Just look at the comment section how many comments are actually related to technology?

    Can we not put the bar on the floor?

  • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    10 months ago

    Nothing to see here. He definitely isn’t suing them because he wants large advertisers like Dosney on the platform and to be able to say the worst shit imaginable at the same time. Clearly nothing to see, obviously. /s

  • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’d imagine it would be rather easy to to prove wether that claim is true or not; show screenshots of said posts with these advertisements next to them.

        • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          screenshots from a single source don’t prove much though, they can be easily doctored. Not saying that they are, but twitter could use that angle to make the case. That’s why services like archive.org are so important IMO, having an unbiased third party take a snapshot of a site that corroborates with what you’re seeing is gold. It’s a shame though that I don’t think archive.org can actually do this with twitter in this way?

          • LinusOnLemmyWld@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            10 months ago

            screenshots from a single source don’t prove much though

            if the source doesn’t lie they very much prove it. the number of sources doesn’t mean anything because a doctored screenshot can easily be spread by many, it’s the quality of source that matters.

          • scarabic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Twitter is heavily heavily heavily monitored by bots day in and out. This is how we have news articles about the latest Boebert tweet that she deleted minutes after drunk posting it. These shots could be corroborated a million different ways.

      • Takatakatakatakatak@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        To be clear, is he in hot water over what he said about the ADL? Or the fact that Nazi’s are proliferating on his platform and advertisers don’t like it?

        • breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Short answer: yes.

          Longer answer: he’s in slightly-higher-than-warm water over his interactions with the ADL and Nazis/antisemitism on the site. He’s in hot water over his personal promotion and espousal of antisemitism and ads being displayed next to Nazi content.

  • Marxism-Fennekinism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    So he’s gonna sue his customers for no longer buying stuff from him? That’s it, I’m suing all of you for never buying any Marxism-Fennekinism merch!

    • 4lan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. This is all a part of his plan to bankrupt the Twitter.

      He has to pretend he is trying to make the business profitable, while sinking the ship in the process.

      He owes more in interest than Twitter makes in profit.

      The company is worth less than a half of what it he bought it for. He can’t even sell it and break even, there would be a 20 billion dollar loss

      Yet again he is going to be bailed out on the back of the taxpayer. You and I

      • nicetomeetyouIMVEGAN@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s just you, with intelligence, trying to explain what he, without intelligence, is doing. You’re projecting intelligence on him because he won capitalism, and Capitalism wants you to think it’s because of merit. It isn’t, he’s an idiot. Look at the name of his child… Do you think this is a person with foresight?

      • Kainsley@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by neglect, ignorance or incompetence

        • reksas@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          And what do you do when someone is actually doing something malicious?

          clarification edit: malicious people can easily pretend to be stupid and claim they have made a mistake when they do bad shit.

      • angrystego@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I agree with you. I think twitter was as good for progressives as it was for nazis and Elon and others couldn’t have that. The fact that we’re not discussing this on Twitter and not even on Reddit, but on this beautiful but obscure platform, showd it all works well for the nazis.