Well I am surprised that Musk completed this deal. I know it has been, pretty much, a done deal for a few weeks now, but a few months back I could not see it. But it seems he never really wanted it, and is somewhat forced into it because he'd lose a 1 billion in financial damages to Twitter if he did not complete, and he's probably worried too about the reputational damage this would do to his brand and his ability to raise revenues (loans and backers) in the future.
If he goes ahead with what he has suggested for Twitter, I think it will - as others have suggested - end up destroying the platform. Yes, Trump
was very important for driving engagement for the platform, but it was becoming too toxic and Twitter, belatedly, recognised this. It is not possible to have both an open platform where nearly anything might be expressed, and at the same time provide space which most people, across the political and social spectrum, will be happy to use in one way or another. Only the most naive believe it is possible to have a social media platform to, effectively, no rules. And, the problem only gets worse with scale. RAWK could not exist without rules - Twitter without rules will be a 'delight to behold'.
As for the man: well, maybe his Asperger's is part of the reason why he engages the way he does online; but I think there are fundamental character flaws too. People with Asperger's often miss social cues and tend to lack the ability to empathise. But they are generally capable of learning to appreciate how others might feel and are affected by their actions, even if the ability is not innate. It is not that they don't care - conversely, Musk appears to not care about anyone but himself. I feel Asperger's is used to excuse much of his bad behaviour. I expect that the primary cause of his lack of empathy is arrogance and sociopathy, not Asperger's. I appreciate that I am going out on a limb with my comments here - they are my feelings on the matter and largely unsupported by facts. Though, his ego-crushed tantrum at not being allowed to hijack the plight of the trapped children in the Thai cave, suggests Asperger's is not the problem here.
I don't know enough about the history of Tesla and SpaceX. But Musk must have a damn good idea of what he is doing there. Maybe Tesla will flounder in the end, as it is up against some mighty competition. But the company has driven forward electric cars like no other company. Would electric cars be a thing without Tesla/Musk? I think not - or, at least, nowhere near as well developed.
SpaceX is responsible for some incredible developments. But I am concerned about the huge increase in use of rockets - they are very ungreen. This also ties into Starlink: a lot of rockets for that too (and their impact on the environment); and we do not know where lies the tipping point for space debris, and the resulting cascading effect of obliterated satellites obliterating more satellites (some think we have already surpassed the tipping point).
Stupid space tourism:
https://theconversation.com/space-tourism-rockets-emit-100-times-more-co-per-passenger-than-flights-imagine-a-whole-industry-164601Stupid shit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_debris#Debris_growthI am not suggesting that there should be no space flights or no Starlink. Obviously, Starlink promises to be a boon for many people around the world. But the launching of rockets should not be a free-for-all - they should occur in a considered way, instead of being left to corporations and the worst governments on the planet.
Even stupider shit:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/old-russian-rocket-motor-explodes-in-orbit-creating-more-space-debris/Anyway. If Musk brings back Trump and effectively does away with any content moderation controls, it will be interesting to see the effects upon membership numbers. If they plummet and the platform becomes even more of a cesspit, Twitter will also lose its importance for news. That could be a very good thing.
