Well, Twitter contributors have approved the acquisition of Elon Musk on Twitter dot com, so that’s fine. Musk, at this point, has sent several messages to try to close the deal, and who knows, maybe he’ll send more. His excuse for backing out of the deal – I wouldn’t try to pretend he really believes in this stuff – doesn’t sound good, in part because it looks like his whistleblowing machine has gone bankrupt.
One way to implement the changes Zatko wanted was to get Dorsey involved!
The pretext Musk relies on is that Twitter intentionally lies about its user numbers, outnumbering bots, etc. The whistleblower complaint filed by Peiter “Mudge” Zatko may slightly support his case, but not much.
I was trying to take Zatko seriously. But Robert Graham put the thing I was thinking into words: Zatko doesn’t know how to get things done in the company culture:
Agents expect their superiors to help defend them in their work disputes. But CEOs don’t have that luxury. They are at the top of the food chain and themselves are responsible for conflict resolution. There is no one to go to to complain, not the board of directors who only wants results, not HR, because you are above HR. Not anyone – you have to resolve your own differences.
Zatko’s complaint appears to be related to seeking a dispute resolution in the court of public opinion, as he was unable to resolve his dispute with [Twitter CEO Parag] Agrawal himself.
Zatko also did a lot of whining about Jack Dorsey, the former CEO of Twitter, in his complaint. I’m not a CEO, but if you give me an absent CEO, I’ll simply do it Whatever I want. I’m surprised that didn’t happen to Zatko because one way to implement the changes Zatko wanted was to turn on Dorsey! He could have done so by conspiring with other Rebel Executives or just by rogue execution. Given how Zatko describes Dorsey as an “uninvolved CEO” who hasn’t spoken to him for “days or weeks,” dealing with Dorsey was supposed to be child’s play.
‘Cyberwhistle’ Not Available Now, Presumably Tesla Is Richer Than Dogecoin
In fact, the more I heard, the more I thought current Twitter CEO Parag Agrawal had a view on Zatko’s “weak leadership”, which was one of the reasons Agrawal cited for Zatko’s dismissal. I’m not alone either – Twitter shares closed 2 percent higher after Zatko’s testimony on Tuesday, which doesn’t seem like much until the rest of the stock market realizes Drops. Investors didn’t seem to think much of Zatko’s complaints either.
More, ace ruffledMike Masnick notes, Zatko’s ideas about Twitter scaling monetized users do not align with Musk’s arguments about bots and fake accounts.
There is one bright side to a mask here. (Well, along with a shareholder lawsuit related to Zatko.) He tweeted a link to a Tesla Merch shop where one can order a “Cyberwhistle” for 1,000 Dogecoin. “Cyberwhistle” is not available now, and it is assumed that Tesla is richer than Dogecoin.
What are Musk’s lawyers doing during all this? Well, according to Twitter, they don’t comply with the discovery process (discover, discover, discover, discover, discover!).
In a filing, Twitter claimed that Musk did not produce texts that he and the man who runs his family’s office, Jared Birshall, sent to each other. You may remember Birchall, aka “James Brickhouse,” from Musk’s 2019 defamation trial: He entered into a non-disclosure agreement with a con man who promises to dig dirt in a cave that Musk has dubbed “Pedo guy” and also earned the URL justballs.com for Musk.
“It wouldn’t make sense to buy Twitter if we were headed to WW3.”
Twitter says it knows these messages between Musk and Birchall exist because they were provided by third parties. “The defendants refused to explain the discovery failure,” Twitter’s lawyers wrote. “Documents have been inappropriately destroyed or inappropriately withheld.”
Twitter cites some messages issued by Morgan Stanley between Musk and his bankers Michael Grimes (unrelated), telling Musk to “slow down in just a few days” when delivering a speech from Russian leader Vladimir Putin. “It wouldn’t make sense to buy Twitter if we were headed to WW3,” Musk wrote in a text message to Grimes. These messages were sent on May 8th, after, after Musk signed his merger agreement for $44 billion on April 25, and they’re proposing BloombergMatt Levine is right: Elon Musk has no idea how the merger will work.
A second set of texts between Musk and the Grimes in which Musk says they need to do their due diligence, which Musk had already given up. “One very essential element of due diligence is understanding exactly how Twitter maintains that 95% of its daily active users are real people and not an account,” Musk wrote in a May 8 text message. (On May 17, Musk will publicly announce the deal “can’t go ahead” because of the bots, so I’m assuming he already had cold feet in the scripts.) “If that number is closer to 50% or less, that’s what I think based on my feed They fundamentally misrepresented Twitter’s value to advertisers and investors.”
Look, it basically seems to me that Musk based his estimates of the robot on his personal Twitter experience. But this is distasteful A way to judge the number of real users on Twitter.
In response, Musk’s lawyers said the failure to deliver all the texts was a minor accident, then complained about the Twitter messages. Ringtone, ring. (There’s even a crazy footnote about how being so mean to other lawyers is unethical.) Lawyers cite some of the issues with Twitter’s production of other documents, then complain that Twitter’s “early movement and frenetic rhetoric” is meant to distract from Twitter’s own failings. In addition to these messages they were In the end, Musk’s team complains. Look , real problem It was the schedule, which is Very fastThe Twitter lawyer, who are they Just so mean.
It’s as if Musk’s money was covered in Teflon
I don’t find this convincing, but I’m not a judge.
Anyway, Musk’s lawyers say the omission of transcripts with the Morgan Stanley bankers was an oversight, and they filed else Texts between Grimes (the banker, not the ex of Musk) and Musk. They say they produced these letters.
Another fun sideline happens in the footnote to a Twitter profile. Apparently, a16z’s Marc Andreessen was discussing a co-investment with Musk in Signal, a texting platform where messages can be set to auto-delete. Musk’s lawyers say he doesn’t usually use this in business. I think Twitter’s lawyers are right to be skeptical of Musk’s claims that he doesn’t usually use Signal for business transactions, but as Musk’s lawyers point out, this exchange happened before Musk decided to back off. It’s messy though.
I don’t know, man. I don’t blame hedge fund managers who are betting that Musk will have to take over Twitter. I’m not impressed with musk here! Kind of looks like an idiot who doesn’t really have an issue! I love the drama, though: One of the hedge fund managers betting against Musk is David Einhorn, who was I once sent a bunch of shorts After he announced that he was short selling Tesla. (This was a branding promotion from a company that sells shorts that are 5.5 inches inside, not a mask.)
On the other hand, Musk managed to avoid his emails getting into discovery, a big win for him and a big loss for me, as I am a person who loves reading other people’s email.
Maybe he’ll have to buy Twitter, and I’ll finally get out of the hell site. But it’s as if Musk’s money had him covered in Teflon – the consequences of his business slipped right in. The SEC was unable to hold him accountable. NASA hasn’t done that either. Nor the National Labor Relations Board that ordered him to do so Delete a tweet that is still pending. Why is the Delaware Court of Delaware different?
#Elon #Musk #attempt #lie