You say that like the Saudi's aren't cool with taking Twitter down. It was the cause of a lot of strife and issues during the "Arab Spring" years.
I suspect they're overjoyed it's tanking.
A small price to pay for them to be killing informational pipelines. It was good to be able to actually talk to politicians in my country, a bit of astroturfing for the greater good.
Yep those kinda of governments thrive best when there isn't an easy way for common people to spread news about them and organize.
I don't see the point of this whole charade, rebranding, slow death. Why not just buy it and close all servers if that's their goal?
Because that's a definite action.
If they wanted twitter destabilised, "giving" it to someone that is going to mismanage it (either deliberately mismanage it, or because they are an egotistical eccentric rich person who aspires to be a tech guru entrepreneur genius) is a much more subtle way to achieve it.
Adding:
Worst case, they have leverage over the company to remove/censor content. Even if that was their initial goal, having twitter collapse is still in their interest
I don't think they care, as long as it becomes a shadow of what it was.
And if it succeeded and made them money? Who are they to complain?
It's a win win in their books.
I don't Musk even knows he's being played as the fool.
You say that like the Saudi's aren't cool with taking Twitter down. It was the cause of a lot of strife and issues during the "Arab Spring" years.
I suspect they're overjoyed it's tanking.
A small price to pay for them to be killing informational pipelines. It was good to be able to actually talk to politicians in my country, a bit of astroturfing for the greater good.
Yep those kinda of governments thrive best when there isn't an easy way for common people to spread news about them and organize.
I don't see the point of this whole charade, rebranding, slow death. Why not just buy it and close all servers if that's their goal?
Because that's a definite action.
If they wanted twitter destabilised, "giving" it to someone that is going to mismanage it (either deliberately mismanage it, or because they are an egotistical eccentric rich person who aspires to be a tech guru entrepreneur genius) is a much more subtle way to achieve it.
Adding:
Worst case, they have leverage over the company to remove/censor content. Even if that was their initial goal, having twitter collapse is still in their interest
I don't think they care, as long as it becomes a shadow of what it was.
And if it succeeded and made them money? Who are they to complain?
It's a win win in their books.
I don't Musk even knows he's being played as the fool.