Elon to buy BG3

[G.I. ROBOT]

https://www.dexerto.com/gaming/elon-musk-hints-at-buying-hasbro-for-dd-after-announcing-ai-game-studio-2993666/

Better make gender-neutral and whatever characters while it's still possible.

[Salty Gamer]

You have to love when people say dumb things like he tanked X. How exactly did he tank X? There are more users now than there was. There are now more features available on X. You can now monetize your content on X. Now people can talk to each other without some blue haired angry feminist or a cuck coming in to "moderate" speech. "Oh yeah he tanked it because now there isn't a far left echo chamber and all the screeching feminists and cucks had to go to sky blue so yeah he tanked it". Have you been paying attention or are you just a closed minded imbecile who have to spout npc talking points to make yourself feel like you are a high ranking saint in the new secular church of leftardinism. If Musk were to buy Hasbro, which I doubt would happen, but if he did I am sure he wouldn't feel the need to change race into species, or change the fundamentals of certain races in the game because the world view of the church of leftardinism is that any races of any universe that has an inherently evil race is somehow an allegory for black people. But we all know the white liberal saviors have to come in to take care of the oppressed dumb black people because they can't do it for themselves. The first tenet of the church of leftardinism.

[Agent Chieftain]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GriffinPilgrim:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Agent Chieftain:

Because without him, there wouldn't be a Space X for them to work at. It's his vision for the company that moves it forward, like him or not. Saying Elon's job at the company hasn't been integral to it's success is like saying a conductor does nothing for a symphony, or coach does nothing for a sports team. Yeah, he's not the talent that's actively playing, but it's his unifying vision and plan that turns that individual talent into a grand, harmonious orchestra.

He's not the coach of the team or the conductor of the symphony, in both similes he'd be the owner. Others run his companies, SpaceX included, he just pays for it. A quick glance at the mess that was once Twitter shows what happens when he meddles directly.
Which I would mind less if he and those so strangely desperate to defend the richest man in the world from people being mean about him in forums he'll never see didn't award him the credit all the time.
It's like if on the release of Iron Man instead of praising Robert Downey Jr or Jon Favreau every started praising Isaac Perlmutter, then Marvel CEO.

Uh, sorry, but that's just plain not true. There have been numerous sources, which include Space X employees, that say that Elon has had direct involvement in the engineering and design of Space X's rockets. You can be both the owner of a restaurant, and it's head chef.

You seem to be treating Elon like he's a Bobby Kotick type. Yeah, those types of guys in business are a cancer who only know how to take and destroy.

[Ryzilynt]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย AsianGirlLover:

Is he a genius? Heck no - he’s actually quite silly, but managed to become successful despite that.

Lmao ... "managed to become successful despite that"

He "managed" to have an enormous pile of cash handed to him by his emerald mine owning father in South Africa. We don't need to get into the unbalanced playing field in South Africa.

It was clever of him to be born into extreme wealth and advantage. We can leave it there.

[Hobocop]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย jonnin:

At least he is a gamer.

Or at least he proclaims to be.

[GrimAtrament]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Salty Gamer:

You have to love when people say dumb things like he tanked X. How exactly did he tank X?

when you're bleeding ad revenue like crazy on a platform that needs ad revenue to survive. you are tanking.

also the company value sank down 56% in one year.

and has gone down 80% since.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2024/10/02/x-valuation-down-fidelity/75481287007/#:~:text=Elon%20Musk%20and%20X%20lost,billions%20of%20dollars%20in%20revenue.

sorry but the platform is tanking.

elon doesn't know how to run a buisness. he got handed money like half the inheriting billionaires that are running there companies into the ground.

twitter had rules to keep ad revenue not some made up culture war you're obsessed over.

[Agent Chieftain]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Salty Gamer:

You have to love when people say dumb things like he tanked X. How exactly did he tank X?

when you're bleeding ad revenue like crazy on a platform that needs ad revenue to survive. you are tanking.

And yet, major advertisers like Comcast, IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lionsgate Entertainment, have all started advertising on twitter again after having left the platform. So clearly, they think it's worth investing ad revenue into it again.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Elon Musk is a monster.

Just ask Grimes.

But he's a monster with a lot of money.

[GrimAtrament]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Agent Chieftain:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

when you're bleeding ad revenue like crazy on a platform that needs ad revenue to survive. you are tanking.

And yet, major advertisers like Comcast, IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lionsgate Entertainment, have all started advertising on twitter again after having left the platform. So clearly, they think it's worth investing ad revenue into it again.

anecdotals don't change the fact that it lost 80% of it's value.
also
considering how many people are moving out in the millions in these two weeks alone. i highly doubt that will last. not to mention elon screwed over artist on that platform. who have been leaving in mass because of his A.I policy nonsense of "owning your art if you post it there."

[Ryzilynt]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Agent Chieftain:

And yet, major advertisers like Comcast, IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lionsgate Entertainment, have all started advertising on twitter again after having left the platform. So clearly, they think it's worth investing ad revenue into it again.

anecdotals don't change the fact that it lost 80% of it's value.
also
considering how many people are moving out i highly doubt that will last. not to mention elon screwed over artist on that platform. who have been leaving in mass because of his A.I policy nonsense of "owning your art if you post it there."

Just to play devils advocate here, I think almost any social media platform you post on say they own your material.

[GrimAtrament]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Ryzilynt:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

anecdotals don't change the fact that it lost 80% of it's value.
also
considering how many people are moving out i highly doubt that will last. not to mention elon screwed over artist on that platform. who have been leaving in mass because of his A.I policy nonsense of "owning your art if you post it there."

Just to play devils advocate here, I think almost any social media platform you post on say they own your material.

no platform except X is stupid enough to claim they can do whatever they want with your art.
that's just social media suicide waiting to happen.

also this entire thread is based on a random statement from elon and Hasbro hasn't even confirmed that they are in talks.

last time someone tried to buy them (tencent who has more money then elon.) hasbro refused them.

and as far as business go i wouldn't trust my company with someone who managed to lose 56% in one year and is now 80% down with no sign of recovery.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Emeralds are a very unique form of 'bootstraps'.

[Agent Chieftain]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Agent Chieftain:

And yet, major advertisers like Comcast, IBM, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Lionsgate Entertainment, have all started advertising on twitter again after having left the platform. So clearly, they think it's worth investing ad revenue into it again.

anecdotals don't change the fact that it lost 80% of it's value.
also
considering how many people are moving out in the millions in these two weeks alone. i highly doubt that will last. not to mention elon screwed over artist on that platform. who have been leaving in mass because of his A.I policy nonsense of "owning your art if you post it there."

That article you shared was from October. The news of advertisers returning happened just a week or two ago. And that means that ad value is already returning to the platform.

And we've heard the "Twitter Exodus" stories before. First it was Mastodon, then it was Threads, now it's BlueSky. And a lot of prominent people saying they were going to leave X for BlueSky have already come back to X, just like every other time. They didn't even make it a week.

Can't speak to the A.I. art policy thing though. Never even heard of that before this.

[GrimAtrament]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Agent Chieftain:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

anecdotals don't change the fact that it lost 80% of it's value.
also
considering how many people are moving out in the millions in these two weeks alone. i highly doubt that will last. not to mention elon screwed over artist on that platform. who have been leaving in mass because of his A.I policy nonsense of "owning your art if you post it there."

That article you shared was from October. The news of advertisers returning happened just a week or two ago. And that means that ad value is already returning to the platform.

And we've heard the "Twitter Exodus" stories before. First it was Mastodon, then it was Threads, now it's BlueSky. And a lot of prominent people saying they were going to leave X for BlueSky have already come back to X, just like every other time. They didn't even make it a week.

Can't speak to the A.I. art policy thing though. Never even heard of that before this.

more anecdotes. show me where the revenue is recovering because it isn't.

considering blue sky is getting more and more people i think this is likely to be permanent. especially if moderation does nothing to curb harassment. which is bad for advertisement revenue. and again artist leaving because a.i policy is bad.

you never heard of it before because you probably don't do research.
https://9meters.com/entertainment/social-media/elon-musks-x-can-now-use-your-data-to-train-its-ai
https://lifehacker.com/tech/x-new-ai-training-terms
https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/15/unlike-x-bluesky-says-it-wont-train-ai-on-your-posts/

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

Elon is a typical billionaire narcissist with no loyalty to any other human being.

[Agent Chieftain]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GrimAtrament:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Agent Chieftain:

That article you shared was from October. The news of advertisers returning happened just a week or two ago. And that means that ad value is already returning to the platform.

And we've heard the "Twitter Exodus" stories before. First it was Mastodon, then it was Threads, now it's BlueSky. And a lot of prominent people saying they were going to leave X for BlueSky have already come back to X, just like every other time. They didn't even make it a week.

Can't speak to the A.I. art policy thing though. Never even heard of that before this.

more anecdotes. show me where the revenue is recovering because it isn't.

considering blue sky is getting more and more people i think this is likely to be permanent. especially if moderation does nothing to curb harassment. which is bad for advertisement revenue.

you never heard of it before because you probably don't do research.

... You're seriously trying to argue that major advertisers, who were absent for a year, won't increase twitter's ad revenue now that they're pumping money into ads on the platform again...

Oookayy....