EconomicCorner001

[richardmurray]

So Musk bought Twitter to make it a legally private data source that is being grown real time by the public users to his own private modern, circa 2025 , computer system commonly while falsely called an Artificial Intelligence, xai. The money he loaned to buy twitter he presented this to them in some way or form. Alot of data today is behind various paywalls, literally as in terms of service or legally through lawsuits if accessed. So getting data that is not only of a heavy quantity while still being added into plus private to all other data acquirers is priceless. Even if former twitter losses social media market share its value to growing xai is on course to making losses with x smaller than revenue earned from xai , potentially of a varying scale. 

 

Question: What will the ability of offline devices software having the generative functionality of OpenAI+ChatGPT+MidJourney aside the data of the google search engines internal encyclopedia have on humans?

At some point devices will exist that don't need to be connected to the world wide web, which is in the internet , for the software inside said devices to exhibit the combined functionality plus base data content of multiple services of the most potent computer programs accessible online today, circa 2024. That moment will be a watershed in terms of online or world wide web usage. 

 

 

CITATIONS

 

Segment Critics said Musk 'overpaid' for Twitter. Thanks to Trump and xAI, it could actually be a steal.
...
Not only has X served as Musk's political megaphone — it has also been a lucrative source of training data for one of the billionaire's other ventures, xAI, a startup that has rocketed to a $50 billion valuation in 16 months. [ https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-xai-startup-valuation-history-chart-2024-11 : POSTSCRIPTA- segment]
That fresh valuation means xAI has surpassed Musk's purchase price for X. It came with a $5 billion funding round, which The Wall Street Journal reported was backed by the Qatar Investment Authority and Sequoia Capital. [ https://www.businessinsider.com/xai-value-twitter-funding-elon-musk-x-2024-11 ]
Musk launched xAI in July 2023 as a springboard to get in the AI race. He had cofounded and then left OpenAI over differences with its CEO, Sam Altman.
The startup has made up significant ground on its rivals by using X as a source of third-party data, one of the key avenues for training large language models. [ https://www.businessinsider.com/generative-ai-wall-scaling-laws-training-data-chatgpt-gemini-claude-2024-11 ]
In late 2023, Musk blocked other organizations from scraping X's data for free — but gave xAI continued access. That gave xAI a crucial boost. [ https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/08/x-updates-its-terms-to-ban-crawling-and-scraping/ : POSTSCRIPTB- segment]
...
Though the number of X users has been falling, Musk said in May that it had 600 million monthly active users.
"This is a level that neither OpenAI nor any other third party can access, or at least not as easily, which provides a huge competitive edge and therefore makes xAI a valuable company," Keenan-O'Malley added.
Wired reported last year that access to 0.3% of X's data would cost about $500,000 annually. [ https://www.wired.com/story/twitter-data-api-prices-out-nearly-everyone/ ; title: Twitter’s $42,000-per-Month API Prices Out Nearly Everyone ; subtitle : Tiers will start at $500,000 a year for access to 0.3 percent of the company’s tweets.~]
"Clearly X's or indeed any social-media platform's data is valuable," Advika Jalan, the head of research at MMC Ventures, told BI.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/critics-said-musk-overpaid-for-twitter-thanks-to-trump-and-xai-it-could-actually-be-a-steal/ar-AA1v6Ojy?ocid=socialshare

 

POSTSCRIPTA 

It took OpenAI, last valued at $157 billion in October, about nine years to reach the $50 billion milestone, according to PitchBook data.
...
Elon Musk, starting with a team of 12 people in July 2023, did it in less than a year and a half.

 

POSTSCRIPTB
The new terms, which are effective from September 29, ban any kind of scraping or crawling without “prior written consent.” [ https://x.com/en/tos ] 

NOTE: crawling or scraping the Services in any form, for any purpose without our prior written consent is expressly prohibited.
The previous version of the terms allowed crawling in accordance with robots.txt.
“NOTE: crawling the Services is permissible if done in accordance with the provisions of the robots.txt file, however, scraping the Services without our prior consent is expressly prohibited,” it read.
In the last few months, Twitter has also altered its robots.txt file — a file that gives instructions to robot crawlers about what parts of the site they are permitted to visit — to remove instructions for all crawler bots apart from Google.
In 2015, Twitter confirmed that it had a firehose deal in place with Google to surface tweets in search results. It is not clear if the nature or terms of that deal have changed under the new management.
We have reached out to Google to understand if the search giant has an agreement in place. We will update the story if we hear back.
X has also altered the robots.txt file to disallow crawlers to get information such as likes and retweets related to specific posts. It also bars robots from looking at an account’s likes, media and photos.
Earlier this month, X changed its privacy policy to state it might use public data to train AI models. Musk has previously noted during a Twitter space that xAI, a company founded in July, would use public data such as tweets to train its models. X’s new privacy policy also has provisions for the collection of biometric data of users along with education and job history.

[ProfD]

The algorithms will mainly serve to further enrich those who are already wealthy and a handful of lucky investors.

[richardmurray]

@ProfD I must add while no one denies the rich get richer the point of this post is to clarify why musk bought twitter

[ProfD]

1 hour ago, richardmurray said:

@ProfD I must add while no one denies the rich get richer the point of this post is to clarify why musk bought twitter

That's simple...Musk bought Twitter because he could afford it.

[Pioneer1]

My question is...why was he ALLOWED to buy it?

I support a well regulated Capitalism and enterprise.....however when it comes to certain things like Twitter, Youtube, and other mass media platforms.....these shouldn't be privately owned.

It's my understanding that Twitter was privately owned BEFORE Musk purchased it, and I had a problem with that too.

You don't coral everybody together and force them into a privately owned domain like Twitter or Facebook or force them to use a private service.
Basically you're FORCING the public to make another man or select group (share holders) rich.

The government can easily come up with platforms and sites that the public can share and the rules are more fair instead of letting dictators run the fucking show.
 

[ProfD]

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

My question is...why was he ALLOWED to buy it?

Capitalism. 

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

I support a well regulated Capitalism and enterprise.....

Slippery slope of Communism.

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

however when it comes to certain things like Twitter, Youtube, and other mass media platforms.....these shouldn't be privately owned.

Under Capitalism, these things start out privately-owned like Microsoft. 

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

It's my understanding that Twitter was privately owned BEFORE Musk purchased it, and I had a problem with that too.

Welcome to Capitalism. 

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

You don't coral everybody together and force them into a privately owned domain like Twitter or Facebook or force them to use a private service.
Basically you're FORCING the public to make another man or select group (share holders) rich.

Nobody was forced into using those platforms. However, the fact that folks flocked to it made the owners rich. 

1 hour ago, Pioneer1 said:

The government can easily come up with platforms and sites that the public can share and the rules are more fair instead of letting dictators run the fucking show.

Socialism is the form of government that is antithetical to Capitalism.

 

The trick is coming up with the next big thing especially if the desire to be wealthy.

[richardmurray]

@ProfD 

No he bought twitter because the firm he part owned involved with AI didn't concur to his strategies. So he bought twitter to advance his own AI firm. H wanted to do it as part of the former firm but he had issues with the other owner. and if certain court cases don't go in musk favor his gambit will fail. but for the moment, leveraging the data of twitter to support xai is working financially well, but musk didn't buy twitter cause he could. remember he loaned money to buy twitter , those investors do not want their investment lost. 

[richardmurray]

@Pioneer1

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

My question is...why was he ALLOWED to buy it?

well you suggest an important question. 

In the usa it isn't illegal for a firm to go from private to public or public to private. So what your suggesting is a special case law. That doesn't allow social media firm online to be privately owned. Government subsidies are common in the usa, so even if government owned wbesites are unprofitable, the usa has a long history of supporting failed industries through subsidies, ala the airline industry to this day. 

 

Interesting, well, the type of service you speak of has precedence in the usa , the post office is a public service, started by the usa government when it was founded by benjamin franklin. so public services of a grand scale are not unheard of in the usa. It took the 1900s for the post office service to be tampered with, opened for private industry,  so it had over a century. And today it is the only postal service that goes everywhere in the usa, all the other private services for all of their managed financial efficiency to specific locales or customers don't actually perform the robust duty of the post office.

 

So the only question I see is a matter of a will. And that is the hurdle for your position pioneer. The social media companies are very wealthy: am*zon/the microsoft/google-abc/ they will not stand by and be forced to sell themselves to the government. The shareholders to these firms, the banks that own their loans will not want  your position because making these firms government owned ends the profiteering potential for shareholders + banks. 

The common populace will not like it because many people make profit through the websites and their various private situations. When the government owns a thing its legality becomes more severe. 

 

I conclude with interesting idea, it has merit but the support for it will have many detractors

[ProfD]

2 hours ago, richardmurray said:

@ProfD 

No he bought twitter because the firm he part owned involved with AI didn't concur to his strategies. So he bought twitter to advance his own AI firm.

Strategic moves make sense. 

2 hours ago, richardmurray said:

....but musk didn't buy twitter cause he could. remember he loaned money to buy twitter , those investors do not want their investment lost. 

Richest man on the planet doesn't really have to *borrow* money. He's definitely not worried about investors.

[Pioneer1]

ProfD

 

 

Capitalism. 

 

So why didn't Capitalism prevent the government from getting involved with saving the car industry a few years back?

And why does Capitalism allow the government to break up monopolies?

 

There's clearly more than just "capitalism" at work here.

 

 

 

Slippery slope of Communism.

 

How so?

 

 

 

 

Nobody was forced into using those platforms. 

 

No, they aren't forced into using them,  but they are heavily INFLUENCED into using them.
Like facebook.
It's so popular, people have few other alternatives as popular to go to.

It didn't get that way on it's own.
It got help from the government in one way or another.

 

In my opinion, under a truly fair Capitalist society...businesses should rise and fall on their OWN merit without being helped by or hindered by the government.
The government should be a FAIR arbiter.

[ProfD]

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

So why didn't Capitalism prevent the government from getting involved with saving the car industry a few years back?

The government gets money from the auto industry. Saving it was an investment.

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

And why does Capitalism allow the government to break up monopolies?

The government breaks up monopolies to keep one individual or company from squeezing everyone else out of the free market of capitalism.  It's a safeguard. 

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Slippery slope of Communism.

 

How so?

Communism has its pros and cons. 

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Nobody was forced into using those platforms. 

 

No, they aren't forced into using them,  but they are heavily INFLUENCED into using them.
Like facebook.
It's so popular, people have few other alternatives as popular to go to.

People still have freewill.

 

I've never had an account on F8cebook or Instagr8m or Tw8tter/X. I don't use those platforms for anything. 

 

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

It didn't get that way on it's own.
It got help from the government in one way or another.

The government didn't drive people to social media. It only puts guardrails in place to keep those entities from taking over.

2 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

In my opinion, under a truly fair Capitalist society...businesses should rise and fall on their OWN merit without being helped by or hindered by the government.
The government should be a FAIR arbiter.

A Democracy seeks to make Capitalism fair.

 

Our system has its warts but there's a reason people that for many decades now have been emigrating form all over the planet to crash land in America.

 

America is the greatest nation on the planet because its system of free market enterprise (Capitalism) works.

 

In America, people can become as successful as their talent, intelligence, ambition, desire and luck allows. The government is not an impediment.

[Troy]

13 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

My question is...why was he ALLOWED to buy it?

 

The same reason Jeff Bezos was allowed to buy the Washington Post -- the forbid them to endorse Kamala for President, which they were planning to do -- not that it would have made much of a difference...

 

Our government serves as Capitalism's hand maiden. 

 

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

America is the greatest nation on the planet because its system of free market enterprise (Capitalism) works.

 

This is a subjective assessment; I'm sure there are people all over the world that would disagree.  I prefer it because it is what I know best, but I'm under no illusion that it is the "greatest" nation.  Unless you define "greatest" as have the largest military, or most billionaires...

 

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

free market enterprise (Capitalism) works.

 

For who?

 

Capitalism brought us hundreds of years of enslavement.  Today we are still groveling for some form of recompense. Our people are locked up more than any other group on Earth. 

 

Man made climate change is off the rails and God only knows what that will men for future generations -- even white men are killing themselves at such a high rate our life expectancy is going down...  

[ProfD]

1 hour ago, Troy said:

This is a subjective assessment; I'm sure there are people all over the world that would disagree.

I wrote that our system has its warts. 

 

 Millions of people do not come to the US for the landscape and weather.  Economic opportunities.

1 hour ago, Troy said:

For who?

The individuals willing to take advantage of Capitalism to the best of their abilities.

1 hour ago, Troy said:

Capitalism brought us hundreds of years of enslavement.  Today we are still groveling for some form of recompense. Our people are locked up more than any other group on Earth. 

There are ongoing hurdles for AfroAmericans.

 

Yet, many of our people have settled comfortably into the prison of racism white supremacy.  Seemingly happy with the status quo. 

 

Also, there's no shortage of Black and brown folks willing to come over and trade places with AfroAmericans. 

 

Right now, replacement is the movement against us.

 

1 hour ago, Troy said:

Man made climate change is off the rails and God only knows what that will men for future generations -- even white men are killing themselves at such a high rate our life expectancy is going down...  

No worries.  The universe has a way of purging and cleaning itself.  Humans cannot break the Earth.

[richardmurray]

@ProfD

13 hours ago, ProfD said:

Strategic moves make sense. 

So by your own words, Musk didn't act strategically when he was a cofounder of openai as he had to leave it when he didn't get his way. The strategic thing would had been to start xai from the beginning not invest in openaii and buy twitter to leverage the data needs of xai.

13 hours ago, ProfD said:

Richest man on the planet doesn't really have to *borrow* money. He's definitely not worried about investors.

I don't know if he has to , but he is. This is  financial fact. And no one lets anyone borrow and borrow absent results. Recently a billion dollar firm has to file for bankruptcy because it will get no more loans and has huge debts from failed use of money from prior loans. Musk is paying back the loans but he will not get  them if he fails repeatedly. 

 

[ProfD]

6 hours ago, richardmurray said:

Musk is paying back the loans but he will not get  them if he fails repeatedly. 

Musk is a billionaire.  The richest man in the world.  Now, he's joined at the hip of the POTUS.  His game is on a completely different level.

[richardmurray]

@ProfD

10 minutes ago, ProfD said:

Now, he's joined at the hip of the POTUS.  His game is on a completely different level.

well by musk own public statements Scrumpft's choices for various positions in the federal government were not musk's choices so... 

And anyway, a man named Conklin of New york State, very rich or powerful, some argued the most powerful man in the usa at that time , once felt he had a president at the hip ,that he could do similar to president harrison and it didn't go to plan, if you know your history of the usa. 

[ProfD]

7 minutes ago, richardmurray said:

@ProfD

well by musk own public statements Scrumpft's choices for various positions in the federal government were not musk's choices so... 

Musk isn't the POTUS.  He's an advisor.

7 minutes ago, richardmurray said:

And anyway, a man named Conklin of New york State, very rich or powerful, some argued the most powerful man in the usa at that time , once felt he had a president at the hip ,that he could do similar to president harrison and it didn't go to plan, if you know your history of the usa. 

I'm aware.  Different times, people and agendas. 

 

These *businessmen* are going to use the government to further enrich themselves. 

 

Musk just wants POTUS to relax regulations to insure that his electric vehicles and other endeavors have little or no interference from the government.

 

[richardmurray]

@ProfD

5 minutes ago, ProfD said:

He's an advisor.

 

at the presidents privy

5 minutes ago, ProfD said:

These *businessmen* are going to use the government to further enrich themselves. 

 

Musk just wants POTUS to relax regulations to insure that his electric vehicles and other endeavors have little or no interference from the government.

businessmen you mean everyone:) I love how you said these businessmen use the government to enrich themselves as do the generals in the joints chiefs as do all the elected officials as do all the people in appointed positions:) these businessman aren't alone in enriching themselves in the empires bounties.

 

well, yeah and so do all the other billionaires:) musk is not alone you  know:)  

At this point I have to ask, what is it you see that don't concerning musk?

 

[ProfD]

31 minutes ago, richardmurray said:

I love how you said these businessmen use the government to enrich themselves as do the generals in the joints chiefs as do all the elected officials as do all the people in appointed positions:) these businessman aren't alone in enriching themselves in the empires bounties.

Right.  Every last one of them is on the take which makes the Muskaswamy DOGE endeavor a joke.  They're going to look for $2 trillion dollars in waste.  Just means rearranging e deck chairs on the Titanic.  Redistributing who gets to steal government money.

 

31 minutes ago, richardmurray said:

At this point I have to ask, what is it you see that don't concerning musk?

Please rephrase your question.  A word or something  is missing.

[richardmurray]

@ProfD

we will see about the future of DOGE . I honestly think finance is ripe for a age of uncertainty that will shake things, to what end, i don't know.

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

Please rephrase your question.  A word or something  is missing.

hhahayes:)

At this point I have to ask, what is it you see that I don't concerning Elon Musk?

 

[Troy]

On 12/5/2024 at 11:00 AM, ProfD said:

Also, there's no shortage of Black and brown folks willing to come over and trade places with AfroAmericans. 

 

If that is one of your standards for greatest country on Earth well...

 

On 12/5/2024 at 11:00 AM, ProfD said:

Humans cannot break the Earth.

 

You are right about that; it looks like Earth will survive long after we are gone!

 

 

[ProfD]

2 minutes ago, Troy said:

If that is one of your standards for greatest country on Earth well...

C'mon mayne.  You took my statement out of context. 

 

I was referring to Black and brown folks replacing AfroAmericans in reference to fulfilling the agenda of racism white supremacy. 

 

Considering my pro-FBA/ADOS stance, there is no way in h8ll that our replacement is one of the standards that makes America the greatest country. 

 

Again, I've acknowledged that America has its warts.  Yet, there's a reason it is considered a super power.  It's not just the military.

 

The hope of freedom and economic opportunities has made America attractive to people from all of the planet. 

 

As a melting pot, that concentration of intelligence, talent and work has also made America more powerful.

 

2 minutes ago, Troy said:

You are right about that; it looks like Earth will survive long after we are gone!

The Earth has been around for 5 billion years.  It's on schedule to be around for another 5 billion years before the Sun burns out. 

 

The human footprint on the Earth is insignificant in the grand scheme of things. 

 

As a species, humans give ourselves way too much credit in believing we can save the planet. 

 

The Earth doesn't need us.  It lets us know on regular basis in the form of incurable diseases and natural disasters. 

[Troy]

8 minutes ago, ProfD said:

Yet, there's a reason it is considered a super power.  It's not just the military.

 

I would argue that the military is -- it always is. Look once we nuked Japan (twice) we served notice on the rest of the planet who was in charge and that is when we because a "super Power" or as you say the greatest place to live on earth.  We maintain this position by building the largest military force ever.

[ProfD]

9 minutes ago, Troy said:

I would argue that the military is -- it always is. Look once we nuked Japan (twice) we served notice on the rest of the planet who was in charge and that is when we because a "super Power" or as you say the greatest place to live on earth.  We maintain this position by building the largest military force ever.

The military is a huge part of our strength as a nation.  The military isn't what attracts people to America.