Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[viper37]

More of Twitter not paying its bills.  This time, not paying Google cloud services for security.
Twitter is refusing to pay its Google Cloud bills

June 10 (Reuters) - Twitter has refused to pay its Google Cloud bills (GOOGL.O) as its contract comes up for renewal this month, which could result in the social media company's trust and safety teams being crippled, Platformer reported on Saturday.
Before Elon Musk's takeover of the social media platform last year, Twitter signed a multi-year contract with Google related to fighting spam and protecting accounts, among other things, the report said.

[...]

[Syt]

Twitter creators are a thing?

Well, I guess it's a scheme to pay Tucker Carlson for putting his content on Twitter.

[HVC]

So, looks like Elon and Zuckerberg are game for a cage match. Strange times.

[Hamilcar]

My money is on Zuck. 

[Tamas]

My money is on Zuck. 

100%

[Sheilbh]

Really odd framing in the Guardian of new EU law that will impact Twitter: "Platform agrees to comply with tough EU disinformation rules".

They're not medieval barons who agree to comply with laws or not. It's the law, they're subject to it. Can't help but feel the whole tech sector could do with a salutary smack of state power (as has happened with previous sectors like oil and gas, railways etc)

[Josquius]

 Not even a contest that Zuckerberg would win.  Man I'd love to see it happen.

They're not medieval barons who agree to comply with laws or not. It's the law, they're subject to it. Can't help but feel the whole tech sector could do with a salutary smack of state power (as has happened with previous sectors like oil and gas, railways etc)

The move of so much of the economy online is another area where the age of nationalism is waning. Even an EU level isn't big enough to properly govern an internet giant. They could always totally block it of course... but that isn't happening and would carry a lot of risks.

[Sheilbh]

The move of so much of the economy online is another area where the age of nationalism is waning. Even an EU level isn't big enough to properly govern an internet giant. They could always totally block it of course... but that isn't happening and would carry a lot of risks.

I totally disagree. They're paper tigers.

There are some things that I think they would not accept and would just move out of a market - I think compromising end to end encryption for example is something WhatsApp have said would make them pull out of the UK and I think that's probably true.

But the UK regulator wrote a code of conduct (not even an act of parliament) and after years of warning that it would make operating in the UK impossible, that they couldn't comply, every single big platform changed all of their policies on how they manage children's data. Often they applied the changes globally. Although they never acknowledged it was because of that code, they just all happened to change their policies in the week before it took effect

Similarly with Australia's mandatory barganing with media organisations. Facebook and Google threatened to pull out and turn off the internet in Australia. I think they had one week of reduced service to show what was coming. The law passed. They all complied and 9 figure sums are now being paid to Australian media companies for the re-use of their content. I think the exact same rulebook is being run in Canada right now.

It's a complicated area and there are lots of competing interests, but they're no more all globally powerful than the oil majors were, before their humbling. It just requires the state to actually act and not indulge in this pathetic learned helplessness in front of tech bros

[Jacob]

So, looks like Elon and Zuckerberg are game for a cage match. Strange times.

Literally? Or metaphorically?

What's happening?

[Hamilcar]

So, looks like Elon and Zuckerberg are game for a cage match. Strange times.

Literally? Or metaphorically?

What's happening?

if they wimp out and fight in the metaverse I will be very disappointed

[Syt]

So, looks like Elon and Zuckerberg are game for a cage match. Strange times.

Literally? Or metaphorically?

What's happening?

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/22/elon-musk-and-mark-zuckerberg-had-beef-before-cage-match-challenge.html

Meta is supposedly working on a competitor to Twitter; Musk said something along the lines of social media public being completely under Zuckerberg's thumb. To which Zuckerberg responded that at least things would be sane. After which Musk issued the challenge. Zuckerberg has recently been into jiu-jitsu and winning tournaments, while Musk ... well.

[DGuller]

Really odd framing in the Guardian of new EU law that will impact Twitter: "Platform agrees to comply with tough EU disinformation rules".

They're not medieval barons who agree to comply with laws or not. It's the law, they're subject to it. Can't help but feel the whole tech sector could do with a salutary smack of state power (as has happened with previous sectors like oil and gas, railways etc)

They can definitely choose to not comply, by exiting the markets subject to the rules.

[Jacob]

They can definitely choose to not comply, by exiting the markets subject to the rules.

Of course. That is a thing they can choose to do.

It'll mean foregoing some revenue and, more importantly I think, it'll mean letting go of non-trivial pieces of their portfolio that supports their market positions.

I mean, say Google and Facebook both exit Europe. That'll leave a gap for sure. It wouldn't be super shocking if companies like Microsoft or Amazon step in to fill the gap (depending on what areas are left open, of course) either directly, or simply by purchasing whatever start-ups fill up the room left by the exits.

Challenging Google and FB in their remaining non-European markets is likely going to be significantly easier if you're expanding from a dominant European position rather than trying to bootstrap as a competitor in markets where Google and FB dominate (which includes Europe as long as Google and FB do not exit the markets), which is a threat to those companies.

... and if then US regulators decide that the EU standards are worth emulating, that's not going to make things any better for the companies that are not complying.

In any case, I suspect Sheilbh meant "cannot simply choose to not comply while continuing to operate." They can, as you say, stop their operations - but the question is whether that's a good actual move on their side (as opposed to as a threat).

[Crazy_Ivan80]

"Platform agrees to comply with tough EU disinformation rules".

that's going to go off the rails fast

[Sheilbh]

In any case, I suspect Sheilbh meant "cannot simply choose to not comply while continuing to operate." They can, as you say, stop their operations - but the question is whether that's a good actual move on their side (as opposed to as a threat).

Exactly. There is no element of choice about it.

I'd add EU (and UK - and Californian) tech law often has an extra-territorial element. So it's ore obvious if you're operating in a jurisdiction, but those laws bite if you are monitoring (tracking online/collecting data of) European/UK/Californian residents wherever you are based. Obviously it's practically more difficult for regulators to enforce, but it's not as simple as turning off google.fr.

It'll mean foregoing some revenue and, more importantly I think, it'll mean letting go of non-trivial pieces of their portfolio that supports their market positions.

Well also possibly importantly the data of all of those residents which we don't really know what they do with - and from the disclosure in the ongoing case against Facebook in California, it's not clear that they really know where all that data is going and what's being done to it.

I think there is something to the hoary old line that if you're not paying for a product, you are the product - and definitely in the case of the tech companies.

I mean, say Google and Facebook both exit Europe. That'll leave a gap for sure. It wouldn't be super shocking if companies like Microsoft or Amazon step in to fill the gap (depending on what areas are left open, of course) either directly, or simply by purchasing whatever start-ups fill up the room left by the exits.

Also I think there's evidence of regulators - especially in competition - starting to really coordinate and hunt as a pack. It's possibly particularly important in the US as the US is obviously central but also it's a judicial procedure which can be uncertain, while in Europe it's administrative.

But for example the UK decision on Microsoft and Activision which there were reports they were just going to ignore then got cited in arguments by the FTC (I think) in seeking emergency injunctive powers to stop any moves towards a merger. Similarly just last week the EU competition chief has announced thhat they will require Google to divest itself of part of its ad business (which it absolutely needs to from a competition perspective - speaking from a publisher's perspective ) - I think that mirrors the ask of the FTC (possibly) and a collection of state AGs in the US courts and is again being picked up in their filings.

As I say I think there's an element of learned helplessness in the face of big tech that we rapidly need to snap out of - and some are.