Elon Musk and company take @x handle from its original user. He got zero dollars for it.
Elon Musk and company take @x handle from its original user. He got zero dollars for it.
Here's how it went down.
-
Elon Musk is a bully
-
As all billionaires are. Along with unempathetic sociopathic psychopaths.
-
You can’t be sociopathic and psychopathic - they’re different points on the same (ASPD) spectrum. Please learn what words mean before throwing them around.
-
Elon is as a Elon does
-
-
According to Hwang, the company now formerly known as Twitter did offer "an alternative handle with the history of the @x account" so that his original account, complete with its posts and followers, could live on and continue to be used.
What short, catchy username did Musk's company change Hwang's handle to? @x12345678998765.
You can't make this shit up. God damn!
-
However, Hwang tells me, he was also offered a new handle of his choice – as long as it's available. He just hasn't picked one yet.
-
That is absolutely hilarious. They should've offered him @twitter in exchange, it would only be fair...
-
Musk probably wanted to make it @x42069.
-
All for the buzz I imagine.
Or for some hyper inflated fragile ego I guess.
Well that's my guess.
-
Let's be real now. That name is temporary until he chooses his new one. Read the whole article. It's rediculous enough without making things seem even worse.
-
But look at that username. It definitely not randomly generated. Someone at Twitter pick that new name. They just give someone with the shortest username possible (1 character) the longest possible username (15 characters), and they do so by pressing the number row back and forth until they hit the username characters size limit. If it's not a mockery then I don't know what is.
-
-
What short, catchy username did Musk's company change Hwang's handle to? @x12345678998765.
It could have been worse.
They could have named him "X Æ A-12" 😵💫
-
Kyle!
-
-
Man...
I was pretty bummed when I heard that Twitter was going to die. There are some cool moments in history that happened on Twitter. It was a hell of a ride, but the writing was on the wall well before Elon bought it. It was time to go.
But not like this.
It deserved a good death. Not to have it's corpse raped on full display over and over.
A lot of very talented people committed so much time and energy to this. When it launched, it was a novel idea and they really forged some roads in our understanding of how we communicate and receive information.
It was clear at the end that it would never produce the kind of ROI on advertising to make investors happy, and that Nazis had clearly taken over the platform and used it to bastardize journalism further. It was time to go to pasture.
But not like this.
Hopefully its mutilated, humiliated and desiccated corpse will feed the growth of the federated web.
I hope you find peace, sweet prince.
-
Twitter was profitable before Musk took over.
The purchase itself saddled Twitter with $13 billion in debt. Musk paid $26bn, other investors (including the Saudi prince) together paid $5bn, and the remaining $13bn was a loan Twitter took out to buy itself on their behalf.
The new owners only paid tax on the $31bn they paid, not the $44bn that was paid to shareholders. (Here's something I'm not sure about: Musk was one of the largest shareholders. Is the $44bn the total value of all shares - does that include Musk's shares? Did he basically buy shares from himself?)
The interest on that $13bn was comparible to Twitter's revenue, before Musk started fucking around. Twitter could not afford that debt.
The buyout itself was what killed Twitter. Everything since then has been nothing but a clown show to distract from the fact that was the original intention.
-
Thank you. I hate it when people say Twitter wasn't profitable. It was profitable. It just wasn't an infinite money printing machine like people (investors) wanted. Twitter didn't need investor money or loans to pay all its bills unlike say Tumblr.
Twitter was the victim of the same financial BS as Toysrus.
-
Wait, that sounds like a leveraged buyout. I overlooked that detail in the news. It changes everything.
I know that some investment firms use leveraged buyouts to drain every bit of money from a company before they chop it up, sell the good bits and let the rest go bankrupt due to the massive debts left in the carcass of the old company. It's so scummy I wonder why it's not illegal.
-
I'm not saying it wasn't profitable. It's a hell of an achievement that it was.
Just that they took on a lot of investment capital and it wasn't the kind of return that investors were expecting.
Ultimately, the efficacy of social media advertising on the whole is in the decline. The number and types of companies that used to advertise and run their business on Facebook is so different today than it was five years ago, and business are seeing far less return for their budget.
Twitter was riding a knife's edge (particularly during COVID) and would have to really scramble to stay in the red in the future.
-
the remaining $13bn was a loan Twitter took out to buy itself on their behalf.
That's truly some Hollywood-accounting-style bullshit. I couldn't even imagine the paradoxical mathematics it took to make that happen.
It would be like me paying you to buy a candy bar from me.
-
-
there was a time when twitter was the place for internet sensation. if you want to see what's going around the world, twitter was a great place to visit. movements like #metoo wouldn't have happened if there was no twitter. sad to see that musk just plays with it like a toy and making it's credibility to lose everyday and giving it a slow death.
-
movements like #metoo wouldn’t have happened if there was no twitter.
That's exactly why Musk is doing what he's doing.
-
-
Indeed, put it out of its misery.
-
-
Shitty social media website does shitty thing and continues enshittification full throttle.
-
Well I went ahead and did a mastadon. No clue what I am doing, but.. Woohoo?
I'm chamrsdeluxe@mastadon.social there too I guess. Idk
-
You'd want to include your instance as part of your handle. I know, it's not as intuitive as a centralized service, but it is a requirement, especially when sharing the name elsewhere. So, your Lemmy account is chamrsdeluxe@lemmy.world. Folks on lemmy.world don't need that, but folks on another instance (like me) would. I can get it from clicking your username, but there's no way to figure it out for a different platform from here.
-
If you type it like this you'll get an instance agnostic link (at least on instances v0.18 and above, not necessarily in apps): /u/ChamrsDeluxe@lemmy.world.
You can also select from a dropdown box on the website to send a mention, however this link goes to their instance rather than your own: @ChamrsDeluxe@lemmy.world. The code for this is
[@ChamrsDeluxe@lemmy.world](https://lemmy.world/u/ChamrsDeluxe), you can type this manually and replace any link text in between the square brackets, so generally[link text](https://userinstance/u/user).The old pre-0.17 instance agnostic links were
[link text](/c/community@instance)or[link text](/u/user@instance), but the new versions will automatically generate without link code:/c/community@instance!community@instance/u/user@instance(does not send a mention)
Also, kbin doesn't federate properly. You might not even see this comment over there...
-
-
You're not done yet - you need to sign up on all the instances!! Then you'll really not know what you're doing!
-
Followed!
-
-
What short, catchy username did Musk's company change Hwang's handle to? @x12345678998765.
That's some really !funnyandsad material...
-
Sounds like someone trying to type a random number on the keyboard, looking at it, and thinking, what ever
-
It's not even random, it's counting 1 to 9 and then down again to 5. Seems like even less effort lol. It's either patronising in a show off kind of way or just dumb. Either way.. just wow.
-
-
-
I hate to say it because Fuck Elon, but this is just one of those things you sign away when you agree to the terms of service.
-
True, but it's still worth criticizing because of him being so dickish about it. He even renamed the account @x12345678998765.
-
-
As much as this sucks, this person has no rights to their name and never did. Stop using the platform and giving it attention!
-
Yeah, it’s not like they ever bought that name from Twitter so there’s no real argument that they actually own it, even if they’d ever bought the checkmark BS.
Money and a rename would have been a goodwill gesture, and expecting any goodwill from this version of twitter is insanity.
-
I don't think anyone is saying they are owed money. But just taking the handle with nothing in return is really not nice.
They could at least give the guy like Twitter Blue for life or whatever the heck premium is called now.
-
Is that not what the title says? Like, i'm new to Lemmy so maybe i'm confused? Didn't OP write "He got no money from it :(" in the title?
-
-
-
To be fair, no user "owns" their account. Everything about your Twitter account, from the user name to the data you tweet belongs to Twitter. I hesitate to call it a dick move. It's more of an Elon move.
-
I really hope phrases like "he got Musked" and "they Musked up" become a thing.
-
Right. Although I don't support it, but if the logic is that they can supress stories and say you don't have a free speech on a private platform, then they can take away your handle because technically it's theirs.
-
The user got Elon'd
-
Get Musked kiddo 😎
-
-
-
Musk is an overpaid idiot, but anyone has to expect not to have any real rights on any website.
-
Imagine how amazing the PR would have been if the title had been: "User gets spectator seating for a SpaceX launch in return for lost handle"
-
Instead he got a "fuck you" 🤷
-
-
More X-crement. Stop wasting your time on this shit site.
-
Another example of Musk being a cunt, what a surprise
-
I can hear his theme song now.....
X gon' take it from ya (uh), he gon' take it from ya X gon' take it from ya, he gon' take it from ya
First we gonna rock, then we gonna roll Then we let it pop, go, let it go
-
This can be done with any centralized social media. You don't know your username.
-
I wouldn't say it's limited to centralized social media. The admin of Lemmy.world could go into its database and do whatever they want to my username, too. And other instances can feel free to steal my name if I didn't grab it first.
-
That's correct! The only social media I would trust is Nostr.
-
-
-
I doubt X has much money to spare to give to people considering how they hemorrhage money.
-
Clearly you don't realize how much a billion dollars really is then.
He could literally lose 99% of his wealth and still be islands buying rich.
-
Elon is not Twitter/X. Sure, he could pump all his personal money into it and keep it afloat indefinitely and I'm sure he's putting in personal money.. but at the end of the day they're separate entities.
You want a business to survive on its own funding. If I were him I would try to put in as little personal money as possible. Which is why we're seeing stuff like them getting evicted from office spaces. He doesn't want to just burn money.
-
From what i have read, most of his money is in the stock value of tesla. If other car makers take away teslas market share then elons wealth will soon follow, and right now he does not exactly do any of "his" companies any favours with his ego and business decisions.
-
-
-
const x = 0; -
The guy should ask for @xoriginal...
-
Technically they don't need to nor would you. Yeah its shitty but its making a mountain out of a molehill....
-
A typical Internet scammer would have at least pretended to offer some money before stealing the username.
-
He ain't pretending ...
-
-
-
Can someone pro-bono the original user for a suit?
inb4 this is a dumb idea-
This is a dumb idea
-
-
FUCK ELON MUSKy
-
I swear to god fucking Elon Musk googled “cool website name generator” before changing it
-
And got this:
-
I read he has a history with trying to make company X happen
-
Yeah I read, he should give up already
-
-
I think it's more likely he googled "Call of Duty Username prefix generator" then shaved the duplicates XD
-
-
Yup, keep fucking that chicken there Elon.
-
I shall refer to it as Ex
-
Or "ten" and we all agree it should be looked at as a Roman numeral.
-
What if I don't like the romans? I think they're the reason we're in this mess in the first place.
-
-
-
Was he ever going to get paid
-
Knowing Musk, this is not a surprise.
-
Me being called XTornado ... That was close not that close but again I didn't predict this happening at all (all the Twitter name change all that ).
-
offensive but idgaf about Tw so, did they ban the owner's email login while at being dicks
-
That would be amazing
-
Why is this news? It is their platform. You have your handle at their discretion. Getting paid for it? Hahahaha. Riiiight. This isn't some domain that is actually owned. You own literally nothing on social media platforms. Whoever theorized he'd be paid is moronic and a perfect example of a twit.
-
Doesn't it come across as unethical and wrong like an abuse of power to you?
-
Sure it's wrong, but the real point is no one is surprised Musk did something to make someone feel like shit. It's his goal
The better move is to let the platform slip away into irrelevancy.
-
-
Its their platform and their reputation. If some users don't like what "Musk" do, then they have right to make and read news about it, regardless of de jure rights, EULA and whatnot.
PS: And yes, the owner's account was renamed in a rather nonchalant "fuck you" way. I would never learn about this, without these news.
-
If you are thinking of building a brand on twitter (or X) or have an existing brand, it is important to know that twitter (or X) are willing just take your name away from you if they feel like it without recourse.
Of course it is always technically possible to take a user name. But most sites make it clear that they wont risk damaging brands by protecting against fake clones and allowing companies to keep their user names. That is why it is news.
-
It's showing a rather funny lack of tact, soft skills and PR skills. Google can take your Gmail account too, but it's rather unheard of (say Google launches a product name "GreatDay" - it's absolutely unheard of for Google to just grab the "GreatDay" handle from Gmail - in fact such a move would sent terror chills up many marketing departments around the world honestly).
I'm not going to blame you for not understanding just how ridiculous this is, but this sends all the wrong messages - i.e. could I pay Elon to grab someone else's Twitter handle because I can make a better business claim for it? That sure is what this seems to imply
-
It's news because as the owners of information channels can do as they please, it's shitty when they don't even pretend to be neutral. Which is why they usually do. Not a hard thing to follow and no, thinking that a payment would be issued isn't a sign of a "twit," it's just one way they could have not seemed like dicks who do as they please.
-
-
Leftpad
-
Has what to do with this? ...
-
-
I wonder how is this post related to technology in any way? That is just some regular news.
-
It's a reminder that in big parts of todays digital world you own nothing. All access, presumed rights, and data can be taken from you whenever a big company decides to do so. Is it news? Probably not. Are people aware of it? Clearly not - at least nobody acts like it.
-
-
https://twitter.com/x12345678908765/status/1684047458341642240
Edit: fake post, my bad
-
Yeah why would they pay the "owner"? It's their platform they do whatever they want. What a dumb thing to complain about.
-
Why would the bank give you your money, its their business and you gave it to them.
-
Not defending the Musk here, but literally it's not your money anymore as soon as you put it in a bank account.
The money you put in your account belongs to the bank, and the account functions as an I.O.U.. A very privileged one compared to other debts, and in most cases redeemable without notice, but you're in fact just another creditor.
-
No one is owed anything, but not compensating the original owner further erodes what little trust was left in the company. You wouldn't want to spend resources building a brand on a platform where your name can suddenly get snatched away at some billionaire's whim.
-
Because there's precedent that handles have value (on the order of thousands of USD). They're taking value from a customer. It'd be interesting to see what swag they offered in exchange, but considering the guy's net worth, he could have afforded some decency. I mean, Gmail can just take your email address to, but it is how many identify themselves in business, so it can harm them financially. Sure, that's the risk with doing that, but it is what it is. Musk could have generated some good will but instead generated more bad publicity. I'm beginning to think he has no PR on staff or just surrounds himself with people who never say no.
-
the main problem with this is that with them doing it without asking or time to prepare all the people the guy knew where lost or have a problem finding him.
And the huy was seemingly not even a nobody but instead had a company so even more company contacts could get lost or customers wanting to directly reach out to him could sent private data to a 3 party (twitter) about confidential informations.Secondly it says that the company can and will take over accounts when they have some reason, even if it is only the name.
That means the trust in the handle gets completly broken because it could be a twitter account in just a few seconds without warning.
So they have the power to take over an official governement or news account without warning and only leaving a reason. This is theoretical but if there is a news station with a handle like "xnews" i can really expect that it gets taken over in some time in the future.-
I agree with all of this. I just think it's idiotic to complain that they didn't pay him. Twitter handles are not "owned" by the user and the platform can and will do with them whatever they like at any time.
-
-
It’s their platform they do whatever they want
Their platform only has value because people use it. Mistreat your users, they go elsewhere and suddenly your platform becomes worthless.
-
They certainly can do whatever they want, but folks are still able to call musk out for being a bully.
It's the same reasoning behind folks confusing freedom of speech with freedom from consequences of their speech.
-
Why do you assume that complaining is the same as saying Twitter isn't allowed to do this? I can still think it's shitty without thinking they aren't allowed to do it.
-
What you should have posted was nothing.
