Kansas Crimson

there is also speculation that musk pushed the launch date because of his fascination with 420…even if it meant launching ahead of the rocket actually being ready

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 3:17 pm awesome

…when it lifted off Thursday, the nearly 400-foot-tall Starship scattered debris for hundreds of yards like mortar fire, leaving a crater under its launch mount, dents in nearby storage tanks and questions about the extent of the repairs and when SpaceX might be able to attempt to launch again.

The public road that bypasses the site was closed much of the day Friday, making it difficult to assess how widespread the damage was. But videos shared on social media showed a piece of debris slamming into a van several hundred feet away.

Shrapnel also struck the nearby beach and pummeled the shoreline, making it seem like a war zone. Splashes from debris plummeting into wetlands can be seen on multiple sides of the launchpad for 10 or more seconds after the launch. The cloud of dust thrown up by the rocket wafted into communities miles away...

Murica

KUTradition wrote: ↑Fri Apr 21, 2023 3:19 pm there is also speculation that musk pushed the launch date because of his fascination with 420…even if it meant launching ahead of the rocket actually being ready

What is his fascination with 4/20?
Because he thinks it's cute/funny in regards to marijuana? Because he is a Hitler fan?

Dear
@elonmusk
I've paid for the checkmark just to tell you this:

1. It doesn't work.
2. You cannot support "free speech" by forcing people to pay for the privilege of speaking as themselves.
3. And at the same time, if we do not pay for the checkmark, then you allow others to pretend to be someone they are not at the cost of authenticity.
4. So, it is both hypocritical and dangerous to take away the legacy checkmarks.
5. Make everyone register in their real name - not a "handle" - to encourage transparency and honesty.

In addition;
6. Anonymity is not transparency.
7. You are not an experienced journalist - nor, it seems, do you understand the difference between "fair" and "factual."
8. It is debatable whether you understand the difference between an opinion and a vetted fact.
9. By your actions, you confuse the difference between public media and state supported media. And being in this business for 40 years, I can say with no doubt that you really do not understand the many problems in today's press. (I can recommend a book to read that will help you get an idea)
10. You cannot support free speech either by suppressing it or giving cover to those who make obstreperous accusations without identification or attribution.

And:
11. You are sacrificing the integrity and profitability of this platform at the expense of anonymous trolls and bots.
12. Either this move is by design or from ignorance. It is still debatable whether it is one or the other - or both. If it's by design you've paid enough money for the platform that it compels one to believe you are ignorant - unless you are getting a boat load of side money from ads and bots, or your goal is to destroy the platform at the cost of what you paid to purchase it. That's an entirely different level of silliness.
13. While I know many who have fled this platform, I have not. I have vowed to stay until the bitter end. Call me stubborn or call me stupid. Don't call me late for dinner. But, that being said, the end seems near - and more and more you look like Slim Pickens at the end of Dr. Strangelove.
- and unfortunately so do I.
14. That being said, it is not yet too late.
15. Restore the legacy check mark. Force real transparency among participants. And support the publication of vetted facts. (see "Fox News" if you want to understand why). Otherwise you've destroyed the village town square and replaced it with the village idiots convention. (See Woody Allen's "Love and Death" for a reference.)

Peace. Love. Rock n' Roll.

And you are not D.D. Harriman. (though count me in on a trip to the stars)

Brian J. Karem

^^^

Bravo!

Feral wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 2:02 pm ^^^

Bravo!

Great post!

now he can post falsehoods and misinformation right along with so many others with the blue check

Free Speech…but with an Overlord

Elon is a spaz but the blue check thing I don't find bad.
He's trying to make money ( or loose less of it ), 10 bucks a month for the badge?
People who need to be verified can afford it.

except for all the users with checks that apparently aren’t verified

pdub wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 9:43 pm Elon is a spaz but the blue check thing I don't find bad.
He's trying to make money ( or loose less of it ), 10 bucks a month for the badge?
People who need to be verified can afford it.

Yeah. The people complaining about it are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Not famous people there is no point in verifying, famous people there is no point in crying over such a small fee

randylahey wrote: ↑Sun Apr 23, 2023 12:17 am

pdub wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 9:43 pm Elon is a spaz but the blue check thing I don't find bad.
He's trying to make money ( or loose less of it ), 10 bucks a month for the badge?
People who need to be verified can afford it.

Yeah. The people complaining about it are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Not famous people there is no point in verifying, famous people there is no point in crying over such a small fee

Man, it must be incredible to be so tuned in to so much.

randylahey wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 5:56 pm

Stupid questions time.
Why don't the people requesting blue checks pay for them?
If Elon Musk is the one actually adding/assigning blue checks wouldn't you think he has better things to be doing?

pdub wrote: ↑Sat Apr 22, 2023 9:43 pm Elon is a spaz but the blue check thing I don't find bad.
He's trying to make money ( or loose less of it ), 10 bucks a month for the badge?
People who need to be verified can afford it.

in SOME ways I find it terrible.
It's inconsistent in that people are being give blue checks who didn't pay for it.
"Verified"? Verified of what? Their actual identity? Ok, but SOME (many?) people paying for it are often tweeting hateful divisive things - UNDER AN ALIAS or maybe I should say a "user name" that is not their actual legal name.

It’s not necessarily a true identity.
You have to have a profile photo and name.
You also get these perks if that does anything for you:

https://help.twitter.com/en/using-twitter/twitter-blue

So its a subscription service. People pay for a lot of apps. Some apps have free versions that you can upgrade. YouTube has been doing that for years

Elon outed for his "burner" account.......

https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7bew8/ ... t-ermnmusk

https://www.indy100.com/celebrities/elo ... nt-twitter

https://www.thedailybeast.com/musk-appe ... er-account

https://www.news18.com/viral/elon-musk- ... 34539.html

https://ustoday.news/is-this-elon-musks ... r-account/