Man, Shitler could fork over $10k for the rest of his natural born life with no fear of repercussion on himself or even any of his shitty ass children who stand to benefit from his death. Monetary fines/penalties should be tied to an individual's income, assets, or net worth (or maybe some combination thereof) if they're to have the desired punitive impact.


People do not debate "matters vital to the future of humanity" in only 140 characters.


Jas, you might want to update the SLOG to include which viral disease the GPB510 is designed for.
In context I assume's it's a COVID vaccine, but vaccines that are "effective at low doses, safe, simple to make on a large scale and stable without deep freezing" could be extremely beneficial global for a host of viral diseases. Polo is still out there as are other viral diseases.


@1 So you believe his wildly exaggerated claims about his wealth?

Truthfully he's in hock up to his hair weave.


"Imagine what Goebbels could
have done with Facebook & Twitter."
--@Sacha Baron-Cohen

Murdoch, Zuckerburgher
Musk et al & no you’re
NOT Invited to the
Royal Fucking Ball

you’re the Pawns the Serfs &
the collaterally Damaged
here for US to Farm &
be Mal-managed

so shut up and Take it
like you Always do
& (eventually) we-
‘ll likely get a-
Round to

Too much Power
in too few hands
& we’ve handed
them the keys to
the dam Mother-
Land . oopsies.

“Polo is still out there as
are other viral diseases.”

well put.


It's not just about how much money Trump has immediate access to, it's also how much he can grift out of his followers.


For a list of promises made and broken, check out ElonMusk.Today - in other words, Twitter is todays shiny toy he can use to bump cryptocurrency value, what will it be tomorrow?


@6 Valid Point



No, but I think he's got enough to absorb those $10k hits without worry. And yeah, to @6's point, part of what prompted my comment was thinking that he could probably just crowdsource those hits if it came down to it. To be fair, I'd think implementation of such a system would be insane and probably similar to the tax code with it's corrupt elements and exploitable loopholes, though even as such it could be a vast improvement.


"Left-Handed Cigarette" still holds a special place in my lingo library


@9 However, judges really don't like being ignored. If a month of $10K/day doesn't shake things loose, the judge can go higher or more punitive. I'm pretty sure they could order an arrest for contempt. That would bump popcorn sales across the country...


"It's important to realize that it was a freak event," he said. "The chances of something like that, something so severe happening again this summer are very small.". Really!

Cliff Mass has been saying that since last summer!

Trust me the Seattle Times is only interested in click bait. Its their survival now.


What happened to the poison pill? Was it just a bluff that nobody would actually pull the trigger on?


Poison pill for Twitter I meay



I know people who deliver for UPS, or a delivery service just like it, right? They say the Capitol Hill area, just like Downtown, is full of druggies. Its dangerous and makes their, and everyone else's work hazardous.



the ”… well-over-100-degree weather we saw last year in June was probably a one-and-done kinda deal.

‘It's important to realize that it was a freak event,’ he said. ‘The chances of something like that, something so severe happening again this summer are very small.’

as small as 500-year Floods
Every Decade? Year-round
Fires throughout the West?

a fucked-up
Jet Stream?

Weather Bombs
From Hell?

so this summer’s
prolly gonna be Rosy.
next summer? good Luck!

Hey didja Hear?
Gas’s Down
a Nickel!


@15 --why?

because people's Lives
are so Full and

that's what makes 'em druggies
cuz they Hate that. simple

when they're
Off our Streets
we'll Know Billionaires
are* Paying their Fair Share



The Union is considering + pay for working in the Central Seattle Hub just because of Druggies!


being on equal footing
makes for a much
Better Game

& don't ferget to
tip your Druggies
they're Union too.


He made a legit financial offer that explained the financing and structure of the deal.

The board had a fiduciary obligation to consider it in good faith, and came to the conclusion that yes it was in the best financial interests of the shareholders and investors of the company to accept the offer.

Like selling a house or a car but with much more due diligence.

I've never tweeted, and have never fully understood the platform.

About the most use for it I have is when I pull up to the Ballard Bridge and it's open I'll check the website for SDOTbridges to see what is up. I guess that puts the bridges' tweets into a web page or something.

Other than that I see no real use for the thing. I sure as hell don't want to know the 140 character rants of anyone.

For shit like that I come to the Stranger, where we have way more than 140 characters, and every now and then someone says something thought provoking.



Thanks, that's mildly comforting I suppose.

Though as nice as it'd be to see, there's a literal 0.0 percent chance we ever see his dumb ass in prison for any infraction. More stringent fine is probably the best we could even hope. Some quick math tells me that if he's got even $1B in the bank, he could absorb daily $10,000 fines for over a quarter century and land on his feet with several million dollars to spare.

That whole "Billionaires shouldn't exist" trope or meme is just common sense and undeniably factual.


Opinions aren't factual and it's a silly statement, but yeah Soros shouldn't exist.


how Dare a
Billionaire use his
Power to do Good?

when there's Human Beings
to be Fleeced Farmed
& then forgotten
forsaken and
for eternity

and no dewey it's
not Soro's EXISTENCE
that Shouldn't Be it's MON-
IES in such Mass Quantities

so Close
and yet
so Far


Monies in mass quantities can inoculate thousands against smallpox, build plumbing infrastructure in poor countries, solve complex problems, devise toilets that don't need water, set up broadband, and the list goes on.

But Bill and Melinda shouldn't have all that money some say.


Jonathon Groff apparently doesn't have the internet?
I mean, show your vulva to whomever you like but you probably could have pulled-up a couple dozen sex-Ed videos on YouTube if the guy really wanted to know all about that mysterious pussy.


@22 I'm OK with taking Soro's billions if you also take the Mercers', Waltons' etc.

Sure, Bill and Melinda have done some good stuff. But they're the exception, not the rule.


@26: The exception is well worth it.


In a sane country we would tax billionaires out of existence and use the money to sustain a robust middle class like they did when the boomers were growing up, before they pulled up the ladder behind themselves. It would be far more productive for the government to fund boring but fundamental things like universal health care, child care assistance, and public education than leaving it up to rich people's vanity projects.

The gates have done some good things but their money would have gone much, much further if they had poured it directly into existing organizations than trying to build their own from the ground up and slap their names on it. But it would go even further if they were taxed appropriately, such that we could guarantee a basic standard of living for all americans that includes access to health care and an affordable college education.


"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230, Communications Decency Act).



"but their money would have gone much, much further if they had poured it directly into existing organizations than trying to build their own from the ground up and slap their names on it. "

That's quite a wild postulation. Existing organizations are not always equipped to do the needed works. In addition, there's corruption, bureaucracy, and inefficiency.


no it isn't


@6 - it's ONLY about the money he can grift from the MAGAts.


I said "not always" - I don't think there's a need for an "either/or", but a combo of new endeavors and investing in existing organizations.


@27 Is it though? The Mercers and Adelson made Trump's run for office possible. The Waltons destroyed most of rural American Main Street, incidentally pushing a lot of rural people to the R side because their livelihoods were destroyed. Bezos is trying to finish the job. The folks behind Hobby Lobby are working hard on creating a theocracy. The Koch brothers kneecapped effective responses to climate change 20+ years ago.

That's a hell of a lot to answer for. Yes, B&MG did some great things. Nothing they did internationally was impossible with a decently-funded USAID.


Meanwhile in the real world, water supplies in the Western US are at about 40 percent of where they are "normally" so keep telling yourself you're ok ...


The Gates have at various times explicitly stated that individual philanthropy is utterly inadequate and they wish that individual philanthropy was not necessary and that nation states could do this work collectively.


@29: Repealing that would result in the end of most online speech engaged in by non-corporations, including the commenters (for instance, you) on this very site. The effect of sites suddenly being held legally responsible for anything any one of their billions of users posts at any time would prompt the corporations that control those platforms to massively curtail the bounds of acceptable speech or go out of business. This would apply not just to comment sections and social media, but any user-posted content of any kind.

This idea that some speech is bad so all speech must be censored is just straight up authoritarian dogma.


@35: I'm sure. We all wish we didn't have wars either.


I think it needs to be said. Fuck Elon Musk!


Having massive unregulated platforms with global reach where people are free to commit abuse, spread disinformation, or even incite genocide is arguably worse for humanity than whatever "free speech" social media offers, considering people existed without them for the overwhelming majority of human history. These platforms are not ungovernable, we only treat them that way because of an outdated law that was written a decade before they even existed. There is no reason section 230 can't be updated to meet the demands of our current information age.


from Democracy Now:

Elon Musk, the World’s Richest Man,
Has Been an “Abusive” Bully on
Twitter for Years. Now
He Owns It.

Amy Goodman: Well, Evan Henshaw-Plath, you have been described as Twitter’s first employee — well, at least the employee of the company that started Twitter.

Can you respond now to the richest man in the world taking over one of the most powerful social media platforms in the world, that you helped start, Rabble?

EVAN HENSHAW-PLATH: I mean, it’s a bit disturbing, because we don’t know what’s going to happen. We don’t know where he’s going to take it and what kind of decisions he’s going to make with it.

Under the current administration of the company, we’ve had commitments to things like the moderation policies and follow the Santa Clara Principles for better behavior, and we can see where it goes.

And Elon Musk has advocated for some things that are big and great, and some things that are really terrible and will harm it. And we simply don’t know anymore where he’s going to take it, but we do know that he has been a bit of an abusive crypto bro on Twitter.

And is that the kind of person we want deciding how our public sphere is governed?

tonnes More at

well if he’s Smart Enough
to become THE RICHEST

well that’s gotta
be Plenty Good
Enough for US.

we’re really Not that
Picky. As long as
we’re Amused


@39: so to be clear, it was bad when Trump wanted to get rid of Section 230, but good now that you want to do it, because...



To be clear i have absolutely no idea what trump said about section 230 & while it’s possible the world’s most stopped clock finally gave the right time, it’s much more likely that the conceptual difference between “update” & “get rid of” applies here bc these 2 things are not the same


Though it’s funny to think the republican stance towards the wild west internet that arguably made his presidency possible is to un-deregulate it, literal lols. I assume his stance is 100% “it should be illegal for twitter to ban me” and 0% consideration given to anything else. To be clear, I think this would be bad.


@43: His stance on it is of a piece with his stance on "updating" libel law -- he seeks a legal pretext for silencing people saying things he doesn't like. Just like every censor.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.