I cannot get over that she literally has The Karen Haircut

Guess who manages .NGO, and who they just got bought out by?

Dumb false equivalence fallacy is dumb.

Honestly it’s some weird combination of fascinating and creepy to see you continuously and repeatedly double down on being so fucking wrong. Your need for validation is worthy of pity, at least, but that’s overshadowed by, uh, the rest of you.

They’re looking pretty great! Marty Byrde was wrong, as always!

But so much of the criticism he receives here is so colored

I mean, they’re not. I’m not even talking about the specific outcome of this case; the Unsworth legal team failed to demonstrate that Musk’s twootering defamed him in a tangible way. However, if it had shown that Musk’s words - whether just an angry snap from a guy firing from the hip while being Mad Online, or…

Except, again, your feelings on the matter are not legally germane; and if it could be shown that Elon Musk, due to being a really famous guy, had caused this dude material harm by calling him a ‘pedo guy’, Elon Musk would have been liable for damages, because that is LITERALLY the definition of defamation.

Musk’s intent doesn’t actually matter.

Yep. Without exclusion, customers are job creators and labor turns the profits. Ownership is largely superfluous. Keeping the customers AND employees happy is how you make a sustainable long-term enterprise. People make you more money when they like you, shocker.

“I know we can do both but not everybody can do both.”

Yup

“Or sexier”

Re: the legal team bit, maybe. However, re: “The Brits gave Unsworth a medal for talking to reporters” -

The problem is famous people have different standards about what they can and can’t say, BECAUSE their fame is a weapon. That may sound unfair but there’s plenty of precedent on the topic. And this is how it should be - it doesn’t matter that some normal non-famous person dissed your shit. You are opening yourself up…

The issue with the pod thing is that it wouldn't be able to make tight turns, would get stuck, and then they would be trapped.

Correct. There ARE rules about when you can insult someone, if you look up the legal standards of defamation instead of making yourself look deeply stupid on the internet.

Oh look someone who doesn't understand the internet and loves a boot on his neck.

They’re actually wrong, as I detailed. Precedent for defamation applies differently to celebrity figures than it does to regular citizens, so a finding against Musk would have no bearing on the average person. Particularly so because the plaintiff’s claim was that Musk’s combination of FAME and careless insults is…

What you don’t get here - while you’re right about theoretical implications - is that historically, figures with fame and celebrity have different standards of defamation applied to them. This is because, obviously, Elon Musk calling someone a pedophile on Twitter has a very different potential for harm than if you or…