It was more than a few months, and it was a disaster. Posting levels dropped immediately (and never fully recovered, I think). They had to comp the heaviest users to keep the content going, the light users weren’t going to pay for it, and hardly anyone new showed up and decided “Heck yes, I’ll pay for this even though I don’t know what it is and there are 20 other places I can read/write for free on the internet.”
While the Fool had a pretty good thing going when AOL was flinging millions of users at them and the market was in full bubble mode in the 90’s, both of those things evaporated in the aughts and the numbers have been declining pretty much ever since. (Still a successful business, Wikipedia says they have over 300 employees, so that’s something. But all the dough comes from the newsletters now.) None of the new ventures have turned into rocket ships, although they are additive, I presume (radio show, podcasts, newspaper column, free boards, etc.)
Apple’s long been under criticism for its App store practices. That’s nothing new, and will likely continue. It’s unclear whether any of that criticism will result in any actual changes. So far, it hasn’t. Epic lost their lawsuit. Congress has declined to act on the matter (under both GOP and Democratic controlled governments). They’re even less likely to do so in a split government. Regulators have similarly declined to act. Neither Facebook nor Netflix (to say nothing of scores of smaller companies) have been able to move the needle either.
There’s no reason to think that Twitter is going to be able to do anything to affect that situation. Which is why Apple is not going to need to “compromise on the app store fees” in response to his public tantrum. Twitter is a relatively small company, and it doesn’t/wouldn’t generate a lot of revenue for Apple. Neither Twitter nor Musk have a lot of power on the Hill, nor a lot of goodwill with regulators. And of course, Musk isn’t going to be able to develop either an App Store or an iPhone alternative.
I suspect that this is just part of Musk speedrunning the social media learning curve. He’s now learning the content moderation lessons that every other site has had to learn. He’s figuring out that Twitter’s content moderation policies weren’t just coming from the political preferences of senior management - that there were regulatory and economic reasons for why these policies looked the way they did. He’s not going to be able to change things as much as he postured. So he wants someone to blame for that.
Based on what would it continue? Just because it is? The entire pantheon of powers is saying no more…the reason they are saying no more is because it is.
The “that” in my sentence referred to the criticism of Apple’s policies. That criticism isn’t anything new. It’s not going to stop. It’s likely to continue.
Whether any action is taken against Apple is a different story. But it’s hard to see Musk or Twitter having any material impact on that.
Despite your claim that the entire pantheon of powers is “saying no more,” legislation to address the Apple/Google duopoly (specifically the Open App Marketplace Act) has been bottled up in the House and Senate. And it’s primarily being blocked by Democratic leadership. Neither Schumer nor Pelosi has been willing to bring it to a floor vote. Most likely that’s because Congresscritters from California don’t want to vote for it. If it doesn’t pass in the lame duck, supporters don’t believe it will pass in the next Congress.
Twitter’s too small to matter in that debate. There’s already massive forces arrayed to push for adoption - Twitter has neither the market share nor the resources relative to those already in the fight to affect the outcome. And since the obstacle to passage is almost certainly Democrats, not Republicans, having Musk do some public complaining about Apple isn’t likely to help either.
It also includes the Senators. Feinstein and Padilla voted to advance the bills when it was in committee, but criticized them as well. They’re not necessarily willing to vote for them without changes.
And the two chambers don’t act in isolation. Of Democrats in the House, 42 are from California - nearly 20% of the entire caucus. Pelosi may not have the votes to get the bills out of the House, and Schumer isn’t going to want to spend political capital in the lame duck on a bill that can’t pass the other chamber.
The “reshuffling” almost certainly dooms these bills in the next congress. Certainly it significantly reduces the chances of anything happening. McCarthy is one of the biggest opponents of the measures - he’d never let either come to a floor vote. Though his ascension to the Speakership is uncertain, Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) is another of the biggest opponents of the bills. And he’s certain to take over as Chair of the Judiciary Committee - and Zoe Lofgren, the #2 ranking Democrat on Judiciary, is also an opponent of the bills. Which means that even if McCarthy doesn’t become Speaker, the bills are still likely dead in the water in the next Congress.
I’m starting to think Musk is waging a war against Dems, possibly in retaliation for the EV snub by the White House, mostly due to the exclusion of union work force.
I’m following quite well both the present and the future.
I’m talking about Pelosi because any effort to regulate Apple will have to be adopted during the current Congress, in the upcoming lame duck session. There are several bills pending that could be approved. But they won’t hit the floor for a vote unless Pelosi signs off. She hasn’t yet committed to doing so, and a number of her California colleagues may not want her to.
But I’ve also talked about the future. As I mentioned, the new GOP leadership in the House is going to keep any legislation hitting Apple/Google from passing. Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan are strongly opposed to them.
Once the new Congress is seated in early January, all of the existing Apple/Google bills will die (bills don’t carry over from one Congress to the other) - which means they have to start over again in committee. Which also means that either McCarthy or Jordan can kill them just by preventing a vote in committee. So even though McCarthy’s role isn’t entirely certain, we know for a fact that Jordan will replace Nadler as chair of the Judiciary Committee.
That means that unless one of these bills passes in the next six weeks, nothing’s happening for the next two years. Long enough away for Apple not to really care about the mewlings of an annoyed Elon Musk.
You are doing it again. You are assuming you know what is going on from the past.
You are simply wrong. I get you never make a mistake, or get things wrong or admit when anything of sort happens.
There are two issues here. One Apple might boot Twitter over conservative speech. Two Musk and a host of others are not interested at all in paying 30% to Apple. Both things are going hand in hand down the church wedding aisle.
Musk “creates” his first win against Apple and is moving on the second win.
Those for freedom of speech on the right wont trust the first win will stick. Why should they? So they will want the second win lower Apple rates than 30%.
What was “wanted” on Jan 29, 2021 is different than what was signed into law by President Biden on Aug 16, 2022. That is ALWAYS the case, laws evolve as they go back and forth between both houses of Congress. For someone who constantly talks about the IRA law, it appears that you haven’t even read it yet! The word “union” or “collective bargaining” doesn’t appear anywhere in it. That’s most likely because it wouldn’t have passed, or some other items would have had to be negotiated, in order to get it passed into law.
This is so ridiculous an assertion that it is laughable. Right now, and for the past few years, you can find FAR more conservative speech apps in the Apple app store. Ones like Parler, 2nd1st, epoch times, etc.
So, Elon flat out lied about Apple. They never considered removing Twitter from the App Store, Surprise! This is what Elon meant all along about “protecting free speech” people! Elon hates being accountable for his words. I’m going to say something many hear will find offended: conservative voices have never been censored because they are conservative. If they have been “censored”, it is because they have said vile and dangerous things, not because they are conservative.
I stopped trusting Elon a long time ago. When is the fracking Robo Taxi???
Except you haven’t demonstrated that they have any chance of passing in a GOP-led House.
Oh, sure - there are Republicans that enjoy taking shots at Apple and Google, and would vote for these two measures. But as I’ve pointed out - repeatedly - the future chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is vigorously opposed to the bills. Jim Jordan doesn’t just oppose this bill - he went all out to try to torpedo Biden’s selection of Lina Khan at the FTC, and is adamantly against expanding the DOJ’s antitrust portfolio by even a smidge.
Because Jordan can (and will) block the bill, it can’t pass in the new Congress. It doesn’t matter if the issue gains a little traction among some Republicans who seize on anti-tech sentiment as a populist issue. With both Jordan and McCarthy against these measures, they can’t pass next Congress.
And again, Musk and Twitter are nearly irrelevant to this. Especially now that Musk has been caught out as being utterly mistaken about Apple having plans to boot Twitter. That’s not a “first win” for Musk - he didn’t change Apple’s mind. He just got it wrong (or made it up). That’s not likely to win him any influence on these issues going forward.
It doesn’t have a chance in pretty much ANY house. Remember, these are very large companies, and with a few strategic campaign contributions, they can quash, or slow down almost interminably, this kind of legislation.