It would be interesting if they did "trade" .... could make sense at that size tbh.... be interested to see their next couple of quarters accounts.


One snag with accepting BTC for Teslas, is, why would most people effectively sell BTC for a mass production car that, as with most cars, will end up on a scrap heap. I personally always thought the most likely reason Tesla stopped accepting BTC was because they had hardly anyone willing to buy a tesla with their BTC, but who knows.







 

Is it all over for the Biden crime syndicate?

Grandpapa Joe says he has cancer and the net is closing in on his model citizen son Hunter.

https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1549830339501199360?s=20&t=sly4M02U5SJWOgCEowMl9w

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11033595/Federal-prosecutors-weighing-charges-against-Hunter-Biden-report-claims.html

Don't be surprised to see impeachment resignation and Kamala as president. I've heard the deep state supposedly want Pete Buttigieg instead.


In the UK we will end up with Liz Truss which unbelievable considering the mess with her foreign affairs regarding the Russian sanctions.
Political failures always seem to double down and fail upwards till there is no higher place to go.

I wouldn't hold my breath. Holding "planet destroying" Bitcoin not compatible with Elon selling poorly QCed cars to people who think they are saving the planet.

I refuse to buy a new car until 0.1 BTC covers it fully after tax.
Most likely it won't be a Tesla considering their prices are only going up whilst the rest of the car industry are catching up and making more interesting cars with less harsh suspension.

A Tata Nano?

I do not think it is a lame excuse in the slightest.... I think it is a very pertinent question.... the most important question relating to the twitter business model full stop.  Did they ever cough up solid data on it? thought the deal was contingent on that ?


I mean, like elon or not, believe he ever wanted to buy Twitter or not... and how far the deal got or not... "how many of the users on Twitter are bots" is not a lame question, or lame reason to quash the deal imo, IF you believe that the data provided is not accurate.


We have all seen how Twitter operate too, lets not pretend they are some company with high morals, they are actually a very scummy company, that has insisted in sticking its beak where they have absolutely no right to be, at the highest of levels. Screw Twitter tbh.


ps - either way, as casual observer, and one that has issues with social media companies and how they have behaved.... I really hope it goes to court, and , regardless of how it turns out, that there is some scrutiny and discovery and disclosure around the issue of bots/spam accounts. That would be, for me, the most interesting thing out of the whole shebang by far.  I would also like to see these social media companies be forced to decide, are they telecommunications based companies, or are they publishers with basically editorial control? They seem to want it both ways (and if they want to be afforded the protections of not being classed as publishers, then , they should not be imposing their political views and biases... and if they are to be effectively considered as publishers, then, well, bye bye social media companies as we know them, they will get sued into oblivion)   

It's a balance sheet.

Perhaps, and perhaps specifically it was to do with the bots.

Personally I do not care what happens with the deal, I would LOVE to see Twitter under the microscope on this issue though in court, very much.

I reckon it probably does not end up in court thou

Ok fair point. I completely missed the words "balance sheet" and "in millions". But in my defense I have had a few beers. This is my sign to stop shitposting and go to sleep.