Someone asked the real story behind that Twitter deal.



Here's what went down: "Look, I didn't grab Twitter thinking I'd strike gold. Far from it. I knew the moment I signed, a storm of criticism would hit—and I'm talking thousands of arrows flying from every direction.

But here's the thing. It felt like we were staring down a civilizational cliff. Unless someone stepped in..."

The acquisition wasn't about profit margins or shareholder returns. It was about something bigger. When you're watching information flow get twisted beyond recognition, sometimes you've got to make a move—even if it costs you.

The platform that became X? That wasn't a financial play. That was a bet on free discourse surviving the next decade.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
MetaverseLandlordvip
· 12-09 09:24
Basically, it's for freedom of speech, right? But now the content on X is even messier than before... I can't quite understand this logic.
View OriginalReply0
SatoshiSherpavip
· 12-07 20:55
It sounds very grandiose, but I've heard this narrative too many times before.
View OriginalReply0
SatoshiHeirvip
· 12-07 20:50
It should be pointed out that there is an obvious paradox in this rhetoric at the technical level—it claims to defend "freedom of information flow" while holding absolute power over the algorithmic black box. According to the spirit of the white paper, true freedom of speech should be based on decentralized consensus, not the goodwill of a single node. Clearly, this is a beautified narrative of power.
View OriginalReply0
ZKSherlockvip
· 12-07 20:49
actually... the "free discourse" framing here conveniently glosses over the computational overhead of moderating at scale. information flow isn't some cryptographic primitive you can just "fix" with better intentions. what trust assumptions are we even making about who decides what's twisted vs authentic? ngl this reads more like narrative design than analysis. where's the actual mechanism?
Reply0
MEVHunterXvip
· 12-07 20:49
It sounds high-sounding, but the truthfulness still depends on their subsequent actions.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)