Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Elon Musk Continues To Amuse Himself On Twitter, Sharing Song, Duck Emoji (billboard.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the March-madness dept.

Yesterday Billboard magazine reported that Elon Musk had dropped a rap song on SoundCloud -- an auto-tuned song called "RIP Harambe." Posted under the handle Emo G Records, the two-minute track pays tribute to the Cincinnati Zoo gorilla who was killed in 2016 after a 3-year-old climbed into its living area. It's unclear if Musk stumbled upon the track, which has his name on it, or if he released the track himself...

"RIP Harambe" had more than 200,000 plays as of Sunday afternoon.
Some Twitter users left bemused replies, like "Dude, sober up by Thursday's contempt hearing." But the song appears to be part of a longer series of tweets. An anonymous reader writes: On Friday Musk had shared a blank tweet containing nothing but an emoji of a duck with his 25.5 million followers. It drew over 24,000 re-tweets, and 4,300 comments -- far more than the Harambe song (which drew only 14,000 retweets and 1,600 comments.) "Duck emoji FTW," Musk tweeted triumphantly on Sunday, following up on his earlier observation that "Duck emoji defeats Emo G Records. Crushing victory."
In its comments there was also a joke about X.com (the original online banking site Musk launched in 1999, which was eventually merged into PayPal). In 2017 Musk repurchased the domain because "it has great sentimental value" -- but replaced it with an entirely blank page with one lowercase x. In response to the duck emoji, someone tweeted that next Musk needed to update X.com.

Musk promptly replied by tweeting the URL x.com/x -- which (due to the site's error-handling) pulls up a web page with a single lowercase y.

40 of 101 comments (clear)

  1. Great gag by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Funny

    I really like the early April Fool's joke where Slashdot is pretending to be TMZ. Most excellent!

    1. Re: Great gag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking Musk is trolling the SEC. Here in the United States, citizens supposedly have freedom of speech. Yet, here is the SEC saying Musk doesn't have freedom of speech. That seems like a serious problem in my opinion.

      If private people want to try suing Musk for saying "material" stuff on Twitter that made them lose money on the stock market, fine, that's their prerogative and good luck with collecting on those lawsuits.

      If the gov't (SEC) wants to prevent Musk from speaking freely, that's a serious problem for all of us who believe in the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights.

  2. Fuck this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I pay this zero attention and am a better person for it.

    1. Re:Fuck this. by uncqual · · Score: 5, Funny

      Empirical evidence suggests you paid more than zero attention to this.

      --
      Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
  3. Nice to see people just not G.A.F. by Crashmarik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I remember all too well when no one gave a fuck on the internet. You have to wonder what happened to kids that someone shoved sticks up their asses.

    1. Re:Nice to see people just not G.A.F. by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      Corporate main stream media, the deep state and the shadow government are playing divide and conquer. When you look at those information sources, you wonder what the fuck is going on because you see none of it around you, yet it is continuously on corporate main stream media. Only the odd and I mean odd, not just occasional, individuals you know are into this, yet corporate main stream media and establishment politicians broadcast it like it is every where.

      I mean seriously this story, we all complain when corporate try to silence their employees on social media, turning a job, into indentured servitude where you thoughts and conversations are to be controlled by the corporation that pays your salary, that owns you. Same should hold for executives, their social media conversations are social media conversations just like everyone else. Real name, real identity social media is just extremely problematic and needs to be held accountable.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    2. Re:Nice to see people just not G.A.F. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There used to be a divide between online and real life. Most people had no significant online presence.

      Now it's mainstream, tweets are the new press releases.

      Also Musk has a hearing coming up where he could be in full effect do-do so it's kinda interesting... Either he is making things worse for himself or trying to show that his Twitter account is not to be taken seriously.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Nice to see people just not G.A.F. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The deep state and the shadow government are the SEC? They don't seem very shadowy or clandestine to me.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re: Nice to see people just not G.A.F. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      You have to wonder what happened to kids that someone shoved sticks up their asses.

      I'll tell you what happened: the little fuckers enjoyed it.

    5. Re: Nice to see people just not G.A.F. by Type44Q · · Score: 1
      "Loser says what?"

      Amimojo: "What?"

      Stuttering John (to give credit where due) and all the rest of us: "Our thoughts exactly."

  4. Not sure what this really means by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2, Informative
    This quarter 19Q1 does not seem to be as critical as the 18Q2 where the cash position turned very precarious. This quarter had unexpectedly long delays in getting euro transition and certiticates, Some China deliveries. Guidance changed from "profitable in all following quarters" (18Q4) to "small loss" (Jan 2019) to "definite loss" (Feb 2019). Share prices are reacting to that.

    SEC contempt case is not strong. "Must pre screen all tweets" was the original demand, it was redlined and negotiated and taken out. So it is clear Tesla never agreed to pre screen ALL tweets. SEC seems to be under the impression there should be a standing panel with some board members and appointees to screen the tweets. Tesla seems to be thinking, if Elon agrees not to treat anything material, not tweet anything during trading hours, there is no need to pre screen, just a post screen to issue clarification before trading resumes.

    The particular tweet seems to be very immaterial, not much to hang its coat on. If this is the most material breach they have found, SEC has nothing. Looks like it is just a pretext to show that there is no standing panel, no real process to pre screen tweets. Court can rule for either party, but not likely to punish Tesla much. Elon has not made a market moving tweet since funding secured. So SEC got what it wanted.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Not sure what this really means by larryjoe · · Score: 1

      SEC contempt case is not strong. "Must pre screen all tweets" was the original demand, it was redlined and negotiated and taken out. So it is clear Tesla never agreed to pre screen ALL tweets. SEC seems to be under the impression there should be a standing panel with some board members and appointees to screen the tweets. Tesla seems to be thinking, if Elon agrees not to treat anything material, not tweet anything during trading hours, there is no need to pre screen, just a post screen to issue clarification before trading resumes.

      The particular complaint against Tesla is a violation of the settlement that says, "Tesla will establish a new committee of independent directors and put in place additional controls and procedures to oversee Musk’s communications". So, the question is whether Tesla instituted "additional controls and procedures to oversee Musk's communications". I suppose that Tesla could have perfunctorily instituted controls and procedures that it knew would not oversee Musk's communications. Perhaps Tesla thought that oversee means to simply observe without any actual control. Maybe Tesla thought that it would be the final arbiter of what constitutes material information. Unfortunately for Tesla, the court gets to be the final arbiter.

      The particular tweet seems to be very immaterial, not much to hang its coat on.

      The particular quote from Feb 19 is "Tesla made 0 cars in 2011, but will make around 500k in 2019." There's no question that that statement is material. Saying "Tesla's a great company!" is not material, but stating specific numbers that are usually stated during a quarterly report is obviously material.

    2. Re:Not sure what this really means by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2, Informative

      The free market disagrees with you. It caused absolutely no movement in the stock, either in the after market fueled by rumors alone, or the next day. Anyway, these numbers were hinted in many statements before. The dispute is 500K in 2019 or 500 K/yr rate in 2019. The tweet went through and a clarification was also issued. It is not material.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    3. Re:Not sure what this really means by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      SEC moved for a ruling without a hearing. And lost. It is not some open and shut case the press has been reporting. Tesla's sur-reply was super good. SEC was expanding and was introducing elements not mentioned in the first round.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    4. Re:Not sure what this really means by larryjoe · · Score: 1

      The free market disagrees with you. It caused absolutely no movement in the stock, either in the after market fueled by rumors alone, or the next day. Anyway, these numbers were hinted in many statements before. The dispute is 500K in 2019 or 500 K/yr rate in 2019. The tweet went through and a clarification was also issued. It is not material.

      Many material facts end up causing no movement in the short-term stock price, but that lack of stock price movement doesn't detract from the intrinsic material nature of the information.

      That the numbers may have been published previously or even entirely made up is also tangential. Due to the existing settlement, Tesla had an obligation to police Musk's communications, regardless of the effect of the communication on the stock price and regardless of who else might have said the same thing.

    5. Re:Not sure what this really means by Luthair · · Score: 1

      If you think there has been no movement in tesla stock you should take a look another look at charts.

    6. Re:Not sure what this really means by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      Due to the existing settlement, Tesla had an obligation to police Musk's communications, regardless of the effect of the communication on the stock price and regardless of who else might have said the same thing.

      That is the stand of SEC, and it looked like an open and shut case. He tweeted. There is no policing. Case closed.

      But the agreement had an out for Elon. Only material tweets need to be policed. And SEC argued how will you know it is material or not, so you need policing. But that means all his tweets must be policed. Specifically that point was removed from the agreement. So SEC had agreed Elon has some discretion to decide whether or not a tweet is material. He need not ask for clearance if he believed, and there was reason to believe, the tweet is not material. The number 500K as well as 500 k/year numbers were already in the 2018Q4 quarterly report and guidance. So he had the reason to believe it was not material. It is not an easy case SEC thought it would be. The judge dismissed its motion for a judgement without trial.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    7. Re:Not sure what this really means by larryjoe · · Score: 2

      SEC moved for a ruling without a hearing. And lost. It is not some open and shut case the press has been reporting. Tesla's sur-reply was super good. SEC was expanding and was introducing elements not mentioned in the first round.

      I can't find any article that says that the judge denied an SEC motion to forego a hearing. Rather, I see many articles saying that the judge called for both sides to request an evidentiary hearing by March 26 and that both sides decided to forego the evidentiary hearing.

      The key point of contention is the interpretation of the settlement point that Tesla "put in place additional controls and procedures to oversee Musk’s communications". Tesla interprets that to mean that it has full discretion in interpreting what those controls and procedures should mean and implicitly when they apply. The SEC claims that there is no indication that such controls and procedures exist.

    8. Re:Not sure what this really means by larryjoe · · Score: 2

      Due to the existing settlement, Tesla had an obligation to police Musk's communications, regardless of the effect of the communication on the stock price and regardless of who else might have said the same thing.

      That is the stand of SEC, and it looked like an open and shut case. He tweeted. There is no policing. Case closed.

      But the agreement had an out for Elon. Only material tweets need to be policed. And SEC argued how will you know it is material or not, so you need policing. But that means all his tweets must be policed. Specifically that point was removed from the agreement. So SEC had agreed Elon has some discretion to decide whether or not a tweet is material. He need not ask for clearance if he believed, and there was reason to believe, the tweet is not material. The number 500K as well as 500 k/year numbers were already in the 2018Q4 quarterly report and guidance. So he had the reason to believe it was not material. It is not an easy case SEC thought it would be. The judge dismissed its motion for a judgement without trial.

      I don't think either side is arguing that Musk has discretion. Rather, Musk's lawyers argue that Tesla has discretion, and it's Tesla's discretion has protects Musk's tweets. The SEC argues that there is no evidence that Tesla has exercised discretion. The SEC settlement is with Tesla, and therefore, it's Tesla that needs to uphold the terms of the settlement.

      If the number 500k were in the quarterly report as the expected target, there would be no problem. The Q4 report said 360 to 400k. Then in the earnings call, Musk said that Tesla would "produce maybe on the order of 350,000 to 500,000 Model 3s, something like that this year." Musk's subsequent tweet said that Tesla "will make around 500K" cars in 2019. That's not a reiteration of public information, as a narrowing of a predicted range toward the upper portion is sufficiently material that most companies would release a PR statement.

      Finally, as far as I can tell from googled news articles, the judge did not deny an SEC request for judgment without trial but rather asked for requests for an evidentiary hearing, which both sides decided to forego. But maybe I missed that article. Is there a link to such an article about the judge denying an SEC request?

    9. Re:Not sure what this really means by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I doubt the argument that production numbers didn't seem "material" will fly in court. They are one of the basic metrics for any manufacturing company.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Not sure what this really means by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You made a typo, it is supposed to be 1Q84!!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    11. Re:Not sure what this really means by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      Tesla is not arguing production numbers are immaterial. It is just arguing, the same number and the range has already been published. The no new material info in that tweet. It is arguing the clarification "it is 500 K/yr rate not 500K for 2019' is just due to some abundance of caution and clarification. Issued well before markets opened.

      Anyway Elon seems to be finding new ways to communicate material info without running afoul with SEC. Rapping about a dead gorilla means good news coming, Tweeting about bankwuptcy means "staring at death in single digit number of weeks". How can any staid slow moving agency deal with this sort of thing?

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    12. Re:Not sure what this really means by samwichse · · Score: 1

      Except they make 100k cars/year that are not Model 3's, so...

      "will make around 500K" cars in 2019

  5. Q1: Demand. Q2 gross margins. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    The most interesting things to watch out for in the initial production/delivery numbers expected tomorrow or day after are Demand, and Gross margins.

    It is very clear the pent up demand of people who booked years ago willing to buy higher trims have been fully sated. By 19Q2 around the world all people willing to pay high priced versions would have bought them. Going forward it needs to sell the lower priced versions to generate the cash it needs to develop the truck and bring to production the Y, the semi and the roadster2.

    Is there enough demand for the 35K version? Are there enough gross margins to pay down the debt and pay for new facilities? Indications are they definitely have a positive margin on the low end version. It is marginal or is it substantial in the 15% to 20% range? That is the question.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  6. Tesla death watch, sneak post view by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Meanwhile the fans are planning a Eleventh Tesla Death Anniversary Celebration. The link has all the previous predictions of death of tesla. Interesting chronology.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  7. Re:Nope. by uncqual · · Score: 1

    Posting takes attention! (And even suggests that enough attention was paid to this to determine it was worthy of no additional interest.)

    --
    Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading /.
  8. Peak Twitter by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

    Twitter has officially jumped the shark. It's all downhill from here...

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  9. Re:Serious question by tepples · · Score: 1

    For exactly the same reason that some white people smell like stool: a medical issue affecting the bowel.

    Wikipedia's summary of Mr. Musk's ventures doesn't appear to list anything related to health care.

  10. All tolled, there are worse things by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I don't even participate with Twitter at all, but frankly I'd rather see random nonsense Tweets from Musk all day long than have to put up with even one from Orange Julious Caesar and his disappointingly bad case of Digital Tourettes Syndrome.

    1. Re:All tolled, there are worse things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Orange Augustus Caesar not Julius Caesar. Julius Caesar is Macron as he went to send the military into Paris and he will be murdered by the Senate, having overestimated his power and the patience of others.

    2. Re:All tolled, there are worse things by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Stay mad.

    3. Re:All tolled, there are worse things by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Go be a buzzkill somewhere else, the name was coined by Colbert not me.

    4. Re:All tolled, there are worse things by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Nobody talking about Trump, but you just have to bring him up. We were having a nice chat before you showed up. What's it like, being consumed with Trump hate so badly you vomit on random forums? The rest of us have lives outside politicians. We aren't thinking about it every waking moment. I'm sorry your life is like this. I hope you get better.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  11. Be thankful it's not a dick emoji by melted · · Score: 1

    Seriously people, loosen up. The dude is basically the coolest innovator in the world, he can do whatever the fuck he pleases, and I'll be OK with that, as long as we get to Mars in 10 years. Elon, if you're reading this, make a Tesla electric bicycle. I have cash on the ready.

  12. robots.txt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The robots.txt for x.com is just the letter 'y'. That gave me a chuckle.

  13. Re: Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Whether Musk chose to fight the SEC at the time or settle is of no consequence. Freedom of speech is an inalienable right. The government can not take away his, or anyone else's right to free speech. Nor can Musk sign away his right to free speech. Inalienable rights are, by definition, incapable of being surrendered or transferred.

    Other CEOs voluntarily self-restrict their speech because they are conformists (much like you). Musk is clearly a non-conformist. In that sense, Musk IS special.

  14. Wow, a Gorilla killed because of a 3 year old? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Cincinnati Zoo gorilla who was killed in 2016 after a 3-year-old climbed into its living area.
    Well, I can agree that one would prefer the life of a three year old over a mere gorilla.
    However Gorillas are very peaceful creatures ... albeit extremely strong and heavy. Why could they not shot a tranquilizer?

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re: Wow, a Gorilla killed because of a 3 year old? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Ha ha, I already assumed it is only a 1st april joke ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  15. x.com TLS cert expired 07/13/2018 by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

    y

    (After submitting this post I get, " Filter error: You can type more than that for your comment."

    y

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  16. Re: Not quite gone the whole Howard Hughes yet... by Type44Q · · Score: 1
    He's just stressed and this silly shit constitutes a little distraction from his routine; I post meaningless blather on here for the same reason.

    If you were smarter and/or not a shill, this would be obvious to you.