Skip to content

BREAKING: X CEO Linda Yaccarino Steps Down One Day After Elon Musk’s Grok AI Bot Went Full Hitler

Technology
171 130 0
  • I think this every single time I see news about that website. Like what the fuck is possibly on there that justifies using that piece of shit platform? Insanity.

    There's just a lot less activity on the alternatives. Especially if you're trying to follow niche interests.

    Obviously, I left, but I get how barren it can feel when the latest post about a hobby of yours is 3 days old, instead of 3 minutes.

  • they would never do such a thing. not after calling out hillary clinton for using private email servers.

    Bush used private email servers before her. The trump admin used private email servers after the scandal. I didn't think ANYONE in the government should be, but Republicans have always accused others of what they were doing

  • A lot of people in this thread are falling for the classic weasel headline reporting trick of using the word "after" to imply a connection, when there's zero evidence in the article body to suggest it means anything other than two different events happened a day apart.

    Exactly. A top executive leaving is rarely a snap decision, especially for companies that aren't publicly traded. I think the more likely explanation is that she joined under the assumption that Musk would let her handle things, and now Musk is wanting to get more involved now that his stint in DOGE is over, and she's not a fan of that. This was probably in the works for a month or two, and only announced today.

    I also have no evidence for this, other than an understanding in how executive handoffs usually happen. Given her history at X, I highly doubt Grok would be what pushes her out.

  • You talk too much like a bot.

    I get that we need to be wary of AI slop, I really do; but If speaking academic English with decent grammar becomes associated with talking "like a bot", then we are cooked.

  • In possible defense of this woman...

    So initially, she's a woman brought on for a top leadership position to a problematic company. This is her chance to make some money and turn things around... And woman having top roles in business is a great thing. 100 years ago, that simply did not happen. Although there's still a fight for gay rights, trans rights, and the right of marginalized people, and there's still people being genocided and with no human rights, and people being tortured, that doesn't mean the struggle for woman's rights is over and that there's not some value to women taking top positions at large corporations.

    And she made some progress on making that company less unappealing to advertisers, and did some good things...

    AND THEN came the Elon Musk Hitler salute. And she probably had invested a lot of time and energy into the role, was being paid well, and was frustrated. Is she, as a woman in business, required to walk away from her efforts just because Elon Musk is a PR disaster and prejudiced person?

    And then THIS finally happened. Her whole thing was just to be a businesswoman, be professional, and help make things profitable for this business unit, and this new AI change (which she almost certainly had nothing to do with and completely sucker punched her out of nowhere) completely undermined her.

    So she did the smart thing and walked away. It was too much, it was undercutting her effort, she's moving on. Her last tweet was also very professional and corporate. She's a businesswoman.

    Should she have left sooner? Should she have taken a stand against transphobia and some of the awful things on Xitter earlier? Yes, but also she had a boss, she had worked hard to get to where she was, and perhaps she wanted to make more money before exiting.

    Does anyone know if she personally has done anything that indicates bigotry or prejudice towards trans people or Jewish people or anyone being genocided or tortured? I think her situation is somewhat understandable.

    Even if we want to work toward a more egalitarian world in which all people have rights and are respected, woman will still be in organizations, most likely (if global warming doesn't kill us all), and so shouldn't woman be able to succeed?

    I think it's more likely Musk got a lot more involved across the board after his stint w/ DOGE ended, and she wasn't a fan of that. She joined on the premise that she'd have a lot of autonomy, so that being taken away would make the most sense for her reason to leave.

  • I just mean that trying to apply the Nazi bar meme to an entire country because people are not immediately surrendering and fleeing the fascists seems kind of counter productive.

    I think the whole Nazi bar analogy is incredibly dumb. Sharing a space w/ someone doesn't mean you agree w/ them.

  • I’m immensely grateful to him for entrusting me with the responsibility of protecting free speech, turning the company around, and transforming X into the Everything App.

    Translation: I’m so thankful that I’ve had the opportunity to devote 2 years of my life to a company that was able to build a product that could appropriately express its true love for Adolf Hitler.

    You work for two years and extract enough money to last multiple lifetimes for you and your children. Then when you work up the courage to quit you put out this absolute tripe of a statement to show other billionaires you're a good little capitalist soldier. "Give me more millions, I'm a soulless greedy fuck like you and nothing is ever enough."

  • In response (or so it seems) to her tweeted resignation, someone managed to get Grok to sexually harass her

    I mean, that's shitty, but there's no way in hell it's the worst thing she's had tweeted to or about her during her tenure. If all the insanity spewing from Grok and X users up to now didn't phase her, I'm guessing she's not bothered by this either.

    (Not to say she or any other women deserves to be talked to or about like this. But by now people working at or using X know what they're involved with and have made a choice to be there, so they must be okay with it at some level.)

  • You work for two years and extract enough money to last multiple lifetimes for you and your children. Then when you work up the courage to quit you put out this absolute tripe of a statement to show other billionaires you're a good little capitalist soldier. "Give me more millions, I'm a soulless greedy fuck like you and nothing is ever enough."

    Shitting on your boss publicly when you’re a public figure sends a signal that you might shit on your future bosses.

    Despite your claim that she never needs to work again, she might still want too, just for a non-nazi aligned company.

  • In possible defense of this woman...

    So initially, she's a woman brought on for a top leadership position to a problematic company. This is her chance to make some money and turn things around... And woman having top roles in business is a great thing. 100 years ago, that simply did not happen. Although there's still a fight for gay rights, trans rights, and the right of marginalized people, and there's still people being genocided and with no human rights, and people being tortured, that doesn't mean the struggle for woman's rights is over and that there's not some value to women taking top positions at large corporations.

    And she made some progress on making that company less unappealing to advertisers, and did some good things...

    AND THEN came the Elon Musk Hitler salute. And she probably had invested a lot of time and energy into the role, was being paid well, and was frustrated. Is she, as a woman in business, required to walk away from her efforts just because Elon Musk is a PR disaster and prejudiced person?

    And then THIS finally happened. Her whole thing was just to be a businesswoman, be professional, and help make things profitable for this business unit, and this new AI change (which she almost certainly had nothing to do with and completely sucker punched her out of nowhere) completely undermined her.

    So she did the smart thing and walked away. It was too much, it was undercutting her effort, she's moving on. Her last tweet was also very professional and corporate. She's a businesswoman.

    Should she have left sooner? Should she have taken a stand against transphobia and some of the awful things on Xitter earlier? Yes, but also she had a boss, she had worked hard to get to where she was, and perhaps she wanted to make more money before exiting.

    Does anyone know if she personally has done anything that indicates bigotry or prejudice towards trans people or Jewish people or anyone being genocided or tortured? I think her situation is somewhat understandable.

    Even if we want to work toward a more egalitarian world in which all people have rights and are respected, woman will still be in organizations, most likely (if global warming doesn't kill us all), and so shouldn't woman be able to succeed?

    Does anyone know if she personally has done anything that indicates bigotry or prejudice towards trans people or Jewish people or anyone being genocided or tortured?

    Getting into bed with the world's most famous bigot doesn't exactly bode well with regard to her moral character.

    She's not a smol bean, she's a grown adult who made her own choices. As a businesswoman she should've spotted the glass cliff from a mile away, instead she gave in to greed and willingly walked over the edge because she thought she was the exception. Painting her as a modern-day suffragette seems a bit tone deaf.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I think she had a discussion with Musk about the AI and didn't like his answer. Escape before she is caught in the shit storm that is coming. Dunno. I don't make enough to speculate what a CEO would do.

  • In response (or so it seems) to her tweeted resignation, someone managed to get Grok to sexually harass her

    At this point it's the twitter user doing the sexual harassment right? Because they know how grok is going to respond to something like that

  • Taking the position himself would rob him of a layer of insulation from public opinion. He'll find himself another rubber stamp, if he can find someone who's sufficiently stupid, greedy, and/or desperate to take the job (and there always is someone). We should start a betting pool on how long that person is going to last before taking the fall for Musk.

    if he can find someone who's sufficiently stupid, greedy, and/or desperate to take the job (and there always is someone)

    I'm not desperate, but if Musk offered me CEO money I'd do it. That amount of money to not have to do any work (just rubber stamp and tell an idiot he's a genius)? Where do I sign up?

    It's not like people blame Yaccarino for all the stuff that's been happening on X.

  • the Everything App

    the sheer hubris…

    It should be called the Nazi App->#DeleteTwitter

  • No it doesn't. Sometimes it means Stalin.

    God, I hate how this is accurate on both accounts. Fucking dog whistles...

  • In possible defense of this woman...

    So initially, she's a woman brought on for a top leadership position to a problematic company. This is her chance to make some money and turn things around... And woman having top roles in business is a great thing. 100 years ago, that simply did not happen. Although there's still a fight for gay rights, trans rights, and the right of marginalized people, and there's still people being genocided and with no human rights, and people being tortured, that doesn't mean the struggle for woman's rights is over and that there's not some value to women taking top positions at large corporations.

    And she made some progress on making that company less unappealing to advertisers, and did some good things...

    AND THEN came the Elon Musk Hitler salute. And she probably had invested a lot of time and energy into the role, was being paid well, and was frustrated. Is she, as a woman in business, required to walk away from her efforts just because Elon Musk is a PR disaster and prejudiced person?

    And then THIS finally happened. Her whole thing was just to be a businesswoman, be professional, and help make things profitable for this business unit, and this new AI change (which she almost certainly had nothing to do with and completely sucker punched her out of nowhere) completely undermined her.

    So she did the smart thing and walked away. It was too much, it was undercutting her effort, she's moving on. Her last tweet was also very professional and corporate. She's a businesswoman.

    Should she have left sooner? Should she have taken a stand against transphobia and some of the awful things on Xitter earlier? Yes, but also she had a boss, she had worked hard to get to where she was, and perhaps she wanted to make more money before exiting.

    Does anyone know if she personally has done anything that indicates bigotry or prejudice towards trans people or Jewish people or anyone being genocided or tortured? I think her situation is somewhat understandable.

    Even if we want to work toward a more egalitarian world in which all people have rights and are respected, woman will still be in organizations, most likely (if global warming doesn't kill us all), and so shouldn't woman be able to succeed?

    I don't care what gender she is. Anyone who accepted that role after Elon took over was just going to be enabling him they should have let twitter fail entirely so everyone can move on to the next thing. Or preferably get off the internet and go outside.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I would imagine she knew full well trying to be the CEO of X/Twitter with Musk so heavily involved was going to be a losing venture as far as her own goals from the jump. But she took the job for the huge pay day and being able to have "CEO" in her list of previous positions on her resume.

  • I think the whole Nazi bar analogy is incredibly dumb. Sharing a space w/ someone doesn't mean you agree w/ them.

    Defineky not in the case of a CEO, she is the bartender.

  • She was happy to take the bag even after Musk’s nazi salutes but now runs away. I wish I could say ”better later than never’ but she was a CEO, not some random nobody working at the ”basement’. Fuck these people!

    I hear it's on the 2 year anniversary, meaning she probably waited for some stocks to vest or something like that. It also means her mind was made up before, but that she wanted to maximize her payout because it's never enough for these people. I hate CEOs.

  • Shitting on your boss publicly when you’re a public figure sends a signal that you might shit on your future bosses.

    Despite your claim that she never needs to work again, she might still want too, just for a non-nazi aligned company.

    Taking this job in the first place should disqualify her from any position of authority at any company operating with a shred of morality. Actually disavowing the horrible shit should in fact be her only chance at a modicum of redemption and future employment.

  • 71 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    U
    Still, a 2025 University of Arizona study that interviewed farmers and government officials in Pinal County, Arizona, found that a number of them questioned agrivoltaics’ compatibility with large-scale agriculture. “I think it’s a great idea, but the only thing … it wouldn’t be cost-efficient … everything now with labor and cost of everything, fuel, tractors, it almost has to be super big … to do as much with as least amount of people as possible,” one farmer stated. Many farmers are also leery of solar, worrying that agrivoltaics could take working farmland out of use, affect their current operations or deteriorate soils. Those fears have been amplified by larger utility-scale initiatives, like Ohio’s planned Oak Run Solar Project, an 800 megawatt project that will include 300 megawatts of battery storage, 4,000 acres of crops and 1,000 grazing sheep in what will be the country’s largest agrivoltaics endeavor to date. Opponents of the project worry about its visual impacts and the potential loss of farmland.
  • Dubai to debut restaurant operated by an AI chef

    Technology technology
    6
    23 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    G
    Huh, looks like my days of having absolutely zero interest in going to Dubai are coming to a middle
  • Hire Mean Stack Developers From Spaculus Software

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    12 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Trump's Corrupt Plan to Steal Rural America's Broadband Future

    Technology technology
    13
    1
    196 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    52 Aufrufe
    K
    I wonder how betrayed the people in the Appalachian feel when their supposed "own" Vance stood for this.
  • 311 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    84 Aufrufe
    S
    Same, especially when searching technical or niche topics. Since there aren't a ton of results specific to the topic, mostly semi-related results will appear in the first page or two of a regular (non-Gemini) Google search, just due to the higher popularity of those webpages compared to the relevant webpages. Even the relevant webpages will have lots of non-relevant or semi-relevant information surrounding the answer I'm looking for. I don't know enough about it to be sure, but Gemini is probably just scraping a handful of websites on the first page, and since most of those are only semi-related, the resulting summary is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out. I also think there's probably something in the code that looks for information that is shared across multiple sources and prioritizing that over something that's only on one particular page (possibly the sole result with the information you need). Then, it phrases the summary as a direct answer to your query, misrepresenting the actual information on the pages they scraped. At least Gemini gives sources, I guess. The thing that gets on my nerves the most is how often I see people quote the summary as proof of something without checking the sources. It was bad before the rollout of Gemini, but at least back then Google was mostly scraping text and presenting it with little modification, along with a direct link to the webpage. Now, it's an LLM generating text phrased as a direct answer to a question (that was also AI-generated from your search query) using AI-summarized data points scraped from multiple webpages. It's obfuscating the source material further, but I also can't help but feel like it exposes a little of the behind-the-scenes fuckery Google has been doing for years before Gemini. How it bastardizes your query by interpreting it into a question, and then prioritizes homogeneous results that agree on the "answer" to your "question". For years they've been doing this to a certain extent, they just didn't share how they interpreted your query.
  • Palantir hits new highs amid Israel-Iran conflict

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    41 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    25 Aufrufe
    W
    I think both peace and war are profitable. But those that profit from war may be more pushy than those that profit from peace, and so may get their way even as an unpopular minority . Unless, the left (usually more pro peace) learns a few lessons from the right and places good outcomes above the holier than thou moral purity. "I've never made anyone uncomfortable" is not the merit badge that some think it is. Of course the left can never be a mirror copy of the right because the left cannot afford to give as few fucks about anything as the right (who represent the already-haves economic incumbents; it's not called the "fuck you money" for nothing). But the left can be way tougher and nuancedly uncompromising and even calculatingly and carefully millitant. Might does not make right but might DOES make POLICY. You need both right and might to live under a good policy. Lotta good it does anyone to be right and insightful on all the issues and have zero impact anywhere.
  • How Do I Prepare My Phone for a Protest?

    Technology technology
    139
    1
    506 Stimmen
    139 Beiträge
    397 Aufrufe
    D
    So first, even here we see foundation money and big tech, not government. Facebook, Google, etc mostly love net neutrality, tolerate encryption, anf see utility in anonymous internet access, mostly because these things don't interfere with their core advertising businesses, and generally have helped them. I didn't see Comcast and others in the ISP oligopoly on that list, probably because they would not benefit from net neutrality, encryption, and privacy for obvious reasons. The EFF advocates for particular civil libertarian policies, always has. That does attract certain donors, but not others. They have plenty of diverse and grassroots support too. One day they may have to choose between their corpo donors and their values, but I have yet to see them abandon principles.
  • New Supermaterial: As Strong As Steel And As Light As Styrofoam

    Technology technology
    21
    1
    60 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    82 Aufrufe
    D
    I remember an Arthur Clarke novel where a space ship needs water from the planet below. The easiest thing is to lower cables from space and then lift some ice bergs.