Skip to content

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

Technology
188 138 0
  • 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.

  • 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 like the theory of the CV, but that thing is a shit stain rather than a valuable experience

  • I like the theory of the CV, but that thing is a shit stain rather than a valuable experience

    Respectfully, this is not how it works up at that level of the machine.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Elon neuralinked into Grok AI, and mechahitler was the result.

  • 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

    Actually, all AIs have guards in place to prevent that kind of abuse.. anyone who has tried to make ChatGPT say lewd things has figured that out a long time ago. It's more than likely one of Elon's tweaks lifted some of those restrictions.

  • Software is evolving backwards

    Technology technology
    64
    1
    342 Stimmen
    64 Beiträge
    327 Aufrufe
    M
    Came here looking for this
  • Resurrecting a dead torrent tracker and finding 3 million peers

    Technology technology
    59
    321 Stimmen
    59 Beiträge
    211 Aufrufe
    I
    Yeah i suppose any form of payment that you have to keep secret for some reason is a reason to use crypto, though I struggle to imagine needing that if you're not doing something dodgy imagine you’re a YouTuber and want to accept donations: that will force you to give out your name to them, which they could use to get your address and phone number. There’s always someone that hates you, and I rather not have them knowing my personal info Wat. Crypto is not good at solving that, it's in fact much much worse than traditional payment methods. There's a reason scammers always want to be paid in crypto if you’re the seller then it’s a lot better. With the traditional banking system, with enough knowledge you can cheat both sides: stolen cards, abusive chargebacks, bank accounts in other countries under fake name/fake ID… Crypto simplifies scamming when the seller, and pretty much makes it impossible for buyers What specifically are you boycotting? Card payments, international tranfers, national transfers taking days to complete, money being seizable at all times many banks lose money on them Their plans are basically all focused on the card you get. Pretty sure they make money with it, else many wouldn’t offer cash back (selling infos and getting a fee from card payments?) if you think the people that benefit from you using crypto (crypto exchange owners and billionaires that own crypto etc.) are less evil than goverment regulated banks, you're deluded. Banks are evil anyways, does it really change anything? The difference is that it technically helps everyone using crypto, not only the rich. Plus P2P exchanges are a thing You'll spend more money using crypto for that, not less That’s just factually false. Do you know the price of a swift transfer? Now compare it to crypto tx fees, with many being under $0.01
  • Power-Hungry Data Centers Are Warming Homes in Nordic Countries

    Technology technology
    3
    1
    12 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    22 Aufrufe
    T
    This is also a thing in Denmark. It's required by law to even build a data center.
  • Tribo777: Promoções e Recompensas Que Valem a Pena

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Covert Web-to-App Tracking via Localhost on Android

    Technology technology
    3
    29 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    23 Aufrufe
    P
    That update though: "... completely removed..." I assume this is because someone at Meta realized this was a huge breach of trust, and likely quite illegal. Edit: I read somewhere that they're just being cautious about Google Play terms of service. That feels worse.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    200 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 275 Stimmen
    134 Beiträge
    50 Aufrufe
    S
    Wait until AI reduces it to just owners.
  • AI will replace routine — freeing people for creativity.

    Technology technology
    14
    2
    42 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    59 Aufrufe
    G
    So you are against having machines do the work of blue collar workers? We should all be out in the fields with plows instead of using a tractor and assembling everything by hand in factories?