the servers he got from the twitter acquisition will probably need total overhaul in about 2 years at most. That would have been a foolish reason to buy it. He probably bought it for a controlled platform and centralization of his other technologies.
While X has attention for the "Social Platform" function their are many uses for in allowing communication from software/bots for automation purposes. Having a platform for all of the Tesla's, SpaceX junk, and other technologies to interact automatically and clandestinely has a much higher value than the silicon that it runs on.
even at the 2020 number in 2 years it will be 5 - 6 years old at best. Most servers are replaced in that time frame. As well setting up a server farm the same size can be done for less than $44 billion. I think it was the connectedness of Twitter and the acceptance of Twitter traffic as normal to all services that watch that kind of thing, the appeal of the acquisition.
It is easy to hide automated network traffic destined to a social platform as just other social traffic especially when the traffic is not distinguishable from normal user traffic. As well the APIs that already exist for X and the prevalence in new API's make any activity as not suspicious.
We agree the acquisition was to further the scheme of CBDC and other technologies that can be used to hold people hostage. I am just stating it is the reputation and network traffic that makes it desirable not the copper and silicon.
the servers he got from the twitter acquisition will probably need total overhaul in about 2 years at most. That would have been a foolish reason to buy it. He probably bought it for a controlled platform and centralization of his other technologies. While X has attention for the "Social Platform" function their are many uses for in allowing communication from software/bots for automation purposes. Having a platform for all of the Tesla's, SpaceX junk, and other technologies to interact automatically and clandestinely has a much higher value than the silicon that it runs on.
This. I could also see it as an intel operation. How many people have the twitter app on their devices?
You could probably acquire your own datacenters for a lot cheaper than 44 billion. There is something in the twitter farm they want.
even at the 2020 number in 2 years it will be 5 - 6 years old at best. Most servers are replaced in that time frame. As well setting up a server farm the same size can be done for less than $44 billion. I think it was the connectedness of Twitter and the acceptance of Twitter traffic as normal to all services that watch that kind of thing, the appeal of the acquisition.
It is easy to hide automated network traffic destined to a social platform as just other social traffic especially when the traffic is not distinguishable from normal user traffic. As well the APIs that already exist for X and the prevalence in new API's make any activity as not suspicious.
We agree the acquisition was to further the scheme of CBDC and other technologies that can be used to hold people hostage. I am just stating it is the reputation and network traffic that makes it desirable not the copper and silicon.
No. You don't understand how levered capital is deployed, what is ROI on old tech and what is the efficient frontier buy/rent.
So, no.
Personally that whole Dorkin interview looked scripted , incl. the fuck you piece.
Why? Wait for the reveal. I'm sure we'll both go "duh! How obvious!".
Starlink problem is not servers, but up/downlinks bandwidth. No amount of servers could solve that.