Connect with us

Tech

Elon Musk Begins Purging Twitter of Up to 3500 Employees

Published

on

X Elon Musk Begins Purging Twitter of Up to 3500 Employees

Billionaire Elon Musk began purging Twitter of its abundance of managers and woke employees on Friday. 

Elon Musk’s overhaul of Twitter has sparked condemnation from leftist progressives and Democrats who say they are worried over the platform’s ability to combat disinformation just days before the US midterm elections.

Musk’s purge of Twitter has led to legal action from the left. At least one lawsuit was filed in San Francisco on Thursday, saying that Twitter violated federal law by failing to provide needed notice to sacked employees.

Musk informed employees through email that they would find out if they had been laid off on Friday. 

His email did not specify how many approximately 7,500 employees would be let go.

Musk did neither confirm nor correct investor Ron Baron, who asked how much money he would save if he “fired half of Twitter” at a conference in New York on Friday.

Musk responded by discussing Twitter’s cost and income issues, blaming activists within Twitter who persuaded large corporations to stop advertising on the platform. 

Musk hasn’t said anything about the Twitter layoffs.

Activist groups, including employees, have been successful in causing a decline in Twitter advertising revenue. We’ve done everything we can to please them, but nothing has worked,” Musk said. 

He went on to say that the decline in advertising was expected as many of the advertisers were aligned with EGS, Environmental, social, and corporate governance.

When activist employees lost access to their work accounts hours earlier, they realized they would soon be fired. 

These employees and others took to the platform using the hashtag #OneTeam to send messages of solidarity. 

The memo to employees stated that job cuts were “essential to ensure the company’s success moving forward.”

No other social media network comes close to Twitter in terms of keeping people informed by public agencies and other key service providers – electoral boards, police departments, utilities, schools, and news sources. 

Before Musk’s takeover of Twitter, conservatives accused the social media site of being biased against conservative viewpoints.  They were excited by the idea of fair moderation under Musk, who has previously criticized Twitter’s leftist moderation.

Republican, Senator Marsha Blackburn, stated on Friday, “I am hopeful that Elon Musk will assist in reining in Big Tech’s history of silencing users who have a different viewpoint than the left.”

The purge of Spam Bots

Musk has stated that Twitter’s mechanism for ranking tweets should be made public, and he has highlighted user-friendly changes to the service, such as the addition of an edit button and the defeat of “spam bots” that send massive numbers of undesired tweets.

“Free expression is the foundation of a functional democracy,” he stated Monday. “I hope that even my harshest detractors remain on Twitter since that is what free expression entails,” he added.

However, many on the left fear Musk’s layoffs will devastate the social media platform and worry about the possible rise of abuse on the platform. Despite Musk’s saying Twitter would not become a “free-for-all hellscape” under his leadership.

Several employees who tweeted about their job losses claimed that Twitter also eliminated their entire teams, including one devoted to human rights and global conflicts. 

Another group for testing Twitter’s algorithms for bias in how tweets are amplified and an engineering team dedicated to making the social platform more accessible to people with disabilities.

Eddie Perez, a former Twitter civic integrity team manager who resigned in September, expressed concern that the layoffs close to the midterm elections could allow disinformation to “spread like wildfire” during the post-election vote-counting phase in particular.

“I have a hard time believing that doesn’t have a meaningful influence on their capacity to handle the quantity of disinformation out there,” he said, adding that there may not be enough personnel to combat it.

Progressive Attack Musk and Twitter

According to Perez, a board member of the nonpartisan election integrity NGO OSET Institute, the post-election period is especially dangerous because “some candidates may refuse to concede and some may cite election anomalies, which is likely to start a fresh cycle of falsehoods.”

However, a Twitter insider says Perez’s concerns are somewhat overinflated, and his comments are stereotypical of the progressive activism that permeated the social media platform.

Since Musk took over as CEO, Twitter staff have been anticipating layoffs. On his first day as owner, he sacked key executives, including CEO Parag Agrawal, and removed the company’s board of directors.

As the emails went out, many Twitter employees rushed to the site to voice their support for one another, typically just tweeting blue heart emojis to represent the company’s blue bird logo and salute emojis in answer to one another.

Meanwhile, a coalition of progressive civil rights organizations say the broad layoffs will threaten content moderation standards, and they have increased their requests for corporations to suspend advertising purchases on the site. 

This claim has, however, been disputed by Musk supporters saying the progressive left is more worried about their voices being moderated as the platform is being purged of cancel culture activists.

Cancel Culture Activism Surges

The cancel culture activists have said Musk’s layoffs are especially perilous in the run-up to the elections, as well as for transgender people and other groups facing violence spurred by hate speech that circulates online.

Free Press and Color of Change leaders claimed they spoke with Musk on Tuesday, and he committed to keeping and implementing existing election integrity procedures.  According to Jessica González, co-CEO of Free Press, the enormous layoffs suggest otherwise.

González disputed Musk’s claim that content moderation procedures had not changed since his takeover, claiming that the organization was already “dangerously under-resourced.”

“When you purportedly lay off 50% of your workforce — including teams in charge of tracking, monitoring, and enforcing content moderation and guidelines — it essentially suggests that content moderation has changed,” González explained.

Media Bias Fact Check rates Free Press.Org as Far-Left biased based on editorial positions that align with the progressive left. 

They also rate them mostly factual in reporting due to one-sided reporting that does not always offer a counter perspective.

Employee Lawsuits and Income Losses

Meanwhile, a California’s Employment Development Department representative stated that Twitter had provided no public notice of the impending layoffs as of Friday. 

On Thursday, a complaint was filed in US federal court in San Francisco by one laid-off employee and 3 other employees who were locked out of their work accounts. 

The cutbacks come at a difficult time for social media businesses, as advertisers cut back and newcomers — primarily TikTok — threaten established platforms like Instagram and Facebook.

Musk blamed cancel culture activists in a Friday post for a “huge loss in income” since taking over Twitter late last week.  He did not specify how much revenue had been lost.

Large corporations that have bought into ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance), such as General Motors, REI, General Mills, and Audi, have all paused advertising on Twitter owing to concerns about how it would run under Musk. 

Volkswagen Group has advised its brands, Audi, Lamborghini, and Porsche, to halt sponsored operations until Twitter updates its brand safety standards.

Musk did tell advertisers last week that Twitter would not become a “free-for-all hellscape,” but many are anxious about whether content monitoring will remain strict and whether sticking to Twitter will degrade their brands.

Musk stated Friday that “nothing has changed with content control.”

Degrading their brand means corporations fear reprisals from woke social media activists who will target their shareholders like they have targeted Musk and Twitter.

 

Geoff Brown is a seasoned staff writer at VORNews, a reputable online publication. With his sharp writing skills he consistently delivers high-quality, engaging content that resonates with readers. Geoff's' articles are well-researched, informative, and written in a clear, concise style that keeps audiences hooked. His ability to craft compelling narratives while seamlessly incorporating relevant keywords has made him a valuable asset to the VORNews team.

Tech

Nukkleus Acquires Star 26 Capital Inc., Marking a Strategic Shift.

Published

on

(VOR News) – A major strategic change has been made when Nukkleus Inc., a fintech business that specialises in digital financial technology, stated that it has paid $26 million to acquire a controlling 51% position in Star 26 Capital Inc.

Israel’s prestigious Iron Dome missile defence system is mostly supplied by RIMON, which Star 26 Capital owns a 95% controlling interest in.

With this acquisition, Nukkleus is expanding from its finance roots into the defence industry, interacting with a rapidly growing industry driven by shifting demands for global security. As businesses look into high-growth industries to improve their market position, the activity aligns with broader trends in strategic diversification.

The Role of Star 26 Capital in the World’s Defence Infrastructure

Through its full ownership in RIMON, Star 26 Capital Inc. plays a crucial role in Israel’s defence infrastructure. The Iron Dome missile defence system, a well acknowledged technology that has successfully saved civilian lives during rising regional tensions, depends heavily on RIMON.

The Iron Dome is renowned for its advanced radar and interceptor systems, which provide outstanding protection from artillery shells and short-range rockets.

Along with the Iron Dome, RIMON has made a name for itself as a key supplier of systems and components for other defence applications.

Their goods include masts, tactical vehicle solutions, specialist generators, and contemporary lighting systems—all crucial for security and military operations. The company operates through exclusive contracts and alliances, which increase its competitiveness in the market.

Nukkleus’s Strategic Justification

The purchase of Star 26 Capital by Nukkleus demonstrates a calculated diversification strategy. This move highlights the company’s goal to leverage emerging opportunities in defence technology, even though finance and digital assets are essential to its operations.

“The acquisition of Star 26 Capital represents a significant milestone, allowing us to enter the rapidly growing defence technology industry,” said Emil Assentato, CEO of Nukkleus. Because of its proven track record of providing vital defence solutions, RIMON is the best partner for us as we work to create long-term value for our investors.

Through this strategic move, Nukkleus is able to profit from the growing global defence budget, which has been exacerbated by regional conflicts, geopolitical instability, and increased security concerns.

By purchasing a share in Star 26 Capital, Nukkleus gains access to cutting-edge technologies and strengthens its position in a prominent international defence industry.

The process of diversification In Light of Changing Market Dynamics

Nukkleus has purposefully diversified its assets during the past year. In order to bolster its position in international financial markets, the company previously inked a term sheet to acquire Mercury Global, a cross-border payments provider.

By acquiring Star 26 Capital, Nukkleus is showcasing a well-rounded expansion strategy by leveraging both financial and defence technologies to increase its footprint.

Star 26 Capital will provide Nukkleus with a significant revenue stream outside of traditional fintech markets thanks to its involvement in the development of tactical vehicles, exclusive contracts for cutting-edge components, and vital contribution to defensive infrastructure.

The Future of Star 26 Capital and Nukkleus

Through the deal, Nukkleus’s financial expertise and Star 26 Capital’s technological know-how may work together more effectively.

Nukkleus is capable of researching financial innovations created especially for military supply chain management, defence contract procurement, and safe international payment options. In an increasingly digital environment, this integration may revolutionise the operational and transactional administration of defence companies.

According to industry analysts, Nukkleus made a bold and wise move by entering the defence market. With the growth of international defence markets and the increasing need for technologies like the Iron Dome, Nukkleus is well-positioned to benefit from this diversification strategy in the long run.

Final evaluation

The purchase of a majority stake in Star 26 Capital and, by extension, RIMON by Nukkleus Inc. represents a significant milestone in the company’s development.

Nukkleus has demonstrated its ability to identify and seize high-growth opportunities by moving from the financial sector to the defence technology sector. This deal strengthens Star 26 Capital’s position as a major player in the global defence ecosystem by providing new avenues for growth and innovation.

By strategically acquiring Star 26 Capital, Nukkleus demonstrated its proactive approach in the military technology space and opened the door for future expansion and influence in a number of industries.

SOURCE: AL

SEE ALSO:

TikTok’s Last Effort Requests Supreme Court Action About U.S. Prohibition.

Trudeau’s Government in Shambles as Ministers Resign

Continue Reading

Tech

Facebook Owner Fined 251 Million Euros For a Data Leak In 2018.

Published

on

(AP Photo/Jeff Chiu, File)

(VOR News) – On Monday, the European Union’s privacy watchdog voted to punish Facebook owner Meta 251 million euros after looking into a 2018 data breach that exposed millions of accounts on the social media site.

After the European Union concluded that the breach had occurred, an investigation was carried out.

The completion of the probe marked the pinnacle of the investigation. The inquiry was conducted in reaction to the circumstances, given that millions of accounts were compromised.

The sanctions were imposed by the Data Protection Commission of Ireland in order to deter future violations at the conclusion of its investigation into the infraction. It was the commission that conducted the full investigation and was in charge of it.

The issue that occurred was ultimately brought on by hackers taking advantage of holes in the platform’s code that gave them access to user accounts. A consequence of the exploited flaws was that the hackers obtained digital keys, also known as “access tokens.”

The Irish watchdog is Meta’s principal privacy regulator.

This is because the European Union (EU) has implemented strict privacy restrictions. The EU’s implementation of these limits is the reason for this.

This decision was taken because Dublin serves as the location of the company’s regional offices, which is the justification for choosing this location. Because of the Facebook location’s selection, this decision was made.

The watchdog discovered several violations of the rules, often known as the General Data Protection Regulation, and responded by imposing reprimands and “administrative penalties” totalling 251 million euros ($264 million). In the course of the watchdog’s inquiry, these infractions were found.

These penalties were applied as a consequence of the recurring infractions that were discovered. These violations were found during the initial inquiry by the watchdog. When the verdict is formally published, the firm has stated that it will attempt to appeal it, according to an announcement.

The incident that serves as the foundation for this interpretation is an incident that happened in 2018 and serves as the inspiration for this statement.

The corporation had stated in a statement released to the public that “We took immediate action to fix the problem as soon as it was identified.” The company also claimed to have “proactively informed people impacted” about the issue that had occurred.

This declaration was made with the Irish Facebook watchdog.

Facebook stated that some 50 million user accounts were impacted by the problem when it first made the problem public. Facebook made this information available to the public for the first time. According to the Irish watchdog, the real figure was probably close to 29 million, with three million of those people living in Europe. The availability of this information was on Tuesday.

When the corporation discovered the defect, it promptly informed the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. and European regulatory bodies. This was completed simultaneously. At the time, regulatory bodies were also found all over Europe.

Three separate issues that happened at the same time affected Facebook’s “View As” feature during the attack. All of these issues were presented simultaneously. By using this feature, users can alter their profiles and see how they seem to others.

The accounts of people whose profiles were shown as a result of searches conducted using the “View As” function were used to gather access tokens. The purpose of these searches was to find a certain person.

All of the individuals who were in charge of executing the attacks exploited the vulnerability to obtain access tokens from the accounts of the targeted users. After that, the attack shifted from one Facebook user’s friend to another user’s friend. This went on till it arrived at its destination.

This specific event occurred almost quickly following the first attack. If such tokens were in the hands of an opponent, the adversary could take over the accounts they were trying to access.

SOUREC: AP

SEE ALSO:

Meta Foundation Donates $1 Million to the Donald Trump Inaugural Fund.

China Begins To Investigate Nvidia And Accuses The Company Of Violating Its Anti-Monopoly Rule.

Continue Reading

Tech

Meta Foundation Donates $1 Million to the Donald Trump Inaugural Fund.

Published

on

(VOR News) – One million dollars was contributed to the Meta establishing fund of Donald Trump, who is going to become the next president of the United States of America.

This donation came from Meta Platforms Inc. For the purpose of re-establishing a constructive relationship with the administration following a challenging history, this contribution was made as part of an effort to do so.

The donation, which comes after a dinner in November between President Trump and Chief Executive Officer Mark Zuckerberg at the Mar-a-Lago club of the vice president-elect, is not something that Meta put together for President Joe Biden or for Trump’s inauguration in 2016. Remember that Meta did not produce the gift on either of these occasions.

This is an extremely important point to keep in mind.

While the conversation was going on, a representative from Meta acknowledged the donation, which was something that The Wall Street Journal had previously disclosed. The agent, on the other hand, declined to provide any other information regarding the donation.

During his first two campaigns for the presidency, Donald Trump made great use of social media platforms such as Facebook and Instagram.

Meta is the owner of both Instagram and Facebook, which are also different websites. Nevertheless, his accounts were terminated as a consequence of the incident that took place at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Because Meta was concerned that Trump could instigate further violence by denying that Biden had won the election, they decided to suspend his accounts. Because of this reason, these accounts were taken down altogether.

Even after his accounts were restored in 2023, Trump continued to publicly voice his discontent with Zuckerberg’s treatment of him, which he considered to be unfair. It seemed to him that Zuckerberg had handled him in an unfair manner.

Zuckerberg may be indicted after Trump called Meta the “enemy of the people” in March.

Since then, Zuckerberg has sent a petition to Trump, which is now being accepted by a greater number of people. In light of the fact that he was on the verge of being murdered, he responded to Trump’s comments by referring to himself as a “badass.”

Additionally, he apologised to the president-elect over the phone during the summer of last year for mistaking photographs of Trump for fact checks. In order to accomplish this, he called the leader who had just been elected president.

Since Trump has returned to the White House, a number of major business leaders and venture capitalists have made efforts to improve their ties with him, despite the fact that they had previously voiced their disdain of him.

Previous to this, they had voiced their disapproval of Trump in the past. A member of this group is Mark Zuckerberg, the man who established Facebook.

During the time period following the election in 2016, Meta only provided modest financial support to a limited number of state-level groups and candidates. The inaugural gift of seven figures is a key turning point for the corporation, given the enormous shift that has occurred in the organization’s financial condition.

One of the issues that surfaced after Trump’s first victory in the White House was the allegation that the corporation allowed Russian agents to influence the election by putting advertisements on the social media platform that criticised Hillary Clinton, who was Trump’s Democratic opponent. Clinton was a former secretary of state.

Specifically, this accusation asserts that the company allowed Russian actors to influence the outcome of the election. During this time period, the company, which was formerly located under the name Facebook, Inc., became involved in a number of controversial issues.

On top of that, the Trump campaign’s use of Facebook throughout the 2016 election campaign was subject to criticism. Additionally, in an effort to minimise the number of people who voted for Clinton, it utilised its audience targeting capabilities to broadcast advertising that were hostile to a specific population.

These advertisements were tailored to the audience in question. It was the primary objective of the platform, which was developed in order to do this, to solicit financial support from contributors who made very little contributions.

SOURCE: YN

SEE ALSO:

China Begins To Investigate Nvidia And Accuses The Company Of Violating Its Anti-Monopoly Rule.

Google Search Is Set To Undergo Significant Evolution By 2025. Sundar Pichai

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version