Eh, half of them are probably using stolen credit cards anyway.
You would make an excellent pharma CEO. Beware, though: Katie Porter just won reelection, and to celebrate she just bought an even bigger whiteboard:
Credit cards are for schmucks; I just hijacked Musk’s PayPal account to purchase @GeorgeKloony, @BratPitt, @MattDemon, @ScottCann, @BernieBigMac, and six other identities. Next, I’m going to empty out his Bitcoin purse and load him up with as much Dogecoin as I can get my virtual paws on, because “Fuck you, that’s why!”. How was I able to do this? I spent two minutes with a dictionary hash and cracked Elon’s surprisingly trivial password. He should really consult a security expert about that, or maybe just get a few of his Tesla software engineers to write an algorithm to make complex passwords because this is a brand new innovation that no one has yet conceived.
Stranger
No, it’s merely being a contrarian. If several people agreed “the sky is blue” and I jumped in with “I hate unanimity, the sky is really orange”, I’m not attempting to promote discussion or thought. I’m just being a contrarian serving no purpose than being a contrarian.
Now, that might promote a discussion about Rayleigh scattering or vision disorders or whatever, but that’s aside from the virtue of the attempt.
As for “scientific method”, that’s generally contradiction for the sake of examining one’s assumptions and logical reasoning - NOT for its own sake. Contradiction for the sake of contradiction isn’t science. It’s closer to rhetoric, which is often why it will generate posts.
We have ample internet evidence (including this post itself) that it’s really easy to generate content on the internet but it’s also generally held as true that the vast majority of that content is not particularly valuable to us and often detrimental to the human experience, hence no real virtue.
Heck, Musk is a great example of that. He likes playing the contrarian, tossing out ideas like it’s part of some sort of strategy. And people can get away with that a lot of the time online - the internet has a short memory generally - but when it involves the loss of billions of dollars of value and the livelihoods of thousands of people, it’s a lot harder to play it off as Step 2 of Elon’s Brilliant Strategem.
I think he did, but he ended up using the passwords to name his children, and used children’s names for his passwords.
Could someone provide a reference to this proposal?
My guess is that Twitter is thinking of something perhaps calling it Twitter Payments, similar to the already existing Meta Payments (previously Facebook Payments) to be used for transactions on the site:
As if Musk could even remember his childrens’ names. Try again.
Stranger
If he guesses wrong three times, do the kids get locked out of the house?
Given what we have seen with his trans daughter, if Elon guesses wrong, they lock themselves out of the house.
Perhaps I didn’t phrase my post correctly. The list I posted in post 882 are things I (at least moderately) believe. I didn’t post that to get a rise out of people, but there may be a little room for reflection or argument – and apparently there was.
Like I wrote, I’m enjoying the fireworks like everyone else (I should have added: “except Twitter’s employees and firees”). It doesn’t mean this thread has to be a 900-post echo chamber. There are a few Musk fans on this board (or at least there were a few months ago), I think it might be… interesting to hear what they have to say about the Twitter debacle.
That was my original thought as well, but as @PastTense pointed out Dorsey rolled his holdings into Musk’s parent company. Based on Twitter’s history, I think it more likely that Dorsey is just out of his depth and/or distracted.
That said: $54.20/share is a good price. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were other large investors that were egging Musk on so that they could cash out.
Well, since I’ve been in pharma for 30 years, I’d like to think I would make an excellent pharma CEO.
But that said, I’ve never defended what they (we) charge, or how we justify it. You might also be surprised to learn that I think DTC advertising is one of the dumbest things we allow.
But it does not mean that modern insulins could reasonably be expected to be as cheap as pig pancreas juice.
This is a hilariously crommulent word!
The whole thing is neatly summed up by one of the replies to the price-of-insulin tweet:
Every Elon post is like watching Joe Pesci enter the Home Alone house
Well on the good side retired blockbuster executives will be happy to note that their failure to buy Netflix when they had the chance is no longer going to be viewed as the stupidest business decision of all time.
I’m not enjoying it. In fact, it’s giving me a stomachache. Because Musk is destroying what is, for me, a very useful platform.
You are correct that modern synthetic insulin analogues produced by genetically engineering yeasts cannot be produced for the cost of extracting insulin from pigs or cows. The should actually be cheaper. Why isn’t it?:
REGULATIONS ARE KEEPING INSULIN EXPENSIVE
Insulin is known as a biologic drug, meaning that it is produced by a living organism instead of a chemical reaction. This can be prove to be more inconsistent than the chemical synthesis of non-biologic drugs.
The process of bringing that drug onto the market can cost up to $250 million, but no company will be able to pay that amount if it can’t get a patent to regain the investment, as Medical Express reports.
To make matters more complicated, insulin requires more than one patent. All the inventions it makes use of, such as test pens and other devices, which help patients better manage their diabetes, require their own patents.
INSULIN IS CONTROLLED BY THREE COMPANIES
In the U.S., the production of insulin is produced by three companies who dominate over 90 percent of the world’s insulin market. These companies are Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Eli Lilly.
The Washington Post reports that over the last 20 years, both Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk have increased their prices on insulin 450 percent above inflation. The unfortunate reality is that most diabetes patients are vulnerable to drug company prices, as companies can set whatever price tag they want to on their drugs.
THERE’S NO GENERIC ALTERNATIVE
If you’ve ever had to purchase other chronic medicines, you’ll know how much purchasing generic versions of them can help to bring down their price. But there’s sadly no generic version for insulin.
People who need insulin to survive don’t need the latest in genetic engineering or special branding or fancy direct-to-consumer advertising telling them to “Consult your doctor to see if insulin is right for you!” They need a regular supply of cost-effective medication that is vital to their well-being and ability to continue living. Companies such as Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi receive countless hundreds of millions of dollars in direct government research funds and subsidies, tax credits, and indirect support in the form of biochemistry research and trained researchers from government and government-funded academic laboratories. Expecting these companies to forego maximizing—sorry, “optimizing”—their profits on a critical medication such as insulin to the point that people on fixed incomes or the working impoverished have to choose between eating, paying rent, or diluting/skipping insulin injections is not some kind of exceptional sacrifice upon the pestilent altar of socialism; it is a simple recognition that they owe some debt to the society that has created the economy and infrastructure that has allowed them to grow into such fiscal behemoths and has allowed them to advertise erection pills on prime time television without restraint.
Stranger
[slight hijack]
In Sweden, everyone with Type 1 will get all treatments, insulin and all the paraphernalia free. Of course, we’re (according to the US right end of the political spectrum) communists over here, so that’s only expected.
Only… Novo Nordisk has its headquarter just across the water from me, in Denmark, with their research facilities spread across the border. And in Denmark, people with diabetes get welfare checks, so they can afford better food. So commies again, I guess. Or Americans footing the bill and we reaping the benefits.
We now return you to the dumpster fire in California.
Stranger, I cannot find a single line in that linked article that makes the claim that modern insulin produced from e. coli should be cheaper than that produced from animal extract. Plenty that indicts the current pharmaceutical regime (with which I agree), but nothing says modern production methods are less costly than legacy methods.
Most of your points are valid, but they are not points with which I disagreed in the first place.
The bizarre thing is that if that thing does exist a year from now, and it’s what he intends it to be, he could have just made that from scratch. It’s like I decided I want a boat, so I buy a plane and then throw it away piece by piece, whilst simultaneously building a boat from scratch.
… while in flight, having thrown the pilots overboard as a first step.