zqps

I was hoping a horse was involved.

You don’t get to become a billionaire, let alone the wealthiest person on earth, without being a greedy fuck. Remember he never actually wanted to buy Twitter, only tried hard to spin the narrative after being sued into it.

“Banning” means making illegal in some fashion. That is very different from breaking phones.

He’d love to also milk it financially, but that’s actually really hard to do with Twitter.

You could say though as a capitalist he also gets a return on investment by manipulating public opinion in favour of conservatism.

Maybe they just never bothered to try.

Also while the platforms are similar, the users and thus the content are not just a smaller version of Twitter.

There is no mention of anyone breaking phones. Where the hell is this claim coming from?

From the article, it isn’t just banning the sale of iPhone 16, but also make iPhone sold to customer non operational.

I could not find such a claim in the article. The only technical information is about issuing IMEIs, the rest is about legality. Where did they say they can and do brick iPhones?