Technology

59999 readers

2837 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

820

Server dealer keeps hitting at Elon Musk for $61 million bill — Wiwynn sues X for unpaid IT infrastructure products (www.tomshardware.com)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/technology

70 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kautau 26 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

“The components used to build the products are largely unique to the products, resulting in long lead times for ordering such component parts from suppliers,” and Twitter must give “written approval for Wiwynn to purchase the necessary components to manufacture the customer products…and expressly assumed liabilities for the procurement costs.”

So basically they were bespoke servers that are great for Twitter, custom designed, and definitely aren’t easy to just resell elsewhere, so because Twitter isn’t paying, the IT company is eating the loss right now

[+] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] kautau 25 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It sounds like in this transaction they are purely a hardware provider, they shipped the bespoke hardware to Twitter based on twitters order, musk took over, and is now refusing to pay them because he doesn’t want whatever the hardware is after having gutted Twitter, and they haven’t been paid

[+] [email protected] -12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yep! It’s more nuanced than the title leads on. But “Elon bad” is the train with momentum around here.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I wouldn't describe taking over a company and then not fulfilling obligations incurred prior to the purchase as good behavior. Would you?

[+] [email protected] -6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If it was done in knowingly and in bad faith, no I would not. With this particular case, all I know is what’s in that article which doesn’t describe the situation in detail. The court case would provide the full picture.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Who would be the bad faith actor here? Wiwynn? If they don't have an order, that's going to fall flat pretty fast. Seems like a pretty risky bet at $60 million. Twitter? Then it isn't Wiwynn's problem, Twitter can take care of their bill, and deal with their internal issues.

[+] [email protected] -9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don’t know. Perhaps as part of the acquisition there were some terms regarding situations like this that are in dispute. Even more nuanced, perhaps Wiwynn knowingly took advantage of the acquisition communication issues to assert a level of standing orders that should have been reconsidered.

Who knows, speculating doesn’t move the needle.

[–] Jtotheb 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So stop speculating that the situation is “more nuanced” than the objective article title that paints a picture you don’t like.

[–] kautau 3 points 1 month ago

lol this is literally the same conversation happening elsewhere on the internet about Diddy. There’s a video of him abusing someone. “Stop speculating, we don’t know the whole story.” Speculation is claiming there’s anything beyond a video of him abusing someone. It’s wild how much people love their celebrities to the point of abandoning all logic to defend them.