Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 74 posts

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#51

Post by x1024 »

dang wrote: post #32
x1024 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't downvoting such an opinion enough? Do we pretend that banning will pacify people that want to stir trouble?

Empirically, no, it's nowhere near enough. Also, sometimes such comments get upvoted.

Then... they are right?

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#52

Post by flylib »

Avshalom wrote: post #34
flylib wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

compared to what? they are two of the most successful tech companies built in the last decade

They really aren't. Or at least if they are it's a terrifying commentary on tech companies because neither of them have ever actually made money.

in terms of returns for investors/founders/early employees, yes they are, and twitter is undoubtedly in terms of reach/impact one of the most important tech companies in the last decade, whether they actually sustain moving forward is another question

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#53

Post by ChuckMcM »

n0us wrote: post #2

I think his status as a single child-free person goes understated in this article. It takes a special kind of husband/wife to be okay with someone who works this hard and not having to juggle a home life frees up his schedule to a huge degree. I can imagine working hard 18hr days while still in my 30s, but I cannot imagine doing that while maintaining a marriage and taking care of a kid or two. The guy is a billionai…

Yup. And I remember very clearly that day when it was going to be my career or my family, and I chose my family. I did so because more and more people I knew were getting more and more stressed at how pissed off their spouse was or that they never saw their kids. A number of them got divorced and could only see their children on every other weekend.

It will be interesting when he is 60 if he feels like he made the right choices.

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#54

Post by yeukhon »

I typically work 14-20 hours a day, as a DevOps. Sounds crazy, yeah. This is an illness. I am depressed, and also bored. I am compulsive to working and sitting in front of a computer. And finally, I am super micro-manage. I like things to be done in my way. Now, I can't get up early in the morning because the lack of sleep. I don't understand how he can be on time every day and manage to work 18 hours a day. This guy is just nut, to be honest. Rumor has it that he's trying to be Steve Jobs or someone similar. My bet is he's just very controlling.

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#56

Post by enraged_camel »

x1024 wrote: post #51
dang wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Empirically, no, it's nowhere near enough. Also, sometimes such comments get upvoted.

Then... they are right?

No, it simply means they are popular, which is not the same thing as "right".

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#57

Post by hitekker »

influx wrote: post #21

Jack actually walked out of the Twitter meeting where they were explaining the layoffs to the leftover employees. I'm sure he had an important meeting though.

To add to this, I recommend reading how Jack, or the person Jack told to write this email presented the layoff:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10379948

In the most charitable light, I believe Jack doesn't want to be seen as a villain. In a less charitable light.... I think most people can read between the lines.

Those can't or do not wish to see any ominous signs here, tend to be still working at the company. Willful ignorance of this kind is completely understandable, in my mind, since few wish to bite the hand that feeds them.

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#58

Post by dang »

mschuster91 wrote: post #50
dang wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've posted many uncivil comments to HN. We've asked you more than once not do this. If you can't or won't stop, we will ban your account. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10798178 and marked it off-topic.

Huh, I can't see anything uncivil in the post you linked to. Copypasted the wrong one?

The comment I chided wasn't 10798178 (which indeed was fine), but an uncivil reply to it which its author subsequently deleted. The deletion is what made this confusing. You should see "[deleted]" just above my comment upthread—that's a stand-in for the post I was replying to.

Re: How Jack Dorsey Runs Both Twitter, Square

#59

Post by dang »

x1024 wrote: post #51
dang wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Empirically, no, it's nowhere near enough. Also, sometimes such comments get upvoted.

Then... they are right?

That's a misunderstanding of how HN works. Upvotes don't determine everything here, because the main value of the site—intellectual curiosity—would quickly be overwhelmed if they did. Drama, gossip, and outrage routinely drive more upvotes, even among groups of smart people. So HN is a constitutional democracy: mostly driven by upvotes, but with checks and balances to mitigate the bad effects. The HN guidelines are the constitution and moderation is one of the checks.
Post reply on HN