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

Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 252 posts

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#181

Post by ryguytilidie »

seabird wrote: post #149
vonnik wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, all Twitter needed was a pack of neo-Nazis, some Russian bots, and a genocidal conman in the White House. Not worth it. The health of Twitter's balance sheet is a counterindication of the health of the world. When their stock goes up, the market should dive.

>genocidal conman It is no surprise that Trump won when his name can't be mentioned without an absolutely asinine, incorrect comment following it. Addressing dishonesty with hyperbole is not helping anyone.

Uhhh, did you miss the tweets where he threatened Nuclear Holocaust on North Koreans if they didn't start behaving the way he wanted?

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#182

Post by dang »

model_m_warrior wrote: post #16
jastanton wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

General reminder to be courteous, especially when people learn something new: https://xkcd.com/1053/

Tech is full of school marms now. Thats how we know its mainstream.

Would you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to HN? We ban accounts that do that as much as you've been.

In case it helps: I don't give a fig about being a schoolmarm, nor does anyone else who works on HN. What we care about is having a web forum that isn't quite at the bottom of the barrel. The downward pressure thither is so overwhelming that unless we do specific things to counteract it, and maintain them constantly, that's where we all end up. That's bad, not because Miss Manners doesn't approve, but because it's boring.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#183

Post by misterHN »

Twitter is subverting the USA, and Trump is as well, by normalizing Twitter use. The punishment for subversion is summary execution because a subverter is assumed to be a traitor. Trump is a traitor, he should be shot immediately for subversion, and the heroes who shot him should be celebrated and enjoy a great triumph of liberating the people of America from Twitter. Liberation means death to those who tolerate the degradation and mental contagion that is Twitter, a disgusting pit of hatred and barbaric behavior. Trump is not just a stupid jerk, he is a stupid jerk who needs to be shot for subverting the USA, stat. Letting these monsters live is stupid. You want to be stupid? You want to tolerate a security force that protects a stupid traitor? That’s what Trump is: a stupid traitor. He wants to pretend it is OK to be a stupid jerk and tell the American people he is an incompetent moron every day. No, it is subversive behavior and it earns you the title of TRAITOR.

TRUMP IS A TRAITOR.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#184

Post by KGIII »

craftyguy wrote: post #159
ImSkeptical wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Threatening a country that is threatening us isn't exactly genocidal. Killing families of terrorists is deeply immoral and murderous - but it's also in keeping with current U.S. policy (see Anwar al-Awlaki - both Trump and Obama administrations have killed Awlaki's children). Terrorists aren't a race though, so wanting to kill them and their families isn't genocide.

Don't confuse yourself. It's not the millions of people El Cheeto would kill in a nuclear strike on DPRK that are threatening the US, it is effectively one trump-like individual in charge of DPRK that is threatening the US.

And you wonder why your side keeps losing elections.

If you're curious, I am on the left.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#185

Post by KGIII »

craftyguy wrote: post #170
wildmusings wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government has consequences. That's why democracy is so important. This is especially true with regards to foreign policy. If a country threatens another such that the threatened country's only viable defense is to attack the civilians of the aggressor, that would be a totally legitimate tactic of war. Taking out North Korea's nuclear capability while preventing a counter attack on South Korea will probably involve t…

> That's why democracy is so important Too bad there is not a true democracy in the US. > Taking out North Korea's nuclear capability while preventing a counter attack on South Korea will probably involve the deaths of many innocent North Koreans, How about we concentrate on their leadership, instead of 'spraying and praying'?

The US has never had a true democracy, and this is by design.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#186

Post by nkozyra »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #169
nkozyra wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't VCs constantly fund things (social media or otherwise) that never reach profitability? Isn't that the whole gamble of "venture" funding in the first place? The monetization aspect is supposedly solved. If I suspect you can garner audience, I posit that said audience can be translated into ad dollars at some point in the future. Only the first part is speculative. And speculation is what venture funding is all a…

> Don't VCs constantly fund things (social media or otherwise) that never reach profitability? The expectation isn’t perpetual. Evert company must become profitable, be acquired by someone who believes it will make them (more) profitable (or attractive to another party with that belief), or go bust.

Of course. But look at the context of my reply:

> More and more these social media platforms feel like scheme's. Round after round of funding without ever reaching profitablity

Nowhere did I say we're looking at perpetual return on investment. Like any investment, you're looking to go in at a certain point and get out at a certain point. This is no more a "scheme" than buying a house and hoping it increases in value or buying a lottery ticket. The underlying value is audience. Some companies get that, others don't.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#187

Post by odammit »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #29
samcheng wrote: post #5

It's not mentioned in the article, but I really think President Trump has been a savior for Twitter. Without those controversial tweets, Twitter would rarely be in much of the public's mind, and the company would have continued its slow slide into irrelevance. As it is, barely a day goes by without "Twitter" being mentioned in national news.

I can't find the article but an economist was estimating Trump's worth to Twitter at almost $2 billion. So I can't say I'm surprised; he is the single best thing that has happened for their company in YEARS.

I’m curious if and how much stock he holds in it.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#188

Post by markdown »

hk__2 wrote: post #128
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And thus why he will never have violated the ToS. He could openly threaten to murder someone and Twitter would not suspend him. (Though in fairness they rarely suspend anyone else either.)

> Though in fairness they rarely suspend anyone else either They probably suspend a lot of people every single day, but we don’t notice it.

The spammers, yes.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#189

Post by qznc »

randomblob wrote: post #30
randomblob wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also: What data is being bought? Publicly available information bundled up so there's not hassle with gathering it would be ok IMO. Private data would spark my interest as well. They can't be selling DMs, can't they?

If somebody says "Emails": What are they used for then by the buyer?

Things I can think of: Broadcast a tv spot, then measure how much hashtag mentions it generates. Find regions where people are more receptive to your product based on Twitter sentiment. Filter for stock mentions and use it for your trading bot.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#190

Post by VVayneTracker »

samcheng wrote: post #5

It's not mentioned in the article, but I really think President Trump has been a savior for Twitter. Without those controversial tweets, Twitter would rarely be in much of the public's mind, and the company would have continued its slow slide into irrelevance. As it is, barely a day goes by without "Twitter" being mentioned in national news.

Agreed. I wonder how much of that money is from strawman purchases that can't be traced directly to russia yet. When the dust finally settles on all this we'll see that twitter received millions from russian surrogates.
Post reply on HN