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

I resigned from Twitter

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#761

Post by Aloha »

zarzavat wrote: post #575
NoGravitas wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is extremely toxic for anyone who's not a VC-adjacent techbro. If you're part of the target audience for /pol/, you wouldn't notice that /pol/ is toxic, either.

If HN is "toxic" then you'll have to define the word toxic, because generally this is one of the best-behaved discussion forums on the internet. Even jokes get downvoted.

Agreed, I regularly have discussions with people who I disagree with here, good, informative ones that inform my perspectives and help me learn.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#762

Post by delaaxe »

mgfist wrote: post #753
mike_d wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes no sense. He is the CEO and on the board, he _is_ the decision maker and could reverse any action he disagreed with. Any disagreement was purely theatre.

A CEO isn't a dictator. They still need board support. If everyone on the board decided that Jack wasn't the guy anymore, Jack can't wave a magic wand and make them disappear. CEOs have been ousted many times.

From what I hear that's not the case the with Zuckerberg, in that most decisions go through him. I would guess the same with Elon

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#763

Post by tshaddox »

adh636 wrote: post #689
surfingdino wrote: post #665

He's left to focus on his ideas for making money with Bitcoin. Compared to crypto, Twitter is just not very exciting.

I don't know him personally so I could certainly be mistaken, but from listening to him speak/write and based on his charitable giving I don't get the impression at all that Jack is motivated by riches. I think he is genuinely interested in Bitcoin as a tool for advancing humanity. I also don't get the impression he is interested in 'crypto'. I guess it remains to be seen though.

Even if it’s not about personal riches, I think it’s pretty clear that he’s motivated by scale of impact, which for any for-profit company would likely be strongly correlated with “riches.”

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#764

Post by bad_username »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #748

A few reflections on this announcement. 1) Remember that CEOs of public companies are essentially unable to say what they think or want. The cost of doing it is being sued for damages, having to spend countless hours with lawyers, etc. Jack might think X, but he's only allowed to say Y, and he doesn't want to go beyond that because he doesn't want to fight that fight. Only people in a close circle really know what's…

> it has essentially enabled an incredible explosion of "voices" that can be heard

Very controlled, curated, and politically corrected explosion. "Very lively debate within allowed spectrum".

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#765

Post by slowmovintarget »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #663
mjamil wrote: post #608

I'm in a post-Thanksgiving charitable mood, so thank you, Jack. The execution hasn't been perfect (as has been commented on ad nauseam), but Twitter is the closest to a worldwide-accessible [1] Speaker's Corner [2] I know of, and that - despite all the completely valid criticism - is a valuable public service: mediating access to information has been the defining tool of control for those in power pretty much since c…

Has mediating access to information been the defining tool of control for civilizations? Maybe in tyrannical, despotic societies that is true, but those don't allow Twitter today via firewalls, so that's mostly a moot point in this thread. I'd say the sword and the coin have both been far more controlling than limited information spread. What of free society? Is the government of the USA, UK, or other "enlightened" s…

> Beneath the rule of men entirely great

> The pen is mightier than the sword.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#766

Post by swalsh »

mike_d wrote: post #703
thaumasiotes wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uncharitable explanation: he's being forced out over his pro-free-speech views. He's been pretty vocal about disagreeing with Twitter's recent actions.

That makes no sense. He is the CEO and on the board, he _is_ the decision maker and could reverse any action he disagreed with. Any disagreement was purely theatre.

Everyone (except maybe Zuck) has a boss.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#767

Post by justapassenger »

snarkypixel wrote: post #659

There's zero explanation in the email for why he resigned. He's re-iterating the point that the company is fine moving forward with the rest of the board, the new CEO and the existing team, but no actual reason as to why he left.

Running social media company is a job, where in the best case, half of the world hates you. No matter how good you’re, you’re always walking thin line between hate, free speech, conspiracy theories, political polarization, media and countless other issues. It’s a game you cannot win, and I’m pretty sure that’s why he’s resigning.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#768

Post by LegitShady »

ryantgtg wrote: post #687
LegitShady wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long ago I made a reddit account with the first suggested name after the one I asked for was 'taken', disabled following all the subreddits, and then selectively added subreddits specific to my hobbies. I don't see anything that normally hits the front page, everything I do see is somewhat relevant to me, and it basically deletes all politics from what is presented. By far the best reddit experience possible, I think…

I assumed this is how almost everyone uses reddit!

by vote counts its clear the default subs (and subs that used to be default) are the biggest with the most traffic, so probably not.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#769

Post by potluckyears »

mjamil wrote: post #608

I'm in a post-Thanksgiving charitable mood, so thank you, Jack. The execution hasn't been perfect (as has been commented on ad nauseam), but Twitter is the closest to a worldwide-accessible [1] Speaker's Corner [2] I know of, and that - despite all the completely valid criticism - is a valuable public service: mediating access to information has been the defining tool of control for those in power pretty much since c…

Perhaps a valuable public service should be owned and governed by...the public? In a corporation like Twitter, only people who can afford a financial stake have a say, and having more financial stake means having more say. Not a great structure if your concern is power. Perhaps everyone in the public (with a social rather than financial stake in a platform like Twitter) should have a voice in its governance.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#770

Post by ctvo »

rexreed wrote: post #754
vimda wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you don't see functionality changing doesn't mean it isn't. Lots of new features, just not for the normal users. Not to mention all the backend work to make all this data flow around, be accurate, and be reliable. And also, there's not just engineering. HR, Accounting, Lawyers, Trust and Safety, it's all there

The point I'm trying to make is assume that user-side functionality stays exactly the same - frozen - for say 10 years. Given what you say above, it would be reasonable to expect the company to continue to grow in any case on its current 10-20% compounded annual rate with no end in sight. Is that truly sustainable?

Which users? Internal users? External users? External developers (I know, I know) or academics consuming their APIs? Advertisers?

Starting from the position of what don't I know about this situation, and / or what systems could cause it to be in this seemingly intractable state leaves you open to all sorts of new learnings vs. assuming there aren't intelligent, capable people on the other side.

Post reply on HN