951–960 of 1001 posts
I have mixed feelings about the implications for free speech, but in the last 10 years I’ve seen YT comments transition from toxic cesspool to “never was heard a discouraging word.” I started investing in Twitter a few months ago when observing how good they’ve become at selectively hiding tweets that would upset the thread. Twitter is already taking steps to get less unpleasant. Having a thoughtful tech-oriented CEO…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The truth is that someone's gotta pay the bills. Pleasing the crowd by giving the content away is easy; finding a way to pay the bills while upsetting the least amount of people who are strategically important for the next month's bills is the hard part. Twitter never "paid the bills" under his leadership. That's what added insult to the injury of removing previous open functionality: they pissed everybody off and di…
I think you have it backwards, or at least you're missing half of the equation. The influencers are also valuable to Twitter, not just the other way around.
1. Twitter is the last untapped value in social 2. Jack doesn't know how to monetize it
Now I'm very much interested to see if I was right or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's easy to write when you're not on the wrong end of a Mongolian bow or a T-34 gun barrel.
The point of the original quote was about people with too much control over others already. In which case, a few strokes of a pen could condemn thousands to misery or death. In that sense, there was no need to be aiming a bow at a single individual. The original quote wasn't about speech, it was about excessive control.
The original quote is about persuasion being better than violence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's easy to write when you're not on the wrong end of a Mongolian bow or a T-34 gun barrel.
Use the pen to design a better sword(missiles, f-35s etc), that's the point, not writing novels and reddit threads with a pen.
The original quote is about persuasion being better than violence.
I am biased here because it's the only place I have any sort of social 'presence or interaction', and care about it more than Facebook, which I don't use, or any other service that stores people's data.
I know it's technically possible to "download my content", but that's a poor substitute for a more transparent Twitter, with _easy_ and _open_ API access.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The truth is that someone's gotta pay the bills. Pleasing the crowd by giving the content away is easy; finding a way to pay the bills while upsetting the least amount of people who are strategically important for the next month's bills is the hard part. We can speculate why Jack left, but the lagging stock price certainly didn't help him. So if anything, rather than criticizing him for not giving away the content fo…
The truth is that someone's gotta pay the bills. Pleasing the crowd by giving the content away is easy; finding a way to pay the bills while upsetting the least amount of people who are strategically important for the next month's bills is the hard part. Twitter never "paid the bills" under his leadership. That's what added insult to the injury of removing previous open functionality: they pissed everybody off and di…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter, ~$35B Market Cap, no profits, operating expenses keeps growing with Gross Profits. Future projection of profitability is still slim. Along with trillions of social / political issues that you have to due with because you are running social media. Square, ~$100B Market Cap, profitable, still mainly US based and growing. Crypto and Payment. Lots of potentials. It is not too hard to pick which one to run.
If your goal is personal monetary profit, maybe. Is it the case of Jack? Why want more when you already have too much
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are so many things that can go wrong, so many other things that will set your company on fire without warnings, and that doesn't give people the time to think strategically on how to tackle certain difficult scenarios. > never seen such amount of power in the hands of a few companies. These two points seem contradictory. If you are very powerful, you can draw on great resources, and you can address many thing…
>These two points seem contradictory. If you are very powerful, you can draw on great resources, and you can address many things. Power isn't a single resource that can be accumulated and spent. The accumulation of soft power over public discourse isn't the sort of thing that inherently helps you put out fires, and in fact managing that growth can be one of the fires. >There is no excuse beyond “we want money more th…