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

Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#941

Post by jsemrau »

fleddr wrote: post #678

I think people are really over-analyzing this move. I think it's motivated by prestige, not money, nor is free speech the heart of the matter. Twitter is a stagnant company. They have thousands of engineers that in the span of a decade don't seem to produce much at all, nothing visible or memorable anyway. Long-lasting Twitter problems (culture, spam, algorithm issues) never seem addressed. User growth is stagnating…

I was following this discussion on finclout (https://app.finclout.io/t/dD66Ww2) and also don't think that Parak will not be CEO in 12 months (probably earlier)

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#942

Post by sytelus »

ALittleLight wrote: post #815
colinmhayes wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People have been begging for an edit button for a decade. And they haven't implemented it because it's a truly horrible idea. If you messed up your tweet delete it. If it's already got traction, then it shouldn't be changed, especially because the edit feature would mostly be used maliciously to cancel retweeters.

Retweet could show the version of the tweet as it was when it was retweeted. If you see a tweet that has a new revision ready you could see a "latest" link. If you see the latest version of a tweet with a version history you could see a "history" link which would show you a revision history.

They can instead add a link for "Original" in edited tweets. So everyone effortlessly see the latest update but if people see it controversial, they can click "Original" to see what it looked like when it was retweeted. The problem with likes still remains but eventually social contract might form that if tweet was editted you cannot harass people for retweeting or liking it.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#943

Post by samarama »

fallingknife wrote: post #218
lbriner wrote: post #85

I have obviously missed something but what is the main objection to Musk being part of Twitter's board?

Two reasons. - Haters who can't stand people more successful than them, and who is more successful than Elon Musk? So anything he does is terrible. - Since Trump, HN mostly supports social media censorship of opposing political ideas, and Elon Musk has expressed that he doesn't like this censorship.

Science denials isn’t political “idea”, it’s just plain and destructive science denial.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#944

Post by sytelus »

ehnto wrote: post #893
fleddr wrote: post #678

I think people are really over-analyzing this move. I think it's motivated by prestige, not money, nor is free speech the heart of the matter. Twitter is a stagnant company. They have thousands of engineers that in the span of a decade don't seem to produce much at all, nothing visible or memorable anyway. Long-lasting Twitter problems (culture, spam, algorithm issues) never seem addressed. User growth is stagnating…

> They have thousands of engineers that in the span of a decade don't seem to produce much at all I have always wondered. Are there "projects" adjascent the core product that I'm not aware of? I can understand the infrastructure side of the work is pretty busy, but feature development and bugfixing don't require that many people even in a fast paced product development phase. What's everyone doing?

Tweeter has released steady slew of new features: https://twitter.com/i/release_notes

People on HN are great at making irresponsible claims and they are the clueless ones. You can bet that thousands of engineers there are very very busy.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#945

Post by awb »

chmod600 wrote: post #933
oneplane wrote: post #840

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The two word combination "Free speech" is so Americanised that it needs a bunch of asterisks to define what it's supposed to mean. Is it the legal thing where the government isn't allowed to arbitrarily censor citizens? Or is it the "I want everything I think to be received by everyone" that a good chunk of people seem to think it means? Or is it "I want to be a dick and everyone has to keep dealing with my shit"? As…

"Or is it the "I want everything I think to be received by everyone" that a good chunk of people seem to think it means?" Tweets aren't forced upon anyone. Twitter isn't a megaphone in a library. It's a flexible medium that allows you to follow the people who write/retweet stuff you want to read, and ignore others. Face it: if you interfere between Sally who writes something she wants Bob to read, and Bob who wants t…

> Face it: if you interfere between Sally who writes something she wants Bob to read, and Bob who wants to read what Sally wrote, that's censorship.

What about national security, NDAs, illegal content, etc.?

Two consenting parties doesn’t mean the speech is legal or good for society.

> And no, I'm not interested in exploring extreme exceptions to the general principle.

The Supreme Court is (to the count of hundreds of times) because the devil is in the details. “Free speech” sounds good on paper, but when you start trying to define it and enforce it it gets complicated with tons of edge cases.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#946

Post by trashtester »

chc wrote: post #771
trashtester wrote: post #731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

You see both white nationalism and civil rights as political antipatterns? What do you consider a healthy political environment? Complete stagnation where people who got theirs are OK but no one else can ever rise to that level? Or do you mean something different by "woke" than its usual meaning of "aware of inequities and desiring to fix them"? Edit: I see the free speech proponents are here to try to make my commen…

First of all, your post is not invisible, just downvoted. Mine got flagged, meaning someone wanted it killed by an authority.

The way I see it, both MAGA and WOKE are ideologies that are more interested in attacking outgroups than really helping ingroups. Seems to me that Trump spent more time talkiing about immigration than helping the Americans that are negatively affected by immigration (while lowering taxes). I'm sure you agree with this part.

On the other side, I see WOKE as more interested in attacking white, conservative males (or some combination of the former), rather than helping whatever minority is their favourite. Case in point, BLM seems to only care about the black lives that are taken by cops. Black-on-black homicide seems completely uninteresting for them.

So how can this improve?`I'm old enough to remember the the Soviet Union, and when I was a kid, old people remembered Hitler.

In my country (northern Europe), everyone from moderate conservatives to social democrats realized that both Communism and Facism lead to terrible results. Facisim was completely off the table for everyone, possibly in part because we had been occupied by Nazi Germany for 5 years. There were some communists, but in fact it was primarily the social democrats who made sure they never achieved any real power. (who at the time were borderline socialist, especially in the 70s).

Actually, most social democratic parties understood that Communism is really an ideology of hate in the 1920s and 1930s, as far as I can tell, and it doesn't help much to use the same boilerplate and just replace the proletariat with some other, more modern victium group, the thought pattern is still based on hate and guaranteed to be toxic if it gains enough power.

This knowledge is still somewhere in the DNA of most social democratic parties in Europe, but it seems that countries who never had strong social democratic parties are not able to see the difference between the inclusive left (liberalism, social democracy) and the hateful left (hardline socialism, communism, and I would argue, hardline WOKE).

Part of the problem with ideologies like MAGA and WOKE are that they feed off each other, and make each other stronger. The more hateful each become, the stronger the other side will be. Trump pushes democrats towards WOKE and AOC pushes republicans towards MAGA.

In the end (EDIT: if the polarization doesn't end), the USA will have some Chavez or some Putin, or one of each in power, possibly a civil war. There are no good outcomes coming out of such polarization.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#947

Post by VeejayRampay »

fleddr wrote: post #678

I think people are really over-analyzing this move. I think it's motivated by prestige, not money, nor is free speech the heart of the matter. Twitter is a stagnant company. They have thousands of engineers that in the span of a decade don't seem to produce much at all, nothing visible or memorable anyway. Long-lasting Twitter problems (culture, spam, algorithm issues) never seem addressed. User growth is stagnating…

no one that is using Twitter right now wants "normies" on the platform

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#948

Post by verisimi »

verisimi wrote: post #725
verisimi wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His family are in the club, he's only playing a role. And its not going to be about increasing freedom, sorry. https://web.archive.org/web/20140809023548/http://www.forbes... In South Africa, my father had a private plane we’d fly in incredibly dangerous weather and barely make it back. This is going to sound slightly crazy, but my father also had a share in an Emerald mine in Zambia . I was 15 and really wanted to g…

Lots of downvotes - but this is verifiable!

Wow - from -4 to +6. I'm quite amazed.

Thanks to those who appreciate the research.

Re: Elon Musk to join Twitter’s board of directors

#949

Post by ehnto »

sytelus wrote: post #944
ehnto wrote: post #893

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have thousands of engineers that in the span of a decade don't seem to produce much at all I have always wondered. Are there "projects" adjascent the core product that I'm not aware of? I can understand the infrastructure side of the work is pretty busy, but feature development and bugfixing don't require that many people even in a fast paced product development phase. What's everyone doing?

Tweeter has released steady slew of new features: https://twitter.com/i/release_notes People on HN are great at making irresponsible claims and they are the clueless ones. You can bet that thousands of engineers there are very very busy.

Irresponsible is a bit rich, I have no responsibilities owed to twitter. Perhaps ignorant would be fair. I am not exactly floored by those releases compared to the team size, but it does show they're not twiddling their thumbs. As mentioned in another comment, they might be a bit inefficient at the size they are now, and the responsibilities they have to internal operations aren't particularly obvious to outsiders.
Post reply on HN