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

Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1000 posts

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#661

Post by _moof »

hintymad wrote: post #96

Growing up outside of the US, I feel kinda cringed when he said he was "INSANELY proud of our collective teams achieved". Such an interesting cultural difference.

It really seems to me that in American English, every word eventually gets watered down to mean either "good," "bad," or "very." Take the word "terrific" for example. It used to have connotations of terror. Now it's just another synonym for "excellent." Or "fantastic," the old meaning of which is still found in the related "fantastical," but now simply means "very good." Or "incredible," which used to mean "not believable." I could go on.

And when every superlative has been watered down like this, you need to pick a word that's completely over the top to express anything with any strength of feeling. It's good, it's great, it's awesome! It's fantastic! It's incredible!! It's insanely unbelievably wonderful!!!

"Insanely" is just the latest entry in our internal linguistic arms race.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#662

Post by nullc »

dave5104 wrote: post #647
Graffur wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they introduce an edit feature people will abuse it in the following ways: * Bait and switch. Now replies to the original tweet will be out of context * Everyone will edit their tweet and put EDIT: at the end. This is what happens on Reddit.

> * Bait and switch. Now replies to the original tweet will be out of context I used to think this could be a problem too... but Reddit has had an edit button as long as I can remember, and bait and switch doesn't really seem to be much of a problem. Perhaps it'd be more troublesome with the concept of retweets or quote tweets?

> I used to think this could be a problem too... but Reddit has had an edit button as long as I can remember, and bait and switch doesn't really seem to be much of a problem.

Anyone who does it enough to be irritating (instead of funny) will just find themselves banned by subreddit mods or otherwise they're doing it in a subreddit where it doesn't matter and no one will care.

The same community controls don't exist in twitter, so its plausible that it might be more damaging there. But so what? Many of the benefits are clear, the risks speculative. They could mitigate with a history button.

Wikipedia lets arbitrary users edit other users posts and gets by just fine-- not just the encyclopedia pages but the discussion pages too. Part of that is because it has a history so funny business is easily caught, but part of it is that if you give people more way to behaving unambiguously abusively if they intentionally chose to do so, some people will take you up on the offer and you can just remove them from the platform without regret. In that case everyone will be better off than if they didn't have the option to shoot themselves in the foot to begin with.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#663

Post by saxonww »

toolz wrote: post #641
kranke155 wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk’s idea of “anything that is legal” is a terrible idea, it comes from someone who’s clearly never moderated a community. Generally any unpleasantness and lack of civility needs to be moderated out in some extent, or the platform gets completely taken over by trolls and normal people leave. That’s just the end result. Anyone who’s been involved in online communities know this. I see this in subreddits. The subredd…

There's an extremely wide chasm between moderating trolls and banning subject experts and even the former president of the USA. It really doesn't matter what you or I think of the president, he was a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world. Musk claims to be all about freedom of speech. Moderation and freedom of speech are not antithetical to one another. You can downrank o…

> he was a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world

This aspect of the discussion around Twitter constantly baffles me. They have no obligation to offer service to anyone, and they have no obligation to ensure freedom of speech, balanced representation, or any other thing you can think of that would ensure everyone gets a voice.

General, universal freedom of speech in the US is not a right we have. We are protected via the 1st and 14th amendments from Federal or State governments (respectively) passing laws restricting our speech, which is not the same thing. Even with those amendments, some speech is restricted (hate speech, etc.). There's nothing preventing Twitter from moderating someone off its platform.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#664

Post by briandear »

mkr-hn wrote: post #507
adventured wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't like a world where the only way to assess someone is by how much money they make for investors. That's a bleak reality, so I prefer to act as though a person's behavior matters in the hopes I might create it by force of will. You can recognize the negative with the positive. Anything else is revisionism.

The money they make for investors is a direct measurement of the value they create.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#665

Post by sudosysgen »

paganel wrote: post #325
SemanticStrengh wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the revolution? There are competitive cars vs tesla for electric. Even if tesla have an edge, it's evolutionary, not at all revolutionary.

> There are competitive cars vs tesla for electric It is my belief that those "competitive cars" wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been for Tesla.

That is quite unreasonable to expect. The Renault Zoe came out at around the same time as the Model S and had over 150km of reasonable range, at half the price a Model 3 sells at today. It was already competitive.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#666

Post by sudosysgen »

dotnet00 wrote: post #324
SemanticStrengh wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the revolution? There are competitive cars vs tesla for electric. Even if tesla have an edge, it's evolutionary, not at all revolutionary.

I assume revolutionary in that other companies have only really started taking EVs seriously due to the success of Tesla.

Nissan and Renault took EVs seriously before Tesla came out with the Model S - Renault was working on the Zoe since before 2008.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#667

Post by KptMarchewa »

rsuelzer wrote: post #645
shapefrog wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am wondering what is in it for those people lining up - they are paying 20% over the market value to be locked in with musk.

Well I bought TWTR at it's peak... I'm voting my shares against a buyout (won't matter), mostly because it locks in a loss that I feel would have been recoverable in the next 5 years...

Have you considered opportunity cost of not using this money for other investments?

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#668

Post by toolz »

saxonww wrote: post #663
toolz wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an extremely wide chasm between moderating trolls and banning subject experts and even the former president of the USA. It really doesn't matter what you or I think of the president, he was a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world. Musk claims to be all about freedom of speech. Moderation and freedom of speech are not antithetical to one another. You can downrank o…

> he was a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world This aspect of the discussion around Twitter constantly baffles me. They have no obligation to offer service to anyone, and they have no obligation to ensure freedom of speech, balanced representation, or any other thing you can think of that would ensure everyone gets a voice. General, universal freedom of speech in the US…

You've misunderstood me. I don't believe twitter has an obligation to be a platform for free speech. You're arguing against points I never made which makes me believe you may be misunderstanding other arguments as well.

Musk wants twitter to be a platform for free speech, that does not mean he or anyone else is legally obligated (or in my opinion even morally obligated) to make their platform a place for free speech.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#669

Post by mkr-hn »

skrtskrt wrote: post #590
optimiz3 wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have kept asking this question for the past 12 years. Meanwhile my TSLA shares bought in 2013 have been doing just fine.

Your shares did well in of the biggest untinerrupted market bull runs in history????

Survivorship bias is a hell of a drug. The real test to see whether it's wisdom or luck is to predict the next Tesla. I don't think many people who point to their Tesla stock performance as vindication could come up with a repeatable theory of investing. If they could, their TSLA gains would be nothing next to their next investments.

That's how I know people who make that argument don't actually know anything. It's like someone still talking about that great touchdown in high school at 50. Where's the next one?

You don't see Elon Musk bragging about his $22 million from Zip2.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#670

Post by krapp »

toolz wrote: post #641
kranke155 wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Musk’s idea of “anything that is legal” is a terrible idea, it comes from someone who’s clearly never moderated a community. Generally any unpleasantness and lack of civility needs to be moderated out in some extent, or the platform gets completely taken over by trolls and normal people leave. That’s just the end result. Anyone who’s been involved in online communities know this. I see this in subreddits. The subredd…

There's an extremely wide chasm between moderating trolls and banning subject experts and even the former president of the USA. It really doesn't matter what you or I think of the president, he was a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world. Musk claims to be all about freedom of speech. Moderation and freedom of speech are not antithetical to one another. You can downrank o…

>It really doesn't matter what you or I think of the president, he was a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world.

The United States is not a monarchy, theocracy or autocracy. The President of the United States is a citizen like any other, with rights equal to any other. Being "a democratically elected leader of arguably, the most influential nation in the world" does not entitle one to a Twitter account, or to carte-blanche rights to endanger and undermine the legitimacy of the peaceful transfer of power of one's own nation, which is why Trump was banned in the first place. Not because of his beliefs, or his political views or because of some radical globalist agenda, but because people were legitimately afraid he was going to trigger a civil war.

The President having to play by the same rules as everyone else, even to the degree that he can be banned from social media like anyone else (even though Trump was still given far more leeway than most people,) is a feature of American democracy, not a bug.

Post reply on HN