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

831–840 of 1000 posts

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#831

Post by hooande »

senko wrote: post #464
SemanticStrengh wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Did tesla open source key scientific innovations in the scaling of batteries? Don't think so. See e.g. The seres f5 from Huawei. I don't know wether it's great but about the main metric, it has a higher range than teslas (1000km)

Tesla dragged the rest of the auto industry, kicking and screaming, into the EV business. EV was, at best, a curiosity and definitely nobody's main focus, until Tesla first showed EV cars are not golf carts (with the rooadster) and then that they can be a desirable higher-class sedan (with Model S). If Tesla went bankrupt today, we'd still be firmly on the path to phase out ICE cars. This was totally unconcievable ju…

citation needed. many of these companies had documented plans to transition to primarily electric vehicles over a period of many years. why is it that you are so convinced that this market shift was causes by one brand? is there any evidence other than observation?

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#832

Post by black_13 »

throwaway_1928 wrote: post #416
dekhn wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CEOs of large companies that are forced out during acquisitions often fail upward. It really depends on how they behave right before the close. Effectively, the CEO has to advocate for the company and get the most out of the acquisition, and if they do, they are often rewarded (with seats on board or choice of next job). realistically, he will be able to retire for life after this if he chooses, and will be able to s…

Job offer or not, $42 million for doing almost nothing is a great deal.

What fucking sinful country i live in

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#834

Post by ByteJockey »

vincvinc wrote: post #493
paganel wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only works because HN is, mostly, politics-free. I'm not a regular Twitter user but afaik that platform is pretty heavy on politics, more than that, it's pretty heavy when it comes to a certain political spectrum, the other side has been mostly de-platformed by now. I don't consider that as a healthy platform to comment on for the general public (even though, I agree, it might be ok for people who happen to shar…

Hmm, are we on the same HN? I feel like I see a lot of topics debated I’d call political (“about how society ought to function”) on a daily basis.

> political (“about how society ought to function”)

I feel like this is a technical definition of political, but that's not how the layman uses the word.

I tend to hear the word political used as a synonym for the current arguments within a society, especially those that professional politicians feel the need to weigh in on and/or there is a significant chance of legislation around.

So, for example, a passionate essay about a Georgism and a land value tax might be political under the technical definition, I don't think it would qualify as political under the layman definition. There's not a sufficient mass of people trying to institute a land value tax for a society wide argument to occur. I don't think the average person would describe aforementioned person as political, I'd say they'd be more likely to be written off as a kook.

Could also be a regional difference. I'm not intimately familiar with all the dialects of the english language.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#835

Post by emodendroket »

kyledrake wrote: post #189

I've been using Twitter since it's main novelty was that it was a successful Ruby on Rails app, and honestly I've been trying to figure out where the exit is for my personal use of Twitter lately. If the acquisition goes through, Twitter won't make enough money to service it's debt, and the things they will do to fix that are pretty much guaranteed to lower the quality of the platform, which frankly has never worked…

> I also think the proposal to have Twitter allow all content that is "legal under US law" is a dangerous idea for the platform being a healthy community that most people actually want to participate in. Content moderation debates have never been so ham-fisted as they are online so I won't try here, suffice to say there's some pretty horrible, disgusting things that are "legal under US law" (and as a content moderator, I've seen them all). If Twitter allows people to do them, it will make it difficult for Twitter to maintain a healthy community, and the platform could quickly devolve into a scarychan-style sewer that only the craziest people on the internet will want to dwell in. To say nothing about whether advertisers will tolerate some of it, or even Apple's app store.

Yeah, I feel like this theory has been repeatedly tested. Anybody remember when Voat was going to overtake Reddit? Turns out people actually don't want to read a forum for people who were so noxious Reddit was embarrassed into banning them.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#836

Post by the_doctah »

gitgud wrote: post #791
the_doctah wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I use hate-speech as an example because the "groomer" as a slur issue is at a peak right now and is fresh in my head. Mm. I think the problem is that censorship advocates like you try to add words like this into the lexicon of "hate speech" and try to have it censored. It's not, and it shouldn't be, and you should be ashamed of even thinking it. It is not other people's responsibility to stay up to date on what may…

> It is not other people's responsibility to stay up to date on what may or may not be triggering you on any particular day. The internet moves fast now, if there's a growing trend of a slang-word to get around hate speech laws without actually breaking any, and everyone reacting to it understands it... then it's hate-speech right? "groomer" is only used in the context of hatred towards a particular group without tec…

We wouldn't have any words left to use if it was up to you I guess.

And what "hate-laws" are you referring to, in regards to speech, that people are "getting around"? You do know Twitter TOS is not the actual law right?

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#837

Post by emodendroket »

paganel wrote: post #316
ilamont wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also think the proposal to have Twitter allow all content that is "legal under US law" is a dangerous idea for the platform being a healthy community that most people actually want to participate in. This is key. If @dang suddenly threw up his hands and said "anything goes on HN within U.S. law" this wonderful virtual discussion forum would die and most of us would sign off forever. I say that as someone whose be…

That only works because HN is, mostly, politics-free. I'm not a regular Twitter user but afaik that platform is pretty heavy on politics, more than that, it's pretty heavy when it comes to a certain political spectrum, the other side has been mostly de-platformed by now. I don't consider that as a healthy platform to comment on for the general public (even though, I agree, it might be ok for people who happen to shar…

> I'm not a regular Twitter user but afaik that platform is pretty heavy on politics, more than that, it's pretty heavy when it comes to a certain political spectrum, the other side has been mostly de-platformed by now.

Please. Despite the howls of protest this is far from true and that would be obvious to anyone who's spent much time reading political discussion on Twitter.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#838

Post by pbreit »

Traster wrote: post #84

So there's two options right - the first is that Parag is for some reason making big strategic decisions about the direction of the company despite the fact that we all know he'll be gone if the deal closes. Or he's making big strategic changes at the behest of the acquirers before the deal closes. Neither of these things seem particularly kosher moves to make. The question is how to figure out which one it is. It wo…

Agree. This seems very odd. They should be all hands on deck through the buyout and then see what new ownership wants to do.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#839

Post by [deleted] »

dillondoyle wrote: post #793
the_doctah wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I use hate-speech as an example because the "groomer" as a slur issue is at a peak right now and is fresh in my head. Mm. I think the problem is that censorship advocates like you try to add words like this into the lexicon of "hate speech" and try to have it censored. It's not, and it shouldn't be, and you should be ashamed of even thinking it. It is not other people's responsibility to stay up to date on what may…

It is 100% hate speech to call all LGBTQ people groomers, to imply ones sexuality is because they were groomed. It's hateful and a disingenuous political argument to use that cast that term on anyone who objects to DeSantis' banning of discussions of LGBTQ topics. Which is why we are discussing this. Not knowing that is triggering is gross. If you have certain distasteful beliefs, at least have the respect not to say…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#840

Post by the_doctah »

dillondoyle wrote: post #793
the_doctah wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I use hate-speech as an example because the "groomer" as a slur issue is at a peak right now and is fresh in my head. Mm. I think the problem is that censorship advocates like you try to add words like this into the lexicon of "hate speech" and try to have it censored. It's not, and it shouldn't be, and you should be ashamed of even thinking it. It is not other people's responsibility to stay up to date on what may…

It is 100% hate speech to call all LGBTQ people groomers, to imply ones sexuality is because they were groomed. It's hateful and a disingenuous political argument to use that cast that term on anyone who objects to DeSantis' banning of discussions of LGBTQ topics. Which is why we are discussing this. Not knowing that is triggering is gross. If you have certain distasteful beliefs, at least have the respect not to say…

>It is 100% hate speech to call all LGBTQ people groomers, to imply ones sexuality is because they were groomed.

Literally no one said this. Maybe you need to think about where you perceive this to be coming from.

Post reply on HN