Live data from Hacker News

Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

theverge.com

921–930 of 1000 posts

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#921

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm assuming you don't know how horrific porn can be.

But porn is allowed to be posted on twitter at present.

Found this out on a work computer searching a hashtag I had overheard from a group conversation.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#922
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla produced the first ICE-equivalent EV sedan that was not merely a "compliance vehicle" in decades. Then, it turned out, people bought them by the hundreds of thousands, single-handedly recreating the market for EVs. Then, other manufacturers noticed, and started realizing they might be left behind if they didn't take EVs seriously. Now, sure, there are many competitors, but even still they have only been built i…

By the time Tesla had sold 100,000 Model S cars in the US, Nissan had already sold over 110 000 Leafs. Tesla created the market for high-performance EVs. They did not create the overall EV market. The high-end market is only a small part of the numbers.

The Leaf that Nissan sold while the Model S was Tesla’s only sedan (ie 2012-2017) was not an ICE-equivalent vehicle. It was explicitly a city vehicle with a If “high-performance” means “can handle the daily driving needs of > 50% of the population” then I guess you’re right, Tesla only created that market.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#923

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm always curious .. how do these execs negotiate such contracts (where contingencies like getting acquired/fired lead to a payoff). Does this start at the VP or EVP level? I assume there are professionals/lawyers involved in the contract part (representing the exec I mean)?

I've only seen it at the CSuite (and occasionally key SVP levels).... almost always if you're brought in from the outside.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#924
post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla produced the first ICE-equivalent EV sedan that was not merely a "compliance vehicle" in decades. Then, it turned out, people bought them by the hundreds of thousands, single-handedly recreating the market for EVs. Then, other manufacturers noticed, and started realizing they might be left behind if they didn't take EVs seriously. Now, sure, there are many competitors, but even still they have only been built i…

The real ace was releasing an EV sports car , the Tesla Roadster. That's what caught people's attention. They were able to see how EV drivetrains were actually better than their ICE counterparts and that electric motors can do much more than drive golf carts – despite having powered everything from submarines to locomotives, people still thought they were weak. Otherwise, Nissan would have been Tesla. They have produ…

You’re right that the Tesla Roadster led the charge — no pun intended — for EVs as uncompromising vehicles.

But I don’t think Nissan would’ve been Tesla: they didn’t think people would pay for a full-range EV (and still don’t, looks like?) and didn’t prioritize it. For many Americans that means the LEAF could not be their only vehicle.

The supercharger network also played a huge role in normalizing EVs, in particular in making the Tesla Model S the first car you could convince yourself was a great car that “happened to be an EV”. The S isn’t perfect, but it doesn’t have any huge, obvious EV-related deficits, like the LEAF’s range and charge time.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#925
post #661

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 belie…

Yep, and people using "absolutely" all the time is the crown jewel.

In the past few years there's been a similar but opposite degradation: the only adverbs anyone uses are "super", "super not", and "not super". I think it came from the infantilized condescending culture on Twitter.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#926
post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many states in the US have family leave (including paternity leave). California is more than 10% of the US population and the rules for paternity leave are extremely broad: - Welcomed a new child into the family in the past 12 months through birth. - Paid into State Disability Insurance (noted as "CASDI" on most paystubs) in the past 5 to 18 months. - Not taken the maximum eight weeks of PFL in the past 12 months Ins…

This is good information, but the original point is still valid. Kayvon is not struggling in the least bit.

I think the issue is more that firing someone during paternity leave discourages others at your company from taking paternity leave, not that this person is in some way financially devastated from the firing.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#927
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…

You're discounting the very real possibility that Parag is operating as if the deal will not go through, and is making large strategic decisions in anticipation of that being the case. For Parag, I don't see it "burning his reputation" at all, considering either a) he's right and will face the tall task of helming a Twitter that continues to disappoint its investors or b) he's wrong and it won't be his problem when E…

Ding ding ding. Congratulations, you are tonight’s HN winner. The Twitter deal didn’t go through, and you totally called it.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#928

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit always has had community moderators which ensured that the subreddits were respecting the rules of their communities. For example, on LGBTQ issues subreddits telling people that they are groomers is not tolerated. If it was, people would quickly go away. While on some other subreddit, it might be tolerated but the targeted people are not present and will not see those messages. It is similar on Facebook where…

>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…

I did not want to focus on the example as it was but one example of common user behavior, but let's do it anyway. I should preface this by saying that I have been a moderator on online spaces for the last two decades. First starting on BBS, IRC, and more recently social networks. Social networks contain some of the worst behaviors I have ever experienced.

It is not words that need to be banned, banning words would be useless. Users could simply call people "gr00mers". Another way people use to talk about trans people in a hateful way is "troons", which is defined on Urban Dictionary as:

Troon, Noun. A transphobic slur referring to a trans woman. The word Troon used to mean "an ugly woman who looks like a man." However, over time the word has been co-opted and turned into a particularly nasty slur against trans women.

This word was quickly identified in groups and people would get removed from groups for using it in an abusive way by setting that word to trigger an moderation warning. The people using it quickly adapted, proving that banning words is useless. This changed to "trains", which was added to the watch list. The little dance kept going on, right now the way it is written is by using a train emoji. So you would see "Look at this filthy[train emoji]".

Banning words is useless. Words are not hardcoded constants that cannot be replaced, they are descriptive and evolve in meaning. Banning "groomer" would simply lead to people using another word. Most slurs are just that, words that are borrowed and then infused with hate. Just take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs, you will find that a lot of the terms are harmless when they are not weaponized or used in a hateful context. Even one of the oldest word used to indicated an intolerant position toward transgender people was simply a way to write "[a car's] transmission", or "bundle of sticks" towards homosexual people. This list is not exhaustive at all and only community websites such as Urban Dictionary is able to track slurs as the list grows constantly.

What I am talking about is seeing through the thing veil of false politeness and banning harmful actions.

Adding to the previous example: people often come ("raid") in private Facebook support groups. To enter those groups, you need to answer several questions. For example, "Are you transgender?/Do you understand that this is a support group and that confrontation is frowned upon?/Do you agree with the rules of the group?". Every single day, people lie to those questions to enter. Upon entering, they quickly drop all false pretense to quickly find the most vulnerable of users and spam them with hate via their inbox (where moderators cannot keep a watch). On threads about depression, they leave comments encouraging the person to end their lives through words that are absolutely legal. Imagine the worst 4chan has to offer but directly in your inbox. Many users are not web-savvy and this type of content will be absolutely crushing. Worst of all, trolls gather in groups where the only purpose is to list the profile of the vulnerable users they find. Some of those groups that I am aware of have up to 25k members. This is worrisome to me. Since they only contain links to profiles and are worded using legal ways, Facebook does not shut them down. They result in users receiving hate and thinly veiled threats from up to a hundred users a day. Since those message are worded in a way as to avoid reports from sticking.

Trans issues are a hot and controversial topic, so let's take a step back and use another community as an example.

Imagine you ran a community of people with anorexia gathering to talk about treatments, solutions and review doctors. One facet of anorexia is body dysmorphia where the person sees themselves as very overweight even when dangerously underweight. The hateful person or troll can find someone on door's death and convince them that they are fat. Is it ethical? Not at all. But if worded by someone skilled at trolling, it can be done in a legal way. They can send that person image of fat people and tell them that they look the same. Another way they go through that is by undermining the authority of doctors and hinting towards false and often dangerous treatments. This kind of trolling will go on for weeks, even months. With people advocating strange concepts under a false account with a false profile photo. Some of them even staying undercover for so long that they manage to gain a high standing in those community only to then use the insider information they have gathered to nefarious purposes.

Often, the trolls do not even hold a grudge or hate towards the targeted communities. To them, it is a game. Many are very young teens acting under the impression that they are great hackers for managing to infiltrate support networks and destroying them.

We can all agree that those behaviors are not only hateful, they are dangerous and target the most vulnerable of individuals. Worst of all for the corporations running those websites, they result in huge exodus of users. One I can think of is a 40k strong Facebook group that moved to Discord due to the constant abuse their members received.

Can Twitter decide to accept the behavior described above? Absolutely. It is a private entity. However this kind of "everything is allowed" at all cost mindset comes with a cost. Often, this cost is the migration of users to other platforms. What happened to Tumblr is a great example.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#929

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but people don't buy vehicles simply for commutes, and IC vehicles will be around for decades for actual work. Nobody along the gulf or southern east coast is going to be buying an electric car as their sole mode of transportation if they have any common sense.

Depends on one’s definition of common sense. If 90% of the time one can own a median vehicle wherein they never have to go to the gas station, the vehicle lasts 1,000,000 miles, they aren’t emitting CO2, and gas prices go past five dollars… it might be common sense to use the savings from the situation to rent vehicles to satisfy the other 10% of your needs.

"Common sense" = "I want to be able to get out of town without being stranded on an interstate when evacuating for a hurricane when traffic comes to a standstill and there's no way to recharge."

But hey, maybe your idea of common sense is to sit around 16 feet in the air with 120 mph winds blowing against the side of your moving brick.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#930
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.

not almost nothing. He's a bit of a tackling dummy at this point. That being said, he's the world's best paid tackling dummy. Even if Musk purchase does not go through, not sure how he stays as the board basically said when they agreed to Musk's offer we have no current plans to create anywhere near the value Musk says he can.
Post reply on HN