51–60 of 135 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A social media company is a very different beast from a tech company, and very easy to quickly run into the ground. We've seen other platforms die very quickly because they institute things that chase off a bulk of users.
This man is building the infrastructure to colonize Mars. Tell me more about how much harder it is to run a social media company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so different, perhaps, from his previous company PayPal however. There, detecting fraud with a hybrid AI/human examiner model was solution they found for that central difficult task. Unearthing bots and nation-state actors may not be too different, and Tesla AI is world-leading. I understand that's not all that goes into managing a social network, but if he mostly gets out of the way other than bot-blocking, as s…
'Paypal' was literally falling apart and Musk had to be ousted and replaced because he was destroying the company. It was Peter Thiel that took over, renamed it Paypal and it became the success as we know it today. So if your barometer of success is Paypal, then Twitter is doomed.
The odds are that Twitter will probably be dead in a year. He'll bring on a few yes-men executives that'll applaud him when he guts development and then when everything grinds to a halt they'll catch the blame. Especially since he'll probably force something like integrated NFTs on a whim. Unlike Facebook and how it's captured an older audience that's relative inelastic to moving to other platforms, I don't see peopl…
And that's based on what exactly?
> He'll bring on a few yes-men executives that'll applaud him
Again, based on what?
Now here's a prediction actually based on Musk's past perf:
He'll bring in people who get shit done, and get it done fast. Twitter will achieve things everyone says is stupid, ridiculous and impossible now as he's done in the past 20 years with Tesla and SpaceX.
That will be followed by a large swath of copy-cats who will try to replicate it to no avail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Can you give some examples of silencing his dissenters? Or where he has undermined democracy to make money? I'm genuinely curious if I've missed these, as I'm not familiar with any by my own recollection.
A part of me is curious about what will happen next. And then there is a part of me, as a participant of whatever democracy is left in the United States, is concerned with what could happen if a particular user is allowed to use Twitter again after their orchestration of certain events.
Like if people voted him back into the presidency. That would be terrible for democracy.
It's never good when someone denies the legitimacy of the very system that brought them into power. This is the part that makes him "terrible for democracy".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tbh the best direction for twitter to move in is to stop recommending content people did not subscribe to. And then adjust the rules to allow anything legal to be tweeted to your own page. If you object to someones tweets, don't follow them. There may still need to be rules on replying to others tweets since thats pushing content on people.
Discoverability is important, but imo there should be a dedicated section for it instead of mixing it with the tweets of the people you actually follow. But on the other hand, people might not really be willing to "switch tabs" and so if you move the feature somewhere else then people will never really see it. It's kind of a trade off. I think what's a bit annoying is that often times these discovery features are use…
The odds are that Twitter will probably be dead in a year. He'll bring on a few yes-men executives that'll applaud him when he guts development and then when everything grinds to a halt they'll catch the blame. Especially since he'll probably force something like integrated NFTs on a whim. Unlike Facebook and how it's captured an older audience that's relative inelastic to moving to other platforms, I don't see peopl…
> The odds are that Twitter will probably be dead in a year. And that's based on what exactly? > He'll bring on a few yes-men executives that'll applaud him Again, based on what? Now here's a prediction actually based on Musk's past perf: He'll bring in people who get shit done, and get it done fast. Twitter will achieve things everyone says is stupid, ridiculous and impossible now as he's done in the past 20 years w…
This whole thing has been rather interesting to observe. I do wonder how the platform will change now that it's privately owned. I don't really care a lot about the platform itself, but it's influence on politics is very real. Personally I don't think this acquisition is healthy for a democracy, but nonetheless, it's something I want to observe. I've always thought these platforms need more democratic structures of g…
Isn't he going to be bringing back people who were banned off the platform, that's more democratic. US has a bunch of problems but the one thing you used to get right is freedom of speech before big tech had so much influence, I thought the major purpose of Elon wanting to buy twitter was to uphold freedom of speech as it is written in the constitution, given it's something of a town square now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The odds are that Twitter will probably be dead in a year. And that's based on what exactly? > He'll bring on a few yes-men executives that'll applaud him Again, based on what? Now here's a prediction actually based on Musk's past perf: He'll bring in people who get shit done, and get it done fast. Twitter will achieve things everyone says is stupid, ridiculous and impossible now as he's done in the past 20 years w…
You're assuming that the attributes that lead to success in those companies will also carry across. Social media is not just an engineering problem. Elon's personal brand and his temperament is a massive liability for something like Twitter.
What you makes you think Tesla is just an engineering problem?
You have regulation, laws protecting dealers, government negotiations, lobbying (and that's just from top of my head) and not to forget, large distributed software and hardware infrastructure
SpaceX: strong relationships with customers, dealing with lots of government and private companies that are paying you millions of dollars, etc.
> You're assuming that the attributes that lead to success in those companies will also carry across.
There are many attributes across the board that is needed to succeed in a scale of those companies. Even in Musk's existing companies, he's most definitly not suited to do certain tasks. It's well known and that Gwen Shotwell is a huge part of SpaceX'es success to date. I agree that social network requires its own area of knowledge and experience, but Musk isn't literally doing all this by himself. He attracts talent and that's the key.
A part of me is curious about what will happen next. And then there is a part of me, as a participant of whatever democracy is left in the United States, is concerned with what could happen if a particular user is allowed to use Twitter again after their orchestration of certain events.