11–20 of 105 posts
Between this and Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino's weird tweet about how great Twitter is ( https://twitter.com/lindayacc/status/1676965566597464065 ), the arrival of Threads is definitely an existential threat for Twitter.
Between this and Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino's weird tweet about how great Twitter is ( https://twitter.com/lindayacc/status/1676965566597464065 ), the arrival of Threads is definitely an existential threat for Twitter.
I don't know Linda Yaccarino well, but so far all her statements, internal and public, read like cringe parody of corporate mediocrity.
Between this and Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino's weird tweet about how great Twitter is ( https://twitter.com/lindayacc/status/1676965566597464065 ), the arrival of Threads is definitely an existential threat for Twitter.
So you fire 80% of your workforce claiming they're dead weight and completely unnecessary, while simultaneously suing their new employer because apparently they were vital cogs who somehow "continue to have access to trade secrets"? So vital you're refusing to pay out any of their severance packages. Only in Elon land.
>Spiro accused Meta of hiring dozens of former Twitter employees who “had and continue to have access to Twitter’s trade secrets and other highly confidential information.” So you fire 80% of your workforce claiming they're dead weight and completely unnecessary, while simultaneously suing their new employer because apparently they were vital cogs who somehow "continue to have access to trade secrets"? So vital you'r…
Between this and Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino's weird tweet about how great Twitter is ( https://twitter.com/lindayacc/status/1676965566597464065 ), the arrival of Threads is definitely an existential threat for Twitter.
This is literally one of the worst moves Twitter could have made to combat Threads or any of their copies. They're literally giving more eyes and coverage to Threads and painting them as a real contender.
We can always rely on Elon Musk's Twitter to make the worst move. Meanwhile (as the article says) Meta has confirmed no employee on the Threads team came from Twitter. So the letter is already shown to be completely without basis.
Meta having a monopoly on all forms of social media does seem pretty bad to me.
I guess “monopoly” has a specific definition, but by having Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and the new Twitter, one company will control the majority of normal peoples’ communication online.
Despite this bone-headed move by Twitter, my question is: does this pose anti-trust problems for Meta? Meta having a monopoly on all forms of social media does seem pretty bad to me. I guess “monopoly” has a specific definition, but by having Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, and the new Twitter, one company will control the majority of normal peoples’ communication online.
>Spiro accused Meta of hiring dozens of former Twitter employees who “had and continue to have access to Twitter’s trade secrets and other highly confidential information.” So you fire 80% of your workforce claiming they're dead weight and completely unnecessary, while simultaneously suing their new employer because apparently they were vital cogs who somehow "continue to have access to trade secrets"? So vital you'r…
I don't think this is a sane take. Knowing trade secrets and being a "necessity" are not related. They were, and you are, and I am, replaceable. Our possible deep esoteric knowledge of secret sauce maybe makes the replacement more painful, but that's all. If you've ever been on the "not fired" side of a layoff, you'll understand how losing someone "vital" is almost always just a disruption, in reality. The group may even collapse, but if the work truly is non-optional, pressure will build, and it will be done. If there's any competence, nobody will miss that person in a short time, and that's a good thing, because key person risk is a bad thing.