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

Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 252 posts

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#141

Post by hxnjxn »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #74
perseusprime11 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fully agree. Also, a good time for Jack to step fully into Twitter boat. Square is doing quite well, he can easily find somebody to run it. If he takes the fulltime role at twitter, expect the stock to go up another 20-30 %

Honest question: why should Dorsey not be seen as an exaggerated media story (by the media and himself) and what has he done which justifies the stock jumping that high? He's run both companies for awhile now, Twitter has basically been stagnant. Doesn't he supposedly work like 80 hours a week anyway? It's already a full time job. Examples from 2011 and 2016: http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/13/technology/dorsey_techonom…

He should be considered an exaggerated media story but that would be a bad look for the valley

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#142

Post by aaron-lebo »

kbhn wrote: post #133
Danihan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ignorant comment. Who has Trump committed genocide on? Who is a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi in the white house?

> Who has Trump committed genocide on? Genocidal doesn't necessarily mean he's committed genocide; it means that he's prone to (and to some extent, fascinated by) mass acts of killing. The tweets about promising fire and fury on an entire nation of people (North Korea), telling Fox that we need to kill the terrorist families as well, etc. He gets off feeling like he's the most powerful man in the world. He's a strong…

You're identifying things which make him an authoritarian, a strongman, and an idiot, but that still doesn't make him genocidal. That has a very specific meaning.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#143

Post by travmatt »

Danihan wrote: post #127
travmatt wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Who is a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi in the white house? Seb Gorka

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/donald-trump-aide... >Mr Gorka denied any anti-Semitism in his family. >He said his father had protected Jewish boys wearing yellow stars on the way to school as a child. When Communists took power, he supplied information to MI6 before being arrested, tortured and imprisoned (possibly betrayed by Kim Philby). He arrived in the UK after escaping during the 1956 uprising. How…

On one hand he says that he isn’t a part of the order, on the other hand he wore their insignia to the inaugural ball. Maybe he was using neo nazi symbolism ironically?

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#144

Post by Danihan »

vesak wrote: post #139
Danihan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ignorant comment. Who has Trump committed genocide on? Who is a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi in the white house?

Well, "Make America great again" seems essentially like a nazi expression, based on the fact that Hitler and his crowd used the same for Germany. I don't know what it needs to make somebody a nazi -- not a single phrase certainly, but I reckon that brings them closer at least.

It's very pathetic to me how desperate people are to label Trump a Nazi, simply because he criticizes Islam and wants to scale back immigration (which the public never even voted to approve in the first place.)

Towards your main point: https://us-east-1.tchyn.io/snopes-production/uploads/2016/03... -- Most politicians talk about making their countries great or better, obviously.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#145

Post by ImSkeptical »

kbhn wrote: post #133
Danihan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ignorant comment. Who has Trump committed genocide on? Who is a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi in the white house?

> Who has Trump committed genocide on? Genocidal doesn't necessarily mean he's committed genocide; it means that he's prone to (and to some extent, fascinated by) mass acts of killing. The tweets about promising fire and fury on an entire nation of people (North Korea), telling Fox that we need to kill the terrorist families as well, etc. He gets off feeling like he's the most powerful man in the world. He's a strong…

Threatening a country that is threatening us isn't exactly genocidal. Killing families of terrorists is deeply immoral and murderous - but it's also in keeping with current U.S. policy (see Anwar al-Awlaki - both Trump and Obama administrations have killed Awlaki's children). Terrorists aren't a race though, so wanting to kill them and their families isn't genocide.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#146

Post by Danihan »

travmatt wrote: post #143
Danihan wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/donald-trump-aide... >Mr Gorka denied any anti-Semitism in his family. >He said his father had protected Jewish boys wearing yellow stars on the way to school as a child. When Communists took power, he supplied information to MI6 before being arrested, tortured and imprisoned (possibly betrayed by Kim Philby). He arrived in the UK after escaping during the 1956 uprising. How…

On one hand he says that he isn’t a part of the order, on the other hand he wore their insignia to the inaugural ball. Maybe he was using neo nazi symbolism ironically?

>Leslie Waters, prof of European History at Randolph-Macon College, said: “It definitely is a symbol that a lot of Hungarians would associate with racist ideology and anti-Semitism but plenty of Hungarians also associate it with some sort of generic patriotism and anti-communism.”

Or he wore it to reflect his family history and as an anti-communist symbol....

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#147

Post by alexasmyths »

a13n wrote: post #47
ProAm wrote: post #3

They would be profitable in an instant if they'd get rid of half their employees? Im not sure why they need SO many people for Twitter. I believe they have over 4000, they could easily get by with 1000

Oh boy, another Hacker News commenter with zero experience running a large corporation telling experienced folks how they should run a large corporation. Better yet, with no explanation for why. The sheer arrogance.

It's a little arrogant, but the commenter is probably more or less correct.

Twitter is bloated.

Their headcount has expanded quite a lot over the last few years - and for what? Their service has remained the same and 'scale' beyond a certain point does not matter.

What is 'labour intensive' - sales? Sure. Maybe some support staff? I doubt they're full time, more likely in Phillipenes off the books.

I don't doubt for a second that they didn't need all those staff members - I've worked enough 'fast growth' places to see how 'hiring for the sake of hiring' happens, it's a political orientation, not really an economic one.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#148

Post by lucas_maximus83 »

vesak wrote: post #139
Danihan wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What an ignorant comment. Who has Trump committed genocide on? Who is a self-proclaimed neo-Nazi in the white house?

Well, "Make America great again" seems essentially like a nazi expression, based on the fact that Hitler and his crowd used the same for Germany. I don't know what it needs to make somebody a nazi -- not a single phrase certainly, but I reckon that brings them closer at least.

Ronald Reagan used the same campaign slogan in the 80s get a fucking grip. It is a short memorable slogan and it is simply good marketing.

Hitler was a vegetarian and liked dogs. According to your logic that makes you a nazi.

Also you probably don't remember, but everyone called George W Bush a nazi when he was elected. It is complete fucking bullshit and tbh I think it is pretty disgusting to demean the real meaning of things like racism, fascism etc when you clearly don't understand what that really means or the implications.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#149

Post by seabird »

vonnik wrote: post #104
samcheng wrote: post #5

It's not mentioned in the article, but I really think President Trump has been a savior for Twitter. Without those controversial tweets, Twitter would rarely be in much of the public's mind, and the company would have continued its slow slide into irrelevance. As it is, barely a day goes by without "Twitter" being mentioned in national news.

Yeah, all Twitter needed was a pack of neo-Nazis, some Russian bots, and a genocidal conman in the White House. Not worth it. The health of Twitter's balance sheet is a counterindication of the health of the world. When their stock goes up, the market should dive.

>genocidal conman

It is no surprise that Trump won when his name can't be mentioned without an absolutely asinine, incorrect comment following it. Addressing dishonesty with hyperbole is not helping anyone.

Re: Twitter says it could turn first-ever profit

#150

Post by travmatt »

Danihan wrote: post #146
travmatt wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand he says that he isn’t a part of the order, on the other hand he wore their insignia to the inaugural ball. Maybe he was using neo nazi symbolism ironically?

>Leslie Waters, prof of European History at Randolph-Macon College, said: “It definitely is a symbol that a lot of Hungarians would associate with racist ideology and anti-Semitism but plenty of Hungarians also associate it with some sort of generic patriotism and anti-communism.” Or he wore it to reflect his family history and as an anti-communist symbol....

His family history as nazis? Also, thank god he’s trying to draw attention to the anti-communist movements in the world, seeing as communism is really a key global issue in the world today.
Post reply on HN