Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far • Hacker News Board

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#231

Post by dboreham » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:15 PM UTC

yumraj wrote: post #221

cinntaile wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Starlink is a gamechanger, but I guess that's part of SpaceX?

But what's the size of the market? TAM may be huge, but what's a realistic SOM? In other words, how many people with hard wired fiber/coax will change to Starlink or will be be useful only for the rural/remote segment. Yes, there's some international, marine, flight etc. market, but, again, how big is that. Serious question - is there any real data?

Starlink will never be competitive with wired connectivity. Source: Claude Shannon.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#232

Post by fulafel » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:15 PM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #203

soumyadeb wrote: post #34

Would be interesting if he makes Twitter more dev friendly (open APIs etc)

"Would be interesting if he makes Twitter more dev friendly (open APIs etc)" How open and dev friendly is Tesla?

Also Starlink.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#233

Post by yeahunlessnow » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #11

I think the thing to watch will be ads and other revenue streams. Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see what happens.

Companies will want their content next to specific content which they will pick when placing bids based on a reputation value which will be computed by a secret algorithm. Whoever has a better reputation will attract more ads and get more cuts from the money twitter collects.

Like, I want to show my gun ads next to Trump's posts and want to show abortion clinics next to Biden's. Nothing wrong with this. Want to show public works ads next to Bernie's ads.

Then when you want to post wild things, anonymous mode will kick in and those posts will not be posted in an identifying fashion. They will be posted in an area that cannot lead to the post owner being "accurately" identified. That way nobody knows who posted it. That should reduce some legal issues. If the poster decides to post it as the owner and successfully gets past the Nazi filter, their reputation will be affected depending on the public reception of their post.

Just like in real life. You stay away from people who you don't like.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#234

Post by tenebrisalietum » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

amazing_rae_123 wrote: post #214

davidw wrote: post #11

I think the thing to watch will be ads and other revenue streams. Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see what happens.

> Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see what happens. This is a misconception. Outsiders don't know anything about ads. Twitter needs to be more useful, especially to iOS users. It users outside of major US metros. It needs older users. It will need better targeting and science. Then it will increase ad revenue.

Older users have Facebook, and Facebook is withering.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#235

Post by zo1 » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

jshier wrote: post #109

hn8305823 wrote: post #69

He literally said it will not be a free for all. He may be chaotic, but he's not stupid. There is a huge difference between no moderation (anarchy), and not targeting conservative voices solely based on ideology.

No one has been targeted on Twitter solely for being conservative.

It's easy to say that when you define conservative opinions as breaking the rules or harassment. So they get banned for hate and harassment instead of just being conservative or right leaning. Congrats you won on a technicality.

So both sides are right, and yet the conversation between the extremes moved backwards instead of finding common ground.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#236

Post by linuxftw » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

celestialcheese wrote: post #141

linuxftw wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Pressure from advertisers" implies the advertisers are paying more than the marginal utility of the ads themselves in some kind of corporate-back-scratching model. If the ads provide a ROI, then other advertisers will gladly jump on board.

100% this. Big advertisers don't stop spending because they have a moral objection to the content, they stop spending when the customers who disagree with the content boycott and make a lot of noise.

And where do the people make noise about these types of things? Twitter. If they just stop promoting that content and turning a few keyboard warriors into news items, then companies will be none the wiser, and will happily spend money.

But even in the case they decide to jump ship, other companies will fill the gap. Do you think all the NFL players are going to leave the platform? All the sports journalists? No amount of internet outrage is going to change them, they're too stuck on the platform.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#237

Post by petilon » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

Covzire wrote: post #14

Musk just tweeted this 5 mins ago: "Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with widely diverse viewpoints. No major content decisions or account reinstatements will happen before that council convenes."

That's a very different position than the one he stated before, i.e., everything that is not illegal will be allowed.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#238

Post by neves » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #11

I think the thing to watch will be ads and other revenue streams. Most companies aren't going to want their ads next to 'free for all' content, so we'll see what happens.

But we can see Twitter being supported by extreme right foundations.

I'm from Brazil and the extreme right is abusing all the communication platforms. it's a complete madness in what people believe right now. Our society is on the verge of crumbling.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#239

Post by nathancahill » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:16 PM UTC

libraryatnight wrote: post #155

danjoredd wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Musk's solar panel business is that it is more expensive and less effective than normal solar panels. They look nicer than normal panels, but to thrive off of solar you need as much efficiency as possible. Tesla panels don't provide that especially for the cost.

I live in Phoenix and a lot of people have been turned off on solar in general for their home because a lot of the companies are aggressive and shady. Seems like a missed opportunity for Tesla to have stepped in to be a "reliable" solar company simply by pricing competitively and not going out of business a year after installation.

They're aggressive and shady (pun intended?) because of government tax breaks that mess with the natural economics of the market. It's become a cash grab by installers to sign up as many people as they can to move money from state coffers to their bank accounts.

Re: Elon Musk owns Twitter: The story so far

#240

Post by practice9 » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:17 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #129

OK, so far, not much. Musk is getting stretched rather thin. Space-X seems to be doing OK with Gwynne Shotwell running things. Tesla, which Musk apparently does really run personally, is doing OK, but their side ventures are not. Self-driving is a mess. Solar panels (yes, Tesla has a solar panel business) are not doing well. The Cybertruck is years late. (Maybe next year.[1]) So is the Tesla Model 2, the low-end vehi…

> Solar panels (yes, Tesla has a solar panel business) are not doing well.

Source? Their last earnings show that energy business part has improved this quarter