Live data from Hacker News

Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

matthewtejo.substack.com

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#271

Twitter is a lot of drama, but ultimately this is a common private equity play: 1) take private 2) fire/layoff until things break, patch up / rehire with cheaper labor. Repeat as necessary 3) spit shine/repackage what's left with a theoretically more appealing balance sheet. 4) resell to another sucker...uh, buyer, or take public again. Fundamentally Musk bought 44 billion for 5 billion of annual revenue, and presuma…

There are a few key differences. PE tries not to massively overpay, it'll put more effort into targeted layoffs, and it'll maintain enough of a "business as usual" posture to not scare away advertisers. Edit: they also put in a CEO whose full-time job is being CEO of that company. But yes, this is very bad execution of the PE playbook.

Elon thinks he's brilliant at everything he tries his hand at, so he thought he'd jump into the private-equity arena and show everyone how brilliant he is.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait Musk saddled Twitter with debt? Please elaborate...

It was a leveraged buyout. Musk borrowed $13 billion to complete the deal, which Twitter needs to pay back.

And if he doesn’t, it might effect tesla very negatively (he used his tesla shares as collateral)

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#273

I think the real question is: Twitter grew 3x on the headcount front with a flat stock price over the course of less than 5 years. What exactly where these thousands of employees actually doing and why did the previous CEO think what they were doing was worth hiring them for? That's just basic accountability from a stock holder or employee perspective. That's apparently a ton of money being wasted on nothing at all.

> Twitter grew 3x on the headcount front There were multiple executives making $10m/yr+ There were board members There were shareholders Why did all of them not stop this headcount increase if it's as easily reduced as "too much headcount bad, smaller headcount good"? These are paid professionals who are supposedly wealthy, good at their jobs, smart, informed, etc. How can us commenters on HackerNews sit from our arm…

Companies are mismanaged into death all the time by groups of highly intelligent, previously successful people.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#274
post #16
post #6

I don't think it's that crazy. Private Equity and Wall Street doesn't have pressure for resilience, it has pressure for churn. As long as revenue and spending... exists... things are fine. Ideally they are numbers that grow. This doesn't lend itself to clearing out a development backlog, or engineers doing the most important things, it lends itself to rapid iteration and justifications for the iterations. So now that…

The problem is that it’s run by someone who overpaid badly and needs to come up with significantly more money to pay for the debt he saddled the company with, and then his actions seriously disrupted ad revenue. That puts him more in the PE playbook of cutting costs as deeply as possible even at the extent of long-term growth. Unlike his other companies there isn’t strong government support to drive business for Twit…

Musk has been in a similar position before when he took over Tesla. At that point it was struggling to make the Roadster, they were facing having a marginal cost of manufacturing a car higher than the sales price.

Musk took over and made cuts. I don't think anyone could argue that those cuts were at the cost of Tesla's long-term growth. They were needed because of an imminent liquidity problem. Tesla has hired great people since then.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me the analogy here is that the new boss rolled in and sold all the fire extinguishers. That by itself doesn't set the building on fire - it doesn't even increase the chances of a fire occurring on any given day. But when one does...

Every SRE knows that the leading cause of outages by far is someone making a change to the system. Twitter isn’t shipping many new features right now or even doing much maintenance. But eventually they will have to. So the analogy becomes, the new boss sold all the fire extinguishers and also placed a short temporary ban on cooking in the building . But eventually people are going to start turning on stoves again… an…

> Twitter isn’t shipping many new features right now

When was the last major new feature? The site has always seemed pretty stagnant.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#276
I have seen this happen twice at a smaller scale. Turnover is too high quantitatively and qualitatively to survive by hiring new people, so Musk's "solution" will probably be to oursource a lot of stuff to some consultancy firm. Twitter will almost inevitably rot within 5 years. But don't expect anything noticeable overnight.

Edit: also the reason Musk wants to shut down all those microservices has nothing to do with money, it's that he doesn't have enough manpower to maintain them. If Twitter is like most non FAANG out there those "microservices" are coupled with each other, so good luck.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#277
post #27

All this does is point out that smart people worked at Twitter who may now no longer work there, whether on their own accord, or due to Elon’s bulldogging tactics. Elon thinks he knows what he’s doing, but what he is going to be left with are people who are willing to work hard by his standards, but not necessarily smart. The simple truth is Elon knows nothing about the actual work involved in tech. He knows words or…

America is such a great country that a random person can just fecklessly blunder into creating a revolutionary electric car company and cluelessly blunder into creating a rocket company that is the envy of the world.

Automotive and aerospace are not that similar to social media. People buying into the vision of "get the planet off fossil fuels for transport" and "get this species to Mars" are probably willing to make sacrifices that people working on social media are not.

It's the Halo Effect fallacy to think competence in one field automatically translates to another. Especially when the founder in question has displayed increasingly erratic behavior in the meantime.

Is today's Elon capable of doing what Elon from 15 years ago did at Tesla? I don't think that is necessarily in evidence, much less in a very different industry.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#278
post #27

All this does is point out that smart people worked at Twitter who may now no longer work there, whether on their own accord, or due to Elon’s bulldogging tactics. Elon thinks he knows what he’s doing, but what he is going to be left with are people who are willing to work hard by his standards, but not necessarily smart. The simple truth is Elon knows nothing about the actual work involved in tech. He knows words or…

It's crazy to think a guy who builds reusable rockets thinks he can run a complex technology operation like Twitter.

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's pretty hilarious. It has caught the ire of a lot of furious unhinged puritans too, which has actually been the funniest thing about it for me.

It doesn’t bother me because it’s lascivious, it bothers me because it’s the comedy equivalent of fart noises. It was one thing when he was just a user of Twitter, but now he’s in charge, and it seems like a tone is being set that’s not really the vibe I’m into. Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

Were you happy with all the decisions twitter was making up until elon musk took over?

Re: Why Twitter didn’t go down: From a real Twitter SRE

#280
post #27

All this does is point out that smart people worked at Twitter who may now no longer work there, whether on their own accord, or due to Elon’s bulldogging tactics. Elon thinks he knows what he’s doing, but what he is going to be left with are people who are willing to work hard by his standards, but not necessarily smart. The simple truth is Elon knows nothing about the actual work involved in tech. He knows words or…

And Twitter's problem are nowhere near technological. The site needed to make more money, not reengineer the whole thing while advertisers are fleeing because Trump is back on on a whim!

>while advertisers are fleeing because Trump is back on

[citation needed]

CNN's ratings were never better than under Trump. He's fantastic for advertising. So is Musk. All controversial figures are. That, oddly, isn't controversial in advertising.

>on a whim!

He created a public poll, and when people voted for Trump to be allowed back won, he unbanned him, tweeting "vox populi, vox dei" ("the will of the people is the will of god"). Had he unbanned him despite the poll saying "no" you could argue it was a whim, but that isn't the reality we're in. He also refused to unban Alex Jones, citing exploitation of child deaths and a personal story. Not unbanning Alex Jones was more whimsical than unbanning Trump was, factually speaking. Why do people always misrepresent his actions? And why is it always upvoted and not flagged here?

Post reply on HN