431–440 of 648 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how many would pay $1/month to be able to communicate their points more clearly? My guess is less than 10,000.
Me. If I still used Twitter. Heck, I tweet maybe 5 times a month and I'd pay that. $1 a month is so cheap I would notice.
This is a fireball. It's shining bright no doubt, but it's a fireball all right.
1. Move the office to a city other than San Francisco where the costs of living aren't exorbitantly high. Plenty of other cities that have lower costs of living and would offer tax breaks for a company like Twitter. Allow employees to remotely work if they want. 2. Reduce salaries and lay some people off. Having seen how many people work for Twitter and how big their office is on Market street, some people need to go…
I've never seen their HQ, much less their lunches, but is that really a thing? And aren't they in the Tenderloin in SF? Wouldn't they normally be donating their excess food to shelters / the homeless / the poor? I don't disagree with your points, it just strikes me as weird that the lunch menu would be such an issue.
Nope, they're on Market St: https://about.twitter.com/company
2. Improve their ad product.
That's it really. It doesn't do anything now that it didn't in 2014, and the workforce is significantly larger. It'd be a decent, profitable company.
Or, make it a non-profit. It's in the public interest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Removing all the anti-hillary trending or pro-bernie hashtags really pissed me off during the election. Google does similar things with auto-complete. Politics is truly separate from threatening to kill/rape people, why are you grouping them? You can threaten people over anything, why conflate threats with political speech? There is real censorship on twitter over political ideas, and threats don't even enter into it…
> Politics is truly separate from threatening to kill/rape people, why are you grouping them? Because it's not. The actions of actively authoritarian/alt-right political actors on Twitter are inextricably tied to the movement itself. Milo Yiannopoulos was not banned for the content of what he said. He was banned for saying things he knew would rile up his base of threatening, assaultive troglodytes into attacking som…
Many people would say that exact thing if Twitter decided to censor content that was about gay marriage, etc. You are giving Twitter an easy out. Just censor everything that doesn't go over well in the suburban zipcode that best mirrors the target audience of Coca Cola.
I would have a product recommendation. Twitter missed the change to be a player in the chat space, but it could still offer a chat experience that other services can't. Imagine Twitter would start offering users the possibility to create group chats where only the invited users can write in but that others could follow in real time. So lets say there is an Apple keynote and @BenedictEvans, @asymco and @gruber start a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Me. If I still used Twitter. Heck, I tweet maybe 5 times a month and I'd pay that. $1 a month is so cheap I would notice.
You'd likely notice the first time it asks you for payment.
There are a few camps of people using twitter, which want different things and are mostly being badly served. 1) Trolls love twitter. The legion of racist eggs sowing destruction for no other reason than their own nihilistic enjoyment is an existential threat to the business and must be culled. The company and the trolls cannot live together in peace. One or the other will die. It feels like twitter hasn't figured ou…
I've been hearing this since trolling was invented on Usenet. No one is going to rid the Internet of trolls unless all of the big players enforce RealName™ and we all know how well that ended. "Culling the trolls" means different things to different people, and probably almost every one of us has at some time in our internet lives posted something that another group would consider trolling.
> they gotta cull a lot of trolls, spammers, and free riders, and that's going to hurt their monthly usage numbers.
From the handful of times I've clicked on a link to a tweet and then wandered around, I would bet that the trolls, spammers, and free riders make up something like 98% of their users, so I'm not sure this would really solve anything, since presumably their gross revenue is driven by the numbers of users.
I would have a product recommendation. Twitter missed the change to be a player in the chat space, but it could still offer a chat experience that other services can't. Imagine Twitter would start offering users the possibility to create group chats where only the invited users can write in but that others could follow in real time. So lets say there is an Apple keynote and @BenedictEvans, @asymco and @gruber start a…