Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#541

Post by ipaddr » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

SamBam wrote: post #266

ben_w wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, why would you think that? His wealth is mostly owning 20% of Tesla, plus some extra few billions from owning significant fractions of SpaceX, The Boring Company, and Neuralink. Presumably there’s some cash in there as well, but on his scale a hundred million is a rounding error.

It still confuses me that being part-owner of an old dot-com payment company, part-owner of a mid-sized car company (by number of cars sold), and part-owner of a (very good) rocket company make a person richer than anyone has ever been in the history of the planet, but that's probably because I just haven't looked into it enough.

The most successful payment company, the top car company on terms of valuation and the top rocket company. We've never seen that profile. Usually it's someone who had monopolized an industry like Gates or Bozo doing under one company.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#542

Post by sulam » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #536

sulam wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A thoughtful CEO doesn’t take the role and immediately start making changes. It takes some time to absorb what’s going on.

It's not like he was an outsider, he was CTO for about 5 years before he became CEO. He knew what was going on in the company.

Knowing Parag, he probably didn’t actually have strong opinions about Product until it was his job to.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#543

Post by chrsw » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

the_doctah wrote: post #509

Karawebnetwork wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit always has had community moderators which ensured that the subreddits were respecting the rules of their communities. For example, on LGBTQ issues subreddits telling people that they are groomers is not tolerated. If it was, people would quickly go away. While on some other subreddit, it might be tolerated but the targeted people are not present and will not see those messages. It is similar on Facebook where…

>I use hate-speech as an example because the "groomer" as a slur issue is at a peak right now and is fresh in my head. Mm. I think the problem is that censorship advocates like you try to add words like this into the lexicon of "hate speech" and try to have it censored. It's not, and it shouldn't be, and you should be ashamed of even thinking it. It is not other people's responsibility to stay up to date on what may…

Well, it depends. I've never heard this term "groomer" before. I don't even understand the term but it sounds like there's a community or subculture out there that takes it very seriously. So, if I were in public spaces where people from that community where known to communicate with one another I would absolutely want to know if something I said was offensive or hateful. I would expect to have the issue brought to my attention if I inadvertantly said something problematic. I'm not trying to hurt anyone, I just want to talk with people. I don't feel like my free speech is being impinged upon either.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#544

Post by Melatonic » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

Am I just getting old or is Twitter just always been a shitty format? I never got the appeal and still do not.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#545

Post by myko » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:36 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #470

jkubicek wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree with this take. I'm also surprised that there hasn't been more strident push-back against the "conservatives are being banned from Twitter" story from conservatives themselves. If I were right-leaning I would certainly not want to be associated with the q-anon advocates for violence that are being kicked off the platform.

Trump wasn't kicked off the platform for being q-anon.

Right, he was kicked off for fomenting an attempt at revolution which included urging QAnon people (who need medical treatment) to attack the nation's capital in an effort to illegally reinstate himself as POTUS and using Twitter in his effort to do so.

Much worse than just promoting QAnon conspiracies IMO!

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#546

Post by hemreldop » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #84

So there's two options right - the first is that Parag is for some reason making big strategic decisions about the direction of the company despite the fact that we all know he'll be gone if the deal closes. Or he's making big strategic changes at the behest of the acquirers before the deal closes. Neither of these things seem particularly kosher moves to make. The question is how to figure out which one it is. It wo…

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#547

Post by lumost » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

SamReidHughes wrote: post #317

SamBam wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still confuses me that being part-owner of an old dot-com payment company, part-owner of a mid-sized car company (by number of cars sold), and part-owner of a (very good) rocket company make a person richer than anyone has ever been in the history of the planet, but that's probably because I just haven't looked into it enough.

I'm really confused how you're confused. What is a better way to become the richest person than by owning and growing a series of hugely successful companies that provide products and services to people?

To my knowledge, none of these companies were run at a profit during Musk's involvement. While this is a normal part of growing a business, it leads to a bias on what people think could happen - rather than what does happen.

How much money did musk really make? how much of it is an artifact of monetary policy.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#548

Post by cwp » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

kyledrake wrote: post #189

I've been using Twitter since it's main novelty was that it was a successful Ruby on Rails app, and honestly I've been trying to figure out where the exit is for my personal use of Twitter lately. If the acquisition goes through, Twitter won't make enough money to service it's debt, and the things they will do to fix that are pretty much guaranteed to lower the quality of the platform, which frankly has never worked…

I think the only real way to do content moderation is to delegate it to users. Let people create something like a subreddit, and then be in charge of content policy for it. Different communities can have different standards, and kicking people out of a given community doesn't ban them from Twitter entirely. There's even some informal version of this already as you can see with the "this part of Twitter" meme.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#549

Post by mywittyname » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:38 PM UTC

shapefrog wrote: post #341

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Elon is margin called by year end is roughly 40% according to option prices The margin loans will almost certainly be replaced with outside equity prior to closing.

I am wondering what is in it for those people lining up - they are paying 20% over the market value to be locked in with musk.

Leveraged buyout at an inflated price in the short term. Banks backing the loans will get guaranteed interest payments on the loans plus a lucrative contract debt servicing and consulting fees in the medium term. Long term they'll IPO again and/or find a fool to acquire them.

Re: Twitter CEO fires two top executives, freezes hiring

#550

Post by moate » Thu, May 12, 2022, 9:39 PM UTC

robonerd wrote: post #232

moate wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feels less condescending than Apple "Geniuses" or Best Buy "Nerds", and pretty in line with "Googlers", "Toasters" or "Hulugans". Is this a thing most people refer to other employees as most of the time? No, but it helps corporate create an image of a fun, playful workplace. I think it's utter bullshit, but you know, to each their own.

> No, but it helps corporate create an image of a fun, playful workplace Nah, all of these corporate 'pet names' are applied unilaterally, by the executives to the workers. Condescension is the point. The application of such a nickname is a show of power, meant to remind workers of their place in the system.

I don't disagree with you, hence the sentence immediately following that. That said, tons of middle managers seem to buy into the BS more than the people above or below them, and seem to proudly think of themselves as stupid nickname that is applicable.

If your culture involves calling me anything other than an "employee", I'm not a fan. Personally, I will always think of myself as a "Mercenary" regardless of who's signing my checks currently.