Live data from Hacker News

Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

esthercrawford.medium.com

61–70 of 149 posts

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#61

> Colleagues openly talked about how Twitter was being sold because leadership didn’t have conviction in their own plan or ability to fix longstanding problems. I think, in this case, the colleagues were wrong. Twitter was sold because an idiot offered far more money than it was worth. If I have a coffee shop that earns me $100,000 in profit per year, and somebody offers to buy it from me for $10 million, I'm going t…

Not to mention if you had effectively a legal obligation to your investors to do so.

Yes. If Twitter had attempted to remain independent, they probably could have, but the board members would have spent the next several years of their lives in depositions for the inevitable shareholder lawsuits. The offer was so rich, they didn’t really have much of a choice but to take it.

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#62
post #30

>A high performance culture pulls everyone up, but the opposite weighs everyone down. I doubt that. Not the opposite part but the high performance one. Sounds like a road to burn out and depression.

I have never been more burned out and depressed than when I was in a low performance culture.

Completely wore me out.

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#63
post #21

I appreciate this considerably more nuanced and thoughtful view of the modern history of Twitter. So much coverage of Twitter since the Musk acquisition is entangled with partisan politics, ultimately in part thanks to Musk provoking such a reaction. That makes this post feel ever more illuminating and thoughtful—it avoids the partisan pitfalls and irrational extremism seen in virtually every other article on the top…

musk has a vast amount of power and influence due to his wealth, links to several corporations, links to other rich people, and his control of a social media site. I believe that someone with that much power has an obligation, a responsibility to improve the world for humanity. Whether elected or not. he instead chooses to do what he does. That is why I dislike him. he could offer so much more but messes around "trol…

Literally who has improved humanity more this century? I ask with all seriousness.

Electric cars and rockets would not be where they are if he had chosen a different and much less difficult path.

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#64

> Colleagues openly talked about how Twitter was being sold because leadership didn’t have conviction in their own plan or ability to fix longstanding problems. I think, in this case, the colleagues were wrong. Twitter was sold because an idiot offered far more money than it was worth. If I have a coffee shop that earns me $100,000 in profit per year, and somebody offers to buy it from me for $10 million, I'm going t…

Not to mention if you had effectively a legal obligation to your investors to do so.

[deleted]

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#65
post #51

>He’s a complicated person with an unfathomable amount of financial and geopolitical power which is why humanity needs him to err on the side of goodness, rather than political divisiveness and pettiness. It's more of an example why nobody should have that much power and money. We should depend on which side one person chooses. It's like a monopoly of money and power and we know monopolies are bad.

I thought this was an absurd statement in her post. Maybe our societies do exist only at the sufferance of billionaires, but I sure hope not. And if the continued existence of our society is in fact totally dependent on whether Elon Musk chooses to act out of the compassion and goodness of his heart, then we lost the plot a long time ago and probably deserve whatever we have coming.

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#66
Did anyone actually find it insightful?

It reads like something half-generated by GPT and half-written by literally any product manager from an S&P 500 company, with a slight tech lean.

Yes, big orgs move slow.

Yes, top performers don't like bureaucracy.

Yes, sometimes companies get sold and there are sweeping changes.

Yes, people stay at companies for the paycheck.

Yes, leaders are sometimes eccentric/erratic but also funny/charismatic (it's almost like people are complex and not a simple myers-briggs automatons).

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's this in reference to? (Blissfully have parted ways with Twitter so I'm not read in on the 24/7 Twitter meta-show)

A QAnon influencer posted CSAM and got banned. Musk personally intervened to reinstate it. https://twitter.com/PokerPolitics/status/1684300589268709377 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1684248597603155976

Wow, he really can go lower and lower eh? No wonder he needed to start Boring Co.

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#68
post #21

I appreciate this considerably more nuanced and thoughtful view of the modern history of Twitter. So much coverage of Twitter since the Musk acquisition is entangled with partisan politics, ultimately in part thanks to Musk provoking such a reaction. That makes this post feel ever more illuminating and thoughtful—it avoids the partisan pitfalls and irrational extremism seen in virtually every other article on the top…

> The incessant lazy about how Twitter is dying, for either technical or other reasons.

I'm absolutely shocked by the appetite people have for weekly stories proclaiming that their enemy is on the verge of being vanquished. So angry, and so incoherent and belligerent when confronted or even ignored. This is a person, not a demon. Also, a person with fairly median-of-the-road politics. He's gross because he's rich and you can't become rich without being unethical, and you can't remain rich without continuing to be, but there's 1000 other guys like him, most a bit less successful (government teat.)

It's bizarre behavior coming from people who are behaving increasingly strangely. I won't be surprised if they're his biggest backers 5 years from now, because he was their ally during some invasion, or helped to defeat some left-wing politician who they used to love until the television and the President said it was time to hate them.

I remember Tea Party people like this, but I honestly thought that kind of sensitivity to media could only thrive in fairly rural or exurban, churchy areas. Instead it's all the people who moved back into the city from the suburbs in the 90s-2000s and their dopey kids, ready to stand up for their DLC and W. Bush Republican kings. They just refuse to consume any information that upsets them. They think of it as assault, which is causing them trauma.

It's a social grouping that demands the right to be traumatized by what they just watched on television. Enough of the rant.

I think he's making a bunch of crazy, thoughtful plays borne out of the desperation of getting some worth out of this thing he was forced to vastly overpay for because of his own dumb mouth. But the valuation could have been wrong; it may not have predicted radical changes like Musk is trying, it was just assuming that this stable social network that was already half-merged with government was going to putter along as it was.

Charging more for participation seemed inevitable, and keeping that pricing structure fairly flat would make people more likely to get used to it. Those things also massacre trolls, socks, and spammers, and allow celebrities/influencers to exclusively interact with people who are willing to sign what they say, and to clean up their timelines. They also stopped both giving away their DM service for free (or at least split it into a premium/free plan), and stopped having a backend that allowed people who abuse by DM free access to the eyes of the people they wish to abuse - if you're not blue, you go to another tab or non-blues can be blanket blocked altogether i.e. if you want to talk to me, do it in public.

All of it sounds like an adventurous way to get money out of people's pockets, and give them some satisfaction in exchange. I don't know if people will pay for twitter, but the way that the internet is going at this moment, people are going to be paying for everything. Web3 but the only crypto involved is the Web Integrity API...

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#69
This is a very well written article and I really enjoyed reading it.

However, I do think the author has romanticized how a privately owned company has exploited, abused and treated their workers like objects. Looking back of the past months of Elon's tenure, its been shocking to see how he violated so many legal and social covenants regarding how an employer should treat staff.

The true insult of it all is that Musk did not need to be so brutal on everyone. He could have restructured the company without the cruelty, drama and chaos. He could have been the reincarnation of Jack Welsh (in his glory days).

Re: Epilogue of my time working at Twitter

#70
post #21

I appreciate this considerably more nuanced and thoughtful view of the modern history of Twitter. So much coverage of Twitter since the Musk acquisition is entangled with partisan politics, ultimately in part thanks to Musk provoking such a reaction. That makes this post feel ever more illuminating and thoughtful—it avoids the partisan pitfalls and irrational extremism seen in virtually every other article on the top…

Yeah, this is great, cuts through a lot of the BS and kneejerk hate.

> At times it seemed he trusted random feedback more than the people in the room who spent their lives dedicated to tackling the problem at hand.

feels related to

> Management had become bloated to accommodate career growth and the company culture felt too soft and entitled for my own taste [...] Twitter often felt like a place that kept squandering its own potential

Post reply on HN