61–70 of 105 posts
I’m not surprised the comments here are universally skeptical so far, but I’ll chime in that I think it’s plausible. The largest expense by far was compensation and with 10% the previous workforce it dropped dramatically. The question is how much revenue would have fallen. In the HN bubble X is basically over and everyone has moved to Mastodon, but there has been little change in the folks I follow. Are journalists a…
And it absolutely would be a major accomplishment if true.
I’m not surprised the comments here are universally skeptical so far, but I’ll chime in that I think it’s plausible. The largest expense by far was compensation and with 10% the previous workforce it dropped dramatically. The question is how much revenue would have fallen. In the HN bubble X is basically over and everyone has moved to Mastodon, but there has been little change in the folks I follow. Are journalists a…
In my own experience I’ve been seeing a lot more dodgy ads (scams, crypto, far-right groups) that were probably rejected by the old management. Maybe that’s making up some of the lost revenue, but it’s exactly the sort of stuff that made traditional businesses anxious about content moderation on platforms like YouTube.
It does seem that the userbase hasn’t gone away - the migration to other platforms hasn’t panned out and the power users are still there. But if the platform is long-term toxic to advertisers then they’re going to need some better ideas than Twitter Blue.
I don't get how it is allowed that C-Suits just are allowed to blatantly lie to their investors/board/users they have the data and they know it won't happen. Exactly how Musks knows FSD won't happen this year...
The investors are Musk, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Binance, Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia and some others. Imaginary profits shouldn't be an issue for this group, the value of their holdings lies elsewhere.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/12/24/elon-mu...
I’m not surprised the comments here are universally skeptical so far, but I’ll chime in that I think it’s plausible. The largest expense by far was compensation and with 10% the previous workforce it dropped dramatically. The question is how much revenue would have fallen. In the HN bubble X is basically over and everyone has moved to Mastodon, but there has been little change in the folks I follow. Are journalists a…
Is it literally 10% or is that figurative?
> Musk was quoted as saying in the interview that the social media platform now has only 1,500 employees, down from under 8,000 who were employed at the time of his acquisition. The reduction equates to roughly 80% of the company’s staff.
That was in April. Another 10% since then seems entirely plausible.
I’m not surprised the comments here are universally skeptical so far, but I’ll chime in that I think it’s plausible. The largest expense by far was compensation and with 10% the previous workforce it dropped dramatically. The question is how much revenue would have fallen. In the HN bubble X is basically over and everyone has moved to Mastodon, but there has been little change in the folks I follow. Are journalists a…
This is obviously not a popular opinion, but: I think this is great news. In the world of Meta dominating social media (+ TikTok now de facto in 2nd spot), we need diversity in the field. Twitter (X) definitely changed in the past year, but I see it as a positive change (maybe it's my bubble) - my tech feed is no longer polluted by people fighting about left vs right, Trump etc, my feed is now tech people sharing tec…
Yeah, its definitely your bubble. I'm seeing much more racism, trolling, and abuse. And from talking with other folks (IRL) I don't think this is my own bubble either.
1) Why are people so certain that the claims that X should profit are incorrect? X did cut a massive percentage of their staff, and presumably whatever infrastructure changes they've initiated in the past months to save money should be done by then. Nobody can perfectly predict the future, but reducing expenses drastically seems like a good step forward in achieving their goal.
2) Why are people acting so personally hurt if X thrives? I don't even see this level of animosity for companies that deserve this level of ire, like companies that deliberately pollute the oceans or even the cable companies.
3) Are people rooting for X to fail? I think competition for Facebook and other social media is a great thing, and X still has a certain connection with the zeitgeist that I don't think can be matched.
4) Why are people ok with the rampant deadnaming of X? Do better!
I would like CEOs saying stuff like this to be forced to take own-money bets on it. I'd like to get in on that action...