Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 93 posts

Re: Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

#71

Post by JumpCrisscross »

smotched wrote: post #64
dragontamer wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you're... into newspaper lingo. But "anonymous source" usually means "Dude who emails reporter", and often someone who is an executive level or above. You know, someone who matters, but for their own sake they need to stay anonymous. If its just a document, then the "source is the document". You don't need to quote an anonymous person (who likely has their own biases), you just quote the document itse…

no, the source is not the document, the document comes from a source. In a journalistic context, a source is a person. That's why words like "my source" are used.

> the source is not the document, the document comes from a source

You’re literally commenting on an article citing “an internal presentation obtained by The New York Times.”

Re: Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

#73

Post by dragontamer »

smotched wrote: post #64
dragontamer wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if you're... into newspaper lingo. But "anonymous source" usually means "Dude who emails reporter", and often someone who is an executive level or above. You know, someone who matters, but for their own sake they need to stay anonymous. If its just a document, then the "source is the document". You don't need to quote an anonymous person (who likely has their own biases), you just quote the document itse…

no, the source is not the document, the document comes from a source. In a journalistic context, a source is a person. That's why words like "my source" are used.

Its not clear at all if there even is a "person" in this context.

Ex: lets say New York Times reporter was let into Twitter HQ for some kind of interview. The reporter noticed that a computer was open, so they stuck a thumb-drive in and grabbed the document.

No human source, but the document is likely valid.

------------

Alternatively, Twitter could have posted some document to an internal Slack or Discord meeting, and New York Times reporter may have the know-how to enter into those private channels or grab something from Discord.

There's no reason to assume that they worked with a Twitter insider to grab this document. Not everything is a leak. Old school Journalism is basically spycraft, a reporter can sometimes just grab something to get a good scoop.

-------------

Or maybe the slides were just laying around on a table, printed out. Etc. etc. So maybe its not a computer document at all, but a bunch of slides that they dug out of the dumpster.

Re: Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

#75

Post by saryant »

paulsutter wrote: post #31
phyrex wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a shortsighted view! Do you think Twitter operates out of the goodness of their hearts and will continue to let you keep up on Ai and new space in the face of losing money? Do you think what’s there will just do to help working without active maintenance? Do you think the servers that make all this possible are running for free?

Their revenue is massively larger than the cost to run their servers (I used to run 3000 physical servers with a small team, it doesn't cost much) > advertising revenue for the five weeks from April 1 to the first week of May was $88 million

You’re off by a couple orders of magnitude on what it takes to run Twitter.

Re: Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

#76

Post by kalleboo »

paulsutter wrote: post #31
phyrex wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a shortsighted view! Do you think Twitter operates out of the goodness of their hearts and will continue to let you keep up on Ai and new space in the face of losing money? Do you think what’s there will just do to help working without active maintenance? Do you think the servers that make all this possible are running for free?

Their revenue is massively larger than the cost to run their servers (I used to run 3000 physical servers with a small team, it doesn't cost much) > advertising revenue for the five weeks from April 1 to the first week of May was $88 million

> Their revenue is massively larger than the cost to run their servers

That never seems to matter when big services shut down. It's more about VC-level opportunity cost ("will this give me unicorn-level returns?")

Re: Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

#77

Post by rsynnott »

EA-3167 wrote: post #58
KptMarchewa wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but Dorsey's political opinions didn't influence Twitter's operations that much, at least compared to current owner's ones.

This is the key. People and companies aren't fleeing Twitter because of what Musk believes, they're fleeing because of what he does .

People sometimes compare Musk to Howard Hughes. This is unfair, on Hughes; as far as I know, if you bought a plane from him he rarely showed up at your house to insist that you not eat large peas. Musk, by contrast, tends to inflict his neuroses on his user base.

(Also, Hughes largely stayed out of direct running of his important businesses when he was in his pea-sizing phase, as far as I know)

Re: Twitter’s U.S. Ad Sales Plunge 59% as Woes Continue

#80

Post by [deleted] »

paulsutter wrote: post #31
phyrex wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a shortsighted view! Do you think Twitter operates out of the goodness of their hearts and will continue to let you keep up on Ai and new space in the face of losing money? Do you think what’s there will just do to help working without active maintenance? Do you think the servers that make all this possible are running for free?

Their revenue is massively larger than the cost to run their servers (I used to run 3000 physical servers with a small team, it doesn't cost much) > advertising revenue for the five weeks from April 1 to the first week of May was $88 million

[deleted]
Post reply on HN