831–840 of 852 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He doesn’t seem to be “reforming” Twitter, he seems to be trying desperately to recoup his lost investment. This wasn’t needed and will be looked upon with embarrassment by him and all of tech in a decade.
He literally just bought it. Give the man a chance before writing him off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how high quality journalism works. There's actually quite an involved skill to reading and fully understanding this kind of writing - and it's infuriatingly difficult to pick up that skill (I've been developing it by spending time talking to professional journalists, but I'm still not there yet). When you read "another person familiar with the deal who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive…
I don't believe this at all. I think there's different tiers of journalism. One tier is going to publish "anonymous person says X" and that tier will be fast, sensational, and less accurate. Another tier is going to publish experts on the record and that tier is going to be slower, boring, and more accurate. My perception of recent news tends is that sources that were in the accurate/quality tier are shifting to the…
The Washington Post and the New Yorker have higher editorial standards than Fox News.
There are important stories for which it simply isn't possible to get an expert to go on the record, for all kinds of reasons.
What's going on inside Twitter right now is a great example. Anyone who leaks details with their name attached to them will clearly get fired, or sued, or both.
That's why good journalists quote anonymous sources. If they could get a reputable source to go on record instead they would obviously do so!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The downside of employee protections is that it makes companies more reluctant to hire. And also once hired, the salary to be offered is reduced to cover the estimated current value of the future employee protections. Yep, that why software engineers in California and New York, where there are a lot of employee protections, don't get paid as much as SWEs in the Midwest or the South, where there are less... Right? Or…
What employee protections are you talking about in California and New York? Both are at will states. So easy to hire, easy to fire.
When California says you can fire an employee for any reason, what they really mean is any reason except for a bunch of reasons we've decided are unacceptable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Love seeing the confirmation bias from people who expect Musk to improve Twitter on day one.
What? Confirmation bias comes when interpreting some random thing as evidence. This is intention change by him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
major news outlets like wapo have a lot of issues, like so many issues, but making up sources is not one of them.
They don't have to make up a source to be taken for a ride. Look at CNBC eating up the story about two guys (Ligma and Johnson) who were supposedly fired. If the source is anonymous we can't check they worked at Twitter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He literally just bought it. Give the man a chance before writing him off.
No, that's not how this works. Elon Musk existed before his Twitter purchase, he doesn't get a pass on literally everything he's done up until now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fine. Elon doesn't want you to work for him. There are people who build multiple successful companies and then there are who prioritize well-being and pick some weird hill to die on.
What's his code volume in the past 60 days?
> Another person familiar with the deal who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters last week said the total number of layoffs is likely to be closer to 50 percent. Unless I’m missing something, the only sources for this article are a mix of speculation and anonymous sources who can’t even agree with each other about the layoff.
Sources cited in the article are: - four people familiar with the discussions who spoke on the condition of anonymity - numerous employees contacted by The Post, who spoke on the condition of anonymity - tweets from some of the people involved - photos obtained by The Washington Post - A document filed with financial regulators Monday - interviews and documents obtained by The Post - court records
Numerous employees - how much insight does a web developer at Twitter have into the inner workings of the management shift happening right now?
Photos of what? The conference room? Are we going to pull in a body language expert to analyze what Elon was saying by walking into the room with sneakers instead of dress shoes?
There is no accountability for sources in journalism, and it's why I think it's 99% useless garbage and never read it. Journalists and publications find the sources they want to tell the story they already planned to write regardless of reality.
> Another person familiar with the deal who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters last week said the total number of layoffs is likely to be closer to 50 percent. Unless I’m missing something, the only sources for this article are a mix of speculation and anonymous sources who can’t even agree with each other about the layoff.
Can verify that Twitter is laying people off. Several contacts at Twitter were laid off this weekend and hoping they I could submit their resumes to my current employer. They were told that these were performance based terminations, despite not receiving any negative evaluations during their time at Twitter. They were also told they needed to sign NDAs in order to receive any severance. Can't confirm the %.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unions in europe also seem far less militant That's because unions are an integral part of the way many of the countries socio-political systems work. In Norway, for instance, the trades unions and the employers get together once a year to hammer out what is called tarriflønn, essentially the going rate for each broad type of job. The state provides a referee for the meetings whose job is to keep them on track and…
It should be noted that European unions were no less militant originally. Being militant (and strong enough) is what gets you concessions - including better arrangements for future deals.