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

I resigned from Twitter

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#881

Post by ineedasername »

cjblomqvist wrote: post #463
ineedasername wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well to be fair, good management should be practically invisible. It shouldn't be much of a factor in your day to day work. They should be overseeing larger trends, gently nudging things to stay on course, talking with others to coordinate, etc. I have reasonably decent leadership where I work, and the only times I have much contact outside of my direct reporting line is when something has gone (or might go) seriousl…

Maybe at some companies, but I think Steve Jobs might beg to differ!

You're right, there are some outliers where micro managing have been successful, but I consider them just that: outliers. Because only a vastly minor portion of the population has that level passion and tunnel-vision of focus that is also right.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#882

Post by gusgus01 »

kwertyoowiyop wrote: post #866
ralfd wrote: post #831

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I guess Musk is the exception proving the rule.

Of course, exceptions don’t prove rules, they disprove them. Maybe Musk is showing that CEOs could say a lot more than they choose to, at least if they have charisma. And run certain kinds of businesses, appealing to a certain kind of investors and customers.

It's a reference to a popular saying: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule

The logic of which is, if something is an exception or so exceptional that it's called out as an exception, that implies the existence of a rule.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#883

Post by pcwalton »

attemptone wrote: post #686
smolder wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is not what I'd call cancer. Social media doesn't need to be an engagement-obsessed, emotionally charged misinformation hose. Social media is broader than the category that twitter and FB live in. It can be less toxic, but less toxic platforms are less exciting and don't get the same kind of attention , which is what all the toxic stuff optimizes for.

As a long time /lit/-izen I wanted bring up 4chan as an counter-example of a toxic platform that hasn't been optimized for attention. But the longer I thought about it, the more I grew sure that it isn't as toxic as it seems to be. Sure people will respond to your post calling you a bundle of sticks or the n-word. But in the end I had more heart-to-hearts with people that have widly different opinions than on any oth…

4chan's /pol is probably the largest neo-Nazi discussion forum on the Internet. I'm actually unsure as to what could even be more toxic than that.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#884

Post by potluckyears »

dawnim wrote: post #849
potluckyears wrote: post #769

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps a valuable public service should be owned and governed by...the public? In a corporation like Twitter, only people who can afford a financial stake have a say, and having more financial stake means having more say. Not a great structure if your concern is power. Perhaps everyone in the public (with a social rather than financial stake in a platform like Twitter) should have a voice in its governance.

Would be interesting to see something like this governed by a community. Interesting in the light of DAO ownership. Any notable projects like this?

Member-owned co-ops like credit unions and REI come to mind. They follow a "one member, one vote" rule. Credit unions are not-for-profit, while REI makes billions in revenue, and both provide great service. They're an existence proof that it's possible to still be a good business while governed democratically.

In some countries like Finland, the democratic government holds some large non-majority stake in companies that affect the public interest. However, I don't think that model would work in the US, particularly in light of some unique jurisprudence (Buckley v. Valeo, Citizens United v. FEC, and Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta) that make all three branches of government captive institutions to a small number of wealthy donors.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#886

Post by jlawson »

madeofpalk wrote: post #838
MaximumYComb wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I lean moderately left and I really disagree with #3. The explosion of voices is only ones that are "allowed". Twitter is one of the biggest offenders of cancel culture (i.e. silencing people).

Compare to before, where the only voices you heard where ones that were allowed by a hand full of media execs.

Before, the voices I heard were people in my life and my local community.

The media was just the media; they'd get put in their own box for analysis and skepticism.

Twitter's great power is controlling peoples' impression of what the people around them are thinking and saying. Or, rather, allowing various aggressive agenda-driven groups to control that.

So now the corps don't just control the voice of the media; they control the voice of your community too.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#887

Post by annadane »

busymom0 wrote: post #777
koheripbal wrote: post #743

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 10% appreciation of the shares as a result of him leaving is reason enough. He's still a big shareholder.

Other than Musk for Tesla and SpaceX, I can't think of any of the major companies who would really be impacted much by their CEO leaving. Maybe Zuck leaving FB might make a small difference but IG seems decently independent of him anyway.

Zuckerberg by all accounts bullied Kevin Systrom out of the company and now it prompts you to sign in when trying to browse photos; doesn't seem independant

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#889

Post by busymom0 »

annadane wrote: post #887
busymom0 wrote: post #777

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other than Musk for Tesla and SpaceX, I can't think of any of the major companies who would really be impacted much by their CEO leaving. Maybe Zuck leaving FB might make a small difference but IG seems decently independent of him anyway.

Zuckerberg by all accounts bullied Kevin Systrom out of the company and now it prompts you to sign in when trying to browse photos; doesn't seem independant

Jack Dorsey did something similar too to Noah Glass which doesn't get talked about much:

https://youtu.be/p8N0xN0ihMA

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#890

Post by baud147258 »

Talanes wrote: post #865
63 wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference for me has always beem that Twitter is organized by person rather than by topic. In some ways that's good if I'm following someone because I care about them personally, but usually I follow people because I'm interested in a particular aspect of their work like art or announcements. In those cases, I don't want to hear about their political opinions or what their child did that week. I know you can fol…

Likes and Retweets are the big annoyances, IMO. If I'm following someone, it's because I want to see the content that they are consciously putting out, not just whatever they impulsively click a heart on. And unless you're a personal friend or a particularly interesting content aggregator, I probably don't care about your RTs either.

I've been mostly successful in removing likes from people I'm following by using (on the desktop) the ... > I'm not interested in this tweet > show fewer likes from X. Though sometime likes reappear and I have to reload the page once or twice to get a chronological timeline. Though that doesn't do anything about retweets.
Post reply on HN