Elon Muskiedoodle

[O Really]

Musk personally gets all the press, but you have to wonder if he has some professional advisors of some sort to provide enough information to make decisions.

You think that anyone who tells him what he doesn't want to hear are going to be around for the long term?

One would think not. But we also have to consider that he's got a couple of very successful complex operations that would seem not to be run on a flighty frivolous seat of the pants basis. I'd have to suspect that he's largely playing a role just short of cosplay, but there's another non-public side. And if he really is what he appears, and he really is making all the decisions on Twitter on a by-guess-by-golly-let's-tear-it-all-down basis, then I have no idea why there's anybody at all left in the Twitter building today.

[Vrede too]

I feel like Musk's hubris is gonna come back and bite him in the ass. Maybe it already has with this Twitter fiasco. The dude's got the character of a fourteen year old. Should be interesting to watch.

It's all made funnier by the fact that he essentially predicted the fiasco. His original play for Twitter was really just a feint to frighten the Board and executives and he canceled the unserious effort as being folly. But wait, he'd carried the "joke" a step too far and a judge ordered him to buy Twitter for $44B. Opps, what does he do with an albatross that he knew was an albatross before being forced to shell out billions?

[GoCubsGo]

I feel like Musk's hubris is gonna come back and bite him in the ass. Maybe it already has with this Twitter fiasco. The dude's got the character of a fourteen year old. Should be interesting to watch.

It's all made funnier by the fact that he essentially predicted the fiasco. His original play for Twitter was really just a feint to frighten the Board and executives and he canceled the unserious effort as being folly. But wait, he'd carried the "joke" a step too far and a judge ordered him to buy Twitter for $44B. Opps, what does he do with an albatross that he knew was an albatross before being forced to shell out billions?

IIRC, he could've walked away for a billion or so....

[GoCubsGo]

Pay 44 billion, claim it's not profitable, screw it up totally and alienate employees, ex employees to be and the "product" ( users). What's the endgame?

[GoCubsGo]

[GoCubsGo]

When you go to war with your own social media company.

[Vrede too]

When you go to war with your own social media company.

Top reply:

I came back to Twitter because of free speech

You just want to be racist outloud

So, racist things are the free speech you were missing in your life? You can go outside and say it wherever you want. But that may lead you to actual consequences, like an ass kickin, huh? So better to say it here, where you are anonymous? Except you're not.

"Protecting their brand" is just an excuse for advertiser to use their clout to enforce the ideological demands of activists that decision makers at those advertisers are sympathetic to.

Right, because corporations are bastions of Radical Leftists.

thats what they have become, yes

mate, finding a bunch of white ppl screeching the n word distasteful and/or not wanting to associate your brand with it for commercial reasons is not radical leftism.

Again, "brand safety" is a euphemism for using corporate power to limit the range of acceptable speech and thought online to serve authoritarian leftist ends

It has nothing to do with money.

How many times do we need to explain it? The decision makers at these companies have ideological sympathy with the demands of the activist groups, i.e. they want assurances that Musk's takeover won't threaten the Left's continued control of information on Twitter.

They are not worried about racial slurs and holocaust deniers; they have always been on Twitter and they will always be on Twitter.

They're worried about their ability to do things in the future like completely censor the Hunter Biden laptop story a month before the election.

yeah, far left is when some white ppl find it distasteful and gross when other white ppl call black ppl the n-word. That's in Marx's critique of hegel's doctrine of the state. Obvs.

[O Really]

Article here about Musk's "chaotic" layoffs - https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/insi ... 02572.html

Comments, however, are terrifying. How did people in the US get so supportive of authoritarianism in business as well as government? How did they get so accepting of anything a rich and famous-y person says. For example:

I suspect calling most of them "workers" would be stretching the meaning of the word. I wonder how many worked from home or felt entitled. I feel sure he did his research and just trimmed the fat.

No, he clearly did NOT do his research. He specifically waived the due diligence process normal for any acquisition, and he hasn't been owner long enough and doesn't have enough of his own team in place to do ANY kind of credible operational or staffing review.

And the comments are full of people who undoubtedly couldn't name three job titles in all of Twitter raving on about how worthless the employees were anyway and most of their wrath seems to be over the "censors" who "destroy free speech". I'm guessing - guessing - that it's all connected to Trump's getting booted. Normal people can't possibly believe that it's a private company's job to "protect free (racist/hate) speech" or that arbitrarily cutting half the employees in a company upon acquisition is normal in any contemporary business setting, can they?

The country is effin' doomed.

[Vrede too]

... The country is effin' doomed.

I think it's all Cult .45. If in a different timeline he hadn't been banned and was whining about the "lies and threats" against him, these same crybabies would be calling for tighter decency standards.

[billy.pilgrim]

Article here about Musk's "chaotic" layoffs - https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/insi ... 02572.html

Comments, however, are terrifying. How did people in the US get so supportive of authoritarianism in business as well as government? How did they get so accepting of anything a rich and famous-y person says. For example:

I suspect calling most of them "workers" would be stretching the meaning of the word. I wonder how many worked from home or felt entitled. I feel sure he did his research and just trimmed the fat.

No, he clearly did NOT do his research. He specifically waived the due diligence process normal for any acquisition, and he hasn't been owner long enough and doesn't have enough of his own team in place to do ANY kind of credible operational or staffing review.

And the comments are full of people who undoubtedly couldn't name three job titles in all of Twitter raving on about how worthless the employees were anyway and most of their wrath seems to be over the "censors" who "destroy free speech". I'm guessing - guessing - that it's all connected to Trump's getting booted. Normal people can't possibly believe that it's a private company's job to "protect free (racist/hate) speech" or that arbitrarily cutting half the employees in a company upon acquisition is normal in any contemporary business setting, can they?

The country is effin' doomed.

I can't find the quote in the article. Who said that?

[O Really]

Article here about Musk's "chaotic" layoffs - https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/insi ... 02572.html

Comments, however, are terrifying. How did people in the US get so supportive of authoritarianism in business as well as government? How did they get so accepting of anything a rich and famous-y person says. For example:

I suspect calling most of them "workers" would be stretching the meaning of the word. I wonder how many worked from home or felt entitled. I feel sure he did his research and just trimmed the fat.

No, he clearly did NOT do his research. He specifically waived the due diligence process normal for any acquisition, and he hasn't been owner long enough and doesn't have enough of his own team in place to do ANY kind of credible operational or staffing review.

And the comments are full of people who undoubtedly couldn't name three job titles in all of Twitter raving on about how worthless the employees were anyway and most of their wrath seems to be over the "censors" who "destroy free speech". I'm guessing - guessing - that it's all connected to Trump's getting booted. Normal people can't possibly believe that it's a private company's job to "protect free (racist/hate) speech" or that arbitrarily cutting half the employees in a company upon acquisition is normal in any contemporary business setting, can they?

The country is effin' doomed.

I can't find the quote in the article. Who said that?

In the comments.

[GoCubsGo]

So apparently celebrity types are changing their handle to Elon Musk and tweeting democratic or unkind type things.

[Whack9]

Seems like Twitter's been getting a lot of bad press after the Musk takeover. First you've got Elon Musk himself who has a penchant for behaving unpredictably. Then you've got the massive layoffs after his takeover which surely will have some ill effect. Then the subsequent likely brain drain as more senior employees see the writing on the wall. Then you've got advertisers pulling out, and Musk doubling down and hreatening to "name and shame" them.

Now, I don't own a social media company, but I have a hunch that this is not how you run a business that largely depends on ad revenue to make money.

Comment I read elsewhere on the internet: Truth social is a shitty knockoff of Twitter. It's like Eloj Musk is trying to make Twitter a shitty knockoff of Truth social.

[neoplacebo]

All I can figure is it's some kind of trickle down supply side voodoo witch hunt. Something that should never happen. He should have a daughter named Dusk.

The whole thing is a shit deal. I'd have bought an island or a planet or something. What a dumbass.

[GoCubsGo]

Let Free Speech Reign!

[GoCubsGo]

This is going well.

[Whack9]

Twitter reportedly asking some staff to return that we're "laid off by mistake"

https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch ... -back/amp/

Also - supposedly one of the metrics they used to determine productivity and who was going to get laid off was lines of code someone wrote. Now, anyone that's ever worked as a dev knows this is an absolutely stupid metric. The worst developers will likely have more lines of code due to unnecessarily duplicating code due to laziness, over-engineering functionality rather than finding the simplest, most elegant solution, and working on more mundane tasks.

[GoCubsGo]

Twitter reportedly asking some staff to return that we're "laid off by mistake"

https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch ... -back/amp/

Also - supposedly one of the metrics they used to determine productivity and who was going to get laid off was lines of code someone wrote. Now, anyone that's ever worked as a dev knows this is an absolutely stupid metric. The worst developers will likely have more lines of code due to unnecessarily duplicating code due to laziness, over-engineering functionality rather than finding the simplest, most elegant solution, and working on more mundane tasks.

He might have to give his genius trophy gack.

Musk and his team have promised to build things like attaching long-form text to tweets and a new version of TweetDeck. According to tweets from a former employee, multiple people from these teams who were working on these features were fired. What’s more, the new Twitter CEO also promised to build a paywall by feature with a set of publishers days after it ended a similar program that was part of the Twitter Blue subscription.

[O Really]

Practically every company has some people that may not be necessary, or whom are less productive than they could be. But nobody in a company does literally nothing. So every person that gets fired today was doing something yesterday that they won't do tomorrow. So if Musk cuts half the workforce, pretty much half of whatever was getting done yesterday won't be done tomorrow. Even if you look at it by department, and say you can fire everybody in the Ethics department because you don't want anybody working on Ethics, it still creates a disruption. Departments don't work in vacuums. Oversimplified example: you've got a policy that says a person can't do X without approval of Department Y. But everybody in Department Y is fired, so can you do X or not? Does the departure of the department nullify all principles of policy? Is there another approval source? Or is everyone left to decide willy-nilly for themselves whether to do X?

[Whack9]

When you go to war with your own social media company.

Top reply:

I came back to Twitter because of free speech

You just want to be racist outloud

So, racist things are the free speech you were missing in your life? You can go outside and say it wherever you want. But that may lead you to actual consequences, like an ass kickin, huh? So better to say it here, where you are anonymous? Except you're not.

"Protecting their brand" is just an excuse for advertiser to use their clout to enforce the ideological demands of activists that decision makers at those advertisers are sympathetic to.

Right, because corporations are bastions of Radical Leftists.

thats what they have become, yes

mate, finding a bunch of white ppl screeching the n word distasteful and/or not wanting to associate your brand with it for commercial reasons is not radical leftism.

Again, "brand safety" is a euphemism for using corporate power to limit the range of acceptable speech and thought online to serve authoritarian leftist ends

It has nothing to do with money.

How many times do we need to explain it? The decision makers at these companies have ideological sympathy with the demands of the activist groups, i.e. they want assurances that Musk's takeover won't threaten the Left's continued control of information on Twitter.

They are not worried about racial slurs and holocaust deniers; they have always been on Twitter and they will always be on Twitter.

They're worried about their ability to do things in the future like completely censor the Hunter Biden laptop story a month before the election.

yeah, far left is when some white ppl find it distasteful and gross when other white ppl call black ppl the n-word. That's in Marx's critique of hegel's doctrine of the state. Obvs.

In regards to "free speech" being violated when advertisers pull out - a company's goal is to make money. If something threatens that, ie a toxic forum on the internet, or the potential to be associated with such, the company is likely going to sever ties to be safe. For such a supposed smart businessman, this simple fact seems to be lost on Elon Musk.

Politically charged or controversial associations = less of a market for your product. These choices aren't being made because of political leanings, they're being made to keep as large of a market as possible or their products and avoid any negative publicity. Also the fact that they don't investors pulling out. Once that ball gets rolling it's hard to stop and recover.

Fucking duh.