Elon Musk: Officially a fraud and piece of shit. Official or unofficial war criminal?

[Neonmoon 38130]

57 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

This is GRHorn's new account right?

Would explain the staggering stupidity 

That is correct 

[956 Worldwide 35598]

Everyone: “Twitter’s kinda starting to suck, it’s getting taken over by dorks and loons and scammers and extremists.” 
 

No one: “Maybe a site created by Bitcoin enthusiasts could be a solution?” 

[atomheartbevo 90656]

4 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

At what point do those of you that hold strong negative beliefs about the corrosive impact of Elon’s Twitter decide to stop supporting it and leave the platform?

I haven't posted on it in quite a few months (since he threw open the doors and let the white supremacists/Holocaust deniers/etc. back), and have been ad-blocking on it for that same period.  So he's not getting revenue from me.

Speaking of, I check my email this morning, and the emailed twitter recommendations for one of my personal twitter accounts consists of catturd2, James Woods, and some Russian propagandist, followed by some UT/Longhorn athletics stuff, some Ukrainian stuff, and some history stuff.  I have blocked catturd2 and James Woods quite a while back after I started getting their recommendations in my emails (for no reason - I've never interacted with them in any way, don't go to their profiles, etc), but I still get their fucking tweets in my recommendations.  That's not a bug, that's Musk fucking around - in the past, my email recommendations were always from people/companies/events I followed/liked.

I would be completely off of it, but I'm still keeping around 10 or so accounts around that are tied to websites I maintain or contribute to because I don't want somebody else mimicking them (which already happens using knock-off twitter accounts) so I log in and check DMs once a week on them.  

Also, unfortunately some of the people/companies I interact with both personally and professionally still use it for the time being, although more and more are investigating alternate platforms, so I keep DMs open, but I've got pinned posts pointing to my websites/other social media accounts, and I've been looking into Medium, Substack, and email newsletters.  

Ironically, Musk fucking up twitter and shoving a bunch of unrelated shit into my recommendations, etc., and pissing off a lot of people has forced me to get off my ass and look at some other forms of communication with people who follow stuff I work on, and I've actually started a new revenue stream from an email newsletter, so I guess thanks Elon?

 

 

Edited April 23, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[HamsterHookah 112]

4 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

At what point do those of you that hold strong negative beliefs about the corrosive impact of Elon’s Twitter decide to stop supporting it and leave the platform?

 

Exactly. 

[HenryJames 67400]

[mdmost 44066]

[atomheartbevo 90656]

3 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

How are you accessing Twitter? I use the mobile app and haven’t been logged out once.

Web client.  It used to not be a problem - I could easily pull stuff up, search stuff, look at profiles, etc. without logging in.   I'm guessing they are trying to drive up statistics of some sort, or are trying to do more data collection.

3 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

Also, I haven’t seen a single email begging me for $8. 

It appears to be only on my accounts that were actually verified with the blue check before he took over (they were verified and tied to websites or a book/author profile). 

3 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

Maybe because no one really wants to?

Twitter may be only the 14th or 15th largest social media site in the world, but that's still hundreds of millions of accounts, so plenty of people actually do want to build a competitor, since even grabbing a small percentage of its audience means millions of people.

3 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

The only people really building one  out that I know of are people you probably don’t like, Bitcoiners.

Then you know very few people.  There's been thousands of would-be Tom Andersons, Zuckerburgs, and Dorseys since MySpace and then Facebook took off.  There are dozens/hundreds of attempts every year at making the next big social media platform, and some of them are even quite well-funded, but most of them go nowhere for a couple of reasons - either they suck for technical or interface reasons, or they don't have a hook that helps them to gain the necessary momentum, or they simply haven't been around long enough (the top 10 or so platforms have almost all been around for over a decade).

And having a hook doesn't necessarily mean it'll work - truth.social should have done better than it did with Trump, but most of his followers didn't follow him from FB or twitter (perhaps because it was so sudden instead of having grown organically for years).  If it was easy to make a list of what is needed to help a social media platform hit critical mass, everybody would be doing it.  

And the fact that twitter is only the 14th or 15th largest social media platform in the world means there's several social media platforms bigger than twitter that most of us in the US have never heard of, but they are all overseas  (China and India alone probably have half-a-dozen bigger than twitter that most of us have never heard of).

3 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

It’s a bunch of larping. For all of Elon and Twitter’s faults, it’s the best news aggregation site out there by a mile. 

Right now, it's definitely the best.  It's easy to use because in the past they kept it focused on doing just a few things and doing them well in the short form format, and it hit a critical mass many years ago.  Now that Musk is fucking with it constantly and allowing the quality to degrade and driving revenue/advertisers away, the door is opening up, especially as he's making noise about making twitter his fabled X.com "everything app" like WeChat or QQ.  WeChat and QQ work for what they do and are popular in Asia, but most of us don't want the "everything app" least of all, one run by Musk.

[ultimaton 2985]

 

[atomheartbevo 90656]

4 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

The best, most informative thread on this whole forum is 99% sourced by Twitter and the tweets are shared by the very same people here talking shit constantly about Elon. 

SurlyHorns.com exists because a daiquiri salesman we don't like took over ShaggyBevo.com.

So yeah, a lot of us are going to talk shit about a guy who took over a site that we liked and is trying to run it into the ground or suppress the very information on that thread.

[aggie08 21829]

Guys, is Twitter.com still up, or is it not? Game. Set. Match.

\Mullet Free

[Chopper 17432]

 

[atomheartbevo 90656]

"DonaldRudolpho" melted down the SpaceX reddit with this (can't find it now, so either they deleted or the comments were cleaned up)

 

[Chopper 17432]

Murdered by Mosk's Saudi financial partners, but stuck with the indignity of the mosktard blue check.

 

[atomheartbevo 90656]

5 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Murdered by Mosk's Saudi financial partners, but stuck with the indignity of the mosktard blue check.

 

It's even worse - because so many celebrities told him to fuck off, it appears he's giving any accounts with a million followers the blue check, so sorry Halle Berry, you don't make the cut.  Probably trying to give off the appearance that more people are buying them than actually are.

[texasdago 7771]

I made my account private, stopped tweeting and RTing Tweets.  I may like the occasional tweet making fun of Elon but my engagement is miniscule now.  I do enjoy blocking ads and morons.  Does blocking accounts somehow mess them up in some way? 

🤞

[Captain Ron 13133]

 

['stache 22145]

Isn’t Mastadon kinda confusing? If trump came make a Twitter clone why can’t some techy create a new Twitter that operates like the old Twitter?

[Francisco 2.0 32602]

 

 

[atomheartbevo 90656]

Of course Elon fans don't believe in the moon landings.

[HenryJames 67400]

Marketing 101 is getting celebrities to come out and say that they refuse to use your product.

[Celery Man 21098]

10 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

If you are creating content and/or viewing ads, you’re putting money in Elon’s pocket.

*taking fewer dollars out of Elon's pocket

41 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Isn’t Mastadon kinda confusing? If trump came make a Twitter clone why can’t some techy create a new Twitter that operates like the old Twitter?

mastodon is for geeks and post is for nerds.

mastodon people explaining how simple it is - 

Post when someone uses it to make a joke - 

 

it's a hard thing to do, although I really do think that if things continue on their current trajectory it will happen.

[Lurch 5950]

Mastodon is not complicated. It just takes work to build a feed since there’s not an algorithm force feeding you content from people you don’t follow.

[Celery Man 21098]

[atomheartbevo 90656]

58 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

it's a hard thing to do, although I really do think that if things continue on their current trajectory it will happen.

There are major players that would get noticed in a heartbeat if/when they make a run at it - Facebook/Meta with Instagram or WhatsApp, SnapChat, Pinterest, Discord, Amazon with Twitch, Google with YouTube.  Even Reddit.  Microsoft and Apple would be the wildcards, although maybe not Microsoft so much.

We know Meta is playing around with it and they have the resources and they can piggyback off of Facebook proper for the world's largest user base, and have Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram that they can tap into for developers and features.  They have a ready-to-go advertising platform. They can host it themselves.

We know Google has tried the social media thing in the past (and they are technically in second place for social media platforms with YouTube) and they have a built-in ready-to-go userbase that they can tap into through YouTube, Gmail and all of their Meet, Play, Voice, Chrome, and a whole shitload of other apps.  They have a ready-to-go advertising platform as well (the whole company is a fucking advertising platform).  They can host it themselves.

Amazon has been building up their social media profile with the gamers through Twitch and Prime Gaming, and they've got a social media platform with devoted/addicted users that's dedicated to their original core business of books - GoodReads and they've done things elsewhere to expand their reach (buying the largest ecommerce platform in the Middle East).  For them, it's an easy monetization since they'd literally be using it to sell their own stuff and hosting it themselves.  They also have hardware to push it on.  And they could model it on TenCent - one of the biggest video game developers in the world, plus one of the largest retailers in China, and if you added up their user bases of their various social media platforms, possibly bigger than Facebook.

Microsoft may not be that much of a wildcard - they own Linked-In with its 900 million users, services like Teams, Skype, Mojang (Minecraft), and they own an advertising platform (Quantative?) and more importantly, besides Mojang, they own two of the larger video game companies (or will) - ZeniMax/Bethesda and Activision Blizzard, both of which have portals of a sort and a presence on all major hardware platforms as well as social media platforms.  They'd be hosting it themselves.

Apple has the money to burn, the hardware platform that seems to be everywhere whether it's a phone, tablet, or computer, the services, a massive pool of developers, but social media is messy as fuck and is not about selling hardware, (something that's important to them based on their acquisitions and product launches).

SnapChat, Pinterest, Discord, and Reddit could tap into their existing user and developer bases, they have existing advertising infrastructure, but they don't have the money the ones above do, and a fuckup could impact them more than those companies above (any number of past Google or Microsoft failures could have sunk those last four companies).  Their user bases are extremely niche as well (maybe not as much with Reddit, but if Reddit wanted to dabble in the short-form social media platform, they could have bought tumblr a few years back).

Edited April 24, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[atomheartbevo 90656]

 

[NoName 17156]

+

+

 

[HamsterHookah 112]

11 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

There are major players that would get noticed in a heartbeat if/when they make a run at it - Facebook/Meta with Instagram or WhatsApp, SnapChat, Pinterest, Discord, Amazon with Twitch, Google with YouTube.  Even Reddit.  Microsoft and Apple would be the wildcards, although maybe not Microsoft so much.

We know Meta is playing around with it and they have the resources and they can piggyback off of Facebook proper for the world's largest user base, and have Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram that they can tap into for developers and features.  They have a ready-to-go advertising platform. They can host it themselves.

We know Google has tried the social media thing in the past (and they are technically in second place for social media platforms with YouTube) and they have a built-in ready-to-go userbase that they can tap into through YouTube, Gmail and all of their Meet, Play, Voice, Chrome, and a whole shitload of other apps.  They have a ready-to-go advertising platform as well (the whole company is a fucking advertising platform).  They can host it themselves.

Amazon has been building up their social media profile with the gamers through Twitch and Prime Gaming, and they've got a social media platform with devoted/addicted users that's dedicated to their original core business of books - GoodReads and they've done things elsewhere to expand their reach (buying the largest ecommerce platform in the Middle East).  For them, it's an easy monetization since they'd literally be using it to sell their own stuff and hosting it themselves.  They also have hardware to push it on.  And they could model it on TenCent - one of the biggest video game developers in the world, plus one of the largest retailers in China, and if you added up their user bases of their various social media platforms, possibly bigger than Facebook.

Microsoft may not be that much of a wildcard - they own Linked-In with its 900 million users, services like Teams, Skype, Mojang (Minecraft), and they own an advertising platform (Quantative?) and more importantly, besides Mojang, they own two of the larger video game companies (or will) - ZeniMax/Bethesda and Activision Blizzard, both of which have portals of a sort and a presence on all major hardware platforms as well as social media platforms.  They'd be hosting it themselves.

Apple has the money to burn, the hardware platform that seems to be everywhere whether it's a phone, tablet, or computer, the services, a massive pool of developers, but social media is messy as fuck and is not about selling hardware, (something that's important to them based on their acquisitions and product launches).

SnapChat, Pinterest, Discord, and Reddit could tap into their existing user and developer bases, they have existing advertising infrastructure, but they don't have the money the ones above do, and a fuckup could impact them more than those companies above (any number of past Google or Microsoft failures could have sunk those last four companies).  Their user bases are extremely niche as well (maybe not as much with Reddit, but if Reddit wanted to dabble in the short-form social media platform, they could have bought tumblr a few years back).

You missed the two obvious ones that are closer to Twitter than anything you mentioned:

Substack with their newest release has a curated feed sort of thing (hence the Twitter war on substack) and the two Instagram founders launched their thing with curated news feed functionality like two weeks ago. I think it’s called Artifact.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

so are his fanbois pissed off that he went from 'power to the people, no more elitists with rarified status on my site, everybody should pay!' to 'hey elites, sorry about the miscommunication, i'm gifting you rarified status on my site for free, but everybody else has to pay'?

 

[SydneyCarton 49510]

On 4/21/2023 at 6:24 PM, Chopper said:

Even some of the fanbois are mad at Elno

 

That Joey Mannarino guy, I had a look at his twitter from some other tweet of his that was posted on this thread or another one somewhere. All of you will be shocked to learn that his profile picture he uses is about as accurate as what you'd see on a dating website. Specifically he's about 50 lbs heaver in real life than how he presents himself online. 

[NoName 17156]

9 minutes ago, HamsterHookah said:

You missed the two obvious ones that are closer to Twitter than anything you mentioned:

Substack with their newest release has a curated feed sort of thing (hence the Twitter war on substack) and the two Instagram founders launched their thing with curated news feed functionality like two weeks ago. I think it’s called Artifact.

tell me you haven't used Artifact without telling me you haven't used it ever or know anything about it. it's much closer to TikTok than Twitter. they just added account profiles recently and it's pretty much a ghost town on comments. it's an AI-driven text-based news app. i use it daily. it ain't twitter.

Substack Notes is like twitter. Post.News is like twitter. Mastadon and the fediverse is like twitter. Nostr is like twitter. Bluesky is kind of like twitter.

Artifact is literally nothing like twitter. here is what it looks like:

[Chopper 17432]

16 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

It's even worse - because so many celebrities told him to fuck off, it appears he's giving any accounts with a million followers the blue check, so sorry Halle Berry, you don't make the cut.  Probably trying to give off the appearance that more people are buying them than actually are.

This weekend was one giant step for mankind toward twitter bankruptcy.

11 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

We know Meta is playing around with it and they have the resources and they can piggyback off of Facebook proper for the world's largest user base, and have Messenger, WhatsApp, and Instagram that they can tap into for developers and features.  They have a ready-to-go advertising platform. They can host it themselves.

Late last week Ed Zitron published a long post about the many fails of Zuckerberg. He built facebook, the original of which wasn't a business. He purchased instagram and has managed to not kill it yet. Other than dwindling insta meta makes money from advertising and massive invasions of privacy of its users. They've started so many new business and failed at all of them, including copycats -- sometimes multiple -- of every single competing platform. The entire article makes for quite a read. I thought about posting it here beause there are some parallels to what mosk is doing with twitter.

 

 

[GoPokes83 2248]

DGAF about Elon one way or another, but I think it’s hilarious that people who spent millions of dollars and untold years building their brand are so offended at having to throw out 96 bucks a year to keep some random jackass from posing as them on social media and damaging that investment.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

1 minute ago, GoPokes83 said:

DGAF about Elon one way or another, but I think it’s hilarious that people who spent millions of dollars and untold years building their brand are so offended at having to throw out 96 bucks a year to keep some random jackass from posing as them on social media and damaging that investment.

Why don’t you take a lap, chief.

[Chopper 17432]

16 minutes ago, NoName said:

Substack Notes is like twitter. Post.News is like twitter. Mastadon and the fediverse is like twitter. Nostr is like twitter. Bluesky is kind of like twitter.

Artifact is literally nothing like twitter. here is what it looks like:

Do you think one of 'em has a shot at capturing the 'legacy blue checkmarks' to build what was once the best of twitter?

I think as far as the major news orgs go, NYT, WaPo, probably others, they came to regret ever getting involved with twitter and will be slow to do so with an upstart unless they do some deep analysis and decide it's in their business interest. Using Twitter wasn't really in their business interest, though it was in the interest of some of their individual reporters who were able to build a following.

 

[Chopper 17432]

I don't give a fuck about okie state pokies one way or the other but I have something I've been thinking about for days and days about their psychotic head corch and would like to post on one of their message boards. Do they have one or do I just search for message boards for meth using inbreds in oklahoma?

edit - please excuse my redundant redunancy

Edited April 24, 2023 by Chopper

[Francisco 2.0 32602]

38 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

so are his fanbois pissed off that he went from 'power to the people, no more elitists with rarified status on my site, everybody should pay!' to 'hey elites, sorry about the miscommunication, i'm gifting you rarified status on my site for free, but everybody else has to pay'?

 

 

Oh, there's a few pockets of confusion, but by and large, they don't have the cognitive skills necessary to understand what exactly transpired.  Elon does something, so praise Elon.

Elon could announce tomorrow that going forward, it will be $80 a month and these suckers will continue to pay up, because "free speech".

 

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 90656]

1 minute ago, Chopper said:

Do you think one of 'em has a shot at capturing the 'legacy blue checkmarks' to build what was once the best of twitter?

On my post, I left out Substack, Post.News, and Mastodon and a few others, because I don't think they can hit that kind of critical mass needed anytime soon - they need a few more years to build up the user base (and Post.News is almost building itself on the fly, but there are parts I like). But then again, they don't have to chip away much of a percentage of twitter users to succeed in the long run, since even millions are enough.

The ones I think could actually replace twitter within a year or two for a lot of people already have that critical mass/user base, and it's really only Meta (Facebook) and Google (YouTube) because not only do they have the resources, they already are the two largest social media platforms, and so it's just a matter of putting out a twitter-like app that hooks into their current user base accounts.

Like the article @Chopper mentioned, Zuckerberg has to pull his head out of his ass and stop trying to reinvent the future every year or two (he's spent or going to spend a billion on VR for instance, but going about it wrong).  With that said, between Messenger, Instagram, and WhatsApp, the pieces and developers are there

1 minute ago, Chopper said:

I think as far as the major news orgs go, NYT, WaPo, probably others, they came to regret ever getting involved with twitter and will be slow to do so with an upstart unless they do some deep analysis and decide it's in their business interest. Using Twitter wasn't really in their business interest, though it was in the interest of some of their individual reporters who were able to build a following.

That's also why I think Meta and Google have the biggest chance in the long term, assuming they put out a twitter-like app, because the companies and employees you mention (major news orgs) already have a comfortable relationship with Facebook, YouTube, etc. and FB and YouTube are safe for advertisers.

Mastodon can pick up the geekier folks (and some of those folks might have found their way there even if Musk wasn't wrecking twitter), and it's definitely benefiting. Post.News is probably picking up some hardcore newsy/posting folks who really want to be done with twitter for whatever reasons they have, but there's a whole shitload of people waiting for The One True Replacement, or who don't care enough until the lights start going out.

[Captain Ron 13133]

20 minutes ago, Chopper said:

This weekend was one giant step for mankind toward twitter bankruptcy.

Late last week Ed Zitron published a long post about the many fails of Zuckerberg. He built facebook, the original of which wasn't a business. He purchased instagram and has managed to not kill it yet. Other than dwindling insta meta makes money from advertising and massive invasions of privacy of its users. They've started so many new business and failed at all of them, including copycats -- sometimes multiple -- of every single competing platform. The entire article makes for quite a read. I thought about posting it here beause there are some parallels to what mosk is doing with twitter.

 

 

He's not wrong. Zuck has done nothing innovative ever.

Facebook was a stolen idea

Every new product was a purchase/acquisition

[HamsterHookah 112]

34 minutes ago, NoName said:

tell me you haven't used Artifact without telling me you haven't used it ever or know anything about it. it's much closer to TikTok than Twitter. they just added account profiles recently and it's pretty much a ghost town on comments. it's an AI-driven text-based news app. i use it daily. it ain't twitter.

Substack Notes is like twitter. Post.News is like twitter. Mastadon and the fediverse is like twitter. Nostr is like twitter. Bluesky is kind of like twitter.

Artifact is literally nothing like twitter. here is what it looks like:

You are right, I don't use it (or ever intend to). I am anti-social media except Surly, which is why I think the downfall of Twitter is hilarious and good and (chaotic good).

I was referencing the April 11th release, of which Tech Crunch outlined it was an update to add functionality and compete with Twitter:

Quote

The feature’s addition makes Artifact more of a social network around news, rather than just the personalized news reading experience it offered at launch. It also makes Artifact more competitive with other places where people share news and information, including larger platforms like Facebook, Instagram and even Twitter

(article here:https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/11/artifact-the-news-aggregator-from-instagrams-co-founders-adds-a-social-discussions-feature/)

[Captain Ron 13133]

19 minutes ago, GoPokes83 said:

DGAF about Elon one way or another, but I think it’s hilarious that people who spent millions of dollars and untold years building their brand are so offended at having to throw out 96 bucks a year to keep some random jackass from posing as them on social media and damaging that investment.

You could have just said "I don't understand Twitter" and saved yourself 49 words.

[HamsterHookah 112]

1 minute ago, Captain Ron said:

You could have just said "I don't understand Twitter" and saved yourself 49 words.

Old Twitter died when they increased the character limits. New Twitter is full of Californian's moving in and raising property prices.

[atomheartbevo 90656]

3 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

He's not wrong. Zuck has done nothing innovative ever.

Facebook was a stolen idea

Every new product was a purchase/acquisition

Yep.  Watching him fart around with VR and metaverse stuff, it's like he read some articles from 2003 about how VR and Second Life would change everything, without comprehending why that stuff hasn't fully hit the mainstream in the subsequent 20 years or so (VR is getting there though, but not because of Zuckerberg or Meta).  Which is ironic, since he bought a solid VR platform.

[NoName 17156]

2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Do you think one of 'em has a shot at capturing the 'legacy blue checkmarks' to build what was once the best of twitter?

I think as far as the major news orgs go, NYT, WaPo, probably others, they came to regret ever getting involved with twitter and will be slow to do so with an upstart unless they do some deep analysis and decide it's in their business interest. Using Twitter wasn't really in their business interest, though it was in the interest of some of their individual reporters who were able to build a following.

no, i do not.

but equally i don't care about most of the blue checks / celebrity folks. i follow a ton of people that went over to mastadon, and that's good for the most part. i'm on post, and it's ok. i'm sad that things like weird baseball, sports, niche tech stuff, SMEs, fun and good bots, and everything else that was good about twitter is now in the wind.

TWTR is going to be a long death and i don't think there is a single home where those folks will congregate...they will just fade away. it's absolutely going to be a business case study in how not to ever handle anything involving a business.

everything with how twitter has been handled is just so dumb. so, so, so dumb.

• misunderstanding of the product.
• misunderstanding of what had value with the product.
• misunderstanding of the technological issues the product had and therefore how to fix them.
• misunderstanding of why people used the product and why it was used so often.
• misunderstanding of what needed to be done, big picture, to improve the product.
• misunderstanding of what needed to be done in the details to improve the product.
• misunderstanding of the value third parties brought to the product.
• misunderstanding of why 280 characters was reasonable.
• misunderstanding of pricing at the individual, corporate, dataset and API levels.
• misunderstanding of the way it made money.

he really had a fundamental misunderstanding of why people liked and used the product. he thought that TWTR needed to be "fixed" when it just needed to be improved. huge difference.

literally, all he had to do was trim the fat, not run of all the advertisers, introduce a new verified level (call it green checks) that worked in conjunction with the existing verification (blue checks) and used a minimal KYC to identify real people vs bots, work to reduce spam and people would have happily stayed, brought their friends, posted a ton (making him more money), and Twitter would have been another "look how smart he is!" situation.

[atomheartbevo 90656]

12 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Oh, there's a few pockets of confusion, but by and large, they don't have the cognitive skills necessary to understand what exactly transpired.  Elon does something, so praise Elon.

Elon could announce tomorrow that going forward, it will be $80 a month and these suckers will continue to pay up, because "free speech".

Fanboys don't get it.

[Brian Fantana 6868]

27 minutes ago, GoPokes83 said:

DGAF about Elon one way or another, but I think it’s hilarious that people who spent millions of dollars and untold years building their brand are so offended at having to throw out 96 bucks a year to keep some random jackass from posing as them on social media and damaging that investment.

Take a lap and maybe go back to defending Gundy's OAN shirt or whatever the fuck you're actually halfway knowledgeable about, dumbass

[Chopper 17432]

17 minutes ago, NoName said:

everything with how twitter has been handled is just so dumb. so, so, so dumb.

• misunderstanding of the product.
• misunderstanding of what had value with the product.
• misunderstanding of the technological issues the product had and therefore how to fix them.
• misunderstanding of why people used the product and why it was used so often.
• misunderstanding of what needed to be done, big picture, to improve the product.
• misunderstanding of what needed to be done in the details to improve the product.
• misunderstanding of the value third parties brought to the product.
• misunderstanding of why 280 characters was reasonable.
• misunderstanding of pricing at the individual, corporate, dataset and API levels.
• misunderstanding of the way it made money.

he really had a fundamental misunderstanding of why people liked and used the product. he thought that TWTR needed to be "fixed" when it just needed to be improved. huge difference.

literally, all he had to do was trim the fat, not run of all the advertisers, introduce a new verified level (call it green checks) that worked in conjunction with the existing verification (blue checks) and used a minimal KYC to identify real people vs bots, work to reduce spam and people would have happily stayed, brought their friends, posted a ton (making him more money), and Twitter would have been another "look how smart he is!" situation.

tbf you omitted, "being an overly emotional twat and getting locked into a deal at a premium price with absolutely no exit ramp because you and you alone considered yourself too smart to need a M&A lawyer"

It's funny that the one thing people clamored for - editing of posts - has either become irrelevant or forgotten, I'm not sure which.

[NoName 17156]

2 minutes ago, Chopper said:

tbf you omitted, "being an overly emotional twat and getting locked into a deal at a premium price with absolutely no exit ramp because you and you alone considered yourself too smart to need a M&A lawyer"

It's funny that the one thing people clamored for - editing of posts - has either become irrelevant or forgotten, I'm not sure which.

i also left off "waived due diligence in a $44 billion purchase"

 

[Chopper 17432]

32 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

That's also why I think Meta and Google have the biggest chance in the long term, assuming they put out a twitter-like app, because the companies and employees you mention (major news orgs) already have a comfortable relationship with Facebook, YouTube, etc. and FB and YouTube are safe for advertisers.

 

Hmmm but didn't FB fuck over news orgs in a major way with 'pivot to video' and lies about metrics? Nobody in media with any memory would trust them, would they?

Youtube's ads seem like the dregs of society, kinda like the ads you'd expect to see on faux news or the CW network. I wonder if google itself would get back into building a social network after their one attempt (only one I think) famously flamed out.

[Proust Bag 20]

I wish I had some of Elon’s fuck you money. 

[Celery Man 21098]

59 minutes ago, Chopper said:

This weekend was one giant step for mankind toward twitter bankruptcy.

Late last week Ed Zitron published a long post about the many fails of Zuckerberg. He built facebook, the original of which wasn't a business. He purchased instagram and has managed to not kill it yet. Other than dwindling insta meta makes money from advertising and massive invasions of privacy of its users. They've started so many new business and failed at all of them, including copycats -- sometimes multiple -- of every single competing platform. The entire article makes for quite a read. I thought about posting it here beause there are some parallels to what mosk is doing with twitter.

 

 

in "Thinking Fast and Slow", Daniel Kahneman spends some time dunking on business books and "Good to Great" specifically (which explains that "Level 5 Leadership" is one of the keys to sustained success, and is generally a dumb fucking book). If I'm remembering correctly his criticism is generally that none of these books account for luck, or how noise is exaggerated in very small samples.  The human mind is strongly predisposed for creating causal connections and rational stories even where they don't exist, and especially in American culture that means attributing business success mostly to strong leadership and almost not at all to luck. Not that creating something like Facebook is all luck, but it's certainly not 5% luck.

Anyways, that seems to be making some form of that argument about Zuck which i find believable, especially given that he never had the idea in the first place.

Has there been any major social media platform that was created by a tech giant (rather than becoming a tech giant or being acquired by a tech giant)?