4 ms·

The value of the business tanked due to Musks poor decisions. The value of twitter didnt drop because a worker didnt add more unit tests. Actually not doing it

The value of the business tanked due to Musks poor decisions. The value of twitter didnt drop because a worker didnt add more unit tests. Actually not doing it may be the reason it’s not bankrupt yet. If bro wouldnt have run his mouth like the baby he is it would have skyrocketed.

zeroCalories 3y ago
It's still pretty funny seeing people cope about Twitter. Turns out you don't need that many engineers for a feature complete product.
- dottjt 3y ago
  That might be so, but are those engineers being worked into the ground to make it happen?
  - peteradio 3y ago
    Make what happen? Apply security patches? Engineers aren't needed to push the electrons around the computers, that happens automatically.
- grotted 3y ago
  I'm not an engineer, but...Twitter doesn't seem to be doing all that well.
- svaha1728 3y ago
  Those in power seizing control of a product once it’s created is a timeless story. See the Prague clock tower or Daedalus the Labyrinth builder who was imprisoned there by King Minos. Not a new story, or a particularly wise business decision.
- absoluteunit1 3y ago
  I don’t have much experience (4 years as a full time dev; FAANG and some medium sized startups) but honestly this is the truth. Some of the projects at these companies are so over bloated and redundant that if a company wanted to save money, they can easily fire a lot of folks, keep the necessary teams for the money making products and go into maintenance mode to keep the existing cash cows going
light_hue_1 3y ago
Yes that's exactly why their value dropped. Because value isn't the present value of the business. It's the future competitiveness and innovation they bring to the table. Twitter has none of that anymore. There's no hope for growth, a new product, etc.
- mrangle 3y ago
  Exactly why the value dropped was advertiser pullout due to a partisan pressure campaign. Which was not a free campaign in terms of political currency.
Paul-Craft 3y ago
He's definitely doing a good job showing that the easiest way to create a $10B company is to start with a $43B company, that's for sure.
lapcat 3y ago
> it would have skyrocketed How so? Costs were cut, but cutting costs doesn't do anything to increase gross revenue, nor does it do anything to increase the user base. You can't just cut your way to making a profit on a $44 billion investment.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

zeroCalories 3y ago

It's still pretty funny seeing people cope about Twitter. Turns out you don't need that many engineers for a feature complete product.

dottjt 3y ago
That might be so, but are those engineers being worked into the ground to make it happen?
- peteradio 3y ago
  Make what happen? Apply security patches? Engineers aren't needed to push the electrons around the computers, that happens automatically.
grotted 3y ago
I'm not an engineer, but...Twitter doesn't seem to be doing all that well.
svaha1728 3y ago
Those in power seizing control of a product once it’s created is a timeless story. See the Prague clock tower or Daedalus the Labyrinth builder who was imprisoned there by King Minos. Not a new story, or a particularly wise business decision.
absoluteunit1 3y ago
I don’t have much experience (4 years as a full time dev; FAANG and some medium sized startups) but honestly this is the truth. Some of the projects at these companies are so over bloated and redundant that if a company wanted to save money, they can easily fire a lot of folks, keep the necessary teams for the money making products and go into maintenance mode to keep the existing cash cows going

light_hue_1 3y ago

Yes that's exactly why their value dropped. Because value isn't the present value of the business. It's the future competitiveness and innovation they bring to the table. Twitter has none of that anymore. There's no hope for growth, a new product, etc.

mrangle 3y ago
Exactly why the value dropped was advertiser pullout due to a partisan pressure campaign. Which was not a free campaign in terms of political currency.

Paul-Craft 3y ago

He's definitely doing a good job showing that the easiest way to create a $10B company is to start with a $43B company, that's for sure.

lapcat 3y ago

> it would have skyrocketed How so? Costs were cut, but cutting costs doesn't do anything to increase gross revenue, nor does it do anything to increase the user base. You can't just cut your way to making a profit on a $44 billion investment.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]