10 ms·
There referring to the people who claimed that Twitter would break down following the large scale firings. Every time Twitter went done for a little bit after t
by gonzobonzo 2y ago
There referring to the people who claimed that Twitter would break down following the large scale firings. Every time Twitter went done for a little bit after that, lots of comments here would pop up claiming that the Twitter site would get worse and worse and eventually break apart because of the firings (see the whole discussion here[1], for example). People said Musk didn't know what he was doing, and wouldn't be able to keep the site up long term after the layoffs.
Despite the fact that these predictions ended up being completely wrong, there seems to have been very little reflection from the people who were making them.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35043433 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35043433
- mlnj 2y agoThe way I see it all these supposed "inefficiencies" got twitter a valuation of 44B and a hub for people across the spectrum to congregate. Firing all these people and goining hardcore mode has only slashed the value of the company by 80% and even more of a cesspool of bots and misinformation, not to mention the exodus of advertisers and a large portion of users. So yeah. Good job.
- gonzobonzo 2y agoThis is a good example of moving the goals posts. There were lot of claims that [A] would happen. In the end, [A] didn't happen. People say, "maybe it's time to admit that the claims that [A] would happen were wrong," and the reply is "no, [B] happened, so it doesn't matter." It's certainly possible to argue that Musk hasn't done a good job of running Twitter. But the claim - made by many people here - that the site wouldn't remain function after 80% of the staff was laid off certainly proved to be incorrect.