Debatably twitter had really smart people build systems that could operate without human intervention. So not really sure we want to say that was a success stor

Debatably twitter had really smart people build systems that could operate without human intervention. So not really sure we want to say that was a success story for Elon Musk so much as he bought a software company where the software worked. Since the take over the product has gotten noticeably worse as far as reliability and with the algorithmic content promotion. The core functionality has stayed, but the overall experience has gotten worse. I do basically agree with the concept that twitter is running without as many people as they had - it is in fact doing that. It's just doing worse than it was and has been a pretty poor business venture for its investors except those who were using it for its capabilities to influence... things appeared to work out for those people. So if the point of a business is to make money and the way they are supposed to do that is through a software product I would say the results are mixed at this moment. Now so far as comparing the government to a software company... not sure thats really how we want to look at this or try to operate the government. Government is basically supposed to exist for market externalities - things the markets can't or shouldn't take care of. Is there bloat in the government? any sane adult can answer that question with a yes without even blinking... but theres also stuff thats easy to gut for savings that we need when shit hits the fan. Thats the stuff thats not so great to save money on. Improving the government is a great thing and we should strive for it... I would just prefer ya know Congress do it since its their job and not an eccentric billionaire.