3 ms·

How did it go "amazingly well"? In Musk's own words Twitter is barely breaking even[0]. Estimates by Fidelity say that about 80% of Twitter business value evap

How did it go "amazingly well"? In Musk's own words Twitter is barely breaking even[0]. Estimates by Fidelity say that about 80% of Twitter business value evaporated under Musk rule [1]. [0]https://www.business-standard.com/companies/news/elon-musk-x-employees-internal-email-financial-strain-advertising-revenue-125012600393_1.html https://www.business-standard.com/companies/news/elon-musk-x... [1] https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/02/business/elon-musk-twitter-x-fidelity/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/10/02/business/elon-musk-twitte...

nomilk 2y ago
> How did it go "amazingly well"? Extremely high site reliability (others claimed it would literally go down, have outages). And the eng team's ability to pump out features: https://x.com/nima_owji/status/1872708051494695422/photo/1 https://x.com/nima_owji/status/1872708051494695422/photo/1
- praptak 2y ago
  These metrics are irrelevant for business. If it means something for predicting Musk involvement in government it's this: there will be some meaningless metrics by which it will be declared a success.
  - nomilk 2y ago
    No - the opposite (!) - these two metrics are not random or meaningless - they're precisely the metrics the 2022 naysayers said Twitter/Musk would fail on! - that is, these are the results according to the metrics of the naysayers!. If we wanted to select more favourable ones, we could. But these are the very metrics the 2022 haters claimed he'd flunk!
    - xracy 2y ago
      It's easy to add reliability to a system if you scale the interested userbase down. Which is exactly what Xitter is doing by pushing content far to the right, and making it a more hostile environment for discourse. Like, yes, I can run a reliable system with 20% of the engineers if I'm aiming for 20% of the userbase and 20% of the quality of the platform that I was originally trying to run.

nomilk 2y ago

> How did it go "amazingly well"? Extremely high site reliability (others claimed it would literally go down, have outages). And the eng team's ability to pump out features: https://x.com/nima_owji/status/1872708051494695422/photo/1 https://x.com/nima_owji/status/1872708051494695422/photo/1

praptak 2y ago
These metrics are irrelevant for business. If it means something for predicting Musk involvement in government it's this: there will be some meaningless metrics by which it will be declared a success.
- nomilk 2y ago
  No - the opposite (!) - these two metrics are not random or meaningless - they're precisely the metrics the 2022 naysayers said Twitter/Musk would fail on! - that is, these are the results according to the metrics of the naysayers!. If we wanted to select more favourable ones, we could. But these are the very metrics the 2022 haters claimed he'd flunk!
  - xracy 2y ago
    It's easy to add reliability to a system if you scale the interested userbase down. Which is exactly what Xitter is doing by pushing content far to the right, and making it a more hostile environment for discourse. Like, yes, I can run a reliable system with 20% of the engineers if I'm aiming for 20% of the userbase and 20% of the quality of the platform that I was originally trying to run.