3 ms·

> I don't know why people say this when Twitter had clear changes to day to day use. Let alone to anyone investing in Twitter. That wasn't my point though. Twi

> I don't know why people say this when Twitter had clear changes to day to day use. Let alone to anyone investing in Twitter. That wasn't my point though. Twitter itself changed, which was expected and (I assume) intended. My point was the months of us being told constantly by the media that the sky is falling - the servers would fall over tomorrow, the advertisers would all leave and there would be no money, etc. This was literally daily for at least a month. Now, Twitter is still up and running fine (from a technical and assumedly financial perspective). It appears Elons methods worked fine, and all the other major tech companies also went on a mass firing spree to trim the fat. I'm honestly not sure how this compares with similar changes to a federal government - or if it does at all. But the context of my comment came from the GPs point, fat cutting and applying highly profitable tech start approaches to a federal government is an interesting thought exercise and especially so for a country that values capitalism over people so highly. Every significant government policy being added or removed has real world impact - both positive and negative. I'm curious if the positives will outweigh the negatives in this case.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
>My point was the months of us being told constantly by the media that the sky is falling - the servers would fall over tomorrow, the advertisers would all leave and there would be no money, etc. This was literally daily for at least a month. That seems to be my point tho. you're imagining Twitter collapsing in a few days and going out of business. That's not really how things work. Twitter went private so no one really knows how well it's doing. I'd bet any confidence in Twitter these days isnt really in Twitter so much as Musk hype, however. >. It appears Elons methods worked fine, and all the other major tech companies also went on a mass firing spree to trim the fat. By waht metric? Financial is dubious of you're following the scene. Workers, certainly not. I guess in the metric that it let him buy the election. That's pretty big, I'll admit. I don't think thst trick will work twice, given his current reputation. In the sense that "it is operating as a domain?" MySpace is still"up and running fine " in 2025. Digg is still up and running in 2025. Such name brands so well known don't really die in a literal sense; someone's going to buy and try to salvage it even after Musk sells it one day. >MySpace is still"up and running fine " in 2025. Digg is still up and running in 2025. Such name brands so well known don't really die in a literal sense ; someone's going to buy and try to salvage it. What positives are you imagining? We pay off the defecit? This ephemeral mood of "corruption" is dealt with? That you get a tax cut? Maybe the 3rd one will save you a few thousand a year. I don't see many upsides here that counter balance this. That's pretty much my whole reservation of this comment. It just seems to be saying "well maybe we get something good out of it" while dimissing the bad that's already come. All on a basis of a company that didn't completely die out from the same cuts and suggesting it "works" because of that.

johnnyanmac 2y ago

>My point was the months of us being told constantly by the media that the sky is falling - the servers would fall over tomorrow, the advertisers would all leave and there would be no money, etc. This was literally daily for at least a month. That seems to be my point tho. you're imagining Twitter collapsing in a few days and going out of business. That's not really how things work. Twitter went private so no one really knows how well it's doing. I'd bet any confidence in Twitter these days isnt really in Twitter so much as Musk hype, however. >. It appears Elons methods worked fine, and all the other major tech companies also went on a mass firing spree to trim the fat. By waht metric? Financial is dubious of you're following the scene. Workers, certainly not. I guess in the metric that it let him buy the election. That's pretty big, I'll admit. I don't think thst trick will work twice, given his current reputation. In the sense that "it is operating as a domain?" MySpace is still"up and running fine " in 2025. Digg is still up and running in 2025. Such name brands so well known don't really die in a literal sense; someone's going to buy and try to salvage it even after Musk sells it one day. >MySpace is still"up and running fine " in 2025. Digg is still up and running in 2025. Such name brands so well known don't really die in a literal sense ; someone's going to buy and try to salvage it. What positives are you imagining? We pay off the defecit? This ephemeral mood of "corruption" is dealt with? That you get a tax cut? Maybe the 3rd one will save you a few thousand a year. I don't see many upsides here that counter balance this. That's pretty much my whole reservation of this comment. It just seems to be saying "well maybe we get something good out of it" while dimissing the bad that's already come. All on a basis of a company that didn't completely die out from the same cuts and suggesting it "works" because of that.