v0idzer0

12 ms·

91.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
NYT gets so much mileage out of “researchers say” and “experts say” yet they never cite anyone
92.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Who said they were?
93.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Citing one crazy person using a platform doesn’t make your argument coherent. How many shooters have live streamed on facebook?
94.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Renaissance Technologies has been beating the market with statistics and machine learning for 4 decades
95.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Those are the major actions taken that affect the platform, so it’s not at all unreasonable to assume those are the actions you’re referring to. Why don’t you just share what you’re referring to?
96.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
What’s trolling about removing the government’s ability to censor political opponents, reverting the heavy handed censorship that Dorsey regretted but could no longer prevent and open sourcing the algorithm? I think if anyone but Elon did t
97.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
With Trump all but banished to a quiet existence somewhere in Florida, the mainstream media cash cow is gone. To boost revenue, they need a new bad guy. And for obvious reasons he needs to be white, male and wealthy. Enter Elon: new media b
98.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
The name of the company is literally National Public Radio and they lobby for more government funds on their own website. Their gripe seems to be “government funded” implies “state sanctioned” but there’s a separate label for state sponsore
99.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
You can already do this right now
100.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
It still blows my mind they can’t run this tiny operation profitably taking 10% of many multimillion dollar writers’ revenue. Is it a requirement that YC companies raise way too much money and then proceed to torch it any way possible?
101.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
As much as I wish this were to true, it’s objectively false. Digital advertising is a healthy industry that powers many profitable companies. Substack is not profitable and torching money even with a 10% claim on wroters’ subscription reven
102.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Why would anyone sign up for blue to get free doge when they can buy thousands of doge with the money it costs to sign up for blue?
103.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Speaking of hubris, is it possible there’s tons of non public factors that affected his rationale and we’ll never really know the whole truth?
104.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
In my experience, people who start companies for the money always fail, because their conviction is weak. Especially risky ones like EVs and rockets. I simply don’t buy it. I think this attitude is mainly a defense mechanism.
105.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Sure but only because he offered to. He always wanted to buy it. He just wanted a better price when the entire stock market tanked shortly afterwards
106.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
The main skepticism I see of Musk on here is he’s motivated by greed. Recently saw someone suggesting he’s pumping doge to earn a few million, which frankly is a waste of time for a guy worth $200B. But the evidence strongly suggests otherw
107.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Very hard to quantify this. I personally believe many companies fail to find product market fit due to poor execution (bad code being a common culprit) but we don’t say they failed due to bad code. We say they failed to find product market
108.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Just a reminder that Twitter was full of bugs before the baddie took over. They just didn’t all get covered in the media
109.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
This is pretty wildly self indulgent. Substack doesn’t empower writers. Publishing to your own domain does that. Owning your customer list does that. Not renting storage space in substacks database and forking over a disproportionately larg
110.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Washington Post is also in financial trouble and their pay is terrible so
111.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Substack just launched a competitor to Twitter which is nearly an identical copy. They call a retweet a restack, etc
112.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Something tells me a guy worth $200 billion doesn’t need to pump and dump doge. I think its merely for fun or a nod to the type of Twitter loyalists he wants to foster
113.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Come on think this through. It’s trivial to tell the difference between a gradual and natural decline and a drastic decline immediately after rolling out a change. Especially when the change is rolled out region by region and only exists in
114.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Everyone has those discussions and then they wake up and have to run their business again. It’s okay to admit that you want to be the one with all the upside this time. You should and you shouldn’t feel bad about that or feel you have to li
115.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
The same reason there are ones for other people? When they make changes, they want to see how it affects the visibility of their most popular accounts
116.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
This is a weird nitpick that doesn’t attack the argument at all. It’s a dense codebase but whatever measure you personally prefer
117.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Every major media company is owned by a billionaire
118.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
You clearly are oblivious as to what they contain
119.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
Elon Musk clickbait broke the brain of half of HN readers. We need to consider permanently banning anything tangentially related to restore the quality here
120.
by v0idzer0 4y ago
It never signaled either. Now it signals a paid account

More ›