Twitter was not in danger of going bankrupt before. They are now due to Musk's actions and financial setup. They did actually make decent profits (over $1B) in 2019 and 2018. The previous organization could have made modest cuts and improved efficiency to become profitable... also they were paying good salaries to over 8,000 people, and more advertisers and users were benefiting from the platform than are now. Musk's destruction of the company was entirely unnecessary.
squiblet
joined 1 year ago
It wasn't sinking before he sunk it. It was losing money, but not that much... then instead of making intelligent, reasonable changes, he stuck them with a ridiculous amount of debt, slashed and burned the work force, and scared off half the advertisers.
I sure wouldn’t get on a rocket that Elron said was so safe it didn’t need an escape system.
They claimed “we learned a lot”, but I’m skeptical. They could have learned a lot from not fucking it up too. The BS like not having proper shielding of the launchpad reeks of some idiotic decision that musk made and wouldn’t change his mind about because he’s a moron. The FAA came up with a long list of things they need to fix - and it was all things they should have known to have in place for the first launch.
Just getting rid of it is a way to influence US politics, and their domestic politics. Oligarchs don’t want people organizing politically on Twitter.
Getting press and attention is basically all he’s good at. No wonder he loves trump so much… they’re basically the same person. He did parlay that trait into making Tesla more of a success.The downfall is when he actually tries to do anything besides get attention in the press.
He’s the only person who really knows anything about websites. Well, tbf he did fire practically everyone at Twitter that wasn’t an H1B programmer or network engineer.
He blew $20 billion dollars on a website that he’s treating like a broken toy, so not sure. Anyway Musk didn’t get rich from being thrifty. He got rich first from inheritance, then getting lucky that PayPal was dumb enough to merge with his crappy site, which did them no good, then got extra wealthy from buying Tesla. None of that involves a need to be stingy.
He wanted to boost his preferred conservative politics and make it less useful for progressives, left and liberals. If he can’t achieve the first goal he’s content to wreck it.
That’s how Twitter was for me 2009-2016. I posted about programming, sysadmin stuff… zero engagement… posted photos about my travels, art hobbies, hiking, random observations, current events… pretty much nobody ever said anything about them. I had a successful nice web app from 2008-2012 and we started a Twitter for announcements, got 8,000 followers, but I doubt it brought us any new business.
Apparently it's based on, according to their FAQ, previous records and "extrapolated extension user behavior." We'd have no idea if it's really accurate. I can't imagine that a vast amount of people are using the extension, and also, that the behavior of people who choose to use the extension reflects the tastes of the YouTube public at large.