|
1. Change system so a lot of accounts you don't follow and aren't interested in show up on your feed, which you want to instantly skip. 2. Limit the number of tweets you can scroll past in a day. 3. ???? 4. Infinite profit
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Tree Reformat posted:We may be heading toward a world in which social media just kind of... dies, in general, as a concept. To be fair, I don't think many of them have ever actually made money. The entire concept is being kept afloat by gullible investors with blind faith that eventually they will get sold to idiots like Musk (which is the only way they can possibly turn a profit).
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 01:04
|
|
|
Remember how Musk made the buyout price per-share a meme number? What a shrewd businessman. I bet his pals on twitter really respect him now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
Huh, i can see posts again but there's a spirit halloween banner at the top of my feed???
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
It’s amazing how he does not seem capable of doing a single thing right. He needs to step down like he promised.
MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Jul 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 01:39
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:Remember how Musk made the buyout price per-share a meme number? What a shrewd businessman. I bet his pals on twitter really respect him now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:It’s amazing how he does seem capable of doing a single thing right. He needs to step down like he promised. I think he did hire a new COO, only he keeps posting and being the face of the company anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
There was an article about the new CEO not even being able to talk to advertisers directly because of her previous employment contract having some kind of timed restriction
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:I think he did hire a new COO, only he keeps posting and being the face of the company anyway. Linda Yaccarino is CEO in name only for the next weeks because apparently she's still under a non-compete with NBC Universal and can't really make deals with advertisers like she was supposed to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:06
|
|
|
people have mentioned some vocab word called the Glass Cliff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cliff which might be the ONE example of musk actually setting up a medium/long term strat that isnt based on his dumb attention span , brain worms, and drugs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
What compelled Twitter to sue Musk? Was he just at a point of no return?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:17
|
|
|
double post
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:17
|
|
|
Star Man posted:What compelled Twitter to sue Musk? Was he just at a point of no return?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:19
|
|
|
And Twitter wanted to get bought because his massive overpayment resulted in a big windfall for the shareholders
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:22
|
|
|
It still cracks me up that Jack decided not to cash out his Twitter stock and took the equity instead
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
Star Man posted:What compelled Twitter to sue Musk? Was he just at a point of no return? The price he'd offered was far, far more than what they knew Twitter was worth, and they wanted to take all that money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:28
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:This almost certainly also has something to do with the site’s issues link doesnt work, what did it say
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:33
|
|
|
Quote not edit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
Star Man posted:What compelled Twitter to sue Musk? Was he just at a point of no return? The board wanted the idiot's money.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:38
|
|
|
Oh I did not realize there was a social media thread on these dead forums. I've been laughing at Twitter today.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:42
|
|
|
He offered such a stupid amount of money for it. It would have been dumb not to take it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:42
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:people have mentioned some vocab word called the Glass Cliff And yet he's also loving it up because that strategy requires stepping back and keeping quiet for long enough to let people plausibly believe the CEO is making any decisions, whereas he's still just tweeting it out
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:43
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:link doesnt work, what did it say
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:50
|
|
|
lobster shirt posted:link doesnt work, what did it say Still up on my end, here's a cap; 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:54
|
|
|
Quorum posted:And yet he's also loving it up because that strategy requires stepping back and keeping quiet for long enough to let people plausibly believe the CEO is making any decisions, whereas he's still just tweeting it out a trait Musk shares with Donnie "heres my guy to do THING" *continues micro managing and birdposting orders*
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:56
|
|
|
I've read in other places that the new """CEO""" convinced him to pay Google though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:57
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I've read in other places that the new """CEO""" convinced him to pay Google though. I have no problem believing he allowed the CEO to believe she'd talked him into it, and then didn't pay the bill anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 02:58
|
|
|
whydirt posted:SA was trending left long before LF The whole country was, since 2006 was when the dems took congress after Katrina and the wars turned sour. Helldump did alot more than LF, since it got taken over early by people who attacked racism and sexism
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 03:08
|
|
|
Wasn't Musk supposed to stop making decisions on how to run Twitter? I thought he agreed to turn it over to someone else. I still don't fully understand why he made any changes at all, when you buy a new car you don't just pop the hood and start randomly pulling out parts. I know the answer is because he's petty and dumb, but I'm morbidly curious to know the thought process behind why he decided doing all of this was better than just doing nothing which would have been way easier, more effective, and not made him look like a complete jackass in front of millions upon millions of people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 04:34
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:I still don't fully understand why he made any changes at all, when you buy a new car you don't just pop the hood and start randomly pulling out parts. I don't know, that's what he did with Tesla, right? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 04:38
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:Wasn't Musk supposed to stop making decisions on how to run Twitter? I thought he agreed to turn it over to someone else. I think the whole situation is similar to the Death Sub guy, actually. It's a narcissism thing where these rich babies feel the need to prove themselves by making these radical(ly idiotic) decisions to gut necessary features (like safety) and cut costs in an attempt to run a profitable company just like daddy did. They can even pretend like they're successful right up until the whole thing implodes. Their role models are likely people like Jack Welch, who as the CEO of GE gutted the entire company and left it as a husk it is now, but got very popular amongst rich idiots for doing so because it looked really good on paper at the time. Mercury_Storm fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Jul 2, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 04:47
|
|
|
Also, well, Twitter was probably losing money in the first place, before he said he'd buy it for the funny weed number, and then once the courts said that, no, you can't take back your signature on the contract just because you were doing a bit, he found himself on the hook for a huge amount of money, and of course Twitter is still bleeding money. So part of it's just that he wants to leave his mark on it, yes, but the other part of it is him desperately looking for a way to monetize it. Which is both impossible and also he's pretty stupid so his ideas are below average.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 05:58
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:I still don't fully understand why he made any changes at all, when you buy a new car you don't just pop the hood and start randomly pulling out parts. I know the answer is because he's petty and dumb, but I'm morbidly curious to know the thought process behind why he decided doing all of this was better than just doing nothing which would have been way easier, more effective, and not made him look like a complete jackass in front of millions upon millions of people. It was telling when it came out how his other companies handle him. Like they have people around just to look Very Important and Totally Busy so he doesn't decid to go gently caress things up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 06:12
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:Wasn't Musk supposed to stop making decisions on how to run Twitter? I thought he agreed to turn it over to someone else. He agreed to hire a new CEO, and he did actually do that a few weeks ago. Linda Yaccarino, formerly from NBC. But when he gave up the CEO position, he instead made himself CTO, putting himself in charge of "product, software, and sysops". So he basically just foisted all the boring stuff (like begging advertisers to come back and fielding phone calls from angry regulators) off on someone else, while retaining personal control over the website itself. As for why he made changes, the only reason he bought it is because he wanted to make changes to it. And it's not like Twitter was doing all that well in the first place. He didn't buy a new car, he bought an old junky car that was barely running, thinking it was gonna be a project car and he'd spend a few months working on it in his garage over the weekends and get it running better than ever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 06:41
|
|
|
Apparently, in the middle of the night, Musk boosted the rate limit to 10,000 tweets a day for bluechecks, 1000 for non-paying users, and 500 for new unverified accounts, so I think the reaction is getting at him. Also, in entirely unrelated news, I found out that you can probably scroll through 100 tweets in a minute, especially low-effort reply tweets, so it really puts a perspective on how damaging these rate limits are to audience retention.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 12:01
|
|
|
500 post per day wouldn't be so bad if a large majority of the posts weren't so useless. Given how much of the underlying infrastructure is the same, I almost wonder if advertisements and other unprompted "recommendations" would count towards that limit, making the actual number that much less. Thinking on it, post distribution is also uneven due to the social inequalities of the platform, which means the rate limiting would actively disincentivise looking at and responding to high-engagement tweets. In an ironic way, this would actively cut into whatever any clout-chaser could hope to achieve. The bots and reply guys one has, the more likely any fresh audience would actively avoid you; may have been economically harmless before, but now it is actively costly to so much as look at it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 12:37
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Also, in entirely unrelated news, I found out that you can probably scroll through 100 tweets in a minute, especially low-effort reply tweets, so it really puts a perspective on how damaging these rate limits are to audience retention. Yeah that’s what I’ve been saying. All you have to do is load up the front page and scroll down and it’ll make hundreds of API requests just like that. After a few minutes you’re done.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 12:42
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Also, well, Twitter was probably losing money in the first place, before he said he'd buy it for the funny weed number, and then once the courts said that, no, you can't take back your signature on the contract just because you were doing a bit, he found himself on the hook for a huge amount of money, and of course Twitter is still bleeding money. So part of it's just that he wants to leave his mark on it, yes, but the other part of it is him desperately looking for a way to monetize it. Which is both impossible and also he's pretty stupid so his ideas are below average. I’ve also read rumors about how he didn’t actually want to buy Twitter at all but instead was looking to sell off Tesla shares without tanking its value. But well, the courts said lol no you signed it and he wasn’t willing to fight it in court for whatever reason. Of course this is all just hearsay and prolly wrong on many counts but it’s hilarious if true.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 12:47
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:a trait Musk shares with Donnie Them and Vince McMahon. All narcissistic cokehead control freaks with no concept of the world outside their arm's reach.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 12:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Yesterday morning I noticed the scroll bar on a post going crazy and thought it was just a browsing glitch. Didn't realize it was the site freaking out on the backend and that I'd be locked out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2023 13:55
|
|
