So, Twatter is going down?
Good riddance, I would say...

...but no, safe bet it will soon be replaced by something even more retarded 😜

The developers/employees made the right decision, I think.
No one with dignity and love for freedom could have accepted this ultimatum with a clear conscience, I believe.
The conditions equal exploitation or a form of slavery, imho.
Gratefully, the employees have enough alternative jobs to look forward to.

So, having been inside the doors of many tech companies over the years and have seen what has been going on, I have started telling people the tech industry has a problem with worker productivity. I have been expecting a tech crash and layoffs for a few years now. The events of 2020-2021 masked the problem that was growing.

I think it was going to happen to twitter anyway, without Elon. Why do you think the twitter board ran back to Elon to change his mind again? They didn't want to be there. The reason why now this downtime is getting press is that Elon is on the wrong spectrum that gathers attention so it's the typical hit-piece. But to me as a "fixer", I don't trust Elon either. So who cares about twitter. I've never used it. There will be companies that will also be turning the boat around quickly by laying off people, so expect more turmoil.

Why do you think the twitter board ran back to Elon to change his mind again? They didn't want to be there.

I think you are not correctly informed. The board didn't run back to Elon. Elon made a too good to refuse offer on their shares and made plunders in his offer, waiving due diligence and agreeing to a high fee ($1billion) if he backs out on the deal.
Whatever his reasons, he tried to back out and found out he couldn't without a very costly trial that had poor chances of success. So he had to go through with it.

He's doing his "job" in management very well. As long as we understand that his "job" is not maintaining a healthy environment with happy people.
(Disclaimer: I'm not happy with the direction tech domain is taking, I'm just not surprised)

an example of a company that wasn't doing well by commercial measures anyway. it also wasn't doing well if it meant to be a global discussion forum - of all its accounts only a small fraction actually were active and of those the vast majority were discussing 'small' things of little global importance

how it could ever be so overvalued is a mystery, why it was used continually by mainstream press as a means of conveying the opinions of people and so forth is less mysterious and rather depressing

i think some people, like musk, are buoyed up on their own enthusiasm and their own popularity (well, number of followers and apparent activity in terms of responses) and that of those who they see as their peers (other well known people). they forget that take out the top few 1000 accounts and the whole things becomes a dustbowl with little activity. its an illusion

so in conclusion, losing grip on reality leads to bad decisions!

Twitter has never appealed to me whatsoever but I find the way things are unfolding fascinating.

Why do through all the trouble of buying Twitter and then basically "torpedo" it. Something ain't jiving here.

Dominus wrote on 2022-11-18, 08:10:

Why do you think the twitter board ran back to Elon to change his mind again? They didn't want to be there.

I think you are not correctly informed. The board didn't run back to Elon. Elon made a too good to refuse offer on their shares and made plunders in his offer, waiving due diligence and agreeing to a high fee ($1billion) if he backs out on the deal.
Whatever his reasons, he tried to back out and found out he couldn't without a very costly trial that had poor chances of success. So he had to go through with it.

Waiving due diligence does not make a contract completely binding to the buyer from there out. I would not say this media statement on due diligence is accurate because he clearly stated that he objected to the condition he found, which tells me in the offer he requested them to provide details on the company status they did not provide. If you believe twitter was sound in their argument, they could have collected on the money. Instead they voted and opted to sell to Elon, which means Elon countered to make the sale happen and they accepted. That means they gave Elon more concessions, which again, nothing was binding to the seller either, they could have walked by then (money or not). This tells me twitter was in pretty bad straights to fail to argue Elon was screwing with them.

Here's a fun place chronicling the fall.

leileilol wrote on 2022-11-18, 22:04:

Here's a fun place chronicling the fall.

Wow, that is a trip.

Would love to see a visual X-Y graph of X:time vs Y:employees left at twitter, bullet-marked with each of Musk's tweets or emails... would make for a nice extrapolating predictions of when they reach zero. 😀

I think somebody spent too much on twitter just to silence it, more likely a few investors figured they would use the place for propaganda and MAYBE make some money down the road.

Social media is pretty much bullshit where people opt in to being targeted for advertising.

the3dfxdude wrote on 2022-11-18, 16:41:

Dominus wrote on 2022-11-18, 08:10:

Why do you think the twitter board ran back to Elon to change his mind again? They didn't want to be there.

I think you are not correctly informed. The board didn't run back to Elon. Elon made a too good to refuse offer on their shares and made plunders in his offer, waiving due diligence and agreeing to a high fee ($1billion) if he backs out on the deal.
Whatever his reasons, he tried to back out and found out he couldn't without a very costly trial that had poor chances of success. So he had to go through with it.

Waiving due diligence does not make a contract completely binding to the buyer from there out. I would not say this media statement on due diligence is accurate because he clearly stated that he objected to the condition he found, which tells me in the offer he requested them to provide details on the company status they did not provide. If you believe twitter was sound in their argument, they could have collected on the money. Instead they voted and opted to sell to Elon, which means Elon countered to make the sale happen and they accepted. That means they gave Elon more concessions, which again, nothing was binding to the seller either, they could have walked by then (money or not). This tells me twitter was in pretty bad straights to fail to argue Elon was screwing with them.

It was already at courts... in the end they decided not to split 1 billion but 44 billions. All that is public makes it clear that they were able to choose, not Elon...

He didn't have to make an offer.
He could have made a conditional offer.
He could have eaten the penality.

Incidentally, he could also have been a bit less rash in his "transformative" effort.

He made and keeps making his choices. He made his bed, he gets to sleep in it.

And the rest of the world gets to live with the consequences of his choices.

darry wrote on 2022-11-19, 03:09:

He made and keeps making his choices. He made his bed, he gets to sleep in it.

Well that’s the end of him

rmay635703 wrote on 2022-11-19, 03:20:

darry wrote on 2022-11-19, 03:09:

He made and keeps making his choices. He made his bed, he gets to sleep in it.

Well that’s the end of him
93A31AC9-9248-464C-8031-39324A611C14.jpeg

Nah, maybe just the end of (part|most|all) of his credibility, especially if Twitter ends up dead before the end of the year.

Honestly, if he doesn't manage to kill Twitter within the next 6 weeks, I will be impressed .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kWCDbxnWKo

Can we all go back to Usenet please?

buckeye wrote on 2022-11-18, 15:49:

Why do through all the trouble of buying Twitter and then basically "torpedo" it. Something ain't jiving here.

gerry wrote on 2022-11-18, 11:41:

i think some people, like musk, are buoyed up on their own enthusiasm and their own popularity (well, number of followers and apparent activity in terms of responses) and that of those who they see as their peers (other well known people). they forget that take out the top few 1000 accounts and the whole things becomes a dustbowl with little activity. its an illusion

so in conclusion, losing grip on reality leads to bad decisions!

Well my thoughts are actually simpler: Musk's net worth is 191.4 billion USD. If he lost the 44 billion USD by bankrupting twitter, that still leaves him with 147 billion USD. However, it seems to be naive to assume that the loss of Musk's net worth is a linear function of the money he burned to drive Twitter to the ground: there is still the loss of trust and reputation, among others. Let say, if Twitter went bankrupt, Musk's net worth would go down by 150 billion.That still leaves him with around 40 billion USD, which is more than enough for a comfortable life.

On the other hand, Twitter would be dead, and I believe it is a great thing.

(Above and below) typical shits made in a cesspool.

Why didn't Twitter ban the two? Are Twitter really serious in combating hate speech? Or only hate speech they don't like?

Shits like cancel culture (which is basically a modern-day version of Salem witch burnings) also flourish on Twitter.

Look, I don't even have a Twitter account, but I have seen enough to believe that Twitter deserves to die.