It amazes me how badly these billionares are at running businesses.
Like im an engineer and Not in my wildest dreams could I have destoyed a company like Twitter faster than musk.
Like Did he do it on purpose?
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
58937 readers
3476 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It HAS to be on purpose. Nobody can get to billionaire levels of wealth and be completely inept, right? RIGHT?
Unfortunately, once you get enough money the system is designed to keep you wealthy no matter how much you fuck up.
Like, Trump has had multiple failed companies including casinos thay failed because he had them competeing with each other.
Yet while he's probably not a billionaire he still has the status of "wealthy" and managed to fail into the most powerful position in government.
Musk had more money, and therefore can fuck up way harder and still be fine. He could burn Twitter to the ground for all the effect it would have on him.
The reason is that they know people with money, and those people listen. For example, Musk only had to post about his attempt to buy Twitter in a groupchat, and he got Billions of Dollars from them to do it, unchecked. Regular people don't get their ear, and even if they do for some unfathomable reason, everything is checked meticulously.
Ironically the two are only half way competing with each other. There's two buckets of twitter peeps:
A) People who keep up with specific people, reducing day by day.
B) The for you page peeps. The vast majority of people I know on Twitter including myself are there for the algorithm feeding us memes and content. Specifically the 2016-2021 algorithm.
Considering mastodon doesn't have any form of FYP/For you it's really only competing for bucket A which in my experience has reduced by an incredible amount in the past few years and continues to reduce and makes it useless to a large majority of twitter users.
Unfortunately or fortunately twitters algorithm also sucks now so there's a pretty big market gap here.
When I did use twitter it was for being the fastest way to get news on events developing in real time. George Floyd protests, J6 coup attempt, start of war in Ukraine, etc. And not just national/world news but also local news. I don't really that type of use fits in to your two buckets and unfortunately I don't think Mastodon is quite there yet to fulfill this type of thing either, but I definitely think it could with more time and more users. Fuck the influencers and people looking for 'content' imo, when people are going to Mastodon with breaking news is when we'll know twitter is completely dead.
Fast, but inefficient.
Inefficient how? I don't use twitter, I never liked twitter being mentioned in the actual news ("a user twitted this, another use twitted that, etc"), but what's more efficient than opening that stupid app and getting content from people who are in the area where the news is happening?
When you open a newspaper (or their website), articles are sorted and curated. You chose a section ( politics/tech/finance), and then you get fact-checked articles, usually one on each event. No more, no less.
In social media, there is less of that. For some events, like protests or a war, that's ok. Speed is more important than journalistic work.
But if you have little time, Twitter is the wrong place to inform yourself. But it's a nice bonus
I thought Twitter rebranded to 69Boobies420 ?!
You mean 69Boobies420Hitlerdidnothingwrong#Jewspiracy#Libsgetrekked
One must wonder why SpaceX is so successful. Is it because Musk or despite Musk? I'm not sure.