He did absolutely no due diligence in vetting out who to keep or not.
The mere order of come in, work crazy hours or leave is proof of this.
Some of the "hardest" workers are the least talented and they need to put in time because they are inefficient.
On the other hand, some people work a light schedule but come up with great ideas that add value. Those people get lost with this approach.
Nobody at Twitter has come up with a new "great idea" in the last 10 years.
Very clear that most people here haven't worked in tech in any capacity. Story time.
I worked for a dinky tech startup for a few years. We had this contracted guy, Alex, around. He barely worked. Rarely contributed code. He mostly advised and reviewed code. But when stuff broke, he knew exactly what to do, and saved the day countless times.
No, guys like Alex don't come up with a new "dislike" button or whatever hot user feature. They keep the lights on. They keep the pipes flowing and make them flower better than ever. They walk into a server room, take a whiff of the air, and go tap a server with a hammer in juuuuust the right place to magically fix it all.
Twitter had like 100 Alexes, and they all held the keys and knowledge to some integral systems and processes. They're short about 100 Alexes right now, and it's gonna be bad.
There's tons of bloat at any large corporation. Jobs like HR and recruiting and middle management are like 75% bloat lol. But something tells me Musk isn't just getting rid of the grifters, and he's fired some people with deep institutional/legacy knowledge that he'll regret pretty soon.
No one is irreplaceable. In Twitter’s case, institutional and legacy anchors may be more of a liability than asset.
I agree with that. Often times the people with the age old "institutional knowledge" are the ones stuck in their ways who won't upgrade their antiquated systems. While the key outside hires quickly build the systems you didn't know you were missing.
No one is irreplaceable. In Twitter’s case, institutional and legacy anchors may be more of a liability than asset.
I agree with that. Often times the people with the age old "institutional knowledge" are the ones stuck in their ways who won't upgrade their antiquated systems. While the key outside hires quickly build the systems you didn't know you were missing.
100% agreed. But there's a big difference between bringing in key outside hires to revamp things and having 95% of your institutional knowledge just walk out the door, all at once.
Nobody at Twitter has come up with a new "great idea" in the last 10 years.
Very clear that most people here haven't worked in tech in any capacity. Story time.
I worked for a dinky tech startup for a few years. We had this contracted guy, Alex, around. He barely worked. Rarely contributed code. He mostly advised and reviewed code. But when stuff broke, he knew exactly what to do, and saved the day countless times.
No, guys like Alex don't come up with a new "dislike" button or whatever hot user feature. They keep the lights on. They keep the pipes flowing and make them flower better than ever. They walk into a server room, take a whiff of the air, and go tap a server with a hammer in juuuuust the right place to magically fix it all.
Twitter had like 100 Alexes, and they all held the keys and knowledge to some integral systems and processes. They're short about 100 Alexes right now, and it's gonna be bad.
I'm in tech, and feel like I sit around all day posting on dumb boards like this. I can't tell you on any given day what I've actually done.
Days I'm not here, which are rare, my phone will ring by 10 a.m. with some issue.
He did absolutely no due diligence in vetting out who to keep or not.
The mere order of come in, work crazy hours or leave is proof of this.
Some of the "hardest" workers are the least talented and they need to put in time because they are inefficient.
On the other hand, some people work a light schedule but come up with great ideas that add value. Those people get lost with this approach.
Nobody at Twitter has come up with a new "great idea" in the last 10 years.
The same could probably be said for Apple or Amazon or Google or Exxon or Microsoft or Saudi Aramco or Berkshire even Tesla is still selling the pretty much the same car it had in 2012... somehow they seem to be surviving
Musk owes $1 bil a year in debt service. If he wants to maintain twitter as a free speech experiment and use his Tesla cash to sustain it, he can probably get away with minimal staffing. The only issue will be whether staffing levels are not able to keep up with and delete content that will drive people off the site. 4chan, 8chan, etc. are examples of what happens when you have minimal moderation. The sites became infested with neo-nazis, porn, pedophiles, and just about every form of low life known to man. You cannot post anything without getting death threats and all sorts of vicious content thrown back at you.
If Musk wants twitter to be financially viable, he will need to be able to get advertisers back. If cuts on staff mean that moderation suffers and everyone leaves the site, twitter will not be financially viable absent Musk willing to fund it personally.
Very clear that most people here haven't worked in tech in any capacity. Story time.
I worked for a dinky tech startup for a few years. We had this contracted guy, Alex, around. He barely worked. Rarely contributed code. He mostly advised and reviewed code. But when stuff broke, he knew exactly what to do, and saved the day countless times.
No, guys like Alex don't come up with a new "dislike" button or whatever hot user feature. They keep the lights on. They keep the pipes flowing and make them flower better than ever. They walk into a server room, take a whiff of the air, and go tap a server with a hammer in juuuuust the right place to magically fix it all.
Twitter had like 100 Alexes, and they all held the keys and knowledge to some integral systems and processes. They're short about 100 Alexes right now, and it's gonna be bad.
The long game for Musk is to have a high reliability app that doesn't need constant futzing. He wants intrinsic innovation delivered as a commodity. Sellers and buyer both win.
Very clear that most people here haven't worked in tech in any capacity. Story time.
I worked for a dinky tech startup for a few years. We had this contracted guy, Alex, around. He barely worked. Rarely contributed code. He mostly advised and reviewed code. But when stuff broke, he knew exactly what to do, and saved the day countless times.
No, guys like Alex don't come up with a new "dislike" button or whatever hot user feature. They keep the lights on. They keep the pipes flowing and make them flower better than ever. They walk into a server room, take a whiff of the air, and go tap a server with a hammer in juuuuust the right place to magically fix it all.
Twitter had like 100 Alexes, and they all held the keys and knowledge to some integral systems and processes. They're short about 100 Alexes right now, and it's gonna be bad.
The long game for Musk is to have a high reliability app that doesn't need constant futzing. He wants intrinsic innovation delivered as a commodity. Sellers and buyer both win.
Read the past few posts. AI isn't there yet. Twitter is turning into 4chan as I type, and doomed.
No one is irreplaceable. In Twitter’s case, institutional and legacy anchors may be more of a liability than asset.
I agree with that. Often times the people with the age old "institutional knowledge" are the ones stuck in their ways who won't upgrade their antiquated systems. While the key outside hires quickly build the systems you didn't know you were missing.
And often times the new comers get to make the same mistake the old timers make a decade ago....
Twitter's revenue is in free fall. What are you smoking? Can I have some of it.
Temporary dip as advertisers dodge cancellation threats. The fickle mob will move on from that, more users join the platform, market forces will prevail.
Nobody at Twitter has come up with a new "great idea" in the last 10 years.
The same could probably be said for Apple or Amazon or Google or Exxon or Microsoft or Saudi Aramco or Berkshire even Tesla is still selling the pretty much the same car it had in 2012... somehow they seem to be surviving
While those companies are somewhat stagnant, there are still some good ideas in the last 10 years off the top of my head:
Apple - m1 chips, airpods
Amazon - Alexa (I don't get it, but every boomer has one)
Tesla - self-driving
Microsoft - not much innovation, but a lot of good acquisitions
Seriously though, what good idea has Twitter come up with in the last 10 years that went anywhere? 280 characters?
He paid $44 billion for company valued at $5 billion. That isn't smart. He could have just started his own version of Twitter or whatever for a fraction of the costs.
The same could probably be said for Apple or Amazon or Google or Exxon or Microsoft or Saudi Aramco or Berkshire even Tesla is still selling the pretty much the same car it had in 2012... somehow they seem to be surviving
While those companies are somewhat stagnant, there are still some good ideas in the last 10 years off the top of my head:
Apple - m1 chips, airpods
Amazon - Alexa (I don't get it, but every boomer has one)
Tesla - self-driving
Microsoft - not much innovation, but a lot of good acquisitions
Seriously though, what good idea has Twitter come up with in the last 10 years that went anywhere? 280 characters?
Apple - Wireless earbuds with blutooth were launched earlier by other companies, not great innovations by Apple
Amazon - Alexa was technology by a different company as well that Amazon bought to copy 2011 Apple.
Tesla Self Driving is still pretty bad and not really a great new idea. Apple, Uber, GM and others have been working on it for a while. I will give him 'credit' for pushing into prod an extremely buggy system and thus for dodging consequences for some pretty bad mistakes.
Microsoft - as with others buying someone else's good/great new ideas does not qualify as innovation.
The success of a company is rarely tied to it's ability to come up with great ideas. Its about the ability to be the most efficient at delivering those great ideas. There were thousands of internet sales websites. Amazon succeeded because they were able to execute better and lower costs by creating their own warehousing, shipping manufacturing etc. Tesla's main advantage is they cut out dealerships and control the sales cycle better than other auto manufacturers.
Twitter is probably not going to succeed by coming up with 'the next great idea,' it'll be successful if it can better deliver customers to its advertisers.
Nobody at Twitter has come up with a new "great idea" in the last 10 years.
Very clear that most people here haven't worked in tech in any capacity. Story time.
I worked for a dinky tech startup for a few years. We had this contracted guy, Alex, around. He barely worked. Rarely contributed code. He mostly advised and reviewed code. But when stuff broke, he knew exactly what to do, and saved the day countless times.
No, guys like Alex don't come up with a new "dislike" button or whatever hot user feature. They keep the lights on. They keep the pipes flowing and make them flower better than ever. They walk into a server room, take a whiff of the air, and go tap a server with a hammer in juuuuust the right place to magically fix it all.
Twitter had like 100 Alexes, and they all held the keys and knowledge to some integral systems and processes. They're short about 100 Alexes right now, and it's gonna be bad.
lol so i worked at a top tier tech company few years ago. so many people claiming their job was "mission critical" and needed more resources. then they wouldn't get what they wanted for support, and they'd either whine that " this place will burn down, can't believe they aren't listening to me" or they'd leave to go somewhere else and on the way out remark "good luck finding someone to replace the MISSION CRITICAL work I was doing, and only I knew how to do"
it never made any difference. people are more expendable than you think. hell, most of these superstar employees, after they would leave, you literallly would forget their name in a week or two.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.