this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2023
60 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

58061 readers
31 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Ad revenue is down (at least) 50% and they just keep making decisions that kick people off their platform.

I’m pretty sure Twitter advertising and Reddit advertising are in a race to the bottom to see who’s going to have to pay companies to put ads on their site first.

It’s insane to watch this happen. I remember watching the rise of Twitter as a kid and it becoming ubiquitous with social media, only to see it crash down this quickly.

I’m speculating, but I’d guess a lot of functionality is being limited because they don’t have dev staff to maintain it, as well as trying to cut server costs as much as possible. I’d honestly be surprised if musk was making these decisions because he thinks it’s good for the health of the platform. There has to be some ulterior motive for it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It is unfathomable to me how Reddit isn't profitable.

Facebook makes a mint by telling advertisers, "trust us, we'll get your ads in front of people who might buy your product based on a lot of inference around their fairly generic profile data plus some tracking cookies". One guy should be able to sell a billion dollars worth of ads on Reddit. Just put up a form that says, "which subreddit do you want to advertise in?" and "what's your credit card number?". That's it. They have like 10,000 completely segmented markets just sitting there full of hundreds of millions of people who have self-selected to be members of those communities.

We spend hundreds of billions of dollars collectively trying to figure out which google search terms might find us a few more solid leads. Reddit has an amazing list of them for every company in the entire world. How in the everloving fuck have they managed to blindly bumble around for two decades without ever falling into the giant pile of money in front of them?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It wasn’t cheaper than paying the contractual penalty, but if he had done that, it would have been his debt and not Twitter's.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

error loading comment

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It’s funny how the biggest fuckups are happening to the platforms that critiqued the billionaire class the loudest.

Hmmm

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This theory requires them to have sufficient devs to implement a new feature. That also seems unlikely to me

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They have plenty of devs, but they're all the worst in their field. How else could they take a fully developed app and turn it into the dumpster fire itbos today?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s usually not the devs who make the decisions on what to implement; that only happens in the early days of a site when the owners are also the devs.

C-levels looking to make money are pulling the strings. The devs at any large site just have a list of user stories to burndown.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Right. Never underestimate the absolute stupidity of hierarchies. (Corp bureaucracy in this case).  Stuff gets done just to make people look good based on who can tell the most convincing lie, not based, primarily at least, even on what would be good for the company as a whole.

 Devs, in most cases, are at the very bottom of this all, and therefore pretty much less responsible and have the least autonomy over what they do

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It wouldn't surprise me if this was what is really going on musk spent 44 billion which is far more than twitter was ever worth he basically got tricked into buying a company that has never made money and now he's trying to get it to make money

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He didn’t get tricked into anything. He massively over offered and then when Twitter accepted his offer he realized he fucked up

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe I'm miss remembering but he made a huge offer realized it wasn't worth anywhere close to that then realized he faced a huge fine and sec investigation if he backed out and was basically forced to buy twitter

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The problem with this remembering of events. Is that what would be more costly. 44 billion dollars. Or a fine that he would be able to pay off with an hour or two's earnings. And an uneventful SEC investigation? And if the 44 billion was the better of the two options. Then what is he hiding that the SEC would absolutely own his ass over? And why is it a good thing that he's hiding it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

If you look in to the court case, he was 100% going to be forced to buy it. There was a penalty fee for backing out but it didn't apply

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/13/elon-musk-cant-just-walk-away-from-twitter-deal-by-paying-1-billion.html

I'm no rich billionaire with insider knowledge but my confident guess is he could finance it on his terms or be forced to liquidate stock to pay straight cash. He chose the option that wouldn't very possible take him out of the top .01%

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think he's already been in trouble with the SEC over alleged Tesla stock manipulation (using Twitter to claim he was taking the company private at 420 a share or something), so maybe it could have become a real mess, so he decided to just go ahead with the deal.

He also manipulated crypto with his oversized influence through Twitter, though afaik the SEC can't do shit about that as crypto was (and still is) basically unregulated.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

One of the sanctions the SEC seeks for repeat offenders is a ban on serving as an officer of any public company.