Comment by eis | Hacker News Reader

Comment by eis | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

On the one hand we have a legend with impressive track record that is trying to bring to light serious issues at a large company and he has not much to gain but a lot to lose by making false accusations.

On the other hand we have the Twitter CEO who does not have any comparable track record and has all to gain by trying to deflect and a lot to lose by admiting that the company under him has serious issues. He does have some "interesting" things he said on the record though. Twitter also has a track record of severe security issues.

Twitter IMHO is not as evil as for example Facebook is but I do feel they are pretty stagnant and don't seem to get a lot done. They are only in the news because of some controversies it feels like.

I think Mr. Agrawals days as Twitter CEO are counted. If Musk ends up buying Twitter he'll surely fire him. And if the deal does not go through then I'm sure the board will have to think hard if the performance was good enough.

PS: I think it reflects poorly on him to mention alleged "ineffective leadership and poor performance" on Mudge's part in the email to all employees. Crap like that is probably the reason why Mudge is now hitting back. He is someone that seems to value honor and doesn't take shit from others.

Eh, hard to grok why you think Twitter is not evil like Facebook. Have we learned nothing about the public/private partnership between the social media companies and the surveillance state? Twitter management is littered with "former" government officials. For all we know, Mudge himself and his whistle are moves in an ongoing internecine fight over who calls the shots at a valuable tool of social control. We were recently treated to a completely astroturfed whistleblower at Facebook. Fool me once...

Caveat emptor and Cui bono.

I believe he didn't say they weren't evil like Facebook, just that they weren't as evil as Facebook.

That "as" is important nuance.

Personally I think that's fair when looking at Facebook's history[1].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Facebook

That sort of hairsplitting doesn't make much sense to me. It's like saying one gangster isn't as bad as another because one has a shorter wrap sheet. It's a difference that doesn't make a difference. They are evil in the same way, as media institutions of a accelerating surveillance and propaganda regime. Facebook is older and has been at it longer, but Twitter is no slouch when it comes to being a front organization for the secret police state. Twitter is another co-opted tech company whose libertarian minded leadership has long been gelded by institutional power. Assume the management of these companies is seeded with government allies at a minimum, incentivizing, cajoling, sabotaging, or threatening the public leadership of the company, as need be.

N.B., it’s “rap sheet”.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rap%20sheet

Ha, yeah, sure it is

Twitter locks accounts for verification and then turns around and sells the phone number used to verify the account to advertisers. This kind of behavior can only happen in thoroughly rotten companies.

What? I’ve worked in adtech for years and have seen a user’s phone number

Well, twitter did: https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/08/twitter-admits-it-used-two...

> I’ve worked in adtech for years and have seen a user’s phone number

Freudian slip much?

Thank you for your service.

I thought the Musk / Twitter deal was DOA a long time ago.

It’s going to trial this fall. Twitter is going to ask courts to enforce the agreement, making Musk buy them.

My guess is he’s blustering to shore up his negotiating position, and will have to make Twitter whole in the range of $10b. Or he believes his own tweets, will go to trial, and be forced to make the purchase.

Like everyone, I’m bad at predicting the future.

He’s going to end up buying Twitter but it will be at a discount due to the bot numbers. My prediction is he ends up leading a group of investors to purchase it for roughly $35 billion.

bot numbers - you are quite gullible but arguing in good faith huzzah

He won't be forced to make the purchase because the court will determine that will cause more harm to Tesla shareholders than benefit to Twitter shareholders. The litigation will probably take about 10 years though. That's according to Andrew Torez from the Opening Arguments podcast.

> the court will determine that will cause more harm to Tesla shareholders than benefit to Twitter shareholders

How does that work with a shareholder vote scheduled before the trial?

Why should the court care about Tesla share holders? I’m genuinely curious. Seems asinine that you can’t enforce contracts because a CEO signed a very poor one.

Businesses are allowed to fail after all…

I don’t understand why you think this would happen. Whatever Twitter would agree to, Musk would rather overpay by $10B with other investors and own Twitter, than to pay a $10B settlement and own nothing. And if it were a small enough settlement without an acquisition, Twitter investors would miss out, and Twitter’s management would be embroiled in shareholder lawsuits.

It's in limbo—trial starts October 17.

Just curious: why is FB evil but TWTR isn't? They both seem to share similar social media posts and both seem to apply quite a bit of censorship at times.

> why is FB evil but TWTR isn't?

Facebook’s senior leadership has shown a pathological pattern of lying. They’ve also predated on children in a way Twitter either hasn’t prioritised or hasn’t been able to. The only reason Instagram for Kids is because of literal Congressional hearings.

Faking video engagements stats to convince a whole generation of small news sites to pivot to video and ultimately fail.

Running psychological experiments on users.

Amplifying hate groups associated with everything from genocide in Myanmar to the groups that brought Kyle Rittenhouse to Kenosha.

Blatantly breaking state facial recognition laws.

I’m sure that’s just scratching the surface.

What groups brought Kyle Rittenhouse to Kenosha? He worked in Kenosha, his father lives in Kenosha, and he was staying with his sister's boyfriend in Kenosha.

> Twitter IMHO is not as evil as for example Facebook

Twitter is just worse at executing.

Facebook should be avoided, but I don't think it's nearly as bad as Twitter. Twitter exemplifies the amplification of an irrational mob more than any other social media platform.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com