Hacker News Reader

Comment by missedthecue | Hacker News Reader

Yes you are right. It is brought up a lot. But the crazy thing is that despite it coming up in every other thread, I have yet to see a solid explanation. Some theories (it looks good for VCs!!!!!), some half-assed justification (akshually, running web apps does need thousands of engineers), and a lot of people agreeing that it's crazy.

I think it's probably true that most companies are overstaffed. He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named managed to cut headcount 80% at a fairly prominent tech employer and drama aside, the business has not severely suffered. Could Ford Motor Company or US steel or Delta Airlines lay off 80% of their workforce and manage to maintain and grow operations as well as the bird app has managed to? I doubt it.

View on HN

> He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named managed to cut headcount 80% at a fairly prominent tech employer and drama aside, the business has not severely suffered

We need to stop repeating this lie.

They have reduced site reliability to reddit levels, had multiple breaches (probably far more than the ones we know about) and managed to get in trouble in multiple countries.

And yes, they were overstaffed like any other company hiring during the pandemic but not by 80%.

I wouldn't pay 5x for that reliability increase.

And I blame the breaches on churn more than head count. And the 'getting in trouble' is generally because of the new things being added.

I mean... according to him, that company's business HAS suffered. Granted, he blames it on a conspiracy out to "cancel" him with advertisers rather than technical problems, but still.

The advertiser exodus has been caused by Elon's contentious personality and his strategic decisions on how to structure Twitter as an experience, with regard to re-platforming controversial users, broadening the definition of acceptable content, and so on and so forth.

It has not been caused by laying off 6,000 project managers and react developers, and will not be fixed by bringing back on 6,000 people at six figure salaries.

The app itself is functioning well even as the number of users has increased and number of staff decreased, and not only is it being maintained, but they seem to be regularly releasing new features without protracted delays or major technical bungles.

Many advertisers have backed off because laying off a lot of people has led to a worse product.

Many more advertisers who might have otherwise been persuaded to stay by sales reps they had contact with have backed off because those sales reps themselves were let go.

One could genuinely make an argument that most SV tech companies have way more employees than they need. And one could almost trivially prove that to be true (many Tech companies were hiring developers not because they needed them, but to keep them out of the hands of competitors). That does not make Elon’s slash and burn destruction of Twitter sensible by any measure.

Meta is also offloading vast number of employees and it’s managing to do it without making it sound like their company is a dumpster fire.

Elon’s approach to Twitter is highly reminiscent of the Stephen Elop burning platform memo to Nokia, but orders of magnitudes worse.

Hyperbole. Advertisers backed away from Twitter because Musk was upsetting a group of people whom advertisers tend to tiptoe around. Twitter is terrible, but it's no more terrible now than it was when Musk bought it.

> broadening the definition of acceptable content

Let's call it what it is: he is using his power to promote some people and some ideologies while actively censoring others.

The irresistible allure of Elon's drama is fascinating. I kept my comment as vague as I could manage yet somehow people cannot help themselves but show the world their opinion about him.

Aside from Trump, I don't think any other person can so successfully and reliably cast this attention grabbing spell on the world's netizens.

What Elon has been doing, and how much of an asshole we may think he is, is actually completely unrelated to the fact that Twitter was overstaffed for essentially the entire duration of it's life as a public company. Which is the sole point of my initial comment.

To be fair, you opened with something that by your own words is not relevant, which is what this person was responding to. It's understandable that people respond to what you say and write, if you do not want to talk about it you should not say it.

> as the number of users has increased

Source?

I don’t get this. The business has suffered severely. But more relevantly, the product has suffered severely.

The most prominent example was the failed DeSantis presidential announcement.

I mean, Twitch regularly does larger livestreams with video!

Elon Musk. Everything Dumbledore said about Voldemort applies here too. If you don’t want to give him the power, don’t give him the power.

But that aside, your point is very good.

Being silly is different from being scared of him.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com