I feel like it's histrionic nonsense.
For a lot of the stuff listed -- particularly the legal stuff -- the potential for problems may indeed exist, but the the way the post paints everything is like there'll be a cop car immediately dispatched the moment anything happens.
Companies end up out of compliance with rules and regulations every day. Some of the biggest companies on earth are presently out of compliance, know they're out of compliance, and the regulator knows they're out of compliance, and the world keeps turning. Even if theyre "caught", it isn't the end of the world. Facebook keeps getting hit with gdpr fines, it says "oops", pays them, and moves on with its day. Facebook has 20 times the staff twitter had at its peak.
Moderation issues are a dead issue for me, because Twitter already had terrible moderation. Remember, this is a website that was already fighting in court because it refused to take down child porn. that wasn't because Elon Musk owned the site, he didn't own the site at that time. If you looked for it, there were all kinds of terrible stuff that were fully allowed and the site didn't end. Twitter is where all the bad campaigns to end innocent people originated, because twitter allowed that sort of thing.
Technical issues could be a thing, but notice how many of the risks are "If we make a broken change". In other words, as long as nobody breaks the site, the site won't break. I've had this first-hand, where something works forever and you make a change and then have to deal with the consequences. Even if it's a bad problem, the world doesn't end. Every major website has had issues in the past 24 months. None of them have failed as a result.
From where I'm standing, I think you could probably maintain twitter with a few hundred competent people maximum. You don't have people shoveling coal into the tweet furnaces, and I think the excesses that were revealed regarding twitter staff and twitter offices reflect that. The stories of people who work a day a month and pull full paycheques are probably real.
In the twitter poster's defense, this is histrionic nonsense if you're trying to make a prediction about the next few weeks of twitter existing, but it excellent work if you're trying to manage risks and identify potential problems so you need to list all the things that could happen and the potential consequences so you can mitigate those risks. I've created documents just like this listing all the risks of a thing, looking at the chances of it happening, the thing that happens, and what the potential consequences could be for the purposes of preventing those things from happening. Thing is, when you're doing stuff like that you're intentionally ignoring "rubber meets road" things like I've written above because nobody wants to be the Ford Pinto manager measuring the number of deaths and lawsuits against the cost of the recall.
For a lot of the stuff listed -- particularly the legal stuff -- the potential for problems may indeed exist, but the the way the post paints everything is like there'll be a cop car immediately dispatched the moment anything happens.
Companies end up out of compliance with rules and regulations every day. Some of the biggest companies on earth are presently out of compliance, know they're out of compliance, and the regulator knows they're out of compliance, and the world keeps turning. Even if theyre "caught", it isn't the end of the world. Facebook keeps getting hit with gdpr fines, it says "oops", pays them, and moves on with its day. Facebook has 20 times the staff twitter had at its peak.
Moderation issues are a dead issue for me, because Twitter already had terrible moderation. Remember, this is a website that was already fighting in court because it refused to take down child porn. that wasn't because Elon Musk owned the site, he didn't own the site at that time. If you looked for it, there were all kinds of terrible stuff that were fully allowed and the site didn't end. Twitter is where all the bad campaigns to end innocent people originated, because twitter allowed that sort of thing.
Technical issues could be a thing, but notice how many of the risks are "If we make a broken change". In other words, as long as nobody breaks the site, the site won't break. I've had this first-hand, where something works forever and you make a change and then have to deal with the consequences. Even if it's a bad problem, the world doesn't end. Every major website has had issues in the past 24 months. None of them have failed as a result.
From where I'm standing, I think you could probably maintain twitter with a few hundred competent people maximum. You don't have people shoveling coal into the tweet furnaces, and I think the excesses that were revealed regarding twitter staff and twitter offices reflect that. The stories of people who work a day a month and pull full paycheques are probably real.
In the twitter poster's defense, this is histrionic nonsense if you're trying to make a prediction about the next few weeks of twitter existing, but it excellent work if you're trying to manage risks and identify potential problems so you need to list all the things that could happen and the potential consequences so you can mitigate those risks. I've created documents just like this listing all the risks of a thing, looking at the chances of it happening, the thing that happens, and what the potential consequences could be for the purposes of preventing those things from happening. Thing is, when you're doing stuff like that you're intentionally ignoring "rubber meets road" things like I've written above because nobody wants to be the Ford Pinto manager measuring the number of deaths and lawsuits against the cost of the recall.
- replies
- 0
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 2