The ongoing X and Elon Musk Transgressions Thread

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by jammies

If he could articulate specifics about what is wrong with the Twitter code he'd be much more convincing when saying it needs to be rewritten. Anyone can throw around buzzwords like "agile" or "efficient" or "extensible", that's visionary bafflegab used by marketers and salesmen, not serious technical folk.

I very much doubt he even knows what the stack currently is, he just knows he didn't have his meddling fingers in creating it, so it's lacking in the distinctive musk of Musk he loves so well.

It’s fascinating insight into what it actually takes to get to Musk’s level (and what it doesn’t). One of the most interesting parts around Musk is how his fanboys and casual viewers alike are determined to treat him with kid gloves. From stuff about him being an unquestionable genius because he is a billionaire to stuff suggesting the actual problem with asking him questions he handles like a grenade is “people are being rude.”

He paid his way into multiple major companies he now pretends to deeply understand the technical aspects of. He’s a billionaire. The questions should be hard and the expectations high. But he’s formed this weird atmosphere around him where people believe hard questions and high expectations are some kind of “attack.”

I think part of the reason developers laugh at him isn’t to be cruel, it’s all you can do when you realize whatever knowledge and talent you haven’t doesn’t actually matter as Musk is living proof you don’t need it.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s fascinating insight into what it actually takes to get to Musk’s level (and what it doesn’t). One of the most interesting parts around Musk is how his fanboys and casual viewers alike are determined to treat him with kid gloves. From stuff about him being an unquestionable genius because he is a billionaire to stuff suggesting the actual problem with asking him questions he handles like a grenade is “people are being rude.”

He paid his way into multiple major companies he now pretends to deeply understand the technical aspects of. He’s a billionaire. The questions should be hard and the expectations high. But he’s formed this weird atmosphere around him where people believe hard questions and high expectations are some kind of “attack.”

I think part of the reason developers laugh at him isn’t to be cruel, it’s all you can do when you realize whatever knowledge and talent you haven’t doesn’t actually matter as Musk is living proof you don’t need it.

I have this theory that most CEOs are sociopaths, and certainly most billionaires if not all. Looking at it through that lens has helped me make sense of some things that don't necessarily make sense otherwise.

Sociopaths with a cult following is a very dangerous thing, indeed. We've seen it with Trump and now Musk among others.

[RedHot25]

In a much more simplistic way, I do laugh that in the last page or two of this thread, we've been talking about how someone "is trolling", and "being mean / not nice", being rude etc to Musk.

Someone being rude. Trolling others. Being "not nice". Hmm, not sure where I've heard that before.

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

I have this theory that most CEOs are sociopaths, and certainly most billionaires if not all. Looking at it through that lens has helped me make sense of some things that don't necessarily make sense otherwise.

Sociopaths with a cult following is a very dangerous thing, indeed. We've seen it with Trump and now Musk among others.

I don't know if I would classify all as, and this is broader than just CEOs, but the "people ultimately in charge" often get a bit of yes-person syndrome from everyone around them. Throw in, like the population overall, a certain % that are, well, sociopaths, as a leader and....well....

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by RedHot25

In a much more simplistic way, I do laugh that in the last page or two of this thread, we've been talking about how someone "is trolling", and "being mean / not nice", being rude etc to Musk.

Someone being rude. Trolling others. Being "not nice". Hmm, not sure where I've heard that before.

What, this guy?

[RedHot25]

Can't quite put my finger on it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

While that is true in a sense the reason they are users is because they like what the existing program does, there's no guarantee they would follow a new different version of Twitter that Musk thinks would be better and to be honest Twitters user base is, by social media standards, tiny, it is barely larger than Pinterest.

If he honestly thought the stack was of 'minimal value' Musk could and should have just written his own stack, started his own new 'just like Twitter only better' app for 'free'

You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter how good the code is now that the users are there. A product would need to be orders of magnitude better to cause users to move.

The societal inertia of these networks is the value. It could be both true that the code is terrible and that their are millions of daily users. Just having a better product does not mean you will ge worth more or have more users.

Now is murk correct? Probably not but saying the code is what drives value just isn’t true at this point. If it was just code people would already be gone. It’s the difficulty in moving together that creates a barrier to leave.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GGG

You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter how good the code is now that the users are there. A product would need to be orders of magnitude better to cause users to move.

The societal inertia of these networks is the value. It could be both true that the code is terrible and that their are millions of daily users. Just having a better product does not mean you will ge worth more or have more users.

Now is murk correct? Probably not but saying the code is what drives value just isn’t true at this point. If it was just code people would already be gone. It’s the difficulty in moving together that creates a barrier to leave.

If you are just going to build the exact same thing with new code... Then sure but that seems like a dramatic waste of time. I assume if you are going to redo the entire code... Then you'd actually change things and then the users will be annoyed.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

If you are just going to build the exact same thing with new code... Then sure but that seems like a dramatic waste of time. I assume if you are going to redo the entire code... Then you'd actually change things and then the users will be annoyed.

You can rebuild from the ground up and keep the user experience identical, but also make significant code efficiency and operability improvements. Is it worth the effort/headaches/potential for calamity? Usually not.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You can rebuild from the ground up and keep the user experience identical, but also make significant code efficiency and operability improvements. Is it worth the effort/headaches/potential for calamity? Usually not.

Plus the amount of daily scope creep under Musk would result in a never ending project.

[photon]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Plus the amount of daily scope creep under Musk would result in a never ending project.

Or even just Musk's apparent philosophy. Fail lots and iterate lots.

Fail lots works great if you're learning every time you blow up a rocket, but is less optimal if there's people in those rockets. There's people using Twitter so every time you launch Twitter Blue then un-launch it because you didn't think it through then relaunch it you give your users whiplash.

Same with Tesla, they change their cars constantly even removing things after you bought. The demand and fan enthusiasm has been such that they could just ignore any negative sentiment from that, but they won't get the same benefit on Twitter. Users hate things constantly changing, especially if it removes things.

Now put that philosophy in a complete rewrite.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s fascinating insight into what it actually takes to get to Musk’s level (and what it doesn’t). One of the most interesting parts around Musk is how his fanboys and casual viewers alike are determined to treat him with kid gloves. From stuff about him being an unquestionable genius because he is a billionaire to stuff suggesting the actual problem with asking him questions he handles like a grenade is “people are being rude.”

He paid his way into multiple major companies he now pretends to deeply understand the technical aspects of. He’s a billionaire. The questions should be hard and the expectations high. But he’s formed this weird atmosphere around him where people believe hard questions and high expectations are some kind of “attack.”

I think part of the reason developers laugh at him isn’t to be cruel, it’s all you can do when you realize whatever knowledge and talent you haven’t doesn’t actually matter as Musk is living proof you don’t need it.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by GGG

You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter how good the code is now that the users are there. A product would need to be orders of magnitude better to cause users to move.

The societal inertia of these networks is the value. It could be both true that the code is terrible and that their are millions of daily users. Just having a better product does not mean you will ge worth more or have more users.

Now is murk correct? Probably not but saying the code is what drives value just isn’t true at this point. If it was just code people would already be gone. It’s the difficulty in moving together that creates a barrier to leave.

No, the point is Twitter has a tiny user base, around 400 million, as I said around the same size as Pinterest, if you looked at the stack and thought 'this is ####e and needs to be rewritten' before you spent 44 BILLION on it you would clearly spend 4 or 5 billion writing a better code, starting a better company and wiping Twitter out, no one in their right mind would buy something that has a tiny user base, makes very little money and also has a good awful stack for 44 billion, he's nuts, a bull#### merchant and a ####e businessman

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GGG

You are missing the point. It doesn’t matter how good the code is now that the users are there. A product would need to be orders of magnitude better to cause users to move.

The societal inertia of these networks is the value. It could be both true that the code is terrible and that their are millions of daily users. Just having a better product does not mean you will ge worth more or have more users.

Now is murk correct? Probably not but saying the code is what drives value just isn’t true at this point. If it was just code people would already be gone. It’s the difficulty in moving together that creates a barrier to leave.

A strong barrier to exit is a fascinating concept, and it is very effective and valuable, but also dangerous and fragile. It's like a dam that does a great job of keeping its client base in tact, until it breaks, at which point it loses all of them all at once.

And right now, Musk is juggling dynamite right beside its base.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s fascinating insight into what it actually takes to get to Musk’s level (and what it doesn’t). One of the most interesting parts around Musk is how his fanboys and casual viewers alike are determined to treat him with kid gloves. From stuff about him being an unquestionable genius because he is a billionaire to stuff suggesting the actual problem with asking him questions he handles like a grenade is “people are being rude.”

He paid his way into multiple major companies he now pretends to deeply understand the technical aspects of. He’s a billionaire. The questions should be hard and the expectations high. But he’s formed this weird atmosphere around him where people believe hard questions and high expectations are some kind of “attack.”

I think part of the reason developers laugh at him isn’t to be cruel, it’s all you can do when you realize whatever knowledge and talent you haven’t doesn’t actually matter as Musk is living proof you don’t need it.

Its amazing how much of our Western Economy is built on a house of cards.

Scam after scam, Theranos and FTX et al are basically just buying into cults of personality.

You dont have to be good at what you do...."as long as you believe it...its not a lie!"

[AltaGuy]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

I have this theory that most CEOs are sociopaths, and certainly most billionaires if not all. Looking at it through that lens has helped me make sense of some things that don't necessarily make sense otherwise.

Sociopaths with a cult following is a very dangerous thing, indeed. We've seen it with Trump and now Musk among others.

Just from my own business experience, the two most successful (monetarily) people I personally know under the age of 30 definitely have sociopathic tendencies. Both have an unwavering determination to get things done - fast, and with whatever means necessary. I have watched them trample some definite societal norms and skirt the laws here and there, with more than a few people harmed along the way. One is approaching billionaire status on paper and is still just in his late twenties, the other maybe worth around $200M in his mid-twenties. Both started from nothing and did do it on their own.

But yeah - they both have this very definite trait where empathy is set aside when business is involved. I've always thought the same as you: to be a mega-titan of capitalism, you've got to have a singular ability to make money-making your one and only objective.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Locke

Its amazing how much of our Western Economy is built on a house of cards.

Scam after scam, Theranos and FTX et al are basically just buying into cults of personality.

You dont have to be good at what you do...."as long as you believe it...its not a lie!"

Theranos and FTX are good points because you have to start to ask yourself how razor thin the line is between “scam” and “success.” Does Elon seem any more intelligent, capable, or honest than Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos? I might be inclined to believe he’s less so, but he got lucky buying into things that (mostly) work and (mostly) don’t endanger people. He makes the same empty promises, massive mistakes, and misses deadlines all the same. Like Holmes, he has a severe knowledge/confidence imbalance.

I don’t think the distance between companies like Tesla and companies like Theranos are very far at all.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Theranos and FTX are good points because you have to start to ask yourself how razor thin the line is between “scam” and “success.” Does Elon seem any more intelligent, capable, or honest than Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos? I might be inclined to believe he’s less so, but he got lucky buying into things that (mostly) work and (mostly) don’t endanger people. He makes the same empty promises, massive mistakes, and misses deadlines all the same. Like Holmes, he has a severe knowledge/confidence imbalance.

I don’t think the distance between companies like Tesla and companies like Theranos are very far at all.

They're not. What Elon did was fill a market at an opportune time and get some amazing deals at the time for it.

Being 'Captain Planet' was all the rage and he made deals with the US Government and foreign Rare Earth Element suppliers at an opportune moment.

Holmes was more of an idiot, she marketed an idea/product that simply was flat-out impossible.

In her case, "Who is the greater Fool? The Fool? Or the Fool who follows him?"

Who is the bigger idiot? Its hard to tell even though one is in jail and the other one isnt, yet...but Teslas arent saving the planet or anything either.

[JohnnyB]

Musk is a ####e businessperson? Tesla and Theranos are basically the same? I think there's too much Festivus spirit in here. More grievance than sense.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Musk is a ####e businessperson? Tesla and Theranos are basically the same? I think there's too much Festivus spirit in here. More grievance than sense.

It’s not grievance, they’re critical viewpoints (which you’ve misrepresented to make your own argument feel stronger to you). This is just another example of trying to reframe normal criticism as an “attack” or rude/angry etc. You haven’t actually presented a counterpoint.