Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

So "X" - nothing to see here. Elon's in control - Part XXX

1247248250252253394

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 901 ✭✭✭sameoldname


    I was driving home last week and part of the route back from work takes me down a road that has a 2 kilometer long straight with a tree-surrounded crossroads right before a bend. As I'm about half way down the straight I see a vehicle poking its nose out at the junction and before it has even started pulling out I start cursing to myself. Why? Because even though I can only see about the first meter of the vehicle I can already see that it has a green body and yellow wheels, which means I'm now probably going to be stuck behind a John Deere for the next 5 kilometers of bends. Because of strong branding I could tell what I was looking at from a kilometer away based on nothing more than the colours I was seeing.

    What Musk has done is the equivalent of John Deere painting their machines black and changing the name because it's "cool".



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,035 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    "I am a being of pure objectivity with no bias. You peons and your valid criticisms of someone amuse me"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,011 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    LOL ignoring all the other incorrect things your posting ill just point out that your core argument here is completely incorrect, microsofts own leaked internal docs showed in 2017 only 10% of xboxes were owned by under kids under 18..... with the average age being 33

    And like others have pointed out it has been ridiculed ever since it came out for its name, the sexbox the x-bone etc etc

    If microsoft were to suddenly change the name from x-box to something else they would be getting similar criticism to elon for throwing away decades of brand recognition



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    He has said before, that he doesn't care about taking big risks and possibly losing money and even possibly failing. Which is clearly evidenced by his past business decisions.

    He's certainly not unusual in the entrepreneurial space with this attitude. He frequently admits that his decisions have the potential to be a financial mistake, and yet he's still willing to do it anyway. Obviously he's not really like most of the general public, he thinks differently and acts very differently. This is why I'm never inclined to bet against the guy. He's way more successful that 99.9% of the people who consistently criticise his decision making. I'm just an interested observer in what he gets up to really... so I'll wait and see how things pan out with this latest venture.

    I'm liking the "X" change anyway. I'm going to predict that it will be a successful re-branding in the long term. But we'll have wait and see what else he has planned, and what the overall strategy is.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    He has said before, that he doesn't care about taking big risks and possibly losing money and even possibly failing. Which is clearly evidenced by his past business decisions.

    Which would be nice if Twitter wasn't saddled with incomparable mountains of debt thanks to the $44 billion takeover - and the 50% loss in advertising revenue admitted to by Musk himself adding its own financial pressure. Meanwhile Twitter Blue has not taken off as a huge money-maker, and only served to devalue the product's core pillars. Other companies like Tesla are having their own problems, not least the ongoing farce of the Cybertruck, or boondoggles like the Hyperloop.

    We've seen from prior communications that his running of Twitter has been at best described as "Ad hoc" when results on the field show a company pivotting in ways that defy common sense. You don't need to be a chef to know the steak you just got can bounce against walls - so you don't need to be a successful CEO to observe, objectively if you will, that Twitter is being run in a way charitably summarised as "mercurial".

    As the saying going, past results do not guarantee future performance, and whatever large changes Musk made to the automotive and rocket industries - it's not a blank cheque to the presumption all decisions WRT Twitter are good ones.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,851 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Okay but the above logic is assuming he is engaging some genius that nobody can discern. This ignores the fact he overpaid and partially did so for a 420 joke. That he's lost a huge amount of advertisers and has publicly complained about this. That the platform has become more unstable and he's actively not paying the actual bills for background services.


    So indiscernible genius sounds more like an inability to defend the mess he's making of the platform. I also think it's a pretty big sign of how things are going when he's not boasting about record breaking traffic etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    Yes, "mercurial"... I think this is a very apt phrase to describe his approach.

    I agree, his past achievements don't guarantee success - he admits this himself. But I would trust his decision making ability by orders of magnitude more than many of the so-called experts and self professed know-it-alls who frequently aim their invective in his direction.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Not an especially Objective attitude to simply demean others as "so called experts" worthy of contempt (and who are they anyway that are so called) - indeed who self professes as being a know it all either?

    Presumption of strategy or nous is not backed up by the actions thus far. And indeed again, the objective analysis would be to take the actual quantitative results of Musk's reign of Twitter - not a presumed competency by the man himself. By definition objective attitudes are dispassionate, while you're clearly not.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 158 ✭✭Kevrano


    You really cannot see your own bias, can you? This "casual observer" schtick doesn't really hold up in the context of your posts.

    I really didn't have much of an opinion on Musk until he bought Twitter. But he's made a site I used everyday unwelcoming and unusable. His tweets with negative comments on minority groups, which are thinly veiled attempts to ingratiate himself with the right wing, tell me what kind person he is. *That* is what I judge a person on, not their business acumen.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,853 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    If he bought Twitter for the brand and the userbase to "kick-start" his new everything app , then he has royally f*cked that part up.

    Fundamentally - Had he truly wanted to create this "everything app" called X he would have been infinitely better off taking a small chunk of the $44B he spent buying Twitter and started from scratch.

    He could have built an app from the ground up that does everything he wants for a tiny fraction of $44B.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 158 ✭✭Kevrano


    Am I right in thinking he didn't plan to buy Twitter, he just posted some bold claim on Twitter and was held to it?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,589 ✭✭✭Harika


    He signed paperwork, that was the issue. Else he doesnt care what he said/tweeted/xed yesterday.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 158 ✭✭Kevrano


    He does seem to act on impulse, which would/should be a red flag to investors



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    But would you not need to wait a few years to see how his venture pans out?

    Very few big business ventures, especially ones that involve significant alterations to the original business model, are likely to be successful overnight. Common sense and historical precedent would tell you that these things take time to bed in and find their feet so to speak. From some of the interviews I've watched with Musk, he seems to be looking at this with longer term objectives. And not necessarily all of them being financial or profit driven either. I get the sense there is some altruistic motive here too.

    I think he understands that this may involve angering a few people, who do not share his vision. But that's part of life really, particularly in such a polarised society that we are currently living.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,853 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    He signed paperwork and agreed to buy it without any of the normal "due diligence" and then couldn't back out of it.

    He also made the price per share offer valuation based on an Internet meme about cannabis - He chose $54.20 because he wanted to have 4/20 in the number because 4/20 is a cannabis meme - The actual share price at the time was around $45.

    Basically, his childish mentality and obsession with 4/20 cost him about $5B as they probably would have accepted an offer in the $47/$48 range if he was really serious.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,853 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Whether or not "X" is ultimately successful is almost secondary to be honest.

    And let me also say , I couldn't care less about Twitter , don't use it and never really got the point of it.

    He bought Twitter for $44B and in the short time he has owned it, he has destroyed almost everything of value that it had to offer.

    The only reason to buy a Twitter and then essentially tear it down and replace it with something completely new is because you are buying the brand or the user-base. He has fundamentally and terminally damaged both of those things with his actions to date.

    Like I said , he could have taken maybe $5B and built "X" from scratch.

    If he ultimately builds "X" into the everything app he claims, it will not for a moment alter the fact that he essentially set fire to $44B for no good reason.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭Ashbourne hoop


    It really wont be a successful rebrand. People will still say Twitter, tweets, retweets etc. Its a monumental stupid decision to re-brand something that has global, everyday recognition, even from people who don't use Twitter. The re-brand is just another in the list of stupid decisions he has taken since buying it for ridiculous money. It's become a cesspit with the worst of the worst being highlighted on it through the "for you" section, a contradiction in terms if ever there was one.

    He seems determined to ruin the site, and I don't think it's by accident either.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭Ashbourne hoop


    But Twitter didn't need significant alterations, it was working just fine, and the last thing it needed was a rebrand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,766 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    I'd argue that Blue Origin did a better job of making space travel more phallic.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    How is "X" being successful in the long term, secondary?

    If his objectives are mostly long term, then it would be the early mistakes or blunders that could be considered "secondary" to the overall big picture goal.

    Unless you are referring to certain people's short term objective to take down a powerful individual, who they identify as some sort of ideological threat? I guess that would supersede any of the longer term objectives/visions.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 478 ✭✭Run Forest Run


    Interesting.

    So, you think his goal is to deliberately take down a popular platform and sabotage it? What do you think the end game of that is?

    Or perhaps I'm misinterpreting your point.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,079 ✭✭✭Ashbourne hoop


    He's acting like the taking down of the site IS his end goal. Why ? I'm not sure, boredom, spite, see if he can, who knows? He's certainly not running it like he wants to protect his investment, but I guess he has the money to be ok with that.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,853 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    It's secondary because the purchase of Twitter will play no hand act or part in whether it's a success or not.

    Why did he buy Twitter as part of his plan to build this "Everything App" ?

    • The Twitter code base is of little to no use to him as it doesn't have any of the features that he claims he will provide with "X"
    • He fired most of the staff so he wasn't "aqui-hiring" specific engineering talent.
    • He clearly doesn't value the brand name as he's just binned it
    • If he was buying the user-base , he isn't doing a good job holding on to them.
    • Twitter wouldn't have been a competitor to "X" so he wasn't "taking out an oppenent"
    • He wasn't buying the infrastructure as he's cancelled (or trying to cancel) all those contracts.

    So again , in the journey to the creation of "X , the Everything App" , why on earth did he spend $44B buying Twitter??

    The purchase of Twitter has no necessary part to play in Musks plan to build "X" , so its just money completely and utterly wasted.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,851 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Thing is, I would suspect that engagement in the platform has dropped drastically. Advertisers have dropped off drastically too. That's long term reputational damage based on spur of the moment decisions from Musk.... That's gonna impact any long term future.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 158 ✭✭Kevrano


    The only thing I can think is the Twitter data itself, i.e. billions of tweets. But what value does it have? Maybe an AI project?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,096 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,035 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    The TLDR being that he didn't buy Twitter for any valid business reason. Bolstered by the fact that he tried to get out of his decision to buy.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    To indulge in a degree of mild Devil's Advocate: I'd say this isn't a question of Musk being directly racist; rather that in firing all those content moderation teams without so much as a second's thought, he sacked whole teams whose job it was was to track & audit prejudice on the system ... which yeah, would be something you'd be more likely to hire PoC as the best perspective to police that toxicity. So the raw numbers look like blanket racism, as opposed to merely a degree of accidental racism from a thoughtless bit of showmanship masquerading as leadership.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,011 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    The simplest and stupidest answer is probably the correct one, he made a stupid 420 joke and then was forced to follow through on it. We know he tried to get out of buying it and he ended up wildy overpaying so for me its the real reason.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,618 ✭✭✭Cordell


    Look at me thanking your post :)

    But, if they are seeing racism where there is none, or if they are playing the race card with this trial, were they fit for purpose in a content moderation team? Isn't it better now when there is none, or only moderation which deals with heavy and illegal stuff?



Advertisement