I doubt I misunderstand... the only one misunderstanding was Musk as it was clear when he tried to get out of the deal to acquire Twitter.vorticism wrote: ↑Sun Jul 02, 2023 4:33 pmYou misunderstand how artificial and overvalued Twitter was, and much of Silicon Valley for that matter. They had a pipeline of practically free money for decades. For various reasons the taps have been shutting in recent years leading to things like monied hardware guys buying software firms. Two different worlds; culture clash inevitable. Apple and Google never figured out how to make a car; yet Tesla wrote software and designed chips and boards. Social media has a lot of non back end overhead; you have to ask, for what purpose? Bots, moderation, curation, etc.; the defining chars of Web 2.0. Imagine if Vodafone/Verizon/phone providers started hiring mods and started eavesdropping calls and texts, and banning customers; then you start to understand what social media is and how inefficient it is and completely removed from deserving the 'tech' demonym.
Overvalued? Maybe but it was Musk that offered 44 bil to buy it out. As far overvalued companies go... Does Tesla being worth more than the whole car industry globally qualify them for overvalued?
I'm not a big user of social media, I'm not even a medium or small user of social media really. But to come in and trash a culture only to show later how much competence you are missing gives the vibes of the car mechanic joke that rips out the engine to fix your battery charge when the car didn't startup up. Designing chips and stuff is just a matter of hiring electronic engineers with experience and sending orders to a FAB, you can design your own custom board in 15 minutes online, I've built my own air quality monitor by buying sensors and chips from Alibaba and soldering stuff together and writing the embedded software for it, it's not easy but it's not that hard either.
Meta, Google, Apple, Amazon all do it, even Nextflix does it, as do smaller startups in the electronic/chip field like Ampere Computing. Designing boards is something that likely even Twitter did as the scale they had before they moved into Google/AWS likely needed them to have custom servers for cooling, again all social media companies have designed this stuff at the scale they are operating at, unless they run on Amazon/Google which I would advise anyone to do really.
Twitter's issues had nothing to do with bots and that crap, but you'd have to know how advertising works in order to make that comment. Most of the spend in advertising goes towards upper funnel campaigns that look for reach on the web or towards DR campaigns like retargeting or search. Twitter wasn't so big to cover the needs of demand gen/upper funnel, and measurement was anyway always a challenge for them because of Apple's cookie policies (among the many reasons), on top of it their performance, even when measured, was never that good to compete with search, people don't browse Twitter to buy stuff but to absorb news mostly so they don't have much intent, they should have opened an exchange to bring in third party data to drive demand, but they wanted to follow in what Facebook did with their FBX product first that turned into Facebook WCA in 2015 or so by thinking they can earn more by owning the whole exchange and only allowing API users, but they vastly overestimated the market interest and had seriously dumb minimum spend guarantee requirements for new partners.
Anyway... this is super OT. I would say we could continue somewhere else but it's not a topic that is that interesting to me because I don't like the advertising market, despite having worked in it for 17 years, and I don't particularly like Musk anyway.
Setting aside Tesla and SpaceX, on which I don't know that much or anything, on Twitter Musk is showing legendary never-before-seen incompetence, you can choose to believe that he's the great experimenter, or what have you, I'm not going to spend more energy trying to convince you otherwise.