itty53

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Twitter was purchased at 44 billion in late 2022. It did not cost Twitter 44 billion to run for the years prior. That is very much profit for those shareholders considering especially that 44 billion was a significant percentage higher than the value at the time. It cost less than half a billion to keep Twitter's lights on every quarter. They started in 2006. So assuming from the get go it cost half a billion a quarter (and you know it didn't right?) ... that's 32 billion to run Twitter the years it was open. And they sold for 44 billion, meaning 12 billion in profit in a windfall.

Still following?

And for a social media company's primary shareholders, selling that company is the ultimate goal and only way to realize true profits. That's the social media scam. Zuckerberg right? You think he wants to run Facebook? He has to, he's an employee at this rate. Well compensated sure but he doesn't pull the strings.

What's hilarious is Elon didn't understand all that. He bought Twitter for cash money. There is no way on God's green earth he manages to turn a profit with it because no social media company has been able to either - not with an entire board and public stock, so certainly not with a private company either. All the profit mechanisms they had before were contingent on the stock market, on speculation. That's all gone now. It's private. There is no public stock price to affect.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Twitter made 44 billion dollars. Pretty sure it didn't cost that much to run. Ergo Twitter made money.

That's the big hurdle. That's the big catch. Social media companies are contingent on speculation to drive profits. Facebook isn't worth what it is without speculative buying in the markets. Twitter, same story. That's where reddit is at, they want a payday and to move on. The funny thing is this same reasoning exposes just how awful a businessman Elon Musk is. Twitter is going to literally drive him from the top ten richest in the world list all on its own. Give it time.

The funnier thing is Steve Huffman is such a loser he is looking up to Elon in this past week. The guy wants so desperately to be able to buy popularity like Elon did.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

David Spade...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

And NMS eventually got good enough to drop a few dozen hours into.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

TIL Voat shut down. Shocker.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

The thing is that corporations already can't sell that data ... unless you give them permission to ... which you do just that explicitly when you agree to the EULAs.

That's the legal basis. No one absolutely must use these platforms, legally. Practically they must in many cases but that's the catch 22. The platforms literally came up on intelligence community funding. Facebook was propped up by'em for this exact reason.

And you can't make an inalienable right to privacy such that companies can't ever sell personal data but still allow people themselves to do so, and you can't stop me from selling my data myself. That would be a much bigger breach of the contract of regulatory power that defends citizens.

Privacy isn't something anyone can reasonably force you to keep. I can't go showing my dick to everyone and then scold them for checking out my package, and still maintain my honesty. If I didn't want people looking at my wangstick, I wouldn't show it to them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

Swing and a miss.

I'll give you a more direct hint about the context: "You do" implies someone said that I [verb] something. But I say that in response to someone calling me [an adjective], which doesn't make sense.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 children)

You do!

[in response to my wife calling me stupid]

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

I mean why couldn't there be a dedicated service that indexes everything? Whoever makes it and gets it working in a user friendly manner is going to have a significant level of control on the content that is shown in the results. If you don't want it, it isn't indexed. I don't have to stretch the imagination to think of parties that have good reason to want to be first to do that across Activity Pub as a whole. Mastodon is already a big frontrunner in that regard.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Reminder that even TOR was an NSA / Naval intelligence project.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah people who say shit like that have never been to jail or prison. Cause you wouldn't. Isolation is fantastic when you're home and you can lounge and play video games. Not so great in an empty 6 ft box.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Thing is the next guy can't actually invigorate them because it's DeSantis. Or Ted Cruz, whom I suspect will actually end up with the nomination. DeSantis is a shitbag but he's entirely lacking in the crowd pleasing department. MAGA diehards are all that's left and they hate him already. Then there's Cruz, who will be a direct opposite to that brand - trying to sell himself as a moderate. Real hard to get people excited about that, and they've spent a decade or more undercutting that exact platform.

The brand of ego maniac that creates a Trump isn't common enough for Republicans to just spin up a new one. We've watched them try time and again the last 8 years and it's laughable how badly it goes for them. I disdain Trump but I can recognize that aspect clearly. The guy was massively and mainstream popular for decades prior to his presidency across multiple, huge platforms. He was already a household name, no one had to ask who he was. That's what it took.

Republicans know it too, it's why they've still been backing him and not going on the direct offensive - yet.

view more: ‹ prev next ›