The hot-hand fallacy is the tendency to believe that someone who has been successful in a task or activity is more likely to be successful again in further attempts. The hot-hand fallacy derives from the saying that athletes have “hot hands” when they repeatedly score, causing people to believe that they are on a streak and will continue to have successful outcomes.
His goals with Twitter feel like hubris not confidence but I guess that is the “bullshitter”? The thing from left field is still “succeed at what”. Right now it almost seems like he wants to attract people like mr beast to the platform and turn it into a 24-hour reality tv show. That is an option that I think could be successful, and the author seems to limit his own vision of twitter 2.0 to not include rich media, which Is not the correct way to think about it.
The original vision of some kind of paid for public square with mature discourse that 80% of the world subscribes to is feasible. Jerry Springer is a much more believable recipe for success than C-SPAN.
If he ends up turning it into a place where the only advertisers who want to be there are shilling male enhancement pills and survivalist supplies, he may have a problem.
Some of the staff would have been working on things that don't matter in the short term but could be eventually disastrous if they don't get done. An example would be third-party software updates to fix security holes.
Ultimately, Twitter will survive simply because there is no replacement for it right now. But it will look and function differently since Musk wants to make a site that has finance at its core for revenue rather than advertisers.
People have speculated that all the tech parts of Twitter can be replicated for less than 500mil so in a way I can see why Musk wants to get rid of a big chunk of its workforce and rebuild it as a new entity with new people and a new way of thinking at its core.
He'll rebuild it and have a new revenue model for it. It will be interesting.
7 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 25.5 ms ] threadThe original vision of some kind of paid for public square with mature discourse that 80% of the world subscribes to is feasible. Jerry Springer is a much more believable recipe for success than C-SPAN.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33680522
Some of the staff would have been working on things that don't matter in the short term but could be eventually disastrous if they don't get done. An example would be third-party software updates to fix security holes.
People have speculated that all the tech parts of Twitter can be replicated for less than 500mil so in a way I can see why Musk wants to get rid of a big chunk of its workforce and rebuild it as a new entity with new people and a new way of thinking at its core.
He'll rebuild it and have a new revenue model for it. It will be interesting.