Stabitha_Christie

9secondkox2 said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

sdw2001 said:

jpellino said:

So Twitter was the preeminent microblogging platform, doing well enough to have shareholders getting earnings.
Musk buys it and starts pulling every lever he can find, many of which were clearly marked DO NOT TOUCH THIS LEVER.
Now the company is bleeding value, invisible to the public, and got its lunch eaten by Meta in less than a week of competition. 
Oh, and a new half-billion liability based on Lever #2.

Remind me how this reflects on the legendary genius of Musk?

Twitter was an absolute disaster and a fraud. That’s why he almost canceled the deal. It was a bloated company that was all smoke and mirrors. It’s going to take a while for even him to turn it around.

Twitter was able to make a profit before Musk took ownership. So it may have been a disaster but it was certainly less of one that it currently is. Also, he didn't;t almost cancel the deal, that was smoke and mirrors as you put it. He was legally obligated to follow through the deal which is why he did. 

You really should do some fact checking rather than just blindly repeating whatever he says. 

Twitter was anything but profitable in the true business sense. Being publicly traded, it got “free money” from investors. And those investors were investing based on false pretenses with the old incompetent Twitter leadership lying about its stats. 

Musk bought it and turned it privately owned. That in itself is cutting off quite a bit of money. The you have some political weirdness with advertisers that simply don’t like musks views. It was bound to happen as Twitter was a liberal echo chamber and was bought by someone with more conservative views. So of course there would be storms to deal with. It’s early days yet. Musk is s very smart and successful leader. It says something that his multiple businesses are so pioneering and risky, yet successful. 

It was an impossible task to tackle Twitter. But he did it. And now he’s fixing the broken foundations he bought. It was s fixer upper with serious issues. And it’s taking time to get right. 

MplsP said:

Elon has done well with Tesla and SpaceX but those were primarily tech companies. Twitter is a social media company - what makes a good social media company is different from what makes a good tech company. Elon is also not necessarily the same person he was when he was building Tesla and SpaceX. The bottom line is his prior successes do not guarantee he has the skill set to make Twitter successful.

Many people like to quote Elon's saying "move fast and break things." That works in some areas but in Twitter's case the main thing he broke was its revenue stream. If you're building a ship on shore you can fix what you break. If you're out to sea and you break the hull you've got some issues. Beyond that, Elon & Twitter have been slow to fix what they've broken. The approach seems to be trade a small problem for a bigger problem then move on.

Things were not all wine and roses but Twitter was doing OK but had its issues when Elon bought it. After purchasing he proceeded to make a series of changes that were universally considered to be ill-advised and poorly thought out. Even the changes that had potentially positive elements were poorly executed. The result has been the destruction of Twitter's reputation, image, with that it advertisers and revenue base.

What's quite interesting that the people who are optimistic about Twitter's potential with Elon's leadership have little more to say than "well, he did good with Tesla and SpaceX so that's proof that he knows what he's doing!" we're 9 months into this debacle and while the bull has stopped (or at least slowed down) knocking over shelves, he's still in the china shop and the mess still remains. 

Twitter had a very commanding position in social media. It was the social media platform and not just by a little. Its market dominance was astounding. Further, it had become a trusted, relied upon platform for many companies to make news and press releases. Even now most people have a hard time naming another significant platform. What that means for companies is they may decide to stay on Twitter simply because even with its faults and issues there's not a better choice. That also means Twitter still has a chance. The bull may have done a lot of damage but the china shop was big enough that it still has wares to sell and can potentially turn itself around. As long as the bull sits down and shuts up.

jfabula1 said:

mikethemartian said:

The previous owners of Twitter must be laughing their asses off.

That’s what this legacy car makers are doing when Mask started Tesla, who’s laughing now??

12Strangers said:

rotateleftbyte said:

Is Elon about to announce that he's running for congress? 
His words sound like those of a politician - lots of drivel.

Either that or not content with about to **** twitter he wants to do the same to Apple.
And to think that I almost bought a Model S in 2018. Now... I will never ever buy anything made by a company that he controls.

I have been thinking, ever since he started trying to by TWITter, that he is going to run for President in 2024.

"The Burn Bar is available for High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT), Treadmill, Cycling, and Rowing workouts."

"The Burn Bar appears 2 minutes into your workout. It displays based on a rolling window and is reflective of your last 2 minutes of work."

The burn bar isn't in your kickboxing workout screenshot because that isn't a workout type that a uses the burn bar. It's also not persistent so it isn't on screen at all times.  You can go into the metrics editor and turn it off.

Fitness+ also didn't do away with the other rings. Activity ring only means you aren't getting data from an Apple Watch. The Fitness app does the same thing if you don't use an Apple Watch. 

CheeseFreeze said:

larryjw said:

Protocols supported

These devices work with VPN servers that support the following protocols and authentication methods:

• IKEv2/IPsec with authentication by shared secret, RSA Certificates, Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm (ECDSA) Certificates, EAP-MSCHAPv2, or EAP-TLS

• SSL-VPN using the appropriate client app from the App Store

• L2TP/IPsec with user authentication by MS-CHAPV2 password and machine authentication by shared secret (iOS, iPadOS, and macOS) and RSA SecurID or CRYPTOCard (macOS only)

• Cisco IPsec with user authentication by password, RSA SecurID or CRYPTOCard, and machine authentication by shared secret and certificates (macOS only)

This article mentions VPN generally. The above quote from Apple indicates the VPN protocols supported. I take this to imply there may be certain VPN apps for iOS, iPadOS and MacOS which may not fully protect communications. 

The article is about VPN and its various protocols in general. The protocols are irrelevant in this discussion.
What is happening is that on an operating system level the VPN tunnel gets ignored for some data streams and is going through the regular ‘channels’. 

That isn’t supposed to work like that. VPN turned on, regardless of the protocol, means no data should move outside the tunnel, which is very problematic.

sdw2001 said:

jpellino said:

So Twitter was the preeminent microblogging platform, doing well enough to have shareholders getting earnings.
Musk buys it and starts pulling every lever he can find, many of which were clearly marked DO NOT TOUCH THIS LEVER.
Now the company is bleeding value, invisible to the public, and got its lunch eaten by Meta in less than a week of competition. 
Oh, and a new half-billion liability based on Lever #2.

Remind me how this reflects on the legendary genius of Musk?

Twitter was an absolute disaster and a fraud. That’s why he almost canceled the deal. It was a bloated company that was all smoke and mirrors. It’s going to take a while for even him to turn it around.