This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
While I don't share the general admiration for Elon Musk, I have to admit, I think this is funny.
I don't know if Americans/non-British English speakers will quite get the joke about "Chief Twit" and it certainly seems a lot more self-aware than Musk has previously shown himself to be.
But I do find myself in need of The Idiot's Guide To What Is Going On Here. First, Musk said he would buy Twitter, and that was so terrible it had to be fought at all costs. Then he backed out, or tried to, and that was also so terrible that he needed to be forced to go through with it. Now it looks like the deal is back on, and this is now terrible again (possibly because he said he'd sack 75% of the workforce, which I don't believe is serious but has a lot of knickers in a twist).
So - good, bad, terrible, meh that he is (seemingly) going to buy Twitter?
I expect him to fire close to 75%. He couldn’t get the funding he needed. Running twitter lean will be essential to paying off acquisition debt. And a lot of people think these tech shops are bloated.
The really hard part is figuring out which 75% to fire. Twitter can certainly be run very lean if you clear all the deadwood and you keep everyone who actually has the implicit knowledge required to run the whole thing, but all the employees are trying to convince you that they're the ones who are very important, we'll have to see if Musk manages to correctly pick the people to keep. It doesn't help that social media companies are especially vulnerable to downtime. If your fishing company gets a 2-month period of downtime while they figure out how to slim down, no problem, you just lose 2 month's revenue, the fish will still be there waiting, but twitter's users will move on to other things after any sort of prolonged downtime.
there is absolutely no way twitter would have downtime. I am sure a transition plan is already in place and there is enough redundancy that the site will still be up even if important people quit. The last people to be fired would be those whose job it is to keep the site up.
Two months won't happen. But there's probably zero people at Twitter that know the entire stack, and probably about 1-2 people per team that know their team's domain well enough to quickly diagnose and recover from outages.
Some of those teams manage things that the entire rest of the site depends on to stay up. What may have been a 10 minute outage with the right people available to fix the issue could become an hours long outage as people with less skill and experience struggle to even root cause the problem.
More options
Context Copy link
It's weird to remember the before time when Twitter was still on Rails and hours long outages would happen every couple of months or so.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link