4
submitted 4 months ago by Joker@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@lemmy.world
all 31 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dandelion 70 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This article is written by James Hayton, a professor at a business school focused on "innovation" and "entrepreneurship", and who received funding from the Nuffield Foundation, founded by William Morris, one of the largest financiers of the British fascist movement.

Just to be clear about the ideological commitments of the author and his financiers. I would suggest taking this article with a lot of skepticism.

[-] megopie 52 points 4 months ago

I mean, he knows how to gut things he doesn’t think are important.

That’s not efficiency, that’s just doing less stuff. Efficiency is when you do the same stuff but with lower cost and the same outcomes. That’s not what musk does.

[-] Joker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

Do you have any examples or references of this?

[-] dandelion 42 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

like that time Elon Musk removed all the LiDAR sensors from Tesla vehicles that allowed them to be driven safely on auto-pilot?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/critics-call-teslas-elon-musk-irresponsible-for-casting-doubt-on-need-for-lidar-sensors-in-self-driving-cars-2019-05-26

You are capable of googling and finding Elon Musk's history of cost-cutting, he guts products - Twitter is another great example

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

See "firing everyone at Twitter" then realizing the people he fired were responsible for, you know, actually running Twitter.

https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/elon-musk-twitter-rehire-fired-employees-soros-magneto-1235615023/

His approach was essentially "If I don't know what you do, you're fired." Failing to realize the flaw in "not knowing what someone does" is between his own two ears.

[-] NameTaken@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

A better question would be do you have any examples of him actually creating efficiencies? I don't mean this in a condescending way but he did do a great job with Tesla but basically no where else. Every time he goes out of his wheelhouse it seems to end in disaster? Honestly I don't follow him but it's impossible not to hear about him. So can you elaborate on what his successes were and how'd that translate into making the government more efficient?

[-] Joker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

As I said in other comment, he lowered Twitter expanses without actually lowering the quality of service quality (I don't know if he lowered moderation for costs or personal control) .

I would preferred he do the costs minimizing measures more slowly, but I don't think anyone can criticize the efficiency there.

And all of that while not knowing anything about how social media companies work or having previous experience.

I am saying all this as a person who use Mastodon and BlueSky instead of Twitter.

Most people who left Twitter left it because of Elon ego rather than the way he manages the company internally.

[-] NameTaken@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

I think a lot of people would disagree with you about X. Objectively he bought the company for $44B and now it's worth $9B that's a huge loss. Most people attribute the decline to his "efficiency" measures. Basically losing all the good talent in his company causing a significant decline in users ( because of quality of service). His running of Twitter I think would be a better example of a failure.

That aside hypothetically even if X was doing well - How would the strategy / approach he used in a public company be good for government. These are two very different places?

[-] BertramDitore@lemm.ee 38 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Wow, that was an incredibly out of touch and frustrating thing to read. The author has no idea what they’re talking about.

in a highly polarised US political landscape, the anguish about his governmental role may be little more than a knee-jerk reaction from the millions of people whose side he did not choose.

No, it’s a reaction to genuinely absurd proposals for how to save money. For example, if they were able to successfully fire every single federal employee, it would save the government just over $100 billion. That money goes to pay the salaries of around 1.5 million federal employees. That’s nothing compared to the entire military budget, for example. So, even accomplishing their goal of firing as many civil servants as possible would save very little money in the scheme of things. All it would accomplish is ruining many basic services that people rely on every day to live a relatively safe and healthy life.

But what this article most glaringly ignores is that this Government Efficiency talk is disingenuous from the start. It’s not about efficiency, it’s about gutting as much of the government as possible so it breaks. That’s what they want, and they’ve been quite open about it.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 10 points 4 months ago

That's also now 1.5 million people out of work and not "contributing" to the economy, not spending money or generating tax revenue.

But any step past "step 1" is too far for Elmo to think about.

[-] snowboardbum@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago

Elon slashed twitters' expenditures too. That lowered the service/experience. Our social contract doesn't need the same.

[-] Joker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

I hate Elon Twitter actions, but Elon actually cut a lot of their costs without any actual significant losses of quality.

I don't know what exactly is Elon stand on spending on moderation on the platform(there is a lot of pirated content there). I really don't know if he removed moderation to have a better control and more freedom to do what he want or he did it to only cut costs.

In all the cases, you got my point.

Just because I hate him, doesn't mean I should criticize everything he ever did in life.

It's ok to have a balanced view on people you love or hate.

[-] Riccosuave@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago

You are in no way a serious person.

[-] Joker@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

Your arguments here sure sound like you are a very serious and thoughtful person.👍🏻

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)
[-] Riccosuave@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Good point.

[-] HK65@sopuli.xyz 12 points 4 months ago

Twitter lost most of its value and revenue though, as a company it lost significant amounts of quality.

[-] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

He cost cut dual factor authentication because he doesn't understand the need for it, then made it premium only? Will that help with the bot problem Mr. Musk?

[-] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

Isn't the Department of Government Efficiency going to have 2 heads? Doesn't sound very efficient to me.

[-] prole 9 points 4 months ago

It is also redundant in and of itself, given that the GAO already exists.

But I guess you can't expect an illegal immigrant from Africa to be familiar with the US federal government.

[-] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

🤣 OMG! How did I forget about the GAO! That is painfully hilarious.

[-] BMTea@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

LMAO

Honestly I think it's just a make-work job Trump gave them in his transactional sort of way. I think he dislikes Musk on a personal level (I have no evidence, I just presume that they have clashing egos and personalities.) I wouldn't be surprised if they have a public falling out in which Musk gets mad that he isn't important enough in the admin and badmouths Trump.

[-] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

It's up to 3 heads, Majorie Titan Green has joined the crew of people Trump wanted to pay back but keep a distance from.

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

I worked at twitter when Musk acquired it. He asked everyone to print out their code. Its one of the stupidest things I have heard anyone say at work, ever. My code would be a stack of paper taller than me, mostly white space or generated code. No one would ever read such a thing, or be able to look through it. Its pathologically stupid. He's just a rich idiot who people work around, not a leader of any sort. Everything at Twitter is broken now. Thats what he will do to ythe government too.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Making savings ≠ increase efficiency

[-] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 6 points 4 months ago

And monkeys might fly out of my butt.

[-] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Hahahahahhahahahhahahahaha... deep breath hahahahahshahahahahahaaaah!!!

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Hey guys, turns out you'll have lots of money if you stop paying pesky things like "employees" and "debt obligations"!

[-] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

He's only the richest man in the world because of government contracts, not because he's a brilliant or a champion of efficiency.

[-] dandelion 1 points 1 month ago

Wow, this thread aged like milk 🤣

this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
4 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22730 readers
3053 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS