[flagged]
As for the Threads app, that's a job any average web dev can have a rough prototype of in a day. The rest is iteration and refinement.
The entire mail is 100% BS. Also, there's no suit. There's a threat of a suit, which will likely not materialize as there's no chance of winning it.
I dislike Musk/Zuck as much as anyone, but I do believe that Meta can build a Twitter clone in 6 months on their infrastructure, and with their product folks.
Twitter's source code is valuable to Twitter, much like Twitter's engineers and their institutional knowhow were valuable to Twitter (before Musk fired them by the thousands).
But outside Twitter, taking their code and assets and trying to awkwardly graft them onto Meta/Instagram's stacks would not only not help, but actually slow them down and cause the product's functionality and stability to suffer.
Twitter's layoffs represent pure loss to Twitter, and much less gain to anyone else. Trying to spin it as if the nature of Twitter's operation is some big valuable secret is such cringe coming from leadership that supposedly prides itself on being technical and hands-on.
From this, it does follow that if you've got some secret-sauce at your company, and it's NOT your employees and their experience, then it must be something else. If you're Twitter, then it's probably The Algorithm, or code printed out onto reams of paper. After all, that's what makes the money right?
Except as is obvious to most companies, it's not. The people, the shared understanding, the experience, the company culture, and even the context of the world that the product is a part of – these are all far more important than the actual code, and where any long-term successful company focuses their efforts.
To put it in terms Musk might understand, product and engineering teams are "stage 0" for a software company, they are the machine that builds the machine.
Edited: the last line is incorrect.
Huh? I'm not aware that it's possible to open source something without, you know, making it OSS. Am I mistaken, or are we talking about two different meanings for "open source"?
The agreements for opening code up for review purposes only is indeed not OSS, despite the word 'open' often being used there.
I started off sound, then diverged. The part of Twitter that was open sourced will have a license spelling out what you need to do (if anything) in order to use the code. The review part is a different thing.
Needless to say, it’s not accurate to call that “open source”.
They are usually _not_ bullshit.
You wouldn't put it past Zuck? Friendly reminder to everyone that Tesla knowledgeably violated GPL for years until they were forced into compliance: https://www.theregister.com/2018/05/21/tesla_inches_toward_g...
I don't trust for a second that Elon's team knows what they're talking about here.
Nothing.
Diversion is what-about-ism.
He knows how to keep a secret from another countries' spies and then wants to also play legal hardball in murkey waters between Meta and Twitter?
His character is consistently inconsistent.