I use twitter daily and the site is a shell of its former self. It's slow, prone to bugs, filled with bots, the amount of real users has cratered, user reports go nowhere, there's no support team, the ads are now bot accounts posting crap like "Today is a good day, be sure to make it advantageous", there are no new features besides previously in-flight projects pre-Musk, they've actually removed a lot of features (like Circles, block lists, etc), and much more. He took an otherwise functioning social media service and forced it into maintenance mode. He also fired all of the people that keep the user base alive so now it's flooded with bots (which he presumably likes so he can boast about engagement being up). So yes it's still around but it's dying and the skeleton crew he has left can't do anything.

In other words, he destroyed it.

> he fired a huge number of the staff and the site is still running, so how was that assumption not proven correct ?

Why would you expect the website to stop running though? Keeping a site running with a smaller crew is easy amd baked in - all organizations with >10 engineers do this frequently, over the holidays or Lunar New year. What's harder is building new features at the same pace and quality as a larger engineering team.

The site was previously engineered such that an uninformed owner could literally start unplugging servers without it going down.

That said, outage frequency did rise following the mass layoffs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/technology/twitter-outage...