> hardly a billion worth of revenue

Where do you pull these numbers out of? Twitter's yearly revenue was $5.2 billion.

If you're so off base for the objective metric, want to guess how off you are on the rest of your opinion?

What are the generations of social graphs?

If that's a serious question, it's something like:

1) Friendster

2) MySpace

3) Facebook

4) Twitter

5) Instagram

6) TikTok

Obviously the exact list is a matter of opinion, but Twitter is definitely not current-generation, I think everyone can agree on that.

Here, have fun exploring when each one was "born" and therefore its generation:

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=t...

It was a serious question. I thought you were talking about the organizing computer science or social principle of the network but it seems you just meant the age the company was founded or became popular, which is unremarkable. Sorry to bother you.

I'm not the person you originally responded to, I was just clarifying what seemed to be the obvious meaning.

But to say the generations are unremarkable isn't quite true -- the whole point is that previous generations are generally stagnant in growth, unlike the newest generation(s) that are still growing. This is a very valid argument for why investing in TikTok might be a smart idea while investing in Twitter is... not.

Ah, sorry. Yes, there is certainly some value in thinking about the age of the company. But it’s also so strsightforward that I wouldn’t have asked about if it they’d used less ambiguous wording. And I’m a little disappointed that I wasn’t able to be pointed to a cool research paper or something. :) I appreciate you clarifying for them; I like to do similarly on HN when I see two people missing each other’s meanings.