
Burtcheno
898 posts

Burtcheno
@burtcheno
音视频工程专家。从 AOSP 源码到 4K 实时流媒体处理。目前正在结合 AI 与高性能计算重构多媒体框架。偶尔分享 Web3 基础架构见解。
US เข้าร่วม Ekim 2019
414 กำลังติดตาม442 ผู้ติดตาม
ทวีตที่ปักหมุด

从 X → X Chat → X Money大家都在疯传马斯克要做大的,超级app
但是我告诉你这个有多难?
X(twttier)是什么信息入口 + 注意力入口”
是全球舆论广场,强调实时性(新闻、金融、AI、热点)这是流量基础,没有这个,后面都没戏。
X Chat
对标的是 WhatsApp / Telegram。
目标:把用户关系链“锁住”
私信 → 群聊 → 加密通信
未来可能结合 AI(聊天助手、客服)
这是“用户粘性”和“关系链”的核心。
X Money
对标的是WeChat(微信支付)PayPal(马斯克早年做过)Cash App
目标:把“流量 → 交易 → 金融”闭环打通
可能包括:
P2P 转账
打赏 / 订阅
电商支付
甚至证券 / 加密货币
这套逻辑本身有没有问题?
从产品逻辑看——完全合理,甚至是顶级设计
其实就是复制中国成功路径:内容 → 社交 → 支付 → 生态闭环
这在 WeChat 上已经被验证过。
但是我想说这个很难。有多难????让我一一分析给你看:
1)美国市场是“分裂生态”
中国:
微信 = 通讯 + 支付 + 生活
美国:
社交:Instagram / Facebook
聊天:iMessage / WhatsApp
支付:Venmo / Cash App
用户习惯已经固化,很难集中到一个 App。
2)监管难度极高(尤其金融)
做 X Money 要面对:
反洗钱(AML)
KYC(身份认证)
各州金融牌照
比做社交难 10 倍以上。乃至数十倍。
3)信任问题
X 现在的现实问题:
内容争议多
广告主流失
品牌信任波动
做支付最核心的是“信任”,这点目前是短板。
4)聊天不是说做就能做起来
通讯产品的本质是:
谁先有关系链,谁赢
WhatsApp / iMessage 已经锁死用户关系
用户不会轻易迁移聊天工具
X Chat 这一步其实是最难的。
但马斯克有没有“优势”?(这是关键)当然有... ...
1)流量极强
X 仍然是全球级平台(政治、科技、金融圈)有“入口权”
2)创始人能力极端强
Elon Musk 的特点:
能跨行业整合(Tesla / SpaceX)
敢硬推产品路线
这点别人做不到。
3)可能结合 AI(真正的变量)
未来可能是:
X = 内容 + AI
X Chat = AI 助手
X Money = AI 交易
如果 AI 融进去,玩法会完全不一样(这点是最大变量)
马斯克不是在做一个 App,而是在做:
“以 X 为核心的数字世界操作系统”
但问题是:
美国没有“长出超级App”的土壤;
朋友们你们怎么看?吧你们的想法说出来。
中文

@LunaAI519 Has no one else paid you any attention besides me? Hi there, my friend. We meet again—right on time.
English


Most people think of philosophy as an abstraction that doesn't touch the real world, but they're wrong.
Most real world problems are philosophy problems, and most philosophy problems are "giving things the wrong names".
For example, if you call feral drug addicts "homeless people", then you can't solve the problem. You can only buy more houses for feral drug addicts to destroy.
In this case, we called the police and courts the "justice system".
But they're not. They can't be the justice system.
The function of a justice system would be to give everyone what they deserve.
Now, I deserve a hundred million dollars, a private Caribbean island, and a foot massage from Lauren Bacall in her prime, but I don't see the "justice" system lifting a finger to correct any of this, do you?
No, what we are supposed to have is a public safety system.
The function of a public safety system is to keep the public and their property safe.
If we understood that, we wouldn't care about what criminals deserve. We would care how likely they are to do it again. Or something worse.
In a public safety system, retardation and mental illness are not migrating factors. They are the opposite.
Because they mean that the criminal is more likely to pose a future threat.
We all understand this.
We all understand that the feral retard who stabs strangers on the train for being White and beautiful is a worse person than the man who murders his wife and her lover when he catches them in the act.
Not because of some abstract calculus of moral agency, of who is disadvantaged and who isn't, but because one is certainly going to murder more people if he can, while the other is a lot less likely to.
We've known for centuries, if not millennia, that it's the same small percentage of people doing all the robbing, raping, and murdering, over and over and over again.
And we've known for centuries that if you physically remove them from society, that's 100% effective in stopping them from doing it again.
The only hurdle is philosophical. Call it a "justice" system, and you have to argue endlessly about morality and redemption, and then some leftie thug-hugger weaponizes your own Christianity against you.
Call it public safety, and you confine the argument to likelihood of reoffense. Then you are in the realm of statistics. Which you can compute.
It all starts with naming things correctly, according to their actual nature.
New York Post@nypost
Crazed homeless man accused of slaughtering Iryna Zarutska on train found incompetent to stand trial trib.al/GsJMZC8
English








