121–130 of 305 posts
Seriously: Jack Dorsey is definitely worth his 100 millions if he can come up with innovations like this; raising the number of character? Holy shmoly, what a genius! A veritable dare devil!
The problem isn't character limit. The problem is missing interesting Tweets. My timeline is flooded with new tweets. Better flagging to read later, algorithms that say you might find this most interesting, filtering would be welcome and are needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The length of your entire message: 285 chars Length of " You can't express complex thought without multi-tweeting ": 56 chars (took " literally " out, because that's incorrect).
"Literally" is not incorrect. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally "Literally" can mean "virtually," or "figuratively."
I like Twitter because it forces people to be concise. There are already plenty of places on the web where people can post long thoughtful articles or op-ed pieces.
And yet that very comment of yours is 164 characters. Do you consider your own comment to be excessively wordy? I don't.
Other commenters seem to be missing a critical point here: tweets continue to have a 140 character display with some sort of "read more" that you click to see the rest. To me, that actually sounds pretty great. One thing that's nice about Twitter is that it's fairly skimmable. All of those "1/ Some thought", "2/ some thought continued" threads damage that. Combining them into a "My thoughts on... read more" tweet wou…
Means that someone can read as usual, or delve for the full series of tweets. They could provide an indication to the writer of what percentage of people read to which depth, for example.
It could work well for presenting news articles (sentence or paragraph at a time), photo galleries/essays, slidedecks, stories, advertising, etc. Using a news article as an example, some people will be interested in just the headline, others in the first three bits, a few in the full story to its end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, only $100k for a 160 character tweet. Edit: mental math botched. I thought I remembered the powers of 2 better than I actually did. 160 characters would be about 10k, and 100k would buy you a whopping 163 characters.
No, like 50 cents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best suggestion I've seen is 1¢ for the 141st character, 2¢ for the 142nd, 4¢ for the 143rd, etc. Going slightly over 140 costs a trivial amount, but it would be stupidly expensive to tweet anything really long. EDIT: I found where I stole this idea from: http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/6207.html
Ah yes, only $100k for a 160 character tweet. Edit: mental math botched. I thought I remembered the powers of 2 better than I actually did. 160 characters would be about 10k, and 100k would buy you a whopping 163 characters.
$10KOther commenters seem to be missing a critical point here: tweets continue to have a 140 character display with some sort of "read more" that you click to see the rest. To me, that actually sounds pretty great. One thing that's nice about Twitter is that it's fairly skimmable. All of those "1/ Some thought", "2/ some thought continued" threads damage that. Combining them into a "My thoughts on... read more" tweet wou…