Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Giving you more characters

blog.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 493 posts

Re: Giving you more characters

#461

Post by accordionclown »

ppod wrote: post #33

In an effort to get people to look into each other’s eyes more, and also to appease the mutes, the government has decided to allot each person exactly one hundred and sixty-seven words, per day. When the phone rings, I put it to my ear without saying hello. In the restaurant I point at chicken noodle soup. I am adjusting well to the new way. Late at night, I call my long distance lover, proudly say I only used fifty-…

it's great seeing a poem by a poet i know.

for the record, jeffrey mcdaniel is also a fantastic performer, so if you get a chance to see him recite, don't sleep on it.

Re: Giving you more characters

#462

Post by craftyguy »

jsnathan wrote: post #30

I'm not sure what to make of this. I suppose there is nothing inherently ideal about the (arbitrary) 140 character limit on tweets. Why not 180, or 280, etc? Still, my first reaction was, this is .. a bad idea: the 140-character limit is iconic, it's at the core of their value proposition, and Twitter is going to dilute their brand if they abandon it. I think it's not only that people sometimes feel limited by the 14…

My first thought is that this guy is going to have to buy a lot more paper now: https://www.theverge.com/tldr/2017/3/28/15102170/donald-trum...

Re: Giving you more characters

#463

Post by 794CD01 »

tajen wrote: post #358
glenstein wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you that the 140 is iconic and it's probably not a good idea to abandon it. What's more, I feel like there was a very simple, elegant solution to this all along. It was to allow long-form text as a type of embedded media, treating it the same as video and pictures. That way you don't lose the iconic 140 characters thing, and you don't have any problem to solve by making weird compromises where the user n…

And reversely, it's incredibly creative for Trump to attempt to fit the entire USA diplomacy in 140 characters.

That's just a side effect of him trying to fit the entire USA diplomacy into his head, which has approximately the same capacity.

Re: Giving you more characters

#464

Post by Markoff »

ppod wrote: post #33

In an effort to get people to look into each other’s eyes more, and also to appease the mutes, the government has decided to allot each person exactly one hundred and sixty-seven words, per day. When the phone rings, I put it to my ear without saying hello. In the restaurant I point at chicken noodle soup. I am adjusting well to the new way. Late at night, I call my long distance lover, proudly say I only used fifty-…

> When the phone rings, I put it to my ear without saying hello.

Actually I often do this with unknown callers, it usually confuse them especially when it's advertisement, they usually wait for someone to speak up, but at least it's easier way to save your breathe if someone who is calling you doesn't even know your name to ask "is mr. XY there?", then you can just hang up.

Re: Giving you more characters

#465

Post by a_t48 »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #444

Early evidence that it is a mistake: OH HOLY SHIT. I figured out what we should do with the new 140 characters. ´•._.•´¯`•._.•´Forum Signatures Are Back Baby`•._.•´¯`•.¸¸.•´ https://twitter.com/austin_walker/status/912793201592999936

Oh nononononono.

Re: Giving you more characters

#466

Post by scbrg »

joelrunyon wrote: post #459
scbrg wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, your message required a lot more attention from me than it would have, if you had used the word "number" rather than the strange glyph "#". I guess you were doing this with some sort of meta humour because the story is about twitter, but the point was inversed. Your attempt to abbreviate things to make them more legible, made them less so. The lesson above applies, incidentally, to pretty much ev…

I'm sorry to inconvenience your day.

Well, apologies. I got the impression that your argument was that you make a messages easier to understand by shortening them. I just gave you a concrete example of when a message got harder to understand because it was shortened.

But good job on deliberately missing the point as a discussion strategy. That too, was very twitter of you.

Re: Giving you more characters

#467

Post by joelrunyon »

scbrg wrote: post #466
joelrunyon wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry to inconvenience your day.

Well, apologies. I got the impression that your argument was that you make a messages easier to understand by shortening them. I just gave you a concrete example of when a message got harder to understand because it was shortened. But good job on deliberately missing the point as a discussion strategy. That too, was very twitter of you.

Hey - I'm not trying to argue. I apologized.

Re: Giving you more characters

#468

Post by joelanman »

was_boring wrote: post #450
macspoofing wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's more, I feel like there was a very simple, elegant solution to this all along. It was to allow long-form text as a type of embedded media, treating it the same as video and pictures. How is that elegant?

People often using the word "elegant" when they actually mean "my preferred." It helps give credence to the solution.

That's an elegant explanation

Re: Giving you more characters

#469

Post by rconti »

SquareWheel wrote: post #363
rollinDyno wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't seem to be working. I'm fairly verbose, nothing I ever want to say fits in 140 characters. I'm better off not reading what DOES fit. (140)

This version reads to me as almost irritated, as if you're ranting about something. This might be a situation I'd abandon the post completely because there's no way to communicate my post in the proper tone and context.

To be fair, I WAS ranting :)

Re: Giving you more characters

#470

Post by glenstein »

was_boring wrote: post #450
macspoofing wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's more, I feel like there was a very simple, elegant solution to this all along. It was to allow long-form text as a type of embedded media, treating it the same as video and pictures. How is that elegant?

People often using the word "elegant" when they actually mean "my preferred." It helps give credence to the solution.

That's true as a general observation, but in this case I meant elegant in the usual sense.
Post reply on HN