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

Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 369 posts

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#71

Post by pjc50 »

ordinaryperson wrote: post #8

I don't understand why Twitter hasn't implemented some kind of reputation gradient that would allow users to filter by levels. Yes, I realize they are tricky to implement and subject to abuse but imagine you got points for using your real name, real photo, demerits for insults etc, then users could filter out hordes of trolls and gutter nonsense and instead focus on the meaningful conversations that do actually occur…

Less than 5% of the accounts I follow have a checkmark. Most of the most interesting ones don't use their real name or profile pic.

The real problem is that reputation can't be absolute but is relative to a context. Hence the blockbot partial solution.

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#72

Post by Eric_WVGG »

jsnell wrote: post #2

> He suggested that the service works best as an “interest-based network,” where you log in and see content relevant to your interests, no matter who posted it Yeah, no thanks. Has anybody ever been happy with Twitter's attempts to force content from non-followed users into the feed? A couple of times a year they'll opt everybody back into whatever crappy experiment they're running ("hey, we'll put some posts to your…

He's also making the mistake of thinking that my interests are what @thisdude and @thatchick are talking about.

My interests are @thisdude and @thatchick. That's why it's called "social."

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#73

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

ordinaryperson wrote: post #8

I don't understand why Twitter hasn't implemented some kind of reputation gradient that would allow users to filter by levels. Yes, I realize they are tricky to implement and subject to abuse but imagine you got points for using your real name, real photo, demerits for insults etc, then users could filter out hordes of trolls and gutter nonsense and instead focus on the meaningful conversations that do actually occur…

I'll tell you why it's not based on that.

Becuase you might not like - or they might not want you to see things that are popular.

How much would you complain if your Twitter feed was filled with Trump tweets? Better yet, how much would they not like that!? - Sorry though it's based on reputation levels and his is up there relative to non-famous users.

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#75

Post by merlincorey »

ordinaryperson wrote: post #8

I don't understand why Twitter hasn't implemented some kind of reputation gradient that would allow users to filter by levels. Yes, I realize they are tricky to implement and subject to abuse but imagine you got points for using your real name, real photo, demerits for insults etc, then users could filter out hordes of trolls and gutter nonsense and instead focus on the meaningful conversations that do actually occur…

> Serious question: has Twitter released any new, major features in the last 2-3 years?

Double-length tweets is the most major thing that comes to mind for me.

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#76

Post by CptFribble »

Shifting to interest-based feeds entirely misses the problem, and would actually make it worse.

Trusting information isn't only about trusting the source, it's also about whether that piece of information fits into your established frame of reference for how the world works. It also depends on how many different emotional buttons the information presses, fear being the strongest.

Shifting to an interest-based delivery system would only reinforce filter bubbles. And what's the alternative? Forcing people to see things you know they'd disagree with? Somewhere in the middle?

I worry a lot more about the rise of advertorials and product placements replacing traditional advertising, than I do about the visibility or importance of follower counts.

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#77

Post by criddell »

EForEndeavour wrote: post #26
criddell wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like that as well. Make the process so anybody can be verified then let me configure my client to only show stuff from verified users. I'd like to see them try other things too. One of the nice features in G+ was that the owner of a thread (the originator) could delete replies. I think that could work nicely in Twitter too.

> One of the nice features in G+ was that the owner of a thread (the originator) could delete replies. I think that could work nicely in Twitter too. Interesting; I think adding this feature without changing anything else would severely exacerbate the already intolerable echo-chamber effect. Sure, trolling and abuse would lose visibility, but so would even slightly contrary opinions. Thought bubbles would shrink even…

It's worth trying. If it makes Twitter worse they can always undo the change.

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#78

Post by TomMckenny »

luckylion wrote: post #48
sverige wrote: post #19

> “It’s democracy at stake, it’s our culture at stake,” Anderson said. Christ, the self-importance of the Twitterverse is astonishing. What they don't say out loud is that Trump and Brexiteers and others they oppose have used the platform to effectively end-run the media, they hate that, but they can't figure out a way to stop them. A little bit of plain speaking would be refreshing.

Be happy that today it's not life on this planet or the universe itself that is at stake. ;) In my experience, there are primarily three kinds of people that regularly claim there's a lot on the line, and it doesn't matter what their political views are. 1) young people that are inexperienced, 2) people that need to feel good about fighting for something important, and 3) people that exploit the other two by appealin…

Perhaps there are better examples of that claim.

More than a dozen democracies have fallen in the last twenty years. Many times that over the last century, making predictions of that correct. Obviously neither life nor the universe have ended as many times in that period.

Furthermore, I know of no well informed people that have ever predicted the later but many who have successfully predicted the former.

Re: Jack Dorsey says it’s time to rethink the fundamental dynamics of Twitter

#79

Post by whatever_dude »

> I don’t think I would create ‘likes’ in the first place.

_You didn't_. It was called "Favorites", and you later renamed it to "likes".

Jack can introspect as much as he wants, but it doesn't change the fact that they keep making the platform _worse_, not better.

Another indication is that the official web/client is a cesspool of unrelated content I don't want to see, and somehow they now think they need to double down on that effort - oh, sorry, "make it a interest-based network" - instead of take a look at whether that's users want.

Twitter is a prime example of A/B testing gone wrong.

Post reply on HN