Live data from Hacker News

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

techcrunch.com

311–320 of 369 posts

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

#311

Abuse and misinformation are certainly the big issues but even more bigger and rather meta-issue is the strong hub-and-spoke model that Twitter promotes. Here's an example: You could tweet some of the most informative and useful tweets relevant to, say, robotics enthusiasts for day after day and years after year, and you might still end up with absymal engagement in terms of likes, retweets and followers. Meanwhile,…

That's not an issue of Twitter, but of human nature. I don't think technology can do anything about it. That is just wishful thinking about "future people" who spend their time learning and improving their skills 24/7, instead of slacking and having fun. Unrealistic - presumably people simply need time outs. You could argue that Twitter actually does well with that problem: after all, if you follow a robotics enthusi…

It's most definitely issue of how Twitter ranks and promotes the content. To make content more visible, you must be popular in first place. To be popular, you must have your content more visible. It's a virtuous cycle 99.9% users cannot possibly break without winning random virality lotteries. I agree Pareto's law and exponential distribution applies in all social networks but for Twitter this is not only skewed by at least an order of magnitude but its current design and algorithms actively promotes this phenomenon instead of resisting it.

A thought experiment: Imagine Twitter was the only way to distribute information. How would that world look like? Everyone who doesn't have followers would almost have no chance of having followers and therefore their content will keep disappearing in Twitter blackhole regardless of how useful it might have been (given how bad their search is). Twitter algorithms takes rich-gets-richer phenomenon to whole new level. At times, it feels their algorithms wants to re-establish ancient model of nobility vs plebs. The whole notion of "follower" has negative connotations with implied power-play top-down relationship. I have seen people with mid-range follower count not following others even when they find them interesting because they don't want to ruin their followers/followee ratio. The notion of follower as opposed to friend or contact firmly puts in place one-way power structure, the information broadcast instead of information exchange model. Many folks have resorted to always following back any followers in protest of this model while many others resist following anyone who they don't consider their peers in power structure created by Twitter Universe.

A minimal fix Twitter can do is to identify good tweets from followers and occasionally show it to followees to at least have a shot at 2-way relationships. The current scheme of "likes" doesn't cut it because first one wins and everyone else gets buried deep. When people ask why Twitter is not so successful with larger population, not so much growing and still relatively quite small (after subtracting bots), I often get surprised they don't see above as the most fundamental issues with their model of social relationships itself.

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

#312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an honest question - why on earth should Twitter be an official support channel for a business? If I had a business, I would respond to Twitter support requests with “please see our support website for how to contact us” or “thanks, we are now contacting you.” I don’t know why Twitter users should get better support and it seems odd to me to rely on Twitter to provide or to ask for support.

Because it's cheaper than having an actual support hotline and easier to ignore than having email. And in the US especially, companies hate having to support users, which is why they are also pushing for AI support instead of actually having a human there. Think about it, when is the last time you had an issue with some Bay Area Saas company and could call them on the phone to get support, like you'd do with a bank?

To put it bluntly -- the prevailing mindset is that customer support is a cost-centre. It's hard to reliably measure customer satisfaction, so its value is misunderstood.

And if you're the only game in town with your own little walled garden, and everyone in your industry has entirely automated (read: low opex) support, where's the incentive to do better?

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

#313
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I really dislike is the spam in the notifications section. If someone likes my tweet, replies to it or retweets it, that's relevant. I don't however want to see a notification for something Tweeter deems interesting under other people you follow liked/retweed this as a notification.

I'm always surprised by these threads expressing frustration at the timelines being re-arranged - then I remember I use a 3rd party client (Tweetbot) and that's why my timeline is not molested and spam-filled. If they ever fully disable 3rd party clients that will be the day I cancel my account. I thought forced ads as you started a DVD were obnoxious...

They're certainly going that way. Group DMs don't work with the API (in that there's not even a "hey log onto the website your client doesn't support this" notification). A ton of features have been removed from or gimped in the API, to the point where many of the third-party devs have given up.

"Fully disable" - probably not. But they'll certainly make it nearly impossible to produce something "like the Twitter app but better".

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

#314
post #289
post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me quote the full paragraph: >> In his view, that means rethinking how Twitter incentivizes user behavior. 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 — rather than a network where everyone feels like they need to follow a bunch of other accounts, and then grow their follower numbers in turn. What he…

> I might be following an individual for a particular topic they are typically insightful on, but I’m also getting their sports and politics at the same time. I've had this happen, typically with interjections of sport commentary, and I will immediately unfollow them. None of the unfollows has been a great loss. People who are truly insightful have enough self-awareness not to self-indulge like this.

Why are you so down on real life - expecting every one to display laser focused concentration on one topic is just not realistic or actually healthy.

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

#315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's cheaper than having an actual support hotline and easier to ignore than having email. And in the US especially, companies hate having to support users, which is why they are also pushing for AI support instead of actually having a human there. Think about it, when is the last time you had an issue with some Bay Area Saas company and could call them on the phone to get support, like you'd do with a bank?

To put it bluntly -- the prevailing mindset is that customer support is a cost-centre. It's hard to reliably measure customer satisfaction, so its value is misunderstood. And if you're the only game in town with your own little walled garden, and everyone in your industry has entirely automated (read: low opex) support, where's the incentive to do better?

Which is partly because the business model is selling data to large companies and data brokers, not providing a service to the "customers" (users). And then you get places like Facebook that are themselves data brokers, and sell access to the data so they can claim they aren't Acxiom.

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

#317
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programmers are usually very vocal leftists. I've always assumed that those who don't speak openly about politics don't care or are right wingers, but who knows.

are usually very vocal leftists...those who don't speak openly about politics don't care or are right wingers It generalizes.

[flagged]

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

#318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1000 This completely ruins using Twitter as an official support channel for a business. I want to be notified immediately whenever my company is mentioned, but enabling email/push notifications so that I'm aware of these asap also means constantly opening Twitter just to dismiss whatever unsolicited spam they're trying to put in front of me. It adds up to quite a lot of wasted time and is a downright obnoxious user…

This is an honest question - why on earth should Twitter be an official support channel for a business? If I had a business, I would respond to Twitter support requests with “please see our support website for how to contact us” or “thanks, we are now contacting you.” I don’t know why Twitter users should get better support and it seems odd to me to rely on Twitter to provide or to ask for support.

As a consumer, if a company with a Twitter presence responds that way I'll ignore them. Because 9 times out of 10 when I tweet at a brand it's either because I'm calling them out for actively harmful stuff (like using plaintext passwords) or prodding them about issues that likely affect more people than just me.

If I have a specific support request about my personal account, I'll go through the usual channels. But if it's on twitter, it's probably there because the extra visibility and public accountability is intentional.

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

#319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why on earth should Twitter be an official support channel for a business? The same reason you do anything - they’ll take their business elsewhere unless you provide service and support in the way they want it. People don’t like being told to go away and follow some other procedure when they have a problem. Might as well tell them they should avoid having any problems requiring support while you’re at it - that’ll…

This is flawed thinking. Surely you're not proposing to implement every support channel your users might want to use? People are generally happy to use designated channels, as long as it's discoverable, easy to use and effective.

People will call you out on Twitter. You likely have a brand account on Twitter already so you'll already get those mentions. Even if you don't have an account people will create a hashtag.

If you want to control your brand perception you don't want the first result when people look for your brand on Twitter to be people tweeting about how terrible you are.

The reasons to do support on Twitter have less to do with what's tech support needs and more with marketing and controlling your brand perception.

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

#320
To his credit, Dorsey seems to at least acknowledge the things at stake. It's a big contrast to zuck.

I dated a girl who worked on a moderation team at FB 2-3 yrs ago, as the fake news problem started getting traction. They had a serious smokescreen of corporate sounding names for the teams, roles and tasks. The tasks were very obviously editing, fact checking, and such... Much of it politically oriented. Meanwhile, they seemed to be in knots trying to make their obviously journalistic job seem like subcategories of spam or abusive IM related jobs. They didn't hire journalists (even though they are cheap and plentiful).

Twitter at least recognizes that they're the news, they're journalism, they're political.

That doesn't/won't necessarily/probably lead to anything useful, but there's an honesty in it that I respect.

Post reply on HN