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

Post by ArtDev » Wed, Apr 17, 2019, 6:51 PM UTC

platz wrote: post #166

markdog12 wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently created a Twitter account, mostly as an experiment. I just followed some programmers, stuck to programming content. Immediately and every day after, I was constantly being displayed Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Justin Trudeau, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, etc. Not a single politician or voice not on the left. Considering how powerful Twitter has become, this is troubling. I know this is just one…

> just followed some programmers Well now you know why you're seeing what you're seeing. Are programmers supposed to be some apolitical hyper-rational cohort?

Post by blotter_paper » Wed, Apr 17, 2019, 7:28 PM UTC

dorfsmay wrote: post #287

SllX wrote: 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…

Sounds a lot closer? It's exactly reddit. I configured twitter to keep tweets in chronological order and not to filter anything, so I only see tweets from accounts I follow, and I see all their tweets, and see them in chron. order. What he wants to do is copy reddit. I can't see what they could add to reddit, but they'd completely lose what twitter is good at (following people).

Post by darawk » Wed, Apr 17, 2019, 11:41 PM UTC

code_duck wrote: post #340

darawk wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a contributor to funding sure, but that's not what I asked. The issue is, would a random person off the street be able to take VC seed money and turn it into a billion dollar business? The answer is obviously no. And they definitely wouldn't be able to do it twice.

A random person of the street? No. Somebody who did it once already and has all the experience and contacts? Far more likely. I would say the first time is a lot harder. But that’s not the point... apparently you’re saying he deserves his success by merit. My opinion is that there are plenty of people of equal merits who didn’t start one of the top 3 social networks. I would attribute much of the success of Twitter a…

Post by hannasanarion » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 11:40 AM UTC

blotter_paper wrote: post #352

_jal wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always asserted that Twitter should have been a protocol, not a startup.

Dorsey has done three recent podcasts (two on JRE, one on Tales From the Crypto) where he states that he thinks there will be a decentralised blockchain based Twitter competitor in the future. I've taken that as a given for years, but to hear the CEO spell it out in public is pretty crazy. He wasn't even cornered into it, but rather brought the topic up himself.

Post by dorfsmay » Thu, Apr 18, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

blotter_paper wrote: post #353

dorfsmay wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a lot closer? It's exactly reddit. I configured twitter to keep tweets in chronological order and not to filter anything, so I only see tweets from accounts I follow, and I see all their tweets, and see them in chron. order. What he wants to do is copy reddit. I can't see what they could add to reddit, but they'd completely lose what twitter is good at (following people).

> It's exactly reddit. That's ridiculous. Is topic vs author the only metric we use to categorize social media? What about thread flatness, delegation of curation/censorship and styling, quantitative and qualitative distinctions about how feeds are tailored to users, etc.? I can think of many distinctions between the two despite rarely using either.