171–180 of 198 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter threads are a tree, but the representation in Twitter's web interface and mobile apps is linear and it's not obvious which tweets are in response to which. There are hints in the interface if you're aware of them, but it's easy to get lost.
They ought to figure this out or let people build alternative clients...
The product has "twit" right in the name. Twitter is where you go to read twits or become one. Why is anyone surprised? From its tiny size limits to its byzantine threading and inability to follow all of one person without creating an account (which they often instantly ban, even if it does nothing but read)... Twitter is a communications medium constructed in a way that maximizes the ability ferment outrage and mini…
Except you can follow all sorts of experts and famous people om there. Not all of them are twits. Even Paul Graham drops the occasional tweet: https://twitter.com/paulg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question: which people? HN is too US/California/Bay Area centric for my tastes (most people here are probably from there), it talks a bit too much about money and jobs, but it's still a decent resource.
I was wrong about the name. It's "the angry orange website". https://twitter.com/search?q="angry%20orange%20website" - that's just a sample of HN's 'haters'. HN has its share of people who are awful and post horrible opinions (see the discussion about any article on JavaScript, health care, wealth, etc). I believe HN has some value left which is why I still post here, but I can absolutely see why people have abandone…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN has a pretty cynical viewpoint on everything. A comment doesn't really feel like a contribution when you're writing it unless you disagree with the parent (like so). People will find all sorts of reasons to think the article is wrong based on "mid-brow dismissal" or will say any public figure or company is lying about any statement they make. Plus there's no emojis.
Yeah, on the other hand Twitter is all roses, and those people always side with public figures and companies, lol. Maybe those guys would like HN better if they could use avatars so they could show off their black lipstick and half-shaved heads.
I used blame twitter for creating at outrage culture. But then I realized I had it backwards. There have always been people who find it fun to vent outrage, moral indignity, and condescension. They just got it from TV blowhards before.
I think human conversations at scale with strangers is inherently difficult to solve. We are prone to quick, context-life reactions. Threading management only gets you so far…
The pink elephant there is profit. Discussion with strangers is not difficult to solve. Even going back to AOL style topic driven chat rooms, which are just a step above IRC, it all worked just fine. BBS style systems also worked phenomenally well. But now enter companies wanting to make a buck. And that's where all the stupidity comes into play. Because now you need to people to disproportionately be exposed to e.g.…
> Twitter, predictably, immediately dysregulated in response. This a rant, but I hate this trend of taking what a couple/few people say and calling it "Twitter" or "everyone is saying" or "people are calling for" or "the Internet hates". Reference the actual person who said the comment and don't lump millions of users in with the comments of a few. Whenever I dig into an issue like this, I find maybe a handful of com…
https://www.pewinternet.org/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-use...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or rather a lot of people are unhappy and express this through constant outrage masked by a facade of happiness and "good vibes"
I think the reality on Twitter is that only a very few people are unhappy and outraged and a very many people without the strong emotions empathise and amplify it. This is actively encouraged and labeled in some groups by "being a good ally" for example.
> Twitter, predictably, immediately dysregulated in response. This a rant, but I hate this trend of taking what a couple/few people say and calling it "Twitter" or "everyone is saying" or "people are calling for" or "the Internet hates". Reference the actual person who said the comment and don't lump millions of users in with the comments of a few. Whenever I dig into an issue like this, I find maybe a handful of com…
HN'ers all agree ;) that modern day journalism is filled with hyperbole and unsubstantiated information.
> Twitter, predictably, immediately dysregulated in response. This a rant, but I hate this trend of taking what a couple/few people say and calling it "Twitter" or "everyone is saying" or "people are calling for" or "the Internet hates". Reference the actual person who said the comment and don't lump millions of users in with the comments of a few. Whenever I dig into an issue like this, I find maybe a handful of com…
The following sentence links to many tweets in Biz Stone's Twitter thread, which itself currently has 527 replies and 242 retweets ("ratioed"). It's a valid proxy for sentiment (in the majority of cases).
https://www.pewinternet.org/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-use...