This looks well done. Although I have to laugh that it exists or needs to exist. It's like a fireproof suit for venturing into a dumpster fire!
Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
61–70 of 95 posts
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#62Typefully cuts a long text into several tweets. Apps like https://threadreaderapp.com/ or https://the.rip/ unroll these stories again. What's wrong with this network where sharing content requires to use such tools both for authors and readers? ;-)
Think on it. We've created a wonderful packet-switched network, on top of which we:
* first built an app that made its users break a message into packets by hand;
* then built apps on top of that app that do the packet disassembly/reassembly for the first app automatically.
There is theoretically no end to the heights this tower of madness can reach! A driven young Hackernews could theoretically be occupied for decades adding to it, all to chase that VC money or Show HN whuffie!
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately the author cannot read your thanks, see upvotes, engage in a conversation, or learn from others’ input. They use a write-only client to access this community.
That would be funny, but there is a difference between Twitter and HN. In this case, the author wants to use twitter as a microblog -- the use case it was designed for. If they don't want to read other input on their twitter, why would they? Meanwhile HN is explicitly designed as a community with a focus on curiosity, exploration, and discussion... none of which your comment provides.
Twitter has features to Share, Like, Subscribe, Explore via Hashtags. Twitter does not have a feature to "Edit". I'm unclear how we can look at these core strategic choices and decide it's designed not as a community, but as a blogging engine.
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be funny, but there is a difference between Twitter and HN. In this case, the author wants to use twitter as a microblog -- the use case it was designed for. If they don't want to read other input on their twitter, why would they? Meanwhile HN is explicitly designed as a community with a focus on curiosity, exploration, and discussion... none of which your comment provides.
Twitter has features to Share, Like, Subscribe, Explore via Hashtags. Twitter does not have a feature to "Edit". I'm unclear how we can look at these core strategic choices and decide it's designed not as a community, but as a blogging engine.
The point is not that twitter cannot be used as a community, but that it has been a microblogging platform as long as it has existed. In addition, each of the features you listed can be quite useful for discovery in a blogging type situation.
For external sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microblogging
> However, by 2006 and 2007, the term microblog was used more widely for services provided by established sites like Tumblr and Twitter.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Twitter
> Twitter, online microblogging service for distributing short messages among groups of recipients via personal computer or mobile telephone.
Regardless, another client that treats the microblogging side of twitter as it's sole focus is not unreasonable. Much like reddit.com being better suited to memes and images and old.reddit.com is better suited to discussion, different clients can have different focuses, which is a Good Thing.
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's doable with a RSS feed service. Some providers which support reading twitter, youtube and other popular feeds without any setup. https://www.inoreader.com/ https://feedbin.com/ https://feedly.com If there are sources that they don't support, you can host your own rsshub instance or use the default. https://rsshub.app/ Happy to help you get this set up.
Thanks, I'm a pretty heavy RSS user, mostly with regular desktop clients. Where my usage pattern is pretty much a single dump for everything and just quickly scrolling through the 100-200 updates/day, scanning some, reading others, postponing some by opening them in browser tabs (I still habitually check "loadDivertedInBackground" in Firefox' config, even years after google reader ceasing to exist). I don't even cate…
You can try: https://hnrss.github.io/
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter has features to Share, Like, Subscribe, Explore via Hashtags. Twitter does not have a feature to "Edit". I'm unclear how we can look at these core strategic choices and decide it's designed not as a community, but as a blogging engine.
The point is not that twitter cannot be used as a community, but that it has been a microblogging platform as long as it has existed. In addition, each of the features you listed can be quite useful for discovery in a blogging type situation. For external sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microblogging > However, by 2006 and 2007, the term microblog was used more widely for services provided by established sites…
Twitter, true to its name, is a bunch of little birdies chirping all around one big tree. Mostly noise, worth it for the occasional song. Like most chit-chatter at most parties. I could show up to a party, get on a soapbox, do my monologue, then leave. But I won't make any friends or impact that way, even if these parties is where the audience is.
Even the "Stoic & Enlightened" accounts like Naval regularly engage with the birdies around them.
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is not that twitter cannot be used as a community, but that it has been a microblogging platform as long as it has existed. In addition, each of the features you listed can be quite useful for discovery in a blogging type situation. For external sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microblogging > However, by 2006 and 2007, the term microblog was used more widely for services provided by established sites…
Twitter, true to its name, is a bunch of little birdies chirping all around one big tree. Mostly noise, worth it for the occasional song. Like most chit-chatter at most parties. I could show up to a party, get on a soapbox, do my monologue, then leave. But I won't make any friends or impact that way, even if these parties is where the audience is. Even the "Stoic & Enlightened" accounts like Naval regularly engage wi…
> Mostly noise. Like most chit-chatter at most parties. I could show up to the party, get on a soapbox, do my monologue, then leave. But I won't make any friends or impact that way, even if these parties is where the audience is.
Good point. However, making friends/impact is not what everyone wants from twitter.
Some people just want a place to put their thoughts out, and don't really care what anyone else is doing.
Edit: I'd like to apologize for being overly aggressive in my first comment. That was uncalled for. This chain clearly has started a discussion, for which I thank you.
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair point, which I didn't think about a lot to be honest. On the other hand, this enables people to write more mindfully, without all the noise around them, and also think twice before "shouting", so I'd be very curious to see what kind of output this will produce.
it also feels a little disrespectful of people who follow you. if I reply to you I know you won't read it. so if someone bragged about using your app it'd be a prompt for me to unfollow them.
I'm working on something in the social networking space, and I'm curious about your views and where you are coming from.
If you don't mind me asking: What type of people do you follow - people you met irl or online, or friend of friends, or famous people? And how do you want to interact with them?
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter, true to its name, is a bunch of little birdies chirping all around one big tree. Mostly noise, worth it for the occasional song. Like most chit-chatter at most parties. I could show up to a party, get on a soapbox, do my monologue, then leave. But I won't make any friends or impact that way, even if these parties is where the audience is. Even the "Stoic & Enlightened" accounts like Naval regularly engage wi…
> Mostly noise. Like most chit-chatter at most parties. I could show up to the party, get on a soapbox, do my monologue, then leave. But I won't make any friends or impact that way, even if these parties is where the audience is. Good point. However, making friends/impact is not what everyone wants from twitter. Some people just want a place to put their thoughts out, and don't really care what anyone else is doing.…
> Some people just want a place to put their thoughts out, and don't really care what anyone else is doing.
Not being snarky: this is what personal journals are for.
It's difficult for me to reconcile "I want to put my thoughts out, but for as many people as possible to see them, and without caring about impact". At best, it feels like void navel-gazing, and at worst it might be a source of so much thoughtless/marginalizing content on Twitter: because the author did not care what their words will do to the reader. The feedback loop is essential not only for enriching the overall community, but for enriching our own understanding.
Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter
#70Great idea!! It seems you can't paste an image inside the text though, which you can do on the regular Twitter webpage?