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

Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

typefully.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#81

Post by rootsudo »

ericsoderstrom wrote: post #78
jhunter1016 wrote: post #36

Despite what many comments here might suggest, Twitter is a microblogging site. You do not have to consume other tweets in order to contribute your own tweets to Twitter. That’s why you can follow 0 people and still tweet. That’s why I love this idea. Imagine writing a blog but everyone suggesting to you that you have to consume other people’s blogs in order to contribute your own. Twitter can be toxic. But it can be…

> Imagine writing a blog but everyone suggesting to you that you have to consume other people’s blogs in order to contribute your own It would be pretty weird to write a blog, but never read others. Especially if you avoided reading blogs because you thought it was bad for your mental health. Why make more of a bad thing?

Because it makes people feel good.

Twitter is toxic, yet people enjoy that echo-chamber.

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#82

Post by JoshTriplett »

e1g wrote: post #63
Shared404 wrote: post #48

Earlier 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.

> Twitter does not have a feature to "Edit".

If you don't care at all about others interacting with your tweets, then Twitter has an edit button: delete the tweet and post a new one.

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#83

Post by mhd »

searchableguy wrote: post #65
mhd wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

Neat, thanks!

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#84

Post by Shared404 »

e1g wrote: post #69
Shared404 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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/margin…

> "I want to put my thoughts out, but for as many people as possible to see them, and without caring about impact".

I suppose I've interpreted the thought process differently. I see it as "I'm going to put my thoughts out, maybe someone will find it interesting.", with the key difference of not caring about many people see/interact.

> 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.

Alternately, this could be caused by echo chambers where people scream endless affirmation at you because you said something that lines up with their political views.

Neither method of using Twitter is more wrong or more right, just different.

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#85

Post by macintux »

biz_booster wrote: post #10

1. 99.00% people don't even think before tweeting. 2. 0.99% think but tweet only one tweet at a time. 3. 0.01% only think and create a long thread. Hence is it really required? What REAL pain are your really trying to solve? For how many people will use this? Are people already searching/paying for this? This is a cold hard and harsh truth. May save you lot of your valuable time in the near future. Pls DON"T build so…

> Pls DON"T build something that NOBODY wants.

...why?

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#86

Post by TheRealNGenius »

Shared404 wrote: post #84
e1g wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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/margin…

> "I want to put my thoughts out, but for as many people as possible to see them, and without caring about impact". I suppose I've interpreted the thought process differently. I see it as "I'm going to put my thoughts out, maybe someone will find it interesting.", with the key difference of not caring about many people see/interact. > at worst it might be a source of so much thoughtless/marginalizing content on Twitt…

Props to both of you for keeping it civil. Genuinely interesting to see slightly opposing views work out through discussion - something that wouldn't be possible in a write-only scenario...

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#87

Post by Shared404 »

TheRealNGenius wrote: post #86
Shared404 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I want to put my thoughts out, but for as many people as possible to see them, and without caring about impact". I suppose I've interpreted the thought process differently. I see it as "I'm going to put my thoughts out, maybe someone will find it interesting.", with the key difference of not caring about many people see/interact. > at worst it might be a source of so much thoughtless/marginalizing content on Twitt…

Props to both of you for keeping it civil. Genuinely interesting to see slightly opposing views work out through discussion - something that wouldn't be possible in a write-only scenario...

> Genuinely interesting to see slightly opposing views work out through discussion[.]

One of the reasons HN is one of the few places I actually post on the internet. People here are generally willing to discuss in good faith.

> something that wouldn't be possible in a write-only scenario...

/me sighs

yes. That was the whole point of the conversation, and why we are having this discussion in a forum designed for discussion, instead of in a platform that is equally designed for microblogging and discussion.

In addition, it's perfectly possible to put contact info in your twitter bio. Someone is just as capable of looking at that and emailing you as they would be if you were blogging off your own website.

Re: Show HN: Write-Only Interface for Twitter

#90

Post by linuz90 »

aboutabot wrote: post #89

I love this idea! I've also recognized you. You're the duo from Mailbrew and Boxy Suite! I wonder, how do you find ideas for the great apps? Looks like you start from a need but at the same time I feel like you must be data-driven.

Hey thanks!

We actually very rarely start from data or market research, but basically from our own needs.

We liked Gmail but hated it using it in the browser, so we've built Boxy Suite.

We like following many websites, authors and creators, but felt overwhelmed by feeds, so we've built Mailbrew.

We love Twitter but needed a focused writing environment to remove distractions when we want to publish our thoughts, so we've built Typefully.

In every case, we decided to go ahead when we felt there might be thousands of people with the same need, and that we can address it effectively, leveraging our specific knowledge.

When we have an idea that feels great, but we feel there's no real market for it, we don't pursue it.

Hope this answers your question!

Post reply on HN