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

Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 235 posts

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#211

Post by oblio »

spike021 wrote: post #188
oblio wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides the shortcuts mentioned by the sibling comment, you can also just go from the exit (yes, you can enter through the exit), straight to the warehouse. You need to know the name of what you're looking for and then use their kiosks to find where the thing is in the warehouse and just pick it up directly. This trick turns 1 hour trips through Ikea into 5 minute trips.

Didn't work for my usecase there. I specifically went to check out a table in person. Not necessarily buy it. It was only on display in a showroom, not the warehouse section.

Yeah, that sometimes happens. I don't really understand why they don't have all their products in the warehouse. Plus they don't deliver some stuff, despite the fact that they deliver almost everything. It's quite confusing.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#212

Post by oblio »

Nextgrid wrote: post #208
oblio wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, considering the context of this thread, are there any social networks not working based on the Silicon Valley model? I don't know any.

The phone company? You pay them a fee for access and that's it - they have no incentive to prioritize certain callers over others for "engagement"'s sake.

In this context social networks = social media = Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and their ilk, we can't really include AT&T in this conversation :-)

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#213

Post by Nextgrid »

oblio wrote: post #212
Nextgrid wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The phone company? You pay them a fee for access and that's it - they have no incentive to prioritize certain callers over others for "engagement"'s sake.

In this context social networks = social media = Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and their ilk, we can't really include AT&T in this conversation :-)

Why not? My point is that a communications network doesn't have to be hostile. It is possible to run a communications platform and get people to pay for it.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#214

Post by spike021 »

oblio wrote: post #211
spike021 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't work for my usecase there. I specifically went to check out a table in person. Not necessarily buy it. It was only on display in a showroom, not the warehouse section.

Yeah, that sometimes happens. I don't really understand why they don't have all their products in the warehouse. Plus they don't deliver some stuff, despite the fact that they deliver almost everything. It's quite confusing.

Funny you mention the delivery thing. When I was in the store, I checked the website for a couple of tables. According to the site neither were deliverable to me (in a major city, FWIW).

So I went up to a couple salespeople and asked why. They couldn't say why, just that they did have it in stock at this warehouse and they themselves could ship it for X fee.

I don't really get it. They said maybe they were out of stock at the factory or online order fulfillment center. But the pages said they were available.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#215

Post by Sunspark »

blacklight wrote: post #93

Just use Twitter's lists. I've been using them for a long time. I added to one of my lists only the accounts that I really want to see on my feed (no old school friends, acquaintances, nor random people that some of the accounts I follow just started following: only sources with added value). The result? Open your list, and you'll see all the tweets sorted chronologically, only from the accounts you really care to fo…

Be aware with lists you still need to select between show top tweets and latest tweets with the icon in the upper right.

Chronological is not the default setting for lists.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#216

Post by dmix »

blacklight wrote: post #93

Just use Twitter's lists. I've been using them for a long time. I added to one of my lists only the accounts that I really want to see on my feed (no old school friends, acquaintances, nor random people that some of the accounts I follow just started following: only sources with added value). The result? Open your list, and you'll see all the tweets sorted chronologically, only from the accounts you really care to fo…

Lists are still a pain to constantly navigate to on mobile/desktop... unless you use TweekDeck which I haven't in years.

You basically have to be a dedicated Twitter user to enjoy it.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#217

Post by dmix »

RF_Savage wrote: post #167
hobs wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesterday I noticed twitter had 9+ "followed by an account you follow" "recommended topic" "utter bullshit nobody godamn wants" I think my other new favorite is having to click "more replies" after what, 8 tweets? Garbo.

Thankfully "Tweak New Twitter" in chrome cleans all that up. Along with some select muted strings to suppress promoted tweets. Ofc it also helps that I don't use twitter on mobile at all and confine it's use to my desktop computer. Been a very good idea these past doomscrolly years.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tweak-new-twitter/...

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tweak-new-twi...

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#218

Post by Sunspark »

SECProto wrote: post #189
blacklight wrote: post #93

Just use Twitter's lists. I've been using them for a long time. I added to one of my lists only the accounts that I really want to see on my feed (no old school friends, acquaintances, nor random people that some of the accounts I follow just started following: only sources with added value). The result? Open your list, and you'll see all the tweets sorted chronologically, only from the accounts you really care to fo…

Caveat: I immediately block anyone who adds me to a list (it's only happened 3 or 4 times and it seems spammy). And I've seen a number of other accounts with "don't add me to lists" or equivalent in their bio.

Interesting that you are so opposed to it. I like lists because it lets me follow topics without having to "follow" an individual, or just to have a subject-matter-focused feed without having to sort through the messy mishmash that is the main one.

In fact, I don't even look at the main feed. I only look at my lists.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#219

Post by oblio »

Nextgrid wrote: post #213
oblio wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this context social networks = social media = Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and their ilk, we can't really include AT&T in this conversation :-)

Why not? My point is that a communications network doesn't have to be hostile. It is possible to run a communications platform and get people to pay for it.

Back in the day? Maybe. Today? Yeah, sure you could create something and try to charge people, but most people are now used to free + ads.

You'll never get enough traction to break through to the mainstream, unless something radical changes.

Re: Twitter makes it harder to choose the old reverse-chronological feed

#220

Post by addingnumbers »

oblio wrote: post #97
clhodapp wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a side-note: a good test of when social networks turn the corner and become evil is when they start conflating liking and sharing by implementing the "You follow x, and he liked" feature that you described. Since this clearly violates the user's intention (if you wanted to share something, you would have shared it), this serves as a subtle but distinct signal that manipulating users has become more important than…

> a good test of when social networks turn the corner and become evil is ... when they are created. Social networks are inherently evil, that's their business model: manipulate users into addiction and serve ads. How do non-evil social networks look like? They're forums, plain old forums. But you don't become an ultra trillionaire with PhpBB.

> Social networks are inherently evil, that's their business model

What's evil about Mastodon, Matrix, Pleroma, diaspora, etc?

Post reply on HN