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

Twitter Notes

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 316 posts

Re: Twitter Notes

#131

Post by randommind »

rpastuszak wrote: post #36
randommind wrote: post #27

I don't know, in times when account suspensions and/or removals for political reasons seem progressively more frequent (and arbitrary), it doesn't seem like a great idea to entrust the longer writings to them as well... It seems wiser to maintain separate blogs.

100% agree with you, but as long as they have an API you can access, you can always syndicate your content to Twitter. Here's an example for my potato.horse site connected to https://twitter.com/yay_psd : https://github.com/paprikka/yay.psd/blob/main/data/twitter/p... Most of my users are come from the site and Reddit, but it's one of those things you just set up and forget, so it was worth the hassle.

Yes but simply linking makes it more difficult to automatically censor content. Aside from the problem of redundancy (sorry, old school here, redundancy must have a reeeally good reason for me), as I have already mentioned, this would get your readers used to reading you ONLY on twitter, while by linking to an external blog your readers will already be used to read you elsewhere, in case your account suddenly disappears.

Of course I imagine that in addition to the intent to expand outward control (and let's call it aggressive "moderation"? the infamous dangerous "unfettered conversations" come back to mind ;)) of content as an alternative to blogs, there is also the intent to offer it as an alternative to long threads, which to me, however, does not seem like a good idea as well, because it is known that the average reader is more likely to read in chunks rather than deal with long text (as others have already said). Not to mention that with threads you can reply point by point, to individual tweets, which as I see it is smoother and neater.

Maybe I'm biased (that's why I started out with "I don't know") but I see it as more of a political move than a functional one, that's all. And by the way, if one really doesn't want to think about censorial and narrative control intentions, in the least worst case scenario to me it looks like a push toward increasing the already troubling monopoly of a few giants on content, data, attention, etc.

Re: Twitter Notes

#132

Post by lupire »

rektide wrote: post #77
layer8 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d have loved inline quoting on Usenet.

We can cite & quote pieces of Notes too. But it wont create anywhere near the interesting forms of engagement an already decomposed thread has. In a thread there are ready made pieces of the thread to talk about. Each piece of the thread has it's own likes. Discussions can start around any piece & we know they're talking about the same general area. Notes feels like a severe & critical downgrade, a regression to a pr…

Everyone is connected, but they are connected to nothing. We don't need more highly accessible trash.

Re: Twitter Notes

#133

Post by lupire »

CyanBird wrote: post #53
hot_gril wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still won't bother. No matter how fast of a computer you use, Twitter is annoyingly slow to load and seems to leak memory if you scroll too far.

My most despised (feature) of Twitter on desktop is that purposeful delay to alerts, where it blinks for a splitsecond and then the little colored alert icon disappears for a solid 3 to 5 seconds only to appear again this time correctly and permanently It is just so annoying that they would do such a thing, I am sure that they have a/b tested it, I don't care it drives me insane, just make it work properly tho I am s…

You give them away too much credit for intent and competence.

They probably have a fast alert based on some cache, and a real alert that takes longer to fetch the real data.

Re: Twitter Notes

#135

Post by caycep »

dend wrote: post #88
caycep wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the "walled garden" comment, I'm wondering - nowadays, all sorts of discourse seems to depend on these types of proprietary services/platforms, that employ armies of engineers to keep them running, develop new features, etc. Attempts to make things decentralized all seem to be aggregating into central controls, i.e. "Web3/crypto" -> coinbase, kraken, etc Why aren't older decentralized "services" protocols being…

You don't need to look far for this. To be fair, my comment was much less about decentralization and more about the existence of tools for content portability and control. For example, you can have Markdown + Ghost + custom domain. Worst case scenario, you move to another hosting platform, but you're not locked to one particular service and its own goals of growth.

distribution/eyeballs is the issue with having your own site/self hosting though. Albeit I feel like if there were momentum in that direction, someone should do the RSS reader killer app for that. I.e. something like Reeder w/ Overcast/Apple's podcast directory...

Re: Twitter Notes

#136

Post by anigbrowl »

nomilk wrote: post #40
dgs_sgd wrote: post #4

I welcome this. I always hated the long multi-tweet essays and have often just given up on reading them, especially when I'm not logged in I can't even make it to the end before twitter blocks me from scrolling further. As of now it doesn't look like you can reply to a note with another note? That might go a long way for improving debate and discussion.

> I always hated the long multi-tweet essays I'm very new to twitter but I love them because feedback can be given on a (near) per sentence basis.

That's the problem; it's like a book where the footnotes come to outweigh the actual text.

Re: Twitter Notes

#137

Post by ThatMedicIsASpy »

rchaud wrote: post #99
dend wrote: post #76

My reaction to this is that it's an effort to keep users within the "walled garden" of Twitter, which is not the best thing for those that write. Recall the story with Medium - yes, you get broader reach with less effort, but at the cost of giving up control of your content. I know that I am talking with an overly developer-focused lens (a-la "you can reimplement Dropbox in a weekend"), but self-hosting blogs outside…

Do you know that Twitter still does not show link previews reliably? It does for big sites like Youtube, but if you link your dinky little self-hosted blog, with all the right OG meta tags, it's 50-50 whether Twitter decides to show the link preview image. At this point, one must assume that Twitter will do nearly anything it can to disincentivize clicking out to a 3rd party site. At least it's better than Instagram,…

As a non twitter user but searching for my site a few times I've always wondered why that is and what I am doing wrong. I didn't know it is a general issue since I don't use it.

Re: Twitter Notes

#138

Post by dend »

lupire wrote: post #126
dend wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comments is a _secondary_ component to the core of what I am talking about - long-form content. I can still post a link to my blog post on Twitter and have all the commentary from my audience without donating the content itself to Twitter.

What do you mean "donating the content"? Ad clicks? Subscription fee on your blog? Is your blog making you money?

You can have your blog make you money if you want to, in whichever way you want to. "Donate content" is just that - when you write long-form on any platform that you have no direct control over, you're handing over the rights to said content. From Twitter's own ToS[0]:

> By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods now known or later developed (for clarity, these rights include, for example, curating, transforming, and translating).

[0]: https://twitter.com/en/tos

Re: Twitter Notes

#139

Post by jabroni_salad »

ChrisArchitect wrote: post #45

I get why they have been working on this (ppl's thread posting out of control) but making longform posts content live on / inside the platform reaks of Facebook walled garden, or Medium etc. Should be encouraging ppl to have blogs or post on urls and just link to them. I dunno, it's annoying direction.

Twitlonger has been around for ages and is pretty nice to use. Writers seem to prefer just making threads because users will read them there. Every time you add a link or some other barrier in front of your content, you are reducing your readership.

Re: Twitter Notes

#140

Post by idealmedtech »

searchableguy wrote: post #20

In my experience, most people on twitter won't click to read long form content if it opens in a separate view. They won't read past few tweets either. I believe most twitter users don't want to read beyond 280 characters. A thread provides them an opportunity to comment on any 280 characters section they have actually read. They should have provided similar interface to typefully to write long form tweet and a button…

I think people actually want to read longer form content on Twitter, just look at how often threads appear under the viral tweets topic! It's more fundamentally a twitter problem than a user attention span problem in my opinion.
Post reply on HN