61–70 of 78 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It looks like it's actually Twitter, Facebook, and LiveJournal: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/06/serious-twitter-outage-... Somebody doesn't like social networks it seems :/
Corporate America is just trying to get some productivity back. Hard economic times, dontchaknow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It looks like it's actually Twitter, Facebook, and LiveJournal: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/06/serious-twitter-outage-... Somebody doesn't like social networks it seems :/
Corporate America is just trying to get some productivity back. Hard economic times, dontchaknow.
Apparently Facebook is seeing intermittent errors as well, down for a bunch of people. Do these people all share a datacenter?
Yup, I keep getting "Transport error (#1001) while retrieving data from endpoint" intermittently.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And as we know a lot of it has been blown out of proportions thanks to the potent mix of random "twats" and overeager traditional media. As a tool it has its uses. However, I strongly believe that 45 million people don't _need_ this as a tool and use it purely for enterntainment. To say that we rely on Twitter for communication is simply false.
I was banned for using the word "twat" (modded down mercilessly even after I posted the full definition because I wasn't sufficiently humble about it). Look up the account, sharkfish. http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=sharkfish What is wrong with you people. Can't you see this poster is ruining the forum!?!?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's how new markets are born. Back in the day e-mail solved a problem that didn't exist too.
There was no way to transfer a document instantly and without using paper. Faxes were slow and used paper. There was a clear business need. So I don't think thats a fair comparison. Then again I don't remember those days from personal experiences, just making an assumption. From a different perspective. If it was serving a need people would be willing to pay for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no way to transfer a document instantly and without using paper. Faxes were slow and used paper. There was a clear business need. So I don't think thats a fair comparison. Then again I don't remember those days from personal experiences, just making an assumption. From a different perspective. If it was serving a need people would be willing to pay for it.
I've been in enough situations where direct messaging on Twitter has the best and most efficient means of communication to dismiss Twitter not serving a need. Yes, the utility of Twitter is almost always overblown by the media, but we shouldn't underestimate how many use it as part of their regular communication workflow.
if social networks are up { spend time there } else { keep checking if they are up, every two minutes. worry and talk about why they are down }