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

On Using Twitter

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 150 posts

Re: On Using Twitter

#111

Post by tomjen3 »

Zealotux wrote: post #13

I have an honest question for Twitter users of HN: what's the net positive value of Twitter to your life? It feels like using Twitter or not has been an uninterrupted argument for years, even on HN, as if on one end your rational brain knows Twitter is detrimental to your mental health, but on the other end: it's a great dopamine, and outrage dispenser.

Twitter is the best way to keep up with patio11. I am not even joking, he has stopped blogging so now he does twitter streams (that should have been blogs) but they are almost always full of very interesting and frequently useful knowledge.

I also use it to keep up with things that will soon become political issues - that has a much smaller amount of noise to signal, but even so.

Ideally, I would love to be able to follow people only for some tags, but that would make twitter nicer to use so that is not going to happen.

Re: On Using Twitter

#112

Post by shuntress »

jpistell wrote: post #22

> First, social address: I’m a white, cis, female, straight, abled Stopped reading there

Perhaps you should reconsider. Her article directly addresses this type of response.

"Learn to listen to your discomfort. Sometimes I find myself reading something that makes me think, “I respect this person, but would be uncomfortable holding that opinion myself.” In such cases, it’s worthwhile thinking about why I find it uncomfortable. Is it someone speaking from unacknowledged privilege? If so, is this is a good moment to call them in (either in DMs or in public)? Alternatively, is it uncomfortable for me because it challenges my privilege? If so, that is worth sitting with and trying to learn from."

Re: On Using Twitter

#113

Post by shuntress »

jimbokun wrote: post #73
pjc50 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

How is it relevant to the topic she is discussing?

Because a significant portion of the article relates to using Twitter as a tool to help understand people who are different from yourself. An important aspect of that is being aware of how you differ from them.

Re: On Using Twitter

#114

Post by anigbrowl »

tinyhouse wrote: post #52

The fact that the social justice conversation in America talks only about black people, as this post does as well, shows the majority of people only care about social justice issues when the minority group becomes big and loud enough. I just skimmed through the article (it's long, I don't have time to read the entire thing). I completely disagree about her overall statement. I prefer not to talk politics in my public…

That doesn't mean I don't comment on issues like police brutality, human rights, sexual harassment, etc. But for me those things have nothing to do with politics.

How could they not? Such issues are frequently the subject of legal contestation, and the writing and administration of laws are inherently political. If you mean that you'd rather focus on policy issues than party identity that's understandable, but they're a corollary of the representative government model. Further, there are relations between the issues you mention, eg the set of people who care a lot (or not) about police brutality tends to overlap with the set of people who prioritize (or discount)_human rights, and so on.

Re: On Using Twitter

#115

Post by mattbk1 »

apsec112 wrote: post #108
aspenmayer wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned this in the early 90s on BBSes, MUDs, Usenet, and forums, before I even discovered the Web. Everything old is new again. Twitter is fine. It’s people who suck. Exercise your own restraint and freedom to associate. Externalizing blame is to throw up your hands and to join all the other naysayers in yelling at clouds.

Twitter has a machine learning algorithm that actively steers people towards political/controversial content. If you choose to see tweets "recent first" to avoid this, Twitter will accidentally-on-purpose 'forget' this every few days, and return you to the AI-generated anger maximization feed. That's blatantly user-hostile behavior that wasn't present on Usenet or IRC.

If you use a 3rd-party app you can view in chronological order and it will stick.

Re: On Using Twitter

#116

Post by mc32 »

allenu wrote: post #104
duxup wrote: post #64

>Cultivate a good set of accounts to follow Man I'm so done with that. Even cultivating a group of accounts on say a topic ... they're still people so I get their angry rants about whatever issue. And I respect their right to be a person and tweet about what they want, but that's a double edged sword as far as my interest goes. I really don't want to see a twitter spat, ever. Even if I AGREE with someone I'm followin…

It's an interesting problem because it's akin to going to a cocktail party and having idle chit chat and then someone brings up politics. Even if you agree with the politics of the person, by introducing it into the discussion, you have no choice but to "take a side" and agree with them on things (or not). All of a sudden, some nice banter has turned into a serious discussion. There's a time and place for those discu…

In person I think it’s easier to be oblique in your response so you don’t have to agree or disagree, or you can agree and disagree in degrees.

Re: On Using Twitter

#117

Post by allenu »

mc32 wrote: post #116
allenu wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an interesting problem because it's akin to going to a cocktail party and having idle chit chat and then someone brings up politics. Even if you agree with the politics of the person, by introducing it into the discussion, you have no choice but to "take a side" and agree with them on things (or not). All of a sudden, some nice banter has turned into a serious discussion. There's a time and place for those discu…

In person I think it’s easier to be oblique in your response so you don’t have to agree or disagree, or you can agree and disagree in degrees.

That's true. In person conversation is much more fluid and easier to wrangle back to a topic.

Re: On Using Twitter

#118

Post by throwaway98797 »

duxup wrote: post #64

>Cultivate a good set of accounts to follow Man I'm so done with that. Even cultivating a group of accounts on say a topic ... they're still people so I get their angry rants about whatever issue. And I respect their right to be a person and tweet about what they want, but that's a double edged sword as far as my interest goes. I really don't want to see a twitter spat, ever. Even if I AGREE with someone I'm followin…

Don’t follow anyone who has spats. Or mute. Or block the offending party.

Re: On Using Twitter

#119

Post by mc32 »

allenu wrote: post #117
mc32 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In person I think it’s easier to be oblique in your response so you don’t have to agree or disagree, or you can agree and disagree in degrees.

That's true. In person conversation is much more fluid and easier to wrangle back to a topic.

In the least you don’t usually have a column of people listening attentively ready to pounce at any perceived false step. Usually 1:1 to 1:3, though it can go up if your convo is “interesting”.

Re: On Using Twitter

#120

Post by burlesona »

mayankkaizen wrote: post #37

Earlier I used to follow all sorts of famous twitter accounts and had joined all sorts of (ugly debate). I really liked Twitter in comparison to FB in the sense that it introduced me people of millions types from all over the world. On FB, everyone was already known to me so there was no novelty in what I was browsing. However, later on I realized that Twitter is actually a "outrage generating machine". Everyone is o…

Totally agree re: "outrage generating machine." Outrage peddling is the easiest and most successful way for media companies to make money, and few media organizations resist that urge.
Post reply on HN