181–190 of 211 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last I checked; thought leaders don't convey their thoughts in 140 characters or less. Nothing of really value is that short. Sorry. Unless you figure out the Theory of Everything... That'll be of value ;)
For sale: baby shoes, never worn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For sale: baby shoes, never worn.
I understand the significance of the poem, but if I'm going into Stride Rite to buy some new shoes for a baby, chances are I'm not going to want them to have been worn before.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"see more" link? groundbreaking stuff. someone get Twitter on the line! i know Dave deserves respect but if i was even a janitor at Twitter this post would piss me off.
What made me giggle was: > that doesn't force you to click a link to see the rest (includes a link you click to see the rest)
Congrats, @jack Would love to see twtr become a platform for a myriad of third-party apps. Wouldn't it be great to place a market order by messaging @bats "buy $TWTR 10,000 30.00". Or order a limo with @uber "2 people in one hour to jfk airport"?
I agree - Twitter is the de facto messaging platform. Taking the idea a bit further, Twitter could be used instead of SQS and other messaging solutions / protocols. That'd be pretty cool. Twitter could be the way the IoT communicate with their AI overlords.
Twitter: 500M tweets per day https://about.twitter.com/company
WhatsApp: 13B messages per day http://venturebeat.com/2015/01/06/whatsapp-now-has-700m-user...
Facebook + FB Messenger - WhatsApp: ~30B messages per day http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/22/facebook-voip-not-facebook-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard for me to get that from what you wrote. It seemed that your point was more that the existence of Twitter means it's easy to reproduce it, but before Twitter, it was difficult to envision a site like Twitter. My counterpoint is that it's not actually the idea that's interesting, it's the fact that they've convinced lots of people to use it, and have built a system powerful enough to support that scale.
The original comment expressly states a "non-scaling" version of twitter...what is so hard about that? this sub=thread then clearly illustrates what "non-scaling" means and doesn't mean. smh
I do think that Twitter's biggest asset are the network effects that it currently enjoys, but I don't think that it would be trivial to recreate what they've done in order to create a Twitter competitor. It's not insurmountable, but it's not trivial either.
The original comment was clearly meant to trivialize the engineering. "One guy can do it in a weekend" is hyperbole, it's something you say when you're trying to communicate that anyone can do something in a relatively short amount of time. If there are a bunch of downvotes I would assume they're more for the hyperbole than people actually disagreeing with whether or not one weekend is enough time to write "non-scaling Twitter", which isn't specific enough for anyone to argue about how long it would take to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last I checked; thought leaders don't convey their thoughts in 140 characters or less. Nothing of really value is that short. Sorry. Unless you figure out the Theory of Everything... That'll be of value ;)
# wc -m Last I checked; thought leaders don't convey their thoughts in 140 characters or less. Nothing of really value is that short. Sorry. 133
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then his job is find something else for Twitter to make. Facebook has launched a lot of experimental apps like Paper, Rooms, Slingshot, Messenger. And they bought Instagram which is very successful. Under Costolo Twitter bought vine and periscope, but they haven't tried to experiment with new app ideas internally.
If they went back to their roots as a messaging API for other apps, they would not have to build new apps. Become the messaging backbone for the Internet. That's plenty of scale to go after.
Where's the money in that, though?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost certainly. Twitter's user base is not growing, and their product basically hasn't changed in 5 years. They have a valuable brand, but they need to figure out how to fundamentally improve the ease of use of the whole thing and make a decent value proposition. Photos, messages, videos, search... make the app not suck. Snapchat and Instagram are very quickly taking over the celebrity/new/sports one-to-many angle…
> they need to figure out how to fundamentally improve the ease of use of the whole thing I've frequently heard this theory, that Twitter's problem is that it's too complicated. I don't buy it. It has a simpler UI than Facebook or Snapchat, and it's not significantly more complicated than Instagram or Vine or Periscope or any other media sharing platform. If you personally enjoy Twitter and derive value from it, it's…
I still think it's impossible to run two companies that both require so much attention, given their stage. Yes Jobs had Apple and Pixar, and Musk has Tesla and SpaceX. But both Pixar and SpaceX don't really require day-to-day CEO attention, they follow long term plans (movies, rockets). That's really different from Square and Twitter, which are both, in their own ways, in a kind of trouble. I'd love to be proven wron…
Jobs didn't run Pixar. He was a principal investor and Chairman of the Board, negotiating a few milestones like the sale to Disney, but most of his focus was on NeXT and then Apple. Ed Catmull and John Lasseter ran Pixar's day-to-day ops. Creativity, Inc. by Catmull covers all this. It paints a better portrait of Jobs than Isaacson's Jobs biography. Plus, you get to read about the history of computer graphics and Toy…
I love this particular chapter where he discusses about how you feel like you don't "belong" in that role of a leader within your own company, imagining that the leader is supposed to have some perceived aggressive characteristics of your ideal leader.
But all along, you may have been the right person to make sense of everything happening in that group and it is very important to let go of those inhibitions and just focus on the job to be done. As long as we have a group that is passionate and motivated to do the job and focused on customers, you are doing alright.
It was beautifully narrated by him and I loved it. It is something you experience as a startup founder, bringing along smarter folks into the group and be humbled by everyday experiences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost certainly. Twitter's user base is not growing, and their product basically hasn't changed in 5 years. They have a valuable brand, but they need to figure out how to fundamentally improve the ease of use of the whole thing and make a decent value proposition. Photos, messages, videos, search... make the app not suck. Snapchat and Instagram are very quickly taking over the celebrity/new/sports one-to-many angle…
> they need to figure out how to fundamentally improve the ease of use of the whole thing I've frequently heard this theory, that Twitter's problem is that it's too complicated. I don't buy it. It has a simpler UI than Facebook or Snapchat, and it's not significantly more complicated than Instagram or Vine or Periscope or any other media sharing platform. If you personally enjoy Twitter and derive value from it, it's…
Lots of people at Twitter are all about (C), and have ideas how to improve it. However, management has never really been hot on it, and prefers (A) because it is easier to "measure" and optimize for. If (C) was done well, and allowed users a good way to find content they though was interesting, it would be super helpful.
Another problem is that Twitter still sucks for media. Michael Sippey, then head of product, was against anything but text. He was out within a year. Text is hard to create (well), but photos are very easy- snap, apply a filter and bam, billions of food photos on Instagram. One of the appeals of Snapchat and Instagram are that they allow you to broadcast photos/video very easily. In essence, they are a better Twitter for 99% of the population.