Twitter is a poor place

[Jer]

6000 tweets per second, on broad average. About half a billion tweets every day.

There are not that many journalists on the planet.

No - you're mistaking usage for importance. Twitter is important because journalists use it and promote it. Most folks use it as at best a timewaster and an unfiltered news feed (that last one being problematic and I guess "important" in the sense that it's a bad thing that is actively making the world a worse place). There are many social media platforms that if they disappeared tomorrow would dramatically impact the lives of everyone using them negatively - WhatsApp, for example, is devestating to people when it goes down because it's basically their main communications platform with friends and family when they're separated. Twitter could disappear tomorrow and nothing of value would be lost. It's an entertainment and advertising platform, and by definition that kind of thing is just not important.

 

[Janx]

What you are describing is someone who is using the medium for a purpose other than that intended. Twitter is for short comments, not long form discussion or prose. Sure, I can use the handle of a screwdriver as a hammer, but wouldn't it be better to just use a hammer?

Indeed.

I put my work on my blog. Then I write an intro text and post the link into my social media.

Like pretty much everybody else doing articles or what have you.

It works for me. I'm well over 4000 followers. Which isn't huge, but more than most.

 

[Ryujin]

Indeed.

I put my work on my blog. Then I write an intro text and post the link into my social media.

Like pretty much everybody else doing articles or what have you.

It works for me. I'm well over 4000 followers. Which isn't huge, but more than most.

Exactly. Twitter is like a preface, not a publication medium. It's a place for 280 character mental expulsions.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

This statement does not say what you seem to think it says.

It's also really bad form to accuse me of disingenuousness just because you disagree with my assessment.

Then what does it mean? My understanding is that being disingenuous is making statement or acting by putting aside relevant information that you do know. I guess it could be viewed as a form of dishonesty? Like I'd tell someone is disingenuous if they omit some relevant information that they clearly have knowledge of. That's my understanding, but again english is not my mother tongue, so I may not understand the nuance of the word.

And there is very little evidence supporting this idea. He bought his way into being called a "founder" of a company he didn't have any part in founding, and wasn't even one of the initial investors in, and then bought out the actual founders so he could position himself as "the guy who started Tesla Motors". He then hired some actual engineers (I've met a few, btw, and a couple fabricators of various skillsets. He's a terrible boss.) to make a rocket company, and then let his various engineers talk shop with eachother and share ideas.

Paypal is the closest he's ever come to actually coming up with anything especially interesting.

I agree with most of what you said. As I said, I'm not a fan of him. He was absolutely born in wealth and did not found most of the business he was in. I also disagree with many of the views he put out publicly, his latest bout concerning Twitter being a good example. But it's really interesting how he has the intelligence to think laterally and move knowledge, technology and resources from one domain to another. A lot of industries struggle with issues that have been figured out elsewhere, and someone that is able to have the right people meet and connect solutions to problems are highly valuable.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I mean, I think that's just the internet. And the world.

Pretty much. I remember individual online forums like this and Wizards.com back before these specialized social media products. As much as there are still toxic and troll-like behaviors going on, I think a bunch of it that used to be here up and left for Reddit and Twitter and such. Anonymity breeds nonbest behavior and worst impulses are rewarded.

No - you're mistaking usage for importance.

Some things are important because people think they are important, watch it or take part in it, and therefore lend their importance to the thing. If, as the politics that keep creeping through here are any indication, Twitter played a non-trivial part in political events of the past several years. People thought Twitter was important, watched it, and it swayed their actions/beliefs/voting patterns. That's importance. Any means by which a large number of people communicate, gather, form tribes, coalesce or reinforce ideas, or otherwise establish their beliefs, ideas, opinions, and allegiances is inherently important, regardless of any outside estimation of its' quality.

That said, I also question whether Twitter really has a long term business model. Of course I have the same question about FacebMeta and it's been going on for a decade and a half, and dead tree publishing has been "on its' deathbed" for a quarter century, etc...

 

[trappedslider]

Exactly. Twitter is like a preface, not a publication medium. It's a place for 280 character mental expulsions.

I've seen a number of folks who post what would have been a blog post on Twitter. This honestly feels like old man yelling at cloud or new media is evil.

Hell, I thought discord was a terrible place for discussion, then I realize it's basically a chatroom and then it all clicked into place.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Pretty much. I remember individual online forums like this and Wizards.com back before these specialized social media products. As much as there are still toxic and troll-like behaviors going on, I think a bunch of it that used to be here up and left for Reddit and Twitter and such. Anonymity breeds nonbest behavior and worst impulses are rewarded.

Some things are important because people think they are important, watch it or take part in it, and therefore lend their importance to the thing. If, as the politics that keep creeping through here are any indication, Twitter played a non-trivial part in political events of the past several years. People thought Twitter was important, watched it, and it swayed their actions/beliefs/voting patterns. That's importance. Any means by which a large number of people communicate, gather, form tribes, coalesce or reinforce ideas, or otherwise establish their beliefs, ideas, opinions, and allegiances is inherently important, regardless of any outside estimation of its' quality.

That said, I also question whether Twitter really has a long term business model. Of course I have the same question about FacebMeta and it's been going on for a decade and a half, and dead tree publishing has been "on its' deathbed" for a quarter century, etc...

There is a lot to say about a platform like Twitter. I don't think the platform is itself the issue, it is the importance we give it and how we use it. Also our understanding of how we are communicating there. One of the reasons I stopped with it, is because of its clear immediate effect on my ability to think. It was visibly impacting my memory and how well I could articulate ideas. But that is something I am sure I could also manage by just using twitter less. The bigger issue I think is twitter is new and like any new communication medium we are still very vulnerable to the way it can be exploited for rhetorical purposes (for instance, the structure of the character limit and how tweets work, really reward making a punchline rather than making a clear argument that leads to a solid conclusion: it is about winning over the crowd, whoever that crowd happens to be, with a quip or slice of wit). That can be a great platform for all kinds of creative communication. I think there is a learning curve where people need to understand how they are allowing themselves to be persuaded by humor and social pressure rather than a real presentation of ideas. At the moment, it tends to bring out the worst in people in my opinion, so I don't really want to be on there. Basically been off it for two years. A lot happier since I left.

All mediums take time for us to adjust to. Doesn't make the medium itself bad. Over time I think they lose their power: propaganda posters don't have the sway they once did, we can see how they manipulate quite clearly. And mediums always introduce changes (people used to tell and remember stories much differently before writing; a lot of unrest followed the widespread use of the printing press). Some of that will just be inevitable.

For right now though, I have just found the best thing for me, if I want to be productive with the things I love doing, is to unplug for the most part. Settle back into a pre-internet pace of life.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Then what does it mean? My understanding is that being disingenuous is making statement or acting by putting aside relevant information that you do know. I guess it could be viewed as a form of dishonesty? Like I'd tell someone is disingenuous if they omit some relevant information that they clearly have knowledge of. That's my understanding, but again english is not my mother tongue, so I may not understand the nuance of the word.

Right, thus you calling me dishonest for disagreeing with you. Which is bad form.

I agree with most of what you said. As I said, I'm not a fan of him. He was absolutely born in wealth and did not found most of the business he was in. I also disagree with many of the views he put out publicly, his latest bout concerning Twitter being a good example. But it's really interesting how he has the intelligence to think laterally and move knowledge, technology and resources from one domain to another. A lot of industries struggle with issues that have been figured out elsewhere, and someone that is able to have the right people meet and connect solutions to problems are highly valuable.

There is nothing valuable about Elon Musk. The world would be better if he'd been born middle class and gotten a job in fabricating or something. He's a net drain.

But more specifically, he didn't do anything innovative, he just took credit for what other people have done. That's it.

 

[gamerprinter]

Have you seen my posts of anything, anywhere - they don't call them walls of text for nothing. Any platform where character limit is one of the primary functions is not condusive to anything that I might post. So I've never used Twitter, I've never looked at it, and have no draw to look. Twitter is a complete non-issue with me. So whether Elon owns it or not, I have no opinion nor care...

 

[Bedrockgames]

Have you seen my posts of anything, anywhere - they don't call them walls of text for nothing. Any platform where character limit is one of the primary functions is not condusive to anything that I might post. So I've never used Twitter, I've never looked at it, and have no draw to look. Twitter is a complete non-issue with me. So whether Elon owns it or not, I have no opinion nor care...

I too tend towards wall of text. I think the specific politics and matter of who owns it is less relevant than how we use it as a society (as people noted journalists have it power by deciding Twitter conversations were important and meaningful). It is has become a bit of a media force multiplier I think is the issue