12 ms·

Is there no value also in how millions of people stare into its feed day and night? Or the vast amounts of content created for free by its huge amount of users

by mbrock 11y ago

Is there no value also in how millions of people stare into its feed day and night? Or the vast amounts of content created for free by its huge amount of users who include both the influential and the aspiring?

ThomPete 11y ago
Not really because they stare at the feed only to find something that then lives somewhere else. It's like being that guy the girls hang out with because you are good friends with the handsome guy in school. You might get to hang out with them but in the end they go home with your friend.
- brianzelip 11y ago
  > Not really because they stare at the feed only to find something that then lives somewhere else. Maybe not. When I want to jump in to @fat's stream of thought and humor for a while i read his twitter log, scrolling thru dozens of tweets. For me, twitter is for a few things: connecting with folks in a cold-call way; learning of trends and new ideas in my areas of interest; getting to know someone.
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    You spend way more time reading an article outside of twitter than you do reading @fats stream of thought. Many many many people don't use it like you do but almost everyone use it as a way to find new content and so thats where twitters opportunity is.
- mbrock 11y ago
  In other words, you are a perfect vector for advertising. If another guy wants to reach those girls, he might want to pay you his whole allowance. Edit: to clarify my point, I say that Twitter not only is friends with the attractive guy, but is also funny and charming and interesting in his own right, and that this is a major value.
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    It doesn't matter what I am. The point is that twitter doesn't monetize properly right now and the primary reason for that is that people don't consume the content twitter links to on twitter but somewhere else.
    - mbrock 11y ago
      I don't know what the primary reason is. Facebook has directed huge amounts of traffic to external sites for years and that doesn't seem to have been a major problem.
      - ThomPete 11y ago
        You consume way more content ON Facebook than you are aware of. Thats the big difference. And a lot of content is being written ON FB. The discussion is ON FB and they allow them to be long which keeps people there too. Just the ability to do a preview of on article is such a big eyeball keeper that it leaves twitter in the dust. Or to write a comment to the article which make people then react to what someone wrote about the article without maybe even reading it. It's like with checkins. People think FourSquare and Swarm is big but it's dwarfed by FBs checkins it's just not a major focus for them and so we don't think about it as a place a lot of people check in. But it's a numbers game.
- StephenCanis 11y ago
  People only stare at Google to find content that lives somewhere else. There is alot of value of linking users to content they are interested in.
  - ThomPete 11y ago
    Thats not at all how Google works. Google works because it give you a selection of what you are looking for right now. It knows whats top of your mind and. Twitter gives you things other people are interested in or find interesting. They are in no way comparable. One is letting you find things you are looking for, the other is mostly showing things you don't care about sometimes things that are interesting to you.
    - StephenCanis 11y ago
      I'm only pointing out that you don't need to host content to provide value.
      - ThomPete 11y ago
        Yeah but you are using the wrong example since twitter is not a search engine.
        StephenCanis 11y ago
        Both Twitter and Google help you find information you're interested in. The internet is massive so sorting and serving useful content to a user is valuable. Google finds this information based on keywords. Twitter finds this information by looking at conversations and people you are interested in. Saying Google and Twitter are in no way comparable isn't helpful. They are comparable though certainly different! Google has better information on your preferences and exactly what you're interested in. That doesn't mean Twitter doesn't have good information. If you follow a ton of yoga instructors then Twitter can feature yoga ads in your feed. While not as targeted as Google ads they still provide value to the user and the advertiser. I don't want to get into an argument, just wanted to explain where I was coming from.

by mbrock 11y ago

ThomPete 11y ago

Not really because they stare at the feed only to find something that then lives somewhere else. It's like being that guy the girls hang out with because you are good friends with the handsome guy in school. You might get to hang out with them but in the end they go home with your friend.

brianzelip 11y ago
> Not really because they stare at the feed only to find something that then lives somewhere else. Maybe not. When I want to jump in to @fat's stream of thought and humor for a while i read his twitter log, scrolling thru dozens of tweets. For me, twitter is for a few things: connecting with folks in a cold-call way; learning of trends and new ideas in my areas of interest; getting to know someone.
- ThomPete 11y ago
  You spend way more time reading an article outside of twitter than you do reading @fats stream of thought. Many many many people don't use it like you do but almost everyone use it as a way to find new content and so thats where twitters opportunity is.
mbrock 11y ago
In other words, you are a perfect vector for advertising. If another guy wants to reach those girls, he might want to pay you his whole allowance. Edit: to clarify my point, I say that Twitter not only is friends with the attractive guy, but is also funny and charming and interesting in his own right, and that this is a major value.
- ThomPete 11y ago
  It doesn't matter what I am. The point is that twitter doesn't monetize properly right now and the primary reason for that is that people don't consume the content twitter links to on twitter but somewhere else.
  - mbrock 11y ago
    I don't know what the primary reason is. Facebook has directed huge amounts of traffic to external sites for years and that doesn't seem to have been a major problem.
    - ThomPete 11y ago
      You consume way more content ON Facebook than you are aware of. Thats the big difference. And a lot of content is being written ON FB. The discussion is ON FB and they allow them to be long which keeps people there too. Just the ability to do a preview of on article is such a big eyeball keeper that it leaves twitter in the dust. Or to write a comment to the article which make people then react to what someone wrote about the article without maybe even reading it. It's like with checkins. People think FourSquare and Swarm is big but it's dwarfed by FBs checkins it's just not a major focus for them and so we don't think about it as a place a lot of people check in. But it's a numbers game.
StephenCanis 11y ago
People only stare at Google to find content that lives somewhere else. There is alot of value of linking users to content they are interested in.
- ThomPete 11y ago
  Thats not at all how Google works. Google works because it give you a selection of what you are looking for right now. It knows whats top of your mind and. Twitter gives you things other people are interested in or find interesting. They are in no way comparable. One is letting you find things you are looking for, the other is mostly showing things you don't care about sometimes things that are interesting to you.
  - StephenCanis 11y ago
    I'm only pointing out that you don't need to host content to provide value.
    - ThomPete 11y ago
      Yeah but you are using the wrong example since twitter is not a search engine.
      - StephenCanis 11y ago
        Both Twitter and Google help you find information you're interested in. The internet is massive so sorting and serving useful content to a user is valuable. Google finds this information based on keywords. Twitter finds this information by looking at conversations and people you are interested in. Saying Google and Twitter are in no way comparable isn't helpful. They are comparable though certainly different! Google has better information on your preferences and exactly what you're interested in. That doesn't mean Twitter doesn't have good information. If you follow a ton of yoga instructors then Twitter can feature yoga ads in your feed. While not as targeted as Google ads they still provide value to the user and the advertiser. I don't want to get into an argument, just wanted to explain where I was coming from.