5 ms·

Twitter should be owned as a worldwide co-operative at this point, it's too useful as infrastructure to hand it over to some greedy jackasses.

by omouse 10y ago

bernardlunn 10y ago
But it is too expensive now for that route
- tarancato 10y ago
  I wonder how cheaper would it be if tweets were removed in, let's say, six months.
  - SwellJoe 10y ago
    This election has proven the value of old tweets; as one candidate in particular has a penchant for making shit up, and then pretending later he didn't make shit up. That said, I thought about this recently when @pmarca took a break from twitter and all of his tweets disappeared, and I figured, "Well, yes, I follow him and enjoy his tweets...but I never planned to go back and read the old ones." It is a fleeting and temporary medium, like a conversation rather than an article or book. Nonetheless, I really doubt storage is anywhere near the majority of the cost of running Twitter. It takes a lot of 140 character tweets to fill up a terabyte.
    - the_watcher 10y ago
      > Nonetheless, I really doubt storage is anywhere near the majority of the cost of running Twitter. It takes a lot of 140 character tweets to fill up a terabyte. Tweets contain photos, videos, gifs, etc. Text is far from the only things that would need to be stored.
      - SwellJoe 10y ago
        How many tweets contain media? On my timeline it is a very, very small percentage.
oldmanjay 10y ago
I'm endlessly amused by the attitude people get over websites they like. I'm not sure what your personal argument for forcing twitter to be a utility is, but I'm sure it would make me laugh. Care to let me know?
- jimmytidey 10y ago
  It doesn't sound like you have a particularly open mind on this one, but I always address this question when it comes up on Hackner News because it's something I have strong feelings about. I'm not going to defend Twitter being a utility (which the parent comment also doesn't mention) but I will say that in general, it's very clear to me we haven't worked out what kind of institutions can best deliver services in the digital age. It's profoundly dubious that Twitter - a defacto 'town square' for public discussion - is owned by an institution that, at best, has few incentives to make it effective for the purpose which it is widely used. This is significant in democracies, where the quality of national decision making will be directly linked to the design of the channels in which public debate happens. The idea that we can take full and fair advantage of the opportunities the web offers exclusively through profit-motivated corporations is flatly wrong. The fact that as Twitter users we agreed to some T&Cs doesn't mean we can't also wish for a more democratic digital public space - which I assume is what the parent comment is really getting at.
  - taurath 10y ago
    I think its a great idea, if a model could be found that would work (with a person at the top with the vision for such a model). Government run just screams surveillance to me, and is a non-starter for a huge percentage of the population. A non-profit wikipedia-like model could work I suppose, but I'm not sure what the problems would be with such a prolific service.
  - tootie 10y ago
    I would strongly dispute that. Twitter has that much public value. Relativley few people use for critical information. It's a default option for broad communication, but it's hardly the only one.
morgante 10y ago
> it's too useful as infrastructure to hand it over to some greedy jackasses. This is an extremely dubious claim and I don't see why everyone is so eager to support it. What exactly makes Twitter valuable infrastructure? What compelling service does it offer to people and society? What other things would stop working if Twitter were shut down? All I see is a bunch of people shouting at each other. Most people do not and will never use Twitter.
- jimmytidey 10y ago
  Twitter is a (I think very well designed) forum for public debate. Good systems for public debate are the precondition for democracy. In a democracy they are the infrastructure on which all other infrastructure depends. Every subsequent spending decision is influenced by them. If you turn off public debate nothing will break the next day, but in a decade most people's lives will be misery.
  - morgante 10y ago
    We had public debate long before Twitter existed. [0] I have full confidence that if Twitter were to close tomorrow that we would continue to have public debate, and it might even be better debate. [0] You might claim that Twitter is superior to other forms of public debate, but then I'd ask if you're really happy with the way politics are going.
  - wott 10y ago
    'Debate' in less than 140 characters, half of those being # and @ tags, is indeed a vibrant proof of a healthy democracy. What's next? A well designed debate platform that allows only emojis? A well designed debate platform that allows only meme pictures?
  - overcast 10y ago
    If Twitter's current intent is to make it a platform for debate. They make it awfully confusing place for any newcomers. A crummy character count, that forces everyone to speak in acronyms, hashtags, and shortened URL's. It's a miserable experience for any type of dialogue, with various overlays, and drill downs, that honestly gets me lost most of the time. TechCrunch summarized this well. https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/19/twitters-new-simpler-rules-for-character-counts-in-tweets-go-live/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/19/twitters-new-simpler-rules... "SIMPLE".
sushid 10y ago
This is hilarious to me. If you find something valuable, your proposal is to take it and have it "owned by the world?" And I thought our presidential candidate were bad.
- smacktoward 10y ago
  It's not crazy, it happens sometimes with private businesses that grow into critical public infrastructure. New York City's subway system is one example. It started out in the 1900s as a couple of private companies, Interborough Rapid Transit (IRT) and Brooklyn Rapid Transit (BRT). The lines these two companies operated suffered more and more over time from overcrowding, leading the city to establish a third, public system in the '30s, and then in 1940 to just buy out IRT and BRT and merge all three systems into the single, publicly-operated network that serves NYC today. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_S... for more on this.)
- omouse 10y ago
  https://boingboing.net/2016/10/04/proposal-turn-twitter-into-a.html https://boingboing.net/2016/10/04/proposal-turn-twitter-into... It can happen, co-operatives are a viable business model. My bank is a co-operative and they work for their member-owners.

Twitter should be owned as a worldwide co-operative at this point, it's too useful as infrastructure to hand it over to some greedy jackasses.

by omouse 10y ago

Twitter should be owned as a worldwide co-operative at this point, it's too useful as infrastructure to hand it over to some greedy jackasses.

bernardlunn 10y ago

But it is too expensive now for that route

tarancato 10y ago
I wonder how cheaper would it be if tweets were removed in, let's say, six months.
- SwellJoe 10y ago
  This election has proven the value of old tweets; as one candidate in particular has a penchant for making shit up, and then pretending later he didn't make shit up. That said, I thought about this recently when @pmarca took a break from twitter and all of his tweets disappeared, and I figured, "Well, yes, I follow him and enjoy his tweets...but I never planned to go back and read the old ones." It is a fleeting and temporary medium, like a conversation rather than an article or book. Nonetheless, I really doubt storage is anywhere near the majority of the cost of running Twitter. It takes a lot of 140 character tweets to fill up a terabyte.
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    > Nonetheless, I really doubt storage is anywhere near the majority of the cost of running Twitter. It takes a lot of 140 character tweets to fill up a terabyte. Tweets contain photos, videos, gifs, etc. Text is far from the only things that would need to be stored.
    - SwellJoe 10y ago
      How many tweets contain media? On my timeline it is a very, very small percentage.

oldmanjay 10y ago

I'm endlessly amused by the attitude people get over websites they like. I'm not sure what your personal argument for forcing twitter to be a utility is, but I'm sure it would make me laugh. Care to let me know?

jimmytidey 10y ago
It doesn't sound like you have a particularly open mind on this one, but I always address this question when it comes up on Hackner News because it's something I have strong feelings about. I'm not going to defend Twitter being a utility (which the parent comment also doesn't mention) but I will say that in general, it's very clear to me we haven't worked out what kind of institutions can best deliver services in the digital age. It's profoundly dubious that Twitter - a defacto 'town square' for public discussion - is owned by an institution that, at best, has few incentives to make it effective for the purpose which it is widely used. This is significant in democracies, where the quality of national decision making will be directly linked to the design of the channels in which public debate happens. The idea that we can take full and fair advantage of the opportunities the web offers exclusively through profit-motivated corporations is flatly wrong. The fact that as Twitter users we agreed to some T&Cs doesn't mean we can't also wish for a more democratic digital public space - which I assume is what the parent comment is really getting at.
- taurath 10y ago
  I think its a great idea, if a model could be found that would work (with a person at the top with the vision for such a model). Government run just screams surveillance to me, and is a non-starter for a huge percentage of the population. A non-profit wikipedia-like model could work I suppose, but I'm not sure what the problems would be with such a prolific service.
- tootie 10y ago
  I would strongly dispute that. Twitter has that much public value. Relativley few people use for critical information. It's a default option for broad communication, but it's hardly the only one.

morgante 10y ago

> it's too useful as infrastructure to hand it over to some greedy jackasses. This is an extremely dubious claim and I don't see why everyone is so eager to support it. What exactly makes Twitter valuable infrastructure? What compelling service does it offer to people and society? What other things would stop working if Twitter were shut down? All I see is a bunch of people shouting at each other. Most people do not and will never use Twitter.

jimmytidey 10y ago
Twitter is a (I think very well designed) forum for public debate. Good systems for public debate are the precondition for democracy. In a democracy they are the infrastructure on which all other infrastructure depends. Every subsequent spending decision is influenced by them. If you turn off public debate nothing will break the next day, but in a decade most people's lives will be misery.
- morgante 10y ago
  We had public debate long before Twitter existed. [0] I have full confidence that if Twitter were to close tomorrow that we would continue to have public debate, and it might even be better debate. [0] You might claim that Twitter is superior to other forms of public debate, but then I'd ask if you're really happy with the way politics are going.
- wott 10y ago
  'Debate' in less than 140 characters, half of those being # and @ tags, is indeed a vibrant proof of a healthy democracy. What's next? A well designed debate platform that allows only emojis? A well designed debate platform that allows only meme pictures?
- overcast 10y ago
  If Twitter's current intent is to make it a platform for debate. They make it awfully confusing place for any newcomers. A crummy character count, that forces everyone to speak in acronyms, hashtags, and shortened URL's. It's a miserable experience for any type of dialogue, with various overlays, and drill downs, that honestly gets me lost most of the time. TechCrunch summarized this well. https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/19/twitters-new-simpler-rules-for-character-counts-in-tweets-go-live/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/09/19/twitters-new-simpler-rules... "SIMPLE".

sushid 10y ago

This is hilarious to me. If you find something valuable, your proposal is to take it and have it "owned by the world?" And I thought our presidential candidate were bad.

smacktoward 10y ago
It's not crazy, it happens sometimes with private businesses that grow into critical public infrastructure. New York City's subway system is one example. It started out in the 1900s as a couple of private companies, Interborough Rapid Transit (IRT) and Brooklyn Rapid Transit (BRT). The lines these two companies operated suffered more and more over time from overcrowding, leading the city to establish a third, public system in the '30s, and then in 1940 to just buy out IRT and BRT and merge all three systems into the single, publicly-operated network that serves NYC today. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_New_York_City_S... for more on this.)
omouse 10y ago
https://boingboing.net/2016/10/04/proposal-turn-twitter-into-a.html https://boingboing.net/2016/10/04/proposal-turn-twitter-into... It can happen, co-operatives are a viable business model. My bank is a co-operative and they work for their member-owners.