7 ms·

The interaction is completely different. I can check on Elon's twitter whenever I want without having to subscribe. People can have conversations around his twe

The interaction is completely different. I can check on Elon's twitter whenever I want without having to subscribe. People can have conversations around his tweets without spamming strangers' inboxen. I can send you a link to one of his tweets and you can pass it on to whoever you want without exposing my address to your friends. I have no idea why you would compare the two.

toomuchtodo 10y ago
You just described a mailing list with a web frontend. Perfect example: NANOG (North American network ops group) Massive mailing list. Web enabled. Trivial cost. Deep links possible to share. EDIT: And more than 160 characters! Hallelujah! A format an actual discussion can take place in. I compare the two because I'm old, tech is cyclic, and everyone reinvents the wheel. Twitter is, clearly, not special, and can't justify its valuation.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- slg 10y ago
  The barrier for a follow is so much lower than a mailing list. I am not going to sign up for a mailing list from a random comedian to send me their tour dates that 98% of the time aren't relevant to me. But I will put up with them Tweeting those date if their other Tweets are funny.
  - ghaff 10y ago
    Twitter also has this element of being like a river you can dip into whenever you're inclined and ignore the rest of the time. As you say, I do subscribe to some newsletters and mailing lists but it's very easy to get overloaded and/or end up filtering things to a folder that you never look at. Twitter seems to strike a reasonable balance of utility/effort/distraction/etc. for a lot of things that email-oriented methods really don't.
    - tigershark 10y ago
      Ah right.. Like that story last week about the writer that got so addicted to twitter that she had to close her account? From my point of view it doesn't seem so easy and balanced.
  - tigershark 10y ago
    I'm missing something.. You just said that you won't click a button to signup a newsletter that delivers you funny jokes and the tour dates of a random comedian, but you are more than happy to press a button to get exactly the same things but with the limitations that the funny jokes must be less than 140 chars. There must be a reason if I never used and understood twitter at all..
    - slg 10y ago
      Emails require more of my attention and they arrive whenever they are sent. Tweets require zero attention, they are easy to ignore, and I never see them unless I specifically seek them out by opening Twitter. Basically Twitter is much more voluntary than email.
      - rdiddly 10y ago
        I get this, but it's kind of funny to hear someone say Twitter's unique value proposition is that you can ignore it. As a non-user I must be extracting tons of value from it then! It's the poor users I feel sorry for! Just joking around. But, not completely. The value you speak of is really the ability to spend your time on something potentially more worthwhile. People forget social media has an opportunity cost.
- res0nat0r 10y ago
  I use twitter to get instant updates on current news from reporters sitting in WH briefing rooms and other breaking news unfiltered from the people on the ground. I like reading quotes from what is happening real time and being able to respond before it even hits the live NBC news feed. You just aren't going to ever have that with a mailing list. If you could we would be doing it.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >I use twitter to get instant updates on current news Because "current news" are so interesting/relevant/important to one's everyday life and/or politics? It's mostly a bunch of noise -- with plenty of BS and lies on top. If you want to know what's happening, better read a "not instant", more analysis/depth outlet.
    - res0nat0r 10y ago
      >If you want to know what's happening, better read a "not instant", more analysis/depth outlet. I read WaPo and the NYT for that, Twitter is for breaking news and info from reporters real-time when they are questioning folks.
    - rhizome 10y ago
      "Mostly" is tunable.
- jkaunisv1 10y ago
  Well, good point. I totally forgot about those. That said, is this page representative of what you're talking about or am I missing a better UI? http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-February/thread.html http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-February/threa... Obviously it could be styled differently/"better" for mass consumption, but that aside, it still exposes private emails and full names of the participants. And I think the character limit is part of what makes it valuable...I don't really want to read an essay, the forced concision is great for a lot of the use cases. And getting back to Elon, he probably doesn't want to engage in deep discussion with all those randoms, he wants to drop a juicy tidbit, build excitement and let the discussion happen elsewhere. When he has something more to say, he writes a blog post and tweets a link. I'm actually not defending Twitter's valuation or business prospects, just the value or uniqueness of the service relative to something like a mailing list. I'm still not convinced they're so similar.

toomuchtodo 10y ago

You just described a mailing list with a web frontend. Perfect example: NANOG (North American network ops group) Massive mailing list. Web enabled. Trivial cost. Deep links possible to share. EDIT: And more than 160 characters! Hallelujah! A format an actual discussion can take place in. I compare the two because I'm old, tech is cyclic, and everyone reinvents the wheel. Twitter is, clearly, not special, and can't justify its valuation.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
slg 10y ago
The barrier for a follow is so much lower than a mailing list. I am not going to sign up for a mailing list from a random comedian to send me their tour dates that 98% of the time aren't relevant to me. But I will put up with them Tweeting those date if their other Tweets are funny.
- ghaff 10y ago
  Twitter also has this element of being like a river you can dip into whenever you're inclined and ignore the rest of the time. As you say, I do subscribe to some newsletters and mailing lists but it's very easy to get overloaded and/or end up filtering things to a folder that you never look at. Twitter seems to strike a reasonable balance of utility/effort/distraction/etc. for a lot of things that email-oriented methods really don't.
  - tigershark 10y ago
    Ah right.. Like that story last week about the writer that got so addicted to twitter that she had to close her account? From my point of view it doesn't seem so easy and balanced.
- tigershark 10y ago
  I'm missing something.. You just said that you won't click a button to signup a newsletter that delivers you funny jokes and the tour dates of a random comedian, but you are more than happy to press a button to get exactly the same things but with the limitations that the funny jokes must be less than 140 chars. There must be a reason if I never used and understood twitter at all..
  - slg 10y ago
    Emails require more of my attention and they arrive whenever they are sent. Tweets require zero attention, they are easy to ignore, and I never see them unless I specifically seek them out by opening Twitter. Basically Twitter is much more voluntary than email.
    - rdiddly 10y ago
      I get this, but it's kind of funny to hear someone say Twitter's unique value proposition is that you can ignore it. As a non-user I must be extracting tons of value from it then! It's the poor users I feel sorry for! Just joking around. But, not completely. The value you speak of is really the ability to spend your time on something potentially more worthwhile. People forget social media has an opportunity cost.
res0nat0r 10y ago
I use twitter to get instant updates on current news from reporters sitting in WH briefing rooms and other breaking news unfiltered from the people on the ground. I like reading quotes from what is happening real time and being able to respond before it even hits the live NBC news feed. You just aren't going to ever have that with a mailing list. If you could we would be doing it.
- coldtea 10y ago
  >I use twitter to get instant updates on current news Because "current news" are so interesting/relevant/important to one's everyday life and/or politics? It's mostly a bunch of noise -- with plenty of BS and lies on top. If you want to know what's happening, better read a "not instant", more analysis/depth outlet.
  - res0nat0r 10y ago
    >If you want to know what's happening, better read a "not instant", more analysis/depth outlet. I read WaPo and the NYT for that, Twitter is for breaking news and info from reporters real-time when they are questioning folks.
  - rhizome 10y ago
    "Mostly" is tunable.
jkaunisv1 10y ago
Well, good point. I totally forgot about those. That said, is this page representative of what you're talking about or am I missing a better UI? http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-February/thread.html http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-February/threa... Obviously it could be styled differently/"better" for mass consumption, but that aside, it still exposes private emails and full names of the participants. And I think the character limit is part of what makes it valuable...I don't really want to read an essay, the forced concision is great for a lot of the use cases. And getting back to Elon, he probably doesn't want to engage in deep discussion with all those randoms, he wants to drop a juicy tidbit, build excitement and let the discussion happen elsewhere. When he has something more to say, he writes a blog post and tweets a link. I'm actually not defending Twitter's valuation or business prospects, just the value or uniqueness of the service relative to something like a mailing list. I'm still not convinced they're so similar.