6 ms·

His 'excuse' was posted 35 minutes after Kristen posted her comment, as tweet 12 in a thread, when tweet 11 in that thread was posted 12 hours earlier. Pro tip

His 'excuse' was posted 35 minutes after Kristen posted her comment, as tweet 12 in a thread, when tweet 11 in that thread was posted 12 hours earlier. Pro tip: Ninja edits don't work on Twitter. https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1495636944289775616 https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/14956369442897756... https://twitter.com/Cavallokristen/status/1495811487897735170 https://twitter.com/Cavallokristen/status/149581148789773517... https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1495820351879659525 https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/14958203518796595...

jancsika 5y ago
If only there were some kind of decentralized linked list of prohibitively-expensive-to-counterfeit ordered records that he could have leveraged to prove to the world that his twelfth statement preceded hers. Just imagine the vast set of use cases for such a data structure! Why it's enough to make one indiscriminately spam various web forums to tirelessly enumerated through all of them.
- TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
  Yet somehow the human race survived for 200,000 years without a block chain.
  - jancsika 5y ago
    Exactly my point: just imagine how fascinating the next 200,000 years will be with blockchain! When you think in those terms you realize how shameful it is that, say, HN isn't getting in on the ground floor and spawning a worker in every reader's browser to mine crypto. The energy expended to mine Bitcoin pales in comparison to the early mover opportunities lost each day from lack of action.
  - colejohnson66 5y ago
    Not really a valid argument. We survived millennia without a lot of things. The Industrial Revolution was only two centuries ago. It doesn't mean life was necessarily better before then.
    - TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
      True. What I’m trying to say is that Twitter in a block chain would probably be an awful user experience.
      - brk 5y ago
        Twitter could be improved by requiring a proof of work effort before posting any tweets. The effort could be computational, or just proof of fact checking and basic proofreading would go a long way.
        auntienomen 5y ago
        "Proof of thought"
        barbazoo 5y ago
        A pretty short blockchain that would be.
        dwheeler 5y ago
        Twitter + proof-of-thought would be awesome :-).
      - CyberDildonics 5y ago
        Twitter is already an awful user experience.
      - ssivark 5y ago
        OTOH -- Twitter (on the blockchain) supporting only ~10 tweets per second is a blessing in disguise that would drastically help improve the user experience by imposing a high cost on junk :P
        cuteboy19 5y ago
        People would get into bidding wars for the next tweet
- smsm42 5y ago
  If only we could spend megawatts of energy and hundreds of millions of dollars in hardware costs to be able to solve a twitter spat between a braggart tech boss and a copywriter feeling not appreciated enough. The humanity could then feel finally its existence amounts to something, some monumental goal is finally achieved.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  > If only there were some kind of decentralized linked list of prohibitively-expensive-to-counterfeit ordered records that he could have leveraged to prove to the world that his twelfth statement preceded hers. The Tweets have timestamps. No blockchain required. The whole point of threading is to group Tweets in order as posted by the author and put replies below them. It wouldn't make sense to throw a bunch of Tweets and replies in chronological order and force the users to try to figure out which Tweet was in response to which parent Tweet.
  - aaronchall 5y ago
    This is so obvious to me that I'm having trouble reading their post as anything but tongue-in-cheek. But perhaps they were indeed being sincere? EDIT: On review of their prior posts, it looks like they were.
    - PragmaticPulp 5y ago
      There's a "blockchain solves everything" mentality that's prevalent in certain web3 communities. It's fueled by the fact that there really aren't many, or perhaps any, usable web3 platforms that do anything beyond distributed ledger or NFT type stuff. Obviously nothing in web3 even resembles the scale and speed and ease of use of Twitter. This has left the door wide open for futurists to paint the most idealistic picture possible of what web3 will look like. Blockchain technology is largely irrelevant to the projections (because it's boring). Instead, the projections suggest to solve all of the various social and legal problems in unspecified ways, with "web3" used as the excuse. It goes hand-in-hand with the idea that big corporations are evil and bad for users, but democratizing ownership will change all of that. Nevermind the fact that the big corporations are already publicly traded and you can buy a share of them today if you want, which isn't actually very different than buying governance tokens of a web3 system. The people with the most money and insider connections (to get early coins at a steep discount) are still going to be the ones calling the shots and shaping the systems to derive profits for themselves. There's nothing magical about web3 that stops people with money from buying outsized influence.
      - 5y ago

jancsika 5y ago

If only there were some kind of decentralized linked list of prohibitively-expensive-to-counterfeit ordered records that he could have leveraged to prove to the world that his twelfth statement preceded hers. Just imagine the vast set of use cases for such a data structure! Why it's enough to make one indiscriminately spam various web forums to tirelessly enumerated through all of them.

TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
Yet somehow the human race survived for 200,000 years without a block chain.
- jancsika 5y ago
  Exactly my point: just imagine how fascinating the next 200,000 years will be with blockchain! When you think in those terms you realize how shameful it is that, say, HN isn't getting in on the ground floor and spawning a worker in every reader's browser to mine crypto. The energy expended to mine Bitcoin pales in comparison to the early mover opportunities lost each day from lack of action.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  Not really a valid argument. We survived millennia without a lot of things. The Industrial Revolution was only two centuries ago. It doesn't mean life was necessarily better before then.
  - TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
    True. What I’m trying to say is that Twitter in a block chain would probably be an awful user experience.
    - brk 5y ago
      Twitter could be improved by requiring a proof of work effort before posting any tweets. The effort could be computational, or just proof of fact checking and basic proofreading would go a long way.
      - auntienomen 5y ago
        "Proof of thought"
        barbazoo 5y ago
        A pretty short blockchain that would be.
        dwheeler 5y ago
        Twitter + proof-of-thought would be awesome :-).
    - CyberDildonics 5y ago
      Twitter is already an awful user experience.
    - ssivark 5y ago
      OTOH -- Twitter (on the blockchain) supporting only ~10 tweets per second is a blessing in disguise that would drastically help improve the user experience by imposing a high cost on junk :P
      - cuteboy19 5y ago
        People would get into bidding wars for the next tweet
smsm42 5y ago
If only we could spend megawatts of energy and hundreds of millions of dollars in hardware costs to be able to solve a twitter spat between a braggart tech boss and a copywriter feeling not appreciated enough. The humanity could then feel finally its existence amounts to something, some monumental goal is finally achieved.
PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> If only there were some kind of decentralized linked list of prohibitively-expensive-to-counterfeit ordered records that he could have leveraged to prove to the world that his twelfth statement preceded hers. The Tweets have timestamps. No blockchain required. The whole point of threading is to group Tweets in order as posted by the author and put replies below them. It wouldn't make sense to throw a bunch of Tweets and replies in chronological order and force the users to try to figure out which Tweet was in response to which parent Tweet.
- aaronchall 5y ago
  This is so obvious to me that I'm having trouble reading their post as anything but tongue-in-cheek. But perhaps they were indeed being sincere? EDIT: On review of their prior posts, it looks like they were.
  - PragmaticPulp 5y ago
    There's a "blockchain solves everything" mentality that's prevalent in certain web3 communities. It's fueled by the fact that there really aren't many, or perhaps any, usable web3 platforms that do anything beyond distributed ledger or NFT type stuff. Obviously nothing in web3 even resembles the scale and speed and ease of use of Twitter. This has left the door wide open for futurists to paint the most idealistic picture possible of what web3 will look like. Blockchain technology is largely irrelevant to the projections (because it's boring). Instead, the projections suggest to solve all of the various social and legal problems in unspecified ways, with "web3" used as the excuse. It goes hand-in-hand with the idea that big corporations are evil and bad for users, but democratizing ownership will change all of that. Nevermind the fact that the big corporations are already publicly traded and you can buy a share of them today if you want, which isn't actually very different than buying governance tokens of a web3 system. The people with the most money and insider connections (to get early coins at a steep discount) are still going to be the ones calling the shots and shaping the systems to derive profits for themselves. There's nothing magical about web3 that stops people with money from buying outsized influence.
    - 5y ago