5 ms·
The essence, perhaps... with none of the nuance or shading. If one thinks that is unnecessary, dispensable fluff, Twitter is no doubt sufficient for most writin
by rfrey 5y ago
The essence, perhaps... with none of the nuance or shading. If one thinks that is unnecessary, dispensable fluff, Twitter is no doubt sufficient for most writing.
And a rhyming dictionary contains all poetry in many fewer pages.
- jasonladuke0311 5y ago> The essence, perhaps... with none of the nuance or shading Precisely why the worlds problems are all solvable on Twitter.
- DocTomoe 5y agoYep, I do remember the many problems Twitter solved. Without Twitter, we would be centuries away from enlightened world peace and mutual understanding.
- jolux 5y agoNuance and shading is not entirely unselfish. Too much nuance indicates a lack of trust in your reader.
- otterley 5y agoGiven the nature and quality of replies I’ve seen even on HN — where there are no such character limits and the level of education its members have is higher on average — it seems to me that trust has yet to be earned.
- gfodor 5y agoI explicitly said that it’s necessary, but generally it’s not for the primary purpose of encoding the core point one is trying to make. Nuance to me is more about convincing the unpersuaded reader the idea has merit and is important or useful. Which is why Twitter allows reasonable idea propagation but does a terrible job of persuading people who disagree.
- laszlojamf 5y agoBefore twitter it was called aphorisms and Nietzsche was doing it before it was cool.
- hammock 5y agoDoes the master oil painter not start with charcoal pencil?