4 ms·
Verified accounts are limited to 6k tweets/day. Assume the average human is awake for 16 hours a day. That's 6.25 tweets/minute if you did literally nothing but
by housemusicfan 3y ago
Verified accounts are limited to 6k tweets/day. Assume the average human is awake for 16 hours a day. That's 6.25 tweets/minute if you did literally nothing but scroll through twitter all day long for 16 hours straight. Please explain how that makes the site "unusable" unless of course you are a non-human bot scraping site content.
- duped 3y agoI hit the 600 post limit in about an hour, so how they're counting that seems kind of suspect. There are dozens of tweets you may scroll past or comments you may load for any one that you care about.
- Terretta 3y agoYou only scroll past 6.25 tweets per minute? An easier way of thinking about this is, 12 followed tweets with 50 replies each, 600 limit reached. Do that in 10 idle times throughout your day (lots of people do more, like, say, Elon), and you hit even the verified limit.
- user_named 3y agoI can't imagine someone scrolling as slowly as in your example. I'm certain I scroll at least 100 tweets/minute.
- housemusicfan 3y agoFor 16 hours straight with no breaks? Your phone's battery would die before that was exceeded.
- user_named 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- harshalizee 3y agoAt 100 tweets/minute they would reach the limit in an hour, wouldn't they?
- LordAtlas 3y agoMore like 6 minutes (600/100) if they're scrolling throughout. Perhaps unrealistic but even given generous allowances, a frequent user of Twitter is screwed within the hour, yes.
- greatwave1 3y ago16 hours? If you're scrolling 100 tweets/min, you'd hit the unverified user limit within 6 minutes, and the verified user limit within an hour
- housemusicfan 3y agoI don't understand, are you actually reading 100 tweets/minute, or just endlessly scrolling through random data for thumb exercise? When you make the good faith assumption that people are actually reading through the content, the numbers start to seem a bit more rational.
- misnome 3y agoNobody consumes twitter that way.
- kemotep 3y agoThe grandparent comments are saying that allegedly the limitation is tweets loaded not read. If you scroll past tweets to get to content you actually want to read, allegedly people have reached the daily limits after only a few minutes after opening twitter. The good faith assumption here is that Twitter only counts tweets read but does that mean the client reads the tweet or the user? The server delivered them all the same, whether a human reads it or not. So does delivery of the tweet by loading it onto the device count or some nebulous amount of time spent lingering on the tweet?
- nickthegreek 3y agoI don’t believe assuming every tweet is read in a feed is good faith. There isn’t a single social media app that I use where I am not quickly scrolling past nonsense all the time.
- greatwave1 3y agoDid you actually read the tweet that you replied to? > "I'm certain I scroll at least 100 tweets/minute." Many Twitter users, including literally the person you are in conversation with, scroll through dozens/hundreds of tweets a minute. Not sure if you're actually used Twitter before, but many tweets are only a line or two of text, and it doesn't take more than a second to process them. Additionally, if you're quickly scrolling through replies or someone's history to try to find something, it can render hundreds of tweets in a matter of seconds.
- LordAtlas 3y agoTwitter can also be used on the desktop. I leave it running in a window while I do other things, and check in a few times a day. Thanks to Twitter product "development", the feed now auto-refreshes itself when you get back to it.
- ramesh31 3y ago>That's 6.25 tweets/minute if you did literally nothing but scroll through twitter all day long for 16 hours straight. Please explain how that makes the site "unusable" unless of course you are a non-human bot scraping site content. Are you kidding? 6,000 tweets is literally like 10 minutes of scrolling through twitter. You're assuming each tweet to be worthy of being read. They aren't. You scroll through hundreds of them to find good threads.
- ummonk 3y agoWith a more normal 100 tweets viewed per minute, a verified user would hit the limit in an hour, which is quite low for the kind of power user that would purchase twitter blue.
- pphysch 3y ago6.25 tweets/minute is nothing. The feed generates a ton of junk (ads, redundant QTs, straight up noise) so there are certainly periods where I will scroll past 6 junk tweets in 1-2 seconds.
- rideontime 3y agoOne correction: It’s tweets fetched via the API, not tweets actually viewed. An unattended open tab could easily bust the limit as twitter fetches more for your feed.
- rsynnott 3y agoDo you use Twitter? Even at the best of times, you learn to flip though fairly quickly skimming over the nonsense, and since the ascension of naughty ol’ mr car bluetick replies get promoted to the front of the queue, so you have to scroll past a sea of bullshit to get to the real replies. Twitter with 600 tweets a day is clearly unusable. That’s one large thread, and you’ll scroll past most of it anyway.
- eterm 3y agoI don't use Twitter. (Or haven't since ~2006). That sounds like a miserable user experience in general, what compels you to seek out that experience?
- SoftTalker 3y agoI don't use twitter either but I guess it's the same reason many of us come here. We find it interesting and/or entertaining. I know I've had days where I killed hours on HN. I try to avoid it, but still probably spend more time here than I get in compensating benefit. Very little of what is discussed here is really important in a significant way if you take a step back and evaluate it honestly.
- yodsanklai 3y agoHN is very different in the sense that HN moderation and culture encourages users to be civic. Twitter incentizes for the opposite.
- rsynnott 3y agoOh, I’m essentially off it since naughty ol’ mr car took it over; it used to be better (though even then, there’s a reason it was affectionately known as the hellsite).
- yodsanklai 3y agoTwitter is extremely addictive and bring the worse in people. There's a constant flow of information, lots of arguments, lots of famous people (also addicted). For some reason, HN likes to pick on Facebook, but Twitter is by far the most toxic social network.
- evan_ 3y agoIt isn’t actually “tweets read”, it’s tweets loaded. If you for instance open the @elonmusk tweet announcing this, it will load dozens if not hundreds of replies, and those will all be counted against your quota. Do that a few times and you’re done in a few minutes. I got rate limited after a few minutes of normal use. (Like most users I don’t have Twitter blue.)