4 ms·

You mean it can't be a link platform. Maybe thats a good thing. It forces content to be posted to X directly instead of click baiting you into ad infested, pay

You mean it can't be a link platform. Maybe thats a good thing. It forces content to be posted to X directly instead of click baiting you into ad infested, paywalled, dark pattern websites. The only losers here are legacy media.

matthewdgreen 2y ago
Links are incredibly useful. Leaving aside the dubious benefit of the idea that we want everything to "be inside the same app" (an idea that is essentially 'platform lock-in rephrased as a feature'), a huge amount of useful content is already on web pages with URLs. The ability to share those resources quickly is essential. There's zero benefit to forcing users into copying and pasting existing text into a medium with extreme formatting limitations and no ability to handle dynamic content or inline images. And there is negative benefit from moving content from the open web to a site that requires a login.
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  This doesn’t really make sense without a well reasoned out argument. How can your opinion outweigh that of the various decision makers who originally agreed to implement it…?
  - judahmeek 2y ago
    > How can your opinion outweigh that of the various decision makers who originally agreed to implement it…? Through subjectivity, of course.
  - schneems 2y ago
    > Berners-Lee, the creator of the Web, chose the name “World Wide Web” because he wanted to emphasize that, in this global hypertext system, anything could link to anything else https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/01/why-the-web-is-called-the-world-wide-web/ https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/01/why-the-web... The net is fundamentally about linking things together.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - jazzyjackson 2y ago
        Berners-Lee was brought up as a rejoinder to various decision makers who originally agreed to implement it, being that the www is more original than twitter, and fwiw he's not an American. It's quite exasperating to find someone arguing that there is some benefit to regression towards applications which don't link into other applications. Why be on the web at all?
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        You haven’t addressed the question. Why does it matter what he thinks or thought about this or that topic? Opinions can’t suddenly transmute into facts, regardless of anyone that has ever existed in human history.
        error_logic 2y ago
        If someone limits your options to only two, or even one source of resources, are you better off? This discussion thread emerged from the suggestion of "maybe that's a good thing." Is it? It's a question of trust, competition, and whether there's so much destruction of honest competition that only the destructive and twisted competition remains, keeping people afraid to venture into the unknown, willing to perpetuate the cycle of destroying competitors and endangering civilization itself.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How does this relate to the prior comment?
        error_logic 2y ago
        A walled garden can protect, or it can enslave. Eye of the beholder. This thread was about creating a walled garden by downranking external links.
  - meiraleal 2y ago
    there’s just one decision maker in Twitter
    - Applejinx 2y ago
      Now there is. Didn't used to be, and it cost a startling amount of money for that to be the case, and it was done to achieve a purpose rather than to make Twitter better at being Twitter. Something of a pyrrhic victory, that.
  - skyyler 2y ago
    >This doesn’t really make sense without a well reasoned out argument. It seemed well reasoned to me... ?
scarface_74 2y ago
You really want all information to be locked up into a proprietary platform controlled by Musk? And Twitter is the ultimate “dark pattern”
- wodenokoto 2y ago
  “Good thing” doesn’t have to mean good for you. It could mean good for the platform.
  - Applejinx 2y ago
    I think the numbers and the ad revenue tell that story.
tbrownaw 2y ago
Some things already exist on other sites, and are worth pointing people to. Also, Twitter isn't a great format for longer posts. And trying to prevent people from leaving your site is itself a user-hostile dark pattern. Btw, what ads? Is that some nonsense that silly people without ublock origin have to deal with?
bayarearefugee 2y ago
the funny thing about your post is that twitter itself is now an ad infested, paywalled, dark pattern website/app. If you think it isn't paywalled you're thinking about it too superficially, you are paying by volunteering to be the product in the form of having an active account, and without an active account the site/app is effectively completely useless for about a year now.
oneeyedpigeon 2y ago
This might've been true when Twitter was still Twitter, but now it's X, it has dropped below the average - it IS the ad-infested, paywalled, dark pattern website. Linking out is (even more of) a positive.
jandrese 2y ago
If you suppress posts where people include the source you are effectively promoting posts that do not include their sources. This gives more power to people who post opinion as fact and outright trolls. It is the fundamental problems with Twitter today, shitposters get amplified while people who try to refute with sources get suppressed.

matthewdgreen 2y ago

Links are incredibly useful. Leaving aside the dubious benefit of the idea that we want everything to "be inside the same app" (an idea that is essentially 'platform lock-in rephrased as a feature'), a huge amount of useful content is already on web pages with URLs. The ability to share those resources quickly is essential. There's zero benefit to forcing users into copying and pasting existing text into a medium with extreme formatting limitations and no ability to handle dynamic content or inline images. And there is negative benefit from moving content from the open web to a site that requires a login.

MichaelZuo 2y ago
This doesn’t really make sense without a well reasoned out argument. How can your opinion outweigh that of the various decision makers who originally agreed to implement it…?
- judahmeek 2y ago
  > How can your opinion outweigh that of the various decision makers who originally agreed to implement it…? Through subjectivity, of course.
- schneems 2y ago
  > Berners-Lee, the creator of the Web, chose the name “World Wide Web” because he wanted to emphasize that, in this global hypertext system, anything could link to anything else https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/01/why-the-web-is-called-the-world-wide-web/ https://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/01/why-the-web... The net is fundamentally about linking things together.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - jazzyjackson 2y ago
      Berners-Lee was brought up as a rejoinder to various decision makers who originally agreed to implement it, being that the www is more original than twitter, and fwiw he's not an American. It's quite exasperating to find someone arguing that there is some benefit to regression towards applications which don't link into other applications. Why be on the web at all?
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        You haven’t addressed the question. Why does it matter what he thinks or thought about this or that topic? Opinions can’t suddenly transmute into facts, regardless of anyone that has ever existed in human history.
        error_logic 2y ago
        If someone limits your options to only two, or even one source of resources, are you better off? This discussion thread emerged from the suggestion of "maybe that's a good thing." Is it? It's a question of trust, competition, and whether there's so much destruction of honest competition that only the destructive and twisted competition remains, keeping people afraid to venture into the unknown, willing to perpetuate the cycle of destroying competitors and endangering civilization itself.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How does this relate to the prior comment?
        error_logic 2y ago
        A walled garden can protect, or it can enslave. Eye of the beholder. This thread was about creating a walled garden by downranking external links.
- meiraleal 2y ago
  there’s just one decision maker in Twitter
  - Applejinx 2y ago
    Now there is. Didn't used to be, and it cost a startling amount of money for that to be the case, and it was done to achieve a purpose rather than to make Twitter better at being Twitter. Something of a pyrrhic victory, that.
- skyyler 2y ago
  >This doesn’t really make sense without a well reasoned out argument. It seemed well reasoned to me... ?

scarface_74 2y ago

You really want all information to be locked up into a proprietary platform controlled by Musk? And Twitter is the ultimate “dark pattern”

wodenokoto 2y ago
“Good thing” doesn’t have to mean good for you. It could mean good for the platform.
- Applejinx 2y ago
  I think the numbers and the ad revenue tell that story.

tbrownaw 2y ago

Some things already exist on other sites, and are worth pointing people to. Also, Twitter isn't a great format for longer posts. And trying to prevent people from leaving your site is itself a user-hostile dark pattern. Btw, what ads? Is that some nonsense that silly people without ublock origin have to deal with?

bayarearefugee 2y ago

the funny thing about your post is that twitter itself is now an ad infested, paywalled, dark pattern website/app. If you think it isn't paywalled you're thinking about it too superficially, you are paying by volunteering to be the product in the form of having an active account, and without an active account the site/app is effectively completely useless for about a year now.

oneeyedpigeon 2y ago

This might've been true when Twitter was still Twitter, but now it's X, it has dropped below the average - it IS the ad-infested, paywalled, dark pattern website. Linking out is (even more of) a positive.

jandrese 2y ago

If you suppress posts where people include the source you are effectively promoting posts that do not include their sources. This gives more power to people who post opinion as fact and outright trolls. It is the fundamental problems with Twitter today, shitposters get amplified while people who try to refute with sources get suppressed.