To be quite honest, I don't think Twitter and Posterous are comparable, but I do think both of them have tapped into two huge modes of human communication. Pri

To be quite honest, I don't think Twitter and Posterous are comparable, but I do think both of them have tapped into two huge modes of human communication. Prior to Twitter, there was no method to capturing stream of consciousness. Sure, there was AIM, but those chats are really transient. Twitter allows me to broadcast the funny youtube video I just found, or a frustration I may be experiencing with a company, and to have friends ride the stream with me. Not only that, we get to look into the streams of celebrities, something completely new. I didn't get Twitter for a time, too, but have realized its value and the 140 character limit, in my opinion, allows messages to retain their stream of consciousness type characteristic. Posterous, on the other hand, is a more structured, more effort-in-your-post version of Twitter. But it's also an interesting middle-ground between both Twitter and conventional blogging, which I think is another form of human communication no one has yet explored. Blogging is for me to write a well thought out essay. Twitter is for saying 'omg check out this discounted laptop.' Posterous gives me a place to post things of importance with ease, in a nice structured manner. I don't want to throw up pictures of my friends at the beach on Twitter, or write a blog post about it, I want to put it on Posterous. However, I don't want to litter my Posterous with random links and thoughts. In those respects, I think Posterous and Twitter really aren't competitors. They both serve two different purposes, to me at least, and there is room for both to thrive.