3 ms·
Again I'll ask: Since when is a revolution measured by quantity? I mean, Twitter is arguably more cutting-edge than television. So in one sense it's more revolu
by unalone 17y ago
Again I'll ask: Since when is a revolution measured by quantity? I mean, Twitter is arguably more cutting-edge than television. So in one sense it's more revolutionary. But television is spreading faster, so that's a revolution that's hitting more people. It doesn't need to be a competition between the two. I for one don't expect to pay television much mind in the coming years, no matter how quickly it's spreading everywhere else.
- chrischen 17y agoOk I don't see how Twitter is more cutting edge than television, but even if you don't watch TV, it will undeniably affect you more than Twitter once it's hype dies down, if Twitter even affects you more than TV right now.
- unalone 17y agoOk I don't see how Twitter is more cutting edge than television Let's see. Television is a form of communication in which there are a hundred channels and I am forced to pick one to consume. Twitter is a form of communication in which there are two million channels and I can create my own. That's cutting edge. but even if you don't watch TV, it will undeniably affect you more than Twitter once it's hype dies down, if Twitter even affects you more than TV right now I don't understand this. Not like I don't understand your mindset: I don't understand what you're saying. This is incredibly convoluted.
- chrischen 17y agoWay more people watch tv than use Twitter, facebook, or even all of the Internet. Heck more people use facebook than twitter. If anything, facebook is more cutting edge than tv, but no, it's not.