Lets turn everything into Facebook


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Did you know that foreigners want to destroy our religious utopia because they’re not happy in their own countries? Now that’s ironic if you ask me.


#3

So… I can use pivot tables on their graph index? Cool!!


#4

So where do people who hate Facebook go if everything is like Facebook? Right now Twitter is full of Facebook refugees.

And yeah, I’m one of them, but I’d say about 80% of the responses from people when I mention I’m not in Facebook are, “I don’t like it, but all my friends and family are on it, so I need it to keep in touch.” That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement of usability.


#5

Oh that’s what the .@ is all about. I’ve tried searching for this information several times and it’s very difficult due to the characters involved.


#6

what does he have against semi-functional search?


#7

Be. Here. Now.


#8

I signed up a little over a year ago, have never tweeted a single thing and have three followers. That’s weird. For me, it’s the way I learn about traffic closures or snow days at our kids’ school but it’s not much good to me for anything else.


#9

From what I can tell, Twitter’s primary unique utility is real-time communication. I find this ironic (and not very useful) because the chief boon of the Internet to me has been the ability to defer as much of my life until I am prepared to deal with it.


#10

WTF is boingboing? Ten years I’ve been coming here and you guys have yet to decide if you’re about furry memes or sonic forks or whose government stole my sextape. Focus, people.


#11

What, are you disappointed with BoingBoing?


#12

No kidding. Boolean search is actually a plus.


#13

Nope, that was irony.


#14

But should be an ampersand, in my opinion.


#15

But, to me at least, Twitter is less usable. I like words, lots of words. I like sharing images. I hate reading infinite mindfarts (“I went shopping today”; “My spawn is clever/cute”; “Look a kitten/meme/puppy!”), and Twitter is even more geared for that than even Facebook. I personally with I could force all my friends and family into the wide Google+ wasteland, as it at least has photo sharing down (and lets me class my friends, so the people I’m friends with for social reasons can live in their ghetto, while the people who say interesting things can sit on top…). The only plus I see, again personally, for Twitter is that it doesn’t try to be smart. Facebook does odd things with content, to the point where my girlfriend doesn’t even see my posts (and the mobile app favors some odd smart sorting over sensible temporal sorting); Twitter at least gives you access to what people say in a nice " dumb" way. Internet “smart” sucks.

As to the article… HOW IS BOOLEAN SEARCH BAD!!! Google killing Boolean search still manages to annoy me once a week, when I really want to find something specific, and not wade through pages of crap. Boolean searches are the most useful thing the internet used to have. Internet “smart” sucks.

As an aside; I have a theory that social media (especially the popularity, and migration of users) tend away from content, and towards the lowest information/content state. LiveJournal was great, you could easily share a 5 page rant on any innane topic you wanted. MySpace still allowed this, but hid it a bit. Facebook pretty much discourages any independent though that worth saying thanks to comment size limits. Twitter extends this further, leaving you with nothing but cryptic mindfarts, and links to what other people say. We’re discouraged from saying what we think, in favor of “sharing” what other people think.


#16

Ouf, if you’re following people who tweet about stuff like that…

Saw this on Twitter a while ago:
LinkedIn is for people you used to know.
Facebook is for people you know.
Twitter is for people you want to get to know.

As for the rants, there’s a reason why Twitter allows links in tweets. If you really want to see the whole rant, you just follow the link.


#17

Perhaps my age and lack of neuroplasticity is showing, but I just don’t see content on twitter. Sure, I see pithy observations (which would have benefited by a couple hundred extra words explaining why I should care, or what the context is). I see random publicity crap, written by PR people. I see the aforementioned mindfarts. But I rarely see anything that wouldn’t be better served by more words.

I think I’m also a bit of a “medium is the message” kind of person; the short form of twitter sort of guides its content into being more “spur of the moment”, more mindfarty. This isn’t a universal rule, but I’ve noticed this. It also really hurts context. If I don’t know what this person said previously, what they already think, etc… their tweets will pretty much make no sense to normal people who don’t follow them, know about them, and whatnot. Which, I’ve noticed, can lead to interesting social consequences, since every tweet is context free.


#18

#Nick Bilton, I served with Twitter. I knew Twitter. Twitter was a friend of mine. Nick Bilton, you’re no Twitter.


#19

I think it’s about semi-functional search.


#20

Can someone point me to a link that actually explains how people use Twitter? Not how to post a tweet and how to search, I mean how do people actually USE it? I didn’t know about .@ like I’m sure I don’t know a lot more. I’m on twitter but I just read a random stream of tidbits from the few people I follow and there is no “conversation” happening. I read about people who find interesting people and projects on twitter, but I’m not seeing that.