(Replying to PARENT post)

Twitter. To this day, I find it idiotic. I thought society reached rock bottom when politics started using it to convey their message (is there anything sadder than a political agenda that can be expressed in 140 characters?)
👤dudul🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

I too thought it was idiotic. Now I realize that because brevity is the soul of wit is the reason it succeeds. Sometimes less is more and the pearls of wisdom of society at large certainly qualify.
👤sunstone🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Twitter is mostly made up of abandoned/inactive accounts, and it hasn't turned a profit. Despite popularity, I don't think it qualifies as a success.
👤codingdave🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> is there anything sadder than a political agenda that can be expressed in 140 characters?

Formerly respected news outlets reproducing others' 140 character comments as a substitute for actually asking subject experts specific questions.

I understand the rationale for reproducing Twitter comments when they come from someone directly connected with the story. I can even see how comments from people claiming to be involved or particularly pithy statements might make it into a "breaking news" feed. What I don't understand is why news outlets with loftier ambitions than Buzzfeed think tweets like these: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-33656579 is substantial enough to constitute a commentary piece.

(Or worse still, the obituary complete with "@randomdave said 'RIP U were a legend'")

👤notahacker🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> (is there anything sadder than a political agenda that can be expressed in 140 characters?)

Sadder? Or anger inducing? I'm convinced the reason twitter succeeded is that it wound up being an echo chamber for the outraged. A perfect platform for trolls. You can't explain anything sufficiently in 140 characters, so dialectic is out. The fallback is usually rhetoric (appeals to emotion), with anger being the most effective.

The end result is you have an internet shouting match where everybody is trying to piss off everyone else and nobody can clarify anything. It's the digital embodiment of CGP Grey's video "This video will make you angry[0]".

[0]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc

👤PopeOfNope🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

is there anything sadder than a political agenda that can be expressed in 140 characters

Well, at least it's a step up from bumper stickers.

👤lexcorvus🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

I really like the idea of a service designed to deliver concise epigrams. Twitter is great when people are doing that.

Of course, more often they're boiling political agendas down to 140 characters, or worse, splitting a page-length message up into 17 chunks tagged (1/17). C'est la vie.

👤PhasmaFelis🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

I don't think it's so much about conveying an important message more than being able to engage the masses at a pretty ridiculous speed. Besides, most politicians only post brief messages linking to bigger and more in-depth articles.
👤zachmachuca🕑10y🔼0🗨️0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Well someone had to say it...
👤oldboyFX🕑10y🔼0🗨️0