Clueless. Twitter has got to start realizing its much more a Wikipedia and not at all a Facebook. Twitter's journalistic and celebrity users are its ONLY value, in the same way Wikipedia's editors are its primary value. Focus on content, incentivizing content and nothing else. Stop treating earnings misses, user growth, etc. as metrics that require your immediate attention. Stay the course and enhance content. Twitter IS important for discourse, democracy and transparency. It is still a national and possibly global treasure.
It is nothing like a Wikipedia - you can't edit my tweet for a start.
It is more like a micro blogging platform with an integrated RSS Reader.
My tweets are my blogs entries limited to 140 characters.
Clicking on followers is the same as clicking on subscribe to another blog RSS.
When I view all my followers tweets, that timeline is exactly like me viewing all my subscribed RSS in an RSS reader, the only different is you see the content there and then rather than clicking a link to view the entire story.
Retweets is same as reblog button on a blog.
Reply to a tweet is same as making a comment to a blog post.
As for Facebook I don't have an FB account to know how it functions. I'm guessing if you think about it long enough it is close to being a blog too with more bells and whistles. Adding your family/friends is akin to subscribing to their feed is just like subscribing to RSS on a blog.
Facebook is like that, except it doesn't show you all the stuff you've subscribed to, and when it does it's out of order.
The relationship between human users and "pages" that don't represent a person is even stranger, given that "like" means "subscribe to this, but only a few percentage of subscribers will see posts unless the page owner pays us".
Without an algorithmic feed, the utility of twitter maxes out once you start following more than about 200 people.
The point of the algorithm is to show the user the content he/she wanted to see in the first place but might not have had the patience to scroll for, or might have gotten fed up reading lower quality content and closed the app before reading.
An algorithmic feed will also help a lot with spam detection/prevention.
I would rather make the call myself about what I want to see delegate to some twitter algorithm. And yes, I'm going to sometimes miss tweets I'd otherwise be interested in; it's no big loss. What I want to see is what's happening now.
Twitter's journalistic and celebrity users are its ONLY value
Not quite - certainly all value is user created, but saying that only certain users are valuable is just as bad. There are whole subgenres of people that don't fit those two categories like "weird twitter", activists, indie game devs, and novelty/parody accounts.
How do you figure that Twitter is a Wikipedia? It is very far from being a vetted, verified source of information. People say whatever they want on there.
A non-linear timeline makes sense to me, as long as the linear one is also left as an option.
No it doesn't. People follow events through a hashtag/keyword search not through their home timeline. If anything Twitter is making their home timeline more useful now.
The reason why I gradually moved to twitter from facebook was the nanny mentality of facebook and its shitty idea that it knows better than me what I want to see. Now twitter is becoming like facebook. Linkedin has also switched to curated timelines (long ago).
It seems the push by product teams to come up with algorithms to boost ad-sales is stronger than the common sense.
Guess it's time to log off, move on and actually go outside for a change.
> We are to blame for the change in Twitter. We whine that it hasn’t changed, then whine when it does.
Really? Maybe for journalists etc who follow very active places or very large numbers but I found following 100-150 moderately active users worked pretty well and haven't heard too many complaints from similar users, except in response to changes.
Of course users who make a couple of tens of tweets a month and don't follow brands or pay attention to ads are not very profitable for twitter, so its no surprise their needs are ignored.
m2w forces it to display in desktop mode on my Nexus 5 and sk=h_chr forces the Newsfeed to display in chronological order.
Presumably Twitter's web page UI would allow for a similar manipulation.
I don't use the FB android app because it inserts ads between Newsfeed content, as does the mobile Web view. Viewing FB in desktop mode on my mobile allows me to zoom the middle column (the newsfeed) to the width of my screen, pushing the advert column to the right, off screen.
I would probably switch away from the twitter app if they made this change.
It still filters the content, right? You won't see all posts of your friends, afaik. [that was the bad change in early 2012 after all]
Until the end of 2011, you could read really all posts of your friends incl. all Farmville, etc posts. The automatics filtering and the automatic inclusion of certain "featured posts" of friends-of-friends and advertisement is what destroyed FB for me.
Yes, I guess it's still curated to some extent but I've clicked on the little menu for items I don't want to see a while bunch of times now and FB appears to be doing what I want it to mostly.
Yup. It's hardly any different to the standard sorting, because facebook's business is controlling what you see. I don't know why people keep spreading that like it's some protip.
I've always used sk=lf to get chronological Facebook. I wonder what the difference is, if any because I'm trying h_chr and it seems to be the same order.
My issue with it has been even though it's chronological, it doesn't actually show you all the posts from all your friends. It still does it's own crappy algorithmic filter(I think it's based on interaction) and I miss stuff from people I want to hear from all the time. I only have about 60 friends and no one is relatively chatty so there's no reason why I should miss anything.
Twitter has been my "home" on the web for years for the qualities that made it unique. Now it's about to go away and that sucks. I've lost favorite forums/sites before but never anything I valued as much as Twitter.
There's a corollary to the network effect. Once a community reaches its ideal size and identity it keeps trying to grow and both the influx of more users and the attempt to chase more users ruins what made it unique and ideal.
Boy golly gee do I ever hate adblock-walled content. Anyone have a way around it? I've been forced to disable adblock to access content on several sites.
had the same problem with forbes when I used adblock plus. switched to uBlock and it works (which also seems to be less of a resource hog). ... forbes is shit though and IMO submissions should really be blacklisted from HN
Twitter could just make it so the algorithmic timeline is implemented as a "show me what I missed" feature via a button. Exactly what FB should have done. Good UX can sidestep this entire issue.
I don't get the complaints here. Most of the complaints about the algorithmic timeline are implementation details, not objections to the concept itself.
An algorithmic timeline does not necessarily mean live events are out of order. There is no reason the algorithm cannot be sophisticated enough to detect time-sensitive tweets and preserve the ordering of real time events. In fact, a sophisticated enough algorithm would cluster real time event-related tweets in chronological batches, and surface relevant replies / commentary around it.
I'm pretty sure that almost all the people threatening to leave Twitter will still be there when the dust settles.
Suppose that the algorithmic timeline is a user discovery disaster akin to Facebook's. How implausible would a migration to an open source Twitter clone truly be? The chronological timeline itself isn't that difficult to build so I could imagine some sort of protocol being written for a Twitter-like service and then a client - website, app, etc - built on top of it. Twitter is unique in its position in that it doesn't have any real direct competition and that could change if it starts stumbling.
