What the hell is twitter for?

Twittter troubles me.

I use it a lot, for keeping up with entertainment news as well as my friends, but what bugs me is how open it is.


I tweeted telling microsoft to f**k off after my xbox died, and within seconds I was being followed by microsoft tech support.

I tweeted telling tv's Lost to f**k off after the final episode, and one of the actresses (Emilie De Ravin) started following me, and I'm pretty sure it's with the intention of messing me up.


Oddly enough, i've yet to come across anyone who tweets about their breakfast.

I heard an update of an old joke:

What do you get if you take an infinite number of monkeys and an infinite number of keyboards with an infinite amount of time?*

Twitter.

I liked it anyway.



*No, not Shakespeare. That's an infinite amount of typewriters.

Once you have enough followers it is very good for crowd sourcing.

onemanbandwith sounds  a warning:

I use Twitter and Facebook in place of an RSS feed now and revel in new information about cultures, conflicts, charities and ways to improve my quality of life and that of others. I am pro revolution and pro profit as long as there is truth in the advertising…

But, of late I have noticed a disturbing trend. Sites like Quora, and Twitter have given credence to digital landlords, anti-revolutionary government and corporate eavesdroppers, rich corporations looking to speak to trends as opposed to consumers, link baiting spam laden roaders and those that inherited social wealth by association or early adoption who now look to dictate the set, setting and content of our conversations and want to make more money telling me how I can do it too. They act as landlords and exclude or attempt to evict those with differing views or too little to offer them as they extend their tweetreach or make their personal brands more recognizable.  And many of them display far from exemplary conduct as they write the leases that we aspiring digerati will tacitly sign in order to get along with them hoping to be included or for fear of being vilified, or worse, cast into the darkness of less social cyberspace.

... if you want to see how social intercourse is being derailed go to:
http://onemanbandwidth.com/wordpress/2011/03/07/social-media-dark-side/

Facebook is for following people you know who have nothing interesting to say.

Twitter on the other hand...

I don't bother with Facebook anymore.  I would be lost without Twitter.

Twittter troubles me.

I use it a lot, for keeping up with entertainment news as well as my friends, but what bugs me is how open it is.

i hate when people complain about lack of privacy on the web. News flash: Every single thing you ever type onto the web can, and will be read by everybody and can be used against you in a court of law.

A lot of my friends are all up in arms about FB being more open, and yes, I kind of agree. But on the other hand i do not give FB my phone number or home address, just like I don't give it out on ANY website. I don't give anybody nuddy pics of myself and I'll never explictely say bad things about a past employer. It's just dumb if you do.

Treat the internet as if your grandmother will read everything you say! Then you won't get screwed, 

i dont care that people can read what i say so muck, but it anbiys me that i have microsoft tech in a list of my followers when i no longer own any working microsoft tech.


i personally feel that people who get upset about facebooks everchanging privacy policy are more annoying though. sick of getting messages from people warning me that facebook are somehow trying to screw me over. i think it would be kinda cool if they used my photo tovadvertise the site

I am still not sure what the point is of following people...I mean, a good literature discussion is always nice, but that is why I am a member of about ten forums dedicated to literature and various authors. I see the networking point of twitter, but being constantly in contact, reachable...that is where I get confused. Meh, new-fangled techno thingy...I am still trying to work out how to deal with this blasted Microsoft Word Windows 7 nonsense... Twitter is, from what I understand, to keep in contact with various people and exchange ideas...I am just too lazy to be a Twit...err..Twitterer...uhm...Tweeter...come on, there must be a more suitable word than twit!

I see the networking point of twitter, but being constantly in contact, reachable...that is where I get confused. Meh, new-fangled techno thingy...

Dude, that's not twitter, that's the telephone.   

Quote from: jameswinterton on March 14, 2011, 05:55:53 PM

Twittter troubles me.

I use it a lot, for keeping up with entertainment news as well as my friends, but what bugs me is how open it is.

i hate when people complain about lack of privacy on the web. News flash: Every single thing you ever type onto the web can, and will be read by everybody and can be used against you in a court of law.

A lot of my friends are all up in arms about FB being more open, and yes, I kind of agree. But on the other hand i do not give FB my phone number or home address, just like I don't give it out on ANY website. I don't give anybody nuddy pics of myself and I'll never explictely say bad things about a past employer. It's just dumb if you do.

Treat the internet as if your grandmother will read everything you say! Then you won't get screwed,  

On the other hand, if you're half clever, you can say all sorts of things and do all sorts of research… without having to worry about repercussions by less than open-minded authorities. One can and perhaps should take some previous unscrupulous employer down a notch. The element of freedom in the internet, and that it allows free flow of information is something that gives me hope for the future. If we all self-censor then there wouldn't be any wikileaks and possibly wouldn't have been the recent changes in that country with pyramids in it. The more people that speak their true minds, the more the censors will be overwhelmed and finally give up. But, again, if one is half clever, one need not worry so much about what their previous employer can do to them, or some other person with a little bit of power, a lot of ego, and not much of spirit.

but doesn't half clever also mean half Ben-Dan?

buy doesn't half clever also mean half Ben-Dan?

The element of freedom in the internet, and that it allows free flow of information is something that gives me hope for the future. If we all self-censor then there wouldn't be any wikileaks and possibly wouldn't have been the recent changes in that country with pyramids in it. The more people that speak their true minds, the more the censors will be overwhelmed and finally give up. But, again, if one is half clever, one need not worry so much about what their previous employer can do to them, or some other person with a little bit of power, a lot of ego, and not much of spirit.

I think how you live your life in real life and how you live your life online is usually the same. In my real life do I walk around giving everyone my phone number? Hell no. I'll only give it out to specific students that ask for it and need it for a good reason (like the monitors) or friends. The same is with my online life. I don't put it on facebook, or other profiles because I don't want anyone to get it.

Self censorship for the sake of privacy and self censorship for the sake of stating your opinion are two different things. If you complain about a company, like Microsoft or whoever, and then are upset that Microsoft is suddenly paying attention to you, then that is hypocrisy. You want to complain loud and to everyone yet not have any reprocusions? That's naivety. This is the modern world and you have to realize that your online life has consequences, just as your real life world.

I'm not arguing that freedom of speech is a bad thing, nothing like the sort! I was just arguing that if you publicly complain about something you shouldn't get upset if that something takes notice.

And yes, I think anonymity on the web is a false security. Wikileaks was not anonymous. The pyramid country people were also not anonymous. In fact people usually want to be known and want more attention the louder they state their opinions.

I am listening to an Australian radio station thanks to the internet.

Is there any chance that Twitter will kill 'talkback' on radio? If there is then it has my vote.

Hi Borkya:

Just trying to understand your meaning here, and clarify some ideas. Hope it doesn't come off as if I'm looking for an argument.

I think how you live your life in real life and how you live your life online is usually the same. In my real life do I walk around giving everyone my phone number? Hell no. I'll only give it out to specific students that ask for it and need it for a good reason (like the monitors) or friends. The same is with my online life. I don't put it on facebook, or other profiles because I don't want anyone to get it.

same same me. I refuse to use facebook and very reluctantly give out my phone #.

Self censorship for the sake of privacy and self censorship for the sake of stating your opinion are two different things.

I kinda' get what you mean here, but to me not giving out my phone number isn't self-censorship, it's just maintaining my privacy. I don't think you are REALLY arguing for self-censorship, it just sounded that way. The reason I said "self-censorship" was the statement

Treat the internet as if your grandmother will read everything you say!

combined with

Every single thing you ever type onto the web can, and will be read by everybody and can be used against you in a court of law.

and

I never explictely say bad things about a past employer. It's just dumb if you do.

So, if one were going to keep "everything you say" online appropriate for the Grandma, that would cut out a lot of material people might like to share, and that editing is what I would consider self-censorship, especially if the reason for doing it was a fear of being sued or otherwise coming up against authorities. But, let me look it up –

courtesy of wikipedia

Self-censorship is the act of censoring or classifying one's own work (blog, book(s), film(s), or other means of expression), out of fear of, or deference to, the sensibilities of others, without overt pressure from any specific party or institution of authority. Self-censorship is often practiced by film producers, film directors, publishers, news anchors, journalists, musicians, and other kinds of authors.

In authoritarian countries, creators of artworks may remove material that their government might find controversial for fear of sanction by their governments. In pluralistic capitalist countries, self-censorship can also occur, particularly in order to conform to the expectations of the market. For example, the editor of a periodical may consciously or unconsciously avoid topics that will anger advertisers or a parent company in order to protect her or his livelihood. This phenomenon is referred to as soft censorship.

Well, I'd certainly agree that the less one says that could end up with some sort of negative repercussions the better, and that one would do well to be cautious unless one has a particularly important cause for which they are willing to sacrifice their security. But, for me at least, if we used the Grandma filter for everything the internet would be kinda' boring.

Twitter is full of twits twittering away their bosses' valuable time by reading the tweets of other twits.

Of course, I've been using it for quite a while (early 2008?). It's a good way to connect with some people--met two groups of former China expats in NYC. Also got some great help for my literary journal website. Even got free tickets to the Manhattan Cocktail Classic through it.

It can be useful, but it's mostly a waste of time.