Comments on: Is tweeting still silo’d?

By: “Twitter for poets”: poetry and conversation in Identica | Via Negativa

Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:30:56 +0000

[...] seem to see the need to give their users that freedom, so Twitter is still essentially a silo. Series Navigation«Poetry in the [...]

By: brianjesse's status on Wednesday, 20-May-09 01:12:02 UTC - Identi.ca

brianjesse's status on Wednesday, 20-May-09 01:12:02 UTC - Identi.ca — Wed, 20 May 2009 01:12:20 +0000

[...] @dsearls wonders too, is tweeting still silo’d? @davewiner http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/05/14/is-tweeting-still-silod/ [...]

By: Don Marti

Don Marti — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:46:54 +0000

I just “tweet” to both Twitter and to identi.ca — one more HTTP POST to update both services. Somebody starts another microblog, I’ll grab “dmarti” there too.

By: perusio

perusio — Fri, 15 May 2009 13:10:59 +0000

Twitter and facebook are different, yes they are. There’s plenty of things built on top of its API. Also the idea of not having ads is really nice.

Furthermore twitter is open by default, i.e., the timeline is open to the public by default.

I think that Identi.ca has already a feature that twitter lacks. The possibility of creating groups. You refer to a group by prefixing its name with a ‘!’. For example, suppose there’s a group called projectvrm. You could write.

“Just updated the !projectvrm wiki with new information.”

This way all people subscribed to the group would get the message. I think it’s a great feature. In enhances discoverability of people that share similar, or not so similar, interests. Also it embeds the metadata in the stream in a much more nice way than in twitter with hashtags.

Anyway I think that twitter has much to gain if they open their code.
There’s a all lot of people out there that would like to make the microblogging experience twitter provides richer.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Fri, 15 May 2009 07:58:25 +0000

To William and Rick … please help me understand how you lump Facebook and Twitter into the same “closed” environments.

By: Rick Bucich

Rick Bucich — Thu, 14 May 2009 19:22:36 +0000

While somewhat in a silo, we’ve seen users at both Facebook and Twitter rebel recently and this has altered the behavior of both companies, opening them to more feedback from users. They may become even more open if the market demands it but at this point, that has not been the case. If another entity were to challenge their superiority that might change. In the case of Friendfeed, I see is symbiotic to Twitter so not a threat. While some changes have been somewhat arbitrary, they openly embraced feedback and provide easy access to do so so their functionality mirrors the needs of the users, not the other way around.

By: william

william — Thu, 14 May 2009 14:57:12 +0000

Closed source companies like twitter, facebook, myspace, and frindfeed do not have to listen to what the users that generate value for them say. This is because you, the user that have given your content and helped put money in the closed source companies pockets own nothing…Not even the content that you have added to their silos….Try to easliy export your content to test this out….Becuase you, the closed source application user does not have any ownership of the application, the “owners” can do what they want….And becuase the twitter application is closed source, the owners never fear the possiblity that you might create your own version with the fetaures that you want. You might not do this, but I beleive the fact that you could would have a dramatic effect on the how companies treated the users that haven given them their billion dollar valuations.

Closed source applications like twitter, facebook, myspace, and frindfeed by their nature assume that you, the user are a stupid child like slave that needs to be told what is good for you. Closed source companies like twitter, facbook, myspace, and frindfeed by their nature create the framework of a share cropping system where you, the user/content creator; work their fields, and obediently follow their rules.