Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by izzydata 303 days ago
It's surprising that any serious organization or person would still use Twitter in its current state.
4 comments

There's exactly three reasons for people to stick to Twitter:

* They don't care/agree with the policies of the guy running it.

* Legacy reasons; either they have no reason to leave (automated org accounts keep running until something in the workflow breaks) or they have an existing community that doesn't want to move. This group will eventually leave but is currently stuck with inertia. Most "public service" accounts are in this category.

* And finally, for artists, Bluesky is undesirable as a platform because it has some very aggressive image compression compared to Twitter (2000x2000 is the absolute limit). Some are dualposting to Bluesky, but are unlikely to fully leave Twitter for this reason.

Finally, I'll note that while accounts are generally abandoning Twitter, this doesn't automatically mean they're moving to Bluesky either. A lot of those service accounts just up and vanished and just said "well, go visit our website".

> * They don't care/agree with the policies of the guy running it.

I don't care, I care that even though I follow/get followed by CS / Math people and still see mostly far right / nazi / trump /crypto comments about everything. In even small threads about very technical stuff, always people come up with the most crazy shit. And these days the almost mandatory 'Grok, is this true/profound/worth anything/etc'. It's just annoying and maybe I shouldn't care. Don't have that experience on other platforms (mostly same following/followers as they are also there).

Ever since Musk took over Twitter, the replies have been useless. It used to be that you can follow replies as a discussion. Now, the replies are a mix of unmarked ads, bots, and weird call-outs to Grok, and maybe all at the same time.

All the automation and algorithmic garbage crowd out actual human discussion. It's a big reason why I stopped using Twitter myself. If they want to optimize for bots and weirdos driving up engagement numbers, go for it. But that's not a service that brings me value.

On the note of artists, I always wondered why so many artists don't use a proper gallery/portfolio in addition to social media. This could be a general art-sharing platform, one of the many niche- or fandom-specific gallery sites, or their own website. Get the audience and reach through social media, but link back to a portfolio with the originals for those who care.
X really sucks in it's current state, but it's where the things I'm interested in happen or are discussed first (eg AI state of the art, bootstrappers). There's a bunch of tech people I follow who aren't on BlueSky, Threads, etc.

Interestingly, when I glance at my Bluesky feed once a month or so, it's a lot of complaining about everything. I think I hear more about Elon on Bluesky than I do X. And yeah, I follow reasonably high-value people.

That said, I keep some sort of X exit plan in place, and I look at it a lot less than before. When the signal vs noise value shifts, I'll be done, but I'm not quite there yet.

It's surprising that any serious organization used it at all. It was never a good place to spend your time really.

It's sad that the science community is just moving to another walled garden rather than spawning its own network of federated ActivityPub services (eg: mastodon).

Bluesky seems to be based on an open protocol (AT Protocol), but how actually interoperable is that ? I can't find a list of non-bluesky AT protocol servers that can interoperate with Bluesky.

Back in the 90s, every University had its own mailserver, USENET server, etc. These offered authentication to any user in the University, and each was federated with other institutions and the internet as a whole.

I'm surprised Universities haven't set up a federated network of ActivityPub servers, with each University hosting its faculty and student accounts on its server. The signal-to-noise ratio of a University-only network would be amazing.

> The signal-to-noise ratio of a University-only network would be amazing

Ha; no. It would be students self-censoring to avoid anything that could draw a universities' ire... while they meet up on Discord to share their actual thoughts, cheating techniques, personal feelings, and date nights. It would be University LinkedIn.

It was a good place to get messages out quickly - if I wanted to know that my cable company knew the internet was down, either from their direct acknowledgement or people sending messages to them, I went there. But now that I need an account to even see the comments or posts it's impractical to use.
No true scotsman's fallacy - no serious person would use X; if you use X you aren't serious.
I don't agree. There are still serious organizations and people using Twitter. I believe that to be true. I'm just surprised they haven't moved.

For example there are emergency systems or local governments that announce information on Twitter. These feel like serious organizations to me. At minimum I feel like they should be in multiple places and not just Twitter.

Ultimately Twitter is timely and has almost universal mindshare.

A few weeks ago when there was the pacific earthquake, I had family who were very close to a danger zone vacationing. Google was not sufficient for finding good local timely info as an outsider but twitter was.

I would never even think to check BlueSky or Mastodon, and my family will never have heard of them.

Things have to be posted in those other places for your regular person to have a chance of hearing about them eventually. If everyone waits for some adoption threshold to support something then it will never reach that threshold.
This makes no sense, the comment obviously implies that there are in fact serious orgs using twitter
The question that motivated the comment obviously implies that this is unbelievable for undisclosed reasons (related to its "current state.") Smarter to argue with the premise than the fluff.