←back to thread

Pixar's Render Farm

(twitter.com)
382 points brundolf | 8 comments | 02 Jan 21 19:56 UTC | HN request time: 0.876s | source | bottom
Show context
hadrien01 ◴[02 Jan 21 20:11 UTC] No.25616026[source]▶
For those that can't stand Twitter's UI: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1345146328058269696.html
replies(7): >>25616111 #>>25616482 #>>25616748 #>>25617285 #>>25617838 #>>25618314 #>>25618916 #
nikolay ◴[02 Jan 21 21:01 UTC] No.25616482[source]▶
It's very painful to follow a conversation on Twitter. I'm not sure why they think the way they've done things makes sense.
replies(7): >>25616558 #>>25616759 #>>25617073 #>>25618707 #>>25619851 #>>25620397 #>>25620402 #
lmilcin ◴[02 Jan 21 21:09 UTC] No.25616558[source]▶
It was never supposed to support conversation in the first place.

People were supposed to shoot short, simple, single messages and other people maybe react to this with their own short, single messages.

replies(5): >>25616749 #>>25616780 #>>25616785 #>>25616919 #>>25617734 #
1. nikolay ◴[02 Jan 21 21:39 UTC] No.25616785[source]▶
Yeah, I've never seen any value in Twitter. They should've called it "Public IM" or limited IIRC and make it function well like IM. Even the poor implementation of threads in Slack is way better than the perverted version of Twitter.
replies(2): >>25618684 #>>25618874 #
2. folkrav ◴[03 Jan 21 02:07 UTC] No.25618684[source]▶
Apart from being stuck to a single level in depth (which IMHO kind of makes sense in the context of an IM platform), what's that bad about Slack's threads?
replies(1): >>25619098 #
3. saagarjha ◴[03 Jan 21 02:48 UTC] No.25618874[source]▶
> I've never seen any value in Twitter.

Except for the information that doesn't show up on other platforms, which is why it is a frequently linked site here?

replies(2): >>25619101 #>>25620305 #
4. nikolay ◴[03 Jan 21 03:25 UTC] No.25619098[source]▶
Well, literally, you need to move aside - they took the skeuomorphism of people getting aside to discuss a topic without bothering others too far.
replies(1): >>25646430 #
5. nikolay ◴[03 Jan 21 03:25 UTC] No.25619101[source]▶
An ever-increasing number of people uses https://threadreaderapp.com/ though.
replies(1): >>25619342 #
6. saagarjha ◴[03 Jan 21 04:08 UTC] No.25619342{3}[source]▶
I am not arguing that Twitter is the perfect interface for its content, or even that its content is particularly good. I am just saying that it can have value regardless of its (many) faults.
7. greggman3 ◴[03 Jan 21 07:46 UTC] No.25620305[source]▶
That value is in the content, not twitter itself
8. folkrav ◴[05 Jan 21 15:23 UTC] No.25646430{3}[source]▶
Not sure what would you have preferred? I can only think of inline, but I'm not sure how well that would have worked in an IM application, where you'd typically expect things to be in chronological order. You basically described the point of having threads in the first place, and I also cannot think of many other existing implementations, so I'm curious.