互联网与文化antirez.com
为什么我无法用 Twitter 进行对话
Why I can't have conversations using Twitter
2014 — 2017，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Redis 作者 antirez 撰文解释为什么他无法在 Twitter 上进行有意义的对话：140 字符的限制、公开围观者的起哄、以及断章取义的攻击，使得复杂的技术讨论在 Twitter 上难以展开。文章引发了对社交媒体媒介特性如何塑造公共讨论的广泛共鸣。
为什么经久不衰：它对'媒介形态决定讨论质量'的观察在算法推荐和短内容主导的今天反而更加切中要害，是理解社交媒体公共讨论困境的经典文本。
HN 评论精选
问题根源不是字数限制，而是名人效应带来的粉丝围观淹没了理性讨论。
我认为问题不在于 140 字符的限制（虽然它确实没帮助），而在于围观起哄的粉丝群体。没有字数限制的 Google+ 上同样存在这个问题：任何有 Linus 这类'名人'参与的讨论，评论区都会被 '+1'、'Linus 你是我的英雄'之类的灌水淹没，任何有建设性的论证都被淹没了。
staz查看英文原文
I don't think this is due to the limit of 140 characters (even if it doesn't help) but much more due to the audience of fanboys and crow cheered during a fight. There is the same problem on Google+ where there is not 140 characters limit. Any discussions with Linus or any other "celebrity" in it and the comments thread will be full of : "+1", "M. Linus you are so smart, you are my hero", "Well said, ripe him a new one" etc... Which drown any constructed argument and render any constructed debate impossible.
断章取义和误读是所有媒介的通病，Twitter 只是放大了它。
我在网上发布的内容平均有几千字，但总有人把其中的话断章取义后加以反驳，我自己大概也对别人这么干过。内容越长，读者越倾向于快速扫读；而短消息和缺失的上下文则导致信息被直接省略。也许 Twitter 比一般媒介更糟，但任何媒介上这都很严重。
_yosefk查看英文原文
The average thing I publish on the Internet is thousands of words long. There was never a shortage of people taking some of those words out of their context, and arguing against what those words supposedly say. And I'm likely to have done it myself to someone else's writing. Certainly I pay attention to some things more than others when I read, especially if I come with some prior knowledge and opinions. I can easily fail to notice important things when scanning something quickly. And the longer it is, the more likely I am to be scanning quickly, actually. On the other hand, shorter messages and less context result in things simply being omitted, even if you do read carefully. Maybe Twitter is worse than average, but it's pretty bad with any medium.
断章取义式攻击源于人性弱点，Twitter 只是放大器。
antirez 描述的现象在 Twitter 上被放大，但绝非它独有。不厚道地挑刺攻击他人言论是人人应抑制的人性弱点，原因包括：听者自我虚弱、想通过驳倒名人来彰显优越；过度挑剔、不等论证完整就攻击第一个 perceived 的漏洞；以及只想'参与吵架'的蹭热度者。别忘了现实中的辩论本质是争胜负，而非用逻辑呈现有力的论证。
sitkack查看英文原文
What Antirez describes is magnified on Twitter but no means isolated to it. Cherry-picking and un-charitably attacking someones statements is a human flaw that everyone should seek to suppress. And it happens for a couple reasons * Weak egos on part of the listener. They want to _take down_ or show their superiority by besting a famous or popular person. * Over Criticality. Instead of waiting for the entire argument to jell, and trying to charitably [1] understand the persons argument, you find the first perceived hole and attack. Often arguing about things that aren't germane to the discussion. * False Drama / Celebrity Association. This is the bullshitter who wants to be "involved in the argument" but doesn't really care about the argument or the outcome. People forget that debate, as practiced in meat space is about winning, not using logic to present cogent arguments. So when Antriez gets beaten on Twitter, he losing the debate due other's rhetorical skill. Your mom. [1] http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html
人们用 Twitter 谈技术不是因为媒介合适，而是因为想对话的人都在那里。
这个服务在产品设计上的根本限制，确实使它不适合详细的技术论证。但归根结底，社交网络的关键在于'谁在那里'。我们在 Twitter 上谈技术话题，不是因为它是合适的论坛，而是因为我们想交流的人都在那里。
moxious查看英文原文
Well the fundamental chosen limitations of the service seem to make it a bad choice for detailed technical arguments. But ultimately social networks are just about who is there. We talk about technical topics on twitter not because it's the right forum, but because the people we want to talk to are there.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
如今电脑上几乎所有操作在感知上都比 1983 年更慢（2017）
Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)
2017 年的推文串认为，尽管计算机硬件比 1983 年快得多，日常操作的感知速度却常常更慢：启动、界面响应和网络应用被层层抽象、动画、后台检查与网络依赖拖累。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2017–2020twitter.com网站肥胖危机
The Website Obesity Crisis
Maciej Cegłowski（idlewords）的经典演讲文稿《网站肥胖症危机》，批评现代网页越来越臃肿：动辄数 MB 的 JavaScript、追踪脚本和广告，把本可以轻…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2016–2021idlewords.com编辑精选亚马逊那本标价 23,698,655.93 美元的苍蝇书
Amazon’s $23,698,655.93 book about flies
博文讲的是亚马逊上一本关于果蝇的二手书被标到 23,698,655.93 美元。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022michaeleisen.org浏览器 User-Agent 字符串的历史
History of the browser user-agent string (2008)
2008 年的经典文章用戏谑的“创世纪”口吻，讲述浏览器 User-Agent 字符串如何从简单的标识演变成层层叠加的伪装：浏览器为了绕过按 UA 分发的网站检测，纷纷把自己伪装…
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2012–2022webaim.org编辑精选最后的问题——艾萨克·阿西莫夫
The Last Question - Isaac Asimov
阿西莫夫最著名的短篇科幻小说《最后的问题》的在线全文。
互联网与文化上首页 5 次 · 2009–2019multivax.com编辑精选