Gigaom reports Twitter have said they are looking at providing a filtered stream, much like Facebook.
At a financial conference, Twitter’s chief financial officer Anthony Noto suggested that the service will offer algorithm-driven curation of feeds much like Facebook does, in order to try and improve the relevance for users.
For a hint of what some of that dissatisfaction might look like, check out some of the responses from Twitter users to this idea.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Facebook-Style Filtered Twitter Feed
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 8 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 3, Funny) by cafebabe on Friday September 05 2014, @11:55AM
I find it entertaining that Facebook and Twitter continue to copy each other's features. Perhaps at some point they could merge and called themselves TwitFace or suchlike. A few whois queries indicate that people put money on this happening.
1702845791×2
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday September 05 2014, @03:04PM
Here come the exercises in Mood Manipulation and other subtle and nefarious co-opting of public opinion.
(Score: 2) by AnonTechie on Friday September 05 2014, @12:03PM
Seems there is some confusion about the "filtered stream" . A clarification from Twitter may set it right.
Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday September 05 2014, @05:47PM
Isn't filtration on twitter easily accomplished via the unfollow button click?
The hashtag has become such a useless construct that I find no use for it at all anymore, (it was always pretty much a cesspool), and I merely (and only) follow specific source accounts.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by MrGuy on Friday September 05 2014, @07:36PM
There's no confusion. Twitter's execs have been very forthcoming on what they're proposing.
They plan to abandon the current date-based timeline, instead using a software algorithm to place tweets they determine to be "more relevant" to you towards the top (even if they're older), and push tweets they consider "less relevant" downward. Basically, twitter wants to position itself as the judge of "relevant."
No one's confused about this as the proposal. There's some argument to be had on whether this would be a welcome development or an abhorrent one (current users do seem overwhelmingly against, but there's an argument to be made that some people would really like this.)
The one thing the COULD in theory clarify (though IMO it's not like it's much of a leap) is whether the real reason to do this is to allow them to offer placement to advertisers in exchange for money - more than just "sponsored tweets," letting people pay to be more "relevant." I can't imagine that NOT being the ulterior motive, but admittedly that's my inference (and many others' inference as well). I suppose they COULD clarify on that point, but either they'd admit this is the goal (which would seem suidicial to do), or deny it's the goal (which won't be believed).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Friday September 05 2014, @07:22PM
What they need is a filter plug-in API to allow people to create their own filters, and build a thriving ecosystem of plug-ins. People who want the raw feeds could get them, or they could apply filters to get the "slices" of posts that they want to see. Then the services would be more valuable, and grow in ways no one could ever have anticipated.
Oh, wait, walled gardens. Sorry. I've been working in Linux a lot.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 2) by Darth Turbogeek on Friday September 05 2014, @10:10PM
IF I used Twitter and IF I didnt just utterly ignore anything from that site, all I would see is less "I POOPED!" posts?
I'm still yet to be even begun to be convinced a single thing of value would be lost if Twitter vanished.
(Score: 1) by f4r on Friday September 05 2014, @11:37PM
I can understand twitter wanting to improve their users' experience, and I've got no problem with this so long as they make it optional rather than forced. If any accounts that I follow start to shit up my feed, they get the boot fairly quickly, and I'd rather continue with this manual method than have twitter maybe show me what I want.
The whole thing does smell a bit like profiteering a la facebook 'sponsored/boosted posts', which on its own is a fat load of bullshit. As one of the admins on a somewhat popular, active, on-topic page on facebook (currently 1.6k likes), I can tell you first hand that facebook is actively retarding how many people will see what is posted on the page unless you pony up. It even gives you a little number below posts, telling you how many people saw it. The last three posts on this page reached 75, 318 and 123 people because we don't play the game.
If twitter is going in this direction, best of luck to them because I'll quite happily abandon my account there.
Do not use as directed.