Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Tests Doubling Character Limit For Tweets To 280 (theverge.com)

Twitter announced today that it has started testing 280-character tweets for select users. The new limit doubles the current 140-character limit, and is said to help users be more expressive. The Verge reports: "Our research shows us that the character limit is a major cause of frustration for people tweeting in English," the company said in a blog post. "When people don't have to cram their thoughts into 140 characters and actually have some to spare, we see more people Tweeting -- which is awesome!"

About 9 percent of all tweets today are exactly 140 characters, Twitter says. It's tough to do that on accident, suggesting that users frequently have to edit their initial thoughts to get them under the limit. (It's certainly true for me.) Now Twitter hopes to ease that burden by doubling the character limit in what it calls "languages impacted by cramming," which includes every language except for Japanese, Chinese, and Korean.
The report goes on to note that the "140-character limit was originally established to reflect the length of SMS messages, which was how tweets were distributed prior to the development of mobile apps. SMS messages are limited to 160 characters; Twitter reserved the remaining 20 for the username," reports The Verge.

132 comments

  1. 240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    240 characters is more than anybody needs brag about their kids, pets, vacations, food, and/or political views.
    Did I miss anything that people actually post about?

    1. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      We all know it's so they can fit more emojicrap in.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

      Did I miss anything that people actually post about?

      Attempting to star nuclear war with North Korea?

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    3. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Bongo · · Score: 1

      "All your base are belong to us."

      31 chars.

    4. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Did I miss anything that people actually post about?

      Attempting to star nuclear war with North Korea?

      'We could destroy you,' Obama warns 'erratic' North Korean leader

      Damn that warmonger Obama.

    5. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals, but aside from the humanitarian costs of that, they are right next door to our vital ally, [South] Korea."

      Funny. His actual quote is explaining why we weren't going to do anything of the sort, while the headline misquotes him to make it sound like a threat.

    6. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might start by following the local National Weather Service and the National Hurricane Center.

    7. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals, but aside from the humanitarian costs of that, they are right next door to our vital ally, [South] Korea."

      Funny. His actual quote is explaining why we weren't going to do anything of the sort, while the headline misquotes him to make it sound like a threat.

      Just like the NY Times does to Trump?

      The New York Times Misquoted Trump’s Charlottesville Remarks In Five Different Reports

      Five times? For ONE event? Gotta be deliberate.

    8. Re: 240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry bud, the King has no clothes.

    9. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by denzacar · · Score: 1

      No anti-Mexican wall. No mention of biggest crowds. Sad.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    10. Re: 240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. The king had no cloths the past 8 yrs.

    11. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      No anti-Mexican wall. No mention of biggest crowds. Sad.

      Her emails tho'

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    12. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by arth1 · · Score: 1

      That's overkill for those services. All they need is to tweet:

      Run. Now.

    13. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      240 characters is more than anybody needs

      Will have profound impact in Germany where users can now post an average of 8 whole words per tweet.

      Or as they say in German:
      Acht Worte pro Tweetingobschlongallicallisprechabuchentangstung.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    14. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by syn3rg · · Score: 1

      Now everyone will appear twice as smart!

      --
      The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
    15. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously now, I find Twitter more engaging than Reddit on specific topics, such as machine learning. Everybody from ML is on it.

    16. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by denzacar · · Score: 1

      I heard she wrote them all while taking a knee, too.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    17. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I heard she wrote them all while taking a knee, too.

      I thought that was Monica?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    18. Re:240 characters is more than anybody needs by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Oh that's not the only thing she did.

      She also typed her emails using a Dvorak keyboard. I know, right?

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  2. More social engineering? by chrism238 · · Score: 1

    If this is an attempt to reverse the decline in Mankind's attention span, then it's too late.

    1. Re:More social engineering? by msauve · · Score: 1

      ...and nothing of value was added.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:More social engineering? by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Interesting

      you know whats actually amazing?
      they created a system, with a limit of 140 characters, got huge numbers of users but running their system was still more expensive than what they could profit from the users - this despite the complexity of the system being simple as can get compared to contemporary facebook.

      oh and if you're outside of usa and are wondering why the 140 character limit in the first place? well, twitter was originally like a one-liner webpage plugin, which was coded terribly but had a good amount of highly visible seed bloggers to start using it - but the limit came from that you could order tweets to your phone delivered via sms.

      which was possible because USA had/has a system where you pay for received SMS so sending them was free for twitter - in most of the world sender pays for spam and receiving sms messages had always been free. this was in a timeframe where you could actually get instant messaging for few bucks a month already if you were living in europe(through gprs) too.

      I say it was coded like shit because otherwise they would have been in profit from year 2 from all the webtraffic(and ads made possible by said webtraffic). also them spending money on useless marketing people and useless executives has had an effect on their poor profits vs. spent money. now the reason why it's all so ridiculous is that they had a fixed size limit on messages which was tiny - the server costs should have been miniscule but they weren't.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    3. Re:More social engineering? by infolation · · Score: 2
      But something of value was taken away.
      • I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.
      • Simple can be harder than complex.
      • Elevator speech.
      • Less is more.
      • Haiku.
    4. Re:More social engineering? by stealth_finger · · Score: 5, Funny

      If this is an attempt to reverse the decline in Mankind's attention span, then it's too late.

      TL:DR

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    5. Re:More social engineering? by taiwanjohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's funny. When Twitter was first launched, I read that the 140 character limit was defined by SMS Text messages for mobile phones.

      Whatever the reason, I've never been able to figure out the attraction of Twitter. I opened an account, followed some people, and every time I check, it just looks like a random mess of information. I can't remember the last time I actually found something useful on Twitter. What am I doing wrong? How do others make Twitter useful?

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
    6. Re:More social engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just delete your account. It's useless.

    7. Re:More social engineering? by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      "Despite the constant negative press covefefe"

      While simple can be harder than complex, it's usually just simplistic and stupid.

    8. Re:More social engineering? by rtb61 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      As already indicated, the 140 character limit was likely tied to the attention span of the typical twitter user. With Don Don the orange orangutan (POTUS why does they look like a swear word) as the star twitter user, it seems they should likely cut back from 140, rather than double it, with Don Don as the star twitter user, it's a wonder people have not yet realised they should be ashamed to use it, look who you twit like.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    9. Re:More social engineering? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Twitter is great because it enforced brevity... Or at least it used to.

      Follow a few interesting people and the signal to noise ratio will vastly improve. Mark Hamill is a good place to start. If you are interested in a topic then follow some of the biggest people in that field, and then look to see who they retweet or like to find less well known but interesting accounts.

      The other really useful feature of Twitter is that because corporations have accounts you can do support in public with them. Have a problem with a crappy product? Tweet at them, using their own marketing hashtags, then it's not just a front line support problem they can ignore, it's a public relations disaster that they need to solve.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re: More social engineering? by TheMeuge · · Score: 1

      Does this mean our political strategy will become twice as complex? With the nuance of the modern world, don't you think 140 characters should be enough to express any opinion on any issue? Many people apparently do.

    11. Re:More social engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're so boring.

      Trump's tweets are the ONLY reason most people EVER look at Twitter nowadays. It's obsolete. Just like your elitist politics.

    12. Re:More social engineering? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't remember the last time I actually found something useful on Twitter. What am I doing wrong? How do others make Twitter useful?

      1) You won't find anything useful on Twitter. It's the confetti of the internet.

      2) You're not doing anything wrong.

      3) They don't.

      Dump your account and you won't miss a thing.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    13. Re:More social engineering? by c · · Score: 1

      I opened an account, followed some people, and every time I check, it just looks like a random mess of information.

      I'm kind of hoping that increasing the limit will encourage people to write actual coherent sentences with articles and punctuation and nifty stuff like that, but I'm not holding my breath...

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    14. Re:More social engineering? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time.

      Citing your source is good form. Here, let me help you:

      Je n'ai fait [cette lettre] plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu le loisir de la faire plus courte. -- Blaise Pascal

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    15. Re:More social engineering? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      As just another old guy you forgot to add 4) Get off my lawn.

      But in all seriousness, you don't need Twitter. Anything "important" happens on twitter you can read the tweet on your local news station, or even slashdot summaries.

      You only need an account if you suffer from Tourettes.

    16. Re:More social engineering? by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      I can't remember the last time I actually found something useful on Twitter. What am I doing wrong? How do others make Twitter useful?

      1) You won't find anything useful on Twitter. It's the confetti of the internet.

      2) You're not doing anything wrong.

      3) They don't.

      I'll give you an example of how I made Twitter useful:

      Back in 2008, my stepson's team went to the state's wrestling championships. His team was favored to win that year, and a lot of people in our home town were interested in the results, but they weren't going to travel several hours to see it. The matches weren't televised, and the state HS athletic association didn't have a very dynamic website. I share a link to my twitter feed on Facebook, then other people shared that. I tweeted the results of the wrestling championships on my flip phone using the T9 keyboard. A popular wrestling website even picked up on the results, and was using them on their message boards. Several hundred people were able to see the results in near real time.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    17. Re:More social engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > If you are interested in a topic then follow some of the biggest people in that field,

      I find it stupid that I can't also subscribe to topics. There is good enough tech to auto-classify tweets into topics. When I subscribe to a bunch of users from a specific field, they also post unrelated stuff that I don't want to weed through. Hashtags are limited and brittle, can't replace a decent classifier.

    18. Re:More social engineering? by tepples · · Score: 1

      A popular wrestling website even picked up on the results

      I guess today I learned that there are popular websites for legit wrestling as opposed to scripted WWEstling.

  3. Gab by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the end it is for one reason.
    Gab supports 300 characters.
    Seems twitter is running scared.

  4. Oh fuck no by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now that idiot will have twice as much to say.

    1. Re:Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      his brain will explode. a great explosion. the best. only the best for him. it'll be yuge! yuge!

    2. Re:Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Master of trolling? Hardly. Master of dodging the draft for "bone spurs" after playing three varsity sports – yup. Master of grabbing 'em by the pussy – yessiree. Master of receiving golden showers – right in one. Master of repealing the ACA – let's hold off on that. Master of making Mexico pay for the wall – er, better hold off on that one too. Master of draining the swap – um, er, yeah, we'll get back to you. Master of respecting the flag – he seems to have figured out right hand over your heart after Melania showed him how. Master of patriotism – what was that about dodging the draft again?

      Unable to be diplomatic due to the 140 limit? Not even remotely possible for him to be diplomatic regardless of how much space you give him.

      So, back to the question, how would it affect Twitler? Not much I'd wager.

      You do realize the "progressive" outrage bubble is about to burst, don't you?

      The crescendo of "OMFG!!! HITLER!!!!" isn't working any more, and now people are starting not to surrender to it. Instead of "I'm sorry" the response is turning into "FUCK YOU!!!"

      So, yeah, FUCK YOU

    3. Re:Oh fuck no by Ogive17 · · Score: 2

      My first thought is now he'll be able to properly explain himself.......

      --
      "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
    4. Re:Oh fuck no by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure the idiot to whom NoNonAlphaCharactersHere was referring is Trump. Trump never stuck to the 140 limit. He uses "..." like it was invented for him. The only question remains is, will this limit his use of "..." or make his tweets twice as long / stupid.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    5. Re:Oh fuck no by jittles · · Score: 1

      My first thought is now he'll be able to properly explain himself.......

      Yes! I've been waiting months for twitter to give him a high enough character count that he can explain what covfefe means to the rest of the world.

    6. Re: Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I got from your long winded post is that you hate yourself.

    7. Re: Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoops. Meant for the person above you.

    8. Re:Oh fuck no by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      From the responses to you, your troll was fairly productive.

      LeoDicaprioRaisingAGlassWithFireworksBehindHim.gif

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    9. Re:Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weird, weren't you the same guy boasting about his thousands, tens of thousands, of comments on here?

      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      Now that you're (finally!) at -1, suddenly you're not here as much?

      What about your precious revenue streams? How you gonna retire now? They don't pay for blubber donations, Chris.

      Still bitter FakeFuck39? Get a fuckng life.

    10. Re:Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have some Bitter Lemon with your whine, loser.

    11. Re:Oh fuck no by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      My first thought is now he'll be able to properly explain himself...

      Twitter will invent flying cars and Mr. Fusion before that happens.

    12. Re:Oh fuck no by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      My first thought is now he'll be able to properly explain himself.......

      What is it that makes you think that giving him more words will let him properly explain anything? It cannot be the past.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re: Oh fuck no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I got from your long winded post is that you hate yourself.

      You think Trump posts as an AC on slashdot? Wow!

  5. Maybe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they'll have extra characters as in-app purchases!

    1. Re:Maybe... by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      And you can earn extra characters by tweeting short, positive reviews for their advertising partner's products! The more likes and retweets your review gets, the more characters you get!

      And somewhere out there, some shitbag advertising executive just splooged his pants at the thought of this.

  6. Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Millennials have regressed to the level of cavemen, and have abandoned language in favour of pictures. If they want to communicate they'll send a picture via Snap Chat. If they want to express how offended they are they'll post an animated gif which illustrates their self-righteous outrage.

    The knock on effect is that software user interfaces have been reduced to pictograms to communicate the functionality. Nasty menus with words that describe the functionality have been all but stripped away, leaving things like the ribbon UI with lots of big pretty pictures to communicate to the millennial. The previous branching Start menu has been replaced by tiles with more big pretty pictures.

    Twitter, your additional character allowance is not welcome here. It's non-inclusive, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic and will be used by Trump supporting white-supremacists. This extra character allowance has caused me great offence and I must now retreat to my safe space.

    1. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, let's tell millennials what they want after they've already demonstrated what they want!

      because that is a good way to avoid having the murderous millennials decide that it's time to murder your business, or business model, or entire industry.

      Maybe stop reading so much about millennials, and instead find one and talk to them...

    2. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They add more and more emojis all of the time. We will reach a point where people can no longer communicate in English and instead communicate by using a system where people use a series of emojis to express ideas. In some ways it will resemble Chinese with the thousands of characters that they have, except with emojis it is impossible to write with pen and paper. I would add that by bumping the limit to 280, that there is less of an excuse to use bad grammar and poor spelling.

    3. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh fuck off. The generation war is an attempt by the media to divide and conquer.
      The group you're actually looking for is normalfags, who can be any age. You emoji shitting mother is a normalfag, and they have ruined the internet.
      Remember when slashdot used to be good? That's because it was 100% geeks with passion for technology. Now it's full of boring normalfags.
      In conclusion: Fuck off you boring old normalfag.

    4. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remember when slashdot used to be good? That's because it was 100% geeks with passion for technology. Now it's full of boring normalfags.

      Seems kind of telling, too, that this kind of a comment is in the response section for an article about some microblog doubling its character limit. Where's the passion for tech here?

    5. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to apologize for my earlier comment. I'm just really excited because I have discovered this obscure internetsite called four channel, where people talk all funny like this. I just *had* to try that myself. My mom has now explained to me that it's best to four channel on four channel, while slashdotting on slashdot, instead of mixing it up.

      Again, sorry!

    6. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The knock on effect is that software user interfaces have been reduced to pictograms to communicate the functionality. Nasty menus with words that describe the functionality have been all but stripped away, leaving things like the ribbon UI with lots of big pretty pictures to communicate to the millennial. The previous branching Start menu has been replaced by tiles with more big pretty pictures.

      It's even worse. Now that they've stripped the words out the menus can be used not only with the English-speaking millenials, but also German-speaking millenials, French-speaking millenials, Spanish-speaking millenials, Italian-speaking millenials, Russian-speaking millenials, Japanese-speaking millenials, Mandarin-speaking millenials, ... the list goes on and on. This is madness!

    7. Re:Millennials Don't Want Words! by d0rp · · Score: 1

      The knock on effect is that software user interfaces have been reduced to pictograms to communicate the functionality.

      And soon (if not already) most of those pictograms don't mean anything to a lot of people, they're just used to seeing them. For example, typically the icon for a "save" function is a floppy disk. When was the last time you actually saw a floppy disk in real life?

  7. Deck chairs on the Titanic by bradley13 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Like, wow, man, totally radical!

    Take an arbitrary limit, and change it to a different, arbitrary limit. But only for "select" users. Wow.

    The point of the limit, and Twitter's only USP, is that messages have to be short. The original limit was based on text-messaging (SMS), of course, but that hasn't been relevant for a long time. They could drop the limit entirely - and just become a rather strange blogging platform.

    Twitter has other problems. In particular, their tendency to political censorship has already pissed off everyone who doesn't subscribe to the progressive world view. However, having started down that road, reversing course would piss off the progressives. On top of all of that, their corporate expenses are just nuts - they don't need (and cannot pay) thousands of employees, to run a simple messaging platform.

    Changing the tweet length really is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Deck chairs on the Titanic by Tranzistors · · Score: 1, Insightful

      tendency to political censorship has already pissed off everyone who doesn't subscribe to the progressive world view

      Am I missing something? Last time I checked Trump, David Duke and Infowars are still there. I remember one BBC Business daily episode which discussed Twitter growth issues (in the latest quarter number of new users was basically nil IIRC). One possible explanation mentioned was lousy community standards enforcement, or as you people call it, censorship. Somehow I gravitate to believing posh experts on radio than some random slashdot user.

    2. Re:Deck chairs on the Titanic by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Twitter has other problems. In particular, their tendency to political censorship has already pissed off everyone
      > who doesn't subscribe to the progressive world view.

      Eh? The largest group now are gamergate kidults and other retards who post death and rape threats to normal people, plus a handful of eternally optimistic people posting replies to celebrities in the hope that they'll read one of them.

  8. Economies of scale? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

    I bet they just want to save money by not forcing people to say something in ten tweets when it can fit into five. Because they would write them anyway but their systems will now only handle half the messages.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  9. Finally a detailed insult by TimothyHollins · · Score: 1

    Yay, now I can have twice the detail in my death threats and witch hunts.

    To the pitch forks!

    1. Re: Finally a detailed insult by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Of course, your target better be a conservative, otherwise you get banned.

  10. 280 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    280 is clearly too much. Users might be confused. Let's just add one character every month.

    > "Our research shows us that the character limit is a major cause of frustration for people tweeting in English," the company said in a blog post. "When people
    > don't have to cram their thoughts into 140 characters and actually have some to spare, we see more people Tweeting -- which is awesome!"

    They need "research" for that?

    1. Re:280 by sheramil · · Score: 3, Funny

      280 is clearly too much. Users might be confused.

      I say reduce it to 80 characters. If it was good enough for fidonet taglines -

    2. Re:280 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reduce it to 50, so it can be used as the first line of a git commit. :)

    3. Re:280 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think 8.3 should be enough.

    4. Re:280 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was enough for CP/M and thus it was enough for clones like MS-DOS. CP/M was frequently used to access large systems that had even stricter limits, DECtape and RT-11 could only give you 6.3 character filenames. Some systems stored filename characters in a 6-bit encoding leaving out lower case letters (like IBM 7000 and CDC 1604).

    5. Re:280 by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      Or they could just require quoted-printable format one line per tweet, and the various Twitter clients can handle multiline decoding

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  11. News for nerds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stuff that matters....

  12. 640 characters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    640 characters ought to be enough for anybody.

    1. Re:640 characters by jlv · · Score: 1

      Mod this up +1 Funny.

      (or does no-one remember?)

  13. slow news day by The123king · · Score: 1

    Is this a slow news day or something?

    --
    If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
  14. Twitter by d3bruts1d · · Score: 1

    @Slashdot The char(140) limit was the big appeal of #twitter to me. It made people express their thought in a short ...

  15. No time by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    I ain't got time to read long winded tweets.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re: No time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad!

  16. Good, posts will contain twice as much content! by ToTheStars · · Score: 2

    Oh wait, twice zero is still zero.

  17. Just stop couting @'s and limit #'s? by wardrich86 · · Score: 2

    It's been a long time since I've used twitter, but last I remember, usernames go against your character count. Want to tell @pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis something important? Well, now you're down to 95 characters. Want to retweet something and tag them? You're probably SOL.

    Furthermore, they should stop counting the letters in hashtags and instead just limit how many you can use. There are a lot of really inefficient things that Twitter does that they could clean up...

    1. Re:Just stop couting @'s and limit #'s? by Tranzistors · · Score: 1

      The first issue is somewhat addressed. As for the second one... why would you want to do that?

    2. Re:Just stop couting @'s and limit #'s? by d0rp · · Score: 1

      From what I remember (it's now been a couple of years since I've worked with the twitter API), a lot of that is already in place, and things like URLs and retweets (as long as you use the actual RT feature and not just quote it) aren't counted against your 140 character limit, and neither are multi-byte characters.

    3. Re:Just stop couting @'s and limit #'s? by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

      Hashtags are meant to be a method for indexing tweets to find them later. Realistically, you shouldn't need more than maybe 5 on a post. If you don't limit the number of hashtags, you could write out an entire novel by just starting each word with a "#"

  18. Twitter by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    "Twitter- now with twice the self-serving, narcissistic drivel!"

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  19. half-broken is still broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A fundamentally broken design cannot be fixed by changing the size of the problem.

  20. Breaking new ground by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who says innovation in Silicon Valley is dead? But it was more exciting when they made actual products.

  21. How to tell journalism from fake news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just like the NY Times does to Trump?

    The New York Times Misquoted Trump’s Charlottesville Remarks In Five Different Reports

    You did notice, I hope that the article you link is pointing out that the New York Times corrected its errors.

    That's how you tell real journalism from fake news: the honest sources correct their mistakes when they make an error.

    I'll also note that the corrections were pretty trivial:

      “Correction: August 22, 2017 An earlier version of this article misquoted President Trump. He said there were ‘very fine people on both sides’ of the deadly melee in Charlottesville, Va., not ‘the good people on both sides.'”

    I'm happy that they corrected this to what he actually said, but whether he used the phrase "good people" or "very fine people" doesn't really make any difference to the sense of the quote.

    1. Re:How to tell journalism from fake news by JackieBrown · · Score: 1

      Making a mistake either knowingly or just because you assume it's true based on your bias and then "taking it back" after the damage is done does not make a journalist honest.

      Most people will never know what he actually said because they don't go back and read old articles - why would they? And even if they do, they read the wrong stuff when they were emotionally invested in the story. In other words, they "passionately feel" the lie. The emotional impact doesn't go away once (if) the truth is read because people aren't computers

      How many people know the 911 tape with George Zimmerman was edited by NBC to make him seem worse even though NBC later admitted and fired people because of it?

  22. Twitter was an accident... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Twitter shouldn't exist as a company. The technology was an accident, the founders played musical chairs for the CEO position, and a business model to generate revenues came years after blowing through venture capital funding. Read all about it in, "Hatching Twitter: A True Story of Money, Power, Friendship, and Betrayal" by Nick Bilton.

  23. Trump needs a more characters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yay!....

  24. Level of importance by WoodstockJeff · · Score: 1

    I tried to come up with an analogy for how profoundly this change affects me, but even the year-to-year butterfly counts in Botswanna are more significant.

    1. Re: Level of importance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you realize that these longer tweets would enable Trump to hurl bigger insults at North Korea? That will result in nuclear war. How do you think the butterflies in Botswana would handle being irradiated?

  25. Tests Doubling Characters? by MichaelJamesBattagli · · Score: 1

    Before: After:

    1. Re:Tests Doubling Characters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's why they get the big bucks

    2. Re: Tests Doubling Characters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fail. Client side enforcement is insecure.

  26. It's crazier than starting a land war in asia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He also wants to go in against a sicilian when death is on the line.

  27. The Donald Negotiated this Deal by OppMan29 · · Score: 1

    Who else benefits?

  28. No! by gillbates · · Score: 1

    280 characters?! When does it stop?! 300? 512? 1k!? Why, you could almost express a coherent thought with that much text.

    Twitter as we know it is dead.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  29. Re:Oh fuck no [the orange guy] by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    same as much to say, just twice the number of Characters in which to say it. Modern Inflation

    So now his tweets will be Yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge!

  30. If someone wanted more then 140... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would they still be using twitter?

    If you are going to increase it, why put a limit on it?

  31. Typety typety type is often bad, not good. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    About 9 percent of all tweets today are exactly 140 characters, Twitter says. It's tough to do that on accident, suggesting that users frequently have to edit their initial thoughts to get them under the limit.

    Believe me, most people need to edit more not less.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  32. Characters for Monetization? by Champaklal · · Score: 1

    Do they want to monetize Twitter, using ads? This may be one reason for 280 character limit. Probably they may try to be a seller platform.

  33. I remember it differently by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    I remember an interview with Jack Dorsey talking about how amazing it is imposing a 140 character limit in an age where verbal diarrhoea is a real problem. He said that when people have a limit it causes them to think carefully about what they say and how to get a message across, and that this was one of the defining features of Twitter that separated it from any other blog or platform for people to speak.

    He then justified this as why they won't increase the character limit. I think he said that in 2010. ... and then 2012... 2014,.. 2016

    Yeah good work mate.

  34. "to do that on accident" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "to do that BY accident". But Americans... those prepositions are so confusing, aren't they...

  35. R U TRIGGERED? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Flamebait? Because I criticized that cheeto piece of shit? Mod me again, Nazi snowflakes.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  36. Wish they'd LOWER it, not raise it by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    Take it down to 50 or 60, would get "hollyweird", politicians & so called news media out of the mix, since they can't think in less than 140 characters.

    1. Re:Wish they'd LOWER it, not raise it by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      50 or 60, nah IBM had it right with their punched cards. 80 characters.

  37. It's still 140 for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must be restricted to a few accounts yet.

  38. Re: Doctor, Doctor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now people can be even bigger nitwits?

  39. Blame the end of physical keyboards by tepples · · Score: 1

    "Despite the constant negative press covefefe"

    The misspelled word in that Tweet was obviously intended to be "coverage". But phones with a built-in physical keyboard have long since been discontinued in favor of phones with a flat sheet of glass as the only text input mechanism, and many apps don't autocorrect the last typed word in a message.

    While simple can be harder than complex, it's usually just simplistic and stupid.

    Exactly. The removal of physical keyboards has simplified the phone mechanically but increased a certain category of stupid data entry mistakes.

  40. More tweets good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Longer tweets take.longer to read, given the terrible signal to noise ratio on twitter thats not a good thing. If I ever wanted to read through walls of nonsensical text i would go read slashdot or medium.

  41. Typo for coverage by tepples · · Score: 1

    I figured that one out in seconds: "Despite the negative press covfefe" means "Despite the negative press coverage". Many messaging applications make the last word of a message exempt from autocorrect.

    1. Re:Typo for coverage by jittles · · Score: 1

      I figured that one out in seconds: "Despite the negative press covfefe" means "Despite the negative press coverage". Many messaging applications make the last word of a message exempt from autocorrect.

      Did he fall asleep while writing his tweet? And why didn't he just admit it was a typo instead of trying to claim it had some super secret meaning?

  42. How to make an over-long Tweet by tepples · · Score: 1

    They could drop the limit entirely - and just become a rather strange blogging platform.

    It already is that way. A properly formatted over-long Tweet contains a headline up to 115 characters and a link to the body on a pastebin service such as Twitlonger or on your traditional blog.

  43. 140 Characters: by PlaynBass · · Score: 1

    The ONLY good thing about Twitter was that it only allows 140 characters. To compose a really good Tweet takes some real thinking skills. That 140 character limit separates the mere twits from the real Tweets.

    --
    PlaynBass
  44. What is twitter? (16 characters, no more needed) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    see above