Yossarian wrote:

I think Twitter works well if you use it correctly.

1/ I think you're right but

3/ Where you quite often stop partway through your

Meh. Ease of sharing still wins, and Twitter wins at ease of sharing. Just try to keep the first half of the sentence in your head as you scan down to the second half. Try to think of it like turning a page in a book.

Sure, he can just post it in, tell them to print it and bill them. That's how freelancing works.

As I've always said about Twitter, it's so popular because it has celebrities on it, and they're on it because it's the equivalent of red-carpeting in print. Engaging your fans with minimal effort and maximum reward.

Lift that limit and your audience's expectations will increase. There's simply no other reason for it than to conduit celebthought to market.

I'm not contesting that: why does it have such a measly limit in these otherwise techfat times?

It's used for lots of good now that it's popular, because it's popular. Others have failed to replicate its success with limitless alternatives; by wide margins.

It was launched in 2006, not 1996, and the limitations of the site have no authority on cost — individual users do.

They'd Drupal their image support if it were really about bandwidth conservation for the poor.

Escape wrote:

It was launched in 2006, not 1996, and the limitations of the site have no authority on cost — individual users do.

They'd Drupal their image support if it were really about bandwidth conservation for the poor.

That was my memory of it, googling it seems that the service was simply originally conceived of as being something you update through a text.

I suspect war is coming.
Both 'barking dog' Trump and 'rocket man' Kim are unlikely to back down. Trump assumes this is his ultimate deal and uses his usual, revolutionary 'art of the deal' tactics. Kim will never give up on his nuclear arsenal, he knows what happens to countries who do (hello Iraq). Both refuse to lose face by backing down, hence nuclear standoff.

Are both insane enough to use their nuclear toys when provoked? If you go by their psyche profiles (narcissistic, sociopathic, paranoid) you betcha! Might be a conventional war first escalating into nuclear. Worst case scenario of course, I hope none of this actually plays out.

Can China save us from this mess? Yes, if they strike a deal with Kim. It won't involve Kim giving up nuclear arms though, that much is certain. If the US wants to resolve this peacefully Trump will have to accept the fact that NK has nuclear capability. Which would mean Trump losing face to NK and the world, a thing Trump cannot allow can he...…

This won't end well.

If Trump is what I suspect he is, millions are going to die in a bullshit war because of a clash between ego's.
Damn you Hillary and your emails!

Invading North Korea would be utter lunacy.

I'm surprised Trump hasn't already done it.

Trump/Generals are waiting for a rocket to fall short and hit Japan. The 'we warned you' nukes fuck NK in minutes to prevent the massive cost to both sides of a conventional war. China and Russia will rightfully moan but stay clear of WW3.

Zuckerberg will run in 2020, there's little doubt of that.

He can probably dig up shit on practically every person on Earth.

Imagine owning a system that helps a dunderhead become president and then running against that president at the very next election.

Disgusting.

Presumably he'll have to sell Facebook though.