On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 05:24:24PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > It has a couple of disadvantages I can think of: Right. It seems to me that both are related to the fact that proper interaction with other users of a social network is intrinsically a social-network-specific (rather than -agnostic) activity. If you want to live-"tweet", you really want to do that on the platform in question, if you want to keep react to interactions with others, same. AFAICT this is not in opposition with the idea of a central source for the "tweets". But it does add an extra requirement: that source should not be the only source, but it should rather be possible to have other "tweets" on each social network. That way we can have a common baseline for all of them, and invite volunteers to do the extra work of interactive on a network-by-network basis. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Former Debian Project Leader . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature