×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

After Domain Squatting, Twitter Squatting

timothy posted more than 5 years ago | from the kept-in-a-special-safe dept.

Businesses 201

carusoj writes "Squatting on domain names is nothing new, but Twitter has created a new opportunity for squatters, in the form of Twitter IDs. Writes Richard Stiennon: 'Is there evidence of Twitter squatting (squitting?) Let's check. Yup, every single-letter TwitID is taken ... How about common words? Garage, wow, war, warcraft, Crisco, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, and Chevrolet are all taken. My guess is that Twitter squatters have grabbed all of these in the hopes that they will be worth selling in the not too distant future. Of course the legitimate holders of brands can sue for them and Twitter can just turn them over if asked. But, because the investment and risk for the squatter is zero, you are going to see the rapid evaporation of available Twitter IDs.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

201 comments

Can't say I ever used Twitter (4, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559337)

So this is pretty much like every other social networking site where you have to pick a username?

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (1)

Prof.Phreak (584152) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559425)

Exactly. What is this Twitter they speak of?

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (4, Funny)

v1 (525388) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559895)

who says you can't still get a short username?

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (5, Insightful)

dintech (998802) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559899)

The poster also forgot that not that many people actually care about twitter.

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (3, Funny)

Billhead (842510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559467)

I don't think this is about the website Twitter but the /. user twitter.

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (0)

Billhead (842510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559505)

Ignore the post above. Note to self: Read TFA before trying to sound like a pretentious asshole and being completely off.

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559583)

With username like "Billhead" I can see why you don't like a hero like twitter [slashdot.org].

So, how often do you give BillG head?

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (5, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559503)

It's as if someone said, "You know, I like MySpace, but the blog posts there just aren't inane enough. I wish there was a site where people could quickly and easily share every minute of their boring lives with the world."

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559657)

12:24 PM - Eating lunch

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559683)

12:28 PM - Vomiting. Regret eating fresh-poached semen a la dick for lunch.

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559719)

12:30 - Eating vomit. Can't let it go to waste.

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559853)

12:45 - gotta take a piss

12:53 - Holy fuck! Barack Obama was taking a shit in the bathrroom

12:54 - he forgot to flush

12:56 - fap fap fap

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25560233)

4:07PM EST - Regret reading your comment

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (2, Insightful)

rivetgeek (977479) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560229)

It's basically livejournal for people with ADD. The worst part is things like loudtwitter which publishes peoples twitter posts on their livejournal.

Twitter who? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559573)

No idea. In other news, all the good Yahoo! email addresses are already taken. Film at 11.

Re:Can't say I ever used Twitter (4, Interesting)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559721)

So this is pretty much like every other social networking site where you have to pick a username?

Yes, Twitter is just one of the most trendy social networking sites right now so people are falling over themselves to act like the squatting of (or competition for) unique IDs in a limited namespace is somehow a new concept. Once you understand the simple concept, the specific application (be it domain names, Twitter usernames, etc) is mere trivia and doesn't really explain anything new but it passes for news. Refer to Henry David Thoreau's take on "the news" to get a better idea of where I'm coming from.

Because Twitter is very trendy right now, in a few months people will probably stop talking about it as though old and well-known concepts are somehow different when applied to the site. Hell, if it's like a lot of trends, then it's possible that in a few months or so many people will not seem to know what you're talking about if you mention it, or they will speak of it like a vague memory.

I should say that I'm all for using Twitter or any other site if you want to and especially if you enjoy it. What I am speaking against is the tendency to make a big deal out of nothing, to attach novelty and significance to events that are actually predictable and trivial.

First post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559357)

YEAHHHHHHH!!!!

First post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559365)

first post

Let Me Be The First To Say (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559367)

Who

I'm squatting for myself (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559373)

I don't use twitter at the moment or have any plans to, but I grabbed a few for myself that I may use in the future just to have them. I can't see anyone actually squatting them to stop me or asking me to pay up, but this way I avoid the situation all together.

Re:I'm squatting for myself (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559577)

Oh, good Idea.

Combatting Multis? (3, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559383)

Don't some sites implement an IP log to combat multi-account users? I've seen used extensively in games like Tribal Wars & Ikariam which are just browser based games because the implications are severe. They will ban you. You would think that Twitter would be able to spot accounts being created on the same IP. If the squatter uses an onion router or Tor to start the account, one would think those IP ranges would be easy to spot & block also.

Yes, it is sacrificing a simple hands off policy for a complicated enforced one ... but if you're that worried about that kind of account squatting, why not? Also, this would eliminate people who might be spamming with twitter or using multiple accounts to game twitter. I don't know if those are serious problems but I would be surprised if they weren't.

Re:Combatting Multis? (1)

snl2587 (1177409) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559491)

Twitter's user base includes a lot of people who would be sharing computers with family members who may also be using Twitter. Would you propose an IP block for them, too?

Re:Combatting Multis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559527)

Twitter's user base includes a lot of people who would be sharing computers with family members who may also be using Twitter. Would you propose an IP block for them, too?

You've obviously put a lot of thought into this. How about a one account to many IP addresses does not raise a red flag but many accounts to one IP address does? Also, the IP of creation is valuable information as well as removing the account after months of inactivity. This is basic account maintenance, I'm shocked if Twitter hasn't implemented this.

Re:Combatting Multis? (2, Informative)

khellendros1984 (792761) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560235)

Scenario: College dorm running behind NAT. Many users, probably many Twitter account holders, but a single IP.

Re:Combatting Multis? (1)

Firehed (942385) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560039)

That, and there are plenty of completely legitimate users for having multiple accounts. Leo Laporte for example (who arguably got the ball rolling for them with an early-on podcast) has several - personal, one for TWiT updates, etc. And given that he's the third most-followed user on the service, you can bet that the Twitter crew are well aware. Plenty of other people with businesses do the same, myself included. Different content for different audiences - unlike proper blogging, you can't easily break out tweets by tags or categories.

Re:Combatting Multis? (2, Insightful)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559575)

You would think that Twitter would be able to spot accounts being created on the same IP.

The same person always has the same IP? The same IP always belongs the same person?

Wrong and wrong, but thanks for playing.

Re:Combatting Multis? (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560393)

The same person always has the same IP? The same IP always belongs the same person?

The same IP has registered every word in the dictionary starting with F?

Seriously, its bloody obvious there isn't a 1:1:1 mapping from IP to user to twitter account, and its true there is no way to separate a little bit of squatting from 'a family of twitter users', but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that that batch of 150,000 twitter accounts created from a particular ID, all linked to single gmail address, aren't a "family"... and if you wanted to be really sure, you dig a little deeper and find out that hey, that IP is assigned to Verizon's pool of 'dynamically allocated residential ip addresses'... hmmmm?

Re:Combatting Multis? (1)

skiman1979 (725635) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559841)

Wouldn't all users of a NAT'd subnet be seen as having the same IP from twitter's standpoint? In that case, Twitter would think that the same user is creating multiple accounts when in reality it's hundreds of users at a university or Internet cafe for example.

Re:Combatting Multis? (1)

skeeto (1138903) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560241)

That would remove using Twitter through TOR, so no more anonymous twittering. How important is it be anonymous on Twitter? I have never used Twitter myself, so I can't say. If I did, having the option to be anonymous might be appealing to me, though.

Re:Combatting Multis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25560309)

While that may work for people playing games from home, it most definitely won't work here. It's not unreasonable to believe that a lot of twitter updates would take place from public wireless, workplaces, universities and cellphones - all of which are more likely than not to use NAT.

Besides, who cares? Twitter's not losing anything, and Nike can register NikeShoeChannel or such if they really want to use twitter. (That's assuming that they don't flex their lawyer muscle, in which case it still isn't really Twitter's problem).

With respect to spamming and gaming, neither of those are huge problems. Nobody's forcing you to 'follow' (I had to google that one) the spammers; and what the fuck are you talking about when you say 'gaming'? It's a meaningless popularity contest, not a casino.

Obligatory (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559385)

How many sock puppets does that guy need?!?!

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559829)

and where is he when you get the thread perfect for him?

This would assume that Twitter was worth a damn (2, Interesting)

Scareduck (177470) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559389)

See also [youtube.com]. Lore Sjoberg rips Twitter a new one, but it's only common sense; who frankly gives a damn?

Twitter what? (0, Troll)

Meor (711208) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559393)

Who the hell uses Twitter? You web programming monkeys are soon to be out of jobs.

Re:Twitter what? (1)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559447)

Who the hell uses Twitter? You web programming monkeys are soon to be out of jobs.

Much as I (mostly) agree with the first statement, I can't understand where the second one is coming from. Just because someone posts a story about people name-squatting on twitter, how does that have anything to do with web programming, and employment aspects there of?

Re:Twitter what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559919)

  1. Twitter is OMGWTFBBQ Web 2.0
  2. Everyone uses Twitter
  3. Therefore everyone must want Web 2.0 "applications"[1]
  4. Except #2 is not even remotely true and most users hate Web 2.0 "applications"
  5. Bye bye Bubble 2.0
  6. No profit.
  7. Enjoy your new McJob.

[1]: Term used as loosely as possible while maintaining a straight face. Mostly.

I would happily... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559395)

Squat and curl out a messy smelly one on Twitter. It would be community service. Seriously, this site is a joke piece of shit.

Yeah (3, Funny)

Daimanta (1140543) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559411)

I heard that Twitter squatted around 100 kazillion accounts on Slashdot including some with prime numbers. If we don't watch out all prime numbers are going to be taken!

Re:Yeah (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559961)

We haven't even discovered all of the prime numbers, so how can this be the case? Plus, who the fuck cares about twitter?

If twitter REALLY takes off... (1)

lumenistan (1165199) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559421)

If this really takes off and becomes as popular as these speculators think, I hope twitter has a better, more fair resolution method than does ICANN.

THOSE TWITS don't know SQUAT and need to have their power kept in check. (couldn't help it)

lumenistan

got that right (4, Funny)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559459)

this is why my entire retirement plan consists of the thousands of facebook and myspace accounts that I have created.

Re:got that right (4, Funny)

corbettw (214229) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559643)

You think that's speculative? My entire retirement plan revolves around putting money into a 401(k) and an IRA, and I'm heavily invested in blue chip stocks and index funds. Now that's playing footloose and fancy free with the future!

Re:got that right (1)

dedazo (737510) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560267)

I hear you. I think I actually owe money on my 401(k) now. I haven't even checked lately. Too scared.

Fortunately I moved most of my long-term investments to Europe and Canada a few years ago when I figured the dollar was going down the drain. Municipal bonds may not be sexy but at least in euros they're safe :)

Re:got that right (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559781)

You might have cornered the market on facebook and myspace accounts, but I own all the good friendster and napster account names!

Re:got that right (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560025)

Well, I'll see your friendster and napster account names and raise you Prodigy and The Sierra Network account names.

Re:got that right (1)

syrinx (106469) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560141)

Well, I'll see your friendster and napster account names and raise you Prodigy and The Sierra Network account names.

Prodigy, eh? How much do you think I can get for clvp10a?

And Twitter Founder Guy says the INTERNET broken (1)

yttrstein (891553) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559469)

Hear that? That's the sound of 4294967296 pots and 4294967296 kettles all crashing into each other simultaneously.

Yet another reason (2, Interesting)

Baldrson (78598) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559495)

This is yet another reason that in-place liquidation value [ar-int.com], rather than economic activity, should be the basis for taxation.

Re:Yet another reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25560343)

No, we should tax good looking people more. They can get a big deduction if they marry an ugly person.

Squitting? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559507)

Why is twitter squatting squitting and not twatting?

Re:Squitting? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25560405)

"Squitting" sounds like something I do about 20 minutes after eating too much Taco Bell.

Slashdot, too (4, Interesting)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559509)

What's pretty funny, is that this is the same on Slashdot. For instance I tried a few car brands and these all exist and have extremely low UIDs:
http://slashdot.org/~mercedes [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/~ferrari [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/~ford [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/~fiat [slashdot.org]

But also
http://slashdot.org/~tefal [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/~aga [slashdot.org]
http://slashdot.org/~farber [slashdot.org]
exists so we have a few happy chef-cooks here as well :-)

Re:Slashdot, too (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559563)

Slashsquatting?

Re:Slashdot, too (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559945)

http://slashdot.org/~farber [slashdot.org]
exists so we have a few happy chef-cooks here as well :-)

I'm going to try to come to the defense of that last one there. His Slashdot user page links to: http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~farber/ [upenn.edu] which claims he is

David Farber, Professor Emeritus

Web Page at CMU:
http://www.epp.cmu.edu/httpdocs/people/bios/farber.html [cmu.edu]

I don't think he selected that name because he's a happy chef cook nor because he is squatting.

Also, is it so wrong for me to select the UID Ferrari because I'm a Ferrari owner and enthusiast? I would hope CmdrTaco would side with the users if Ferrari & Farber ever wanted to start spamming us with threads about their latest cars and pans.

They're going to be waiting for a long time... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559547)

... for huge businesses to give a damn about some username on a social networking site that isn't even that popular.

Still, its a great excuse (5, Funny)

tpjunkie (911544) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559609)

to use the term "twatter" or "twating" which I find much more hilarious than "squitting"

rigorous test (1)

YouWantFriesWithThat (1123591) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559627)

well after that rigorous test of the alphabet and 9 words i am sure that we can safely assume that all usernames are taken. a "rapid evaporation of twitter ids" indeed...time to move on to some other 'micro-blogging' (or internet-based mass text-messaging) service provider. i would imagine that if one was actually trying to tell if these accounts were being squatted one could see if they were posting anything. maybe they just would set the squatted accounts to private. i don't know, i don't tweet or twit or whatever.

Yep. (5, Interesting)

Wolfger (96957) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559631)

Chrysler recently announced they were on Twitter, but the name was ChryslerCom or something like that. Squatters beat them to their own name. That's the problem with unique usernames, though. I mean, say your name (because your parents are insensitive clods) actually *is* Chevy... Should you be prevented from being "Chevy" online because a car company holds a trademark on that name? Is it really fair for the courts to just take something away from you and give it to a rich corporation?

Re:Yep. (1)

mschuyler (197441) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559791)

Yeah, it's 'fair' as determined by the courts. There was a woman whose name was Sony who used it in her restaurant name: Sony's Restaurant. Sony sued. Sony won. Trademark law has a long and illustrious past. Once you get that (r) you're on the 'registered list' and that mark is inviolate--not just a 'tm' which is just a wannabe in comparison legally. You have to have a certain amount of 'time in grade' as a 'tm' before you qualify for (r).

That's not the first time. In terms of surnames, netidentity.com swooped in and got zillions of surnames which they now will rent back to you. Had I jumped on it three weeks earlier, I would have gotten it, but I hesitated--and lost. But why should I be the one to get my surname? I'm not the only one with it. What of there are several people with the name Chevy? Who gets it? First come first served? Date of birth? High bidder? When you invoke 'fairness' what you're really saying is, "I don't agree.' Fairness is dubious at best. As for 'rich corporations,' I think that's assuming a lot, too. Netidentity can barely keep their servers online. I don't think they are very rich, but they sure do own a lot of surnames.

Re:Yep. (2, Informative)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559885)

Sony didn't win. The lady just couldn't afford to continue the legal battle and gave in. Because justice in our civil court system (and sometimes in the criminal side as well) is bought rather than won.

Re:Yep. (1)

RobertB-DC (622190) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559975)

That's the problem with unique usernames, though. I mean, say your name (because your parents are insensitive clods) actually *is* Chevy.

Don't talk like that about my grandmother, you insensitive clod!
- Sincerely, Chevy Chase [wikipedia.org]

Re:Yep. (1)

causality (777677) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560109)

Is it really fair for the courts to just take something away from you and give it to a rich corporation?

You almost say that as though taking something away from you and giving it to a nearly bankrupt corporation would somehow be more justifiable. I realize you almost certainly don't believe that one is any better than the other (in fact to worry about whether I understand that is to miss my point). All I'm saying is that there is so much undue concern about wealth (usually someone else's) that it tends to infiltrate discussions that it really has nothing to do with.

Re:Yep. (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560175)

You mean like that "used to be really good comedian but is now an asshat like most of the good comedians of the 80's" Chevy Chase?

Re:Yep. (1)

key134 (673907) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560279)

Chrysler recently announced they were on Twitter, but the name was ChryslerCom or something like that. Squatters beat them to their own name. That's the problem with unique usernames, though. I mean, say your name (because your parents are insensitive clods) actually *is* Chevy... Should you be prevented from being "Chevy" online because a car company holds a trademark on that name? Is it really fair for the courts to just take something away from you and give it to a rich corporation?

No, apparently it's not fair. See http://www.nissan.com/ [nissan.com]

Scientific (4, Funny)

qoncept (599709) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559687)

What a wonderful "study." Check a bunch of names that you randomly presume would be desirable, find they are taken, and then assume their use isn't legit.

I'm trying to find a way to tie my hatred of the very concept of twitter in to this but I can't, so I'll just make it a seperate statement.

Squat before someone else does (5, Interesting)

uncledrax (112438) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559747)

I love how TFA suggests you go out and shot-gun register anything associated with your brand.

in short.. he's saying you should fight squatting by squatting it first.

Gotta love that.

Twitter singularity (4, Funny)

matt me (850665) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559753)

Twitter has problems with downtime. Aas the number of users has grown (approximately exponentially, until approaching saturation), so has downtime.

In 2011, twitter downtime will surpass 365 days per year.

Re:Twitter singularity (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25560211)

In 2011, twitter downtime will surpass 365 days per year.

Shortly after that, all the sockpuppets will become self-aware and slaughter everyone.

Oh, wrong twitter...

Wha? (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559769)

What the fuck is a twitter? Can I spend it?

Re:Wha? (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559831)

LOL seriously I had no idea what Twitter even was. So I went to the site, watched the video on the site, and yeah...who the fuck finds Twitter useful, really? Like I give a shit if some dude who I might know likes baseball or not. If he's really a friend, do you think I won't know that he likes Baseball, and really if I didn't know, would it make my life less meaningful? Jesus, people need to open their doors and go outside for a few hours each day, their brains are starting to become oxygen deprived.

You have got to be kidding ... (1)

timholman (71886) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559771)

My guess is that Twitter squatters have grabbed all of these in the hopes that they will be worth selling in the not too distant future.

Yeah, like all of those multimillionaires who made a fortune selling usernames on Friendster, and MySpace, and Facebook, and ... oh, wait ...

Twitter or just plain twit? (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 5 years ago | (#25559837)

Does anyone have any idea HOW a twitter account could be worth anything to a massive corporation like Nike or Pepsi, when they can just as easily carpet bomb other media such as television and website banner ads. I just don't see twitter as an omnipresent advertising presence, unless someone can suggest a method that can be implementing that I'm just not seeing.

Free to squat, but with no potential returns. How valuable is your time, is my question.

Re:Twitter or just plain twit? (1)

Kevin72594 (1301889) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560501)

Umm, special rebates that are distributed through Twitter and are good for say 24 hours?

Could make for a great advertising campaign in my opinion.

Why even bother with Twitter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25559969)

Twitter is useless. Get an RSS reader for your phone.

viral marketing (5, Insightful)

owlnation (858981) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560153)

This is the 3rd piece of viral marketing from the Twitter jerks in as many days.

Twitter jerks, we all know you are desperate. But understand this: your train has sailed. We know you are desperate to be bought out by some large company like Myspace was. It is NOT going to happen for you. The credit crunch makes that certain. Plus your crappy site never stays up more than 24 hours in a row. It's time to give up. Or at least SHUT UP, and stop spamming this site with marketing crap disguised as articles.

Investment is non-zero (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560275)

...because the investment and risk for the squatter is zero, you are going to see the rapid evaporation of available Twitter IDs.
The investment is only zero if your time has absolutely no value. Anybody who considers it worth their while to register hundreds of usernames seriously needs to think about getting a life!

Squitting today, gone tomorrow... (1)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560333)

...The 'Net itself has become far too viral to pin any long-term plans on service-oriented sites like this. It's far too fashionable and will come and go in favor of the next big thing.

Smaller sites like this, I give it 4-8 months and no one will care because the masses will have found a shiny new e-penny to go ADD over.

Larger sites like MySpace, Facebook, I give it 48 months and no one will care because the masses will have found a shiny new e-penny to go ADD over.

ERROR: Word in use. (1)

6Yankee (597075) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560339)

If you're going to make up words like "squitting", make sure someone else hasn't used them first. Squitting is an activity often associated with a bad fish curry.

Then again, given the average Twitterer's output...

wtf.. (1)

noanoxan (1395409) | more than 5 years ago | (#25560465)

what the hell is a twitter, and why should anyone care?

this internet thing is really starting to get stupid. every day there's some new stupid myspace thing or livejournal or whatever. every day people are being set up on blind dates by a damn computer. every day companies are taking over stupid people's computers with advertising crap, that then spew more advertising crap on the net slowing everything down, requiring constant upgrades and maintenance.

you can spend your ENTIRE life on the internet and not learn a damn thing. best yet, you'll like it, 'cause you don't know any better.

stupid. just stupid.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...