The Grumpy Editor's Twitter experience

Posted Sep 14, 2010 0:25 UTC (Tue) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630)
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's Twitter experience

I don't use twitter because nothing intelligent can be written in 140 characters. (Hmm, pipe this post through wc -c and see what happens.)

The Grumpy Editor's Twitter experience

Posted Sep 14, 2010 10:22 UTC (Tue) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link] (1 responses)

I don't use twitter because nothing intelligent can be written in 140 characters.

Why not compress messages with a Huffman code of word frequency (140 chars is too short for gzip to work, but if you have a separate table of English word frequency you could do something) and then base64 encode?

The Grumpy Editor's Twitter experience

Posted Sep 14, 2010 10:57 UTC (Tue) by Trou.fr (subscriber, #26289) [Link]

http://blog.ksplice.com/2010/04/1st-international-longest...

"How much information is in a tweet?" The result: about 4,370 bits.

Some cool tricks involved :)

The Grumpy Editor's Twitter experience

Posted Sep 15, 2010 14:55 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

The post is intelligent, thus self-disproving, thus wrong, thus cannot be intelligent because no intelligent person would write something 140 characters yet wrong. Thus it is a 140-character paradox. This is, of course, an intelligent thing to post.

(My head is spinning.)

The Grumpy Editor's Twitter experience

Posted Sep 20, 2010 4:52 UTC (Mon) by jtc (guest, #6246) [Link]

echo "I don't use twitter because nothing intelligent can be written in 140 characters. (Hmm, pipe this post through wc -c and see what happens.)"|wc
1 24 140