Twitter's Vine App Ready To Bomb Internet With GIF-Like Videos 117
Nerval's Lobster writes "Twitter has rolled out Vine, a free app for iOS devices that allows users to shoot and post short videos. Twitter's strategic focus on brevity—the company has long resisted calls to lengthen Tweets beyond the current 140-character limit—extends to Vine videos, which can only be six seconds in length. 'Posts on Vine are about abbreviation — the shortened form of something larger,' Dom Hoffman, Vine's co-founder and general manager, wrote in a blog posting. 'They're little windows into the people, settings, ideas and objects that make up your life.' It's easy to see the Vine acquisition as part of Twitter's larger push into multimedia. The company launched a muscled-up photo service Dec. 10, complete with Instagram-style filters and editing tools. That photo launch came on the heels of an escalating battle with Instagram, the Facebook subsidiary, which decided to disable photo integration with Twitter; that same month, Yahoo also decided to jump into the fray with a new Flickr app for iPhone, complete with special filters and the ability to post images to various social networks."
bomb the internet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:bomb the internet? (Score:5, Funny)
Ok, why?
Re: bomb the internet? (Score:1)
Why? Because the celebrity's intern is authorized to tweet on his owner's behalf.
"There's a Brand New Dance, Spread Far and Wide" (Score:4, Funny)
"C'mon, and show it/Let's Do the Goatse!
It's better than Sext/Girl, Do the Goatse!
I see it coming down the Vine/Let's Do the Goatse!"
Re: (Score:1)
Simon Pegg called me a dolt on twitter. It was awesome.
Re: (Score:1)
As for the video service, it's probably going to fail pretty hard. People can get used to posting within a word limit, but most idiots with a cell phone take a good 10 seconds just to get the camera pointed at what they're trying to film. Just look at youtube for examples, 6 seconds is far too short... they'll need at least 30 seconds to a full minute to make it work.
I support a short limit for EXACTLY that reason. Twitter taught people to be brief. While you CAN tweet a long thought in 5 rapid fire tweets it's not worth the effort usually. So you just shorten and let it go. YouTube is an example of why we need to give limits. I mean people post 15 minute clips of something that took less than 7 to say. I still think YouTube should institute a policy of making people watch their own videos before posting them. Even if it's just for the lowest ranked videos or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of us don't just use Twitter to stalk celebrities. I personally use it for political commentary, getting blog hits (I don't run ads, so no, not for revenue), & getting news before news websites get it.
It's probably the most powerful medium for journalists & bloggers.
That being said, I don't see Vine as adding anything to Twitter, nor do I see it being taken up in a hurry. I'll give it a go, but I don't think I'll rush out & "Vine" everything I see.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Twittering is not, can not be discussion in ant meaningful sense of the word. It's throwing soundbites back and forth.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:bomb the internet? (Score:5, Insightful)
What? No. A large number of the high-profile celebrity twitter accounts are run by a social media manager, same as on facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Just because they respond to some tweets personally doesn't mean they even see most of them. I doubt Smith, Campbell, etc. get all that many Tweets, but someone like Shatner would spend every waking moment reading Twitter if he didn't use an intern or some kind of automatic filter to sort them.
I've heard a lot of Celebs mention in interviews that they don't really "read" their Twitter, they just kind of scan the pages of posts every so often and sometimes one post "jumps out" at them and they might respond.
Re:bomb the internet? (Score:5, Funny)
Shatner needs 140 characters just for whitespace.
oblig (Score:5, Funny)
Ah the Internet -- where the men are boys, the women are men, and the teenage girls are FBI agents.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're chatting up people who are, or are who purport to be, teenage girls, and those teenage girls couldn't fairly, decently or naturally be referred to by others as YOUR peers, then I'm glad the desk sergeant is doing his job.
Also, I read it wrong at first - I actually warmed to the idea of being chatted up online by a Sarge, then I read it again and got the context correct from the bust bit...
Re: (Score:2)
On Twitter I can actually interact with celebrities directly
What do you mean "interact". Tweeting at a person you don't know is the equivalent of saying (or maybe yelling) something at them as they walk by in a public place. Celebs don't really do the public interactions very well as it is, so why would they interact with something that is far easier to ignore / delete?
with thousands of people talking to them, you're lucky if they notice what you say.
Re: (Score:2)
"On Twitter I can actually interact with celebrities directly"
Has it ever crossed your mind that you could just get a life, instead? WTF does a celebrity have to say that could possibly interest me? I visit Sodahead occasionally. A vast majority of the posts/surveys are mindless drivel about people that I simply don't give a damn about. If a catastrophe took them all out tomorrow, I'd never miss any of them. The headline would catch my eye, and I'd go "Awww, that's a shame." Ten minutes later, I'd for
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The fact that you give a fuck about interacting with celebrities is precisely why your opinion doesn't matter.
Re: (Score:3)
How do you know that? A good manager is indistinguishable from the real thing, except for never saying anything offensive, legally dubious, or that could be seen as endorsing a product. Something no sensible celebrity would do. The only way I can imagine to know with any degree of reliability that a celebrity account is real and not filtered by their PR agent would be if they said something so monumentally stupid that no PR agency could possibly allow it - and I'm talking 'Blame the jews for ruining the eco
6 seconds? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:6 seconds? (Score:4, Informative)
Unicode++;
Re:6 seconds? (Score:4, Informative)
Short version: In certain circumstances, rarely encountered on modern operating systems but once frustratingly common, pressing backspace would not be recognised and instead give you a ^H symbol. Worse, under very specific circumstances the backspace might be recognised by the OS (erasing a character on screen) but passed as ^H to the application - from the user's perspective, all works, but really their typoes and erased sentences are getting recorded as part of whatever document they are writing.
I have encountered it myself only once, when connected via serial terminal with the wrong termtype set. Back when serial terminals were common this was a very easy mistake to make, but serial terminals today are confined only to hardware configuration ports and occasionally access-of-last-resort on servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, my comment got modded up funny, not informative/interesting/etc. So the mod just thought I was a stupid n00bl3t -- which I am this time!
Re: (Score:2)
Well yeah... (Score:2)
but instagram is still the name brand that emo kids and hipsters are too good to admit they're using.
You mean, like 5 second films? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I for one smell a hint of YTMND.
Re: (Score:2)
I for one smell a hint of YTMND.
At least YTMND knows it's making the Internet worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Apples to Oranges.
5secondfilms is an art form. This new "service" is a dumpster where a bunch of kids will throw their crap that even youtube does not want.
Re: (Score:2)
"5secondfilms is an art form. This new "service" is a dumpster where a bunch of kids will throw their crap that even youtube and MySpace does not want."
Think that's more accurate?
Re: (Score:2)
So much innovation ...
Whew! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The Twitter Video Storyboard (Score:3)
Second 2: Create a service that allows people to post and view super-abbreviated blog posts
Second 3: Buy a video service, integrate with your existing service
Second 4: Limit videos to six seconds
Second 5: ?????
Second 6: Profit!
I've never understood... (Score:2)
I mean, 140 characters made sense in an era before widespread smartphones, where the average person only had a phone capable of receiving SMSes and carriers often charged per message.
But its 2013, we've got faster internet connections via mobile networks than what most of us used to have back home ten years ago. With all this added bandwidth you think we'd be overcoming limitations, not adding in more.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I can say "Fuck You!" 14 times in six seconds. That should be enough to get my point across.
Ah, but you could say it 17.5 times textually in a tweet, which is far more efficient. Oddly enough, I still don't get your point. Repeating yourself does not make it clearer. Are you upset at the poster, Twitter, Vine, or yourself?
Re: (Score:2)
140 characters is enough for me to correct your grammar (more readable, not more clear) and still say it 4 times.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:I've never understood... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I should start a twitter for intellects, and require > 140 characters to post.
Not.
XXXX XXXX xxxx xxx XXXX xxxxx XXXX (stupid word count filter for posts) xxx XXXX
(^^ example of a post on your twitter for intellects site :-) )
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Twitter is almost never just 140 characters. Rather, it is 10 words of description and then a shortened URL to who-knows-what.
That's just people thinking they're outsmarting the system by working around it because they're not smart enough to realize why the limit is there. And you're free to decide their shortened URL isn't worth following. I ignore all tweets that contain a shortened URL if they don't adequately describe what they're sending me to. And I ignore all Twitterers (Twitterheads?) who use shortened URLs in every other tweet. People who post or read that stuff deserve what they get -- it's like watching (or appearing on
Re: (Score:2)
You used more than 140 characters in your post, this detracts from your argument.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that you control who you follow, it's you own fault for following people that post links and not text. Very little content in the twitter feed of people I follow even has links.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Twitter is almost never just 140 characters. Rather, it is 10 words of description and then a shortened URL to who-knows-what. There's very little meaningful information that can be conveyed via video in 6 seconds.
In 140 characters you can learn whether or not you want to follow the link. (Or the tweeter.) It's brilliant.
Not sure what 6 seconds of video can do, but I'm interested in finding out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
See the relevant xkcd strip [xkcd.com].
Not always, no. You can send an SMS from a hell of a lot more territory than you can get a data connection.
Re: (Score:2)
Simple: Twitter has to pay for SMS gateway access to receive tweets from people's phones. They get special bulk rates which would have to be adjusted higher to compensate for the extra bandwidth if they accepted multi-part SMS traffic. To get the cheapest rate they keep the limit to the max length of a single SMS message.
Even in this era of widespread smartphones with high speed cellular data and WiFi connectivity, the SMS functionality is implemented as a kludge on top of the old voice protocol. That imple
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The limited size of messages ensures that they will be devoid of any useful content.
Most of them are "Look! a squirrel!" type messages and can be ignored. They do fit well with the attention span of many people.
I think the problem is that the bandwidth of people has shrunk to Twitter size.
Gif vs Vine (Score:2)
I wonder, is the vine format smaller than gif? Lots of small gifs all around, so no reason they couldnt be placed if devices can view them.
Only problem I can think of, I want to be able to see them on my android phone and laptop and no viewer yet?
Not sure what all the hate is, its like people dont like new tech around here.
GIF vs. AVC (Score:2)
is the vine format smaller than gif?
I'd assume so. MPEG-4 AVC is a much more efficient codec for live-action moving images than GIF animation.
Re: (Score:2)
At six seconds, you could fit the whole video into one GOP.
GOP in one GOP (Score:1)
Wont anyone think of the copywrite infringement!?! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
attention span (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
to be fair most of their demographic wouldn't know how to count to 140 if it wasnt for twitter
so its really helping society by extending these peoples attention span to 6 seconds
Re: (Score:3)
I have a long, detailed reply to this -- hang on
YTMND (Score:3)
Just long enough for an "Ow My Balls!" segment... (Score:5, Funny)
Yep, it's all coming together. As It Was Foretold.
Pointless (Score:3)
Oww! My Balls! (Score:2)
WarioWare: You must DIY! (Score:2)
6 seconds of porn? (Score:2)
a replica of (Score:1)
6 Seconds? (Score:2)
What if you have a stut.. a stut... a stut... a stutter-LIMIT OF VIDEO LENGTH
The Scourge of Digital Minimalism: TwitterBits (Score:2)
Never thought I'd see the day when arbitrarily imposed 'less', and not cleverly achieved 'more' -- becomes the fad and business model. It is perverse, evolution in reverse, an ill wind.
Imagine folks abandoning Twitter en mass on the announcement of a competitor with a 139 character limit. And so on until we are down to a single bit.
I can see it now, some people will log on to TwitterBit to twit ones, some twit zeroes. If my TwitterBit matches yours we are best friends forever, if it does not we are enemies
perfect match (Score:3)
140 character messages, 5 second video clips, and iOS-only.