Comments on: A status update from 1940

By: Montana Flynn

Montana Flynn — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:22:32 +0000

Very original post!

By: Ryan Kuder

Ryan Kuder — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 19:20:38 +0000

Human behavior has remained fairly constant throughout time. What has changed are the tools that facilitate this behavior. With all the fancy social networking tools we’ve got now, we’re really just doing the same things we’ve always done. The innovation is in the efficiency with which we do those things.

By: Lesley

Lesley — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:37:41 +0000

HI,

I think it’s important not to be too ahistorical here. In London in the middle to late 19th century, for example, it was possible to post a letter in the morning and know that the recipient would be able to read it the same day and pen a reply. In mayn ways, electronic communications have brought to many, many more people, the ability to communicate quickly in writing that used to be the privilege of only a few.

By: Gentry Underwood

Gentry Underwood — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:49:48 +0000

*love this* — i had a very similar experience last week.. http://socialsoftware.org/ka9etp/

By: Hans

Hans — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:04:08 +0000

According to http://www.westegg.com/inflation/,
one cent in 1940 equals ~16 cents in 2008. Add to that the cost of the postcard itself. Let’s say add another 84 current cents there to make a dollar for the message.

I wonder if a tweet cost a buck how that would that change the way we communicate.

By: Sanjay Kairam

Sanjay Kairam — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:13:21 +0000

Hi Chris – thanks for posting that image – it definitely made the post!

A number of people have posted previously about the derivation of the 140 character limit on Twitter – i.e it was derived from SMS > telegrams? > textile looms? (that’s totally made up, I’m sure – I really don’t remember).

I actually think that at some level it points to what we (at least the English-speaking ‘we’, but perhaps all of us) perceive as a base unit of conversation. If you were to take a survey of naturally-occurring sentences, I wonder if they might average out to about 140 characters.

Maybe there’s nothing particularly snack-sized about now vs. then?

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:52:38 +0000

Trippy.

By: Marshall Kirkpatrick

Marshall Kirkpatrick — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 04:55:47 +0000

i like it. that said, I think the ease of publishing and consumption has changed so radically that the behavior has changed pretty substantially between now and then.