I have to say I like the 280 char limit. It feels like legal cannabis. Something that was once forbidden that now is OK. It's like what, I can do that! Wow.#

One of the reasons 280 chars is great is that it means that links I post to Facebook can have longer descriptions. It may seem counter-intuitive, but I use Radio3 to post my links, to Twitter, Facebook, to my linkblog and to an RSS feed. I don't write different versions for each environment, so what you get is the least common denominator. Which is Twitter. When they up the limit, they do it for all other platforms, at least in my world. #

I was invited to a future-of-news conference in Moscow in 2011, all expenses paid, by a Russian news agency, Ria Novosti. I said yes at first, but in the end didn't go. Something didn't seem right. Soon after, their feed redirected to Sputnik, then to RT. #

Lindsey Graham this $5 is yours if you vote against the Repub tax bill.#

The 2017 election proved that the way out of our mess is with the people, not the pre-Internet political parties. This is true for everything, really. For tech, for news as well as politics. The institutions may fail, but that's not the end.#

In 2013 I wrote a piece on why men stay silent re sexual harassment. #

Re Google and antitrust, a little story. I have an Android phone. When it rings, if they think it's a spam caller, the screen goes red and there's a label under the number that says it's probably spam. I trust Google to not use this feature to censor political opinions, though technically they could, and we would never know. I want to believe they're saying it's spam because it is spam. The same way I trust Google not lower the rank of a site because it doesn't support HTTPS. The fact that they do this, and are open about it, means I don't trust the whole move to HTTPS that they're trying to force on the internet, without any public debate, oversight or recourse. This is exactly the kind of thing Google, a company, not an elected government, should not be doing. #