Thing about Twitter is that it's best used as a broadcasting mechanism. If you have a lot of people following you, it's a good way to broadcast links and other short bits of information. However, if that's all you do then you probably won't have much of an audience. I didn't think much of Twitter at once, but I'm starting to see it as more of a newswire thing.

No doubt lifestreaming will appeal to some people, so I do expect it to grow. Will it displace blogging? I doubt it, but I think it will pick up an audience and users who don't currently blog today because it will fit their own interests better.

Admittedly, after using Twitter for several weeks I still think the value there is pretty small, compared to blogging, because the form is so restrictive that there's very little content. If that's an example of “lifestreaming”, then I'd agree that it's low-cost, but you get what you pay for.

I read Sarah Perez' article and while it might be the way blogging will go, it seems at odds with the way blogging should go. Rather than trying to pack more and more non-content onto a single page, we need tools that will present the content in an elegant, readable form, and help people to find real content and not have to slog through all the “Going to lunch now” Twittering noise.

While this sort of web site might have helped Julia Allison (who?) achieve some level of fame, I think Perez mistakes a handful of success stories for a web-wide trend. How many non-success stories are there are every Julia Allison, and how many people are reading them?

It's good to hear from another introvert about this.