1–10 of 14 posts
"See more Tweets from Paul Graham When you log in you’ll be able to see every Tweet from Paul Graham."
So it did almost the exact same thing Instagram does if you're not logged in. Anyone else seeing the same thing?
One-way communications are not what motivates people to post anything. I would compare it to actively listening in to other people's conversations at a restaurant. Could be done, but that's not the motivation for having conversations at restaurants.
I am not affiliated in any way, other than using it sometimes to skim a twitter link.
Try the "Thread Reader app" (note, not really an 'app', it is a website) https://threadreaderapp.com/ I am not affiliated in any way, other than using it sometimes to skim a twitter link.
To be fair, if you don't even have an account, I wouldn't want you freely combing through everything I've ever posted or commented on for all history either. One-way communications are not what motivates people to post anything. I would compare it to actively listening in to other people's conversations at a restaurant. Could be done, but that's not the motivation for having conversations at restaurants.
If this restriction was out of concern for their users, they'd let them toggle it.
To be fair, if you don't even have an account, I wouldn't want you freely combing through everything I've ever posted or commented on for all history either. One-way communications are not what motivates people to post anything. I would compare it to actively listening in to other people's conversations at a restaurant. Could be done, but that's not the motivation for having conversations at restaurants.
And yet Twitter waited until after it got hundreds of millions of users to start limiting visibility. I wonder if it would have gotten so popular if it worked this way from the start? Along with the mandatory phone-number to sign-up (that they still aren't up-front about, letting you sign-up and then auto-locking your account until you provide your phone). If this restriction was out of concern for their users, they'…
The phone thing is a different issue - one that I've noticed on a lot of other sites. It's always under the guise of 2FA, even if you don't enable that. It's an obvious data grab.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And yet Twitter waited until after it got hundreds of millions of users to start limiting visibility. I wonder if it would have gotten so popular if it worked this way from the start? Along with the mandatory phone-number to sign-up (that they still aren't up-front about, letting you sign-up and then auto-locking your account until you provide your phone). If this restriction was out of concern for their users, they'…
Yes, I agree with that - it should be a user toggle instead of a "walled garden" automagically applied to everyone. Especially after it was determined that posts from the president are Presidential communications, which by default (legally) are public. That suggests you shouldn't have to log in to read everything current and past public servants have posted. The phone thing is a different issue - one that I've notice…
It's a different manifestation of the same issue - bait & switch. Get popular, then implement user-hostile features.
Just use nitter.net
However, since that page can be a little outdated (because the wiki page needs to be manually updated), you can also try out this live Nitter instances status page: https://xnaas.github.io/nitter-instances/
Since the main nitter.net instance can be rate limited at times, I highly recommend testing out the other Nitter instances out there and find one that is both consistently online and doesn't get rate limited.