Live data from Hacker News

Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

imgur.com

61–70 of 259 posts

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#61
post #22

A lot of people here are jumping to conclusions based on what could simply be a bug. Why not wait 24hrs and see if this is actually some policy or just a mistake.

The logic of social media pileons is too pervasive at this point. As you can see upthread, a lot of people genuinely believe that they’re morally obligated to join these kind of pileons precisely because there’s not much information available; if we don’t apply pressure, there’ll never be a full investigation and they will get away with it! (And I very much include myself in "people" here, I've been there before many times.)

I think you just have to accept these days that when you go on an online platform you’ll see a few outrage mobs gathered around some tiny scrap of information. It’s like walking into a nightclub and asking people why they won’t drink more responsibly.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#62
post #22

A lot of people here are jumping to conclusions based on what could simply be a bug. Why not wait 24hrs and see if this is actually some policy or just a mistake.

They will of course say that it's a bug otherwise they're in potential great trouble.

But "why" that "bug" was there in the first place is another issue.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#63

May I suggest nitter.net - an open source, javascript-free alternative front-end to twitter to help you wean off.

Wouldn't you still not be able to post the link as it's hitting the same servers/API?

Remembering that this is happening on a platform where many celebrities' accounts were totally compromised, I wouldn't be super surprised if they've implemented client-side filtering.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#64

Not surprising. Social networks have been known to block smaller competitors. After all, it’s their right to as a private company. Isn’t that how that works? Everyone always says that, and this is a case of that.

No, this is arguably "monopolization", which is illegal under the Sherman Act. Even the 9th Circuit, which has adopted an implausibly broad reading of 230, does not think that 230 is a defense against antitrust claims.

The word monopoly unfortunately invites all sorts of pedantry about whether a company is a monopoly (and it goes on endlessly because people can play a game of quibbling about exactly what 'the market' is). Twitter is obviously a powerful player in the social media market, whether or not it is a monopoly. You don't need to be a monopoly to engage in anti-competitive behavior.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#65
post #56
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are a private company Not yet. Twitter is still a publicly owned company.

When people talk about "private companies" they're referring to entities that are not government-owned/controlled. Being listed on the stock market does not change that.

It feels redundant. How many government companies are there in the US?

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#66
This is likely the same reason that sometimes links on FB can't be pasted. There's a spike in usage and some anti-spam mechanism blocks it. Which makes sense, but sometimes catches the wrong URL just like every spam filter.

Give it a day, move along.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#67
post #11

I bet it's likely a bug. There were times i wasnt able to post LinkedIn urls in the past. I bet it's their crawler/integrity service having hard time. Never assume malice when it can be sufficiently explained by a bug or incompetence.

Plausible deniability. Design the system in a way that it'd pick up competitor links as spam (without directly blacklisting them explicitly) using fine-tuned training data. In case of media attention, tell it's an error and ML algorithms are blackboxes, and take action to "whitelist" those domains only when needed. Yeah, we buy it, Twitter.

Design a better one and there will be companies looking to acquire you. Problem solved, in a more constructive way.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#68
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> After all, it’s their right to as a private company. Isn’t that how that works? Everyone always says that, and this is a case of that. Unless I missed it, until you wrote this nobody had argued it wasn't their right to do this.

It's their right but it's still crummy. I want Section 230 to be repealed.

In other words, you want every website to be held liable for all user generated content on their platform, which would benefit every large social media (because smaller ones wouldn't be able to afford to moderate every single post), leading to them becoming even more of a monopoly?

Or do you have something concrete in mind on what to replace it with? Because just repealing it would lead to a much different Internet than it is today — and not in a good way.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#69
post #44
post #11

I bet it's likely a bug. There were times i wasnt able to post LinkedIn urls in the past. I bet it's their crawler/integrity service having hard time. Never assume malice when it can be sufficiently explained by a bug or incompetence.

Building systems that occasionally set themselves up for mistakes like this is the malice.

Please build a system with 100% availability under load and with no false positive. I'll wait.

Re: Twitter Blocks Linking to Mastodon.social

#70
post #46

Not surprising. Social networks have been known to block smaller competitors. After all, it’s their right to as a private company. Isn’t that how that works? Everyone always says that, and this is a case of that.

> After all, it’s their right to as a private company. Why do people always use the term "private company"? Twitter is a publicly owned corporation. If the Musk deal goes through, it'll be private. But I'm not sure what work the word "private" is supposed to be doing.

"Private company", in this context, means "not the government". The opposite would be "public sector", referring to the government or companies it owns/runs.
Post reply on HN