Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#391

Post by johannes1234321 »

cmckn wrote: post #208
consumer451 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what percentage of legitimate traffic is blocked by this. I would imagine that the majority of users don't have an account, by a large margin, correct?

I would not assume that, no. Following accounts is fundamental to using Twitter; I absolutely think the majority of people using Twitter are logged-in.

There are tons of usages of Twitter which don't need an account. All those Twitter links on this site for isntance. Some of them provide interesting input, however the urge to participate in those threads is low, as the need to follow those authors. The browser I use for HN is not signed in to twitter. Neither is my phone, where I sometimes get Twitter links in messages from friends.

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#392

Post by onlypositive »

twicetwice wrote: post #300
Terr_ wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me the main barrier is that I want to have portable/roaming control over my IDENTITY , even if the content hosting is (for now) entirely through a system administered by someone else. If I control the identity, I can at least keep local copies and rehost/repost content later. Instead, it feels like the current Fediverse demands that I make a blind choice to entrust not merely a copy of my content but also my whol…

This is basically the entire point of the Authenticated Transfer Protocol (AT Protocol), which powers Bluesky. I think it does a ton of stuff right, including portable identity backed by solid cryptography (no blockchain or "crypto"!) and has a lot of promise. It's still in development, but I am hopeful that it will live up to its promise.

How is this better than everyone having their own Wordpress or Drupal install?

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#393

Post by danielheath »

8note wrote: post #382
Terr_ wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me the main barrier is that I want to have portable/roaming control over my IDENTITY , even if the content hosting is (for now) entirely through a system administered by someone else. If I control the identity, I can at least keep local copies and rehost/repost content later. Instead, it feels like the current Fediverse demands that I make a blind choice to entrust not merely a copy of my content but also my whol…

This sounds like you want to self host, then federate with instances?

Not OP but I want to point my dns at a host and have them handle it.

You can pay for that service, but you have to administer the instance, and it’s not able to reuse the servers RAM for multiple domains; it’s not like email where spam management is built in.

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#395

Post by robot_no_421 »

Anybody feel like this is ironically going to accelerate the decline of twitter?

I'm never, EVER making a twitter account. However publishers still communicate with me via tweets I could see. Now that I need an account to view tweets, publishers just have a smaller audience.

I'll just see the screenshots on reddit anyway :)

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#396

Post by Dalewyn »

7e wrote: post #237
akira2501 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This version of the Internet is starting to suck. :( The internet is fine. The highly centralized businesses that built themselves on the technology are meeting their inevitable end.

Why are centralized businesses doomed to fail? It’s been the primary organizational mode for the last 10,000 years.

It's not centralized businesses that inevitably fail, it's businesses that become top dog that inevitably fail.

If you own a company and want it to last through the ages and you aren't literally the only guy in town, never become number one. Aim high, but don't hit the top.

The same can be said for countries and practically any organization or group. You stay an underdog if you do not want to ever fail.

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#397

Post by firecall »

Terr_ wrote: post #265
fluidcruft wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like lemmy too. I think the biggest issue is that people think of Lemmy itself as the replacement of reddit.com. But what makes more sense to me is thinking about Lemmy as a tool to build separate websites that are each a replacement for reddit.com and that these can interoperate with each other to grow based on the local users interests. I think the biggest hurdle is figuring out where to create your first…

> I think that's the biggest hurdle is figuring out where to create your first account. Agreed. I think the barrier would be lower if I knew I could migrate my identity to another instance if the first one became sketchy or shut down or de-federated. Instead AFAICT I have to choose not just what community to join and where the content will initially live, but also which of these random groups to trust with my identit…

Maybe we need some sort of self-identifying system.

Like SSH keys, where you manage your own identity and then share a public key to each instance that identifies you to that instance.

Like an identity client you could self manage if you wanted to. Make it optional, portable, and transferable. So you can choose to let a server host manage your identity, or migrate to a self managed identity.

If I had more time on my hands….

Re: Twitter now requires an account to view tweets

#398

Post by ronsor »

pessimizer wrote: post #264
coffeebeqn wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN doesn’t really have a business model so I’m not sure how much it can be corrupted. I guess if YCombinator ever gets tired of paying the bills , but I’d imagine having a majority(?) of startup/tech employees visit your site almost daily is quite good for them in indirect ways

I assume that if HN ever caused them any serious PR damage, they'd pull the plug that day. It's always been made clear that it's a single-server site sitting somewhere that was written as a hobby a long time ago. That kind of nothing cost they're willing to take on indefinitely, but not any serious bad media cost. I've always felt that was the reason for the heavy moderation, especially as compared to the anarchic ea…

Based on the content that gets posted, I don't think there's a way for HN to cause serious PR damage to them.
Post reply on HN