301–310 of 1001 posts
Anybody knows if these requests were happening before the login only change? Because it would be hilarious if huge scrapping operation was a bug in their javascript.
This kind of stuff is unavoidable with what's going on at Twitter. Infrastructure changes, platform changes and mass layoffs all at once. I'm actually impressed they haven't experienced more and longer outages.
True, the rate of improvements has been insane. I use it pretty often and haven't even noticed a second of unavailability even today and right now, not to say I use it 24/7 though. It's pretty obvious some people have a political bend to their hatred of Twitter so any second something isn't perfect they jump on it. It's really a sad state of affairs really.
Being unable to look at anyone's tweets doesn't count as unavailability to you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think if we fired every civil engineer tomorrow, the bridges and the highways they built would fall apart right afterwards, or even in a few months? Engineering isn't like service positions where the lack of competent personnel is felt immediately; the debt keeps growing until your whole system collapses under it one day, how far the day is in the future depends on what system you're working on.
Did you forget how people were saying that Twitter would stop working within days?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well "forced to execute" is somewhat subjective. If you are convinced leadership is doing the "wrong thing," then best to either leave or accept that you're just collecting your paycheck. In the case of Twitter, the new owner has thoroughly broken the advertising business and is trying to aggressively pursue a new version of the data business Twitter once had-- E.g. Google's Caffeine, which Twitter also eventually lo…
> Well "forced to execute" is somewhat subjective. If you are convinced leadership is doing the "wrong thing," then best to either leave or accept that you're just collecting your paycheck. Я, Unless your visa is sponsored by your employer.
And it's a tough market where 5% of IT engineers across the board have recently been let go.
Even non visa holders at Twitter have had to wait it out, sometimes months, until a suitable job was found.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly. what the fuck is this response? I hear always that centralising everything is great because efficiencies of scale: but then we have something that works as good or better and the response is; “ah yeah, but the load is so high!” Why do I care? I don't honestly give a shit about how much load you have, you could be factoring Pi on every page load; it means -nothing- to me. I kindly invite you to give more of…
Mastodon isn't truly decentralized. Every instance is its own feifdom and you have to communicate directly with them to exchange messages. This is unlike how Usenet, FidoNet, and SMTP work. They are truly decentralized as you can exchange data without directly accessing a peer's host server.
Speaking from very painful, personal experience, few things are more agitating than being forced to execute on something you fully know is a horrible idea, especially when you tried and failed to communicate this fact to the individual pushing you to go against your best judgement. Even more so when that person later loudly proclaims that they never made such a request, even when provided with written proof. I can of…
A union vote is the only way to save that platform. Either unionize or let the company die.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Complex systems like Twitter don't break overnight when you lay off the talented engineers. They deteriorate piece-by-piece, potentially over the course of many months, until the compounding effects of these problems and the growing technical debt overwhelms the team that they have left.
Which pieces have deteriorated?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> [...] it was a very old, very large startup [...] Can we start to call companies with almost 18 years old just "companies" and not startup anymore?
Totally agree with you. It was only a startup in the sense that it was still struggling to find profitability / solid market fit. As opposed to something like Amazon which grew and grew for nearly 20 years, always burning more cash than it made to fuel growth, but they understood the business really well and when they decided to optimize for profitability rather than growth, never never gone back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point of it is that it isn't a company but a standard, so if one instance owner goes crazy and patches ads in you can move to another (or your own) and keep your network
The problem there is that there's nothing stopping the crazy instance owner from retaliating by "defederating" your own instance and cutting you off from your network.
Also probably not the best argument to make in a thread whose main topic of conversation is about how one of the biggest social networks on the internet is disintegrating in real time thanks in part to the management of its owner.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I read more about this? What topics are banned?
When they say "banned", they mean "if I say grotesquely offensive things, other people will chose not to listen". You know, just like in real life. There are plenty of instances that allow abhorrent content, if that's what you want, but you can't force others to receive it.
I don't think you'd agree that it would be weird to not want your social media and what you see online to be tied to what some, for example, Saudi dudes think is acceptable at the moment.