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

Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

syzito.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 241 posts

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#91

Post by pessimizer »

Aachen wrote: post #45
khaledh wrote: post #26

People should start referring to it as "Ex".

Or just stop referring to it, rather than continuing to give it attention I'm on Mastodon now, there's no need for me to talk of ex-twitter. It's not a topic that interests me

The only point is to talk about how much you hate Twitter. If they didn't talk about hating Musk and Twitter constantly, you wouldn't notice the slightest difference between their behavior pre- and post-Musk.

I honestly think the Musk hate has been gradually dialed down because the people who set mainstream agendas thought it was going to take attention away from Trump hate going into the campaign season.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#92

Post by femiagbabiaka »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #57
maximinus_thrax wrote: post #3

From another article [0]: > Vaught is mostly a Musk fan, as he's interested in Musk's electric cars and space developments. He said that this experience with X hasn't tainted his opinion of Musk or his relationship too much with X as a platform. He's holding out hope that Musk has a long-term plan for where Musk is taking X, but like many users, he's struggling to adjust to the rebranding. Vaught still refers to the…

He only hits me when I deserve it.

All hail Loviatar.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#93

Post by fluoridation »

nullfield wrote: post #81

This is the consequence of lack of self-sovereignty, along with the lack of an agreed universal naming system. That said, I’m not sure that first-come-first-wins is simultaneously fair, in such a universal environment. Nor, really, do I want it to be a “whoever can pay most gets the desirable names”, like DNS works. I don’t have a better solution right now, but acknowledge that there’s a problem with the combination/…

>Are there any solutions that are even close to … some kind of fairness, or even approximation of a system that respects… anything?

One way could be have names mean nothing in terms of identification. You can call yourself "music" if you like, but so can anyone else. You're better off calling yourself something unique and then building a following, so that future potential followers can distinguish you from copycats.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#95

Post by fluoridation »

morkalork wrote: post #31
rglullis wrote: post #23

*Never build your house on someone else's land". Episode 237.

Kind of tired of this low effort canned reply. Unless you are the literal embodiment of a state, it's always someone else's land. You're just renting it as long as you pay taxes on it. Same goes digitally. Hosting is someone else's land. Domain name registration is someone else's land. Do you say the same thing when a piracy site loses it's domain and moves yet again to another obscure tld?

Some land does, in fact, have private owners.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#96

Post by constantly »

isykt wrote: post #83
constantly wrote: post #6

I do think this is philosophically unjust, but in no way should anyone have built any brand on Twitter, particularly a generic like “music”, and not expected something like this would happen. Twitter in particular has a long and storied history of this sort of thing. I think the move should have been, if one were going to start on Twitter, to slowly funnel the largest possible portion of their 11M followers to their…

Wildly ahistorical take. 16 years ago nobody had “Diamond mine trust fund baby takes over Twitter and yoinks handles” on their bingo card for 16 years into the fucking future. In 2007, the housing market hadn’t crashed. George W Goddamn Bush was President. The Web seemed wide open for the taking, and scrappy startups seemed like fun places to share your life or your words or whatever. Vine was still more than half a…

The downside risk you’re protecting against isn’t “billionaire buys company and steals your account” but is instead the much more general, “I lose access to my account,” which you will agree is a much more likely thing to happen, particularly given that it has happened on Twitter, so it’s not exactly speculative.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#97

Post by Supermancho »

pessimizer wrote: post #87
PaulHoule wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People gotta quit bitchin' about Twitter and just move to Mastodon, Bluesky, Threads or whatever. Bankruptcy is the one language that Elon Musk will understand and it's absolutely necessary because his behavior is contagious. Donald Trump set a precedent for him and Scott Adams, only their destruction will send a message this behavior is just not cool.

There's no relationship between Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and Scott Adams other than that they're people you don't like.

> There's no relationship between Elon Musk, Donald Trump, and Scott Adams other than that they're people you don't like.

They understand how to manipulate people specifically or intrinsically. They are, each, sociopaths for better or worse.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#98

Post by verve_rat »

nullfield wrote: post #81

This is the consequence of lack of self-sovereignty, along with the lack of an agreed universal naming system. That said, I’m not sure that first-come-first-wins is simultaneously fair, in such a universal environment. Nor, really, do I want it to be a “whoever can pay most gets the desirable names”, like DNS works. I don’t have a better solution right now, but acknowledge that there’s a problem with the combination/…

Better search?

Authors of books don't call themselves Scifi P. BestAuthor, they market themselves and their books.

First come first served for @music or @movies or @whatever shouldn't really matter if you want to find content you enjoy and want to follow the author for more of the same.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#99

Post by wilde »

TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #51

When this was initially announced I saw multiple people posting on Twitter how the the non-Musk version of the company would also occasionally take over short name accounts and give them to government officials and large corporations. Some of the replies when @x and @music got transferred were also complaining about not being compensated monetarily, which honestly seems like a bizarre expectation. Elon paid $44 billi…

I mean yes Elon doesn’t want to spend money. Whether he has to would be determined by a court, if the handle owners decided to sue for unfair trade practices or the like.

Re: Jeremy Vaught spent 16 years to build @music on Twitter, then X took it away

#100

Post by Dalewyn »

It is generally (almost always) the case that user accounts on a given service are the property of said service, you merely have the privilege of using them according to terms and conditions set forth by said service.

Which is to say you shouldn't rely on them for anything critical; they can and in certain cases will be seized by said service for any or no reason at any given time. This can be said of Twitter, regardless Musk, as well as any other online service (eg: Reddit, Hacker News, Slashdot, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Netflix, Google...).

Journalism of this sort is merely stoking the emotional flames for sensationalism (clickbait!) and driving the mainstream narrative that Twitter is a goner and an evil that must be slain.

Post reply on HN