Live data from Hacker News

Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

github.com

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are all posting their updates on X - because, like the users, they have no choice, because no alternative exists. The fediverse is a viable alternative. But most non-tech people don't know about it.

> The fediverse is a viable alternative Bluesky attracted socialist progressives, furries, and kink-positive folks early on. I'm not making any value statements, and there's nothing wrong with the userbase, but this is what dominates the feed for new users. A lot of people are turned off by that when they see it as their first experience with the platform. Or they're actively turned away upon interaction. That's not…

> Despite stated intentions, I think these platforms want to stay small and niche and non mainstream.

I think that's essentially it, whether they are doing it intentionally or not.

Running a social network is like curating a party or conference. Who you do and don't let participate, and who you do and don't promote above others, is essentially the product. And that is a lot of work.

Open protocols don't solve any of these problems, and people who care about open protocols don't tend to be the same people interested in curating giant parties and conferences for a mass audience.

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#732

who cares about c&d? just host it outside of us

I've always found it baffling that more projects by folks that disagree with copyright, access controls, etc aren't hosted in places where the cease and desist won't work.

It's like, you're doing something to annoy a large company with lots of legal resources, and you host everything in the US? Why?

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#734

Why have we let X (et al) have total control over the content posted by the users ? Why do the users agree to the limits imposed by them and let the platform decide who gets to see the content they posted ? Because they're offering the infrastructure. The tech for such a network is now within reach of many, but these apps are heavily dominated by network effects and that makes it impossible for competing apps to take…

Whatever happened to "Twitter can do what it wants, it's a private platform"?

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#735
post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to comply with a cease and desist notice, depending on your risk tolerance. They're not legally binding, like court orders. Rather, they are threats, equivalent to "gimme your lunch money or I'll beat you up"

It depends on how deep your pockets are, not risk tolerance. And the manbaby in charge will absolutely go after you.

That's risk tolerance. You can even choose not to have a lawyer (but you shouldn't) and then it costs you very little until you lose.

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are all posting their updates on X - because, like the users, they have no choice, because no alternative exists. The fediverse is a viable alternative. But most non-tech people don't know about it.

> The fediverse is a viable alternative Bluesky attracted socialist progressives, furries, and kink-positive folks early on. I'm not making any value statements, and there's nothing wrong with the userbase, but this is what dominates the feed for new users. A lot of people are turned off by that when they see it as their first experience with the platform. Or they're actively turned away upon interaction. That's not…

Is that not precisely how Twitter built their original social network...?

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are all posting their updates on X - because, like the users, they have no choice, because no alternative exists. The fediverse is a viable alternative. But most non-tech people don't know about it.

> The fediverse is a viable alternative Bluesky attracted socialist progressives, furries, and kink-positive folks early on. I'm not making any value statements, and there's nothing wrong with the userbase, but this is what dominates the feed for new users. A lot of people are turned off by that when they see it as their first experience with the platform. Or they're actively turned away upon interaction. That's not…

You're right

I'd say Mastodon at this point is mostly people talking in a vacuum (even more than BlueSky)

No mainstream discussion or debate comes from Mastodon, you don't see screenshots around (and you do see skeets around)

As much as SpaceXAi lost audience, there's a lot of discussion still going around there

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because open protocols were abandoned, because they generally lacked security, discoverability, and perhaps most significantly of all, moderation. Even FINGER had .plan files, where you could get status updates from people. But how are you going to query whose plans you want to read, and who is going to moderate without centralisation? It's the moderation in particular that dooms most federalised efforts. The web its…

The requirement for strong moderation only exists *because* of centralization. If I'm looking at a linear feed of content, it has to be curated by someone. In the old days, content on the internet was mostly links between webpages -- the "web" if you will. If i like the content on a page, it'll link to other pages i may like, and I'm free to follow those links at will, and no third party moderation is required. Contr…

Well, replies to a post also require moderation. In general, if you want people to ever see something created by people outside of their explicitly chosen friends: moderation.

(Plenty of people don't want that, or would at least prefer interacting only with their explicitly chosen friends if they were forced to choose between that and unmoderated public access. For them, group chats on Signal/WhatsApp/Telegram suffice.)

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#739

Why have we let X (et al) have total control over the content posted by the users ? Why do the users agree to the limits imposed by them and let the platform decide who gets to see the content they posted ? Because they're offering the infrastructure. The tech for such a network is now within reach of many, but these apps are heavily dominated by network effects and that makes it impossible for competing apps to take…

>Why have we let X (et al) have total control over the content posted by the users ?

Because it is a private enterprise that you signed up for. You don't have a right to Twitter. You don't have a right to Facebook. If you don't like it, leave. The entitlement is massive here. These sites are poison in so many ways. Stop feeding the beast.

Re: Nitter and XCancel receive cease and desist notices

#740
post #729

Twitter is just bots and nazis today, not really worth trying to save

"Elites" of both left and right stay because no matter how much they hate Elon they still need to be in the same country club with other elites. That always takes precedence.

Remember the uniparty.

Post reply on HN