211–220 of 764 posts
Are there other instances available? X can't ban them all. I wish legal issues wouldn’t exist for this project and X would stop attacking projects that provide information for free. Privacy is important more than ever as many of us don't want to login into X.
Consider running your own to spread out the HN/Slashdot effect.
IMO, if you hate Elon so much, you shouldn't be visiting his website. You look very odd and silly if you still want to engage with it and just use a different UI layer (i.e., "XCancel", "Nitter".) If they want you to have an account to read the post and you want to read the post, create an account, log in, and move on. If you don't want to do that, nobody is forcing you to view a public website. There's alternatives…
There is no reason for xcancel to exist. Either you cancel X. Meaning: NOT consuming X content. Or you just visit X.com. Right? Right?
Xcancel allows HN users and adjacent to swear that they have left Twitter because it has nothing to offer them because its all shit, but still consume Twitter content because every other similar platform really sucks and is boring and has no content
Earlier quoted context omitted.
but how to do that without protecting the content from enemy LLM companies scraping?
On the off chance someone thinks this is serious, being locked behind a login doesn't prevent your site from being scraped.
Xitter can't make a web UI that's actually usable to save their lives - so they're going after the one platform that does with lawfare. Despicable behavior.
This to me is a big issue. You have politicians, government entities and other public institutions posting to twitter, but to access we need to log in. There needs to be a free, non-ad, non-login environment people can use to access this information posted by public entities. This comment also applies to facebook too, which I think is even worse than twitter.
RSS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no reason for xcancel to exist A bit like your comment. It's possible that other people you want to read, are using a platform you don't want to use. Have this perhaps never happened to you, even once?
A good idea would be: Make a decision. A trade-off. Either these people are important enough to you, and you don't disfavor the platform soo much. Then visit that platform. Or you dislike the platform so much that you even wonder why these people are there. You definitely don't want to be in contact with the platform. If so, then give up these people. There's no free lunch, right? You also (typically) cannot buy stea…
If you don’t like X, I don’t understand why anyone would use a service like XCancel, which effectively helps maintain the cultural relevance of X. On a practical level, I’m also wondering what consistent legal standard people want when it comes to things like terms of service and individuals' copyright. It's unworkable to maintain one rule for the awesome people we might like and and another rule for the horrible des…
I don't have an X account, and I only use xcancel when someone sends me a link. The reason it's impossible to completely avoid both of them, at least in my corner of the world is that a lot of public organisms seem to think publishing information online exclusively on Twitter is okay, and if you complain they tend to ignore you (I admit I haven't tried complaining about it on Twitter, which seems to be the only thing…
If they post on Reddit, it gets lost in the sea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precedent is pretty clear: competitive uses bad, transformative uses good. Xcancel scrapes and then competes directly with X, whereas LLM labs scrape the internet to make an agentic intelligent bot, a transformative use of the scraped content.
> Xcancel scrapes and then competes directly with X, whereas LLM labs scrape the internet to make an agentic intelligent bot, a transformative use of the scraped content. It seems unreasonable to stop there though; the agentic bots are designed and marketed as able to compete with the initially-scraped sources. I'm not convinced that a competitive use at one remove should be treated as not competitive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe if people didn't make services like XCancel, the impracticality of X would be more salient.
It isn't. We know this because there was a time before xcancel and people just accepted they needed an account. It can happen - nobody would post an Instagram link to HN. But for X it did not happen. Notice the EU's Digital Markets Act is a liability shield for Nitter instances hosted in the EU.