Live data from Hacker News

XCancel service is suspended until further notice

xcancel.com

331–340 of 787 posts

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#332

Regardless of the legality of the service: I always use xcancel instead of X. I don't have a twitter account and I don't want to sign in. I just occasionally want to read what some people had to say about something. Even this is usually a mistake. It's probably better taken as entertainment. My point is: companies stop making your product suck, and people won't have a reason to try and fix it for you.

The problem companies have is that "doesn't suck" generally means "it's free with no ads". The internet has this innate expectation that everything digital be totally free and have no form of tracking or ads, or if it does have ads/tracking, that you are trivially capable of blocking them while still totally enjoying the service/product. xcancel, archive, whatever are all tools almost solely meant to access monetized…

Your comment seems to implicitly assume that X has some ethical claim to the content they're monetizing, when in fact they're trying to monetize _others'_ content.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the correct action is to either create a competitor, or point money/ad views at a competitor. But like I said, the internet is largely unwilling to do this. You won't make a competitor that is a charity, and the internet at large won't point dollars and ad-views at a nascent start-up in the space.

None of that has to do with blocking the content behind a login wall. X can still serve ads just fine to non-logged in users. I'm against the site running ads, at all, I'm against mandatory account creation. The internet ran ad supported without mandatory accounts for years.

True, and Britain ruled the waves with wooden warships for a long time. But if they went back to wooden warships they would not rule the waves. The world has changed. Adblock, archive.is, third party mirrors all exist today.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems you're right. They have done this in the past though, so wouldn't exactly be a surprise. Here is what the "free speech" platform have censored previously on GitHub: > X Corp. employs various technical protection measures to control access to its copyrighted works, including those at issue here (API schemas and platform content): e.g., official X Corp. API key/OAuth authentication, rate-limiting mechanisms, prop…

I thought the US courts decided that APIs aren’t copyrightable, and the rest of it is not their content.

Does things like that even matter anymore? Lots of things shouldn't be what they are, and vice-versa, yet no one seem to do anything. If Microsoft listens to the demands of XCorp, then that's the reality, regardless of what courts say.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Capital interests have this innate expectation that everything must be profitable. What rubs me the wrong way about statements like this, is that it is almost always said by people who totally miss that they are advocating for things that are personally profitable for them. A website that allows you to skirt paywalls, is immensely profitable to the end user. That same end user, who detests the idea of having to spen…

> A website that allows you to skirt paywalls, is immensely profitable to the end user. login wall != paywall As for your apples:oranges comparison about maximizing money, which group do you suppose has an unfair advantage these days? Modern Capitalism Is Weirder Than You Think: It also no longer works as advertised https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/how-asset-managers-h... ( https://archive.is/wSmtd )

All the evidence in the world that corporations are greedy doesn't detract from the fact the end users are also greedy.

It's all greed, all the ways down.

I also can't read the article, not going to make an account, and I stand by not backdooring.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#337
post #99

Maybe instead of trying to get rid of services that provide a more convenient access to X to non-logged-in users, they should realize that there is a real market behind these services - users that will likely never sign up to X, but who want to read/watch some content without the incessant nagging and limitations that X subjects non-logged-in users to?

That’s not a market. You are not exchanging anything of value. It’s a public service. One might as well lament that Ferrari doesn’t offer cars to the millions of people who would gladly take one for free.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the correct action is to either create a competitor, or point money/ad views at a competitor. But like I said, the internet is largely unwilling to do this. You won't make a competitor that is a charity, and the internet at large won't point dollars and ad-views at a nascent start-up in the space.

None of that has to do with blocking the content behind a login wall. X can still serve ads just fine to non-logged in users. I'm against the site running ads, at all, I'm against mandatory account creation. The internet ran ad supported without mandatory accounts for years.

You can rest assured, 100%, that account walls are also there for money.

I'd be tickled if you argue that corporations create friction for any other reason than money.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Reddit has also started blocking signed out users in my region.

They are now telling me that I need an account to use old.reddit.com (the only usable version of Reddit UI). Needless to say, I have stopped visiting Reddit completely.

FWIW, Old Reddit Redirect manages to somehow still be usable without a user.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#340
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love how the content belongs to them when someone else reposts it but it belongs to the user if the content is illegal. Such a double standard with these social media and AI companies. Why do we put up with it?

Did the users of X consent to XCancel copying their posts to their servers?

How do you know data is copied to their servers?

> If you serve as a mere conduit for automatic transmission of user communications, there are no other qualifications or obligations you need to meet. If you serve a caching function, in addition to the two requirements above, you must maintain comply with the notice-and-takedown process.

https://www.copyright.gov/512/

https://internetcases.com/2024/02/12/dmca-subpoena-to-mere-c...

Post reply on HN