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

XCancel service is suspended until further notice

xcancel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 787 posts

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#421

Post by charcircuit »

immibis2 wrote: post #324
Klonoar wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scraping is legal, but IIRC scraping authenticated contents is not. Isn't Nitter abusing account sign-in for this?

Anyone can make an account, though, and instantly access that content, so Elon doesn't really have any leg to stand on by claiming they're private. It's not the same as Cambridge Analytica scraping stuff you had to have certain privileges to see by tricking the system into granting those privileges.

But if they ban the nitter operator surely you can't just bypass that ban legally by making a new X account. That there are bans and the operator has to bypass bans by pretending to be a new person I think that this makes it different.

It's like a club that checks ids to ban people. I wouldn't call that club open to the general public.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#425

Post by freedomben »

angoragoats wrote: post #138
freedomben wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very much on the side of xcancel and nitter on this one, but I do think it's fair to point out that Twitter is free of monetary charge. It's not free in the sense that you do have to provide some personal information and data to them in exchange for that free account, but it isn't a huge roadblock for most people, however annoying it may be. Now that said, I sure hope Elon will pivot this and make these services…

The phrase "free speech" does not typically mean "free as in beer," rather it means "free as in freedom," so in this case you're conflating the two meanings of "free" in English. The fact that Twitter is login-gated makes it objectively less free as in freedom.

Indeed, fair point. I've conflated those in my comment above!

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#426

Post by xyst »

newscracker wrote: post #113

This may be a situation where revealing a solution may end up harming it. For those who use iOS and other Apple OSes, I learned of this recently released free Safari extension called Litterbox that allows looking at one post on x.com. [1]: https://andadinosaur.com/launch-litterbox

With alternatives available:

- bluesky - mastodon

Why does anybody (that’s not some right wing, white Christian nationalist nut job) still use twitter?

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#427

Post by squeegmeister »

maipen wrote: post #362
harrisoned wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same reason is wrong to require a Google or Apple phone to exercise basic civil duties within government services. You are gating the service, or information, behind a 3rd party ToS, a login, and basically stating that you are not allowed to have it until you hand over personal data to such companies.

Why is it wrong? Is it wrong to require people to use certain tools? I don’t think so. It’s the same thing as requiring dress code to go to the tribunal or anything formal. People here overthink so much about this topic.

Because the owner of said tool is a white nationalist

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#428

Post by butlike »

spuz wrote: post #404
rusk wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ineptitude. Of course it is. Otherwise it would be indefensible. EDIT in which I clumsily express my weariness at hearing some of the smartest people in the world claim they “didn’t know” because they have arbitrated foolishness against liability

The decision to force you to sign in to view replies is clearly not by accident or ineptitude. It's probably not malice either - just a business decision.

So business decisions are absolved of morality?

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#429

Post by angoragoats »

weberer wrote: post #190
angoragoats wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is. It seems self-evident to me that the speech on Twitter is more free when it isn't behind a login wall. How could it not be? If you'd like to provide an actual counter-argument, I'd be happy to consider it.

"Freedom of speech" means you are allowed to express your opinion without fear of being censored or persecuted for it. It is not the same kind of "free" as in "no cost". Twitter is a paid service. To access Twitter, you have to pay for it. Either by purchasing a subscription or viewing ads. Think of it as having to buy a newspaper before being able to read it. That doesn't stop the paper's editors from being able to…

> "Freedom of speech" means you are allowed to express your opinion without fear of being censored or persecuted for it.

This is one way to define it, yes, but Musk is a self-described “free speech absolutist” which I would argue means that he feels speech should be maximally free.

> It is not the same kind of "free" as in "no cost".

I have never meant it in that way, and I’m not sure why you thought I did.

> To access Twitter, you have to pay for it. Either by purchasing a subscription or viewing ads.

This is possibly pedantic but this statement as written is false. I can view single tweets just fine, and I don’t see ads.

> Think of it as having to buy a newspaper before being able to read it. That doesn't stop the paper's editors from being able to criticize the government.

That analogy doesn’t really work here, IMO. My only point is that it’s objectively true that speech behind a login wall is less free (as in freedom) than speech not behind a login wall, and so a (non-hypocritical) “free speech absolutist” should always prefer the latter.

Re: XCancel service is suspended until further notice

#430

Post by treyd »

spuz wrote: post #404
rusk wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ineptitude. Of course it is. Otherwise it would be indefensible. EDIT in which I clumsily express my weariness at hearing some of the smartest people in the world claim they “didn’t know” because they have arbitrated foolishness against liability

The decision to force you to sign in to view replies is clearly not by accident or ineptitude. It's probably not malice either - just a business decision.

A system that makes "business decisions" indistinguishable from malice is an interesting one.
Post reply on HN