Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
121–130 of 266 posts
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#122Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Twitter potentially bears liability by hosting them into the future, and is only willing to bear that liability if you agree to their terms.
Except that Section 230 explicitly states that they don't bear liability.
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
To what end? You already assume Twitter has a shorter lifespan than the internet. Are you going to be upset when Twitter dies, removing not just all the accounts of live people, but dead people as well? Also, Twitter may disagree with you on its lifespan. I wouldn't, but I do believe that unless they do start archiving, it will reduce its lifespan, perhaps considerably.
This is why I really don't like the recent trend of third party sites dynamically embedding tweets on their own page when a screenshot plus direct link could have sufficed. The internet has already lost a great deal of its past with many historical image hosts that went down or rogue (looking at you Photobucket). Why are people making the same mistake again? BTW Facebook have had the option to memorialize the profile…
Even migrating those to Pocket (which I hope doesn't do similarly, though it remains all but useless), I've got hundreds of link-shortened articles I need to track down, one by one.
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#125This is actually useful for me. The name of my new company is taken by a 10 year old account that has never tweeted, and I haven’t managed to find somebody at Twitter who can get the name for me. Does anybody know what’s going to happen to the names? Are they going to become available to register on 11th Dec? I hope somebody isn’t waiting there with a dictionary to squat them all...
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
What sort of change?
Any change that prompts you to re-accept? Just like twitters in this instance.
So if you fell under the free tier then I'm curious if it would continue to run indefinitely.
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#127Time for a regular reminder that Twitter's namespace is the sole property of Twitter, Inc.
We should really get about replacing it. How's Mastodon holding up? I could never get over the ridiculous name or "toots", but if it scales we should really be using it instead. Another thing that shocks me is that ads actually pay for Twitter. How did they build such a massive company (expensive employees and outsized market cap) on ad revenue? It seems like the wrong demographics for ads to actually work and persua…
But in terms of namespace, domain-name, and instance issues, you've got pretty much all your traditional Internet concerns, with a few new twists added.
My first primary instance has gone the way of the dodo, and its domain is now parked somewhere entirely different (https://mammouth.cafe). Numerous other instances have also come and gone.
My current instance, run initially by an anonymous administrator, was transferred to a Japanese concern, who don't do much to keep anyone advised of service outages or their causes/resolution. This is an instance with 56k registered users, large by Mastodon standards.
Then there are the issues with blocking and federation, which don't immediately concern namespace, but could as blocked instances die, and potentially others occupy their namespace, or they change their identity to evade blocks.
There's been a lot of agitation over the dot-org PIR self-dealing and corruption, as that's a fairly commonly-used TLD, either directly by instances or for related resources. The whole DNS / registry system is a bit of a mess.
The fact that between the Internet and DNS there's no real allowance made for either space or time is becoming an increasing stress point. What solutions might exist isn't clear, but assumptions of the 1970s and 1980s are not being sustained 30-40 years later.
As I've noted a few times recently, a dictionary bibliographic entry typically consists of little more than name, dates, nationality, and profession. Webster's 11 Collegiate includes some 6,000 or so such entries. There are roughly 1 million times more people than that now living, and another 100 or 200x more who have ever lived.
In digital systems, there is no distinction between use and mention -- the name is the thing and the thing is the name. This is convenient in narrow scopes (time, place, scale), and ... exceedingly inconvenient over broad scopes (time, place, scale). UUIDs address the collision problem but not the convenience. Convenient shortcuts address convenience, but not uniqueness requirements.
Since meatspace identity is who you are, and other references (names, nicknames, registration numbers, etc.) are not identities but identifiers, the problems aren't as manifest. Your actual identity cannot be merged with another (though numerous related aspects and relations can be). Online, if A and B are suddenly both called "A", then they are both "A".
I think we'll be sorting this out for a while yet.
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#128Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#129I think the reaction shows how much the internet has changed - and, to be honest - how much the tech crowd has been seduced by the idea that all data should be around forever.
I think this is a great descision by Twitter in terms of user privacy.
Re: Twitter prepares for cull of inactive users
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
I worked with a guy who died of a heart attack. Every year LinkedIn asks me to congratulate him having worked X+N years at the company. You have to wonder when they'll give up.
I follow an acquaintance on Twitter who set up an auto-tweet while he was alive. Now, after his death, he still tweets whenever the weather drops below a certain temperature in Scotland.