Twitter is using its embedded JavaScript to hide tweets that have been deleted

Post by shakna » Wed, Apr 06, 2022, 10:44 AM UTC

ghayes wrote: post #101

shakna wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For what? Just so you can quickly copy one snippet and be done with it, instead of manually copying author name, content and link and spending 10 seconds to format this yourself. Unfortunately copyright law is not going to be happy with that one. [0] It's insanely complicated, but basically, as things are at the moment, the original poster has a right to retract the publication at any time. You may find yourself in…

Under US law, you’d likely be covered by fair-use so long as you’re reporting on the tweet as a news-worthy event (versus, say, asking for lols).

Post by numeri » Wed, Apr 06, 2022, 10:54 AM UTC

account-5 wrote: post #151

Disclaimer: I'm not a web developer nor a journalist/blogger, whatever. My non-expert, likely useless, take on this: Don't use Twitter's technology. If you're interested in quoting a tweet to create a public take a screenshot, copy of the text, quote it and provide a link. Simple. If part of your post links, or portals, to another site you don't control it's not part of your blog/post/site. Complaining when remote co…

Post by renewiltord » Wed, Apr 06, 2022, 10:56 AM UTC

tom_ wrote: post #140

simonw wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you want to act as a repository for the public record, you better use your own system." I deliberately chose Twitter's JavaScript because I inspected the design of how it worked and saw that they had deliberately built it in a way that would respect my preferences for how deletion should be handled. They've changed that on me - without even announcing the change. This is a rug-pull. Now I have to replace their co…

Ask for your money back.

Post by renewiltord » Wed, Apr 06, 2022, 10:57 AM UTC

bennyp101 wrote: post #126

hda2 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter is under no obligation to retain this kind of stuff on your behalf. They declared something worked one way then silently changed how that thing works without properly announcing the change first and giving people enough time to adapt. Would you still be willing to make these excuses if your emails provider decided to do the same thing? Even if it's their system, there's a limit where people would rightfully…

An email provider (which you most likely pay for - and don't publish on a website) is very different to a social media site (that you don't pay for and want it out in the public) It's a free service that they provide - why can they not change how their system works when they want? People can object whenever they want - but it doesn't change the fact that they don't have any 'rights' to show someone elses content via…

Post by victorstanciu » Wed, Apr 06, 2022, 11:02 AM UTC

ivanche wrote: post #128

victorstanciu wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Functionality aside embedding random scripts from twitter seems like a big risk for security and privacy." When I started blogging again, I wanted to render my Twitter feed on the homepage, as a sort of bitesize alternative to the regular content, but I too have a deep aversion to allowing external scripts on my websites. So I added some code to my Hugo theme that pulls the tweets from my profile via the Twitter API…

Hey Victor, would you mind sharing that piece of code?