231–240 of 254 posts
hmm. Personally i think when u delete a tweet, you should not be able to embed it. If you changed your mind about a tweet, you should be able to decouple it from your account. If people want to refer to tweets, how about a screenshot? It's safer, faster and cant 404 when twitter is down. And i think the whole "they edited my page" statement is ridiculous. You EMBED a part of twitter into your page. You know it can ch…
Don't like the "Twitter Edits You" title of the article. Sensationalist/misleading. Tweet embeds are a live link to the Twitter system to show a tweet. To show the actual tweet from the Twitter platform. If the tweet doesn't exist, there's nothing to show. No one said it should maintain some kind of 'copy' of old data on your site.
hmm. Personally i think when u delete a tweet, you should not be able to embed it. If you changed your mind about a tweet, you should be able to decouple it from your account. If people want to refer to tweets, how about a screenshot? It's safer, faster and cant 404 when twitter is down. And i think the whole "they edited my page" statement is ridiculous. You EMBED a part of twitter into your page. You know it can ch…
You don't need to use Twitter's JS to show Tweets. If you choose to use their system, you're subject to their rules. If you don't like their rules, don't use their stuff. Calling it "altering the public record" is a little hyperbolic imo. If you want to act as a repository for the public record, you better use your own system. Twitter is under no obligation to retain this kind of stuff on your behalf. I'm not trying…
"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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why did you trust them from the beginning? Serious question.
We trusted them because they were committed to being part of the wider web, and as you can see from Ben Ward's tweet at the time, took that seriously.
You don't need to use Twitter's JS to show Tweets. If you choose to use their system, you're subject to their rules. If you don't like their rules, don't use their stuff. Calling it "altering the public record" is a little hyperbolic imo. If you want to act as a repository for the public record, you better use your own system. Twitter is under no obligation to retain this kind of stuff on your behalf. I'm not trying…
> Twitter is under no obligation to retain this kind of stuff on your behalf. You have badly missed the most crucial message of the post. When you copy the embed link, you are copying the string literal of the tweet too. You put this text on your site. You are the one retaining it. The twitter module is hiding the text from the rendered page, rather than loading the local copy.
You don't need to use Twitter's JS to show Tweets. If you choose to use their system, you're subject to their rules. If you don't like their rules, don't use their stuff. Calling it "altering the public record" is a little hyperbolic imo. If you want to act as a repository for the public record, you better use your own system. Twitter is under no obligation to retain this kind of stuff on your behalf. I'm not trying…
There's always a few that posts like this. Yes Twitter has a legal right to do stuff like this but can YOU separate what Twitter is legally allowed to do from what is the right thing to do? What's wrong with criticizing a particular policy from a corporate behemoth?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Twitter is under no obligation to retain this kind of stuff on your behalf. You have badly missed the most crucial message of the post. When you copy the embed link, you are copying the string literal of the tweet too. You put this text on your site. You are the one retaining it. The twitter module is hiding the text from the rendered page, rather than loading the local copy.
So, don't include their javascript. Its so simple.
Don't like the "Twitter Edits You" title of the article. Sensationalist/misleading. Tweet embeds are a live link to the Twitter system to show a tweet. To show the actual tweet from the Twitter platform. If the tweet doesn't exist, there's nothing to show. No one said it should maintain some kind of 'copy' of old data on your site.
You're wrong. The tweet embeds decorate a blockquote of the tweet - read the article. The now code removes that blockquote from the DOM.
They're not entirely right, but they're not wrong either. You're running their javascript to power the embed, and so they gave the response "respecting user's deletion".