Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

news.ycombinator.com

551–560 of 577 posts

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#551
post #493
post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who is using Bluesky in the US? A lot of writers and creatives who could not stomach X.com anymore (and were then likely burned by Mastodon's geekiness). > Is it just my friends? If your friends are in the right-wing sphere (e.g. Joe Rogan listeners, etc), then yeah, likely.

>If your friends are in the right-wing sphere (e.g. Joe Rogan listeners, etc), then yeah, likely. I reckon there's more of a correlation between this type of statement and being a Bluesky user than being right-wing and using X. I mean X userbase is enormous compared to that of Bluesky, you can't be serious.

It's also dropping like a stone, which is why they are resorting to these tricks to inflate one of the few metrics that can be observed from outside (how much traffic they send to other sites).

Where I live, X has completely exited polite conversation.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#552
post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a communicator, no audience means you lose everything. Why would he, or for that matter, anyone do that? Look at JK Rowling. Stood her ground, if it wasn't for her books allowing her advocacy, she'd have disappeared. Instead she has to endure being among the most hated millionaires for a good bunch of the left. Say Rogan sticks to his guns. He would face similar, never-ending attacks, no left-leaning figure could…

> Stood her ground, if it wasn't for her books allowing her advocacy, she'd have disappeared. Instead she has to endure being among the most hated millionaires for a good bunch of the left. This framing is laying on the narrative a little bit thick don't you think? It makes it seem like she's hated for being wealthy, when it is actually because she has been funding hate groups and calling for trans people to be physi…

You are just proving my point. Statements like this show that it's worthless to engage.

Can you provide any source for her "calling for trans people to be physically attacked"? Because you seem fixated on it, and I've just spent the last 15 minutes looking for one, and I can't find it.

What I can find is her spending so much goddamned money on philanthropy that she stops being a billionaire, while not dodging a dime of taxes precisely because she considers it her obligation. A fortune amassed in what is probably the most ethic way possible, through exploitation of nobody, writing books.

Related to this I can find the foundation of the Volant Charitable Trust, "a grant-making trust to support charitable causes in Scotland, helping vulnerable groups with an emphasis on women, children and young people."

I can also find a comment of "every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them".

And that's the point. You want to paint her as some lunatic who would like to hunt trans people down for sport, when it's crystal clear that she has the "radical" (standard 2018 radical leftist) notion that trans women are not the same thing as biological women and that the definition of women shouldn't be changed to appease to them.

But again. It's not worth it to engage, because we both know I can spend 20+ minutes working on this reply and you are not going to change your stance. An apostate is worse than a heathen, which is why people complain about Rowling rather than anyone who is actually right wing. Because you are scared that if you defended her, you would face the same judgement. Making the world a worse place through and through.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

And a vaccination programme was used as a front when searching for Bin Ladin. That doesn’t mean that vaccine programs are bad. Anything can be used as a front

>That doesn’t mean that vaccine programs are bad.

Obviously. But the organization that discredits vaccine programs by being a front for CIA is bad and deserves to be dismantled.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Not sure if this is intended to be critical or supportive. A lot of Americans supported these types of efforts to oppose the Soviet Union. There’s a Tom Hanks movie about it, for example.

Because they were lied to by American mass media that presented mujahedeen as freedom fighters. When 9/11 happened Americans suddenly found themselves on the receiving end and stopped being supportive of Islamic extremists.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yeah, if it weren't for USAID then the CIA wouldn't have had any cover for smuggling those weapons and would have just given up. The argument is like saying "criminals used this bank to transfer stolen money so the bank is bad and I'm glad they were shut down." USAID has done far more good than the harm they were exploited to enable.

>criminals used this bank to transfer stolen money so the bank is bad

If a bank willingly cooperates with criminals it is a bad bank, yes.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#557
post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a communicator, no audience means you lose everything. Why would he, or for that matter, anyone do that? Look at JK Rowling. Stood her ground, if it wasn't for her books allowing her advocacy, she'd have disappeared. Instead she has to endure being among the most hated millionaires for a good bunch of the left. Say Rogan sticks to his guns. He would face similar, never-ending attacks, no left-leaning figure could…

> Stood her ground, if it wasn't for her books allowing her advocacy, she'd have disappeared. Instead she has to endure being among the most hated millionaires for a good bunch of the left. This framing is laying on the narrative a little bit thick don't you think? It makes it seem like she's hated for being wealthy, when it is actually because she has been funding hate groups and calling for trans people to be physi…

> she has been funding hate groups and calling for trans people to be physically attacked

She has done neither of these things you claim. Please refrain from spreading misinformation.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#558
post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting down voted for stating a fact. Just goes to show how short some people’s memories are.

You're getting downvoted for stating falsehoods. > Why you’re describing isn’t a recent phenomenon. Not even remotely. The big platforms were accessible without login a few years ago, now they're not. That is literally a recent phenomenon. > Facebook has never allowed people read only views to their platform. In the past, I've often looked at Facebook posts without logging in.

> You're getting downvoted for stating falsehoods.

I'm getting downvoted because people are either to young to remember the web in the 00s, or just misremembering what the web was like.

> The big platforms were accessible without login a few years ago, now they're not. That is literally a recent phenomenon.

I gave examples of big platforms that weren't accessible without a login. And modern platforms were also heading this way long before LLMs existed.

Redit and Twitter didn't restrict their API use because of LLMs. Meta haven't locked down Instagram because of LLMs. they do it because they need people locked into their ecosystem. LLMs are just the latest way to scrape data, but the practice isn't new. Search engines did it before. And before then, it was just people leeching off other people's work. This is a tale as old as the web. And I remember it well, having been both a web developer and user of the web since 1994.

Lets also not forget all the attempts that Microsoft took to try and control the internet and how AOL had their own walled gardens too. Yahoo had a plethora of cool features, most of which weren't available without a Yahoo account. And so on and so forth.

Walled gardens are not a recent phenomenon.

> In the past, I've often looked at Facebook posts without logging in.

You're misremembering. Literally the only reason I have a Facebook account because I needed to check someone's profile and couldn't without signing up. This was back in the early to mid 00s (I can't recall exactly when, but it was long before Facebook was a household name. Back when MySpace was still cool and before Twitter was launched)

For example this archived page from Facebook. Notice how there's no way to advance without signing up? https://web.archive.org/web/20070630190243/https://register....

---

I know people want to blame AI for everything that goes wrong these days be that simply isn't the reason that platforms lock down. They do it because thats how you make money. You either:

1. lock down and charge people for access

or

2. lock down and sell your user data

(or, depressingly too often, both)

Giving people free and anonymous access isn't profitable. It wasn't before and it still isn't now. AI hasn't changed that.

What AI has changed is the increase in invasive bot detection on sites that don't monetise anonymous access.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#559
post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're getting downvoted for stating falsehoods. > Why you’re describing isn’t a recent phenomenon. Not even remotely. The big platforms were accessible without login a few years ago, now they're not. That is literally a recent phenomenon. > Facebook has never allowed people read only views to their platform. In the past, I've often looked at Facebook posts without logging in.

> You're getting downvoted for stating falsehoods. I'm getting downvoted because people are either to young to remember the web in the 00s, or just misremembering what the web was like. > The big platforms were accessible without login a few years ago, now they're not. That is literally a recent phenomenon. I gave examples of big platforms that weren't accessible without a login. And modern platforms were also headin…

> Redit and Twitter didn't restrict their API use because of LLMs. Meta haven't locked down Instagram because of LLMs. they do it because they need people locked into their ecosystem.

Yet the recent wave of API & public site lockdowns were mostly kicked off when Musk took over Twitter, and he publicly stated that a big reason was using the data for AI training. Similarly, platforms like Reddit have started selling access to that data for the same purpose.

> LLMs are just the latest way to scrape data, but the practice isn't new. Search engines did it before.

LLMs aren't used to scrape data, they're trained on that scraped data. When search engines did it, it was useful for the sites, since it lead people to them. With LLMs they no longer have to visit the sites, which is why the platforms want to monetize their data directly.

> You're misremembering. Literally the only reason I have a Facebook account because I needed to check someone's profile and couldn't without signing up. This was back in the early to mid 00s (I can't recall exactly when, but it was long before Facebook was a household name. Back when MySpace was still cool and before Twitter was launched)

It's a bit ridiculous to tell me I'm misremembering when you're talking about a different feature. Yes, to look at most profile data you needed (need?) to be logged in. But you could view public posts without logging in as long as you had the link, I used to do that for various types of communities explicitly after I'd deleted my Facebook account.

> Giving people free and anonymous access isn't profitable. It wasn't before and it still isn't now. AI hasn't changed that.

Literally most of the web is open, for free and anonymously, and is profitable due to ads & selling visitor data. This is changing because 1) people are no longer visiting the pages, they're instead asking LLM clients, and 2) free and anonymous access is getting harder due to sites getting hammered by crawlers for LLM training purposes. This has been in the news a lot over the last few months.

Re: Tell HN: X is opening any tweet link in a webview whether you press it or not

#560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An "administration" doesn't add debt - Congress does. Power of the purse strings, no? I'm not sure what you mean by "this administration". Are you including DJT's first term? Regardless, here are the numbers per Investopedia: "Based on total dollar amounts, Joe Biden contributed the most to the national debt, adding $8.5 trillion during his presidency, followed by Donald Trump ($7.8 trillion in his first term) and Ba…

This Congress does whatever the president wants, because they are scared of what he will do to them if they don't.

I hope you're right, the nuclear option is looking mighty good right now! ;-)
Post reply on HN