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

Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

help.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 790 posts

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#721

Post by jrmg »

d23 wrote: post #673
jrmg wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think he lied. I don’t think it’s even hypocrisy - he just put very little thought into his previous belief and changed his mind. He’ll do it again later. That’s why you shouldn’t believe what he says. It’s _not_ that he’s _lying_ - he believes what he says when he says it - he just has no care for consistency and will change his mind whenever it looks prudent, without regard for others. I am not defending th…

He has repeatedly shown a proclivity for lying, so I don't know why it should be ruled out altogether. And regardless of what the intent or driving motivation was, it's still hypocrisy.

I'd only accuse someone of hypocrisy if they did one thing while saying another simultaneously.

If someone changes their mind that's not hypocrisy. I want to stick to that definition because to do otherwise seems to be to be disapproving of people's ability to change their mind. People changing their mind is necessary for the political process to work (and for society and friendship in general!)

Elon Musk might indeed be a hypocrite, but I don't think he's necessarily being hypocritical in this case. If he _continues_ to harp on about freedom of speech on Twitter while keeping this policy in place that will be hypocritical though.

[Edit: I'm not trying to defend Musk in general. I think the facts of the current situation, and things he's done in the past, are pretty terrible!]

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#722

Post by eternalban »

greggarious wrote: post #705
eternalban wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> adversarial Watergate. Also my impression has been that NYTimes definitely does geopolitics - Earth laughably and famously turned "flat" in NYTimes editorial pages*, not the Washington Post's /g. The Intercept can not possibly be classed in the same group (of which I am not exactly a fan, but fair is fair). New York Times is the establishment's (the fabled East Coast Liberals of yore) ideological platform. Washingt…

> Watergate. Fair point, my bad -- I'm a millennial, that's before my time, I'm giving my thoughts as someone who became old enough to stop violating COPPA around "Indecision 2000". > Also my impression has been that NYTimes definitely does geopolitics - Earth laughably and famously turned "flat" in NYTimes editorial pages My impression was WaPo is run by the CIA, and NYT is run by like, at least nine eyes[1]. (With…

archive.is - ft, wsj, foreign affairs. Have at it! FA has specially good fare, in fact, well worth the visit to the archives.

p.s. just read the whole thing. When did I conflate? Some do however reasonably point out that power comes out of the barrel of a gun and you need money for guns ..

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#723

Post by [deleted] »

haxiomic wrote: post #84

Let’s help people get off this ship Tools to migrate to mastodon: Archive your data and repost to mastodon: https://twitter.com/settings/download_your_data https://github.com/FGRibreau/import-tweets-to-mastodon Find accounts you follow on mastodon: Browser Extension - https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/mastodon-handles-i... Using API - https://debirdify.pruvisto.org/ (thanks @guerrilla) - https://www.movetodon…

[deleted]

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#724

Post by ssnistfajen »

es7 wrote: post #93

Thats got to be the worst possible decision for Twitter to possibly make. What good is a social media platform that prohibits links to other platforms? I use FB, Twitter, Insta, TikTok, LinkedIn, Discord, etc for a variety of purposes and find and share great content across platforms.

Elonjet is on FB, Insta, Mastodon, and Truth Social. I'm not surprised if this blanket ban was partially motivated by his obsession over the made-up doxxing accusations over ADS-B data.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#725

Post by tareqak »

The Streisand Effect encoded as a Term of Service [0][1].

As of 2:22 PM Pacific Time:

> What is a violation of this policy?

> At both the Tweet level and the account level, we will remove any free promotion of prohibited 3rd-party social media platforms, such as linking out (i.e. using URLs) to any of the below platforms on Twitter, or providing your handle without a URL:

> Prohibited platforms:

> Facebook, Instagram, Mastodon, Truth Social, Tribel, Post and Nostr > 3rd-party social media link aggregators such as linktr.ee, lnk.bio Examples:

> “follow me @username on Instagram” > “username@mastodon.social” > “check out my profile on Facebook - facebook.com/username”

1) Why are only specific social media platforms banned, but the entire category of “3rd-party social media link aggregators”?

Where is Reddit? Where is HN (this forum)? Where is Sina Weibo [2]? Where is VK [3]? Where is Parler [4]?

2) What would happen if different third party websites were used as link aggregators? This could be an individual website’s “Links”/“Socials”/“Contact Us” page, or something like an HN/GitHub/LinkedIn/etc profile page. What about the *chans?

3) What about discussion happening via different text media like Slack/Discord/IRC and the text descriptions in YouTube and TikTok videos?

4) What about text embedded as part of the video itself?

5) What about websites constructed with easy-to-guess login and password or a series of captchas?

Personal observation/feeling:

This entire situation seems like an arms race between the richest troll playing whack-a-mole against the rest of the Internet where the moral and/or legal high ground shifts between the parties each round.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_service

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_service

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sina_Weibo

[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/VK_(service)

[4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parler

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#726

Post by lolc »

wombatpm wrote: post #568
tompagenet2 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because he's always been an insecure child, who says what he thinks will make him popular or stand out to a group of acolytes. Sometimes that'll work for a while, sometimes it'll really help, but over time you get more cocksure, more convinced of your own greatness and more foolish.

My wife always thought him to be a jerk. I thought he was a visionary. Twitter has proven my wife was correct

He can be both.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#727

Post by ssnistfajen »

kristianc wrote: post #202
strangattractor wrote: post #169

There is no money is promoting free speech or at least not the kind of money Twitter needs to pay back it's investors and creditors. There have been multiple poor business decisions since the buyout. The "burn it the ground and start over mentality" is effectively placing the company in a startup position. Given the risk of startups it would have likely been cheaper/smarter to start a new company than pursue a levera…

There’s been some speculation he is trying to build an Everything app a-la WeChat in China. Aside from the fact that the everything app concept has never really worked outside China, and certainly won’t fly with the EU — he probably would have been better starting it from zero. I’m pretty sure if he could have got out of the Twitter acquisition he would have.

So far Elon's actions have consisted entirely of destroying and zero building. He promised a money market feature (which is a prominent part of Chinese mega-apps e.g. Alipay and WeChat), but there have been no concrete plans or any regulatory talk related to it.

If Elon Musk is still serious about building a mega-app then he needs to rapidly acquire/launch a lot more companies in consumer spending sectors e.g. entertainment, hotels, delivery, restaurant reviews, etc. But linking to those services within the mega-app would run into trouble with anticompetitive lawsuits pretty much everywhere.

There is a big hill for Elon to climb yet he's only focused on kicking rocks barefoot at the bottom of that hill.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#728

Post by ssnistfajen »

spamizbad wrote: post #256
kristianc wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s been some speculation he is trying to build an Everything app a-la WeChat in China. Aside from the fact that the everything app concept has never really worked outside China, and certainly won’t fly with the EU — he probably would have been better starting it from zero. I’m pretty sure if he could have got out of the Twitter acquisition he would have.

I’ve noticed a lot of entrepreneurs have those kinds of ambitions but nobody is hiring at the scale of WeChat (well, Tencent Holding). You’re talking about a platform/ecosystem that has tens of thousands of developers actively working on it. Twitter is in the opposite position having been cut down to the bone. Not going to happen.

Tecent already had a diversified Internet business before they launched WeChat. Musk needs a whole portofolio of companies to enable his mega-app vision, and that is not considering all the anti-competition lawsuits coming his way should he acquire those companies and refer to them exclusively within the X app.

FB/Meta and Google likely had similar ambitions and they haven't succeeded in building one despite being in a far better position to do so. Google Maps is probably the closest thing we can get to a mega-app in the Western world, for now.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#729

Post by ssnistfajen »

wfaler wrote: post #291
jlundberg wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And not only speculation, he tweeted this in October 2022: ”Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app”

Forgive me for being stupid, but why would any consumer want an "everything app"? It's not exactly a compelling need I've ever heard anyone express. Yes, multiple things can be combined, but if it works, probably just coincidence.

Smartphones saw rapid growth in China at the same time as mega-apps formed. The tech giants that built these mega-apps also acquired many consumer services that used to be independent companies and integrated them into the mega-app over time. Then out of the interest to compete with each other, these tech giants kept making their own mega-app larger in order to capture more user activity within their ecosystem of services. The emergence of mega-apps in China was not the consumer's choice.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#730

Post by yellowapple »

Klinky wrote: post #613
9wzYQbTYsAIc wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's also a quite absurd for a free-speech platform to even have such a policy in the first place It does make sense for a paid-speech platform, though. Also, as a thought experiment, if Twitter were a part of the fediverse, wouldn’t this policy essentially be the same as defederating from the prohibited sites? I’m new to the concept of the fediverse, so I welcome edification or enlightenment on that thought experi…

>It does make sense for a paid-speech platform, though. What is a "paid-speech platform" exactly? Twitter is just going to be for press releases and advertisers now? It would also be absurd for a node that claims to implement free-speech absolutism to defederate from any particular node. It would also be absurd to stay federated with nodes that you claim are prohibited while telling people on your node to still cross…

> Twitter is just going to be for press releases and advertisers now?

It wasn't already?

Post reply on HN