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

EFF is leaving X

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: EFF is leaving X

#891

Post by unselect5917 »

paulbjensen wrote: post #420
paulbjensen wrote: post #333

There does seem to be evidence that X (formerly Twitter) is a dying platform, but what surprised me here is that longtime platforms like Snapchat, Reddit and even Pinterest get more MAUs than X - and this is more October 2025: https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-net... It would be really interesting to learn if brands and advertisers are seeing the same thing?

Why is this downvoted? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Because it's completely unfounded unhinged lunacy. Detailed why here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47714636

Re: EFF is leaving X

#892

Post by unselect5917 »

vvpan wrote: post #750
ilyin wrote: post #639

They will accomplish nothing and be happy, like so many. I used to respect the exodus, but these days my mental heuristics go off with red alert at the sight of a Bluesky icon replacing Twitter in a website footer.

Why does that trigger a red alert?

It's a signal of lying, closed minded, authoritarian, sexist, and racist ideologues.

The truth and people telling it fear no debate. Debate isn't allowed on blusky.

Re: EFF is leaving X

#896

Post by GaryBluto »

schoen wrote: post #591
baggachipz wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the way that they think and talk about that work, in terms of what motivates it or what it is meant to achieve, is now a predominantly left-wing framing. If you don't have a left-wing worldview, you're at least not going to be culturally aligned with EFF's take on things, even if you agree with many of their positions and projects. Is this due to them literally changing their mission and tack, or is this a shifting…

I'd say both of those. There is a conscious effort to focus more directly and consistently on helping groups that are seen as oppressed. There was an associated mission statement change sometime around 2015 > The Electronic Frontier Foundation is dedicated to ensuring that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all the people of the world. (The "for all the people of the world" part is doing a lot o…

Reminds me of when I checked the Sierra Club website a year or so ago (I'm a big fan of American National Parks) only to find that their most prioritized element of their "values" was "anti-racism".

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/07/us/politics/sierra-club-s...

This appears to be part of a greater pattern of semi-bipartisan organizations veering to the left and losing credibility.

Re: EFF is leaving X

#897

Post by vintermann »

bifrost wrote: post #851
schoen wrote: post #340

I worked at EFF from 2001 to 2019. When I started, EFF was a very effective coalition between (primarily) progressives and libertarians. This had largely been the case since EFF was founded in 1990 by both progressives and libertarians. When people would call EFF a "left-wing" organization, I would correct them. It wasn't a left-wing organization, it was a big tent and had consistently had very significant non-left-w…

It was over for me when the EFF advanced the charge of government censorship of the internet. The EFF had previously been a client of mine so I was somewhat familiar with how things worked and basically once Gilmore was out, it went downhill. They did a lot of good work (much like the ACLU) but they are now honestly unrecognizable. My old company donated around $3k/mo of services for almost a decade which in the gran…

What specific cause are you referring to here as government censorship of the internet?

Re: EFF is leaving X

#898

Post by hackable_sand »

schoen wrote: post #591
baggachipz wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the way that they think and talk about that work, in terms of what motivates it or what it is meant to achieve, is now a predominantly left-wing framing. If you don't have a left-wing worldview, you're at least not going to be culturally aligned with EFF's take on things, even if you agree with many of their positions and projects. Is this due to them literally changing their mission and tack, or is this a shifting…

I'd say both of those. There is a conscious effort to focus more directly and consistently on helping groups that are seen as oppressed. There was an associated mission statement change sometime around 2015 > The Electronic Frontier Foundation is dedicated to ensuring that technology supports freedom, justice, and innovation for all the people of the world. (The "for all the people of the world" part is doing a lot o…

[flagged]

Re: EFF is leaving X

#899

Post by vintermann »

pbreit wrote: post #854
helaoban wrote: post #259

>Our presence on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok is not an endorsement [...] We stay because the people on those platforms deserve access to information, too. We stay because some of our most-read posts are the ones criticizing the very platform we're posting on. We stay because the fewer steps between you and the resources you need to protect yourself, the better. Does this not apply to X users?

"X post today receives less than 3% of the views a single tweet delivered seven years ago" Does anyone believe this?

It comes from X's own metrics, why would they lie about it?

Re: EFF is leaving X

#900

Post by tovej »

libertarianinpa wrote: post #814
lta wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear what you're saying and it's very insightful. But I'm under the impression the libertarians have moved a lot closer to fascism I'm the recent years so it's hard to keep them in any tent. The "society has become more polarized" is an euphemism to describe an important rise of fascism across the world and in the US (that I'm not a citizen of). Yes it's polarized, because there's a side that's trying to create a p…

This is part of the political polarization narrative. People are far more quick to throw around the word “fascist” for coalitions that support things like effective policing of crime or immigration controls that would result in a similar level of immigration as the recent past.

You're saying some people want a particular end, and that justifies certain illegal, violent, and discriminatory means.

I'd say those people support authoritarian politics at the least. Now add in the context of the end in question (less immigration of racialized people) and the means in question (indiscriminately imprisoning minorities), that in itself is well in line with fascism.

Post reply on HN