Live data from Hacker News

EFF is leaving X

eff.org

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: EFF is leaving X

#961

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There does seem to be evidence that X (formerly Twitter) is a dying platform, Absurd statement. Check the App Store's news app rankings: https://apps.apple.com/us/iphone/charts/6009 X/twitter is #1. reddit is #4, NYT is #11, Fox is #16, AP is #18, CNN is #21. That's not a dying platform as much as you clearly wish that were true. The question is why are you so hellbent on convincing people something that is clearly…

Maybe declining might be a better choice of word than dying. Threads apparently overtook X for DAUs last year according to SimilarWeb.

Threads surpassed X in DAU only for mobile, with a slow decline shown in X (see plot), with "dying" being a misleading word. For web, X has 18x more DAU than threads [1].

Total daily active users (all access methods) is overwhelmingly for X. I can't find the trend for web. Please post the link you found.

Disclaimer: I use neither.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2026/01/18/threads-edges-out-x-in-dai...

Re: EFF is leaving X

#962

Doesn't X have the things they asked for? end to end message encryption community notes open source algorithm What about the marginalized people organizing on X? They don't deserve EFF

I guess the downvote means yes but we don't like Elon

Re: EFF is leaving X

#963
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…

I trend libertarian because I have a strong anti-authoritarian streak. I used to think of myself as closer to the Republicans, but these days I mostly only agree with the Democrats. Weird times.

[flagged]

Re: EFF is leaving X

#964
post #960

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of what happened politically in the late 2010s and hit its peak during COVID was that this meme grew that people were thinking and saying things so offensive, we had to make sure they didn’t have a voice on any viable platform. Oh, yeah, they could still in theory host their own website on Tor Onion, but in practice people would pull whatever domain they had, tell their hosting provider to get these people off…

I also heard the slogan "the answer to bad speech is more speech" frequently inside EFF in the first half of my time working there and almost never in the second half. It's actually a conceptually challenging question for me to try to account for why that changed. I would like to go off and ponder that a bit. I should also emphasize that EFF has never advocated for narrowing what is protected speech under the first a…

I think the problem with the free speech ideals is a combination of engagement farms (i.e. a room full of smart phones where people “like” or view particular content so it artificially becomes more popular on social media) and bots (which, with modern AI, are pretty hard to distinguish from people who know how to write) which make modern online content a lot less organic.

In addition, the outrage culture (because anger increases engagement) went from us being “I disagree with you, but I defend your right to say that” to “What you say is so awful I want to destroy you”. It’s this second issue which has made things difficult for the EFF—their original mission was to allow the racists, misogynists, misandrists, and what not to have their soapbox. But that’s something which just doesn’t work in today’s political climate.

Ironically, I think X in a lot of ways was a beacon of free speech in a world where people advocating certain ideas will just be permanently banned from a given platform without question. Yes, they had issues with going out of their way to discourage people from linking outside of their walled garden [1], but they allowed a lot of content that would instantly get someone banned on Bluesky or Reddit.

Don’t get me started on how Facebook has morphed from being a place where I could see what my old college buddy from 30 years ago (who I parted ways with when I changed colleges) was up to, into a place where I just mainly see slop from content farms and troll farms.

[1] I left Twitter because they marked me as a “spammer” because I would link to Substacks or blogs showing men that, no, women aren’t only sleeping with 10% of men.

Re: EFF is leaving X

#965

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> groups that actively pursue the government for violating our constitutional rights Could you share some examples?

https://www.fire.org/

Re: EFF is leaving X

#966

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He banned me after I replied to his tweet with my display name set as "Elon's Musk". I think I lasted <1 week after this takeover.

So you got banned for trolling and this is supposed to mean what exactly?

Self proclaimed libertarians always fall apart when the freedom is used against them.

Reminds me of Christians and free will.

Re: EFF is leaving X

#967
post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does that trigger a red alert?

Pattern recognition - people who are on bsky are overly concerned with pronouns and extreme leftist ideology and/or extreme hate for trump. There is no actual discourse. Just a bubble where there is no tolerance for debate or difference of opinion.

"Extreme leftist ideology", I actually wish they had that, sadly pronouns have little to do with economic inequality and faulty markets.

Re: EFF is leaving X

#968
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…

O'Sullivan's First Law: "All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_O%27Sullivan_(columnist)#...

[dead]

Re: EFF is leaving X

#969
Disabling replies on their X post is one hell of a "we support free speech" move. Hats off, guys. if I had not stopped donating to y'all a few years back due to your many other recent idiotic statements, this would have done it for me.

If you seek some other org that still does what it says and fights for speech: https://www.fire.org/

Re: EFF is leaving X

#970
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…

A lot of what happened politically in the late 2010s and hit its peak during COVID was that this meme grew that people were thinking and saying things so offensive, we had to make sure they didn’t have a voice on any viable platform. Oh, yeah, they could still in theory host their own website on Tor Onion, but in practice people would pull whatever domain they had, tell their hosting provider to get these people off…

Because of the asymmetry of energy required to refute bullshit, letting people spew bullshit and cleaning up afterwards is very expensive. And because some people are very bad at updating information in their heads (worse than the average, which is already poor), people will be told a refutation, agree, and later will forget, and repeat the refuted bullshit. And I truly believe they forget, not just pretend to agree with the refutation.

So preventing some things from gaining a big platform is good.

But, the mainstream media is extremely not neutral. A lot of what is said is not strictly true, because people are pushing an agenda. People have a right to talk about it. People need to resist very bad social engineering experiments being done on them "for their own good". The fact that sometimes people have to issue retractions and apologies and are even sometimes fired proves that if you just accept the first version of every story you hear and don't let people make a fuss about lies, even more lies will be accepted as mainstream truth. There needs to be an opposition to keep people honest. The opposition must be not cranks or enemies, but reasonable skeptics.

People who simply note that men and women are not exactly the same are grouped with rapists and pimps, and that is similar to the strategy to declare classical liberals who are not leftists "far right".

Dating patterns absolutely changed, women's online culture absolutely affects them. When women choose from men they know, like work colleagues, it works out. But on dating apps, women really are only interested in the top men. When judged only based on photo, by the opposite sex, most men are not attractive, while most women are attractive. But now people don't date colleagues and rarely even friends of friends. For many men, 1 match for 10,000 swipes is reality.

Telling the average man that he needs to get in better shape, take better care of his hygiene, dress better, demonstrate that he is a provider and a protector and he wants to spend time with her not only for sex, is not misogyny.

Telling the average woman that sleeping with the most attractive man who will sleep with her is not the way to find a husband is not misogyny.

A lot of dating advice is "adulting" advice. People are immature. They don't know how people perceive them, they don't know how to change that. Their expectations are based on bad fiction. They are overconfident or they are wimps.

Some advice from "the manosphere" should be grounds for imprisonment, and some should be taught in every school, and using a single name for both is terrible.

Post reply on HN