FR version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
63% Positive
Analyzed from 1259 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#twitter#legal#don#need#content#social#more#scraping#copyright#read
Discussion (28 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
I would prefer that people post their own works to their own websites, but that's a pipe dream. As far as X is concerned, I would prefer that it behave more like 2010 Twitter and less like 2020 Twitter, but I can deal with the differences. I'm ambivalent about anyone posting on X over the Fediverse, Bluesky, Medium, Substack, here, Reddit or whatever else; it's all bad. I'll log in wherever I need to, except maybe Facebook and TikTok.
Normally yes, but if you use nitter then no.
I need X for work but I don't really enjoy posting as it feels like you have to shitpost constantly to get engagement. That's not how I want to spend my energy.
Meanwhile, the non-Facebook Threads alternatives (Bluesky / Mastodon) are edgy spaces where furry, kink, and progressive DSA content reigns. Nothing wrong with that, but it's a bad first experience for newcomers when content like that is worn on the sleeve, shown as the first experience, and used to exclude outsiders.
Paraphrasing, but seeing profiles that say "If you're not [8 acronyms I don't understand], go to hell" - why is that even on my feed? What is this? I don't get any of this.
I remember when I signed up the main feed was full of horny anime profiles, sex toys, and death wishes for politicians intermixed with an occasional tech post. I'm pretty sure they didn't have that tracking data on me to tailor my feed.
There's nowhere middle of the road average. (Maybe Threads is that?) The other alternatives have certainly niched down and become unattractive to the mainstream.
It's like Reddit with Voat a decade or so ago, except Voat attracted people that were banned from Reddit for typically valid reasons.
Building an all inclusive social network is hard, because it depends on who the first users are. It sets the stage for growth and limits the ultimate appeal if it over-indexes on one type of user.
I wish this was all a protocol like email, but everyone building a protocol makes it weird and exclusive and ruins the vibes before users even arrive.
Plus they all insist on federation, when P2P is the way to go. It's scalable if people use super nodes to publish and gulp down content. The problem is Mastodon and Bluesky effectively have super nodes run by people that want to exclude mainstream. You can't do that and hope to get the world on board.
On Bluesky in particular you have to put some effort into having a good feed. You just can't follow the people who posted about Donald Trump 20 times a day. If you use the "more like this" and "less like this" buttons on the discover feed consistently #uspol will fall away and you will find the people who are into cat pictures, #bloomscrolling and maybe even Jacobin/Joan Williams/Catherine Liu instead of the cultural stuff.
[1] ... in real life there was that day I got off the bus as-a-fox and there was somebody waiting for me wearing an animal ear hat and holding a chicken purse
The network effect is hard to pull away from especially when you realize nobody is listening elsewhere.
Anything that challenges their existing view is treated like you're a Salem witch and everyone piles on with their own garbage.
And I still can't go over how this title looks like draft version with placeholder, published a bit too fast. How could anyone thing a single letter is good choice for an company/service name?
In this case, Musk is stuck being his 12 year old self and carrying a 30 year old obsession to use this very cool naming for his "everything company", after losing that name along with him leaving PayPal. He finally got the chance.
It’s also hilarious how hypocritical these tech companies, meta steal and sell users data and sue a company for scraping, xitter send C&D letters, AI companies are building models from stolen books and sometimes even physically destroying them, then lecture others when their models get distilled, basically: rules for thee and not for me.
Google got dragged into court for exactly this, and they were summarizing/snipping, so they had a fair-use argument to make. This is a 1:1 reproduction of the content, so the legal arguments on fair-use would be harder to make I suspect.
I've personally used XCancel, and I really like it, but stepping back legally they're on shaky ground if Twitter decides to stop it.
In general, the cases where scraping has been found to be legal have largely turned on the basis of things like accessing the public parts of the website and attempting to minimize potential copyright violation. Here, these services are bypassing a login requirement and reproducing the scraped data in full--actions that have generally led to findings of illegality in the past.
It's not a slam-dunk case in either direction, and I think the result would come down more to the quality of the lawyers to craft their arguments. And SpaceX has the cash right now to afford the better lawyers.