In other hostile takeover Tweets...
-
@dcon said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
I'm surprsied Musk hasn't thought about closing all the offices and making everyone WFH because that'd be a lot cheaper.
Wasn't he saying he wanted everyone back and if you wanted to WFH you could find another employer?
-
Let them fight...
-
E: I do like the byline: “Billionaire clowns bloviating at one another”
-
@topspin But this is the correct thread!
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Let them fight...
-
@topspin said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
I do like the byline
That's not a byline. It's a subtitle or sub-headline. A byline tells you who it's by, i. e., the author's name.
-
@HardwareGeek said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@topspin said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
I do like the byline
That's not a byline. It's a subtitle or sub-headline. A byline tells you who it's by, i. e., the author's name.
Unless the article has been actually written by billionaire clowns.
-
@Kamil-Podlesak As far as I care to find, they're not billionaires. But they're journalists, so the clown part naturally applies.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Kamil-Podlesak As far as I care to find, they're not billionaires. But they're journalists, so the clown part naturally applies.
Pretty sure if the people writing the article were billionaires, they’d be writing about something more entertaining than a Musk vs Zuckerface cage match.
Then again, maybe they wouldn’t?
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Applied-Mediocrity said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Kamil-Podlesak As far as I care to find, they're not billionaires. But they're journalists, so the clown part naturally applies.
Pretty sure if the people writing the article were billionaires, they’d be writing about something more entertaining than a Musk vs Zuckerface cage match.
Then again, maybe they wouldn’t?
:
Literally
-
So Musk has now enforced 'temporary' limits on viewing. You need to be logged in, and if you are verified, you can view 6000 tweets per day, 600 if not verified and only 300 per day if you are a new account. Anything else gets you the 'rate limiting' message.
-
@Arantor I don't think I'll even reach 6,000 tweets in my lifetime.
-
@The_Quiet_One You've written 4000 posts here, and read an unknown number, probably larger than that.
-
@jinpa said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
probably larger than that.
It's bold to assume people here read the posts they write
-
@The_Quiet_One you’ve presumably read more than 600 posts though? The limit is on reading, not writing, to stop excessive scraping, so the man says.
-
In hilarious news, Elon’s “rate limiting” is apparently not because the site is being scraped so hard but because it’s DDOSing itself, and meanwhile he’s trying to drive up paid folks in the interim.
What a guy!
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
So Musk has now enforced 'temporary' limits on viewing. You need to be logged in, and if you are verified, you can view 6000 tweets per day, 600 if not verified and only 300 per day if you are a new account. Anything else gets you the 'rate limiting' message.
That’s great news. Can we lower that?
-
@topspin Elon has suggested bigger numbers - apparently he has raised them to 8000/800/400 and then 10k/1k/500 - but in actuality this coincides with Google suspending some services due to non payment.
Any uplift in the numbers is because they'll have figured out how to make the self-DDOS hurt less.
-
@Arantor how are they ddosing themselves. I’m genuinely curious. How badly implemented is everything they do? Its probably the simplest concept for a social media platform. If implemented even semi competently they could probably host it on a few dozen T2 instances.
-
@DogsB easy: don't pay the company that handle load balancing and edge caching so they turn it off (as of 30th June, so all the failures start on 1st July), combined with stupid changes on the front end that go 'get me some data, I didn't get any data, I'll try again' x20 because as we all know the network is infinite and there is never any latency.
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
You need to be logged in
But if you are not, it doesn't tell you you need to be. It just says “Something went wrong”.
-
@DogsB said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Arantor how are they ddosing themselves. I’m genuinely curious. How badly implemented is everything they do? Its probably the simplest concept for a social media platform. If implemented even semi competently they could probably host it on a few dozen T2 instances.
-
From the people who thought "let's not pay rent" was a good idea, now the sequel "let's not pay infrastructure".
-
@Bulb Saw that yesterday, after reading that Twitter had made some changes (e.g., account-walled). If luck holds, I have an excuse to not read tweets from now on.
Edit: @loopback0 The self-DDOS (if true) is glorious. Self-DDOS by attempting to lock out / rate limit users. That's a new one.
-
@DogsB said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Arantor how are they ddosing themselves. I’m genuinely curious. How badly implemented is everything they do? Its probably the simplest concept for a social media platform. If implemented even semi competently they could probably host it on a few dozen T2 instances.
Remember that Twitter started as a way to let people sign up for mass text messages. There's a poor Nokia candy bar phone buried somewhere in their IT infrastructure desperately trying to keep up with outgoing Tweets.
-
I was going to look up Twitter's stock price to see how Musk's shenanigans were affecting it.
And then I remembered that it went private. Dammit, I wanted to
make moneyday-trade very badly!
-
@Bulb said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
But if you are not, it doesn't tell you you need to be. It just says “Something went wrong”.
Works as expected with a login prompt trying to go to someone's feed, but you get the 'something went wrong' going to a tweet. I could have sworn I checked this at some point in the last day or two and got a log in prompt but I could be wrong about my memory on the subject. It's one hell of a moving shitshow.
@cvi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
The self-DDOS (if true) is glorious. Self-DDOS by attempting to lock out / rate limit users. That's a new one.
I've heard the theory both ways, that it's rate limiting breaking everything, and that it's breaking everything and calling it rate limiting as a cause.
Either is as plausible.
-
@Parody said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@DogsB said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Arantor how are they ddosing themselves. I’m genuinely curious. How badly implemented is everything they do? Its probably the simplest concept for a social media platform. If implemented even semi competently they could probably host it on a few dozen T2 instances.
Remember that Twitter started as a way to let people sign up for mass text messages. There's a poor Nokia candy bar phone buried somewhere in their IT infrastructure desperately trying to keep up with outgoing Tweets.
That's the solid part of their infrastructure.
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
the site is being scraped so hard
Excerpt from one article that made me :
Large language models need to learn from masses of real human conversations. But the quality is vital to the success of a chatbot. Reddit and Twitter's huge trove of billions of posts are thought to be hugely important training data - and used by AI companies.
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
So Musk has now enforced 'temporary' limits on viewing. You need to be logged in, and if you are verified, you can view 6000 tweets per day, 600 if not verified.
600 ...? Per day ...?
It is possible to engage in actual communication and discussion here. It might not happen often, but it is possible.
But Twitter is just useless. The UI is terrible and it is little more than a vanity website where people can shout their stupid, ill-informed opinions at the world. One sentence at a time.
-
@Gern_Blaanston said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
600 ...? Per day ...?
My first thought was - what will NotTheBee do?!?
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@The_Quiet_One you’ve presumably
readloaded more than 600 posts though? The limit is on reading, not writing, to stop excessive scraping, so the man says.
-
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@The_Quiet_One you’ve presumably read more than 600 posts though? The limit is on reading, not writing, to stop excessive scraping, so the man says.
Sure. Whenever someone posts a link to an “article” on twitter, that’s either posted as an image or as 6000 tweets.
-
One amusing thing I've noted about the recent Twitter changes, is that all articles that talk about it focus on the number of tweets a registered user can see, but the fact that unregistered users can't see anything is either not mentioned at all, or vaguely mentioned in passing.
This is interesting because it shows how all the people writing the articles assume that everybody has a Twitter account!
But at the same time, most people I actually know in real life... don't. In fact, I don't think anyone I know in the real world has a Twitter account (though of course I probably don't know everything, in particular accounts that almost never post, since I myself don't have an account!).
Meanwhile, I know a lot of people who are on various other of the big social network (Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin...). So that says something about the typical Twitter user, though I'm not quite sure what it says.
-
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Twitter, ... Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin
I have no account there - in any of those mentioned - either!
But I have a WTD account. And that's what counts.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Twitter, ... Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin
I have no account there - in any of those mentioned - either!
But I have a WTD account. And that's what counts.It's the worst form of social media, except for all the others.
-
@Gern_Blaanston said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@Arantor said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
So Musk has now enforced 'temporary' limits on viewing. You need to be logged in, and if you are verified, you can view 6000 tweets per day, 600 if not verified.
600 ...? Per day ...?
Correct me if I'm wrong (I do not have twitter account, never had and never will), but AFAIK just displaying the tweet in list while scrolling does actually count as "read".
-
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
This is interesting because it shows how all the people writing the articles assume that everybody has a Twitter account!
People generally tend to believe that the whole world looks exactly like their personal bubble of reality, but journos take this to the extreme.
But at the same time, most people I actually know in real life... don't. In fact, I don't think anyone I know in the real world has a Twitter account (though of course I probably don't know everything, in particular accounts that almost never post, since I myself don't have an account!).
Ditto. I'm 100% sure noone who I know has a twitter account. Nor does anyone I know ever mention twitter or a particular tweet. In fact I don't recall ever talking with anyone about twitter irl, even during Musk buyout.
-
@MrL said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
People generally tend to believe that the whole world looks exactly like their personal bubble of reality, but journos take this to the extreme.
I know we love to shit on journalists here (and especially there ) but in this case, it applies to everyone who talks about this. Take this thread for example and before my post, see how many references to "unregistered users can't read a single tweet anymore" you can find. I'm betting on a maximum of 1, and that's just to cover my ass.
ETA: I did the needful and there are actually 3 or 4 posts here, though they all either mention that just as a tiny side-effect, or focus on the of the implementation (nondescript error message). So I think my point still holds.
Ditto. I'm 100% sure noone who I know has a twitter account. Nor does anyone I know ever mention twitter or a particular tweet.
TBF, there's at least one relative who regularly shares tweets, mostly from the same 2-3 accounts so I'm guessing they might actually have an account (and they obviously do mention tweets). It's mostly of the "funny cat" variety.
In fact I don't recall ever talking with anyone about twitter irl, even during Musk buyout.
I had a couple of "<blank in conversation>... so, um, you've seen this thing about Musk and Twitter? ... yeah, wild. <another blank> and, uh, what about Aunt Mary, how is she doing?"
-
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@MrL said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
People generally tend to believe that the whole world looks exactly like their personal bubble of reality, but journos take this to the extreme.
I know we love to shit on journalists here (and especially there ) but in this case, it applies to everyone who talks about this. Take this thread for example and before my post, see how many references to "unregistered users can't read a single tweet anymore" you can find. I'm betting on a maximum of 1, and that's just to cover my ass.
Maybe people who don't have twitter accounts also DGAF and don't write about it?
-
@MrL probably. Though there should at least be a fair amount of .
Then again, maybe all is on Twitter itself. In which case, fencing that part of the internet away sounds a pretty good idea.
-
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
@MrL probably. Though there should at least be a fair amount of .
Then again, maybe all is on Twitter itself. In which case, fencing that part of the internet away sounds a pretty good idea.
To me it seems to be a suicidal move. I'm all for it.
-
@MrL said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Maybe people who don't have twitter accounts also DGAF and don't write about it?
I don't have a Twitter account, but I read a lot of tweets. Do these limitations apply to embeds? If they don't.... that's silly.
-
@Zecc said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Do these limitations apply to embeds?
Twitter embeds stopped working for me months ago.
-
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Take this thread for example and before my post, see how many references to "unregistered users can't read a single tweet anymore" you can find. I'm betting on a maximum of 1, and that's just to cover my ass.
Is that even the case?
Above it said goes back to look 300 tweets for unregistered users, so I assumed that's the case. I didn't go check, and certainly didn't assume everyone has a twitter account.I just remembered "registered bigger number, unregistered smaller number", and the 600 was the smaller number. By that time I had already forgotten there were 3 tiers, unregistered, suckers, and paying suckers. So I assumed everybody is talking about not having an account.
-
@topspin I think I saw something about a lower limit for newly registered suckers.
-
Yes, the limits were paid suckers, freeloaders and newly minted freeloaders.
The limits were stated as 6000/600/300 which quickly got revised to 8k/800/400 then 10k/1k/500 but it’s not clear if this actually is applied now (since no one much seems to be reporting it still happening), or whether the move off Google Cloud is complete because that was the inflection point - GC resources going away causing it to shit itself under load, with the limits being used to explain it.
-
@Zecc said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Do these limitations apply to embeds?
It doesn't seem to be the case, no, and indeed I have no idea how that can work.
For example, take this article (in French and ignore the topic which would be more suited to the but it's in French so you'll be doing so anyway). It ends with a couple of tweets that perfectly embed (at least for me?), but clicking them gives me the Twitter "something's wrong" error.
-
@topspin said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
Is that even the case?
There is one tiny caveat in @Arantor's post about being "logged in" but for the most part it's all about "verified / non-verified" users which in both cases assumes registered users (TBF, most services wouldn't really count "unregistered users" as "users," maybe more like "page views" or similar) i.e. people who do have a Twitter login (of whatever tier).
The rest of the mentions of these "not logged in" users is about how the error message is (i.e. a generic "something's wrong" rather than e.g. "you must be logged in to see this content"). But apart from that, the whole discussion is about people who do have a Twitter login.
-
@remi said in In other hostile takeover Tweets...:
But apart from that, the whole discussion is about people who do have a Twitter login.
I assumed it's not.
Who cares about people who have a Twitter login.