Technology

Both Apple and Google benefit from Twitter "nazifying" their users so they vote Repug and pay zero taxes. They'll never do shit.

Exactly my thoughts, the rules are bullshit if they are not equal for everybody.

We’ll see. Bullying is a probably a bigger hurdle for them to jump over. The single letter rule was so that people couldn’t game App Store search results.

So if I make and app to track potassium intake, I get special priviledges?

K

The problem though is that your comment/mindset, and of those like you, who just want to ignore Twitter and just do our own thing here, ignores the point of the social gathering critical mass situation.

People talk about Twitter because they're trying to gain intel from others about if they're moving over or staying, so they can decide if they should stay or move over as well. They're trying to determine the location of where everyone will gather at.

And yes, at this point you're going to say "oh they should move over anyway and we will just grow our content here". Unfortunately that's not how human minds work, we're social creatures, and we like to gather in singular large locations when we want to interact with each other socially.

There's a battle being fought right now, the battle for where the social critical gathering point is located/hosted at.

To ignore that battle, is to lose that battle.

I think it's overlooked how many people just by default have Twitter on their phone and open it while on the toilet or waiting in line etc. It will essentially fill that need for them outside of anything Musk does short of rendering the service unavailable. Reddit used to be the big one for people who were a bit more tech savvy, even Twitter in it's inception was full of tech journalists, I think that's the status they've lost over the years. If you're connected to tech scene in some way Fed is fertile ground.

I can't imagine that still won't violate both store policies.

Everything you mentioned is simply a subset of "[corporation] takes away our ability to own property" (i.e., trying to usurp our fundamental property right to control our computer). You can also add Apple and John Deere "right to repair" to the list, along with automakers trying to lock capabilities of the machine we already payfor behind paywalled subscriptions. It's all the same underlying issue.

Make no mistake: corporations are waging a war on the public's right to own property, and we're going to be forcibly returned to serfdom if we don't start fighting back.

Luckily there are alternatives to all of these.

Duck duck go can replace Google search. Dropbox can replace Google drive. Firefox can replace Chrome.

Mastodon replaces x / Twitter

Go buy a brother printer instead of HP

As far as Adobe, we do have photopea... The rest are harder.

The only reason why this dipshit wants to get rid of the block feature is because he's probably the most blocked person on Twitter. People were sick of his dumb, unfunny brain farts getting pushed into their timeline and blocked him, and his ego can't handle it.

I never got onto twitter in the first place. I got a bit concerned when governments and NGOs started using it as the default shopfront from which they interacted with the public.

I've read somewhere that all important decision making for SpaceX and Tesla are out of muskrat's hands.

oh him and his buddies will still enjoy blocking undesirables. this whole stunt is just so everyone has to read every stupid thought that comes out of his stupid mouth.

Imagine being excited about publicly announcing the deletion of a critical feature. Have you even seen such a brazen and naked attempt at control from a CEO or corporation? Seriously, name one. Name one company that has done this sort of thing.

Any other company that would even attempt to remove a critical feature like that would try to sugarcoat it with an apology letter about how it was a tough decision, or have a bulleted list of reasons why they were forced to remove the feature.

No, not this guy. Just a blind, unfiltered matter-of-fact tweet. No explanation. No apologies. No signs of any remorse.

Name. One. Company. Who. Has. Done. This.

If it's an "in-app system" that the user doesn't have access to, what's the point of building it into the app at all?

The people running the service at the company don't use the app itself, they use dedicated internal tools that interact with the service.

They also clearly differentiate between reporting users and content, and requiring that the user be able to directly block them in the app, so I think it's pretty clear they're requiring direct blocking at the end user level.