Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | self_awareness's commentslogin

Because people like using social media?

I don't know about USA, but in the place I live, I can get a package 24 hours after buying it on-line, even on Saturday. It depends on when the shop will actually send the package.

FYI: MIT licensed

Is it wrong? Who the heck downvotes this?

username checks out

I felt bad after reading your comment.

This is generally sad.

People hate a service, but they depend on it so much they create whole codebases to cope with it.

Depending on things we hate is a tragedy.

How about just admitting the things you hate? Then you can just drop it and live a happier life.

Unless you are of course somehow required/forced to use X, then I'm all for projects like these.


I assume the use case is for people who don't have a twitter account but encounter twitter links from time to time (Twitter's been broken for non-logged-in users since shortly after Naughty Old Mr Car took over, and even before his reign was sometimes flaky for them).

Broken? They curbed abuse and view botting while increasing their user base. Working as intended.

More of a "Ugh, I clicked a mystery link, and it's Twitter" situation for me. A rare case for sure, but I'm petty enough that adding even one (legit, non-bot) MAU irks me.

Define depending. I don't post on it and I don't care much about its algorithmic timeline, but if I didn't use it I'd miss out on the announcements and posts from several people and companies I'm interested in. The alternative is cutting myself out from those, not just from Twitter itself.

Xcancel.com is a site that archives discussions that took place on a site I don't want to visit. What's wrong with that?

Similarly archive.org maintains copies of the Fox News website in the past. I don't see that as sad. If anything, it's a way to keep these sites accountable because they can't just memory-hole the content they once hosted.


I never liked Twitter and I like X just as little but I don't 'hate' them. I use libredirect to redirect to my own instances of Nitter, Redlib and Invidious (and more services but these are the 'big' one) not because I 'hate' X, Reddit and YouTube but because I don't want them to track me, I don't like ads and using these services through proxies makes then work on hardware which would totally bog down were it not for the proxies. It is amazing how much useless guff can be cut away from these while improving the user experience.

> How about just admitting the things you hate? Then you can just drop it and live a happier life.

These are two very separate things. I hate X. That doesn't mean I hate the few remaining people on there who still post things I wish to see. It's an annoyingly good source of artwork. Many migrated/dualpost to Bluesky, but far from all.

For some similar real world example:s I hate (all?) the local grocery stores and other shops I buy food from. That doesn't mean I'm going to stop buying food from them. I'm not a fan of any of the local electronics shops, but sometimes they're the only choice if I want a local warranty, which I wouldn't get if I imported one. The actually good option in both of these cases simply doesn't exist in the first place, and doing nothing is rarely a desirable option.


Honestly I barely see the use of this, I've ""needed"" to read a twitter thread like once in my life, I can't imagine needing it so often that a dedicated extension makes sense.

Also, I only adopt new browser plugins very sparingly, because the chance of some random extension getting bought out by a shadowy ad and malware firm is way too high, and Mozilla doesn't assure me with the level of vetting they do (nonexistent, compared to F-Droid or any mainstream linux distro.) Why is this such a problem for Mozilla? They even try to make it difficult to get extensions from anybody but them, so a third party extension store that actually does due diligence is basically off the table. I can't even install extensions straight from a developer's github, which wouldn't be as good as a trusted 3rd party repo, but still better than Mozilla's status quo. In fact, so called userscripts loaded through one trusted extension actually feel a lot safer than normal extensions.


I think you're either over- or underthinking this. I don't want to have an X account, but I do sometimes want to follow a link to a specific tweet and be able to view the surrounding context. So sites like xcancel and nitter are useful to me.

So, in other words, you want the cargo, but without the tiring "pay for it" aspect?

> So, in other words, you want the cargo, but without the tiring "pay for it" aspect?

I'm not trying to be difficult, but I'm not quite sure what this means! In literal terms, I want the ability to read tweets, see threads and replies, and view a user's tweets chronologically, and I don't think the second and third things are possible on X.com without an account. I don't want an account for various reasons, including that I don't want any temptation to become a regular or active user.


The idea that we can independently decide what to ignore in life is a fallacy I think. Not read regularly sure, but we need to know what's written on X in some cases when it could be important for news or politics.

> we need to know what's written on X in some cases when it could be important for news or politics.

If it's that important, you'll see it elsewhere in no time at all.


Is twitter the only way to get the information you need?

When the information is "what exactly did person X tweet", then yeah. I'm in favour of mostly avoiding X, and I make a point of not spending significant time on it or actively participating. But sometimes, I want to follow a link to a tweet that someone whose work I'm reading thinks is relevant -- or I want to see what a specific person has been saying publicly lately, and it happens that X is one of the main places they do that.

A lot of people used to use Twitter before it got bought out and made worse.

Somewhat related: more than half of my Firefox extensions are to fix YouTube (no shorts, no autoplay in playlists, more videos on the home page, no AI dubs or title translation (plus sponsorblock)). I don't hate it but I hate its progressive enshittification.

Though that's quite different from X; while the issues with YouTube are mostly plain old enshittification, the issues I have with X are more political (thus, I do hate it).


Which ones do you use?

I use the following:

* No autoplay on playlists: https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/no-playlist-auto...

* No translations and AI dubs: https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/youtube-no-trans...

* No YouTube shorts: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/hide-youtube-...

* More videos on the home page / smaller thumbnails: https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/addon/youtube-tweaks/ (to be fair, it could probably replace the "No YT shorts" one)

Not sure how safe those are, but since they only require access to data for youtube domains I assume if there was a leak it would not be too bad.


Unfortunately the alternatives aren't much better. Bluesky now does the same BS where they demand an account if you just want to read replies to a tweet or whatever they call that at bluesky.

And there is no bskycancel.com yet.


Huh, no it doesn't? Threads work fine when logged out on Bluesky (unless a post has been set by the author to logged-in users only, in which case it'll be hidden; this is fairly rare tho).

To add to that, this option only limits visibility on official Bluesky app/website. The data for this post is still available and third-party clients can make use of it. Hence what GP asks already exists: https://skyview.social/.

Thanks!

No they don’t. That is an opt-in setting that a user can put on their profile to only have logged in users see their content. The default is open viewing.

Ah ok, I don't use bsky much but I got linked there on another HN post. I could see that but when I clicked on replies I got a login prompt just like twitter.

I normally use nostr more because that really is decentralised. Also mastodon. Though I don't like the short message twitter style blogs anyway. So Lemmy really is my favourite (too bad about all the tankies though)


A bigger problem with BS is the rabid and - to use a phrase often used by them - toxic user base which seems to derive energy from pouring its frenzied opinions on whatever Trump, Musk and those in their general surroundings are supposed to be guilty of. If there was ever a case of the pot telling the kettle it is black it is the b.s. pouring out of a substantial fraction of the denizens of BS who have turned the place into what they accuse X of being and then some.

What have they turned it into? Be specific. You say it turned into "what they accuse X of being" but I don't know what that is.

They turned what was supposed to be a refuge from the 'hate' and 'toxic ${subject}' of Musk-owned X into a hive of 'hate' and 'toxic ${subject}', the only difference being that on BS the 'hate' and 'toxicity' is aimed at X, Musk, Trump and those who dare to trespass outside of the desired narrative of the day. BS is for the 'left' what e.g. Gab is for the 'right': an outpost for the looney fringe. On both Gab as well as BS you may be able to find some areas which are not suffused with ideologically driven discourse but that is the exception to the rule.

I'm still not understanding you.

If you're a happy participant of BS I wish you good luck. If you're not using the site/service yet but plan to do so I advice you to have a good look around the place before you commit too much time and effort in it.

You're really selling me on bluesky lol. I have no time for toxic masculinity and conservatism.

Though I tend to hang out at fediverse instances that are more lgbt specific and not that political, I'm just sick of politics, I don't believe in democracy anymore since my own country went 30% to the extreme right party. I just hang out with like-minded people and avoid everyone else.


Isn't the concept of 'lgbt' (etc.) inherently political? I never come across the acronym without it being bandied around in a political context. Also, being with 'like-minded people' is, again, political just as intentionally trying to interact with people outside your personal bubble. That's what makes it so hard to 'keep out politics' since just about everything has been made political: from what you eat to what you work with to what you read to where you live, where and how you travel, with whom you speak and, yes, your sexual preferences and everything else. What music you listen to, what books you read, what (if any) movies you see, everything.

And no, BS will most likely not be your place. Even if you're welcomed now you'll have to keep walking on eggshells to make sure you never violate the current and every-changing unwritten rules and regulations and dictions and dogmas or you'll be quickly ousted as not being pure enough. Especially if you don't want to talk politics - and with 'talk politics' I mean agree with and verbally support the current thing. If you're one of the ideological puritans who're in the forefront of ousting infidels you'll sooner or later be hoisted on your own petard so the only way to win that game is by not playing it.


No lgbt is not political. It was made political by our enemies who think they have a say in what consenting adults do in their bedroom.

In lgbt spaces it's much more free for someone to be as they are, the only thing that's not allowed is judging others. No phobias, no ageism etc. And we don't generally talk about politics other than how to survive in the current climate.

I would most equate it with rave culture I think. That openness and acceptance of being different.


> Isn't the concept of 'lgbt' (etc.) inherently political?

I mean in the sense that literally everything is political, yes, I suppose so. Certainly if you ask, say, a Marxist, then yes. But in that sense, so is, say, a chocolate bar.

In the more narrow everyday sense of the word, though, nope, my mere existence isn't a political matter.


> In the more narrow everyday sense of the word, though, nope, my mere existence isn't a political matter.

It isn't, but neither is your existence 'lgbt' since you are not defined solely by your sexual orientation. You may have been gathered - by whom? - under this moniker but had nobody ever thought to create an identity category related to sexual orientation your existence would not have been changed in any way. It is the fact that one of your characteristics has been turned into a 'membership card' of a specific identity which makes 'lgbt' political.

I'm left-handed and as far as I know - ... - there is no identity category related to handedness (yet). If one were to be dreamt up by someone and that person decided I would be counted in as a member of this identity group and be represented by some self-appointed spokesperson my handedness would have been politicised. It would not make a whit of difference as far as my 'existence' were concerned, I'm left-handed with our without a related identity group.


Okay, so on _your_ basis (that it is an identity), being, say, a bird-watcher, or a nerd, or from a rural area, or all sorts of other things, can be, and often is, treated as an identity, and is thus political.

(Ditto for left-handed people to some extent; less of a thing these days, but there _was_ a time they were kinda treated as an outgroup in many places.)


Only if people start talking about the 'bird-watching' community instead of individual bird watchers and people who happen to like watching birds begin to talk about themselves in that way: as a member of the bird-watching community I .... The same for the other examples: nerds, 'farmers', etc. In essence it comes down to this: when people start being identified and as a result start identifying themselves by some specific characteristic - bird-watcher, nerd, etc - it starts becoming political. Some of these examples - especially the nerdy one - won't come to much but it wouldn't surprise you to read about an organised group of bird-watchers from the bird-watching community staking out a protest in front of some planned building site where a small patch of forest is to be razed to the ground to make place for some housing project. The same is true for the rural example, especially those who actually derive their living from 'rural activities' - farmers and those dependent on them for their livelihood have been active as political groups for a very long time.

Here's one of the many ways the Open University answers the question on what politics is:

Among the broadest ways of defining politics is to understand it as a ‘social activity’ – an activity we engage in together with others, or one through which we engage others. Politics, in this sense, is ‘always a dialogue, and never a monologue’ (Heywood, 2013, p. 1). A similarly broad (or perhaps even broader) definition is offered by Arendt (2005), who argues that politics does not have an ‘essence’ – it does not have an intrinsic nature, or an indispensable element according to which we can definitively, and in all circumstances, identify something as political. Thus, there are no quintessentially political acts, subjects or places. Politics, rather, is the world that emerges between us – the world that emerges through our interactions with each other, or through the ways that our individual actions and perspectives are aggregated into collectivities. [1]

[1] https://www.open.edu/openlearn/society-politics-law/what-pol...


You are correct - modern society is disgustingly intolerant of child pornography and dictatorships.

Child pornography and dictatorships are good, and there should be more of it.


There's Twitter links on the frontpage of HN right now. Sure, I don't have an account but until _nobody_ interesting has an account I have to use XCancel. The UX for signed out users is deliberately bad.

> How about just admitting the things you hate? Then you can just drop it and live a happier life.

I hate X and have never used it.

Any link that resolves to Twitter will instantly become a closed tab; still waiting for that happier life.


If more people behaved like this, X would never be a problem, because it wouldn't exist. But most people are opportunists and just want to use, without thinking about consequences.

I hate X, its anti-user patterns and how its oligarch owner uses it to manipulate discourse to steer society towards his right-wing extremist views.

That being said, many public figures have not made the same judgement and post their communications there.

Should I just stop informing myself on the public discourse because the place it happens got taken over by a shady character?

I think using code to liberate the discourse from its would-be manipulator is the most reasonable thing to do and a reflection of true hacker ethics.


Do you apply the same logic to owners of popular newspapers such as BBC, CNN, Fox News etc?

Since X is still highly popular, will you ever reconsider your position?

Just curious, not looking for a fight or debate.


> Do you apply the same logic to owners of popular newspapers such as BBC, CNN, Fox News etc?

Of course! It's always important to consider the agenda behind any media.

> Since X is still highly popular, will you ever reconsider your position?

I don't see how popularity is a factor. It has data I want in a system I don't support, so I exfiltrate the data.


Your "true hacker ethics" results in the person still using X to distribute information, so you're actually powering the popularity of X.

I can't control what other people do, unfortunately. But I can choose to engage on my own terms.

Agree. I have the X domain blacklisted in my Pihole.

Remember when Reddit mods made a whole show of virtue signaling about banning links to X, but most of those same subreddits’ top content (and 20% of the front page) was screenshots of X?

A lot of people are unwilling to withstand even a bit of discomfort to stand up for their supposed principles.


TBH posting twitter screenshots doesn't give any revenue, data or clicks to Musk, which is what we want.

There are still people who only post stuff on Twitter whose opinion I kinda want to hear, but I'm not creating an account there.


it doesnt sound sustainable anyway, you would need somebody to go through each post to check for twitter screenshots. blocking a certain domain is automated, i would imagine

i remember some guy luke_skyw, or similar. Did you write any tutorials back then?

> Inplace overlay on Wayland only works with fullscreen windows (Wayland's security model prevents knowing window positions).

"Security is more important than usability. In a perfect world, no one would be able to use anything!"


HN is an anti-Trump fanclub of people who think they know better, while pointing out that worst trait of Trump is that he thinks he knows better, hence the downvotes.

A lot of those were written in assembly by teenagers, using WinAPI directly. Yet they still run on Win10/Win11. A lost art.

Win32 is definitely not a lost art. It's more accessible than ever with modern code generation tools like cswin32.

This inspiration to build things that look like this is what has been lost.


If today's programmers need code generation tools to use what teenagers could use on their own back in the day, then it truly is a lost art.

The code generator just recreates the C header files in C#, let's not be dramatic.

Is it a lost art or does nobody do it more than they have to because it was always such bear?

Definitely a lost art.

It's not all about WinAPI, it's about the approach.

Today's approach is "let me use electron for GUI and python backend for my bitcoin monitoring app because it's convenient for me". This results in bundling 1 GB of code for a trivial project which is a pain to use.

And the "legacy" approach is "let me use masm32 and winapi because it will be enough".


Those aren't mutually exclusive

It wasn’t all assembly (though those were the popular ones), heavy C use too. What really changed the game was when DirectX came.

Do you know where I can find source code for such intros?


Thematically, many of them resemble the kind of WordArt we used to make as children in MS Word.

Bikeshedding.

Libraries this well established can afford to bikeshed.

True. But for most projects, this is pretty much counterproductive.

> There's a misconception that you can't statically link your app when using the open-source LGPL version of Qt. From my reading of the LGPL license this doesn't appear to be the case. The LGPL allows you to statically link your app as long as you provide the object files and allow users to relink your app with a different version of Qt. I've observed many people spreading this misinformation about only being able to dynamically link with the LGPL version of Qt.

I mean... is it possible to statically link while giving an option to re-link an application using different set of libraries?


Yes, of course.

By calling dlopen() in runtime? Or how exactly?

The answer is linked to by the section of the article you quoted:

> (1) If you statically link against an LGPLed library, you must also provide your application in an object (not necessarily source) format, so that a user has the opportunity to modify the library and relink the application.

And also answered directly in the section you quoted:

> as long as you provide the object files and allow users to relink your app with a different version of Qt


By linking the provided proprietary object files with Qt compiled from source.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: