21 ms·

Ask HN: Can we ban Twitter links, please?

• snemvalts 5y ago
  Let's ban Medium as well when we're at it. They go a step further and actually paywall free articles, rather than twitter that just needs a free account.
• ksaj 5y ago
  I think there already is a rule. Something like "If it's a link to another link, just link to that one." My suspicion is they do it hoping that people who click it will also follow them on Twitter.
  • Tomte 5y ago
    > My suspicion is they do it hoping that people who click it will also follow them on Twitter. In my experience tweets are almost never submitted by the tweet's author.
  • ColinWright 5y ago
    I don't understand this ... people aren't posting links to their own tweets, they're posting links to tweets by other people that they found.
    • pfarrell 5y ago
      Is that different from posting a link to a webpage you found?
      • ColinWright 5y ago
        In short, no, linking to a thing you found on Twitter is absolutely no different from posting a link to a webpage you found. That's what I'm saying. Other people seem to think that HN users are submitting links to tweets that they themselves authored, and that's generally not the case, so there seem to be a lot of misconceptions flying around.
        • pfarrell 5y ago
          I misread your original comment and can see that now. I don’t like the slow degrade of the twitter experience for non-users and would like to see them get pushback from turning twitter into a Pinterest-like walled garden. But this isn’t the place to do it.
• t0bia_s 5y ago
  I'd rather educate people on how to use social platforms instead of banning some links. We should use social media primarily for sharing links, not to fill them by content. Then this problem would disappear.
• ilinks91 5y ago
• jb1991 5y ago
  For what it's worth, I do not have a twitter account but have never seen this popup you are seeing. Likely due to better browser blocking. I'm using FF with UBlock, ABP, and Privacy Badger.
  • defanor 5y ago
    FF with uBO (default lists + "annoyances") and noscript here (with Twitter itself whitelisted, otherwise it doesn't seem to work anymore), no popups in sight either.
• mrintellectual 5y ago
  There could be a personalized setting to show/hide Twitter links.
• baash05 5y ago
  NYTimes is just a paywall. There are a few of these. Flagging them as credential_walls or pay_walls would be cool.
  • dazc 5y ago
    Linking from HN to paywalled sites does nothing to discourage such site's behaviour. Fine, if you want a paywalled internet just don't suck the life out of the open version. It's a common complaint that decent websites don't get surfaced on Google - well given so many valuable links are going to cloaked sites such as NYT, it's no wonder?
  • beardyw 5y ago
    Someone will mostly put an archive link in the comments. Some of those stories are valuable.
  • whyoh 5y ago
    Flagging would be better than nothing, I guess. But it's not enough IMO. My main problem with Twitter is the UI, which is bad in general and terrible for long posts (threads). The second problem is the "culture" of posting outrage and low quality content in general, often full of typos (due to Twitter being a mobile-centric platform). Requiring credentials is just the last straw. So I think a stronger deterrent is needed. If not a ban, lowering the score for Twitter-link submissions (each vote counts 0.5 votes)?
    • ziml77 5y ago
      I do not want content missing out on page 1 simply because it's on Twitter. That content may not be available elsewhere, meaning that people are very likely to miss useful and informative posts. And it's not like a vote bias on HN is going to make those people move off of Twitter. Either use an extension to redirect you to a site like nitter.net, manually adjust the URL yourself, or just don't click on Twitter links at all.
• DarthNebo 5y ago
  Twitter lets you see that specific content but nothing else w/o logging in. Still better than full blown paywalls IMO.
• firecall 5y ago
  Twitter Threads are the absolute worst! Just write a blog post already! But I guess for better or worse, the Twitter Threads get people more internet points!
  • tiborsaas 5y ago
    Twitter played well in the impulse control game and unfortunately won over many people. Crafting a blog post takes way more effort compared to a rant like loosely connected stream of tweets.
    • mh_ 5y ago
      I wrote this about 13 years ago (a little tongue in cheek) but it held up: https://sensepost.com/blog/2009/twitter-killed-the-infosec-blogging-star/ https://sensepost.com/blog/2009/twitter-killed-the-infosec-b... -snip- There’s something liberating about saying “here’s a link”, as opposed to taking the time to formulate your thoughts into a full blown posting. We were curious if this twitter-effect was real, imaginary or only applicable to lazy people like us.. Thanks to python-twitter and a few lines of script we can look at the the blogging habits of some info-sec superstars (and maybe confuse correlation and causation to jump to conclusions while we at it). -snip-
  • btgeekboy 5y ago
    I've never come to understand the disdain for tweet threads. Sure, a blog would be nice, but as a reader I have no idea if it's going to render correctly on mobile or be inundated with terrible ads. At minimum there'll be a braindead cookie banner taking up 1/3 of the screen. Meanwhile, the author now has to go set up a blog somewhere, link to it, moderate comments on two forums, etc. All because people can't read with a faint horizontal line between coherent thoughts? Or is there something I'm missing?
    • tadzik_ 5y ago
      > but as a reader I have no idea if it's going to render correctly on mobile (...). At minimum there'll be a braindead cookie banner taking up 1/3 of the screen This is the reality of reading twitter on mobile if you aren't logged in/using their app though.
• MaknMoreGtnLess 5y ago
  > Every day there are posts here with some Twitter thread as the source These threads are extremely and overwhelmingly popular and that surprises me. These threads always start off like "Here's how to make $100MM in 10 hours" and then multiple sub posts of most generic nonsense I've ever seen. What's even interesting is people think they get tremendous value out of there and share/re-tweet and go crazy about them. Am I really stupid or are most people on Twitter who engage with these threads on some kind of hallucinogen(s)?
• cylinder714 5y ago
  I don't have a Twitter account, but I view posts and threads simply by opening Twitter links in a private browser window. Does that not work for you all?
  • MaknMoreGtnLess 5y ago
    > I don't have a Twitter account, but I view posts and threads simply by opening Twitter links in a private browser window. Does that not work for you all? No. After a while there's a huge modal layer asking me to log in
• rullopat 5y ago
  I would do the same for all the paywall links, there are really a lot of HN lately.
• durnygbur 5y ago
  Twitter is a platform for politicians and the rich to announce stuff and new laws. Haven't u... 1/8
  • MaknMoreGtnLess 5y ago
    Ha ha haha - EXACTLY to the last dot! I am terrified of where we are headed as a society. I get that writing blogs are more time consuming than tweeting but for the consumer - is this content really valuable in the long term?
• Adamantcheese 5y ago
  There are some posts where Twitter is the primary source. Banning Twitter outright isn't a solution for this type of situation.
• dusted 5y ago
  I'd much rather we ban paywalled links.
  • rognjen 5y ago
    Paywalled links without an alternative are disallowed as far as I know. When you encounter one, go into the comments and there will be an archive.is link.
• rkagerer 5y ago
  I'm disappointed by what Twitter has become and wish this could happen. But sometimes the content is relevant or innovative; not sure it's fair to expect HN to take a principled stance against the platform. How about a preference that hides Twitter submissions? Half the time I skip them anyway or hit Back before the site finishes loading. If enough readers move along, perhaps it would incentivize publishers to as well.
• laurencei 5y ago
  Doesnt the HN voting system kind of take care of this problem? If the tweet is low-quality, not important, then it wont get many upvotes. But if the tweet is highly important, has information people believe is valuable etc - then it gets upvoted towards the top of HN. An outright ban on tweets also creates a secondary problem; what if there was some single tweet that was extremely important to the HN community. The inability to post it means people miss out on the news/discussion, until later on when it is re-submitted as a news story elsewhere.
  • stunt 5y ago
    Not anymore. Last week we had an article about "Why babies cry" on the first page. Exact title was "Why babies cry in the first three months, how to tell them apart, and what to do"
  • samwillis 5y ago
    I agree with this. This is asked for somewhat regularly as well as banning paywalled sites. It would be wrong to do so. In general I think it's good to have the primary source be the linked posting. If that's a Twitter thread or an original price of journalism on a paywalled site, and its interesting to the HN community it should be linked here. What the OP if suggesting is that the only Twitter threads that are submitted are submitted by the Twitter user themselves, that's a tiny proportion of posts. If someone sees a twitter thread that would be interesting to the HN community there is no other option but to post it.
  • kevincox 5y ago
    Exactly this. I don't click Twitter links myself and have considered taking the time to filter them out often. But I don't feel the need to impose that on others. Just because I think Twitter is a poor way to share and discuss information, and that the website is painful to use doesn't mean that I should deprive others. Now an account-level domain filter. That would be a fantastic idea.
  • hhjinks 5y ago
    That's one way to view it. Personally, I think it works the opposite. The voting only gives the community so much power. Often the content starts dictating the community, not the other way around. With enough low effort and uninteresting content clogging up the chronological feed, you eventually see core- and power users migrating to other sites or communities. The community is eventually transplanted by those who seek out the kind of content that made the core community leave, perpetuating the new kind of content. I've seen it happen to a lot of subreddits.
• MattGaiser 5y ago
  > There are many free blog posting platforms out there that don't annoy users like that and — needless to say — are in a much more readable format. That is of no significance if the content you want to share is not on those platforms and you did not make the content.
  • whyoh 5y ago
    Right. My suggestion/rant is not just strictly about HN posts, but about Twitter in general. I'm hoping HN discouraging such links would have a wider effect and encourage Twitter users to write their next blog post elsewhere.
• llui85 5y ago
  What about rewriting links to Nitter? https://nitter.net/about https://nitter.net/about
  • achairapart 5y ago
    Better yet, using this extension: Privacy Redirect[0] [0]: https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect
  • gadders 5y ago
    Came here to say this. It's less user-hostile.
    • jacquesm 5y ago
      Right up to the point that it dies, takes all those links with it or redirects them to something completely different (or malicious).
      • ShowalkKama 5y ago
        when that happens you can just change the domain back to twitter.com
• mdoms 5y ago
  As a submitter I have no control over the platform the original content is published on.
  • IYasha 5y ago
    Post link to nitter?
• shantnutiwari 5y ago
  Somebody linked to nitter the other day (As an alternative to a twitter post) -- maybe thats what we should require-- if you must post a twitter link, please use nitter or similar
  • Jaruzel 5y ago
    Or as a community, if we don't see a nitter link in the comments, add one.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  • kevincox 5y ago
    I don't really like linking to alternative frontends. It actually makes it harder for people to decide for themselves. If I use extensions that redirect Twitter to my preferred Nitter instance hard-coding a Nitter link makes it worse for me. I feel the same way about people linking to old.reddit.com. I have configured Reddit to use the old UI automatically on desktop but on mobile I find the new UI the best of the awful options. However the old links still use the old UI because it was explicitly requested. Basically the canonical URL serves as a consistent identifier, and the reader can choose how it opens. By linking to alternatives that you prefer you are depriving the power-user reader that choice to apply their preference. So I think we should use canonical URLs most of the time (especially for popular sites) because I value viewers preferences more than submitters preferences or a better default.
• arm 5y ago
  I used to have the same misgivings with Twitter threads being linked, but after discovering Privacy Redirect¹ (and Privacy Redirect for Safari²)—which automatically redirects Twitter links to a alternative Twitter frontend (like Nitter)—Twitter threads are much nicer to read. ―――――― ¹ — https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect ² — https://github.com/smmr-software/privacy-redirect-safari https://github.com/smmr-software/privacy-redirect-safari
• Tomte 5y ago
  You don't get to decide for others where they are writing, and you don't get to decide for others what they are upvoting on HN. There aren't many Twitter submissions, at least on the front page. Get over it, nobody forces you to click on a Twitter link. There are plenty of other submissions.
• nivertech 5y ago
  IMO it should be configurable per user. Not only twitter, but all social media, paywalls, politics, etc. Also HN desperately lacking tags: I only interested in couple of tech stacks/protocols and several problem domains/verticals - why do I need sift through all these unrelevant submissions?
  • config_yml 5y ago
    IMHO that's the beauty of HN. By "sifting" through "unrelevant" submissions you discover things that you wouldn't have looked at otherwise.
  • mywacaday 5y ago
    I have agreed with all your points at one time or another but I now think that it's HNs structure that stops it turning into Reddit/social media or another echo chamber. I don't program or develop for a living or hobby any more but the realtively high quality submissions and the super high quality comments and discussions make the the trawl worth while, I regularly find interesting discussion in subjects I have no real interest in that cause me to reflect on my own opinions and thinking, to me that is invaluable and I don't get it anywhere else.
  • dspillett 5y ago
    I think that would be complex to implement in a way that would be useful to enough people without getting in the way of everyone else, you are either putting a log of load on detecting what content is into the site, or putting that load onto submitters by expecting them to take time to tag things appropriately. And the just isn't enough traffic to make it worthwhile IMO (is scanning a page, or maybe two, of HN to see if anything piques your interest really a chore?). I avoid clicking twitter links generally, Medium too, but the discussion they bring up can be interesting, and often include links to relevant information from less irritating sources, so I wouldn't want them to simply not be here. If you do want fully rid of the links yourself, maybe a userscript is a practical answer? Though if you are a Chrome user that option will be less convenient in future as IIRC Manifest 3 will break options like Tapermonkey (a bookmarklet will still work, assuming you don't mind an extra click).
• dan-robertson 5y ago
  One tip is to replace twitter.com in the URL with nitter.net. But I realise that isn’t a great solution. I think one must accept that, annoying as the platform may be, Twitter is the place where many discussions of interest to HN happen and so I think it ought to be acceptable to link it. One could imagine an alternative where people post buzzfeed-style blog posts that merely repost Twitter threads and I think that would be worse.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• aasasd 5y ago
  Indeed, let's make sure only articles allowed are those with a cheesy work anecdote at the start for those who fall asleep too easily, then the entire life story of the subject person beginning with their dad, and ten screenfuls down you may finally learn what the article is supposedly about. I'm not even exaggerating, that's one of the top posts from the past week. Editors of longreads in ‘serious’ publications love this formula for some mysterious reason.
• sva_ 5y ago
  No blanket bans on websites please. I dislike Twitters interface as much as the next guy, but if it annoys you so much, then use an adblocker filter. twitter.com##[id^="layers"] > [class^="css-"]:has([dir^="auto"]):not(:has([aria-expanded])):has(a[href^="/"]):has-text(/Log in|Sign Up/) twitter.com##html[dir]:style(overflow: auto !important;)
  • Jaruzel 5y ago
    I've just done some rudimentary testing... 1. Incognito window -> No Model Popup, just the accept cookies/sign-in bottom bar 2. Edge with no add-ons -> No Model Popup, just the accept cookies/sign-in bottom bar 3. Chrome with uBlock Origin -> Model Popup, impossible to browse Twitter if not logged in. So, are they detecting an ad-blocker, and ONLY doing the model popup on those browsers?
    • strken 5y ago
      If Chrome's your main browser, they're probably just tracking you and detecting that you've visited Twitter a number of times without signing up.
      • weird-eye-issue 5y ago
        By the way you can enable extensions in Incognito if you wanted to test this
    • mkl 5y ago
      Chrome with uBlock Origin here, and I've never seen the modal*, so it can't be as simple as that. I'd guess country plays a role. Of course, even without the modal, I often can't find the comments/replies that other people seem to, but that's a different problem. *Yes, not "model", "modal" as in "mode", but not spelled as in "mode".
    • dmos62 5y ago
      Firefox + ublock origin = no annoyances on twitter without being signed in.
• soheilpro 5y ago
  This got me wondering, are there any websites that are banned from HN?
  • Tomte 5y ago
    Some domains are shadowbanned (Huffington Post, for example), but the list is not public.
  • jacquesm 5y ago
    Absolutely, turn showdead on and check the 'new' page.
• grujicd 5y ago
  If content is relevant for HN, I would like to see it, even if it’s on Twitter. Yes, we would collectively prefer that it’s in a blog and that there are no paywalls or login screens, that RSS is available everywhere, that Google Reader is still alive, etc. But that’s not the current reality. To make things less abstract, John Carmack is active on twitter. Should we ban a link to his tweets if it’s something interesting?
• outloudvi 5y ago
  Unfortunately Twitter still remains as a major information source. Since Twitter does not care about UX for unregistered users (so do Facebook, Instagram, Medium, Reddit on mobile and so on), users can switch to Nitter instances or using some extensions to block it. It would be also somehow helpful to disable Cookie on twitter.com.
• jasode 5y ago
  >There are many free blog posting platforms out there that don't annoy users like that [...] All it takes is a couple of minutes to sign up... Your proposed suggestion usually can't be followed as it seems like you're not noticing the difference between the HN submitter userid vs the Twitter userid. The HN submitters sharing the links are usually not the Twitter authors. Consider the Twitter SSD thread on the HN frontpage right now and look at the metadata fields : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30419618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30419618 * The HN user who submitted it : ahachete * The Twitter user: xenadu02 Side note: I notice that xenadu02's Twitter profile has a link to his blog website (http://russbishop.net http://russbishop.net) but he hasn't put any articles there since 2019. (It looks like that site doesn't have SSL enabled so it's not even modernized for https.) The SSD comparison was only published to his Twitter page. It's been frequently discussed why people do that even though many readers don't like it: the Twitter platform has more engagement from a bigger audience than a personal blog site.
• pheasantquiff 5y ago
  It's disappointing that some very clever and interesting people now write posts (exclusively?) on twitter. This means that many people, like myself, cannot read them (for non-technical reasons). I have a couple of solutions to this: The first is very low-tech. If you post a twitter link please copy/paste the tweet into a HN comment. The second is please simul-post your tweets to your personal blog. Of course this requires extra effort, but it could be alleviated by making a twitter client which provides simul-posting. Although such a client is probably against corp-law. As more people are making informative tweets, we are locking too much valuable information away behind the tweet-wall. I think this is an important post and am glad [whyoh] has raised the general topic.
  • carrolldunham 5y ago
    >cannot read them Just type nitter.net over twitter.com
    • pheasantquiff 5y ago
      Thanks. I just tried this (recent SSD submission) and it worked. I also have a non-javascript browser so I was not optimistic, but it did work. https://nitter.net/xenadu02/status/1495693475584557056 https://nitter.net/xenadu02/status/1495693475584557056
    • gulbrandr 5y ago
      Other public instances can be found here https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances
    • sodality2 5y ago
      https://twiiit.com https://twiiit.com redirects to a random online instance of nitter.
    • bmn__ 5y ago
      See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30425746 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30425746
  • 5y ago
• jacquesm 5y ago
  No. People that barely participate on HN are the ones with the loudest voices when it comes to what should/may be posted and what not. But you have all the power you need to improve HN right at your fingertips: quality submissions, rather than ASK HN's requesting blanket censorship, upvotes of articles on the new page that are interesting (and note that there is more than one new page). That's far more effective than a ban on one of the most popular social media sites, that also happens to be a pretty good conduit for timely stuff. Have a look at a couple of these pages and decide if you wanted to lose all of the highly upvoted links: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=twitter.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=twitter.com
  • ur-whale 5y ago
    > decide if you wanted to lose all of the highly upvoted links To be fair, they are already lost to a sizeable fraction of the audience now that Twitter pesters you for signing in.
    • jacquesm 5y ago
      As opposed to all the paywalled articles that are regularly submitted to HN? Really, I don't see the difference, if anything Twitter wins out there because (1) it is free and (2) it's super easy to circumvent.
  • Turing_Machine 5y ago
    As of this moment, 4 of the first 10 stories at your link are [dead] or [flagged] [dead]. Edit: compare to 1 of the first 10 and 2 of the first 30 for washingtonpost.com. Twitter appears to be a very low-quality source overall. > People that barely participate on HN are the ones with the loudest voices when it comes to what should/may be posted and what not. I participate quite a bit, and I think Twitter is cancer.
    • jacquesm 5y ago
      > As of this moment, 4 of the first 10 stories at your link are [dead] or [flagged] [dead]. Yes, but in the first couple of pages there are plenty with 100's of upvotes that we would have missed out on. To me this is proof that the system works. > I participate quite a bit, and I think Twitter is cancer. I don't think that's either accurate or in good taste.
• 4io3i343io4 5y ago
  It's such a joke that even officials at least in my country post their stuff to Twitter, where people without account can't read it... The platform is clearly unsuitable for any serious communication.
• keiferski 5y ago
  Links to Twitter discussions are fine, but it would be nice if they automatically redirected to a tweet-reader app and/or a self post that contained the entire discussion.
• ufo 5y ago
  The main problem I have with twitter links is that they're too short to understand what they're saying if you don't already know the whole context. I almost always have to dig through the HN comment section hoping that someone explained what the tweet said.
• SolveMyNight 5y ago
  A very valid point is that Twitter asks for an account to view content. This makes it unacceptable to be posted here as is, imo. All OPs posting Tweets should be required to post an alternative link which doesn't require an account, just like with other paywalled content.
  • sva_ 5y ago
    This comment is your only contribution on this site, and that contribution is demanding censorship? Seems legit.
    • SolveMyNight 5y ago
      The irony in complaining about censorship while censoring someone for 'having a new account'. Cheers for the warm welcome! The 'register' page is there for a reason...
      • sva_ 5y ago
        Welcome around. I can assure you, that you're not being censored. I was merely voicing my opinion, that it seems weird that someone who just joined this place would have their first post be voicing their support to demand censorship of the submission process of the site. Perhaps it was a coincidence, if so, my apologies.
• CodeGlitch 5y ago
  Perhaps HN could automatically convert Twitter links into nitter.net?
  • jacquesm 5y ago
    That just sets you up for long term issues similar to the ones associated with URL redirectors and shorteners.
    • CodeGlitch 5y ago
      Thanks, but dang could do a search and replace if that ever occurred?
      • jacquesm 5y ago
        Dan has enough on his plate I would say. HN links to original sources, that's in the guidelines, if that's Twitter then so be it, if you want to replace the links there are browser plug ins that will do that for you with ease.
        • CodeGlitch 5y ago
          Yeah the browser plugin route looks like the best solution for now. Cheers.
  • ziml77 5y ago
    A simple userscript should do the trick instead of HN changing the URL. var nitterUrl = window.location.toString().replace('twitter.com', 'nitter.net'); window.location.replace(nitterUrl); Though if you want to be sure you never send a single packet to Twitter, you'll have to make a script that operates on all sites and rewrites URLs in the anchor tags. Edit: Just saw someone mention this extension which could be a better option https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect
    • ShowalkKama 5y ago
• vymague 5y ago
  > Twitter won't let you see the content without logging in anymore. I don't know why people don't make a bigger deal out of it. I guess everyone has twitter now.
• oxplot 5y ago
  First of all, absolutely not. - Twitter hosts some of the highest quality content that get into the nitty gritty of some topic, exactly because it's so low friction to post to Twitter. Those of you saying "just put it on a blog" are either oblivious to how much more effort that is, or have already spent a lot of time making blogging low friction for your needs. That's not the rule however. - There are countless posts with a mixed quality here from NY Times and other subscription based sites that show a pay wall when opened. Do you propose banning those too? - If someone really cares to find out what's there to see, they'll sign up. If not, they move on and the post doesn't get any upvotes. Works itself out. As others have mentioned, script it out of your view if it really bothers you that much.
• IYasha 5y ago
  Yes, please.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• aembleton 5y ago
  If you don't want to login to twitter, then install the Redirector addon: https://einaregilsson.com/redirector/ https://einaregilsson.com/redirector/ Then set a redirect from twitter links to https://nitter.net https://nitter.net or https://threadreaderapp.com/ https://threadreaderapp.com/
• kornhole 5y ago
  As Twitter now requires ID and it closes down alternative front ends such as nitter.net, these posts will naturally lose relevance and not be upvoted by those who cannot view them. We have similar situation with Facebook.
• ChrisArchitect 5y ago
  There was another recent complaint about this 'twitter not letting you see content without popups asking you to login'. What is this about? Doesn't seem to be case. Tweets are public for the most part, even the replies. I cannot duplicate this behavior on Chrome or Firefox (Windows, logged out, incognito, because you seem to want to use a site without actually being a participant). Are you using some weird addons or something, ad blocker? Weirdness. Tweet links wouldn't keep being shared on here if they weren't accessible by majority of readers. The side issue is the reason for these shares is trend of more content being shared only as tweets, breaking news, the dreaded threads etc....with no other non-social source at the time.... breaking news with no associated blog post or news story yet etc, so as HN moves fast, it's the tweet that gets shared.
  • ChrisArchitect 5y ago
    Seeing the investigating below where some mention behaviour with popups may be related to ad-blockers. Not the best move by Twitter but also no sympathy from me here. You want to read content without logging in to be an actual participant on the site and ad-block also out of paranoia or whatever? Ease up on the entitlement. It's not in Twitter's interest really to wall-off all their content and I'm all for the open web but them trying to onboard users visiting that aren't signed in and encourage people to use the site where yes, there will be ads, is their right.
• dang 5y ago
  This is an easy question to decide once you understand that there's a single thing we're optimizing for on HN, namely intellectual curiosity: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=curiosity%20optimiz%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.... We're not going to ban Twitter because, like it or not, it's the source of some of the most intellectually interesting material that gets posted here. It's also, of course, the source of a lot of gunk. We penalize such sites by default (almost all major media sites are penalized this way on HN), but we don't ban them, because we'd miss out on too many good things if we did. It's more important not to miss good things than it is to ban bad things: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22article%20quality%22%20%22site%20quality%22%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... The paywall question is a different one. See https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 for how we handle paywalls. I don't think twitter.com is hardwalled, though like a lot of big sites, its behavior seems to vary a lot across different regions. It shouldn't be hard for people to post workarounds in the threads, though.
• Seb-C 5y ago
  Those links have been usable again since I installed this extension (automatically redirects to Nitter, which is an alternative client for Twitter). https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nitter-redirect/mohaicophfnifehkkkdbcejkflmgfkof https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nitter-redirect/mo... Feels like déjà-vu with 'old twitter redirect', but it works wonderfully for me.
• lamontcg 5y ago
  I tend to scan an RSS feed of HN articles that hit at least 100 points and I don't think I ever see twitter links. If you're reading `new` then I think you're going to have to wade through the garbage. Every now and then there's a good twitter thread by a legit expert in their field which adds context to something in the news which you really can't get anywhere else. Particularly during the pandemic.