3 ms·

Obviously they do. To quote their TOS: > You agree that you will not work around any technical limitations in the software provided to you as part of the Servi

by oauea 4y ago

Obviously they do. To quote their TOS: > You agree that you will not work around any technical limitations in the software provided to you as part of the Services, or reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the software, except and only to the extent that applicable law expressly permits. Go to twitter right now and try to post a message containing 300 characters. You can't do it. It is a technical limitation. Now make a screenshot of that text and post it. You just worked around a technical limitation and are now in blatant violation of their TOS.

coldpie 4y ago
- oauea 4y ago
  Have you considered reading the TOS instead of insulting me?
  - coldpie 4y ago
    Yes, obviously I have read it. The technical limitations are that you can post 250 characters and up to four images. There are no technical limitations being violated by posting an image containing more than 250 characters. People use images all the time to communicate longer text portions in a single post. Do you really think Twitter's intent by saying users may not work around technical limitations is to clamp down on this extremely common behavior?
    - oauea 4y ago
      I'm not talking about their intent, I'm not a mind reader, I'm talking about their published TOS.
      - coldpie 4y ago
        Yes, I regret putting those last two sentences in there. Please ignore them and just respond to the first two: > The technical limitations are that you can post 250 characters and up to four images. There are no technical limitations being violated by posting an image containing more than 250 characters.
      - jolux 4y ago
        Posting images of text is not posting text. It is posting images. Posting an image of a dog is posting an image, not posting a dog. (Ceci n’est pas un pipe) If you posted an image that triggered an injection bug in their backend and filled a tweet with more than 280 characters, that would be circumvention. But there is no technical limitation preventing people from posting images of text, or dogs. Similarly, the alt text box allowing up to 1000 characters is not a circumvention of tweets only allowing 280 characters. You are allowed to write up to 1000 characters of alt text. You are allowed to post images.
    - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
      "People use images all the time to communicate longer text portions in a single post. " People also post porn, or use bots, both are against TOS. So its not obvious or clrar, and they interpret their own TOS however it suits them every day. Its intentionally vague

by oauea 4y ago

coldpie 4y ago

oauea 4y ago
Have you considered reading the TOS instead of insulting me?
- coldpie 4y ago
  Yes, obviously I have read it. The technical limitations are that you can post 250 characters and up to four images. There are no technical limitations being violated by posting an image containing more than 250 characters. People use images all the time to communicate longer text portions in a single post. Do you really think Twitter's intent by saying users may not work around technical limitations is to clamp down on this extremely common behavior?
  - oauea 4y ago
    I'm not talking about their intent, I'm not a mind reader, I'm talking about their published TOS.
    - coldpie 4y ago
      Yes, I regret putting those last two sentences in there. Please ignore them and just respond to the first two: > The technical limitations are that you can post 250 characters and up to four images. There are no technical limitations being violated by posting an image containing more than 250 characters.
    - jolux 4y ago
      Posting images of text is not posting text. It is posting images. Posting an image of a dog is posting an image, not posting a dog. (Ceci n’est pas un pipe) If you posted an image that triggered an injection bug in their backend and filled a tweet with more than 280 characters, that would be circumvention. But there is no technical limitation preventing people from posting images of text, or dogs. Similarly, the alt text box allowing up to 1000 characters is not a circumvention of tweets only allowing 280 characters. You are allowed to write up to 1000 characters of alt text. You are allowed to post images.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    "People use images all the time to communicate longer text portions in a single post. " People also post porn, or use bots, both are against TOS. So its not obvious or clrar, and they interpret their own TOS however it suits them every day. Its intentionally vague