6 ms·

Reading the thread, it seems like what they've actually done is broken old t.co links. https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1692928633004757144 https://twitter.com

by LocalH 3y ago

Reading the thread, it seems like what they've actually done is broken old t.co links. https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1692928633004757144 https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1692928633004757144 If they were removing old media, then I doubt that said media would still be present on the CDN. https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1692926763481862438 https://twitter.com/simonw/status/1692926763481862438 I'm no Musk fan, but I still try to ensure that my criticism of him and/or Twitter (I refuse to call it X) is accurate.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
ArchiveTeam backs up link shorteners. Might have saved some of this corpus.
kemayo 3y ago
Specifically, it looks like they've broken any http links to t.co, while the newer https ones still work. The practical effect of this is actually worse than the thread stated -- all old media and links on Twitter are broken (at least, since 2010 when they started using t.co). But perhaps they can fix it by restoring the http version of t.co?
- computerfriend 3y ago
  My guess as to what happened: they wanted to clean up t.co URLs so ran a query like "select all words in tweets starting with https://t.co/ https://t.co/" and deleted all entries not present in that search, accidentally deleting all the plain http ones.
  - distract8901 3y ago
    That sounds exactly as jank and half-assed as I would expect from twitter these days.
    - 40yearoldman 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - kaba0 3y ago
        [flagged]
    - koromak 3y ago
      Bro doesn't even have a dry run button
  - archo 3y ago
    Is it possible in an effort to reduced hosting costs they are intending to deleting the data? Are they floating the big red balloon to gauge customer reaction?
ignoramous 3y ago
> Twitter (I refuse to call it X) Same energy as "I refuse to call it Meta"? I wonder why such thinking takes hold in the first place. It is fascinating someone would so invested in products like they'd be in sports, for example.
- zeagle 3y ago
  I am not the OP, but I just don't have the mental bandwidth or care to invest in these random swings and title changes at the whim of billionaires. I don't use either site, am not in tech, and my social circle will still refer to either as Facebook or Twitter. Maybe a relatable example: There are a couple major roads that have been renamed in the last ten years in my city and everyone still uses the old names in conversation.
- bradleyjg 3y ago
  I still call it the Tappen Zee bridge, not because I’m a big enthusiast for Dutch and Lenape. It’s not so much being invested as not wanting to give in to the rebranders.
- dtjb 3y ago
  For most, it's a community more than a product. A lot of people see the rebranding similar to a billionaire buying their town and renaming it.
- zapnuk 3y ago
  No. Facebook is still Facebook. More like still referring Alphabet as Google. I also find it fascinating how one person can buy the communication platform 450 million people use, only for him to change it for the worst. And somehow all users should go along with it.
  - rascul 3y ago
    > No. Facebook is still Facebook. > More like still referring Alphabet as Google. Facebook and Google are still the products. Meta and Alphabet are the parent company names. So it's not wrong. I don't know what X is supposed to be.
gumby 3y ago
[flagged]
- appplication 3y ago
  This got a legitimate chuckle out of me. Deadnaming a corporation. What a world we live in.
  - gumby 3y ago
    Somehow meta, alphabet, block and x all seemed worth ignoring. Esso->Exxon seemed natural, and of course we all ignored Federal Express-> FedEx because that was really catching up with what everybody already said.
audunw 3y ago
I suggest calling it Xitter. (Pronounced with the Chinese pinyin “X”, so like “shitter”). It’s a good compromise.
- Balgair 3y ago
  Even the X = Z sounding in English makes it sound bad: Zitter. God, he really did no market research at all, didn't even roll it around in his head for 3 minutes.
  - michelb 3y ago
    None of that matters to the users of the product, or so it seems.
- fakedang 3y ago
  And when Musk eventually gives up on Twitter and sells it to the Saudi PIF, we can all refer to him as an X-itter Badum tsss, I'll see myself out.

by LocalH 3y ago

toomuchtodo 3y ago

ArchiveTeam backs up link shorteners. Might have saved some of this corpus.

kemayo 3y ago

Specifically, it looks like they've broken any http links to t.co, while the newer https ones still work. The practical effect of this is actually worse than the thread stated -- all old media and links on Twitter are broken (at least, since 2010 when they started using t.co). But perhaps they can fix it by restoring the http version of t.co?

computerfriend 3y ago
My guess as to what happened: they wanted to clean up t.co URLs so ran a query like "select all words in tweets starting with https://t.co/ https://t.co/" and deleted all entries not present in that search, accidentally deleting all the plain http ones.
- distract8901 3y ago
  That sounds exactly as jank and half-assed as I would expect from twitter these days.
  - 40yearoldman 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - kaba0 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - koromak 3y ago
    Bro doesn't even have a dry run button
- archo 3y ago
  Is it possible in an effort to reduced hosting costs they are intending to deleting the data? Are they floating the big red balloon to gauge customer reaction?

ignoramous 3y ago

> Twitter (I refuse to call it X) Same energy as "I refuse to call it Meta"? I wonder why such thinking takes hold in the first place. It is fascinating someone would so invested in products like they'd be in sports, for example.

zeagle 3y ago
I am not the OP, but I just don't have the mental bandwidth or care to invest in these random swings and title changes at the whim of billionaires. I don't use either site, am not in tech, and my social circle will still refer to either as Facebook or Twitter. Maybe a relatable example: There are a couple major roads that have been renamed in the last ten years in my city and everyone still uses the old names in conversation.
bradleyjg 3y ago
I still call it the Tappen Zee bridge, not because I’m a big enthusiast for Dutch and Lenape. It’s not so much being invested as not wanting to give in to the rebranders.
dtjb 3y ago
For most, it's a community more than a product. A lot of people see the rebranding similar to a billionaire buying their town and renaming it.
zapnuk 3y ago
No. Facebook is still Facebook. More like still referring Alphabet as Google. I also find it fascinating how one person can buy the communication platform 450 million people use, only for him to change it for the worst. And somehow all users should go along with it.
- rascul 3y ago
  > No. Facebook is still Facebook. > More like still referring Alphabet as Google. Facebook and Google are still the products. Meta and Alphabet are the parent company names. So it's not wrong. I don't know what X is supposed to be.

gumby 3y ago

[flagged]

appplication 3y ago
This got a legitimate chuckle out of me. Deadnaming a corporation. What a world we live in.
- gumby 3y ago
  Somehow meta, alphabet, block and x all seemed worth ignoring. Esso->Exxon seemed natural, and of course we all ignored Federal Express-> FedEx because that was really catching up with what everybody already said.

audunw 3y ago

I suggest calling it Xitter. (Pronounced with the Chinese pinyin “X”, so like “shitter”). It’s a good compromise.

Balgair 3y ago
Even the X = Z sounding in English makes it sound bad: Zitter. God, he really did no market research at all, didn't even roll it around in his head for 3 minutes.
- michelb 3y ago
  None of that matters to the users of the product, or so it seems.
fakedang 3y ago
And when Musk eventually gives up on Twitter and sells it to the Saudi PIF, we can all refer to him as an X-itter Badum tsss, I'll see myself out.