20 ms·

X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

803 points by confusing3478 2y ago

smashah 2y ago
Remember the promises they made about Web 2.0 (interoperability, APIs, etc.)? The stripped those promises from us, tried to flog memecoins to steal from us and now pushing AI garbage onto us.
aussieguy1234 2y ago
It's free speech, but only if Musk approves of it.
type_Ben_struct 2y ago
[flagged]
- nicce 2y ago
  People have only that much power we give to them. If everyone stops using Twitter/X, it is nothing. Nobody buys Teslas - it is nothing. The list goes on since his # in wealthy ranks defines his position. Just make it drop.
  - firen777 2y ago
    Xitter is the least of the issues considering his tie to China and Russia and the all-you-can-eat buffet happening right now in the US government.
    - nicce 2y ago
      All the ties and US government position is based on his money and influence in platforms.
    - andrepd 2y ago
      Flood the zone. Propose ethinc cleansing and sell Ukraine to Russia and manipulate the German elections and censor twitter and cut usaid and pass inane stuff about transgenders. All in the space of a week. How can you even process what's happening, let alone resist it?
      - phtrivier 2y ago
        You pick a line where you have some degree of control, and you stay focussed on it. Coordination should not be about "hey, let's all make a lot of noise about his last move", because you're overwhelmed. It's about making sure not too many people are working on the same line. You pick a line. One where you can act. You get one executive order rescinded. Someone else work on another one. You legislate one doggy doger at a time. You focus like crazy. (First action to focus is, of course, to delete your Twitter account.) You make noise about all the times where you win, and they loose. In two years, you get the voters out. If you don't have any other control then "not playing their game, and wait", that's at least something. There's probably a food bank close to your place. Keep the lights on there.
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
  - addandsubtract 2y ago
    There really should be a bigger campaign for everyone to sell their Tesla shares. As you said, take away his money and he goes away.
    - XorNot 2y ago
      I mean people should do that anyway, because when that stock takes a tumble it's going to shed value incredibly fast. It's been overvalued before, and now it's cruising on "how good will the government corruption money be". Needless to say, you can look at how things worked out in Russia for who gets paid, and how much that winds up being worth in the end.
    - kstrauser 2y ago
      Sell them to whom? If I had a Tesla and sold it to you, there are still the same number of people driving one. I’m sympathetic to Tesla owners who've had their car for a while. If Akio Toyoda turned out to be a bastard, I wouldn't buy another new Toyota, but I’d continue to drive our current one until the wheels fall off. Same with Teslas. It's unreasonable to ask someone to get rid of their working, paid-for family transport. We can't just scrap all of them. But. Anyone driving an Incel Camino just bought the thing, and I will continue pointing at them and laughing.
      - nicce 2y ago
        Only the initial purchase matters for buying the cars from the point of Musk and Tesla's value. I think the revenue for repairing the cars during their lifetime does not bring that much money back to the Tesla. So ideally, we want to reduce the purchases of new Teslas and bring the stock down.
      - eesmith 2y ago
        addandsubtract wrote "sell their Tesla shares", not "sell their Teslas". Even nicce's parent comment only concerned buying new Teslas.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Nobody buys Teslas - it is nothing The pussyfooting around this from some countries is genuinely surprising. Like, how are the Germans of all people confused about whether the oligarch courting their neo Nazis is a threat to their national security?
    - milesrout 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - nicce 2y ago
        Other parties in many countries don’t seem to understand that if they try to solve the immigration issues more seriously - many right-wing parties would disappear as they have nothing else.
        _fw 2y ago
        It’s not about immigration. If it was, then mainstream parties WOULD fix immigration. It’s about national identity, “us and them”. If it wasn’t about immigrants it would be about “experts”. If it wasn’t about experts it would be about “the gays”. This kind of thing doesn’t go away with appeasement: orgs like AfD just point their weapons at somebody else. It has always been the way with facists.
        milesrout 2y ago
        It is about immigration. The mainstream parties can't fix migration because Germany's political system makes it almost impossible to form majority governments. Coalition politics and the cordon sanitaire force the CDU to work with the left and seemingly the left's only consistent political position is opposition to migration reform. The AfD aren't fascists and the attempts to win elections by just screaming slurs until they lose all meaning has stopped working. People have realised that calling everything "racist" or "fascist" or "Nazi" or whatever doesn't mean it actually is, and the left's entire political strategy is just labelling things it doesn't like with bad words. And yes part of the issue with immigration is national identity. Germany is a nation-state and always has been, just like France and Poland and Italy and Spain and Portugal and Czechia and Hungary and Ireland and Greece are. There are still some non-national states in Europe like the UK (which contains multiple nations: England, Scotland and Wales, arguably part of Ireland (although some claim Northern Ireland has been separate long enough to have its own national identity) and arguably Cornwall if you listen to Cornish nationalists which you probably shouldn't). Economic migrants, falsely claiming to be refugees, from Somalia and Syria, aren't German. Or French. Or Italian. Or Greek. They are Somalian, or Syrian. To pretend migration policy debates don't raise issues of national identity is fucking insane.
  - palata 2y ago
    The scary part is that most US citizens seem to support Mump. I think Trump has never been that high in popularity, right?
- waonderer 2y ago
  “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.” ― Friedrich W. Nietzsche Elon's proclamation that he is fighting "them" (deep state/democrats/...) has turned around and he is the same now. He is the USAID-ish funding for his cause. The cause could be different but the tools are the same, albeit in different names.
xyzal 2y ago
Tags like #coup, #protest and so on will be next.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  "cisgender" was banned a while ago already, probably one of many 'shadowbanned' terms that the king doesn't like.
  - sirsinsalot 2y ago
    The situation is insane
decimalenough 2y ago
Remember the Arab Spring and how Twitter was hailed as a tool for the masses to fight against their oppressors? And remember how Elon bought Twitter, loudly proclaiming he was doing so to defend free speech? I'm mildly curious to see how X tries to justify this, but I suspect they've reached the stage where they don't even need to pretend to pay lip service to their notional values.
- meibo 2y ago
  They haven't had proper PR since the end of 2023. They don't respond, if it blows up you might get an one-liner Elon tweet.
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  You can also ignore any justification X gives, all the statements coming from Musk and the other tech companies and the government are untrustworthy or deceptive. But people are still hopeful in that Musk saying "free speech" actually gives them any reasing to keep using Twitter.
  - abernard1 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - ta1243 2y ago
      The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer.
      - abernard1 2y ago
        Your comment is quite extraordinary as Orwell's work dealt with an unthinking bureaucracy resembling the Soviet Union. He also had the foresight to see the U.K. could be a totalitarian state. An honest assessment of the revelations of USAID spending and its funding of literally thousands of media companies via direct grants or voluntary purchases would suggest the information environment surrounding this is not entirely benign. And it would suggest that reasonable people can also dispute the pure intentions of a system that makes it almost entirely impossible to fire people, and was started as a soft power system for US foreign policy.
nubinetwork 2y ago
It would really cut down on spam/scams if they also blocked links to Instagram, telegram, and the onlyfans redirect sites...
muddi900 2y ago
I think the only smaet business move for twitter right now is to ban all external links in posts, like Instagram and TikTok. It was never much of a driver of traffic outside news and most news consumers that click have already left. And most news sources you'd want to click are behind paywalls The users that remain are more likely to watch Twitter videos and read those long-ass tweets, out of loyalty to Papa Elon.
- gloosx 2y ago
  Agreed. Most twitter posts I see anyway is stolen content without a single link to attribute it. Almost seems like posting a link to the source there is bad manners.
jgaa 2y ago
So much for Elons "Free Speech"! This may come as a shock to him: Free Speech means to allow people to say something that he disagree with. Something that may hurt his interests or even his ego. Free speech is not to allow people to say things he agree with or don't care about.
- mordae 2y ago
  There never was any demand for free speech from him. He just wanted to advance his fascist agenda and used whatever means he had at his disposal.
  - scott_w 2y ago
    While you’re correct as to his intentions, it’s still important to point out his hypocrisy as he called himself “a free speech absolutist,” and claimed to want Twitter to be part of that vision. He explicitly called left wing and right wing views as things he wants. Yes, we know it was all lies but not putting out the evidence allows people like Musk and his acolytes to make it the new truth without a fight.
    - matwood 2y ago
      We really are living in a world where we were always at war with Eurasia. Musk shouted loudly to his followers his views on free speech and why he wanted to buy Twitter. And now, it’s like it never happened. This isn’t like a bias news outlet leaving out certain facts, this is Musk himself saying these things and people going along with it. It’s bonkers to me.
      - jmcgough 2y ago
        I'm not sure you understand free speech. Free speech means he can make public threats to people without repercussions, doxx people when he feels like it, lie, and spread misinformation for personal gain. It means unbanning rule breakers, doxxers and harassers, as long as they're right-wing. Free speech does not extend to anyone who he personally disagrees with or dislikes, who will instead be banned from the platform.
emsign 2y ago
[flagged]
- spiderfarmer 2y ago
  I blocked twitter embeds on all my forums today. I'm so done with him.
benguild 2y ago
This is incredibly stupid if true
casenmgreen 2y ago
[flagged]
- ThePowerOfFuet 2y ago
  >both times was asked to complete ten captchas, about five minutes of pure captcha work If you were using a VPN, this might have been why.
  - casenmgreen 2y ago
    Direct connection, nothing special or fancy.
- latexr 2y ago
  You’re reading too much into it. Stop thinking he’s playing 5D chess, he’s not even playing regular checkers. It’s well known he bought Twitter because he thought he would be forced to, he clearly tried to actively back out of the purchase. https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/12/elon-musk-admits-he-only-bought-twitter-because-he-thought-hed-be-forced-to/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/12/elon-musk-admits-he-only-b...
  - casenmgreen 2y ago
    Good point, and I strongly hold if you can explain something by incompetence, it's profoundly more likely to be true than cunning. OTOH, I recall Elon's comment about "vote Dem in House and GOP in Senate, divided is better", something like that. Given his position as Donald's right hand man, that comment takes on new meaning.
  - bookaway 2y ago
    The parent post is by and large correct, except for the right-hand man of Donald Trump stuff. Musk was indeed trying to buy influence, which is definitely not a "5D chess move" but simply common sense for extremely wealthy people if they can get away with it. He also wanted to ensure that he is always the center of attention and intended to use twitter as the marketing arm for his brand. He only wanted to back out once US and global economic indicators started going south and made his offer look ridiculously overpriced, and also made himself look like a sucker. And Musk does not like being the sucker. But his wanting to back out later doesn't cancel out his initial intentions. And once he was forced to buy it, he started playing high stakes poker and managed to turn it into a great investment for him personally by the end of 2024, becoming one of the most powerful men in the world in addition to being the richest. How long it will last might depend on how many consecutive presidential terms the Republicans can hold on to. The righthand man for Trump stuff was never the intention initially. Musk went gaga for Trump rather late, he was a DeSantis supporter after all, with DeSantis launching his terrible presidential bid on Elon's twitter.
maxehmookau 2y ago
All that free speech is a bit too much for dear Elon apparently.
aeurielesn 2y ago
Free speech for thee but not for me.
- waonderer 2y ago
  Some free speech is more free than some free speech. /s
- alt227 2y ago
  Why, does Musk have the ability to post signal links on X with no issues?
lawgimenez 2y ago
[flagged]
neumann 2y ago
[flagged]
- flanked-evergl 2y ago
  I don't want my news filtered by state actors before I read it.
  - buyucu 2y ago
    Elon Musk is a state actor. The biggest one in fact.
    - flanked-evergl 2y ago
      No he is not.
      - buyucu 2y ago
        he controls the US government right now through DOGE.
        flanked-evergl 2y ago
        If that was the case, that would definitely mean he is not a state actor, which is defined as «An entity that is a part of, or which operates licitly or semi-licitly on behalf or in service of, a government agency.». The only way you can claim he is a state actor if you think he acts, in his management of X, on behalf of the US state, a claim which would be entirely laughable even to partisans.
      - rsynnott 2y ago
        ... In what way is he not? He is de facto if not de jure more or less in charge of the US government.
        flanked-evergl 2y ago
teekert 2y ago
Somehow I don’t believe this, it is too much out of character, even if it fits so nicely with how we want to see Elon. Did anyone here actually confirm this? I never used Twitter nor X or id check myself.
- out-of-ideas 2y ago
  sure, use the goog's to site-search twitter.com and signal.me, here's one: https://x.com/harris/status/1764683829455843464 https://x.com/harris/status/1764683829455843464 and it says the malware after you click the obfuscated signal.me url here is another: https://x.com/tomwarren https://x.com/tomwarren edit: the url's are still visible in the mouse-over text popup, and the obfuscated site-redirection url does have the url in the address bar - but only time will tell before those vanish honestly, any site that visibly displays one url as a hyperlink (underlines ect) and links to another site is practicing in malware style link hijacking. stop using those sites
- ben_w 2y ago
  > it is too much out of character But it's not the first time they banned links to other social media? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34041985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34041985
- latexr 2y ago
  It is perfectly in character. It’s not the first time he blocked people or services he personally doesn’t like.
- emaro 2y ago
  It's entirely consistent with Musk's character I observed the last couple of years.
- buyucu 2y ago
  it is very consistent of how Elon Musk has been behaving for the last 20 years.
- fourside 2y ago
  > it is too much out of character I’m curious what you’re basing this on if you’ve never used X?
kome 2y ago
Instagram blocked telegram 8 years ago and nobody complained, the ban in still in place as far i know; trying to block the competition is fairly common, unfortunately
- RIMR 2y ago
  Well, Instagram never claimed to be a free speech network. Also Instagram is covered with content that sexually exploits children, and Telegram links to CSAM were pretty common. Given that Telegram has very publicly failed at that kind of moderation, it is pretty defensible to block it. If only they would do something about the weirdo Instagram mommies that flood the network with pictures of their preteen daughters in swimsuit and leotards... It's gross what some people do for anything resembling Internet clout.
berkes 2y ago
I'm not defending Twitter or their policy in any way (disclaimer: I left Twitter the moment Elmo took over. I despise his hypocrisy and his fascist ideas) But this could be a "legitimate f-up". Normally, most of these unsafe-url protection and detection is automated in something with the scale of Twitter. Just like URL-shorteners often are (were?) "seemingly randomly" banned, because a portion of the shared urls are pointing at malware/phishing/otherwise banned content, all urls from this shortener get banned. It may be that signal.me is simply picking up on amount of illegitimate links. Signal is clearly growing strong. Therefore signal.me links' are increasingly seen by Twitter. Most legitimate links, but the amount of illegitimate links will then also increase. This would trigger an automated ban¹. The real problem then is that even if it was deliberate (conspiracy theory: Mark messaged Elon: Pls help me curb the growth of the biggest competitor of Whatsapp?) twitter can easily hide behind "overzealous automation, sorry". ¹ Especially if this automation isn't maintained properly, finetuned and kept being tweaked by teams of experts - many of which left or were layd off after the aquisition of Twitter.
- M4v3R 2y ago
  You might be onto something, I noticed that all the banned links were in the format: https://signal.me/#eu/fdy5h1miMifXa https://signal.me/#eu/fdy5h1miMifXa... The URL hash (the part after #) is often not considered by automated systems to be a part of URL that's meaningful, because hash is normally only used for addressing parts of the website that was loaded based on the previous part of the URL. If a particular Signal.me link was flagged for whatever legitimate reason (contained malware or illegal content) it's entirely reasonable that an automated system would strip the hash and block the whole domain (because the path part in this URL is just "/" and nothing else). It'll be interesting to see whether they address and reverse it. If not, then we can be fairly sure this was intentional.
  - red_trumpet 2y ago
    You can actually post links of the form https://signal.me/asdf https://signal.me/asdf. But https://signal.me/#asdf https://signal.me/#asdf is blocked. That supports you point of view, I guess?
dotdi 2y ago
[flagged]
- glowiefedposter 2y ago
  [flagged]
akmarinov 2y ago
So? Who's using Twitter anyway?
nanna 2y ago
Particularly ironic given that DOGE is reported to be using Signal as its comms platform. [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42579873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42579873
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- tremon 2y ago
  That's interesting, given that as an official government department they're subject to FOIA requests and as such have an obligation to persist their documentation.
  - gosub100 2y ago
    * Unless you're secretary of state.
    - throwaway5752 2y ago
      What happened in that case, and do you believe the same standard should be applied currently?
      - gosub100 2y ago
        In that case a corrupt politician with lots to hide was able to keep their crimes hidden using the secret service (who defended her house). I do not think that standard should be applied to anyone, ever.
        throwaway5752 2y ago
        She went before Congress for to testify for 11 hours under oath, as a point of fact. I feel like that would be a reasonable next step. The FBI investigation https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-dir... is at odds with your description. It appears nothing was as anywhere as severe as the recent intelligence breach of when DOGE posted NOFORN material publicly (https://abcnews.go.com/US/agency-data-shared-doge-online-sparks-concern-intelligence/story?id=118858837 https://abcnews.go.com/US/agency-data-shared-doge-online-spa...)
sounddetective 2y ago
Everyone reading this -- sign up for Bluesky, help it build up a larger network effect, so it can outcompete X. It already has 30m users.
- alwyn 2y ago
  bsky still lacks basic security features like 2FA (beyond an email code) (andOAuth implementation), which puts me off from actively using it...
- nxpnsv 2y ago
  Who owns bsky? What prevents a random billionaire to buy it and use it their election platform? Mastodon just feels as a safer bet...
  - berkes 2y ago
    bsky is decentralized, in theory more so than Mastodon, which is federated (a variant of decentralization that requires you to trust the server admins of a server of your choice) "In theory", because so far, there are very few nodes (one?), very few (if any?) alternative implementations, most is controlled and operated by a small team paid for by a.o. Jack Dorsey and other funds. Mastodon (using the ActivityPub protocol) has one main repo, managed by one person under a non-profit that also operates the biggest instance. But also has dozens of other implementations in other languages, with other niches, with more, less, other features and so on. So, "best bet" would probably be to: - Sign up at both a Mastodon and Bsky. Try them both for while. - See which one fits your needs, style and practical needs best. Stick with that one.
    - hug 2y ago
      Bluesky is neither decentralised nor federated. I wouldn't let that stop you from signing up for bluesky -- in my experience it is definitely the best of the options for a twitter alternative -- but you should know exactly what it is you're getting into before you get into it. And if you want to know exactly what you're getting into with bluesky, you should read this, which tells you more than you really want to know: https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/ https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/
martin-t 2y ago
This is what happens when a society allows narcissists in positions of power. It's a disease and when they refuse to seek treatment, it should make them ineligible for any leadership position, in both the private and public sector. Nobody (sane) would allow a psychotic individual to run for president or become a CEO. This is the same thing, except they are less of a danger to themselves and more to others. And of course they're able to craft more convincing lies. Mr. Musk never cared about free speech, only about being worshipped and the best way to achieve that is to say what people want to hear.
buyucu 2y ago
[flagged]
- waonderer 2y ago
  Which platform provides the same network effect? Bsky? Mastodon? I don't see the popular Twitter personalities there such as naval, balajis, paulg, etc. or folks from TOPT, etc.
  - MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
    I don't benefit from being plugged into any of that. Do you?
    - waonderer 2y ago
      I mentioned some global accounts that are very generic, but I do follow some folks from my country (India) who share valuable content for my field of work. Such content doesn't seem possible on other platforms. FB is dead here. Insta is only images/videos. Threads is a no-no. I don't know any alternatives as of yet where my network is active.
  - rsynnott 2y ago
    I mean, I suppose it really depends on what you want out of a social network. Some combo of mastodon and bluesky is fine for me, but then I didn't follow any of those people in the first place. If you want celeb VCs, then, yeah, you're probably stuck with Twitter. Most people don't, though.
    - waonderer 2y ago
      Makes sense. What other platforms do you know where we can get access to the network of entrepreneurs, thought-leaders, governments, and authors? I am considering text-based social apps only.
      - rsynnott 2y ago
j-bos 2y ago
This comment section has turned into something of a circle, it's cool to be mad nd all, but there was a comment expressing doubt at the details, wonder about a reason other than those stated, and asking if anyone independently verified, as I clicked it the comment was flagged to oblivion. No opportunity to engage with that viewpoint.
- sunaookami 2y ago
  There are certain topics that you can't discuss on Hacker News reasonably and social media is one of them.
  - bluebarbet 2y ago
    Politics in general. Because everyone has an opinion, often based on their values rather than cold facts, and people do not like their values being questioned. The discussion is more civil than on other forums, but the difference is not night and day. Disappointing.
    - AlecSchueler 2y ago
      I generally agree with no politics on here but the DOGE stuff is very much tech news.
- Liquidor 2y ago
  HN is always a mess when the subject contains Musk, Trump, Google, browsers or social media platforms in general. I don't mind the slight political aspects of things, but reading a ton of hate and "I already deleted X" (pun intended) and "Just use Y other platform" (that no normal user can figure out) comments is just uninteresting and should stay on Reddit or wherever these nonproductive comments fit into. I'd love to hear more about this case, the technical aspects and the follow-ups/investigations. Let's focus on that, no? Maybe it's just me.
  - t43562 2y ago
    You get to moderate up or down. Otherwise people say what they want.
PedroBatista 2y ago
Signal could start doing some posts praising Musk and promoting Tesla or whatever scam he’s pushing at the given moment, that would unblock them really fast. Pre-Musk Twitter was indeed bad, a sign of it’s time and dying. Now it’s even worse and quite pathetic.
karel-3d 2y ago
I think there should be a pinned post about Elon Musk at the top of HN and all posts and comments about Elon Musk should go there.
- concordDance 2y ago
  Can it be at the bottom instead?
  - karel-3d 2y ago
    If it's at the bottom, people will keep submitting more Elon Musk news.
NicoJuicy 2y ago
Looking at the thread here. Trust in society is being eradicated and that's how authoritarian regimes win. Great video to understand what's going on: https://youtu.be/nknYtlOvaQ0?si=1LP6QsbFgIvpfIay https://youtu.be/nknYtlOvaQ0?si=1LP6QsbFgIvpfIay It's sad
JodieBenitez 2y ago
Some much people commenting about Elon Musk "free speech" declarations. There was never free speech on Twitter. Not before him, not after him.
nikolayasdf123 2y ago
probably to ensure integrity. they need to fight fraud and abuse on a massive scale. nothing to see here
redbell 2y ago
Ironically, three years ago, Musk encouraged the use of Signal and tweeted: "Use Signal", https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1347165127036977153 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1347165127036977153 Edit: In my opinion, Elon Musk initially endorsed Signal because of its strong encryption, security, and commitment to privacy. Now, he's blocking it for those very same reasons—what a blatant double standard! On a related note, one of the key advantages of the modern internet—and more specifically, social media—is that everything you say publicly is archived. This means that if you ever do a complete 180° on your claims or principles, it can easily come back to haunt you. So, it's always wise to be mindful of what you say and stay true to your values.
- dmazin 2y ago
  Don't the DOGE dweebs use Signal? Though I think they were forced to stop.
- rsolva 2y ago
  He may use Signal, but he does not want people on X to advertise their presence on any competing platforms. It is a childish and protectionist policy, and in no way align with his Free Speech® claims. It was the same when URLs to Mastodon/Fediverse instances was banned on X, in an attempt to hamper the network effect for those who migrated. Meta does the same with Pixelfed these days, to hamper migration away from Instagram. Elon and Mark are all for competition and free markets, but as soon as alternatives that can't be bought and controlled pops up, they outright ban any mention of it on their platforms.
  - scarab92 2y ago
    It's probably just a spam filter going awry. Signal links are odd, in that all the identifies are after the #, so to a spam filter this just looks like a single url, https://signal.me https://signal.me , being sent out in mass.
    - genewitch 2y ago
      I run a service that does the decryption in the client so it's links look the same to filters. It runs up1, a really old version. The links are all like http://example.com/#longhexhash http://example.com/#longhexhash
FergusArgyll 2y ago
[flagged]
coldblues 2y ago
The logical explanation to me is that most of the Signal contacts shared tend to be for drugs or CSAM trading, so they went for the nuclear approach to make moderation easier.
- duxup 2y ago
  Is that true? I’ve never used signal.
  - JansjoFromIkea 2y ago
    Telegram is overwhelmingly the app of choice for drug dealers with Whatsapp coming second, at least on a direct to customer level. No clue about CSAM but I'd really doubt it considering it requires a phone number.
    - coldblues 2y ago
      Telegram is overwhelmingly the preferred messenger for CSAM distribution, a search can find you all the relevant articles.
      - JansjoFromIkea 2y ago
        Thanks for the clarification. I misread your top post as though it meant Signal was the main source for those things. Sorry for the confusion.
- axegon_ 2y ago
  Give me a break, open telegram, which is still in the clear for comrade musk and he publicly advocated for comrade durov and tell me how long it will take you to find anything from prostitution to weapons, drugs and human trafficking. It's all about punishing people who can question musk & co's authoritarian desires.
  - coldblues 2y ago
    Feds can request info from Telegram. Additionally, Telegram has evolved past a simple messenger application. A massive amount of projects, most of them being crypto projects, use Telegram as their primary method of communication and announcements. It is also a very popular messenger in India and parts of Europe. They can block Signal because they can get away with it. If it means banning a bunch of CSAM traders and drug dealers, even if it includes a few users and privacy nerds, they're still winning in terms of easing up their moderation efforts without significant outcry. I believe this block will be lifted, even if Signal users a minority, they are a loud minority. This could have very well been a mistake.
remon 2y ago
At this point you're actively contributing to the death of free speech if you're still active on X in any way. There are no excuses to use it still if you have any sort of functional moral compass.
- skybrian 2y ago
  No, this is just mood affiliation. Usually, posting on Twitter or quitting it has a very tiny, almost imperceptible effect on the larger world and it's certainly not something to get worked up about.
  - remon 2y ago
    That's reversing the argument. I'm not saying quitting X is bad for X, I'm saying quitting X is good for you. Nobody's completely immune to whatever that sociological experiment is turning into and staying on X is likely to influence your ethics, morals and standards in an objectively negative way.
    - skybrian 2y ago
      Even personally, you couldn't possibly know whether it's positive or negative for a random stranger on the Internet, because it depends on how much they use it and what they use it for. For example, keeping a Twitter account in case someone wants to contact you seems pretty harmless.
      - remon 2y ago
        Well, sure, if you're exceptionally picky about non-normative use cases you can probably find a use for it that is not harmful to the average person. But you're doing a lot of heavy lifting already to justify a positive use case (contacting a person you apparently have no other way of reaching, which isn't in the top 3 of primary use cases for X). Anyway, I was speaking in the aggregate. X (so, post Elon) has been bad for society as a whole and if that's not an objective statement then it is at least close enough to make no difference. I suspect any arguments to use it anyway probably boil down "but...I like it". And since we live in a free world that's a good enough argument to have. It is not, however, harmless.
BLKNSLVR 2y ago
[flagged]
inatreecrown2 2y ago
do we know why?
trehGaf 2y ago
And Vance is lecturing the EU about free speech. The EU might be very happy with blocking encrypted services, just as Musk is.
- kortilla 2y ago
  Nobody is required to use X. False dichotomy
maelito 2y ago
The US is playing with fire. Most of Wall Street's valuation is at stake.
- sitkack 2y ago
  That is the point, crash the economy and pick up the pieces for pennies on the dollar.
  - glouwbug 2y ago
    Tariff the world, devalue the dollar
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  Wallstreet is a tumor, but the scope of this biopsy seems to be all wrong.
eptcyka 2y ago
I think it is critical to not forget the context of russian aligned bots getting free reign on Twitter, they are not being blocked, and Musk is keeping close ties to Putin.
philipdavis 2y ago
Do people in the US still use X? If yes, why? What keeps you on the platform (so the owner is a tiny step closer to destroying your own country)?
- stainablesteel 2y ago
  i voted for that, i voted for the destruction of the federal government because it's bankrupting us by stealing our money
  - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
    Do you expect that money will be worth very much after the entity that issues it is destroyed?
  - lolc 2y ago
    Then federated governments with local currencies, or what?
  - whoitwas 2y ago
    the people who ensure government is broken and stealing from you are now in charge. they recently requested $4.3 trillion in deficit spending for tax cuts and the dissolution of medicaid.
  - doodlebugging 2y ago
    I saw your comment and saw it getting downvoted or flagged but it is useful to have a discussion so that others similarly inclined can potentially learn something that they obviously don't already understand. I reproduce that comment here in case it somehow disappears. >i voted for that, i voted for the destruction of the federal government because it's bankrupting us by stealing our money If you're concerned about the federal government bankrupting "us" by stealing our money then ask yourself why one of the first things that happened was the firing of OIG personnel. The Inspectors General and their OIG employees are the federal employees with the mandate to identify waste, fraud, and abuse in every federal program regardless of size. They have the power to audit any recipient of taxpayer monies and to work with US Attorney federal prosecutors to prosecute those who steal, waste, or otherwise violate plan guidelines in disbursing money. US Attorneys will not even take a case to trial unless agency auditors can document in detail that a crime has occurred and that crime fits within prosecutorial guidelines and a conviction is nearly guaranteed. To take a case that has any weaknesses risks wasting public money prosecuting a case you might not win. The whole point is to make sure you have the evidence that forces the defendant to either make restitution or to spend some time in a federal lock-up. It's suspicious to me that the first thing they do is fire all the people who not only can watch, but who have the Congressional mandate to seek out waste, fraud, and abuse of federal programs that disburse money to individuals, small businesses, cities and other non-federal entities, non-profits, and corporations. Though I am not a doctor, I do think that you should seriously work on your mental health. Start by changing your diet to include less kool-aid as the sugar high you're on can cause metabolic changes that lead to seriously bad health outcomes. My spouse has spent a career in a federal department working to insure that the money Congress allocates to specific programs ends up being spent for purposes that are allowed under the guidelines of those federal programs. If you think the federal government is the one stealing your money you are sadly mistaken. Federal programs are full of fraud but the fraud occurs at the recipient end, not within the department. If you or anyone else are so concerned about where your tax money goes then the last agency entity that you would eliminate would be the one charged with insuring that all the monies in all the programs administered by the agency are disbursed lawfully according to plan guidelines which were approved by Congress. These people, as part of their job, have to read and internalize all the nuances, conflicts with existing programs, and contradictions in all the programs that they serve as watchdog over and it is their skills that allow federal prosecutors to take fraud cases to trial and to convict those who have abused federal programs for personal gain. You voted for someone who has a documented history of fraudulent use of federal money who made it a point in both of his administrations to remove the specific persons and agencies that would guarantee oversight so that they can do anything without worrying about accountability. Internalize that.
upofadown 2y ago
This make me curious about exactly what "signal.me" links were all about. The details appear to be available here: * https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Signal.me_URLs https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Signal.me_URLs * https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Usernames#Username_links https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Usernames#Username_links Signal.me links are just a way to easily send either a phone number or user name to someone else. No cryptographic identity. No protection of the phone number or user name. So to get around the ban a Signal user could simply send their phone number or user name over Twitter/X. It seems that the encrypted username form does provide some identity protection in that it can be cancelled, but for as long as it is active it appears that someone can just ask the Signal server what the associated user name is. The people involved probably should not be using Twitter/X for this sort of thing in the first place. Mastodon comes to mind as an alternative, but really, anything else.
- zecg 2y ago
  signal.me links are used to join (and advertise) Signal groups
  - upofadown 2y ago
    OK, I couldn't find any specific documentation just floating around about group links. It appears that the base64 value is specific to the group and is only exposed through the link. I didn't see any way to munge the "signal.me" domain and fix it again. So for groups Twitter/X seems to have won.
  - mlindner 2y ago
    No. Signal groups are advertised with signal.group URLs.
    - mlindner 2y ago
      Which, it is worth noting, are not blocked. I checked.
- bad_user 2y ago
guappa 2y ago
I legit thought the desktop signal app had some bug on X11 and not wayland. Can this be titled clearly?
DrNosferatu 2y ago
[flagged]
tiberius_p 2y ago
When will they start to block wikipedia links?
DrNosferatu 2y ago
I guess they’ll be moving to BlueSky or Mastodon…
hackerbeat 2y ago
[flagged]
Tycho 2y ago
Can’t really tell what most of you are complaining about. You can say anything on X (short of doxing and inciting violence and things that are against the law), you can follow or block anyone on X. If they ban Signal links, a competitor platform, that’s a shame, but whatever you say on Signal you can say on X instead. Seems like some people think a “free speech platform” would be some sort of moderated debating space where opinions you dislike are silenced on your behalf and the downstream political ramifications are things that you personally enjoy, or else it’s not free speech but “fascism” (lol).
- karparov 2y ago
  > whatever you say on Signal you can say on X instead. Except one of them allows Elon to read what you write, the other doesn't.
- sterlind 2y ago
  try saying "cisgender."
  - Tycho 2y ago
    A quick search for the word shows numerous X posts using it in the last few hours.
    - chownie 2y ago
      You have to search that word specifically to find those posts, they're otherwise algorithmically censored from timelines.
rpastuszak 2y ago
I had some time in the morning so built a simple site to share Signal links on X: https://link-in-a-box.vercel.app https://link-in-a-box.vercel.app If you think someone might benefit from it, please share. Also, spam if you have feedback!
- rpastuszak 2y ago
  This comment keeps going up and then getting downvoted -- if you have time to leave some feedback - I'd appreciate it. People already started using this thing, so if there's an issue with it, I'd like to respond/apply fixes if needed.
FergusArgyll 2y ago
If you just need to get all the emotions off your chest, feel free to continue, If you want to know what's actually getting blocked see the discussion here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43077124 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43077124
- trust_bt_verify 2y ago
  Why link a comment in the same thread? What does this add?
ss64 2y ago
[flagged]
mlindner 2y ago
Signal group chat links still work as do signal.org links. It's only signal.me links that are blocked.
tiberius_p 2y ago
This free speech absolutism thing is brutal.
rullopat 2y ago
And few days ago JD Vance went to Munich to say to EU leaders that they "there is a problem of freedom of speech in Europe"...
- kjrfghslkdjfl 2y ago
  [dead]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- scarab92 2y ago
  There obviously are problems with freedom of speech in Europe. Everyone knows it.
  - ruune 2y ago
    Tell me more. I live here and have never encountered a situation where I was not allowed to express my opinions in a systematic way. So I don't know but would be delighted to
    - sltkr 2y ago
      It might simply mean your opinions fall in the narrow band of views that are permitted to be expressed. It proves nothing about freedom of speech in general. Even in North Korea, people are allowed to freely express their love for their Dear Leader. Those who express a different view are swiftly disposed of. If you love Dear Leader you could live your entire life believing that you and everyone else has free speech, simply because you have never encountered evidence to the contrary.
      - torlok 2y ago
        AfD is a Nazi party, and nobody's silencing them, despite overwhelming opposition in all EU countries. If you listen to EU parliament speeches, there's all kinds of radical political views being shared during debates. Vance came to Europe to peddle US culture wars and got laughed out.
bjoli 2y ago
On a similar note: the Swedish armed forces just came out and recommended that people working for the military should use signal for their calls and messages for things that are not classified in any of the higher classifications. https://cornucopia.se/2025/02/forsvarsmakten-infor-krav-pa-signal-for-samtal-och-meddelanden/ https://cornucopia.se/2025/02/forsvarsmakten-infor-krav-pa-s... (Swedish)
fweimer 2y ago
I was curious because over here, the ownership of signal.me is pretty much obscured (behind Cloudflare and WHOIS privacy). Doing this for infrastructure domains is not a good idea because it encourages persistent overblocking because it makes manual review more difficult. At least there is official documentation mentioning signal.me: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007320291-Firewall-and-Internet-settings https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007320291-Fi... (The page is in the Bing index, but it seems "signal.me" is treated as a stop word by the search engine.)
28304283409234 2y ago
Shoshana Zuboff was so right it is scary. The name ('Surveillance Capitalism') put me on the wrong foot as I already knew about the surveillance part. But what I found most scary was the part where the tech companies turned from surveillance to influence. Once you have these billions of people using only your platform to view the world, it is trivial alter their view of the world. And thereby changing policital currents, policies, opinions.... anything. It is like the Bible before Martin Luther translated it into German, and all christians just had to accept blindly that whatever the priests said was written in the bible actually was. Most humans now have so little input other than whatever priests they follow we might as well be back in the dark ages.
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  The dark ages is the plan according to Curtis Yarvin, their “prophet”. A network of techno-feudal states run by a joint-stock corporation headed by a CEO with absolute power. Like Hunger Games, fancy dress, bad tans, and all. It’s really lame and shortsighted. Never mind philosophically broken.
outside1234 2y ago
People, why are you still on X? It is a disinformation site. Move to Bluesky or Threads.
askonomm 2y ago
So the Public Town Square with Freedom of Speech has become the most censored, and private social network out there?
noname120 2y ago
Pretty sure it's because literally all the signal.me links are the same when you remove the part after the #. When you perform an HTTP(S) request you never provide the part after the # in the request URL, it's only interpreted by the web browser itself. It's likely that their antispam thing does the same and ignores the hash altogether. ———— Example of link (blocked): https://signal.me/#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHGbYwCkQbo7TNzMHPRKWquiWEttS85C https://signal.me/#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHGbYw... Without the hash (blocked): https://signal.me/ https://signal.me/ There is no blocking if you add any letters in the path (e.g. “abc”): https://signal.me/abc#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHGbYwCkQbo7TNzMHPRKWquiWEttS85C https://signal.me/abc#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHG...
Febra33 2y ago
Free speech absolutists, am I right?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
axiologist 2y ago
That must be the free speech some american politicians are lecturing the world about...
bttrpll 2y ago
is X susceptible to DDOS?

803 points by confusing3478 2y ago

Remember the promises they made about Web 2.0 (interoperability, APIs, etc.)? The stripped those promises from us, tried to flog memecoins to steal from us and now pushing AI garbage onto us.

aussieguy1234 2y ago

It's free speech, but only if Musk approves of it.

type_Ben_struct 2y ago

[flagged]

nicce 2y ago
People have only that much power we give to them. If everyone stops using Twitter/X, it is nothing. Nobody buys Teslas - it is nothing. The list goes on since his # in wealthy ranks defines his position. Just make it drop.
- firen777 2y ago
  Xitter is the least of the issues considering his tie to China and Russia and the all-you-can-eat buffet happening right now in the US government.
  - nicce 2y ago
    All the ties and US government position is based on his money and influence in platforms.
  - andrepd 2y ago
    Flood the zone. Propose ethinc cleansing and sell Ukraine to Russia and manipulate the German elections and censor twitter and cut usaid and pass inane stuff about transgenders. All in the space of a week. How can you even process what's happening, let alone resist it?
    - phtrivier 2y ago
      You pick a line where you have some degree of control, and you stay focussed on it. Coordination should not be about "hey, let's all make a lot of noise about his last move", because you're overwhelmed. It's about making sure not too many people are working on the same line. You pick a line. One where you can act. You get one executive order rescinded. Someone else work on another one. You legislate one doggy doger at a time. You focus like crazy. (First action to focus is, of course, to delete your Twitter account.) You make noise about all the times where you win, and they loose. In two years, you get the voters out. If you don't have any other control then "not playing their game, and wait", that's at least something. There's probably a food bank close to your place. Keep the lights on there.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
- addandsubtract 2y ago
  There really should be a bigger campaign for everyone to sell their Tesla shares. As you said, take away his money and he goes away.
  - XorNot 2y ago
    I mean people should do that anyway, because when that stock takes a tumble it's going to shed value incredibly fast. It's been overvalued before, and now it's cruising on "how good will the government corruption money be". Needless to say, you can look at how things worked out in Russia for who gets paid, and how much that winds up being worth in the end.
  - kstrauser 2y ago
    Sell them to whom? If I had a Tesla and sold it to you, there are still the same number of people driving one. I’m sympathetic to Tesla owners who've had their car for a while. If Akio Toyoda turned out to be a bastard, I wouldn't buy another new Toyota, but I’d continue to drive our current one until the wheels fall off. Same with Teslas. It's unreasonable to ask someone to get rid of their working, paid-for family transport. We can't just scrap all of them. But. Anyone driving an Incel Camino just bought the thing, and I will continue pointing at them and laughing.
    - nicce 2y ago
      Only the initial purchase matters for buying the cars from the point of Musk and Tesla's value. I think the revenue for repairing the cars during their lifetime does not bring that much money back to the Tesla. So ideally, we want to reduce the purchases of new Teslas and bring the stock down.
    - eesmith 2y ago
      addandsubtract wrote "sell their Tesla shares", not "sell their Teslas". Even nicce's parent comment only concerned buying new Teslas.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Nobody buys Teslas - it is nothing The pussyfooting around this from some countries is genuinely surprising. Like, how are the Germans of all people confused about whether the oligarch courting their neo Nazis is a threat to their national security?
  - milesrout 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - nicce 2y ago
      Other parties in many countries don’t seem to understand that if they try to solve the immigration issues more seriously - many right-wing parties would disappear as they have nothing else.
      - _fw 2y ago
        It’s not about immigration. If it was, then mainstream parties WOULD fix immigration. It’s about national identity, “us and them”. If it wasn’t about immigrants it would be about “experts”. If it wasn’t about experts it would be about “the gays”. This kind of thing doesn’t go away with appeasement: orgs like AfD just point their weapons at somebody else. It has always been the way with facists.
        milesrout 2y ago
        It is about immigration. The mainstream parties can't fix migration because Germany's political system makes it almost impossible to form majority governments. Coalition politics and the cordon sanitaire force the CDU to work with the left and seemingly the left's only consistent political position is opposition to migration reform. The AfD aren't fascists and the attempts to win elections by just screaming slurs until they lose all meaning has stopped working. People have realised that calling everything "racist" or "fascist" or "Nazi" or whatever doesn't mean it actually is, and the left's entire political strategy is just labelling things it doesn't like with bad words. And yes part of the issue with immigration is national identity. Germany is a nation-state and always has been, just like France and Poland and Italy and Spain and Portugal and Czechia and Hungary and Ireland and Greece are. There are still some non-national states in Europe like the UK (which contains multiple nations: England, Scotland and Wales, arguably part of Ireland (although some claim Northern Ireland has been separate long enough to have its own national identity) and arguably Cornwall if you listen to Cornish nationalists which you probably shouldn't). Economic migrants, falsely claiming to be refugees, from Somalia and Syria, aren't German. Or French. Or Italian. Or Greek. They are Somalian, or Syrian. To pretend migration policy debates don't raise issues of national identity is fucking insane.
- palata 2y ago
  The scary part is that most US citizens seem to support Mump. I think Trump has never been that high in popularity, right?
waonderer 2y ago
“Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you.” ― Friedrich W. Nietzsche Elon's proclamation that he is fighting "them" (deep state/democrats/...) has turned around and he is the same now. He is the USAID-ish funding for his cause. The cause could be different but the tools are the same, albeit in different names.

xyzal 2y ago

Tags like #coup, #protest and so on will be next.

Cthulhu_ 2y ago
"cisgender" was banned a while ago already, probably one of many 'shadowbanned' terms that the king doesn't like.
- sirsinsalot 2y ago
  The situation is insane

decimalenough 2y ago

Remember the Arab Spring and how Twitter was hailed as a tool for the masses to fight against their oppressors? And remember how Elon bought Twitter, loudly proclaiming he was doing so to defend free speech? I'm mildly curious to see how X tries to justify this, but I suspect they've reached the stage where they don't even need to pretend to pay lip service to their notional values.

meibo 2y ago
They haven't had proper PR since the end of 2023. They don't respond, if it blows up you might get an one-liner Elon tweet.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
You can also ignore any justification X gives, all the statements coming from Musk and the other tech companies and the government are untrustworthy or deceptive. But people are still hopeful in that Musk saying "free speech" actually gives them any reasing to keep using Twitter.
- abernard1 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - ta1243 2y ago
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer.
    - abernard1 2y ago
      Your comment is quite extraordinary as Orwell's work dealt with an unthinking bureaucracy resembling the Soviet Union. He also had the foresight to see the U.K. could be a totalitarian state. An honest assessment of the revelations of USAID spending and its funding of literally thousands of media companies via direct grants or voluntary purchases would suggest the information environment surrounding this is not entirely benign. And it would suggest that reasonable people can also dispute the pure intentions of a system that makes it almost entirely impossible to fire people, and was started as a soft power system for US foreign policy.

nubinetwork 2y ago

It would really cut down on spam/scams if they also blocked links to Instagram, telegram, and the onlyfans redirect sites...

muddi900 2y ago

I think the only smaet business move for twitter right now is to ban all external links in posts, like Instagram and TikTok. It was never much of a driver of traffic outside news and most news consumers that click have already left. And most news sources you'd want to click are behind paywalls The users that remain are more likely to watch Twitter videos and read those long-ass tweets, out of loyalty to Papa Elon.

gloosx 2y ago
Agreed. Most twitter posts I see anyway is stolen content without a single link to attribute it. Almost seems like posting a link to the source there is bad manners.

jgaa 2y ago

So much for Elons "Free Speech"! This may come as a shock to him: Free Speech means to allow people to say something that he disagree with. Something that may hurt his interests or even his ego. Free speech is not to allow people to say things he agree with or don't care about.

mordae 2y ago
There never was any demand for free speech from him. He just wanted to advance his fascist agenda and used whatever means he had at his disposal.
- scott_w 2y ago
  While you’re correct as to his intentions, it’s still important to point out his hypocrisy as he called himself “a free speech absolutist,” and claimed to want Twitter to be part of that vision. He explicitly called left wing and right wing views as things he wants. Yes, we know it was all lies but not putting out the evidence allows people like Musk and his acolytes to make it the new truth without a fight.
  - matwood 2y ago
    We really are living in a world where we were always at war with Eurasia. Musk shouted loudly to his followers his views on free speech and why he wanted to buy Twitter. And now, it’s like it never happened. This isn’t like a bias news outlet leaving out certain facts, this is Musk himself saying these things and people going along with it. It’s bonkers to me.
    - jmcgough 2y ago
      I'm not sure you understand free speech. Free speech means he can make public threats to people without repercussions, doxx people when he feels like it, lie, and spread misinformation for personal gain. It means unbanning rule breakers, doxxers and harassers, as long as they're right-wing. Free speech does not extend to anyone who he personally disagrees with or dislikes, who will instead be banned from the platform.

emsign 2y ago

[flagged]

spiderfarmer 2y ago
I blocked twitter embeds on all my forums today. I'm so done with him.

benguild 2y ago

This is incredibly stupid if true

casenmgreen 2y ago

[flagged]

ThePowerOfFuet 2y ago
>both times was asked to complete ten captchas, about five minutes of pure captcha work If you were using a VPN, this might have been why.
- casenmgreen 2y ago
  Direct connection, nothing special or fancy.
latexr 2y ago
You’re reading too much into it. Stop thinking he’s playing 5D chess, he’s not even playing regular checkers. It’s well known he bought Twitter because he thought he would be forced to, he clearly tried to actively back out of the purchase. https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/12/elon-musk-admits-he-only-bought-twitter-because-he-thought-hed-be-forced-to/ https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/12/elon-musk-admits-he-only-b...
- casenmgreen 2y ago
  Good point, and I strongly hold if you can explain something by incompetence, it's profoundly more likely to be true than cunning. OTOH, I recall Elon's comment about "vote Dem in House and GOP in Senate, divided is better", something like that. Given his position as Donald's right hand man, that comment takes on new meaning.
- bookaway 2y ago
  The parent post is by and large correct, except for the right-hand man of Donald Trump stuff. Musk was indeed trying to buy influence, which is definitely not a "5D chess move" but simply common sense for extremely wealthy people if they can get away with it. He also wanted to ensure that he is always the center of attention and intended to use twitter as the marketing arm for his brand. He only wanted to back out once US and global economic indicators started going south and made his offer look ridiculously overpriced, and also made himself look like a sucker. And Musk does not like being the sucker. But his wanting to back out later doesn't cancel out his initial intentions. And once he was forced to buy it, he started playing high stakes poker and managed to turn it into a great investment for him personally by the end of 2024, becoming one of the most powerful men in the world in addition to being the richest. How long it will last might depend on how many consecutive presidential terms the Republicans can hold on to. The righthand man for Trump stuff was never the intention initially. Musk went gaga for Trump rather late, he was a DeSantis supporter after all, with DeSantis launching his terrible presidential bid on Elon's twitter.

maxehmookau 2y ago

All that free speech is a bit too much for dear Elon apparently.

aeurielesn 2y ago

Free speech for thee but not for me.

waonderer 2y ago
Some free speech is more free than some free speech. /s
alt227 2y ago
Why, does Musk have the ability to post signal links on X with no issues?

lawgimenez 2y ago

[flagged]

neumann 2y ago

[flagged]

flanked-evergl 2y ago
I don't want my news filtered by state actors before I read it.
- buyucu 2y ago
  Elon Musk is a state actor. The biggest one in fact.
  - flanked-evergl 2y ago
    No he is not.
    - buyucu 2y ago
      he controls the US government right now through DOGE.
      - flanked-evergl 2y ago
        If that was the case, that would definitely mean he is not a state actor, which is defined as «An entity that is a part of, or which operates licitly or semi-licitly on behalf or in service of, a government agency.». The only way you can claim he is a state actor if you think he acts, in his management of X, on behalf of the US state, a claim which would be entirely laughable even to partisans.
    - rsynnott 2y ago
      ... In what way is he not? He is de facto if not de jure more or less in charge of the US government.
      - flanked-evergl 2y ago

teekert 2y ago

Somehow I don’t believe this, it is too much out of character, even if it fits so nicely with how we want to see Elon. Did anyone here actually confirm this? I never used Twitter nor X or id check myself.

out-of-ideas 2y ago
sure, use the goog's to site-search twitter.com and signal.me, here's one: https://x.com/harris/status/1764683829455843464 https://x.com/harris/status/1764683829455843464 and it says the malware after you click the obfuscated signal.me url here is another: https://x.com/tomwarren https://x.com/tomwarren edit: the url's are still visible in the mouse-over text popup, and the obfuscated site-redirection url does have the url in the address bar - but only time will tell before those vanish honestly, any site that visibly displays one url as a hyperlink (underlines ect) and links to another site is practicing in malware style link hijacking. stop using those sites
ben_w 2y ago
> it is too much out of character But it's not the first time they banned links to other social media? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34041985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34041985
latexr 2y ago
It is perfectly in character. It’s not the first time he blocked people or services he personally doesn’t like.
emaro 2y ago
It's entirely consistent with Musk's character I observed the last couple of years.
buyucu 2y ago
it is very consistent of how Elon Musk has been behaving for the last 20 years.
fourside 2y ago
> it is too much out of character I’m curious what you’re basing this on if you’ve never used X?

kome 2y ago

Instagram blocked telegram 8 years ago and nobody complained, the ban in still in place as far i know; trying to block the competition is fairly common, unfortunately

RIMR 2y ago
Well, Instagram never claimed to be a free speech network. Also Instagram is covered with content that sexually exploits children, and Telegram links to CSAM were pretty common. Given that Telegram has very publicly failed at that kind of moderation, it is pretty defensible to block it. If only they would do something about the weirdo Instagram mommies that flood the network with pictures of their preteen daughters in swimsuit and leotards... It's gross what some people do for anything resembling Internet clout.

berkes 2y ago

I'm not defending Twitter or their policy in any way (disclaimer: I left Twitter the moment Elmo took over. I despise his hypocrisy and his fascist ideas) But this could be a "legitimate f-up". Normally, most of these unsafe-url protection and detection is automated in something with the scale of Twitter. Just like URL-shorteners often are (were?) "seemingly randomly" banned, because a portion of the shared urls are pointing at malware/phishing/otherwise banned content, all urls from this shortener get banned. It may be that signal.me is simply picking up on amount of illegitimate links. Signal is clearly growing strong. Therefore signal.me links' are increasingly seen by Twitter. Most legitimate links, but the amount of illegitimate links will then also increase. This would trigger an automated ban¹. The real problem then is that even if it was deliberate (conspiracy theory: Mark messaged Elon: Pls help me curb the growth of the biggest competitor of Whatsapp?) twitter can easily hide behind "overzealous automation, sorry". ¹ Especially if this automation isn't maintained properly, finetuned and kept being tweaked by teams of experts - many of which left or were layd off after the aquisition of Twitter.

M4v3R 2y ago
You might be onto something, I noticed that all the banned links were in the format: https://signal.me/#eu/fdy5h1miMifXa https://signal.me/#eu/fdy5h1miMifXa... The URL hash (the part after #) is often not considered by automated systems to be a part of URL that's meaningful, because hash is normally only used for addressing parts of the website that was loaded based on the previous part of the URL. If a particular Signal.me link was flagged for whatever legitimate reason (contained malware or illegal content) it's entirely reasonable that an automated system would strip the hash and block the whole domain (because the path part in this URL is just "/" and nothing else). It'll be interesting to see whether they address and reverse it. If not, then we can be fairly sure this was intentional.
- red_trumpet 2y ago
  You can actually post links of the form https://signal.me/asdf https://signal.me/asdf. But https://signal.me/#asdf https://signal.me/#asdf is blocked. That supports you point of view, I guess?

dotdi 2y ago

[flagged]

glowiefedposter 2y ago
[flagged]

akmarinov 2y ago

So? Who's using Twitter anyway?

nanna 2y ago

Particularly ironic given that DOGE is reported to be using Signal as its comms platform. [1] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42579873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42579873

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tremon 2y ago
That's interesting, given that as an official government department they're subject to FOIA requests and as such have an obligation to persist their documentation.
- gosub100 2y ago
  * Unless you're secretary of state.
  - throwaway5752 2y ago
    What happened in that case, and do you believe the same standard should be applied currently?
    - gosub100 2y ago
      In that case a corrupt politician with lots to hide was able to keep their crimes hidden using the secret service (who defended her house). I do not think that standard should be applied to anyone, ever.
      - throwaway5752 2y ago
        She went before Congress for to testify for 11 hours under oath, as a point of fact. I feel like that would be a reasonable next step. The FBI investigation https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-dir... is at odds with your description. It appears nothing was as anywhere as severe as the recent intelligence breach of when DOGE posted NOFORN material publicly (https://abcnews.go.com/US/agency-data-shared-doge-online-sparks-concern-intelligence/story?id=118858837 https://abcnews.go.com/US/agency-data-shared-doge-online-spa...)

sounddetective 2y ago

Everyone reading this -- sign up for Bluesky, help it build up a larger network effect, so it can outcompete X. It already has 30m users.

alwyn 2y ago
bsky still lacks basic security features like 2FA (beyond an email code) (andOAuth implementation), which puts me off from actively using it...
nxpnsv 2y ago
Who owns bsky? What prevents a random billionaire to buy it and use it their election platform? Mastodon just feels as a safer bet...
- berkes 2y ago
  bsky is decentralized, in theory more so than Mastodon, which is federated (a variant of decentralization that requires you to trust the server admins of a server of your choice) "In theory", because so far, there are very few nodes (one?), very few (if any?) alternative implementations, most is controlled and operated by a small team paid for by a.o. Jack Dorsey and other funds. Mastodon (using the ActivityPub protocol) has one main repo, managed by one person under a non-profit that also operates the biggest instance. But also has dozens of other implementations in other languages, with other niches, with more, less, other features and so on. So, "best bet" would probably be to: - Sign up at both a Mastodon and Bsky. Try them both for while. - See which one fits your needs, style and practical needs best. Stick with that one.
  - hug 2y ago
    Bluesky is neither decentralised nor federated. I wouldn't let that stop you from signing up for bluesky -- in my experience it is definitely the best of the options for a twitter alternative -- but you should know exactly what it is you're getting into before you get into it. And if you want to know exactly what you're getting into with bluesky, you should read this, which tells you more than you really want to know: https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/ https://dustycloud.org/blog/how-decentralized-is-bluesky/

martin-t 2y ago

This is what happens when a society allows narcissists in positions of power. It's a disease and when they refuse to seek treatment, it should make them ineligible for any leadership position, in both the private and public sector. Nobody (sane) would allow a psychotic individual to run for president or become a CEO. This is the same thing, except they are less of a danger to themselves and more to others. And of course they're able to craft more convincing lies. Mr. Musk never cared about free speech, only about being worshipped and the best way to achieve that is to say what people want to hear.

buyucu 2y ago

[flagged]

waonderer 2y ago
Which platform provides the same network effect? Bsky? Mastodon? I don't see the popular Twitter personalities there such as naval, balajis, paulg, etc. or folks from TOPT, etc.
- MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
  I don't benefit from being plugged into any of that. Do you?
  - waonderer 2y ago
    I mentioned some global accounts that are very generic, but I do follow some folks from my country (India) who share valuable content for my field of work. Such content doesn't seem possible on other platforms. FB is dead here. Insta is only images/videos. Threads is a no-no. I don't know any alternatives as of yet where my network is active.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  I mean, I suppose it really depends on what you want out of a social network. Some combo of mastodon and bluesky is fine for me, but then I didn't follow any of those people in the first place. If you want celeb VCs, then, yeah, you're probably stuck with Twitter. Most people don't, though.
  - waonderer 2y ago
    Makes sense. What other platforms do you know where we can get access to the network of entrepreneurs, thought-leaders, governments, and authors? I am considering text-based social apps only.
    - rsynnott 2y ago

j-bos 2y ago

This comment section has turned into something of a circle, it's cool to be mad nd all, but there was a comment expressing doubt at the details, wonder about a reason other than those stated, and asking if anyone independently verified, as I clicked it the comment was flagged to oblivion. No opportunity to engage with that viewpoint.

sunaookami 2y ago
There are certain topics that you can't discuss on Hacker News reasonably and social media is one of them.
- bluebarbet 2y ago
  Politics in general. Because everyone has an opinion, often based on their values rather than cold facts, and people do not like their values being questioned. The discussion is more civil than on other forums, but the difference is not night and day. Disappointing.
  - AlecSchueler 2y ago
    I generally agree with no politics on here but the DOGE stuff is very much tech news.
Liquidor 2y ago
HN is always a mess when the subject contains Musk, Trump, Google, browsers or social media platforms in general. I don't mind the slight political aspects of things, but reading a ton of hate and "I already deleted X" (pun intended) and "Just use Y other platform" (that no normal user can figure out) comments is just uninteresting and should stay on Reddit or wherever these nonproductive comments fit into. I'd love to hear more about this case, the technical aspects and the follow-ups/investigations. Let's focus on that, no? Maybe it's just me.
- t43562 2y ago
  You get to moderate up or down. Otherwise people say what they want.

PedroBatista 2y ago

Signal could start doing some posts praising Musk and promoting Tesla or whatever scam he’s pushing at the given moment, that would unblock them really fast. Pre-Musk Twitter was indeed bad, a sign of it’s time and dying. Now it’s even worse and quite pathetic.

karel-3d 2y ago

I think there should be a pinned post about Elon Musk at the top of HN and all posts and comments about Elon Musk should go there.

concordDance 2y ago
Can it be at the bottom instead?
- karel-3d 2y ago
  If it's at the bottom, people will keep submitting more Elon Musk news.

NicoJuicy 2y ago

Looking at the thread here. Trust in society is being eradicated and that's how authoritarian regimes win. Great video to understand what's going on: https://youtu.be/nknYtlOvaQ0?si=1LP6QsbFgIvpfIay https://youtu.be/nknYtlOvaQ0?si=1LP6QsbFgIvpfIay It's sad

JodieBenitez 2y ago

Some much people commenting about Elon Musk "free speech" declarations. There was never free speech on Twitter. Not before him, not after him.

nikolayasdf123 2y ago

probably to ensure integrity. they need to fight fraud and abuse on a massive scale. nothing to see here

redbell 2y ago

Ironically, three years ago, Musk encouraged the use of Signal and tweeted: "Use Signal", https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1347165127036977153 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1347165127036977153 Edit: In my opinion, Elon Musk initially endorsed Signal because of its strong encryption, security, and commitment to privacy. Now, he's blocking it for those very same reasons—what a blatant double standard! On a related note, one of the key advantages of the modern internet—and more specifically, social media—is that everything you say publicly is archived. This means that if you ever do a complete 180° on your claims or principles, it can easily come back to haunt you. So, it's always wise to be mindful of what you say and stay true to your values.

dmazin 2y ago
Don't the DOGE dweebs use Signal? Though I think they were forced to stop.
rsolva 2y ago
He may use Signal, but he does not want people on X to advertise their presence on any competing platforms. It is a childish and protectionist policy, and in no way align with his Free Speech® claims. It was the same when URLs to Mastodon/Fediverse instances was banned on X, in an attempt to hamper the network effect for those who migrated. Meta does the same with Pixelfed these days, to hamper migration away from Instagram. Elon and Mark are all for competition and free markets, but as soon as alternatives that can't be bought and controlled pops up, they outright ban any mention of it on their platforms.
- scarab92 2y ago
  It's probably just a spam filter going awry. Signal links are odd, in that all the identifies are after the #, so to a spam filter this just looks like a single url, https://signal.me https://signal.me , being sent out in mass.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    I run a service that does the decryption in the client so it's links look the same to filters. It runs up1, a really old version. The links are all like http://example.com/#longhexhash http://example.com/#longhexhash

FergusArgyll 2y ago

[flagged]

coldblues 2y ago

The logical explanation to me is that most of the Signal contacts shared tend to be for drugs or CSAM trading, so they went for the nuclear approach to make moderation easier.

duxup 2y ago
Is that true? I’ve never used signal.
- JansjoFromIkea 2y ago
  Telegram is overwhelmingly the app of choice for drug dealers with Whatsapp coming second, at least on a direct to customer level. No clue about CSAM but I'd really doubt it considering it requires a phone number.
  - coldblues 2y ago
    Telegram is overwhelmingly the preferred messenger for CSAM distribution, a search can find you all the relevant articles.
    - JansjoFromIkea 2y ago
      Thanks for the clarification. I misread your top post as though it meant Signal was the main source for those things. Sorry for the confusion.
axegon_ 2y ago
Give me a break, open telegram, which is still in the clear for comrade musk and he publicly advocated for comrade durov and tell me how long it will take you to find anything from prostitution to weapons, drugs and human trafficking. It's all about punishing people who can question musk & co's authoritarian desires.
- coldblues 2y ago
  Feds can request info from Telegram. Additionally, Telegram has evolved past a simple messenger application. A massive amount of projects, most of them being crypto projects, use Telegram as their primary method of communication and announcements. It is also a very popular messenger in India and parts of Europe. They can block Signal because they can get away with it. If it means banning a bunch of CSAM traders and drug dealers, even if it includes a few users and privacy nerds, they're still winning in terms of easing up their moderation efforts without significant outcry. I believe this block will be lifted, even if Signal users a minority, they are a loud minority. This could have very well been a mistake.

remon 2y ago

At this point you're actively contributing to the death of free speech if you're still active on X in any way. There are no excuses to use it still if you have any sort of functional moral compass.

skybrian 2y ago
No, this is just mood affiliation. Usually, posting on Twitter or quitting it has a very tiny, almost imperceptible effect on the larger world and it's certainly not something to get worked up about.
- remon 2y ago
  That's reversing the argument. I'm not saying quitting X is bad for X, I'm saying quitting X is good for you. Nobody's completely immune to whatever that sociological experiment is turning into and staying on X is likely to influence your ethics, morals and standards in an objectively negative way.
  - skybrian 2y ago
    Even personally, you couldn't possibly know whether it's positive or negative for a random stranger on the Internet, because it depends on how much they use it and what they use it for. For example, keeping a Twitter account in case someone wants to contact you seems pretty harmless.
    - remon 2y ago
      Well, sure, if you're exceptionally picky about non-normative use cases you can probably find a use for it that is not harmful to the average person. But you're doing a lot of heavy lifting already to justify a positive use case (contacting a person you apparently have no other way of reaching, which isn't in the top 3 of primary use cases for X). Anyway, I was speaking in the aggregate. X (so, post Elon) has been bad for society as a whole and if that's not an objective statement then it is at least close enough to make no difference. I suspect any arguments to use it anyway probably boil down "but...I like it". And since we live in a free world that's a good enough argument to have. It is not, however, harmless.

BLKNSLVR 2y ago

[flagged]

inatreecrown2 2y ago

do we know why?

trehGaf 2y ago

And Vance is lecturing the EU about free speech. The EU might be very happy with blocking encrypted services, just as Musk is.

kortilla 2y ago
Nobody is required to use X. False dichotomy

maelito 2y ago

The US is playing with fire. Most of Wall Street's valuation is at stake.

sitkack 2y ago
That is the point, crash the economy and pick up the pieces for pennies on the dollar.
- glouwbug 2y ago
  Tariff the world, devalue the dollar
__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
Wallstreet is a tumor, but the scope of this biopsy seems to be all wrong.

eptcyka 2y ago

I think it is critical to not forget the context of russian aligned bots getting free reign on Twitter, they are not being blocked, and Musk is keeping close ties to Putin.

philipdavis 2y ago

Do people in the US still use X? If yes, why? What keeps you on the platform (so the owner is a tiny step closer to destroying your own country)?

stainablesteel 2y ago
i voted for that, i voted for the destruction of the federal government because it's bankrupting us by stealing our money
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  Do you expect that money will be worth very much after the entity that issues it is destroyed?
- lolc 2y ago
  Then federated governments with local currencies, or what?
- whoitwas 2y ago
  the people who ensure government is broken and stealing from you are now in charge. they recently requested $4.3 trillion in deficit spending for tax cuts and the dissolution of medicaid.
- doodlebugging 2y ago
  I saw your comment and saw it getting downvoted or flagged but it is useful to have a discussion so that others similarly inclined can potentially learn something that they obviously don't already understand. I reproduce that comment here in case it somehow disappears. >i voted for that, i voted for the destruction of the federal government because it's bankrupting us by stealing our money If you're concerned about the federal government bankrupting "us" by stealing our money then ask yourself why one of the first things that happened was the firing of OIG personnel. The Inspectors General and their OIG employees are the federal employees with the mandate to identify waste, fraud, and abuse in every federal program regardless of size. They have the power to audit any recipient of taxpayer monies and to work with US Attorney federal prosecutors to prosecute those who steal, waste, or otherwise violate plan guidelines in disbursing money. US Attorneys will not even take a case to trial unless agency auditors can document in detail that a crime has occurred and that crime fits within prosecutorial guidelines and a conviction is nearly guaranteed. To take a case that has any weaknesses risks wasting public money prosecuting a case you might not win. The whole point is to make sure you have the evidence that forces the defendant to either make restitution or to spend some time in a federal lock-up. It's suspicious to me that the first thing they do is fire all the people who not only can watch, but who have the Congressional mandate to seek out waste, fraud, and abuse of federal programs that disburse money to individuals, small businesses, cities and other non-federal entities, non-profits, and corporations. Though I am not a doctor, I do think that you should seriously work on your mental health. Start by changing your diet to include less kool-aid as the sugar high you're on can cause metabolic changes that lead to seriously bad health outcomes. My spouse has spent a career in a federal department working to insure that the money Congress allocates to specific programs ends up being spent for purposes that are allowed under the guidelines of those federal programs. If you think the federal government is the one stealing your money you are sadly mistaken. Federal programs are full of fraud but the fraud occurs at the recipient end, not within the department. If you or anyone else are so concerned about where your tax money goes then the last agency entity that you would eliminate would be the one charged with insuring that all the monies in all the programs administered by the agency are disbursed lawfully according to plan guidelines which were approved by Congress. These people, as part of their job, have to read and internalize all the nuances, conflicts with existing programs, and contradictions in all the programs that they serve as watchdog over and it is their skills that allow federal prosecutors to take fraud cases to trial and to convict those who have abused federal programs for personal gain. You voted for someone who has a documented history of fraudulent use of federal money who made it a point in both of his administrations to remove the specific persons and agencies that would guarantee oversight so that they can do anything without worrying about accountability. Internalize that.

upofadown 2y ago

This make me curious about exactly what "signal.me" links were all about. The details appear to be available here: * https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Signal.me_URLs https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Signal.me_URLs * https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Usernames#Username_links https://signal.miraheze.org/wiki/Usernames#Username_links Signal.me links are just a way to easily send either a phone number or user name to someone else. No cryptographic identity. No protection of the phone number or user name. So to get around the ban a Signal user could simply send their phone number or user name over Twitter/X. It seems that the encrypted username form does provide some identity protection in that it can be cancelled, but for as long as it is active it appears that someone can just ask the Signal server what the associated user name is. The people involved probably should not be using Twitter/X for this sort of thing in the first place. Mastodon comes to mind as an alternative, but really, anything else.

zecg 2y ago
signal.me links are used to join (and advertise) Signal groups
- upofadown 2y ago
  OK, I couldn't find any specific documentation just floating around about group links. It appears that the base64 value is specific to the group and is only exposed through the link. I didn't see any way to munge the "signal.me" domain and fix it again. So for groups Twitter/X seems to have won.
- mlindner 2y ago
  No. Signal groups are advertised with signal.group URLs.
  - mlindner 2y ago
    Which, it is worth noting, are not blocked. I checked.
bad_user 2y ago

guappa 2y ago

I legit thought the desktop signal app had some bug on X11 and not wayland. Can this be titled clearly?

DrNosferatu 2y ago

[flagged]

tiberius_p 2y ago

When will they start to block wikipedia links?

DrNosferatu 2y ago

I guess they’ll be moving to BlueSky or Mastodon…

hackerbeat 2y ago

[flagged]

Tycho 2y ago

Can’t really tell what most of you are complaining about. You can say anything on X (short of doxing and inciting violence and things that are against the law), you can follow or block anyone on X. If they ban Signal links, a competitor platform, that’s a shame, but whatever you say on Signal you can say on X instead. Seems like some people think a “free speech platform” would be some sort of moderated debating space where opinions you dislike are silenced on your behalf and the downstream political ramifications are things that you personally enjoy, or else it’s not free speech but “fascism” (lol).

karparov 2y ago
> whatever you say on Signal you can say on X instead. Except one of them allows Elon to read what you write, the other doesn't.
sterlind 2y ago
try saying "cisgender."
- Tycho 2y ago
  A quick search for the word shows numerous X posts using it in the last few hours.
  - chownie 2y ago
    You have to search that word specifically to find those posts, they're otherwise algorithmically censored from timelines.

rpastuszak 2y ago

I had some time in the morning so built a simple site to share Signal links on X: https://link-in-a-box.vercel.app https://link-in-a-box.vercel.app If you think someone might benefit from it, please share. Also, spam if you have feedback!

rpastuszak 2y ago
This comment keeps going up and then getting downvoted -- if you have time to leave some feedback - I'd appreciate it. People already started using this thing, so if there's an issue with it, I'd like to respond/apply fixes if needed.

FergusArgyll 2y ago

If you just need to get all the emotions off your chest, feel free to continue, If you want to know what's actually getting blocked see the discussion here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43077124 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43077124

trust_bt_verify 2y ago
Why link a comment in the same thread? What does this add?

ss64 2y ago

[flagged]

mlindner 2y ago

Signal group chat links still work as do signal.org links. It's only signal.me links that are blocked.

tiberius_p 2y ago

This free speech absolutism thing is brutal.

rullopat 2y ago

And few days ago JD Vance went to Munich to say to EU leaders that they "there is a problem of freedom of speech in Europe"...

kjrfghslkdjfl 2y ago
[dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
scarab92 2y ago
There obviously are problems with freedom of speech in Europe. Everyone knows it.
- ruune 2y ago
  Tell me more. I live here and have never encountered a situation where I was not allowed to express my opinions in a systematic way. So I don't know but would be delighted to
  - sltkr 2y ago
    It might simply mean your opinions fall in the narrow band of views that are permitted to be expressed. It proves nothing about freedom of speech in general. Even in North Korea, people are allowed to freely express their love for their Dear Leader. Those who express a different view are swiftly disposed of. If you love Dear Leader you could live your entire life believing that you and everyone else has free speech, simply because you have never encountered evidence to the contrary.
    - torlok 2y ago
      AfD is a Nazi party, and nobody's silencing them, despite overwhelming opposition in all EU countries. If you listen to EU parliament speeches, there's all kinds of radical political views being shared during debates. Vance came to Europe to peddle US culture wars and got laughed out.

bjoli 2y ago

On a similar note: the Swedish armed forces just came out and recommended that people working for the military should use signal for their calls and messages for things that are not classified in any of the higher classifications. https://cornucopia.se/2025/02/forsvarsmakten-infor-krav-pa-signal-for-samtal-och-meddelanden/ https://cornucopia.se/2025/02/forsvarsmakten-infor-krav-pa-s... (Swedish)

fweimer 2y ago

I was curious because over here, the ownership of signal.me is pretty much obscured (behind Cloudflare and WHOIS privacy). Doing this for infrastructure domains is not a good idea because it encourages persistent overblocking because it makes manual review more difficult. At least there is official documentation mentioning signal.me: https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007320291-Firewall-and-Internet-settings https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007320291-Fi... (The page is in the Bing index, but it seems "signal.me" is treated as a stop word by the search engine.)

28304283409234 2y ago

Shoshana Zuboff was so right it is scary. The name ('Surveillance Capitalism') put me on the wrong foot as I already knew about the surveillance part. But what I found most scary was the part where the tech companies turned from surveillance to influence. Once you have these billions of people using only your platform to view the world, it is trivial alter their view of the world. And thereby changing policital currents, policies, opinions.... anything. It is like the Bible before Martin Luther translated it into German, and all christians just had to accept blindly that whatever the priests said was written in the bible actually was. Most humans now have so little input other than whatever priests they follow we might as well be back in the dark ages.

52-6F-62 2y ago
The dark ages is the plan according to Curtis Yarvin, their “prophet”. A network of techno-feudal states run by a joint-stock corporation headed by a CEO with absolute power. Like Hunger Games, fancy dress, bad tans, and all. It’s really lame and shortsighted. Never mind philosophically broken.

outside1234 2y ago

People, why are you still on X? It is a disinformation site. Move to Bluesky or Threads.

askonomm 2y ago

So the Public Town Square with Freedom of Speech has become the most censored, and private social network out there?

noname120 2y ago

Pretty sure it's because literally all the signal.me links are the same when you remove the part after the #. When you perform an HTTP(S) request you never provide the part after the # in the request URL, it's only interpreted by the web browser itself. It's likely that their antispam thing does the same and ignores the hash altogether. ———— Example of link (blocked): https://signal.me/#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHGbYwCkQbo7TNzMHPRKWquiWEttS85C https://signal.me/#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHGbYw... Without the hash (blocked): https://signal.me/ https://signal.me/ There is no blocking if you add any letters in the path (e.g. “abc”): https://signal.me/abc#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHGbYwCkQbo7TNzMHPRKWquiWEttS85C https://signal.me/abc#eu/P01wpUmC4nT2BBTwMrPAw7Nxcp81055tKHG...

Febra33 2y ago

Free speech absolutists, am I right?

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

axiologist 2y ago

That must be the free speech some american politicians are lecturing the world about...

bttrpll 2y ago

is X susceptible to DDOS?