4 ms·

But you don't own it. X does. It's their service, they are free to apportion handles as they see fit. It is nothing like a house where you have an actual owners

by arcfour 7mo ago

But you don't own it. X does. It's their service, they are free to apportion handles as they see fit. It is nothing like a house where you have an actual ownership claim through the deed.

Krasnol 7mo ago
This "ownership" or rather "identification" is a significant part of the service though. It wouldn't have been so successful if everybody be called "Anonymous" meaning that they wouldn't be able to make money with it. They've started to take this away now. Today it's some account with obviously few words. Tomorrow it might be one with wrong words. What you counted as value is nothing. It might be lost tomorrow, so why bother?
applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
[flagged]
- nomel 7mo ago
  > but there's something of a grand social contract that keeps the concept of accounts on websites working no there's not. this is complete and utter fiction. the things that keep it working are ads and normal users putting their eye in front of them, and the tos to make any silly claims of "social contracts" legally and absolutely moot.
- 627467 7mo ago
  > can we please not play stupid. Hmmm who is playing stupid? Internet monolithic social services are run by private companies with TOS that no one reads and change, services that barely anyone pays for (except through their data). We should definitely normalize this so that people see what the internet actually is for the vast majority of people.
- sharifhsn 7mo ago
  It’s playing stupid to pretend that the theft of a hardly used handle has anything to do with an actual user account. I’m sure if @hac had a presence online, their handle wouldn’t have been sold from under them.
oskarw85 7mo ago
[flagged]
hayleox 7mo ago
It's less like having the house taken away, and more like having your house's street address reassigned to someone else's house. Sure, no one's taken your land. Your deed gives you ownership of parcel #530453080, not of the identifier "123 Vine Street", so nothing you legally own has been taken from you. But it's your identity. It's the way you've been putting yourself into the world and telling people they can reach you there. It used to be that if someone sent a message to that address, or tried to navigate to that address, they would reach you; but now, they'll be taken to somewhere else, and they perhaps won't even realize what's happened. And for the ownership issue, sheesh. Yes X, in a literal sense, owns all the usernames. We're talking about whether it's morally right for them to do, not about whether it's illegal. If they had held back these short "valuable" usernames from the beginning, no one would care; it's the act of taking away someone's established identity that is problematic.

by arcfour 7mo ago

But you don't own it. X does. It's their service, they are free to apportion handles as they see fit. It is nothing like a house where you have an actual ownership claim through the deed.

Krasnol 7mo ago

This "ownership" or rather "identification" is a significant part of the service though. It wouldn't have been so successful if everybody be called "Anonymous" meaning that they wouldn't be able to make money with it. They've started to take this away now. Today it's some account with obviously few words. Tomorrow it might be one with wrong words. What you counted as value is nothing. It might be lost tomorrow, so why bother?

applfanboysbgon 7mo ago

[flagged]

nomel 7mo ago
> but there's something of a grand social contract that keeps the concept of accounts on websites working no there's not. this is complete and utter fiction. the things that keep it working are ads and normal users putting their eye in front of them, and the tos to make any silly claims of "social contracts" legally and absolutely moot.
627467 7mo ago
> can we please not play stupid. Hmmm who is playing stupid? Internet monolithic social services are run by private companies with TOS that no one reads and change, services that barely anyone pays for (except through their data). We should definitely normalize this so that people see what the internet actually is for the vast majority of people.
sharifhsn 7mo ago
It’s playing stupid to pretend that the theft of a hardly used handle has anything to do with an actual user account. I’m sure if @hac had a presence online, their handle wouldn’t have been sold from under them.

oskarw85 7mo ago

[flagged]

hayleox 7mo ago

It's less like having the house taken away, and more like having your house's street address reassigned to someone else's house. Sure, no one's taken your land. Your deed gives you ownership of parcel #530453080, not of the identifier "123 Vine Street", so nothing you legally own has been taken from you. But it's your identity. It's the way you've been putting yourself into the world and telling people they can reach you there. It used to be that if someone sent a message to that address, or tried to navigate to that address, they would reach you; but now, they'll be taken to somewhere else, and they perhaps won't even realize what's happened. And for the ownership issue, sheesh. Yes X, in a literal sense, owns all the usernames. We're talking about whether it's morally right for them to do, not about whether it's illegal. If they had held back these short "valuable" usernames from the beginning, no one would care; it's the act of taking away someone's established identity that is problematic.