3 ms·

Don't be so generous in your assumptions. Meta simply stole the username because they could, and gave the old owner nothing in return. Or if they were lucky, ma

Don't be so generous in your assumptions. Meta simply stole the username because they could, and gave the old owner nothing in return. Or if they were lucky, maybe the band got a few Meta branded t-shirts, as was the case for one of the other victims from the article. Seriously, look at that list of all the times Meta stole people's handles. Why would this time be any different?

blast 26d ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49636930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49636930
usef- 26d ago
If it happened across multiple platforms (of different owners) and the band themselves are not complaining, months after the rename, it seems quite likely. Note that if this was done against the band's will it would be fantastic publicity for them to say so. Everyone would be on their side. Meta probably reached out to them to remove any uncertainty around sharing the Muse trademark, and this was included in the deal. The band themselves didn't lose any followers, it was a rename. They might have asked for a clause not to talk about the deal.
00ze 26d ago
"The old owner" was $platform Read the TOS for these services ... you don't own anything stored on their servers
- Aurornis 26d ago
  Incorrect. This happened across platforms including X.
  - loeg 25d ago
    I think GP is (correctly) claiming that you don't actually own your account handle on social media services, including X. But I don't think it was a particularly relevant response at that point in the comment thread, and I agree Meta likely bought the usernames from the band on the various platforms.
Aurornis 26d ago
> Meta simply stole the username because they could, and gave the old owner nothing in return. The name changed happened across platforms including Twitter\X. Meta doesn’t own X. Is nobody reading the article? This comment section is crazy.
- brookst 26d ago
  This place has become Reddit with how easy it is to farm upvotes for any “evil corpos” take, no matter how clueless or inane.
  - throw0101a 26d ago
    > This place has become Reddit […] Not reading TFA (the fine article) has been a noble Internet tradition since (at least) the earliest days of Slashdot.
    - brookst 26d ago
      Oh way before that. But the mating displays about every company being a conspiracy are about Reddit era, IIRC.
      - mfru 25d ago
        to be fair, Meta is a conspiracy company, probably just not in this particular case
- underlipton 26d ago
  That's what happens when you abuse people's trust for years: they don't trust you.

blast 26d ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49636930 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49636930

usef- 26d ago

If it happened across multiple platforms (of different owners) and the band themselves are not complaining, months after the rename, it seems quite likely. Note that if this was done against the band's will it would be fantastic publicity for them to say so. Everyone would be on their side. Meta probably reached out to them to remove any uncertainty around sharing the Muse trademark, and this was included in the deal. The band themselves didn't lose any followers, it was a rename. They might have asked for a clause not to talk about the deal.

00ze 26d ago

"The old owner" was $platform Read the TOS for these services ... you don't own anything stored on their servers

Aurornis 26d ago
Incorrect. This happened across platforms including X.
- loeg 25d ago
  I think GP is (correctly) claiming that you don't actually own your account handle on social media services, including X. But I don't think it was a particularly relevant response at that point in the comment thread, and I agree Meta likely bought the usernames from the band on the various platforms.

Aurornis 26d ago

> Meta simply stole the username because they could, and gave the old owner nothing in return. The name changed happened across platforms including Twitter\X. Meta doesn’t own X. Is nobody reading the article? This comment section is crazy.

brookst 26d ago
This place has become Reddit with how easy it is to farm upvotes for any “evil corpos” take, no matter how clueless or inane.
- throw0101a 26d ago
  > This place has become Reddit […] Not reading TFA (the fine article) has been a noble Internet tradition since (at least) the earliest days of Slashdot.
  - brookst 26d ago
    Oh way before that. But the mating displays about every company being a conspiracy are about Reddit era, IIRC.
    - mfru 25d ago
      to be fair, Meta is a conspiracy company, probably just not in this particular case
underlipton 26d ago
That's what happens when you abuse people's trust for years: they don't trust you.