Elon Musk (No Politics)

[EEVblog]

Log is now required is to prevent AI scraping it to no end. There is a limit how many posts user can view for the same reason.

Yes, this change was reluctantly made to prevent the bots from hogging all the bandwidth.
AI bots have rendered the EEVblog forum unusable at several points due to scrapping, and steps have also had to be taken the prevent this.

I don't like that you can't just browse all of X now, but it is what it is. Had Jack Dorsey still been in charge when the AI bot surge hit, he almost certainly would have had to have done the same thing.

[EEVblog]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Really? AFAIK it's really hard to get banned unless you doxx or threaten to kill someone. Thunderf00t and many others post shit about Elon to no end and nothing happens to them.

Happened in the past, certainly.

Name specific accounts.

[Monkeh]

- Paid subscriptions
- Elimination of the one sided woke "blue check" brigade, and all the associated algorithmic promotion.
Yes, now you can pay to be 'trusted' and pushed to people. What an improvement.

So being on the right (left) side of the socio-political spectrum was the best way to determine if someone got a Blue Check?

At least now everyone gets the same opportunity.

No, and nor is being on the right and Elon liking it. Paying for it is also not better. Just do away with it except for manually reviewed high profile entities. And no, you're not high enough profile to care - politicians, major businesses, celebrities. Actual influence, not influencers. And no, that doesn't imply going back to the old bias, and being able to pay for it doesn't prevent them from taking it away.

- Secure encrypted messages and chat
You'd have to be a fool to trust that.

How is it not better than no encryption before?

Who says it's any encryption today? They store the 'private' keys, you have only their word as to the security of them. Their word is worth absolutely nothing to me (and no, it wasn't worth anything before Elon either).

- Direct stock ticker integration
- View counts
- Job postings
And a Payment system is coming soon.

I cannot for a second comprehend why any of these would be considered valuable in the context of Twitter.

It's called adding features, which the old Twitter practically never did, hence this discussion of your original claim. Not all features are of use to all people.

Adding features doesn't make a thing better. If you want a job search site, go to one of those. If you want a stock trading platform, those exist too. You do not need everything under one banner, especially this one.

Also not logging in does nothing to prevent tracking. Those who think websites need that for tracking your behavior are naive.

There are many ways to avoid tracking. Without public access not biased to present a specific view to individuals, there is only censorship.

Yes, this change was reluctantly made to prevent the bots from hogging all the bandwidth.

Had Jack Dorsey still been in charge when the AI bot surge hit, he almost certainly would have had to have done the same thing.

You mean the great Elon Musk with all his knowhow and money and the best engineers in the world (I hope the sarcasm is suitably waterfall-esque) can't keep a site primarily delivering short text messages online in the face of a little bot scraping when other high profile sites are managing fine? Youtube doesn't hide videos and comments from unregistered viewers. Wikipedia is still open for business.

[wraper]

You mean the great Elon Musk with all his knowhow and money and the best engineers in the world (I hope the sarcasm is suitably waterfall-esque) can't keep a site primarily delivering short text messages online in the face of a little bot scraping when other high profile sites are managing fine? Youtube doesn't hide videos and comments from unregistered viewers. Wikipedia is still open for business.

Needing to double-triple your capacity is not "a little". Not to say why would you tolerate someone who not only causes you additional expenses but also likely will use scraped data to compete with you or against you in some other way?

[Monkeh]

You mean the great Elon Musk with all his knowhow and money and the best engineers in the world (I hope the sarcasm is suitably waterfall-esque) can't keep a site primarily delivering short text messages online in the face of a little bot scraping when other high profile sites are managing fine? Youtube doesn't hide videos and comments from unregistered viewers. Wikipedia is still open for business.

Needing to double-triple your capacity is not "a little". Not to say why would you tolerate someone who not only causes you additional expenses but also likely will will use scraped data against you.

Have YT and Wikimedia tripled their capacity solely to survive 'AI'? That's a genuine question.

You know, it's possible to take steps against scraping without blocking all unregistered access. But instead they take measures to ensure control over what people see.

[EEVblog]

You know, it's possible to take steps against scraping without blocking all unregistered access. But instead they take measures to ensure control over what people see.

This forum now has such tight control over bots that I have to spend 10 minutes every day manually approving all the account caught in the spam bot traps. And they still get through...

[Monkeh]

You know, it's possible to take steps against scraping without blocking all unregistered access. But instead they take measures to ensure control over what people see.

This forum now has such tight control over bots that I have to spend 10 minutes every day manually approving all the account caught in the spam bot traps. And they still get through...

Great. That's nothing to do with scraping via public viewing, it's just the cost of dealing with spam.

[temperance]

This message board which is supposed to be about raw semiconductors, nifty circuits, things going up in smoke, getting more digits out of ADC's, RF voodoo, scaring test equipment and their manufacturers, all things which can and will go wrong sooner or later, some good fights about dots and commas in embedded software, exposing dodgy technology, at times very interesting technical discussions, has somehow acquired a musky scent.

[Cyclotron]

You mean the great Elon Musk with all his knowhow and money and the best engineers in the world (I hope the sarcasm is suitably waterfall-esque) can't keep a site primarily delivering short text messages online in the face of a little bot scraping when other high profile sites are managing fine? Youtube doesn't hide videos and comments from unregistered viewers. Wikipedia is still open for business.

Needing to double-triple your capacity is not "a little". Not to say why would you tolerate someone who not only causes you additional expenses but also likely will will use scraped data against you.

Have YT and Wikimedia tripled their capacity solely to survive 'AI'? That's a genuine question.

Yes, triple and more.

You know, it's possible to take steps against scraping without blocking all unregistered access. But instead they take measures to ensure control over what people see.

If you have a simple solution, the market is ripe and you'd make a fortune. Can you share your steps?

[Monkeh]

Have YT and Wikimedia tripled their capacity solely to survive 'AI'? That's a genuine question.

Yes, triple and more.

I'd love to see a citation on that. But if that is the case, clearly they saw it as being better than the alternative.

You know, it's possible to take steps against scraping without blocking all unregistered access. But instead they take measures to ensure control over what people see.

If you have a simple solution, the market is ripe and you'd make a fortune. Can you share your steps?

I never suggested a simple solution, and you know it. But, apparently, it's possible - even little EEVBlog managed to remain open to the public.

Ah well, this thread was doomed from the start (whole purpose being to shit on anyone critical), and now you're here, it's definitely lights out..

[Cyclotron]

Have YT and Wikimedia tripled their capacity solely to survive 'AI'? That's a genuine question.

Yes, triple and more.

I'd love to see a citation on that. But if that is the case, clearly they saw it as being better than the alternative.

Well, I don't generally go with my qualifications for comment, but Cybersecurity is my profession, and business is good. I won't mix my profession with my hobby as that's not good practice.

You obviously haven't noticed anything about what's going on in the industry. One recent example:
https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/04/perplexity-accused-of-scraping-websites-that-explicitly-blocked-ai-scraping/

If the above context isn't enough, then nothing would suffice for you.  This is Cloudflare complaining about volumes.
This is just one case with a source of Perplexity. The problem is massive. The bot and AI security market is projected to reach nearly 100 billion dollars by 2030.
So if you have a solution, your moment has arrived.

You know, it's possible to take steps against scraping without blocking all unregistered access. But instead they take measures to ensure control over what people see.

If you have a simple solution, the market is ripe and you'd make a fortune. Can you share your steps?

I never suggested a simple solution, and you know it. But, apparently, it's possible - even little EEVBlog managed to remain open to the public.

You stated that there's a way for X to protect itself without blocking all unregistered users. Please provide the solution.

Ah well, this thread was doomed from the start (whole purpose being to shit on anyone critical), and now you're here, it's definitely lights out..

I didn't shit on you for being critical, I provided what you asked for. Thank you for that compliment. I appreciate the respect.

[EEVblog]

Ah well, this thread was doomed from the start (whole purpose being to shit on anyone critical)

Nope, it's the marketplace of ideas/opinion.
Bring a good reasoned take either way and you can "win".
Bring an obviously dumb take and you'll get shot down.
Welcome to the internet.

I literally get called both an Elon sycophant AND an Elon hater on the same day on X 

[EEVblog]

You stated that there's a way for X to protect itself without blocking all unregistered users. Please provide the solution.

As I understand it, the blocking all non-users thing was the easiest temporary measure at the time the problem started. IIRC, it was during a very vulnerable period after the takeover when the server performance was hanging by a thread until they could figure things out.
Not sure what happened after that, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they didn't get that much push back at the move, and it was a great effective way to kill the bots, so they just left it in place.
And IIRC it started as blocking all access to non-accounts, but then moved to being able to see the original tweet so anyone could share, but not the see the replies. Not an unreasonable compromise.

[Monkeh]

it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they didn't get that much push back at the move

Of course not. To get pushback would require people to have accounts. Those who don't want them, well, they never had them, and most others not interested in the new direction simply left before that point.

[EEVblog]

it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they didn't get that much push back at the move

Of course not. To get pushback would require people to have accounts. Those who don't want them, well, they never had them, and most others not interested in the new direction simply left before that point.

I complained about it at the time, because people were complaining they couldn't see anything at the X links I was posting on other sites because they didn't have an account.
I wasn't alone.

[johansen]

I literally get called both an Elon sycophant AND an Elon hater on the same day on X 

i'm wondering why you have time to waste replying to this thread so many times, and haven't nuked it simply for being off topic

elon musk hasn't touched a soldering iron in 3 decades at least.


don't like him? setup a filter to auto delete posts that mention political figures. all of them.

[Cyclotron]

Welcome to the internet.

I literally get called both an Elon sycophant AND an Elon hater on the same day on X 

^This. The world is binary these days.

Elon is an excellent subject for discussion, given his leadership in companies dominated by EEs.
Given how boiling the discussion of him appears to get, I give you praise for opening a dumping ground for the topic.

[Cyclotron]

You stated that there's a way for X to protect itself without blocking all unregistered users. Please provide the solution.

As I understand it, the blocking all non-users thing was the easiest temporary measure at the time the problem started. IIRC, it was during a very vulnerable period after the takeover when the server performance was hanging by a thread until they could figure things out.
Not sure what happened after that, but it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they didn't get that much push back at the move, and it was a great effective way to kill the bots, so they just left it in place.
And IIRC it started as blocking all access to non-accounts, but then moved to being able to see the original tweet so anyone could share, but not the see the replies. Not an unreasonable compromise.

I won't go into it, but they have been offered solutions to help. The cost of the solutions at that scale is "significant." X is not exactly rolling in cash as they try to reach sustainable profitability, so they have gone it alone in their battle. Honestly, many of us in the industry didn't think they'd make it this far, but they have.

Many companies do very similar. You can only take a look at Facebook Marketplace before it demands you to login, for example.

[tggzzz]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Cite exact examples.

Unless you have access to the original, that is impossibly difficult, as Lenin and "Uncle Joe" Stalin well knew (for the avoidance of doubt, their audience could only see what was politically allowed)

[tggzzz]

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.
One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Twitter is VASTLY better than what it was before. Musk improved it more in 6 months than in the entire history of Twitter, with 75% less staff.

Not that I can see. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Just off the top of my head:
- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Now all you have to so is incur the wrath of one person, e.g. Lenin or Stalin or Musk or Xi or Putin.

- Community Notes (massive)
- Monetisation
- Hiding Likes (very underrated upgrade)

Community notes are merely a way for them to disclaim the harmful effects of the crap (monetised/paid and otherwise) posted there. "It must be OK since nobody complained".

Hiding "likes" is a positive Didn't even realise Twatter had them.

- Vastly improved video support (I can upload 4k native content now, and any length long form videos)
- Communities
- Paid subscriptions

Don't care about any of those.

- Elimination of the one sided woke "blue check" brigade, and all the associated algorithmic promotion.

No change there: the algorithmic promotion is merely different.

- Secure encrypted messages and chat
- Really long form posts
- Post editing (the #1 requested feature forever that Twitter never added)

I don't like historical revisionism; it is too easy to end up in a Soviet or Chinese state (think Trotsky etc purges, and Tiananmen Square Pooh Bear)

- AI integration via Grok (like it or hate it)

Such integration is necessary in order to be able to shape/distort what is seen on a forum.

There is no benefit for disinterested users.

- Direct stock ticker integration
- Job postings

Unbeneficial duplication of what's available elsewhere, only beneficial to those who benefit from platform lockin. Think Farcebook.

And a Payment system is coming soon.

Is that pay to write drivel or pay to read drivel?

[Analog Kid]

Others like CommonSenseSkeptic trounce Musk on a daily basis, way worse than Thunderf00t does, and none of them ever get banned. Barnacules Nerdgasm is another one that comes to mind that I know of (and they have had personal tussles in the past), and there are countless others. None of them get banned.
This rumor started because the mainstream media went with a story one time that must was permanently banning journalists. They were just temporarily banned due to breaking the T&C for various reasons.

Again, if you think Musk is banning people he hates then provide provide actual examples.
He let the ultimate litmus test Alex Jones back on the platform, and he hates his guts.

Well, if what you wrote is true, then point in Musk's favor. (Not a fanboi here.)

[tszaboo]

- Now zero chance of me (and others) getting cancelled by the infamous "Trust and Safety Council". There were many attempts by those who did not like me to get my account shut down. Twitter was literally infamous for people getting cancelled like this for having the "wrong social politics"

Instead, people get banned for being critical of Musk, his companies, his politics, his pet politicians.. Don't forget for calling attention to things like reporters (regularly banned) being arrested under false charges due to the political nature of their coverage.

Really? AFAIK it's really hard to get banned unless you doxx or threaten to kill someone. Thunderf00t and many others post shit about Elon to no end and nothing happens to them.

Happened in the past, certainly. Among other things, like firing employees for personal opinions (the hypocrisy is strong there). As I've pointed out in the past, however, what happens on Twitter in realtime today is a complete unknown to me. I'm not allowed to see any of it. Because obviously keeping everything secret from untracked views which don't have their perception of the content on the platform biased by the platform makes it better.

if you put politics and ideology at work into your work, and you are asked to stop, and you don't stop... The only legal way to stop you is to fire you. All these woke idiots corrupting our discussion who were fired had a chance to be a decent person.

[Monkeh]

I complained about it at the time, because people were complaining they couldn't see anything at the X links I was posting on other sites because they didn't have an account.
I wasn't alone.

Welcome to the minority, I guess? You didn't complain about it enough, because people are still locked out of context with your 'reasonable compromise'.

if you put politics and ideology at work into your work, and you are asked to stop, and you don't stop... The only legal way to stop you is to fire you. All these woke idiots corrupting our discussion who were fired had a chance to be a decent person.

The ease with which you label and dismiss people is pretty disturbing.

[EEVblog]

if you put politics and ideology at work into your work, and you are asked to stop, and you don't stop... The only legal way to stop you is to fire you. All these woke idiots corrupting our discussion who were fired had a chance to be a decent person.

Quite a few months ago I responded to a SpaceX employee who complained on X that he was fired for posting a company grounds photo of Starship on X.
When they asked him to take it down because it's company policy for employees not to post any work related images online, he refused, so they fired him.

His excuse was that there a hundred similar photos of the same Starship taken by people right outside the gates, why should his photo be any different.
I tried to explain how the real work works, and how the company has to have a policy, but he got all upset and claimed he did nothing wrong and that they fired him for no cause
Some people just don't get it.

Tried to find the post, but found this instead, LOL.
https://x.com/eevblog/status/1592352154433777665

[EEVblog]

Welcome to the minority, I guess? You didn't complain about it enough, because people are still locked out of context with your 'reasonable compromise'.

Meh, it is what it is.
If it worries you that much how about you join X and complain about it?