Replying again to say: that actually makes sense. You should have said that upfront! Suddenly being locked out of critical software is definitely a risk worth considering

Why?

His actual goal is in the final sentence of the article and has nothing to do with moral intent.

It wasn’t about video length, it was about the Twitter leadership at that time being categorically incapable of monetizing any of their products.

Combine that with the orders-of-magnitude higher cost of running Vine compared to the bird, and it was always either going to be sold off or shut down.

It’s easy to forget that this was back in the time when these companies thought they were changing the planet for the better and drinking their own Kool aid by the gallon.

Great summary, but I want to point out that the reality of why they’re doing this is to pander to racist voters who were told their opinion by a highly effective villification campaign against this woman in tabloid newspapers.

Once these things gain traction, politicians always kowtow to the loudest public opinions

Which is also exactly how Signal works too; I migrated both two days ago. Process was virtually identical.

I much prefer Signal, but can’t judge WhatsApp to harshly on this tbh.

What in the actual fuck

Mark Zuckerberg needs to tread carefully or he might have to spend another afternoon answering the nonsensical questions of a bunch of geriatric luddites.

So, fire him? This is a fairly unambiguous failure to meet the requirements of your role

Skill issue

No, not at all. People really feel that way about Trump

“made”

my

He virtually always puts his statements on a knife’s edge. The meaning is irrelevant as long as individual readings can be interpreted to support the readers/listeners viewpoint without precluding what he actually intends which will be something entirely self serving.

fReE sPeEcH PuRiSt

The useful idiot certainly keeps himself busy doesn’t he

I mean, yeah, doesn’t everyone?

already paying more than 30% of their income — the standard threshold

See how they tried to normalize that hoping you wouldn’t notice?

This is also slightly off. It was primarily to eliminate third party apps from the existing landscape. Reddit want money from users in one of two ways:

1. Use their app and pay with your data via invasive tracking and advertising.
2. Pay for a third party app that pays them for API access.

Due to the extortionate pricing, (2) was only ever hypothetical. In reality there was no sustainable model for this for any third party app, even as a non-profit.

The case around AI does exist, but it was smoke and mirrors for Reddit pulling the same nonsense that Twitter did once they realized they might get away with it, regardless of the short term damage it would do to their public image.

Obligatory

They should change it to “reject and swerve”.