Hacker News Reader

Comment by coldpie | Hacker News Reader

Yes, obviously I have read it. The technical limitations are that you can post 250 characters and up to four images. There are no technical limitations being violated by posting an image containing more than 250 characters. People use images all the time to communicate longer text portions in a single post. Do you really think Twitter's intent by saying users may not work around technical limitations is to clamp down on this extremely common behavior?

View on HN

"People use images all the time to communicate longer text portions in a single post. "

People also post porn, or use bots, both are against TOS.

So its not obvious or clrar, and they interpret their own TOS however it suits them every day. Its intentionally vague

I'm not talking about their intent, I'm not a mind reader, I'm talking about their published TOS.

Yes, I regret putting those last two sentences in there. Please ignore them and just respond to the first two:

> The technical limitations are that you can post 250 characters and up to four images. There are no technical limitations being violated by posting an image containing more than 250 characters.

Posting images of text is not posting text. It is posting images. Posting an image of a dog is posting an image, not posting a dog. (Ceci n’est pas un pipe) If you posted an image that triggered an injection bug in their backend and filled a tweet with more than 280 characters, that would be circumvention. But there is no technical limitation preventing people from posting images of text, or dogs.

Similarly, the alt text box allowing up to 1000 characters is not a circumvention of tweets only allowing 280 characters. You are allowed to write up to 1000 characters of alt text. You are allowed to post images.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com