Comment by dotnet00 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by dotnet00 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I don't get how this is so hard to understand (in general, so many people seem to be reading this completely backwards).

Previously, if X blocks Y, X isn't recommended Y's posts, Y can't interact with X's posts, Y can't see X's posts.

Now, if X blocks Y, X isn't recommended Y's posts, Y can't interact with X's posts, but Y can see X's posts.

The new system changes nothing in terms of what the person doing the blocking experiences. It fixes abuses of the previous block system, where scammers, grifters and impersonators hide behind blocks to reduce the chances of being caught. It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target on a platform that has free accounts and the ability to easily switch between multiple accounts.

Apple's policy is that apps must have "The ability to block abusive users from the service." They don't say that users should be able to block other users from seeing their posts. In fact, this is also how blocks work on other platforms like Discord. If I block a user, I don't see their posts unless I click on them, they can see mine, but they can't directly ping or reply to me. Similarly with Reddit, being blocked from a subreddit makes me unable to interact with it, but lets me continue to view it.

> It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target.

I would have made the opposite move, adding an option for paying customers to be invisible to logged out users.

We will see how it goes, but unless you add a rule to prevent people to screenshot tweets from people who blocked them and sharing that picture to their followers, I don't see how the changes are more improvements than regression.

And to be honest, I'm not sure I really care about this change, the two person I know that were harassed on Twitter aren't using it anymore, so :/

Hopefully the platform improve thanks to this change :D

To me, this is an improvement. I don't care about the thing about preventing people from screenshot-ing tweets, since the barrier was so low it was happening often anyway. But, I've seen many cases of accounts being impersonated and used for scams, where the impersonated user only finds out after the damage has already been done. E.g. you sell commissions for something, impersonator makes an account, blocks you so you can't see him, then tricks potential customers into sending him money. You only piece things together weeks later when those customers start calling you out for running off with their money. Another variation involves someone commissioning something, then blocking when their order is ready as a way to harass the creator.

Ok, i see. It isn't an issue here, i don't think i've ever saw twitter used for real businesses beside crypto and "coaching".

Lots of artists do commissions via DMs.

On twitter? Maybe in the US, but here it's mostly instagram and a book on DeviantArt or ArtStation, or emails for more serious project.

Really mute would be a better word than block, right? I do agree that it seems like muting is a more sensible option than blocking though.

There is already a mute feature, when X mutes Y, X will no longer see Y's posts. Y will still be able to interact, but X won't see any of it.

Wait, if X blocks Y, I'm confused now, who is Y? (Just joking)

thank you for the explanation.

Can they subscribe to Y’s posts? (I mean, without creating another account.)

More generally, though, I agree. Twitter’s aggressive spamming of nearly every page with irrelevant posts (for example, the replies page) is a better reason to switch.

Seems to be unclear, apparently X doesn't do auto-unsubscribes, so you'd still be charged for the subscription. Previously it'd tell you that you can't access subscriber content anymore, but it isn't clear if that's still the case.

> It also eliminates the silly fiction that a block prevented stalkers from stalking their target

It's about adding enough friction to discourage the behavior. Human problems don't always need mathematically-perfect solutions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com