acters

Great examples of how letting these private companies act however they feel like will ultimately lead us down to a worse experience and quality of life. Apollo and Tweetbot were great software that made those platforms much more useable and brought a lot of dedicated users to the platform. Now we have is poorly made official apps that offer nothing to the users. I don't use either platforms. I don't have an account with them anymore. I removed myself from them. Yet people like you make them important and justify their decisions. Instead of listening to their userbases' feedback, they instead PR it up and wait till there is only dysfunctional idiots left. TickTock started out as that and everyone else is trying to copy that homework. There are too many people in this world with poor mental health.

We should realize that somehow there needs to be an increase in regulation in business behavior. Even to how businesses treat other businesses that use their online platforms. Internet is too much of a wild west. It just does not seem there is modern actions and behaviors at play here. too narrow minded and thinking of how they are free too whatever they like without consequences.

I got dunked on. I casually commented an opinion without thinking of how to put my feelings and thoughts into words. I made the legal option too upfront. It is an eye catching controversial topic to jump on. I am just enjoying myself for now. typing up random ramblings.

It is not pushed; it is a right. It is just a difference in culture. We americans have a strong legal system that is made for small and large cases. On top of that, we are allowed to do it privately by settling matters outside of the legal system when possible. It is not meant to be a “I don’t like this, so I will sue” however a lot of bad actors have popularized this. In fact, if a business acted in a way that was offensive, we have a right to defend ourselves. If there is no way to do that then we are losing something necessary to prevent a dystopian future. I do believe the american schooling system has become to naive and only teach the abstract general education classes.

I believe a lot of it came down to how much American companies had to be sued in the past and presently are because of the lack of regulations. Especially for a lot of newer technologies, or reduction of cost for previously discovered technologies. With current lobbying practices and ease of influence on our government, many people are forced to take things to court to cementify regulations or rights. Sometimes we are forced to take a business or individuals to court because many americans are uncaring for one another and some have tried to screw each other over.

It is not to say this does not happen all around the world. America seems to very loud. It is easy to see and hear about all kinds of things that happen to a large nation like america. While other larger nations either shut down the press or news coverages and are blatantly corrupted. Some of the large nations in europe are not all roped into one another under a single name like "Europe." It is all odd and complex.

I have jumped the gun too early on telling him to sue. I should have asked if he spoke to github before making that suggestion. my bad.

that is what the previous owner of the twitter x handle said. No compensation or warning. However, Twitter(or X) was exercising their trademark policy. Github just changed OP's username without any warning or breach of any policy.

https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-twitter-takes-over...

If Github has the power to change usernames or account details without notice then I would like them to communicate that to me clearly and upfront. Also, you dont have to pay github to have legal grounds. If the account is used for business purposes(business card, or other forms), then github could cause you financial damages no matter how small. As a business, they should try to be more open and communicative with the users. OP clearly does not have much of a case, which makes that a lame example to bring up this court stuff. This is my bad, however if OP was using his account as we both mentioned then he would have a good case.

Overall, Github should update their policy to communicate more clearly with us. This is something we should demand from them. We can just throw up our hands and say github can do whatever they want. If that was the case and Github came out to say that, I would never do business with them or use their services/platform.

This is the main issue I wanted to bring the conversation towards. instead I got flamed for making it seem like I am a "sue-aholic." Some people use their Github for business use and allowing Github to change a username without notice is bad blood. On top of that Github has no mention of telling its user base of changing usernames with or without notice. There is almost no mention that they can do whatever they like on their platform with your personal account details. If Github ever does end up changing someone's username and that person was doing what you said. Github would be in deeper trouble than what OP does have.

Obviously OP understands the company's decision for changing his username but he was allowed to have it in the beginning. It is odd to backtrack and force a name change without notice. Github should update their policy with new reasonings for allowing themselves the ability to change your username(or account details) without notice. Afterall If Github can change my username(or account details), I would like that to be communicated to me.

If push comes to shove I would play ball and enjoy it, even if undesirable. I would like to say that I suggested OP should speak with Github support before court however people skipped that part because my comment mainly talked about the sueing aspect in deeper detail.

OP should talk to support and get Github communicate with the public more clearly through their policy/terms of service about forcing username changes with or without consent.

True, which is why it should be a considered a fun activity. Not everything is a hobby but a tool to exercised when needed or wanted.

I mentioned in a different comment how Github's policy and terms of service has no mention of changing an account's username with or without notice. Unless they can prove that they are "squatting" by holding an username considered "inactively held for future use." It is inappropriate behavior for Github to do this to OP.

I also mentioned to talk to support first but I failed to mention why. Instead my comment made it seem as though OP should immediately sue them. I do not condone that kind of behavior and would have edited my earlier comment to reflect this after some of the comments made it clear I made a mistake.(I can not edit it now)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention and grateful for your understanding. Hopefully I can leave this comment behind me as it seems to have run its course.

It will be done in arbitrage before anything like that. It is perfectly ok to sue a business for inappropriate actions that are not clearly stated or wrongfully done. After closely reviewing Github's policy and terms of service. They do not state they will change your username(with or without notice). Unless the account is "inactively held for future use." I highly doubt OP had been inactive enough to be considered a squatter. Either way, Github needs to update their policies describing why and how someone like OP had to have their username changed without notice. If this happened to me with a username that I carefully crafted and was unjustifiably acted on. I would certainly speak with support then sue them if there is no resolution, hoping to settle out of court because going through the court process is a giant pain for both parties.

I am unsure how society is "made worse" On the contrary, this is playful, it is not evil or abusive. also helps keep companies on their toes. Changing someone's username without notifying them AND consent should be frowned on. Taking a large company to small claims will not make the company worse or hurt anyone. Most of the time it is helpful and sometimes brings about the creation of needed regulations. It is feedback in a professional manner for disrespecting one of their users/clients.

Lol, imagine how confused people will be. They will think that there is a mistake somewhere when infact this guy rightfully owned the username username!

I have a strange fascination with meetings, legalize, and other boring business stuff.

You are correct, a lot of forces are canceling out on the long term(instead of instantaneously) it can easily be manipulated into increasing periods of unbalance in one direction until a point is reached then a separate mechanism is used to force it to a balanced state. Conservation of energy is always in effect. Gyroscope effects that bike wheels can be added with other separate gyroscopes. Thus, a self righting bike. The effect called precession is understood well enough.

How a human is able to manipulate it is simply by using the force of gravity from shifting their weight(moving the center of gravity). However, the movement of the center of gravity has to be perpendicular to the wheels axle. The steeper the angle of attack the wheel has to the ground, there will need to be an exponential increase in distance to move the center of gravity. Once the wheel is parallel to the ground, there will be an undefined distance needed to move the center of gravity.

Speaking directly about the title, it is true. Once you start something, it is the most important thing. It can be dropped at any moment if desired. However, the optimal path is towards completion. This means that you are unable to do something else. Thereby planning to do nothing else. You have to make sure you can focus on your task to completion. Otherwise, you will end up having to alternate tasks. Surprisingly, we alternate tasks constantly. Mainly, it is because of boredom, time constraints, or lack of capability(knowledge, power, resources, etc).

You are correct! We may be dismayed by how fast we approached new information (and thereby the speed of action), however, productivity has been steadily rising. On top of that, we are able to act and learn more variety than ever before. There are clear downsides and upsides to the speed. Overall, faster has shown to be better.

I guess they are just min/maxing their real world personality and connections. Very similar to how people play MMOs to the highest level.

This is the biggest benefit reddit provided to the user base. Google search has been lackluster and appending the word reddit allowed me to see plenty of good anecdotal and informative focused discussions without fluffing up the content for SEO.

The ethics of how to properly allow users to send both encrypted and unencrypted emails was an issue. Sending encrypted messages and plain text at the same time will defeat the idea of security and privacy. if there is a thread with many members that have both unencrypted and encrypted-capable messaging, then the encryption is unnecessary and becomes worthless. Eventually there was an agreement that having unencrypted as default is bad. There had to be a way to increase the amount of users enabling encryption. Implementation was halted as the brainstorming of how to make this feature was sidelined as it was lower priority. 19 years later, users made another push to bring this feature into mainstream. Developers saw that they had enough time to brainstorm this low priority feature. the larger user base allowed this feature to be brainstormed faster. after a year and half of feedback, the main developers were able to have this fully featured. This final implementation will allow users to be encrypting messages more often and not need to disable the encryption. More users will be able to use this client and less frustration from users who are unknowledgeable of technology. If there is a need for only encryption, then it is possible. This "automatic" feature is more desirable than forcing the sending unencrypted to all. There is a chance a thread will only have encrypted-capable members, and accidentally sending an unencrypted message in the thread is a bigger problem to privacy and security. The final consensus is that sending of messages should be the responsibility of the user, not the application. The applications should always try to send encrypted messages. Unencrypted messaging should be the users responsibility as there is now a possible way to discern a thread has encrypted-capable members or not.

TLDR: people argued whether it is bad or good feature, this was sidelined as low priority, users 2 years ago made a last push to implement this feature, They came to an agreement that responsibility of encryption is on message thread members and having unencrypted only is a worse option than the application sending encrypted where possible, feedback was collected on how the user experience should be implemented, and lastly the automatic selection feature was implemented.

Users should still look into how this was implemented and give feedback on possible security/privacy concerns that may need to be implemented when the automatic feature is enabled. types of toggleable features that should be implemented and may not be is confirmation dialogues, message encryption per recipient/thread, visual indicators of received/sent messages being encrypted/unencrypted, and more. This is up to the developers to implement this to the GUI. I have not explored the new feature in its entirety.