About a month ago, Twitter blocked access to everyone without an
account. I've never had or wanted an account on Twitter or on any
other so-called social network.

So of course I've never posted to Twitter. But there were several
people whose Twitter feeds I regularly read.

Today I noticed that I can read some of them again. But the posts are
in seemingly random order, with the top ones usually several years
old. And some accounts still won't let me in at all.

Does anyone know of a way to read the posts in order, most recent
first? Thanks.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

On Fri, 28 Jul 2023 02:36:27 -0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
<kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

>About a month ago, Twitter blocked access to everyone without an
>account. I've never had or wanted an account on Twitter or on any
>other so-called social network.
>
>So of course I've never posted to Twitter. But there were several
>people whose Twitter feeds I regularly read.
>
>Today I noticed that I can read some of them again. But the posts are
>in seemingly random order, with the top ones usually several years
>old. And some accounts still won't let me in at all.
>
>Does anyone know of a way to read the posts in order, most recent
>first? Thanks.

<Snide Comment>
Maybe Elon Must does, but I wouldn't count on it.
</Snide>
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

On 7/27/23 10:36 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
> About a month ago, Twitter blocked access to everyone without an
> account. I've never had or wanted an account on Twitter or on any
> other so-called social network.
>
> So of course I've never posted to Twitter. But there were several
> people whose Twitter feeds I regularly read.
>
> Today I noticed that I can read some of them again. But the posts are
> in seemingly random order, with the top ones usually several years
> old. And some accounts still won't let me in at all.
>
> Does anyone know of a way to read the posts in order, most recent
> first? Thanks.

Twitter is now "X," as in "unknown variable." I think that explains it all.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
> Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>> Today I noticed that I can read some of them again. But the posts
>> are in seemingly random order, with the top ones usually several
>> years old. And some accounts still won't let me in at all.

To clarify, it's always the *same* random order for each feed, and
always the same ones that demand a login. So at least it's consistent.
Are others seeing the same thing?

> Twitter is now "X," as in "unknown variable." I think that explains
> it all.

I've heard claims that it's not just any X, but a stylized X which is
trademarked by the X Consortium, owner of the X-Windows system.

I've also heard the claim that Facebook has a trademark on all uses of
the letter X as the name of a social network.

Richard Litter posted, in mastodon.social:

"We've made 'Coca Cola' a household name. Everyone on the planet
knows it. How do we best protect & build on such a brand identity?"

Elon: "Change the company name to 'Spud,' insult consumers of fizzy
drinks, stop making drinks altogether, then sell horseshoes for
hamsters"
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

In article <ua265r$llg$1@reader2.panix.com>, kfl@KeithLynch.net (Keith F.
Lynch) wrote:

> To clarify, it's always the *same* random order for each feed, and
> always the same ones that demand a login. So at least it's
> consistent. Are others seeing the same thing?

Like you, I've never been a member of Twitter. I was down to one person's
tweets that I looked at, but when Twitter started wanting a login, I
deleted that bookmark. The chap's expressed principles were rather
incompatible with being a member of modern-day Twitter, so I gave up on
him.

> I've heard claims that it's not just any X, but a stylized X which
> is trademarked by the X Consortium, owner of the X-Windows system.

It's not identical to the X-Windows X, but it's quite similar.

--
John Dallman
"This isn't a supernova problem. It's a pointy-haired boss problem."

On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 09:21 +0100 (BST), jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman)
wrote:

>> To clarify, it's always the *same* random order for each feed, and
>> always the same ones that demand a login. So at least it's
>> consistent. Are others seeing the same thing?
>
>Like you, I've never been a member of Twitter. I was down to one person's
>tweets that I looked at, but when Twitter started wanting a login, I
>deleted that bookmark. The chap's expressed principles were rather
>incompatible with being a member of modern-day Twitter, so I gave up on
>him.

I've never been a member of Twitter/X but I've been getting four or
five headline teaser/tweets from them for years in my e-mail. Before
Musk took over they were mostly newsy headlines, since, they've been
almost exclusively tittiepics.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>> Twitter is now "X," as in "unknown variable." I think that explains
>> it all.
>
>I've heard claims that it's not just any X, but a stylized X which is
>trademarked by the X Consortium, owner of the X-Windows system.

Other than both being stylized X'es I don't see much similarities [3].
Yes, two of the legs are very slightly offset but that's not uncommon.

What Twitter has show arguably isn't the letter X but the Unicode
symbol "Mathematical Double Struck Capital X" (U+1D54F) [1] [2]

So likely he can't even protect their new logo since it's identical to
the most common representation of this codepoint which has been in
Unicode since at least 2001 (Unicode 3.1) And it was probably already
in use long before that.

>I've also heard the claim that Facebook has a trademark on all uses of
>the letter X as the name of a social network.

They got something at least.
https://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=87980831&caseType=SERIAL_NO&searchType=statusSearch

Not sure the letter X is actually trademarked here (for this specific
purpose) since it's just a single letter which IIRC just like words
*generally* can't be protected.

So it may be that the only thing they have protection on is that logo,
but someone that actually understands the relevant rules and laws
needs to look at it and the articles I've seen about it clearly had no
adult supervision, never mind consulting someone that had any legal
knowledge.

And Musk's new logo clearly isn't close to the protected logo. But who
knows what will happen, as we all know there's no requirement for
sanity or likelyhood to succeed for FILING a lawsuit in the US.

1. https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/apps/a44641211/twitter-x-unicode-symbol/
2. https://www.compart.com/en/unicode/U+1D54F
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System

On 8/1/23 8:22 AM, Torbjorn Lindgren wrote:
> Not sure the letter X is actually trademarked here (for this specific
> purpose) since it's just a single letter which IIRC just like words
> *generally* can't be protected.
>
> So it may be that the only thing they have protection on is that logo,
> but someone that actually understands the relevant rules and laws
> needs to look at it and the articles I've seen about it clearly had no
> adult supervision, never mind consulting someone that had any legal
> knowledge.
>
> And Musk's new logo clearly isn't close to the protected logo. But who
> knows what will happen, as we all know there's no requirement for
> sanity or likelyhood to succeed for FILING a lawsuit in the US.

I have wondered if Musk picked that logo for trademark trolling against
anyone who uses "X" in a name. Not that he could ever win in court, but
the threat can sometimes be enough.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>On 8/1/23 8:22 AM, Torbjorn Lindgren wrote:
>> Not sure the letter X is actually trademarked here (for this specific
>> purpose) since it's just a single letter which IIRC just like words
>> *generally* can't be protected.
>>
>> So it may be that the only thing they have protection on is that logo,
>> but someone that actually understands the relevant rules and laws
>> needs to look at it and the articles I've seen about it clearly had no
>> adult supervision, never mind consulting someone that had any legal
>> knowledge.
>>
>> And Musk's new logo clearly isn't close to the protected logo. But who
>> knows what will happen, as we all know there's no requirement for
>> sanity or likelyhood to succeed for FILING a lawsuit in the US.
>
>I have wondered if Musk picked that logo for trademark trolling against
>anyone who uses "X" in a name. Not that he could ever win in court, but
>the threat can sometimes be enough.

I doubt it's planned beyond "Muhahah", Musk has been fascinated with
"X" for a long time.

The earliest well-known example is probably x.com/PayPal: what would
later become PayPal started out as Confinity, then merged with Musk's
x.com "internet bank" company, and x.com redirected to the PayPal
website.

And Musk really, REALLY wanted PayPal to become X-PayPal and then...
X.com and become some kind of mega app not that dissimilar to what
he's trying hawk now as Twitter's future (IE along WeChat lines).

Supposedly the fascination is because his earlier Zip2 city guide
brand struggled a lot with name/branding issues.

It appears that no one else was the slightest bit interested in doing
that PayPal->X-PayPal->X rebranding and he was kicked out of PayPal
less than 6 months later.

Musk later bought x.com back from PayPal in 2017, they saw no value in
it.

Other evidence of this fascination is things like SpaceX, xAI, the two
X companies involved in the Twitter purchase and, well, just look at
the names of his first child with Grimes (ALL the variants). Which
probably qualifies as cruelty to children.

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>
>I have wondered if Musk picked that logo for trademark trolling against
>anyone who uses "X" in a name. Not that he could ever win in court, but
>the threat can sometimes be enough.

When I was a kid it seemed like half of the Catholic church was named
Francis Xavier something-or-other. Many of them just used their initials,
F. X. Smith, since everyone knew what their full name was from the initials.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
> Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>> I have wondered if Musk picked that logo for trademark trolling
>> against anyone who uses "X" in a name. Not that he could ever win
>> in court, but the threat can sometimes be enough.

Indeed. Going to court is *expensive* -- unless you don't mind
losing. For decades, a troll claimed ownership of the Happy Birthday
song. And got paid millions until someone finally took them to
court, and won. How someone in the 21st century could claim to own a
copyright on a song composed in the 19th century made no sense to me.

> When I was a kid it seemed like half of the Catholic church was
> named Francis Xavier something-or-other. Many of them just used
> their initials, F. X. Smith, since everyone knew what their full
> name was from the initials.

For nearly 400 years (1216-1603) every king of England was named
Edward, Henry, or Richard.

Edward is the most common name for a king of England or Britain.
There have been eleven of them, living from 874 through 1972 (they
ruled, intermittently, from 899 through 1936), most recently Edward
VIII. But the term "Edwardian" only refers to the nine-year rule of
Edward VII, who ironically was the only one of the eleven who wasn't
actually named Edward.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

On 8/1/23 5:37 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> When I was a kid it seemed like half of the Catholic church was named
> Francis Xavier something-or-other. Many of them just used their initials,
> F. X. Smith, since everyone knew what their full name was from the initials.

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart had a son named Franz Xaver Wolfgang Mozart,
born just a few months before Wolfgang's death. He composed some music,
including a respectable piano concerto.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

In article <uadbgr$1785$1@dont-email.me>,
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>On 8/1/23 5:37 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> When I was a kid it seemed like half of the Catholic church was named
>> Francis Xavier something-or-other. Many of them just used their initials,
>> F. X. Smith, since everyone knew what their full name was from the initials.
>
>Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart had a son named Franz Xaver Wolfgang Mozart,
>born just a few months before Wolfgang's death. He composed some music,
>including a respectable piano concerto.

I guess St. Francis X. had been dead for about 400 years or so, so that
was quite a reasonable thing to do.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 8/2/23 4:16 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <uadbgr$1785$1@dont-email.me>,
> Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>> Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart had a son named Franz Xaver Wolfgang Mozart,
>> born just a few months before Wolfgang's death. He composed some music,
>> including a respectable piano concerto.
>
> I guess St. Francis X. had been dead for about 400 years or so, so that
> was quite a reasonable thing to do.

Today I noticed that Süssmayer, who completed Mozart's Requiem, was also
a Franz Xaver.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com