According to the ars technica article, he was not squatting, he had been actively using it for 16 years. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/07/twitter-took-x-handle-from-longtime-user-and-only-offered-him-some-merch/
This guy is taking it way too nicely. I’d be shouting expletives from every account I owned.
To what end? Elon spent $44b and destroyed an entire company just so he could ban the guy who was tracking his flights. You think he gives a shit about the guy who has the username he wants?
In any other situation, sure, you’d take to Twitter and start rustling as many jimmies as you could in hopes of shaming the big bad company into doing the right thing. But in this case, Twitter itself is the big bad company, and the guy you’d ultimately be complaining to/about/against also owns the platform and is probably the only guy can give you your username back, and you can probably guess about how well that’s gonna go.
This is framed in a way that I would side with Elon, but it’s editorialized. I’ve seen nothing that says @x was squatting. He did try to sell his name, but it’s because he had a desirable name.
Just having something isn’t “Cyber squatting” Cyber squatting is that shit where you buy something only in the hopes of reselling it instead of using it as your own.
… yea trying to sell space Karen an account on the platform they own was never going to happen. Space Karen has never played the game of life without cheat codes turned on.
Taking things away from people who don’t deserve it. Sounds appropriate for someone who grew up in apartheid South Africa.
Lol they thought the person who owns the platform would pay them.
How naïve do you have to be to expect otherwise? My hope is they take their misguided anger and disappointment as a lesson. You will always be beholden to the owners of private property. Maybe they’ll even realize this concept extends to the real world and agitate for the abolishment of private property. Maybe I’m being naïve now.
