Basically agree, though I notice the overall quality of content here is way higher. I wonder if the average user feels this way.
I think Substack will prove more important in a relative sense as media, but twitter will remain a basic professional requirement for some industries as it always has been
Elon saved our lives, didn't he? Perhaps people don't use X as sensibly as they might. I "follow" several dozen people but I never read my feed. Every morning I go directly to the "home" of the guys I want to read and read them. Streamlined experience.
X is not free speech if the algorithm buries you, support ghosts you, and journalist accounts can disappear into the machinery. Free speech is not just “you may technically post.” It is whether the platform lets the public find you, whether enforcement is fair, and whether creators have recourse when something goes wrong.
Substack has the edge because email ownership is real leverage. X has scale and speed, but scale without due process becomes digital feudalism. Musk deserves credit for breaking the old censorship cartel. But the test is simple: can dissident journalists actually speak and be seen? In my case, no.
I thought that after Linda Yaccarino left, Twitter/X would restore accounts wrongfully terminated. No such luck.
Substack: I too have noticed conservative writers get “buried” on Substack. I understand conservatives are greatly outnumbered by left wing writers. I agree about Twitter being on the cutting edge of news- though much of what is breathlessly reported “ain’t necessarily so”, but you do get alerted that something is going on. The downside is Twitter attracts a lot of really dreadful humans (or trolls?) only able to respond with crude & disgusting obscenities. Grok is heavily influenced by MSM…frequently begs off on answering questions that might reflect badly on the progressive left wing narrative.
Like most mainstream platforms, Twitter/X’s technically illegitimate policies have special rules for special groups and weaselly mix violent actions with personal choices and viewpoints. They are absolutely not a free speech platform and do not permit all viewpoints. Their enforcement is inconsistent, allowing large accounts to severely violate their policies, while smaller accounts are frequently banned for less. They banned the Aussie nationalists in a concerted takedown early last year. They still ban transgender critical people. They are very clear that they can and will ban without cause or appeal. They only reinstated well known banned profiles to maintain their deception.
Their claim that “X's mission is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information, and to express their opinions and beliefs without barriers. Free expression is a human right – we believe that everyone has a voice, and the right to use it.” is flagrant false advertising. This is not “free speech”:
“You may not threaten terrorism and/or violent extremism, nor promote violent and hateful entities.
…
Hateful entities are those that have systematically and intentionally promoted, supported and/or advocated for hateful conduct, which includes promoting violence or engaging in targeted harassment towards a protected category.
…
You may not directly attack other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, caste, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.
…
We recognize that if people experience abuse on X, it can jeopardize their ability to express themselves. Research has shown that some groups of people are disproportionately targeted with abuse online. For those who identify with multiple underrepresented groups, abuse may be more common, more severe in nature, and more harmful.
We are committed to combating abuse motivated by hatred, prejudice or intolerance, particularly abuse that seeks to silence the voices of those who have been historically marginalized. For this reason, we prohibit behavior that targets individuals or groups with abuse based on their perceived membership in a protected category.
…
This includes:
inciting fear or spreading fearful stereotypes about a protected category, including asserting that members of a protected category are more likely to take part in dangerous or illegal activities
…
inciting others to discriminate in the form of denial of support to the economic enterprise of an individual or group because of their perceived membership in a protected category
…
targeting others with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category.“
Twitter feels like the high school cafeteria during break: a cacophony of hooligans and louts cracking jokes with a only handful of studious nerds in the mix who can actually think straight. Substack (at least a few years ago) feels more like grad school – cited articles and astute takes without any images in the comment section. Instagram is middle school in this analogy.
So, with multi factor auth, access keys, and separate passwords for each account, what was, if you can say, the key to a hacker gaining your account access? If that info can be shared, even if it's embarrassing, it may help others to foil an attack.
I would also like to know. A creator I follow downloaded a malware version of a free program from the top Google result. They waited months until he logged into his bank account. Another through a fake phishing email. I always emphasize the vulnerability with downloads and logins, especially from links, to my mom.
Quite often, it is the Substack control center that is hacked. In the old days, loose lips may sink ships. But modern-day espionage all starts from the power center.
Sure, I understand that. Yuri lost control from more than one "power center"... One possibly, but two? What are the odds both attacks were inside jobs? And both companies are purported champions of free speech, so if we believe that premise, makes it less likely Yuri pissed of someone on the inside. But maybe..
Great post; I knew you'd been hacked when I received a weird email under your name that was obviously spam. Good on Substack for fixing it quickly. I also have a Proton.me account and will be giving it a look for security issues.
I have stayed away from social media platforms, for the most part, since the beginning of the internet. My forays into such media usually got people who like to destroy anyone that disagreed with them. The ones I used were topic driven; (Not much political as we still had lives that did not orbit around Washington DC and D & Rs) art and jewelry making, sailing, early YouTube where I was into art and music. Also Linked-In when they bought Lynda where I was taking various courses on book editing as my wife was writing books at the time. At which time, these courses were mostly negative experiences, not so much for the course content, but for the low talent/massive egos that wanted everyone to feel small compared to them. I quit all of that. Substack has a much better comment section in all the ones I subscribe to. Yes there are some trolls and bots there, too, but people mostly don't engage with them and they go away. So, that leaves a lot of good comments and and dialogs with sincere people who listen and contribute. many times the comment sections are even better than the article posted and we all benefit = authors and readers.
Excellent analysis, Yuri—as always. Substack’s IMMEDIATE response to remove hate posts directed against me is invaluable to civil discourse. LFG is right.
Yuri, so sorry this happened to you. It’s happening a lot as of late. My question to you is did you have weak or strong passwords on your accounts? I ask because my passwords are very long, really complicated, and of my own naming convention. I feel secure in my accounts because of this supposed safeguard. But if you had strong passwords and still got hacked then I’m going to need a better password solution.
Basically agree, though I notice the overall quality of content here is way higher. I wonder if the average user feels this way.
I think Substack will prove more important in a relative sense as media, but twitter will remain a basic professional requirement for some industries as it always has been
Elon saved our lives, didn't he? Perhaps people don't use X as sensibly as they might. I "follow" several dozen people but I never read my feed. Every morning I go directly to the "home" of the guys I want to read and read them. Streamlined experience.
X is not free speech if the algorithm buries you, support ghosts you, and journalist accounts can disappear into the machinery. Free speech is not just “you may technically post.” It is whether the platform lets the public find you, whether enforcement is fair, and whether creators have recourse when something goes wrong.
https://luthmann.substack.com/p/musks-free-speech-test
Substack has the edge because email ownership is real leverage. X has scale and speed, but scale without due process becomes digital feudalism. Musk deserves credit for breaking the old censorship cartel. But the test is simple: can dissident journalists actually speak and be seen? In my case, no.
I thought that after Linda Yaccarino left, Twitter/X would restore accounts wrongfully terminated. No such luck.
https://x.com/LuthmannNews
https://x.com/rluthmann
Still, they are better than YouTube.
Mindless TDS slop merchants are getting tens of thousands of likes per post on Substack while people like Yuri struggle to reach 100.
Substack is burying right-wing content at the behest of the HCR crowd. X is doing that less than Substack is today.
Substack: I too have noticed conservative writers get “buried” on Substack. I understand conservatives are greatly outnumbered by left wing writers. I agree about Twitter being on the cutting edge of news- though much of what is breathlessly reported “ain’t necessarily so”, but you do get alerted that something is going on. The downside is Twitter attracts a lot of really dreadful humans (or trolls?) only able to respond with crude & disgusting obscenities. Grok is heavily influenced by MSM…frequently begs off on answering questions that might reflect badly on the progressive left wing narrative.
Wasn't Linda the one who proclaimed that "Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Reach will not be treated the same on X"? Or something to that effect.
I know of at least 3 other Substack authors who have had their X accounts hacked too.
They all also agreed that X support to fix the hacks was non-existent.
Like most mainstream platforms, Twitter/X’s technically illegitimate policies have special rules for special groups and weaselly mix violent actions with personal choices and viewpoints. They are absolutely not a free speech platform and do not permit all viewpoints. Their enforcement is inconsistent, allowing large accounts to severely violate their policies, while smaller accounts are frequently banned for less. They banned the Aussie nationalists in a concerted takedown early last year. They still ban transgender critical people. They are very clear that they can and will ban without cause or appeal. They only reinstated well known banned profiles to maintain their deception.
Their claim that “X's mission is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information, and to express their opinions and beliefs without barriers. Free expression is a human right – we believe that everyone has a voice, and the right to use it.” is flagrant false advertising. This is not “free speech”:
“You may not threaten terrorism and/or violent extremism, nor promote violent and hateful entities.
…
Hateful entities are those that have systematically and intentionally promoted, supported and/or advocated for hateful conduct, which includes promoting violence or engaging in targeted harassment towards a protected category.
…
You may not directly attack other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, caste, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.
…
We recognize that if people experience abuse on X, it can jeopardize their ability to express themselves. Research has shown that some groups of people are disproportionately targeted with abuse online. For those who identify with multiple underrepresented groups, abuse may be more common, more severe in nature, and more harmful.
We are committed to combating abuse motivated by hatred, prejudice or intolerance, particularly abuse that seeks to silence the voices of those who have been historically marginalized. For this reason, we prohibit behavior that targets individuals or groups with abuse based on their perceived membership in a protected category.
…
This includes:
inciting fear or spreading fearful stereotypes about a protected category, including asserting that members of a protected category are more likely to take part in dangerous or illegal activities
…
inciting others to discriminate in the form of denial of support to the economic enterprise of an individual or group because of their perceived membership in a protected category
…
targeting others with repeated slurs, tropes or other content that intends to degrade or reinforce negative or harmful stereotypes about a protected category.“
Well, there’s always Facebook…
<ducks for cover>
Twitter feels like the high school cafeteria during break: a cacophony of hooligans and louts cracking jokes with a only handful of studious nerds in the mix who can actually think straight. Substack (at least a few years ago) feels more like grad school – cited articles and astute takes without any images in the comment section. Instagram is middle school in this analogy.
So, with multi factor auth, access keys, and separate passwords for each account, what was, if you can say, the key to a hacker gaining your account access? If that info can be shared, even if it's embarrassing, it may help others to foil an attack.
I would also like to know. A creator I follow downloaded a malware version of a free program from the top Google result. They waited months until he logged into his bank account. Another through a fake phishing email. I always emphasize the vulnerability with downloads and logins, especially from links, to my mom.
Quite often, it is the Substack control center that is hacked. In the old days, loose lips may sink ships. But modern-day espionage all starts from the power center.
Sure, I understand that. Yuri lost control from more than one "power center"... One possibly, but two? What are the odds both attacks were inside jobs? And both companies are purported champions of free speech, so if we believe that premise, makes it less likely Yuri pissed of someone on the inside. But maybe..
They are completely different platforms, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. I wish success for both.
Great post; I knew you'd been hacked when I received a weird email under your name that was obviously spam. Good on Substack for fixing it quickly. I also have a Proton.me account and will be giving it a look for security issues.
I wondered that. I thought it was ultrasecure. Not that I actually believe in that term in today's world.
I have stayed away from social media platforms, for the most part, since the beginning of the internet. My forays into such media usually got people who like to destroy anyone that disagreed with them. The ones I used were topic driven; (Not much political as we still had lives that did not orbit around Washington DC and D & Rs) art and jewelry making, sailing, early YouTube where I was into art and music. Also Linked-In when they bought Lynda where I was taking various courses on book editing as my wife was writing books at the time. At which time, these courses were mostly negative experiences, not so much for the course content, but for the low talent/massive egos that wanted everyone to feel small compared to them. I quit all of that. Substack has a much better comment section in all the ones I subscribe to. Yes there are some trolls and bots there, too, but people mostly don't engage with them and they go away. So, that leaves a lot of good comments and and dialogs with sincere people who listen and contribute. many times the comment sections are even better than the article posted and we all benefit = authors and readers.
I have resisted going down the X rabbit hole even though I am a news junkie. I rely on trusted commentators.
Excellent analysis, Yuri—as always. Substack’s IMMEDIATE response to remove hate posts directed against me is invaluable to civil discourse. LFG is right.
Substack is substantial and I like the subscription model. Similar to a magazine subscription but mostly going to the creators.
Open expression of ideas.
Substack refuses to issue refunds. For that reason alone I'm letting all my paid substacks expire.
A few fraudsters pretending to be Substack authors that I subscribe to would DM or follow me to get me to follow them on Substack.
I also don't let any web site store my card numbers, since so many sites get hacked and all of their customer/subscriber data stolen.
Even my ISP, Comcast was hacked, and their customer data was stolen.
That was a class action suit that I was a member of.
Agree on the analysis from a user perspective.
If you truly want to know about someone's deep thought process, Substack is the best medium. For a surface-level idea, X will suffice!!
Great analysis, but I'm still sticking to Substack only.
Twitter is where I find the news out of context three hours later when someone vagueposts about what is happening.
Yuri, so sorry this happened to you. It’s happening a lot as of late. My question to you is did you have weak or strong passwords on your accounts? I ask because my passwords are very long, really complicated, and of my own naming convention. I feel secure in my accounts because of this supposed safeguard. But if you had strong passwords and still got hacked then I’m going to need a better password solution.