Adios, accountability: X to hide 'likes' for everyone this week

After making the option available for Premium users last year, the site formerly known as Twitter has decided to begin hiding everyone's "likes" to "better protect your privacy."  X's engineering team shared the news on its account yesterday, saying that it planned to flip the private-like switch sometime this week. Once it …

[cornetman]

> Twitter accounts belonging to US Senator Ted Cruz and Kentucky state senator Jason Howell, for example, have both been caught tapping "like" on pornographic posts in the past. With such an engagement secret to all but the original poster, you can begin to see the possibilities of such information in the hands of a bad actor – a fact plenty of X users pointed out in response to the X engineering team's post.

Seems a bit of a stretch to me. If people are happy to "like" pornographic posts in the public glare for all to see, I don't know why anyone would care if only a single person knows.

[Bendacious]

You can't blackmail someone with information that is in the public domain. If a family-values politician is enjoying some pornography and accidentally hits the like button, they may well pay someone to not reveal that information.

[cornetman]

> You can't blackmail someone with information that is in the public domain. If a family-values politician is enjoying some pornography and accidentally hits the like button, they may well pay someone to not reveal that information.

I get that, but in the suggested example, the politician had no problem liking porn when "likes" were publicly visible, unless I understood correctly.

So why would someone care about private likes if they don't care about public likes? I suppose mileage might vary depending on the user.

And if you are a politician that cares about their image, why wouldn't they just not "like" the porn? I mean, what is the point of "liking" something if no-one else knows?

[Yankee Doodle Doofus]

You think these politicians clicked "like" on purpose, knowing full-well that anyone could see it? Preposterous. They either clicked by accident, or mistakenly thought the "like" was private. If they could have paid a small blackmail to keep these events private after realizing their folly, they may well have done so.

[MachDiamond]

"If they could have paid a small blackmail to keep these events private after realizing their folly, they may well have done so."

And this is where the new X comes to the rescue. For a small nominal up-front fee and autopay monthly subscription, they will make sure nobody will see that Like and they won't "share" it with their "partners". Cue the 48 page fine print.

[Pascal Monett]

Re: You think these politicians clicked "like" on purpose

Well yes, I do.

I do think that they navigated to a page containing porn, did not click "back", reviewed the page contents and clicked Like.

It's not the cat that did it and, although I do not use TwitterX, I'me pretty sure that the zone on screen to click Like does not take up half the screen.

So yeah, he clicked on purpose.

Not that I have a problem with that . . .

[Yankee Doodle Doofus]

Re: You think these politicians clicked "like" on purpose

So you read the first half of my first sentence and then stopped there?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: You think these politicians clicked "like" on purpose

> So you read the first half of my first sentence and then stopped there?

What? You think putting in the word "preposterous" means that nobody can disagree with you?

He clicked "like" because he always clicked "like" on things he liked, quite deliberately. Not by mistake, not because he thought the like would be private.

[Yankee Doodle Doofus]

Re: You think these politicians clicked "like" on purpose

No, of course people can disagree with me. You addressed my whole comment, but Pascal above did not address the possibility that Cruz thought the like would be private, which I find to be the most probable explanation. I still find the idea that a sitting senator would want to advertise his porn consumption on social media for all the world to see to be preposterous, and the senator's public response to the incident supports my point.

'The Texas senator went on to add “there are a number of people on the team that have access to the account and it appears that someone inadvertently hit the like button”. When asked if Cruz himself had liked the tweet, he said said: “It was a staffing issue, and it was inadvertent, it was a mistake, it was not a deliberate action.” '

[Anonymous Coward]

> Preposterous

You have a lot of faith in the quick-thinking ability of politicians, especially when in the thrall of porn.

[EricM]

Try to imagine what people could start to like once they expect their likes to be kind of "private" and not directly attributable to them...

Even though true privacy on X is at least improbable, some (most?) remaining users will probably believe it.

Once an expectation of privacy sets in with those users, they could start to like all sort of even more "edgy" things which they did not dare to like before: drugs, sexual content, right/left wing nuts posts, satanic stuff, etc., not necessarily clearly illegal, but nevertheless potentially damaging to a person's reputation in the society/peer group/party they are embedded in?

Let this go on for a while and the potential for blackmail using the "secret" like-data from X is not an unrealistic scenario.

[cornetman]

Sounds like they have much bigger problems than their public image.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like being blackmailed and shamed out of politics would be in everyone's best interests, if those are the sort of things they are likely to go around "liking".

[JWLong]

Please Flush Twice............

Even if it's all down hill to X[.]com.

[Craqdi]

Re: Please Flush Twice............

It seems like an unfortunate proposal on the part of X, people should decide whether to do it publicly or privately.

[Jason Bloomberg]

Smash that Like button like there's no tomorrow

And wake up one morning to the horror that His Muskiness has u-turned again and the whole world can see what you liked when you maybe shouldn't have in polite society.

[TaabuTheCat]

Re: Smash that Like button like there's no tomorrow

Don't worry, there will be a new subscription plan to keep those Likes hidden. They're playing the long game.

[Cruachan]

Re: Smash that Like button like there's no tomorrow

They're certainly playing a game, not sure it's a long one. Seems more like throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks.

[Dave559]

Re: Smash that Like button like there's no tomorrow

And, given that Musk had sacked most of the Twitter developers, there is now probably an even greater than usual risk that, because of poor coding, lack of proper security testing, and probably a sloppier attitude to security updates, sooner or later some black hats will hack the site and exfiltrate all those dodgy Likes for blackmail purposes…

[samzebra]

Huh... people still use that?

[Blackjack]

Not even Tumblr worked this hard to maje people stop using it.

Then again X now allows porn.

[YetAnotherLocksmith]

It has always allowed porn. Now it is allowing porn *to be advertised* to anyone.

[Blackjack]

I don't understand how Musk plans to make X an everything App if Porn is allowed.

[Tron]

I really don't care whether members of the government 'like' porn or not.

I just wish they were competent at governing the nation.

They can frolic naked with farm animals on their days off for all I care. I just want them to be less crap in their capacity as ministers of state.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I really don't care whether members of the government 'like' porn or not.

frolicking naked with farm animals on days off, ah those were the days!

[Cliffwilliams44]

Re: I really don't care whether members of the government 'like' porn or not.

It's not about porn! That's just the cover because the Fascists are upset because they can no longer troll X likes to find those who are "liking" politicians on the right and Donald Trump!

They can no longer compile there "hit lists"!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I really don't care whether members of the government 'like' porn or not.

> politicians on the right and Donald Trump

*and*? So you think Trump is not playing in politics or do you think he isn't on the right? Or you think he is neither?

> They can no longer compile there "hit lists"!

Nope, it is "them thar hit lists" not "there hit lists"

> the Fascists are upset

Now you are just trying to confuse us, aren't you? The famously right-wing Fascists are making hit lists against right-wingers? What, you think Trump is going too far even for the Fascists to endure?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I really don't care whether members of the government 'like' porn or not.

As, I assume, the other anonymous cowards reply to you was far too subtle for you to understand, I suggest you look up the word "fascist" and stop pretending you know anything about politics.

You remind me of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY

[VicMortimer]

Xitter

Please stop calling it "x". It's Xitter, pronounced "shitter".

[Anonymous Coward]

Something irrelevant

Did something irrelevant

[TheMeerkat]

The Register does not even try to hide its hatred of Musk.

Do you know what news reporting is (something that we used to read you for) as opposed to hateful propaganda?

[Casca]

Thanks for the input cult member

[jospanner]

People made fun of his favourite manbaby billionaire :(

[sabroni]

re: The Register does not even try to hide its hatred of Musk.

I thought you Musk lot were all about free speech?

That includes speech you don't agree with.

[Naich]

Re: re: The Register does not even try to hide its hatred of Musk.

Only for them. Everyone else has to STFU and be forced to listen to what they say.

[Charlie Clark]

You might want to look up what the words "hate" along with "disdain" and "propaganda" are generally accepted to mean. It's perfectly acceptable and. indeed common, for publications to take a position when reporting. Though I didn't really see much of this in the article.

Twitter's biggest problem is maintaining interest. It bored me 10 years ago and things haven't improved since. Musk's involvement is sympomatic of how entitled some of the tech moguls think they are as if might wealth equals right rather than just privelege – another term for you to look up.

[Anonymous Coward]

> privelege – another term for you to look up

And you, apparently ;-)

Sorry, I agree 100% with your post, but couldn't resist!

[Like a badger]

The Register does not even try to hide its hatred of Musk.

They don't hate him, they mock him. And deservedly so.

[Anonymous Coward]

X owner Elon Musk, whose preferred method of engaging with hate speech

I find it quite amusing you spill your hate-the-haters wars onto the Register forum, when the hate temperatures are definitely on the ironic side.

[Cliffwilliams44]

This is not about porn or blackmail

If the Marxist regimes in the west were not trolling X likes to identify people who are liking posts by Right leaning politicians and a certain US ex-President and current candidate, this would not be an issue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is not about porn or blackmail

> to identify people who are liking...

So what do you fantasise those trolls are going to do once they've identified these people?

Send them nastygrams on X, like claiming they like porn?

Utterly destroy their lives, and their families' lives, by viciously, and with premeditated intent, downvoting them on X? Oh, the humanity!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This is not about porn or blackmail

Oh geeeze. Add "Marxist" to your list of words or phrases to look up before posting ever again, along with "Fascist", and presumably "Communist", "Socialist", and "critical race theory".

With your new found knowledge, please read "Project 2025" and explain how the words "Authoritarianism", "Dictatorship", "anti-democracy", "Fascist", "Regressive", "Autocratic", and "Seditionists" don't apply.

We'll wait.

[Watashi]

Dislike

If only there was a way to not "like" things you don't want to go public.

I mean, I get that privacy is important but it does feel like a case of the professionally offended here.

[Bebu]

"Two percent for looking in the mirror twice"

Don't quite understand what the fuss is about but then I don't understand Twitter/X or "social" media on any level whatsoever.

If the real problem is the poster's knowing who his (or her etc) "likers" were, then the obvious solution is to insert an anonymizer between the "liker's" identity and the like counter. Then only X could then know that the liker OxDEADBEEF, of an "animal frolicker's" explicit photo gallery, was a well known political candidate.

Normally when a business removes a feature or facility they intend later to charge you to restore the feature and here perhaps add a "per like" tax,

Musk's vain attempts to extract value from the carcass of Twitter reminds me of M.Thénardier's song Master of the House from Les Mis.