upvote
Just one example, but having to be logged in to view most content on there was a recent change that made it pretty hostile to the openness of the web platform.

You can find links to other criticisms of twitter in TFA:

Interop: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/01/twitter-and-interopera...

Privacy: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/twitter-removes-privac...

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/08/twitter-and-others-dou...

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/twitter-uninentionally...

Accountability: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/08/twitter-axes-accountab...

DM encryption: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/07/after-weeks-hack-it-pa...

reply
Have you tried using Facebook, Linked-In, or Instagram while not logged in?
reply
I'm not sure why you're using Zuckerberg's sites as examples of internet freedoms.
reply
TFA mentions that EFF continues to post on Facebook and Instagram.
reply
Banned third party clients and interoperability. Use their software to access your data on their servers, on their terms, or get shut down. Hard to think of anything more anti-internet freedom. I left when they did that, years ago.

They would not be able to enforce it on desktop computers, short of banning every user one-at-a-time, but they can easily blanket-ban it on mobile phones by requesting Apple and Google remove unauthorized third-party clients from their app stores. (Which they will do. Apple even lists unauthorized clients for services controlled by other parties as against the rules. Whatever that means.)

reply
Do Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, and TikTok allow third party clients?
reply
Probably not, and I've never used any of those, and never will. X used to, and then stopped, so I left. Not interested in using a service that asks you to put your effort into it and then tries to turn its control against you. Especially when there are other options.
reply
deleted
reply