My Twitter account is currently locked and I don't look at it, but I'm hard deleting it this month. If you have a Twitter account you don't read, I also recommend full deletion before Nov. 15. Here's why.

Twitter has their TOS now in an unusual state https://x.com/en/tos with two copies of the TOS printed one after the other, with a notice the new TOS goes active November 15.

The major difference I see is starting Nov 15 they give themselves explicit rights to train AI models on your posts.

X Terms of Service

Read X's Terms of Service to understand the rules governing your access of all Twitter services.

@mcc obviously not going to defend Elon/his actions, but you *can* opt out in settings > privacy and safety > Data sharing and personalization > Grok
@dngrs For how long will this opt out be honored?
@mcc @dngrs it won't after November 15th. Thats kind of the whole point, opt-out is going to go away.
@GabeMoralesVR @dngrs Do you know this for a fact or are you assuming?

@mcc @dngrs It's what's been reported across multiple tech outlets that I've seen reporting on this, eg: https://tech.co/news/musk-sneaks-in-x-ai-training-clauseand-no-you-cant-opt-out

EDIT: Note, I don'tk now if tech.co is legit, it's just the first example I saw when I went to grab a link saying this. I'm simply using it as an example of such reporting.

Musk Sneaks in X AI Training Clause…and No, You Can’t Opt Out

X has updated its T&Cs and eagle-eyed users have spotted a now sweeping rights grab that means all content can be used for training AI models

Tech.co
@GabeMoralesVR @mcc oh wow. Time to poison the AI well with more unhinged tweets I guess (I can't easily delete because I rely on (Long) Covid information which is pretty rare outside of Twitter, sadly)
@dngrs well @mcc's follow up toots have me questioning the validity of their reporting, and whether or not it's just an interpretation that hasn't been clarified. But either way I'd urge everyone to get off twitter asap, like even more than normally.
@GabeMoralesVR @dngrs A person with a website can just say anything they want. Come to think of it, a person with a newspaper printing press can just print anything they want on it. With any form of media, when a claim is made, you need to check to see what source they cite. If the source is some anonymous entity and you're supposed to just trust they've checked it out, then they should say that.

@mcc @dngrs thing is, unfortunate I don't think that line of thinking necessarily works in this instance, because the only possible source can be the twitter TOS, which then becomes an interpretation thing, which then becomes a "test in court" thing. And that's probably all by design. My inclination would probably be to at least consider the worst-case interpretations in this case.

I saw people citing lawyers when reading about this, but again, that's an interpretation until it goes to court.