zlacker

>>ZacnyL+(OP)
It's an interesting theory but the DDoS predates the decision to disable anonymous access. In fact, that decision was taken in order to mitigate an ongoing DDoS[0][1]. So while it's possible that the questionnable web front end retry logic is not helping things, it's not the root cause.

[0] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1674865731136020505

> Temporary emergency measure. We were getting data pillaged so much that it was degrading service for normal users!

[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1674942336583757825

> This will be unlocked shortly. Per my earlier post, drastic & immediate action was necessary due to EXTREME levels of data scraping.

> Almost every company doing AI, from startups to some of the biggest corporations on Earth, was scraping vast amounts of data.

> It is rather galling to have to bring large numbers of servers online on an emergency basis just to facilitate some AI startup’s outrageous valuation.

>>olalon+Ag1
That is a post-backlash claim by Elon Musk, so it should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

>>tsimio+Tv1
It seems more plausible than the alternative. Let's say that Twitter availability issues were really caused by disabling anonymous access and that Elon wants to back out of his decision due to public backlash, wouldn't he just reverse the decision? That would fix both of his issues at once. He could even claim to have solved the scraping issues through a clever trick that doesn't require disabling anonymous access. The fact he hasn't done so indicates that there is a genuine issue that he can't just fix by restoring anonymous access.