As Free Speech Enthusiast Elon Plans To Release Twitter’s Source Code, Twitter Desperately Seeking Identity Of FreeSpeechEnthusiast Who Leaked Twitter Source Code
from the troll-speech-enthusiast dept
Ever since Elon Musk made his initial bid to buy Twitter, he’s talked about “open sourcing” the algorithm. He mentioned it last April in the first interview he gave, on the TED stage, to talk about his plans with Twitter. And since taking over the company at the end of October, he’s mentioned it over and over again.
Indeed, on February 21st, he promised that Twitter would release its “algorithm” as open source code “next week.”

And then, two weeks ago, he announced that “all code used to recommend tweets” will be released as open source on March 31st (i.e., this Friday).

Who knows if he’ll meet his deadline this time (he has a habit of missing deadlines pretty regularly).
However, over the weekend something vaguely interesting happened, in that it was revealed that someone had already, um, “open sourced” Twitter’s source code for it, by posting a repository of at least some of the code to Github. This was revealed in a DMCA notice that Twitter sent to Github, followed by a DMCA subpoena demanding the identity of the person who posted it along with any one who downloaded it.
Now, I initially wasn’t going to write about this. Leaks happen, and I think it’s perfectly fine for Twitter to issue the DMCA takedown for such a leak. But what caught my attention was the username of the leaker. According to the DMCA notice, the leaker went by “FreeSpeechEnthusiast,” and their account is (at the moment) still up on GitHub showing a single contribution on January 3rd (which makes me wonder if the code was sitting there for anyone to find for a whole month and a half):

That name choice takes this from a garden variety leak operation to an ultimate troll attempt against admitted troll Elon Musk. After all, Musk himself continually (if ridiculously) refers to himself as a “free speech absolutist.”
So, given both Elon’s repeated promises to reveal the source code and his publicly stated (if often violated) commitment to “free speech,” the leak of the source code by someone using the name FreeSpeechEnthusiast seems like it was designed directly as a troll move to Musk, goading him into exposing his own hypocrisy (which is way easier than many people may have thought).
Well played, FreeSpeechEnthusiast, well played.
As for the actual leak, again, it’s not clear how much source code was actually leaked or how problematic it is. As I understand it (and would expect) the full source code for Twitter is cumbersome and complex. Releasing a full dump of it would be difficult even if authorized, so I’m guessing it’s not everything.
And while you can find lots of quotes from “cybersecurity experts” about how this may expose vulnerabilities, my guess is that the risk of that is actually fairly low at first? Given enough time, yes, someone can probably find some messy code and some vulnerabilities, but Twitter had (at one time) lots of engineers who were focused on finding and patching those vulnerabilities themselves, and so whatever remains is likely nothing obvious, and anyone going through the code now would first have to figure out how it all worked, which may be no easy task in the first place.
Indeed, this is why, from the beginning, I’ve said that Elon’s promises to open source the code was mostly meaningless, because there are almost no examples of companies taking large, complex systems in proprietary code, and open sourcing them and finding anything valuable come out of it, because there’s so much baggage and complexity for people to even figuring out what the hell anything really does.
This is also why Musk’s announced plans to fix things that people find in the code he still promises to release this week also seems a bit silly, as there’s a reasonable interpretation of this as: “we fired everyone who understands our code, so we’re going to open it up to get engineers to clean up our code for free for the world’s richest man.”
It’s also why the better approach would have just been to improve the API and to allow more developers to build more tools, services, and features on top of Twitter code, but Elon’s already killed off that whole idea.
In the end, this particular story isn’t likely to be that big a deal, but it seemed worth commenting on solely for the lulz of the epic trolling job whoever leaked the code did in highlighting Musk’s hypocrisy. Again.
Filed Under: copyright, dmca, elon musk, free speech, freespeechenthusiast, leak, open source, release, source code, subpoena, troll
Companies: github, twitter


Comments on “As Free Speech Enthusiast Elon Plans To Release Twitter’s Source Code, Twitter Desperately Seeking Identity Of FreeSpeechEnthusiast Who Leaked Twitter Source Code”
Err. Isn’t that because you asked the lion’s share of people who contributed key understanding to go find employment elsewhere?
It’s self inflicted wounds. Not quite all the way down, but He’s working on it.
Re:
I was about to ask… Is this an admission that he has no fucking idea how Twitter works?
Re: Re:
He didn’t really have to admit it. He’s proven it over and over again.
Re: Re: Re:
To Wit: Elon Musk Values Twitter at $20 Billion
He’s lost over $20 billion in less than a year…
That tells me he is in way over his head and has no fucking clue how to run a social media company.
Re: Re: Re:2
What’s even more hilarious about that story is that he apparently believes he can duodecuple that value.
Re: Re: Re:2
Hey, maybe he didn’t lose 20 million dollars. Maybe he overvalued it by 20 million dollars that he then had to pay. Either way, it’s very funny.
Re: Re: Re:3
You’re off by a factor of 1000
Re: Re: Re:4
Right, yes. That’s embarrassing, but I also think my point stands even harder now
Re: Re: Re:2
There’s no way it’s worth $20 billion now considering it wasn’t when he overpaid for it. He’s a guy who bought a $150k house for $600k, smashed all the windows with a sledgehammer, knocked holes in the floors, sold the fixtures and ripped out all the copper wiring then turned around and said ‘Oops, my bad. It’s only worth $200k now, but it could be worth a million if you do 800k worth of work for me. You can sleep on the floor of the bathroom while doing it.’
This a bit strange huh. Almost as if Elon is asking the open source community for help in fixing his code, without admitting he can not do it himself.
asking for sources? that’s not cool, elmo (stupid rofl emoji)
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
I wasted my life reading this article
Re:
Then why did you waste more of it making this comment?
Re:
You must have that magical browser plugin that forces you to read articles on Techdirt.
BTW, have you ever learned self-control? Do you know what that means?
Goading Musk
Regarding this kind of exposure: fig leafs don’t come in showboat size. Great balls of fire. I am unsure whether there may be an “n” missing in “goading”.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
You're conflating a bunch of things
For one thing the algorithm driving the recommendations and the “source code” for the site are very different things. You at first make it sound like you understand this and then go and say stuff like this:
Well, no, I don’t think the algo driving the recommendations can reveal “vulnerabilities”, it’s just an algo for recommendations. The worst that revealing it can do is allow people to game the system better (which is why Google keeps theirs secret) but the only downside there is a messed up looking feed.
And while the algo is probably quite complex it’s probably not THAT much compared to say, a full computer program. Like, probably a few thousand lines, at most? If that, could be a couple hundred.
Your blog post should’ve ended there, tbh. Code could’ve been misleading, or incomplete, misleading by being incomplete, or actual code that revealed vulnerabilities. Regardless there’s nothing wrong with Musk wanting to release the algo (not really “source code”) when and how he wants to.
Not only does Musk really seem to be a free speech absolutist, which you have done nothing to show otherwise (despite NUMEROUS attempts at “gotchas” to manufacture hypocrisy where there is none) but what the fuck would you know about it?
Any flaw, real or imagined in Musk’s position leaves him 1000x more a free speech advocate than someone who says shit like “moderation is free speech” and provides continuous, outrageous FUD to cover for the federal government actually attempting to censor speech by proxy. (somewhat successfully)
Re:
You’re lying again, Matthew. He had people kicked off Twitter for reporting on something that affected him.
Not very “free speech absolutist” of him.
Damn, projection going strong today, I see.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
See, you’re lying, cuz that was about doxxing.
No, I don’t really care if you think it’s “doxxing” or not, cuz that would just mean you don’t fucking know what doxxing is.
Re: Re: Re:
See, you’re lying again, cuz he banned reporters who were reporting on Elmo banning Elon Jet. And there were several people that specifically DID NOT link to ElonJet but were still banned anyway. Oh, and several were banned for just reporting critically of Elmo.
Care to try again skippy?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
and:
All of whom linked to Elonjet. Taylor Lorenz doxxed Libs of Tiktok (which really was quite reprehensible). Anything else: [Citation needed]
No, I really don’t think I need to, actually.
Re: Re: Re:3
I have provided as much proof as you have ever provied to me…
So I am right and you are wrong… again… and again and again and again.
Re: Re: Re:3
And yet you cheer on LoTT every time they dox somebody who is trans and the bulling that ensues.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
Literally all Libs of TikTok does is repost videos. Sometimes with an explainer that “hey this crazy person is a teacher at [blank] school”, which since those videos were published publicly with their faces, often under their name and certainly with no attempt to be anonymous seems fine. Just shining light on that which is in the open. This is completely different than what Lorenz did which was dig up the name of someone who was very much attempting to stay anonymous.
I do like how flexible you guys’ definition of “doxxing” can be, tho.
Re: Re: Re:
Sure, let’s just assume that it was actually doxxing. It wasn’t, but let’s assume for the sake of argument.
The reporters wrote about Musk being “doxxed” without actually linking to the allegedly “doxxing” material. They simply reported on the story unfolding.
In other words, they broke no rules or policies, yet were booted because Musk is a thin-skinned narcissist.
QED, you’re lying again.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
You would have to provide evidence of that actually happening. Not just someone claiming that happened, mind you. I haven’t seen any.
Re: Re: Re:3
I could say the same to you regarding the alleged censorship by proxy on Twitter. Ironic.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
No, you couldn’t actually. Evidence has been provided in spades.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
No matter how much you Stan for him, Elmo’s not gonna let you suck it.
Re: Re:
I mean, Elon’s really only interested in womb donators to carry his hellspawn but we all know Elon’s team’s views on transwomen.
Vulnerabilities? Lol. Just wait for the newer code. Or maybe you don’t even have to wait, at this point. Counting down to news in six months of twitter breach currently occurring.
Re:
Twitter still has SOFTWARE DEVS?
Holy shit, that’s news! Better not let Elon know, though, he might just fire them! Or send them back to Tesla!
I don’t know what “open sourcing” the algorithm means in this case, but I guess it will be more about restrictive licences, NDA and suing contributors for all the vulnerabilities they find, for a piece of in-house code that’s too specific to be re-used for another project (even if the licence allows it), and would maybe never be put back in Twitter service (because it needs expertise to check, and of course to understand, public code).
Going open-source is time-consuming (with a whole full-time team dedicated to it), and only work if you trust the community that’s helping, and not the opposite, just to “hope to earn (some) trust”. Maybe it will only be a read-only page with thousand of obscure lines of code, with a (auto-proclaimed) security expert saying that all is fine.
Re:
It took me a while to realize that “open source” meant “the source code is available” and “free as in speech” whereas most people-including myself at one point-thought it only meant “the source code is available”.
I think “open source” really has a branding problem.
If Twitter’s code is as messy as Mike thinks it is…
I doubt even the FOSS community wants to even want to try even looking at the code, let alone try to fix it.
'Free speech only counts on my terms!'
Elon: I am a staunch defender of free speech and plan to open source Twitter’s source code(so competent people can look it over since I fired all the ones that were working here).
FreeSpeechEnthusiast: Posts a portion of Twitter’s source code for everyone to look over
Elon: How dare you?!
While it does depend on exactly how you means the subjective terms of “large, complex systems” and “finding anything valuable”, I would argue (with my interpretation of those terms) that there are examples of such.
The first one that comes to mind is the FreeSpace 2 open source project (which has effectively kept the game alive on its own, even if not too well known). Not sure if that qualifies as “large, complex systems” (it’s definitely not a multi-server redundant internet platform, but it a significant proprietary software project). I would definitely argue that something of value came out. I liked FreeSpace 2 (though I haven’t had time to play it lately), and the fact that it’s still playable on modern systems (including Linux IIRC), means that sales on GoG are valuable still today (IIRC the assets themselves were not open sourced, just the engines).
I believe Amazon, Google, and Facebook have all take internal (proprietary) projects, and open sourced them. However since none of the ones I saw were memorable to me, I don’t know if anything of value came out of those endeavors.
I have read that some consider Elon to be a free speech absolutist.
fwiw, I think Elon is a free speech bullshitist.
Finding out Derek Smart righteously called out Elon Musk is the god damn funniest thing ever. I remember all the years the Something Awful forums used to lambast Smart for being a pompous windbag.
my hunch is
George Hotz leaked the code
Then again, Hotz also complained that he was not allowed to refactor the code, and how much of a giant mess the code base was, so I would not be surprised if there are vulnerabilities.
Look at that profile picture again
It’s clearly flipping the bird at beloved Elmo!
The irony
Using a post with Derek (not so)Smart, a man that is equally cencerous, and has failed on his own promise to release his AI code from 30 years ago.
It’s a great spot to find new information. Your post is very knowledgeable and useful. Thanks for sharing.
https://sponaugletowing.com/