Saki

I meant the situation. Your assumption that Nitter instances are generally Tor-friendly (with only a few exceptions) used to be true, but anymore. The situation has changed and as such your understanding is slightly outdated.

I’ll accept that you’re saying you did this out of good will. So you too can accept that the results were not necessarily ideal, as many instances are not (or no longer) exactly Tor-friendly.

When talking to Tails users next time, you might want to consider nitter.oksocial.net (officially used by EFF too)

a nice no-log, no-js site…

https://static(.)cloudflareinsights(.)com/beacon.min.js/v84a3a4012de94ce1a686ba8c167c359c1696973893317 etc.

Nitter had been indeed generally Tor-friendly until around September, 2023. After that, even the official instance nitter.net started blocking Tor from time to time (currently not blocking), and there are now relatively few working instances for Tor users.

This is something most Tor users know through daily experiences. The problem seems to be, your link was a "meta link" redirected to a random Nitter instance, right? If so, that’s the problem; not every instance is Tor-friendly. Another problem is, your knowledge about this privacy front end is not up-to-date.

The current situation is so obvious for actual users that if you were actually using Tor/Tails every day, you would have never done what you did. But it’s okay. Thanks for a $20 donation to Tails, you seem to be very proud of. Well, xmr user would be more likely to send or say 0.2 XMR etc. because we tend to think in our native currency :)

We have uBlock Origin on Tails, not just Tor. If you were on Tails, you’d know a working Nitter instance.

PS.

1. When a random instance is randomly called, the instance might be behind CloudFlare, which wants to “scan” Tor Browser, saying “One moment please…” (TB users know this too well.)
2. While this is annoying and time-wasting, if you’re using a vanilla version of TB, chances are they’ll let you go.
3. On Tails, however, we have uBO, so fingerprints are different. This sometimes causes an infinite loop of “One moment please…” perhaps b/c uBO blocks CF scanning scripts.
4. Because of this, and because CF is everywhere nowadays, when something doesn’t work on TB on Tails, the first thing a user might say is “We have uBO.” Hope this makes sense! And sorry, I was not clear enough.

If you were actually always on Tor, you’d never post a non-Tor friendly link. The right answer is: use DEX.

I have three possibly theories about the "21".

1. The white hat is implying, “Windows 10? A nice OS. So you’re going to use Windows 11 soon? Well, this is what happens when you’re on Win 10 or 11.”
2. The white hat likes the digits 69, thinking it looks sexy.
3. There was a boat accident, and the hacker accidentally hit the wrong keys.

A bad move. Your "Tails donation" link is itself not Tails-friendly. Have you actually ever been on Tails? Get the details right.
Here: https://nitter.oksocial.net/intercambio_app/status/1718590127985905924

I have a Bitcoin joke, but the fees are too expensive to deliver it

I vaguely remember I had a Tails joke, but I seem to have amnesia.

The scary part is, that the US can do something like this if it wants to. A service provider saying “We’re privacy-friendly. Your email address is all we ask.” could end up this way. Think about so-called bullet-proof hosting providers or so-called trusted no-long VPN providers.

The only safe way, if any, may be that you never show them your IP… (much less any identifying information)