Elon Musk, the CEO of Twitter/X, is floating an idea that he's had before to remedy the problem of social media bots: charging people to use social media.
Yup, because Musk has no ability to plan ahead. He thinks his every idea is perfect and that he should instantly implement whatever nonsense he just came up with.
I know you think this is unusual but you’ve literally just described every founder or C level I have ever dealt with throughout over 20 years in tech. I mean you’d think that two decades would be enough to at least observe a single outlier but nope.
“[We’re] moving to a small monthly payment for use of the X system,” he just told Benjamin Netanyahu, saying it’s [the] only way to stamp out botsactual human users .
I sincerely hope his management team applies their best judgment and deliver exactly what their boss requested of them. It's the right thing to do according to their employment contracts.
He was also the CEO of EA when it was voted Worst Company in the World. Off the top of my head, I believe it was the second time they won the Golden Poo award, during the height of their SimCity fiasco.
Please let it die. It will be nice to force media outlets to actually put effort into stories again, instead of just reporting on what is being tweeted by the usual gaggle of assholes.
It's a fucking song reference. Also, it's a particularly popular song, especially in lieu of the recent pandemic and such. It's been on the late show with Colbert.
I had a momentary panic because it's the end of the month and I'm low on money... but then I remembered I deleted my Twitter account and life has just been absolutely peachy since then.
Twitter was never a particularly big brand. Even in just the space of social media it was an also-ran.
At its peak (and it's nowhere near its peak now!) Twitter had ~400 million monthly active users. Reddit has ~500 million. Snapchat ~750. Telegram ~800. LinkedIn ~930 (!). Messenger and TikTok ~1 billion each. Instagram and Whatsapp ~2 each. Youtube ~2.5. And Facebook ~3 billion.
Twitter at its peak is just barely outside of rounding error territory compared to Facebook and Youtube.
And here I've compared Twitter against its "peers": international social media sites. There are regional social media sites that are bigger than Twitter was at its peak. QZone is ~500 million. QQ and Weibo are ~575. Kuaishou is ~650. Douyin (Tiktok's origin) is ~725. WeChat is 1.3 billion. These six sites are in one country only ... and each of them are larger than Twitter's highest ever count. (And note that in China Weibo is considered largely a joke. At 550 million. Larger, again I stress, than Twitter was at its peak.)
The only reason Twitter has ever been treated as anything but a loser's game is because lazy-assed reporters found reading sound bites on Twitter was easier than doing actual reportage. As a result Twitter has had outsized visibility for its rather pathetic actual participation.
The same reporters who report on China by looking in on Weibo (the "joke").
Chess is by default two-dimensional or three-dimensional, if you count time. Maybe you meant four-dimensional? That's what they say when they mean a joke or to say that he's smart.
He wants people to pay for a "service" (lol) that is now FAR WORSE than it was when it was free (in every single way) + one that doesn't even work correctly.
Initially? Maybe... But a big part of Twitter is just people sharing links of celebrity posters with one another casually. It would have eaten away the base of all the casual users. And then celebrity engagement would sag, which would discourage them from using the platform. It would have been a slower death spiral.
But with competing services ramping up and people already migrating away by degrees, the old networks that made Twitter valuable are breaking down. Why pay to put up with this shit when you can be on Reddit or Threads or WorldStar for free instead?
I maybe click a link to the site every couple of weeks if it's a source on something I can't get elsewhere, but then that I can't see any replies or whatever without logging in just makes me glad I left.
And I was a big user. 10k followers, 100+ likes on most posts I made. Elon hacked it to pieces of course, but it was mortally wounded by the 2018 algo change.
He didn't buy the company with the intent to kill it, he didn't even intend to buy the company at all. He made a joke offer to buy the company and took it to far, so they were able to sue him and force him to buy the company. If anything he hoped to get some trade secrets out of them before withdrawing the offer.
Hey guys, check it out, I'm entering into a legally binding contract as a hilaaaarious joke. So funny, oh my lmao! I'm such a joker. You know me, I just do it for the rotfls.
He’s really just incompetent. He’s going to go down in history as the greatest example of upward failing ever. He’s just held onto shares for companies that happened to work out - most of the time despite his best efforts - and was frequently fired for it.
He’s a con man who has fallen for his own con and thinks he’s actually as smart as he pretends to be.
If a person has ugly thoughts, it begins to show on the face. And when that person has ugly thoughts every day, every week, every year, the face gets uglier and uglier until you can hardly bear to look at it.
A person who has good thoughts cannot ever be ugly. You can have a wonky nose and a crooked mouth and a double chin and stick-out teeth, but if you have good thoughts it will shine out of your face like sunbeams and you will always look lovely.
Bear in mind that his public perception has gone from lovable billionaire selling flamethrowers because it's cool, to right wing douchebag supporting putin. News outlets tend to pick nice photos of the "good guy" and find something awful for the bad.
Though I do agree, he's not aged well. But our perception is probably skewed by cherry picked photos for news articles through the years.
Mastodon + the Ice Cubes app for iOS is far better than Twitter ever was. Plus the platform comes with the added benefit of a userbase that's openly hostile toward fascist rhetoric.
It's a Xitter, Michael - what could it cost? Ten dollars?
Does anyone think it's a good idea for an idiot with effectively unlimited money (though he's working damn hard to change that) to be making pricing decisions?
The remaining dickriders could barely be considered human. If you're supporting that obvious moron and mockery of the concept of meritocracy against your personal interests and those of humanity, there's something fundamentally broken in you that's disconnected from reality and what it means to be sapient.
Oh I totally agree - he's entirely divorced from the experiences and troubles of 99.99999% of humanity - but deciding to set his own pricing when he barely understands what money is just acting against his own self-interest.
Ask him 'how much he thinks each tweet costs twitter?'
He'll have an analyst run the numbers. After a few months it'll bother him so much he'll come back with the idea that it should be charge per tweet. Works like a charm.
If you move to a price per tweet, you're getting close to just doing it on something like Ethereum with rollups.
That would be truly free speech and uncensorable if that's truly what he wanted (it isnt)
But the last thing he wants is to convince people on a price per message model as getting people used to that will make it that much easier to migrate one day in the future to something blockchain based.
I don't think it'd be the same problem with a monthly sub, just per tweet.
Edit: and yes, he should totally do it, either way it'll fuck twitter in the short or long term.
No, no, do it per tweet getting a retweet or a heart or whatever "X" does, so that everyone using the service does it with a huge risk to get bancrupted if people either like or hate your tweet too much. It will definitely work, thrust me Musk.
I think what we have here is a "Brewster's Millions" situation, where Musk is bound to a secret contact where he has to lose a ton of money with nothing to show for it in order to win a larger fortune.
I used it for immediate news during emergencies and also if there's a big crash in F1 and the cameras won't show what's happening until the driver's confirmed okay.
I don't know if any social media platform could survive charging even as low as 1 dollar per year. Even if they somehow end up net positive in money, there won't be enough people using the new platform for it to become the platform most normal people use.
I’d love to see him take the full scenic Lowtax route but he already weaseled his way out of a TBI from Zuck (which suggests that, like Lowtax did, he has a spine made of wood pulp). On the other hand, he’s got the same sterling reputation as a father.
I don't think so. Twitter (X) users tend to be relatively mellow and don't mind parting with their money. Elon Musk is a beloved genius and even more people will love him if he does this. They'll love him just like he always wanted his father to love him.
Did you read the article? An extremely small percentage of users have subscribed to blue. I highly doubt even 20% of the user base would pay.
There’s really no alternative. Sure, mastodon seem great. But most are on Twitter because that’s where the people are. It’s not as easy to swap out as Reddit, because it’s not just about any content that anyone can post. It’s about following specific people.
I would say Elon is trying to squeeze one last bit of cash from this dumpster fire before cutting his losses and liquidating it all, but given past evidence I think he just actually thinks this will work going forward.
Welp, he can suck on the head of his dead bird for all I care. I want him to ban me actually, I don't even use his service, except to slip in subtle jabs at Elon himself.
In my opinion this won't kill the platform. If those still using it are still there after all that happened since this clown took over, then nothing will make them leave the platform. They'll pay for it and they'll continue to enjoy it.
Wildly incorrect. Most people will never pay a cent for social media. They are still on X because they don’t care about politics at all, or have an audience there they don’t want to give up. That’s it.
The small cadre of sycophants that are willing to pay for Twitter Blue would stay and those are the people who love him, but 50,000 people is not a social network. It would 100% kill the site.
I found this neat comment floating on the interwebs
"As someone who has never subscribed to X or Fakebook, I applaud the move. Not sure what if any social redeeming purpose it has other than being a time killing amusement. And if that is the case people should expect to pay for the value of the amusement they are getting. Obviously, advertisers don't take X that seriously, if they did then the ads would pay enough where X wouldn't have to charge. Deep State propagandists were more interested in Twitter than advertisers. I always saw that as a problem is which why I never subscribed. Finding unbiased facts on the internet is hard as prospecting for gold."
The best way, IMO to combat bullshit on social media is to make people submit their personal information (ie govt ID etc) to have an account. I don't support or condone that, but it would cut down on trolling and other shit dramatically. He's not wrong that charging would stymie bot accounts, but it won't stop them, and will piss off your user base in the process.