this seems doomed to fail. were i a spammer, i'd just make a million new accounts and let them "season" until they were not "new" anymore and could spam for free. people will farm them in vintages and sell them to spammers as a cottage industry. it's kind of a nasty fork. despite the value, few people seem willing to pay to use social media. everyone has been trained that it's "free" but when you do not pay for a good or service, you're not the customer, you're the product. people hate bots and spam and love to bitch about it, but apparently they don't hate it enough to pay $5 a month to avoid it. if you make twitter "pay only" you'll gut it. too many voices will be lost and metcalfe's law breaks. barring some sort of better security algos, there may just not be a real cure for bots. but maybe it's not really that big a problem either. if it were, people would pay to be rid of it. the fact that they won't is the market speaking. actions, not complaints reveal the true preference function. @elonmusk just remove the botnet block effect from visibility algos, do the best you can on security, and be done with it.
this seems doomed to fail. were i a spammer, i'd just make a million new accounts and let them "season" until they were not "new" anymore and could spam for free. people will farm them in vintages and sell them to spammers as a cottage industry. it's kind of a nasty fork. despite the value, few people seem willing to pay to use social media. everyone has been trained that it's "free" but when you do not pay for a good or service, you're not the customer, you're the product. people hate bots and spam and love to bitch about it, but apparently they don't hate it enough to pay $5 a month to avoid it. if you make twitter "pay only" you'll gut it. too many voices will be lost and metcalfe's law breaks. barring some sort of better security algos, there may just not be a real cure for bots. but maybe it's not really that big a problem either. if it were, people would pay to be rid of it. the fact that they won't is the market speaking. actions, not complaints reveal the true preference function. @elonmusk just remove the botnet block effect from visibility algos, do the best you can on security, and be done with it.
@boriquagato I'm trying to imagine this but I think it won't work
@boriquagato indeed, essentially all of the thirstbot spam I get already seems to come from aged accounts of Aug 2023-Nov 2023
@boriquagato On the other hand, this may also be the cure we need for so many people's addiction to social media. The value might go up for those who find value while those who don't will stop engaging...net-net this may be for the best.
@boriquagato I always thought something like $1 to create an account, or $1/year to post, would cut down drastically on spam.
@boriquagato You are too pessimistic. First, letting an account "season" for X time is itself a signal that can be used to detect fraud. Second, Spam is a cat&mouse game. Anything which make spammers "wait" weeks/months is a huge win.
@boriquagato Absent some rational explanation of the thot bot biz model, Occam's Razor tells me it is US/NATO security services going after Elon and the only remotely functional free speech platform in the world.
@boriquagato "the market" was never the arbiter of ideal outcomes, hence the life as we know it. "Economics" is the reason the lonely planet is besieged by scammers and their bots, what to say killer vaccines and wars
@boriquagato I got the impression that 'new user' here means accounts created after some given date, not age of existing accounts.
@boriquagato I’ll pay for the first decent app that doesn’t limit reach. So, I won’t be paying.
@boriquagato But Yet Electric cars, Robots, Human interfaces, Rockets to Mars, but cant fix Bots, Huh OK?