This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Saved you a click: New Zealand and the Philippines are the countries.
Thats hilarious. Does a vpn get around this? Because if so, it wont stop botting
If I'm a bot owner and I could pay $500/year to ensure my 500 bots run unfettered, it might be worth it. I can influence a significant amount of discourse with 500 accounts xitting, rexitting the original xit that was xit out, etc.
If he thinks he can make money from bot managers, it may make sense.
It will probably decrease trust in the whole xitty system, but maybe Musk doesn't care?
And you'll use 500 accounts for that?
I think that when they are banned, you'll have to come up with 500 new ways to pay
I think you underestimate how many validated credit cards come up for sale every week on the internet.
Trust me, paying $1 isn't even a speed bump to scammers: they pay it with Other People's Money.
That's the tough part about white-hat, you follow the rules, they don't.
Rounding, let's say that there are 125 million people in the Philippines and New Zealand. And let's say that for some reason they all decide to make a new Twitter account and pay for it in perpetuity. Elon paid $44 billion for Twitter. At this rate, this move would allow him to recoup his investment in...352 years.
He doesn't get the whole dollar.
CC often have a %+$ fee
E.g 2.5% and 10c per transaction
Nice.. I love math presented like this.
While the "not a bot" argument exists, it is a weak one. I suspect the goal of this is,
A. Convince users outside of NZ and the Philippines to either create an account or at least keep (not delete) their existing account. Twitter needs to prove to advertisers that Twitter has reach/influence and with this they can say "you may have heard Twitter is bleeding users, but did you know the number of new Twitter users has actually increased xx/yy?" and it won't technically be a lie.
B. Elon really does think this service will be an everything app of the future. He and anyone who believes this is absolutely bonkers and should genuinely seek help. However the value of an account that is already onboarded (e.g. had a credit card on file) is worth far more than any regular account. Convincing an account to spend their first dollar is much harder than convincing them to spend their second and so on.
C. He was financed specifically to tank Twitter subtly and he's doing a very job bad of it.
Okay this is the point where I start to buy the theory that he's purposely tanking the site
I highly doubt NZ is the center of a bot epidemic. It does (along with the Philippines), however, have high transit fees and twitter is hemorrhaging money.
I beg they do this it'll only make things worse
Downvote Musk spam.
The billionaire doesn’t need your help ensuring him and his businesses stay in the 24 hour news cycle. Don’t be a useful idiot.
Elon Musk, as we all know it:
He likes spending it
LOL. Fuck twitter. If anyone reading this hasn't jumped ship yet, now's as good a time as any. Mastodon's mobile website makes for a great PWA, alternatively, Ice Cubes for iOS is a solid free third party mobile app. Now let's talk desktop. The normal site is pretty good. But if you're looking for something a little more robust mastodeck.com is a third party front end that's great for power users and multitasking.
Haven't heard of Mastodeck. Gonna have to check it out. But to add some android apps to your list Megalodon treated me well when I was using it and Moshidon looked good too. For those that don't need something as crazy as Mastodeck on desktop though, there's Mastodon's built-in advanced view as well. I was never a Twitter user, but Mastodon and Firefish have been very fun to check out.
ETA: Tested Mastodeck with Firefirsh since other Mastodon clients seem to handle it and it also works. Just don't be surprised when something goes wrong since it's unsupported.
Tusky kicks ass for Mastodon on Android.
Think I tried it when I was just starting with Mastodon. Can't remember if I didn't like it or something. Might try it again
Huh...
Shame those greedy security guys wanted to get paid so bad.
I charge $1/month to send email on my email service. There’s a reason for that. It’s because it’s the smallest amount I can charge, and spammers are unlikely to pay anything, no matter how small, to send email. If they do, and I catch them, I’d probably be able to get their payment account suspended. So, I understand why this could be a good approach to combatting spam. Here’s the problem with Twitter doing it:
My first thought is that it still requires them to follow up on catching spammers (similar to the paid checkmark, this as a "solution" makes me think they won't do that).
I could see spammers deciding "hey, I'll make more than $1 before I'm caught" and do something with payment to hide their tracks (maybe a simple thing that should be known), meanwhile normal users say "Eh, I gotta pay? No thanks."
What if this is just a plan to recreate the original x.com and be a payment processor. Gotta have an excuse to rebuild payment processing architecture right?
I'd be happier with the dollar.
It's beginning.
To my recollection, Aotearoa and the Phillipines are both common countries for market trials, right? I wonder if he's looking to see the response ^(Elon^ ^Musk^ ^questioning^ ^himself?^ ^Has^ ^he^ ^gained^ ^sentience?)^ or if he's specifically looking to see what impact it has on how much it costs to operate in that country?
Either way, I hope they raise the price before the international rollout.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
If you want to join X, the service formerly known as Twitter, via its website in New Zealand and the Philippines, be prepared to fork over $1 a year for the privilege.
X’s post doesn’t explain why the new $1 subscription is only for new users joining via the web and not the mobile app, or why Not a Bot is only being rolled out in two countries.
A guess would be that X has seen more bot activity from these regions than others, and that it’s much easier to create a bunch of fake accounts via the website.
“New users who opt out of subscribing will only be able to take ‘read only’ actions,” such as viewing posts and watching videos, according to the company.
(Confusingly, the “Not A Bot” terms and conditions indicate that people will be able to also subscribe from X’s iOS and Android apps, even though the main post on X’s help center only specifies web.)
Musk has been clear from the beginning of his Twitter takeover that he thinks charging will impede bot armies, though it’s estimated that a very, very small percentage of users are paying.
The original article contains 312 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 38%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
hahahahahahahahahahaha all these dingbats are gonna give elon fucking musk their credit card information
This is the best summary I could come up with:
If you want to join X, the service formerly known as Twitter, via its website in New Zealand and the Philippines, be prepared to fork over $1 a year for the privilege.
X’s post doesn’t explain why the new $1 subscription is only for new users joining via the web and not the mobile app, or why Not a Bot is only being rolled out in two countries.
A guess would be that X has seen more bot activity from these regions than others, and that it’s much easier to create a bunch of fake accounts via the website.
“New users who opt out of subscribing will only be able to take ‘read only’ actions,” such as viewing posts and watching videos, according to the company.
(Confusingly, the “Not A Bot” terms and conditions indicate that people will be able to also subscribe from X’s iOS and Android apps, even though the main post on X’s help center only specifies web.)
Musk has been clear from the beginning of his Twitter takeover that he thinks charging will impede bot armies, though it’s estimated that a very, very small percentage of users are paying.
The original article contains 312 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 38%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
What, is this because of botters?
He's probably trying to tank twitter to align with some political request. The destabilization of the communication platform will disrupt flow of information, potentially, for the next US election cycle and with current world conflicts/tensions.
What grand Machiavellian plan requires this shit show when he could just shut it down at a moments notice? He owns the entire platform, he can do whatever he wants with it.
I like how the two main threads of thought are "he's an utter drooling moron" and "he's a seven-dimensional chess player who's trying to take Twitter down without looking like he's taking Twitter down."
Plausible deniability.
For what? It's not a crime to close a business you wholly own.
Idk I'm just spitballing. It just seems like an expensive way to misbehave. Chalking it up to stupidity/huberis on his part just seems too easy.
