this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
929 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

69247 readers
3894 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] soba@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"This is going to make so much easy money", Musk thinks, delusionaly, as he further alienates the former core user base of the site he bought for literal billions of dollars and yet has never made any money. "They are going to be lining up to pay for this", he imagines, forgetting that paid checkmarks was a huge ass failure and twitter still has never turned a profit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] michaelmrose@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This isn't useful or sufficient. You have to consider how many bots get banned and cost to determine efficacy. If you want 10,000 fake people to manipulate real people $10,000 doesn't seem a high price if you make the fake people act organic enough that they largely aren't banned.

It would be more useful if a singular service verified sufficient credentials to prove you were an authentic human and allowed you to auth to various sites. This in turn creates the problem that verifiers now know a LOT about your online life.

If the verification involved site -> verifier -> government held public key I think you could arrange so that none of the parties had enough info to identify users.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] shortwavesurfer@monero.town 8 points 1 year ago

Well, if nothing else, it does reduce some load on their servers because less people will be posting.

[–] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Would not give him 56 cents

[–] psmgx@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

That's 56 too much

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

We're going to be 🤑 rich! Rich I tell you!

[–] elephantium@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

I like to be on x-twitter now

O.K. by me on x-twitter now

Every speech free on x-twitter now

...

For a small fee on x-twitter now.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] arunshah240@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Good news for X alternative Social Media, if pay to post for X I'm exit form X.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Well, one more reason to ignore that platform on it's way to obsolescence.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›