Ownage
Member
If it fails it'll be an epic tax write-off for his other businesses.He has to break even on his 44 billion investment first.
If it fails it'll be an epic tax write-off for his other businesses.He has to break even on his 44 billion investment first.
I'm with Omega on this one. "Elongated Muskrat" sounds like a toothless nickname-by-committee that A group makes up in hopes it goes viral. In short, seems very forced. See: the Donald "Ducks" his taxes campaign from back in 2016
You're taking me way too seriously. I just wanted to post a cat gif. Sometimes innocents get caught in the crossfire, but that's the price we pay for comedy.
What? Its not funny. Do you think it is? I also said the whole enterprise can sink so I'm not sure where I'm "triggered"
Brah-ms, was a joke from Twitter.The elongated muskrat thing is era garbage. We can do better. It's not even funny.
On the subject. I'm all for the whole thing going down. Take facebook down next please.
It's hard to tell these days. Weirdos everywhere.You're taking me way too seriously. I just wanted to post a cat gif. Sometimes innocents get caught in the crossfire, but that's the price we pay for comedy.
The Kathy Griffin ban is worth $8.Great idea. People can still use Twitter for free but verified users get a boost.
Sounds great to me and will help combat bots and spam. What's the problem?
That’s how I understand it too. I thought blue checks got priority in the first place currently, so basically, nothing will change besides the $8? I saw tweets from them all the time, even though I wasn’t subbed. I think Elon wants to give perks to people who actually want it, thereby leveling the playing field to any type of content creator. And it’s not that normal people won’t be seen at all, just in a different category or something.Great idea. People can still use Twitter for free but verified users get a boost.
Sounds great to me and will help combat bots and spam. What's the problem?
Peterson isn't banned.Has he reinstated people that the era types feared yet? Peterson, the former pres etc.
I mean..... i'm not a billionaire and don't know shit about running a successful business
This.He is forcing an account to have a single primary user and making it hard (expensive at least) for one user to have multiple accounts.
Better p2w than get picked to win. The current verification system is trash, and is still used to boost Tweet visibility currently.So Twitter is now pay-to-win.
This just keeps getting worse and worse by the day. It's like watching the Titanic sink in slow motion, and it's the captain making the holes.
He’s going to bury the fucking thing completely if he does this.
Not ending, just changing.I think the end of social media as we knew it is upon us. The kids don't like fb, Instagram with its shadow bans and now Twitter with this.
I can't tell the difference between those 3 these days.For $8 a month, I could:
Get Disney Plus, and watch a bunch Star Wars, Marvel, and classic Disney content.
Get Hulu, and watch a bunch of movies and television programs.
Get Twitter, and watch a bunch of people call each other racists and degenerates.
Social media is ending as we know it. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/as we know itNot ending, just changing.
People love change.
Oops -I've been dictional! -ed.Social media is ending as we know it. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/as we know it
The Kathy Griffin saga continues.
She’s now screaming at him from her dead mother’s account.
This is what batshit insane looks like.She’s now screaming at him from her dead mother’s account.
This is what batshit insane looks like.
I'm being serious, but not for malicious reasons. I know nothing about Meta's monetization of their services and apps. I just know that everyone always talks about how Twitter has never been good at making money. I've heard that for years now. I'm wondering if there's anything they could do within Twitter to be more effective at earning ad revenue, vs charging people a subscription. If they go down the path of charging people, Twitter as we know it will cease to exist. Honestly, that isn't a bad thing. Social media in general has proven to be a net negative and literally harmful to society, in ways we are still finding out as we go. But, if they want to make money and not impact the user experience, they could just double-down on ad revenue and find other ways to trim expenses. A subscription model will not work, at least for 99% of the users.not sure if you're being serious but the answer is adverts and collecting/selling data of users.
facebook on the surface might look like a social media platform but it's gathering information on literally everyone and that includes people who never signed up to facebook. what they do is create a "shadow profile" so if you never joined facebook they most likely still have a profile for you. if you've ever gave someone your data (phone number, email, address, etc) and they are on facebook and sync their contacts then your data is on facebooks servers. they take that data and match it with existing users or start building a profile on you. for example, i don't use facebook anymore but people at my work do. person A has my name/number. person B has my name/number. person C. person D. facebook will have a profile with name and phone number. if i were ever to sign up then they'd be like well that phone number matches so we'll recommend you friend person A/B/C/D. they actually have a tool where you can put in your email/phone number to check if they have it and you can mark it not to be used. it's a bit fucking stupid because they still have your info. it's just goes onto a "not allowed to use" list.
think of all the shit people post on facebook and then know that facebook will track you across the internet through their "Pixel" tracker. if you've ever seen a FB icon, "log in with facebook", or looked an embedded photo/share link on a website then facebook knows you visited that site.
and that's just facebook. instagram is more of the same and whatsapp too.
all that data is collected to build adverts to show you and your data is valuable so it makes them $.
google/facebook/amazon are probably the worst when it comes to tracking you. twitter hardly compares in scale to what those 3 gather on you.
Why is it Facebook makes so much money? They’ve never had to charge a subscription.
Customers /products. That is kind of how it works, though. Just calling a spade a spade, here.
Well people do that anyway, though. On FB and Twitter. Just look at the damage caused by the widespread circulation of election conspiracies about fraud. People still talk about it like it happened.So someone can literally pay and then post fake news. Brilliant move lol
Ive been using twitter for 14 years and i wont pay anything. i mainly use it to get news anyway
99% of the users are not genuine content producers though, and don't need to be verified. So nothing changes for them.I'm being serious, but not for malicious reasons. I know nothing about Meta's monetization of their services and apps. I just know that everyone always talks about how Twitter has never been good at making money. I've heard that for years now. I'm wondering if there's anything they could do within Twitter to be more effective at earning ad revenue, vs charging people a subscription. If they go down the path of charging people, Twitter as we know it will cease to exist. Honestly, that isn't a bad thing. Social media in general has proven to be a net negative and literally harmful to society, in ways we are still finding out as we go. But, if they want to make money and not impact the user experience, they could just double-down on ad revenue and find other ways to trim expenses. A subscription model will not work, at least for 99% of the users.
I wonder about that, because Elon himself has made Twitter posts saying the timeline algorithm is trash and use the chronological timeline option. My guess is that it applies to replies, but replies already are subject to a shit algo (so nothing will really change), and on top of that if more than 20 people comment on a Tweet your reply isn't getting read ever, under any circumstance or ownership of Twitter, anyway.So tweets are based on payers and not chronological?
So one guys tweets with a free account right now, but a payer replied yesterday, the $8 payer tweet will show up before the more recent free profiler's tweet?
It's not chronological now.So tweets are based on payers and not chronological?
So one guys tweets with a free account right now, but a payer replied yesterday, the $8 payer tweet will show up before the more recent free profiler's tweet?
I mean..... i'm not a billionaire and don't know shit about running a successful business but it seems to me that adding this charge is going to kill off a huge percentage of users from the platform.
Twitter is the virtual town square, you go to the town square to chat and debate, would you pay $8 a month to have entry into that town square? I wouldn't.
It isn't by default, but you can make it chronological.It's not chronological now.
It isn't by default, but you can make it chronological.