Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 181 posts

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#101

Post by glimshe »

iamdelirium wrote: post #6

This is going to kill engagement. 90% of people don't care enough to pay for that and any sort of barrier will lower engagement. Twitter/X is going to be use this as a way to fight spammers and bots but those accounts never had a problem paying or using stolen money.

The question is how much value Twitter is adding to people's lives. Netflix costs almost 200x this proposed price and yet it has over 200M subscribers. We got so used to free, but we all know that there is no such thing as free; today the only source of income for many web companies is to sell your data. So what if it loses engagement, I'd rather pay a bit for Twitter than the status quo which is getting followed by scam porn bots.

I like seeing more and more services becoming paid like, well, everything else in life. You don't get free haircuts while watching 30 minutes of ads. This actually helps competition by taking some power and leverage away from the big ads cartels.

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#102

Post by bathtub365 »

codetrotter wrote: post #26
skyyler wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Well, here is X trying to make a product you pay for. No, this is an attempt to have it both ways. To do data collection / data brokerage and ALSO charge users for the service.

I think X should get credit for this move anyways. Them charging for access may make more people comfortable with the idea of paying for social networking, so that in the future more people will join when new social networks are made that don’t mine the data of the people

WhatsApp did the $1/yr thing a long time ago. Here is an article from 2016 about them scrapping it.

https://venturebeat.com/mobile/whatsapp-subscription/

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#104

Post by rurp »

glimshe wrote: post #101
iamdelirium wrote: post #6

This is going to kill engagement. 90% of people don't care enough to pay for that and any sort of barrier will lower engagement. Twitter/X is going to be use this as a way to fight spammers and bots but those accounts never had a problem paying or using stolen money.

The question is how much value Twitter is adding to people's lives. Netflix costs almost 200x this proposed price and yet it has over 200M subscribers. We got so used to free, but we all know that there is no such thing as free; today the only source of income for many web companies is to sell your data. So what if it loses engagement, I'd rather pay a bit for Twitter than the status quo which is getting followed by…

But... Twitter users who pay will still be tracked constantly, see targetted ads, and run into tons of spam bots. But now they have to trust Twitter with their payment information for the privilege.

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#105

Post by rurp »

nomilk wrote: post #49

Charging $1/year for the ability to tweet and retweet should reduce spammers significantly. But don't journalists in oppressive regimes (e.g. Venezuela, China, Russia, Myanmar, Arab Spring) use twitter to share information? They could previously share information with nothing more than an internet connection, but now they'd be required to enter payment info; what does that do for their anonymity? If the idea is to im…

This is a great point. There have already been scandals in the past where oppressive regimes offered Twitter employees bribes to expose the people behind certain accounts so that they could be tortured or killed. This will make that existing risk even greater. Musk's cosiness with dictatorships makes the threat even worse. I would never trust this version of Twitter with my real identity or payment information, and hope people in precarious positions know not to as well.

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#106

Post by jryle70 »

nomilk wrote: post #49

Charging $1/year for the ability to tweet and retweet should reduce spammers significantly. But don't journalists in oppressive regimes (e.g. Venezuela, China, Russia, Myanmar, Arab Spring) use twitter to share information? They could previously share information with nothing more than an internet connection, but now they'd be required to enter payment info; what does that do for their anonymity? If the idea is to im…

> They could previously share information with nothing more than an internet connection

Do you know who else could do the same? those who spread misinformation. EU threaten to take action against Twitter if they don't take it seriously - [0] This could be a step they take to address EU.

[0] - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/26/eu-warns-...

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#108

Post by mvdtnz »

pard68 wrote: post #4

I know people are down on the-social-networking-platform-formerly-known-as-twitter, and I have no skin in the game, I gave up on social networking about a decade ago, but I think this is the model to beat. Forever the FOSS world has said, "if you do not pay for the product, you are the product". Well, here is X trying to make a product you pay for. I do not know their new policy on tracking/ads/spying but even if the…

No, this is intended to tackle bot signups. No one, not even a moron like Musk, believes that $1/y is the value of a social network user. He will continue selling user data and pushing ads.

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#109

Post by ballenf »

rewmie wrote: post #36
Eji1700 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly seconded. Another upside is this really does put a much larger cost to bots and problem accounts. Even $1 a year is a big deal if you've got an army of 5000 bot accounts (something pretty trivial in this environment). I'm all for things like Kagi doing this RIGHT and supposedly not selling all my data, but I've argued that companies like twitter charging for access is the path to a healthier environment. Oh an…

> Even $1 a year is a big deal if you've got an army of 5000 bot accounts (something pretty trivial in this environment). I think this belief is highly misguided. Whoever is in the business of managing bot farms comprised of thousands of bots is certainly monetizing them for way more than $5000/month.

Not per account. Also the point is you then need 5000 methods of payment, making correlation between accounts trivial.

Re: X/Twitter will begin charging new users $1 a year to access key features

#110

Post by mvdtnz »

rewmie wrote: post #36
Eji1700 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly seconded. Another upside is this really does put a much larger cost to bots and problem accounts. Even $1 a year is a big deal if you've got an army of 5000 bot accounts (something pretty trivial in this environment). I'm all for things like Kagi doing this RIGHT and supposedly not selling all my data, but I've argued that companies like twitter charging for access is the path to a healthier environment. Oh an…

> Even $1 a year is a big deal if you've got an army of 5000 bot accounts (something pretty trivial in this environment). I think this belief is highly misguided. Whoever is in the business of managing bot farms comprised of thousands of bots is certainly monetizing them for way more than $5000/month.

That $5,000/mo is 5,000 payment transactions that need to come from somewhere. People running illegal or shady activities are not super fond of leaving their fingerprints all over payment gateways (this is the entire reason cryptocurrencies exist). Even if they're not doing anything illegal, they are certainly violating the TOS and tracking down fresh credit cards each time one of their accounts gets banned presents a significant logistical problem.
Post reply on HN