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

Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

endpts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 222 posts

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#201

Post by regpertom »

freejazz wrote: post #197
regpertom wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given a list of all twitter bans, there would surely be many that we would both agree are obvious parodies. So, obvious is relative, or, a grey area/high weasel potential area to do what you want. So it’s not obvious that anything has changed there either. That’s besides the point though that, while widely reported and repeated, Musk, as far as I’m aware, did not institute the rule about impersonation.

If you seriously think that Nintendo would tweet a picture of Mario "flipping the bird", you don't come across as a neutral arbiter, you come across as someone ridiculous.

Rather confusing thing to try and pin on me. Could you elaborate on how I’ve caused you to think that?

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#202

Post by scotty79 »

partiallypro wrote: post #66
scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

Unverified accounts provide most of the good content on Twitter, so I think you're wrong there. What should have happened is you do have an $8 (I think $8 is too much, but alas) verification, but you simply make the badge different. Some people say that defeats the purpose, but it doesn't. You then know you are talking to someone with a vested interest, and since credit cards are now linked to the account you can do…

> Unverified accounts provide most of the good content on Twitter,

I don't think good content is the core value of twitter. In my perception value of twitter is who said what. Good or bad.

I don't use twitter and have contact with twitter only when it's cited elsewhere and bulk of most popular citations are mostly not "here's interesting thought someone had on twitter" but rather "this celebrity/politician/office tweeted that".

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#203

Post by theshrike79 »

sangnoir wrote: post #142
theshrike79 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing they had to do was have someone's nephew draw a different symbol for the $8 tier and use that instead of the very well known Verified badge. That's it. This whole debacle would've been instantly avoided.

True, but who wants the dollar-store version if the verification mark? Twitter is/was selling the prestige of the badge and what it represents to some, specifically "I am a notable individual". Any other symbol would only mean "I paid $8 for this", and my guess is that isn't quite as compelling.

Then take the old blue mark and make it ... green like the money you paid for it? :)

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#204

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

It's really a bit surprising that noone told him that his tweets are worth anything only because people reading them can know they come from Elon not some guy who paid 8$ to call himself Elon on Twitter.

How was that not obvious? The current situation Twitter is in is the most naive prediction. If Mr. Musk needed someone to point this out to him and ask why it wouldn't go down this way, I'm not sure what to say. Hell, a bunch of comedians actually pointed this out by changing their names and avatars to Elon Musk and impersonating him. Elon banned them. It really should have clicked at this point.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#205

Post by Gordonjcp »

scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

> suggested changes that would make very valuable features removed or made less easily accessible while bringing to the front features that are not very useful

I see this a lot in redesigns, and it's always "oh people aren't using this thing that I think they should, it must be because they don't know about it" and not "it must not be what they want".

It's like that thing that people do when they come into the room and say "oh why are you sitting in the dark" and switch on the lights, without stopping to check why you're sitting in the dark. I know how to switch on a light, it's just that right now I'm loading a camera.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#206

Post by isitmadeofglass »

So I guess Elon ends up winning by instantly showing how much damage he can wreck against big organizations if they don’t pay him huge sums to “advertise” essentially internet anarchy protection money. And I’m sure how bigger companies are paying up they’ll do actual verification before anyone else gets to go out with a blue checkmark claiming to be Eli Lilly…

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#207

Post by cactusplant7374 »

scotty79 wrote: post #7

It's super funny that identity verification of authors of things published was basically more than half of the value twitter provided to its users, both readers and writers and the first thing Elon did was to destroy it. Just to replace it with what he calls "payment verified", which basically means you have 8$ and means to send it to twitter. Which apparently is worth less than nothing. It kind of reminds me how a w…

Is anyone really fooled by fake profiles? I thought twitter verification is a way to get boosted by the algo? I see many influencers with less than 10k followers that are verified. Who is going to impersonate them? No one.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#208

Post by cactusplant7374 »

oceanplexian wrote: post #69
labrador wrote: post #18

My theory is that when people who lean right are complaining about a "woke agenda" at Twitter they are complaining mostly about trans activism. Since Eli Lilly is trans friendly, I wouldn't be sure that Musk is unhappy they are leaving his platform. Corporate Equality Index: List of Businesses with Transgender-Inclusive Health Insurance Benefits https://www.thehrcfoundation.org/professional-resources/corp... Elon Mus…

> My theory is that when people who lean right are complaining about a "woke agenda" at Twitter they are complaining mostly about trans activism. Twitter shouldn't ban people on behalf of a corporation; it has nothing to do with "woke" or not "woke". This is a problem with all media, advertising groups have formed mobs that intimidate organizations like Twitter, and other media outlets that don't give in to their cor…

> A world where groups of corporations control free speech through collective intimidation is literally a dystopian science fiction trope. So IMHO, it doesn't matter where you lean politically, screw Eli Lilly and others like them.

And a world where Eli Lilly is forced to advertise on Twitter is totalitarian. Their only agenda in this instance is not supporting fake news. They should be applauded.

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#209

Post by toss1 »

scotty79 wrote: post #177
toss1 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> he really didn't understand what's most valuable part and took it for granted. This is particularly surprising to me also, for a different reason. Since Musk was a key player at PayPal, he should have learned that although the vast majority of users are well-intentioned and harmless, there are a small group of scammers and criminal who MUST be dealt with or they will rapidly bankrupt you. On Twitter, we must add t…

> Since Musk was a key player at PayPal That's mostly a legend. In actuality he took some part in some company that got bought by another company which eventually became PayPal.

Although, especially since he still made significant fortune from it, it still seems sufficient exposure to at least understand the concept of a minority of scammers & criminals who must be identified & shut off in real time (maybe even more exposure if he came up through two precursor companies).

Heck, it is something that is already obvious to everyone here, and most of us were never employed in banking or payments operations...

Re: Eli Lilly pulls millions in Twitter advertising after fake account debacle

#210

Post by freejazz »

regpertom wrote: post #201
freejazz wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you seriously think that Nintendo would tweet a picture of Mario "flipping the bird", you don't come across as a neutral arbiter, you come across as someone ridiculous.

Rather confusing thing to try and pin on me. Could you elaborate on how I’ve caused you to think that?

Well you seemed to do everything but acknowledge that the Nintendoofus context was obvious parody, so what else are we to think?
Post reply on HN