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

Twitter Blue for $8/Month

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#301

Post by type-r »

morsch wrote: post #266
danpalmer wrote: post #14

The good: Twitter should not be editorally curating people through verification, making verification only about ID and being a real person is a broadly good change, as long as it's not necessary for participation. Brands, celebrities, those in the public eye could benefit from this. Needs to be implemented with care and ideally with a branding change so as not to confuse users as the semantics change. The bad: $8 is…

Virtually all streaming services still have ads at the paid tier: sponsored content in YouTube videos, product placement everywhere, athletes that are living billboards.

SponsorBlock is key for YouTube

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#302

Post by AtNightWeCode »

I have zero doubt that EM will bring Twitter to a better place. I mean, this is the platform where basic image upload was broken for 10+ years. How can that not be the top task in the backlog? I can answer that right away. Tech people focus on tech.

I think cost might be a problem with Blue. I mean, I collect domain names for fun. I don't think Twitter can provide the right tools to guard against false blue account claims.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#303

Post by TeMPOraL »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #204
drawfloat wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not a higher barrier to entry – you can read and respond freely. It's a higher barrier to having a good experience, which I can't think of many successful examples of to be honest.

Every commercial product and service is an example of that.

Yup. I'm gonna keep drumming this up: most markets today are supplier-driven. The "barrier to having a good experience" gets higher, and the experience gets worse, and there's shit all you can do about it, because you're only able to choose out of what's on the market, and the market isn't serving lower barrier / better experience options it did a month, year or decade ago.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#304

Post by lupire »

mattgreenrocks wrote: post #255
suoduandao2 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I was just listening to Naval Ravikant talking about it being better to seek wealth than status, because the latter is a zero-sum game. hard to unsee that dynamic once it's pointed out.

This is very astute, but I can't help wonder why people worry so much about their status on the bird website. Actually doing/making things in real life is pretty much guaranteed to have a much higher return in multiple dimensions (incl. status) than pretending like what happens there matters. It doesn't have to be either/or: make something cool, throw out a link to it, repeat.

The only reason things matter is because they lead to status. Skipping the matter is an efficient solution to gaining status.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#305

Post by LastTrain »

memish wrote: post #202

A lot of people aren't groking what this means, even on tech and startup savvy HN. Naval and Balaji said it well: Charging for the blue check moves it from a status symbol to a utilitarian one. It elicits shrieks because it’s more about leveling the playing field than making money. https://twitter.com/naval/status/1587523978456748033 The blue checks wanted to abolish billionaires, in the name of equality. The billion…

Except famous people now get a verified tag, rendering most of what you said moot. This is a bad idea, it will fail, and Musk will make like he never said it. If you don’t think so, just imagine yourself paying Facebook for a checkmark and see if that feels right.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#306

Post by lupire »

suoduandao2 wrote: post #232
memish wrote: post #202

A lot of people aren't groking what this means, even on tech and startup savvy HN. Naval and Balaji said it well: Charging for the blue check moves it from a status symbol to a utilitarian one. It elicits shrieks because it’s more about leveling the playing field than making money. https://twitter.com/naval/status/1587523978456748033 The blue checks wanted to abolish billionaires, in the name of equality. The billion…

Funny, I was just listening to Naval Ravikant talking about it being better to seek wealth than status, because the latter is a zero-sum game. hard to unsee that dynamic once it's pointed out.

After subsistence, wealth doesn't provide value except as a way to buy status.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#307

Post by __tmk__ »

trh0awayman wrote: post #146

I would pay $10 a month for Twitter Black - it would block everyone with Twitter Blue and you get to interact with the dregs, the most controversial figures of all of Twitter, based on most reports/blocks/flags, etc. (minus the bots, crypto stuff). That's the real town square. Let me sleep in the gutter!

Most of that will be crypto spam though...

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#308

Post by watwut »

danpalmer wrote: post #36
michaelmior wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> See: every streaming service. Plenty of streaming services have ad-supported versions that are in this price range (e.g. Hulu, HBO Max). I don't disagree that having ads at all on Twitter Blue is bad, but I'm not sure the comparison with streaming services works.

Fair enough. Neither are available in the UK. My thinking was based on YouTube Premium, Apple TV, Netflix (currently), 4oD, Disney+, etc.

I dont think twitter is anywhere near Netflix or even youtube premium in terms of what it provides. And I am saying it as someone who do actually uses twitter (unlike half of HN who claims to never use it).

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#309

Post by lupire »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #288
meragrin_ wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At $8/month, that's patently not true. Who needs one that cannot afford $8/month? Does anyone really need it? > Why should verification be anything other than a pay-once deal, if it has to be paid for at all? It is not just verification though. Verification is just part of the subscription.

> Who needs one that cannot afford $8/month? Does anyone really need it? A lot of freelance writers, in my experience. > It is not just verification though. Verification is just part of the subscription. That's a fair point, but why not make verification free (or a one-off payment) and remove it from the subscription feature package?

What happens if you freelance write without a blue check?

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#310

Post by LastTrain »

memish wrote: post #243
res0nat0r wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some better takes on this from what I've seen: https://twitter.com/jamesrbuk/status/1587381512500125699 > If one in five current blue ticks paid $20 a month that would raise just under $15 million a year for Twitter…Twitter’s current revenues (mostly from ads) are $5 billion a year. Musk’s apparent plan would generate about 30 hours’ worth of annual revenue. https://twitter.com/ashtonpittman/status/158750920240192716…

"It elicits shrieks because it’s more about leveling the playing field than making money."

You already said that. Leveling the playfield would be having no distinguishing marks at all.
Post reply on HN