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

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#431

Post by Dma54rhs »

baby wrote: post #211
thorum wrote: post #24

Blue checkmarks are not just about verification and extra features. They’re a status symbol. They mean you are cool and notable enough to deserve one according the shadowy and mysterious Twitter checkmark committee. If they become a commodity that anyone with a little money can buy, they lose a big part of their appeal to the average person.

I mean so is the Github "pro" badge. You don't need it if all you're using are free features. And yet a lot of people buy it to showcase support or have that "cool" badge. If the same happens for twitter then good for them no? They get more funding to develop cool shit.

Do people really do that on github? Im curious where you have noticed it or similar behaviour. I know the GitHub stars being a status symbol for dinner but never noticed badge idea.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#432

Post by nothatscool »

I think changing the verification badge into something actually useful instead of a status symbol is a good thing. If there is a great exodus of Twitter influencers and it starts to affect traffic, then twitter can just add some kind of notability mark to high profile accounts.

Edit: They already plan to add a tag for public figures.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#433

Post by threatofrain »

koonsolo wrote: post #415
paxys wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the core problem with this approach. Elon and others have the idea in their head that Twitter is a social graph where people come to interact with each other, and everyone is relatively equal. So every user paying $X/mo to solidify their place in the graph makes some conceptual sense. In reality Twitter is more akin to YouTube than Facebook. A tiny percentage of users are creators while the vast majority are c…

> In reality Twitter is more akin to YouTube than Facebook. There is a very big difference between Twitter and YouTube, and it's obvious once you know it. Look at the most popular people on twitter: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitte... All celebrities outside of twitter. Then look at YouTube: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-subscribed_YouT... Almost all made famous by YouTube.…

There's not enough "room" to produce interesting content solely on Twitter vs YouTube — you have to hiccup out your value in segmented tweet threads. Thus if Twitter does provide value to followers it is in referencing outside material. Elon is supposedly directing Twitter engineers to go full-steam on reviving Vine so we'll see if that can turn things around.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#434

Post by paxys »

koonsolo wrote: post #415
paxys wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the core problem with this approach. Elon and others have the idea in their head that Twitter is a social graph where people come to interact with each other, and everyone is relatively equal. So every user paying $X/mo to solidify their place in the graph makes some conceptual sense. In reality Twitter is more akin to YouTube than Facebook. A tiny percentage of users are creators while the vast majority are c…

> In reality Twitter is more akin to YouTube than Facebook. There is a very big difference between Twitter and YouTube, and it's obvious once you know it. Look at the most popular people on twitter: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitte... All celebrities outside of twitter. Then look at YouTube: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-subscribed_YouT... Almost all made famous by YouTube.…

> Then look at YouTube: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-subscribed_YouT...

> Almost all made famous by YouTube.

I looked the top 50 in that list and maybe ~5 of them are what you describe. The rest are big music labels, TV channels, artists and other such independently popular figures, not very different from Twitter.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#436

Post by freejazz »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #414
freejazz wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's business, good faith isn't really the issue... this isn't your neighbor asking for some eggs.... >"Burning Twitter to the ground seems quite counterproductive" Good faith or not, it doesn't mean someone can't be misguided. which is why I asked, who cares about their faith??

Because I am not a heavy enough Twitter user for this to affect me at all, so I'm just curious to see if Musk's gamble works. He's gambling that the network effect is as important for Verified users as it is for non-Verified users, which is not a bet most other creator-based social media sites have made. Judging by the number/temperature of comments you've made about this topic over the last two days, I think you're…

I'm not a twitter user either, I'm not sure what that has to do with viewing Musk's actions as either being good or bad faith. That seems like a limiting and bizarre way to view things. Similarly, I didn't accuse you of being inappropriately emotionally invested... I'm more fascinated that people see someone doing something wildly illogical and then say to themselves, "well it's Musk, he must have his reasons"... yeah, I'm sure he has his reasons. That doesn't mean they are good and I have no idea why anyone would assume so given how all of this transpired.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#437

Post by throwaway04923 »

What is this going to solve? Blue checkmarks was intended to find the real public person instead of thousand scammers. If it now means that you have paid for account, then what is the point?

This is not going to help their finances either. Someone [1] did a calculation:

"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/jamesrbuk/status/1587381512500125699

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#438

Post by serf »

power to the people... for only 8 dollars a month!

is anyone sick of this salesman shtick? it's even more egregious when used as some form of crusade for the people.

let's be clear here, the 8 dollars a month is the motivation. He doesn't give two-shits about any moral sense of right or wrong or the well-being people that used the service.

he'd be more respectable/relatable if he had said "It's 8 bucks a month because I need to pay back the loans."

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#439

Post by encryptluks2 »

enumjorge wrote: post #395
dan-robertson wrote: post #285

The dynamics on Twitter are quite weird. There’s a small number of users with potentially lots of followers for whom Twitter is an important part of their work or life. If you’re a journalist, being on Twitter is basically part of your job so maybe you should have to pay a bit more just like the customer of some business software ($100 pa seems pretty cheap there). Indeed maybe media publications should be paying for…

To your point here's a tweet from Stephen King that was making the rounds where he protests the idea that he should be paying Twitter instead of the reverse: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1587312517679878144

And I agree with Stephen King. YouTube rewards content creators and provides a strong platform for creators to market themselves. Twitter provides a platform for brain farts and now they want to charge for a blue checkmark. I guess Musk believes if people are stupid enough to believe in his lies before that they'll be stupid enough to pay for a blue checkmark.

Wait until you see how they begin marketing the subscription.. it will be ridiculous. Might as well be trying to sell snake oil.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#440

Post by [deleted] »

matwood wrote: post #412
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.

> you can read and respond freely Sure, but I hope as mainly a reader of Twitter this change comes along with a box I can check that says 'only show Tweets from people I follow and those who are verified'. Overnight, most of my bot issues are fixed. And, any people I don't want to hear from again are easily blocked.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN