Earlier quoted context omitted.
...so TikTok is less dumped on?
I assume it was when it was newer, as they all were.
Hacker compromises A16Z-backed phone farm, calling them the 'antichrist'
51–54 of 54 posts
Re: Hacker compromises A16Z-backed phone farm, calling them the 'antichrist'
#52If this is the kind of thing you can do in the open as a "reputable" company with VC investment, I can only imagine the kind of horrific industrial-scale social media spam+slop botnets for hire that exist less publicly.
Re: Hacker compromises A16Z-backed phone farm, calling them the 'antichrist'
#53* Andreessen Horowitz - scammers. * Y Combinator - vibe coders. Are there any respectable VC tech companies out there in 2026?
Re: Hacker compromises A16Z-backed phone farm, calling them the 'antichrist'
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume it was when it was newer, as they all were.
It might still be. It's not so much about the quality of the content as you or I would judge it, it's the authenticity.
I have a hypothesis that network effects kick in for social interaction before they do for monetisation, which is why the advertisers/influencers/propagandists/scammers(/trolls, though this is different) are in a constant state of hunting down and infesting whatever platform good-faith users have most recently fled them too. Part of it is likely that smaller communities are more robust and have an easier time identifying and repelling smaller-scale incursions, but I suspect a big part is that smaller communities simply aren't worth the investment of larger incursions, especially since they'll more easily be ruined before any real payout.
Anyway, I agree with you that "quality" (as in effort and craft) is lower on the list of factors than authenticity, which makes complete sense. There was a time when a well-crafted ad was worthy of note, but ads have been so sneaky and pervasive that I think many people are desperate to have a spontaneous interaction or experience that's not trying to sell them anything.