Live data from Hacker News

Twitter Blue for $8/Month

twitter.com

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#651
post #454

Elon is the PM from hell. Has some shower thought and starts throwing tickets on everyone's board 45 minutes later. This is why the Model X has those silly doors.

I'll take those silly doors any day over some designed-by-committe boring car. Like stupid bean-shaped electric Mercedes for example.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#652
post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"biases towards those with means rather than those contributing to the conversation" I'm not sure this is a bad thing. If you are a user who actively contributes to the conversation and get's value out of being in that conversation, then it's likely you derive enough value to pay $8. The difference however is that now your contribution is more likely to be seen. You might even engage more now. If you aren't that user…

Nah. Basically, who will loose are topical experts who tweeted about what they knew well about. Layers tweeting about law, developers tweeting about frameworks, academics tweeting about crypto, viruses, history. These wont pay and will be less visible. Who will pay will be grifters and ideologues.

These topical experts as you put it, make more than $8/month today from their engaged audiences. What Twitter should do is build better engagement tools for them and then monetize that at much more than $8/month.

You think Stephen King, who is worth $500m, is going to drop Twitter for $96/year. That tweet itself was him doing a good job of using that platform (twitter) and his audience to get some free exposure.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#653
post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He wasn't haggling. He was mocking the blue check status symbol in King's face and audience. $8 makes it cheaper than a Netflix subscription for something that previously exclusive and had no dollar value attached to it. It was literally unbuyable.

We're not really discussing reality if you believe that Stephen King gets status from the blue check rather than it working the other way around. There are people that do (sadly, pathetically) extract status from blue checkmarks, but they're only able to do that because people like Stephen King play ball with this system. The "blue checkmark status" could literally be phrased as "people as high-status as Stephen King…

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#654
post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stephen King’s tweet on that topic, to summarize: “ $20 a month to keep my blue check? Fuck that, they should pay me. If that gets instituted, I’m gone like Enron.” https://twitter.com/stephenking/status/1587042605627490304?s...

The idea that someone who is addicted to Twitter and worth $500M would leave because they lose their special Blue Check over $20 is hilarious. He's just butt hurt because the VIP room and symbol is being opened to the proles. Now any schlub with $8 can have the once exclusive symbol.

> Now any schlub with $8 can have the once exclusive symbol.

And as a consequence, it is not worth the $8. King's analysis is correct.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#655
post #454

Elon is the PM from hell. Has some shower thought and starts throwing tickets on everyone's board 45 minutes later. This is why the Model X has those silly doors.

How do you reconcile that view with Elon's successful ventures, e.g. the other Tesla's, Starlink, and SpaceX?

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stephen King’s tweet on that topic, to summarize: “ $20 a month to keep my blue check? Fuck that, they should pay me. If that gets instituted, I’m gone like Enron.” https://twitter.com/stephenking/status/1587042605627490304?s...

> they should pay me ...why? As someone who doesn't use Twitter, remarks like this have left me very confused. Clearly these people found Twitter valuable before. Does not having the checkmark make it less valuable? Is there an alternative service that provides similar value? The blue checkmark is a service. Now they want money to continue that service. If you don't want it, don't pay for it. Leaving over concerns ab…

> ...why?

Because the content on Twitter is generated by a relatively small number of users. A lot never tweet, quote tweet or retweet but it goes beyond that number once you weight it by audience. A small number of people have a large amount of reach and thus are responsible for a good chunk of the content.

That content is why the users are on Twitter and it is those users who are advertised to that pay for Twitter to exist. That's what Stephen King means.

Now you can turn this around and say that those power users are only there because the audience is and that they get value for being there but platforms need users and users follow creators more than the platform as a general rule.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stephen King’s tweet on that topic, to summarize: “ $20 a month to keep my blue check? Fuck that, they should pay me. If that gets instituted, I’m gone like Enron.” https://twitter.com/stephenking/status/1587042605627490304?s...

> they should pay me ...why? As someone who doesn't use Twitter, remarks like this have left me very confused. Clearly these people found Twitter valuable before. Does not having the checkmark make it less valuable? Is there an alternative service that provides similar value? The blue checkmark is a service. Now they want money to continue that service. If you don't want it, don't pay for it. Leaving over concerns ab…

It seems rather symbiotic to me. twitter has nothing to offer without people of note. People of note use it to become more popular. I think generally people of note don't need twitter to be successful but twitter needs them

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#658
So two things about this: (1) Twitter verification was started as a way to dodge lawsuits about people registering fake Twitter accounts.[1] Verified Twitter was a way to ensure you couldn't register yourself as "realLocalPolitician" and be mistaken in a way which made Twitter liable.

So turning it into a paid-for service puts Twitter in a weird spot, where they can probably be sued again about this because "verified only if you pay" is alternatively interpretable as a shakedown racket - and Twitter knowingly allowing people to misrepresent their identity to defame people makes Twitter liable again.

But (2): this just isn't worth any money to anyone. There just aren't that many people for whom Twitter-verified is a worthwhile expense. Word-of-mouth verifies accounts easily, and once everyone knows @nyTimes is the New York Times official account or whatever, then its entirely unlike something like TLS where the process provides an active component in validating or securing the content or link. Optimistically this is worth like USD$30 million a year to Twitter...out of about USD$5.5 billion of year-over-year revenues. Or about 47 hours of revenue.

[1] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/ton...

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not really discussing reality if you believe that Stephen King gets status from the blue check rather than it working the other way around. There are people that do (sadly, pathetically) extract status from blue checkmarks, but they're only able to do that because people like Stephen King play ball with this system. The "blue checkmark status" could literally be phrased as "people as high-status as Stephen King…

Quoted post unavailable.

No. His last major film, from 2019, had the second-highest opening weekend of any horror film in history. His work might not be relevant to you (it's not especially relevant to me), but we're back in motivated unreality when we start talking about him being culturally irrelevant, or that "nobody knows he's still alive".

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#660

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…

Personally, I'd be more than willing to pay $8/mo for Twitter if it meant no more ads and helped the company become profitable from something besides ads. I have YouTube Premium for those exact reasons. I hate what the attention economy has done to user experience, and if paying for Twitter gave me a significantly better user experience, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Post reply on HN