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

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#801

Post by habitue »

ForHackernews wrote: post #710
jltsiren wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is basically a broadcast platform for people who matter "in the real world". It gives them an easy way to reach their audience on their own terms without any middlemen. As a centralized platform, Twitter creates more value for those who follow than those who broadcast. Because the broadcasters are primarily known for something other than the "content" they create on the platform, they would find their audienc…

> on their own terms without any middlemen. Twitter is the middle-man.

Technically true, but I think the comment you're replying to was thinking of the era when celebrities had to go on late night shows in order for people to hear what they had to say. Like literally, the middle man had limited airtime and got to pick and choose who was allowed to be broadcast.

If you had some opinions on the latest whatever, if no television station felt like interviewing you, you just told it to your friends or whatever like everybody else. No matter how famous you were.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#802

Post by mecha_ghidorah »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #791
mecha_ghidorah wrote: post #750

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine a new form of news and communication that solves all of our social woes, allows people to be informed, and have constructive discourse. I did imagine that happening once - I imagined the internet would lead to that. The state of things now is very different from what the me of 15 years ago imagined, in part because of things like twitter in fact. I now believe that social woes have significant parts that ar…

I don't think the communication problems are inherent to the internet but I'm sympathetic to your greater point. I think the gamification of communication on the Internet is one of the worst inventions, feeding into a lot of very negative neural architecture. Encourages people to seek quick validation from there like-minded peers, and encourages a sense of superiority people can only get from knocking down strawman.…

I don't think the problems are inherent to the internet... sadly I think they are inherent to human beings.

Twitter by design exacerbates a lot of these problems though IMO. Character limits, the way replies work and things are displayed such as to make any particularly active comment section practically impossible to follow, etc

EDIT: I do actually genuinely hope that Twitter dies, but I am scared that is a monkey paw where whatever the next thing happens to be it ends up being worse

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#804

Post by assttoasstmgr »

paxys wrote: post #322
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…

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…

Gonna disagree with you here.

Musk is only doing with Twitter what Fark.com did over 20 years ago with TotalFark - you pay a small monthly fee for admission, and you get a shiny badge next to your username, along with a few perks.

Just like Something Awful forums did before that - paid admission - it's an excellent tool to weed out the obvious bots and low effort trolls.

Twitter has no "creators" - it's just a fancy message board.

Everything old is new again. The Gen-Z kids on Twitter and TikTok were still pooping in diapers when these sites ruled the Internet, and now have sadly been relegated to a dusty corner thereof.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#805

Post by abledon »

rtpg wrote: post #594
pkaye wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why is he able to get smart people around him? Its not like he pays them a lot or offer a good work/life balance in their job.

Mission, and there are a lot of smart people in the world. Also, some people identify with him because he acts completely the same as That One Guy in the university who had studied programming before getting to the CS classes. I think that a lot of people also don't have to directly work with him, and there are a lot of assholes running companies. That being said, Musk's behavior personally turned me off from all of…

>he acts completely the same as That One Guy in the university who had studied programming before getting to the CS classes.

I don't get this reference, how does a person like that act in uni?

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#806

Post by FooBarWidget »

paxys wrote: post #322
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…

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…

> So you really want to instead do the exact opposite – ask the consumers to pay and fund your creators with that money

This sounds like "pay to follow" (or at least "please donate X monthly to your favorite creators" ala Patreon).

I think to most Twitter users, content has a value of €0. If you ask users to pay then they'd rather switch to another free creator, or not use Twitter at all.

If users see any value in creators at all, that'll be having interacted with creators for a long time and having developed a deep connection. Or if creators started publishing "premium content" that's obviously worth in.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#807

Post by eozoon »

AOsborn wrote: post #731
tptacek wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is not greatly increasing Stephen King's reach.

Anecdotally this isn't true. The only time I have heard anything about Stephen King in the past few years has been in relation to a tweet he has made. I think this is true for many significant accounts on the platform: I'm not going to read their blog or watch their Youtube video, but I'll probably see someone resharing a tweet they have made, whether on Reddit, HN, a news website etc. Which is where I see the huge v…

People who have not heard of King before Twitter and only hear of him from Twitter are not going to be the people buying his books.

So even if there were significant amount of people like you, he is not gaining anything from people seeing his Twitter. On the other hand, I have relatives who created Twitter accounts only to follow authors they like - the number of curated lists of notable literary figures is a testament to that fact.

I'm not saying Twitter is worthless to writers - readers talking about the books certainly helps sales, but that occurs regardless of whether the author themselves are on Twitter or not, and Twitter is certainly not the main platform people use to discuss books.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#808

Post by MisterSandman »

minhazm wrote: post #595
paxys wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Unclear why this is getting downvoted, it is accurate statement. Only 20 of the top 50 channels are not brands. Of those 20 if you exclude music channels like BTS, Blackpink, Justin Bieber, etc. you're only left with 10 channels.

Justin Bieber literally got his start from YouTube. BTS and Black pink would also not be as popular as they are without YouTube.

The original comment was a bit miseleading, but you have to admit that there is no equivalent to Pewdiepie on Twitter.

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#809

Post by didip »

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!

4chan doesn’t exist anymore?

Re: Twitter Blue for $8/Month

#810

Post by jonny_eh »

411111111111111 wrote: post #164
codemac wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, thank you. I was going to say - $8/mo per US user would be a failing ad business.

YouTube is 13€ for ad-free and they're actually hosting videos (High bandwidth) AND share over 50% of this with the content creators. $8 is a lot - relatively speaking.

and includes YouTube Music.
Post reply on HN