Aaron Thomas wrote to All <=-
I made an account on x.com. I posted stuff, but nobody can see my
posts. There was a message when I signed up that said the equivalent of "Your posts won't be seen by anyone because for all we know you might
be a bot."
So I post stuff, but for what? Nobody sees my posts. It's not like a
BBS, and maybe it's even worse than Facebook.
However, there's the elite. Posts from the elite are being seen. Even
the elite that I respect like Megyn Kelly, I can see her posts.
But me? Nobody can see my posts on x.com. I guess I better go back to elitist school?
They have a big problem on X with bots inflating numbers. I swear I
have to block at least 5 obvious bots "following" me every week.
Lunduke did some good videos about this (ex: https://rumble.com/v6zjkny-is-mainstream-tech-news-dead.html) recently.
However, there's the elite. Posts from the elite are being seen. Even the elite that I respect like Megyn Kelly, I can see her posts.
That's because they have verified themselves to X. Usually by paying a monthly fee that's associated with a credit card.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
I get it now. So it's sort of a contest. The more people who follow
you, the more visibility you get, and the more valuable you are to advertisers. It makes sense, but I just don't like that system.
I appreciate you explaining all this. You're great at explaining things
in a straightforward way. But doesn't it seem wrong for a great person like Megyn Kelly to have to pay to be heard?
Online, too many people have workable ad blockers. Then there's the
whole bot problem that inflates eyeball count.
I think that we are moving toward a pay-for-play set up now on the Internet. No more free services (or free, but you are very restricted).
I appreciate you explaining all this. You're great at explaining thin in a straightforward way. But doesn't it seem wrong for a great perso like Megyn Kelly to have to pay to be heard?
The alternative is a bunch of fakes claiming to be Megyn Kelly wanting
you to hear them.
Aaron Thomas wrote to Dr. What <=-
I don't have all the answers, but I don't understand how a big company like X couldn't use agent-detection to block all headless browsers,
with exceptions for legitimate ones. I'm probably overlooking
something, but sometimes these big tech companies lie about things to
get their way. For example: "Due to too much spam and bot activity, the only trusted email providers are Google and Microsoft."
This reminds me of my prior paragraph; "Due to bots and impostors, Facebook now has no choice but to charge $5 per month to safeguard the platform." The kind of people who they want on their platform will walk right into that.
How does the verification work? Do they look at your photo ID? To me, that's the only way it could work. But they'd need to have access to government databases to check if the ID is legit.
Sysop: | Coz |
---|---|
Location: | Anoka, MN |
Users: | 2 |
Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
Uptime: | 73:44:06 |
Calls: | 359 |
Files: | 6,267 |
Messages: | 235,597 |