https://fortune.com/2023/10/17/twitter-x-charging-new-users-1-dollar-year-to-tweet/ there ya go. Not about killing bots. About deanonymizing people. Usually when you pay for stuff, no ads. On Twitter, you still get ads, because those ads are worth more to a deanonymized person, which will be more people soon.

nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx (was right)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Exactly. It is purely about deanonymization

I’m still there for now. But the day this happens I’m gone.

I feel the same gut-level reaction. Still, the quality of the platform could improve dramatically if bots and spam is filtered out like that.

I don’t care. I am more comfortable spotting scam bots than creating an avenue to be pursued at my home or place of work over my comments there. We all know that, the moment a channel that steps on ANY political or social issue crosses a certain threshold of notoriety, the DOXXing and other issues explode. Look no further than libs of ticktok—who by that point NEVER even put her own WORDS to content and SOLELY compiled other people making asses of themselves of their own accord—getting doxxed by a journalist of a major newspaper and being forced to come public.

Yep, I feel similarly about self-doxxing. Such a policy would likely increase usage of Nostr

I’m here for it if it does. At this point, I’m not interested in adopting ANY new apps that aren’t similarly permissionless.