Twitter never sounded like a great idea to me. Years went by and I finally made an effort in the last few months to get on it so I could follow political tweets. I found that it sucked in all the ways I thought it would suck. When you find a good tweet, you get to enjoy reading it for a few seconds, but it leaves you empty and searching for another one.
I think there's a general feeling that Twitter has not much growth potential and it's slowly becoming obsolete.
If it's filling up with bots, that strikes me as a sign of decay.
Re:Up to 48M Twitter accounts may be bots
by patgenzler on Saturday March 11, 2017 @05:13PM
(#13847547)
Unfortunately no. When a social platform becomes "big" as in, reaches early majority, spam finds a way in. No algorithm can stop it. Quantity kills quality. The "sophisticated" early adopters lose it.
Look around. People will do whatever it takes to get to "front page", "top stories", and such.
Medium obsesses about quality, but their top stories, fueled by recommendations from "the common man", are full of junk. Same with LinkedIn. Twitter. Facebook.
HackerNews is saved simply because it's small.
Re:Up to 48M Twitter accounts may be bots
by owenmarshall on Saturday March 11, 2017 @08:54PM
(#13848445)
> HackerNews is saved simply because it's small.
lol
Does buying 5k followers really help in any way? Won't the more sophisticated users (ideally those whom you'd be targeting as followers) see through this based on your engagement rates, or does having a certain number of followers hold some weight with the algos which leads to your stuff attracting more engagement, followers, etc. in some kind of virtuous cycle?