News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:'A place of joy': why scientists are joining the rush to ... by slater on Sunday November 24, 2024 @12:04AM (#42226009)
Make 'em pay for a user account, even a one-off $5 per account should suffice
Re:'A place of joy': why scientists are joining the rush to ... by petre on Sunday November 24, 2024 @12:32AM (#42226105)
What stops political campaign money from funding accounts and bots?
Re:'A place of joy': why scientists are joining the rush to ... by tim333 on Sunday November 24, 2024 @07:25AM (#42227586)
$5 is enough for a human to glance at the feed and mute it if it seems bad. The trouble with $0 is you can create a million bots and no one has time to look at them.

I wouldn't mind something like that. When I joined Whatsapp it cost $1 for life and I thought that was a good system. Sadly it's gone, replaced by free but ad funded.

Re:'A place of joy': why scientists are joining the rush to ... by Philpax on Sunday November 24, 2024 @07:24AM (#42227584)
The bots pay monthly for a blue checkmark so that they're promoted to the top of the replies. A small cost does not appear to have been a meaningful disincentive, especially when scammers can easily make that money back and political operatives can easily bankroll that.
Re:'A place of joy': why scientists are joining the rush to ... by slater on Sunday November 24, 2024 @11:33AM (#42228735)
Ah, well… y’see that’s where heavy moderation and bans would come in to play, and uhhh…