Probably it won't always be ID since companies can also verify and they wouldn't have ID for a company
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
Probably it won't always be ID since companies can also verify and they wouldn't have ID for a company
Some features have already been announced (higher prominence in replies, more visibility etc..) and already posted in this thread, you can go back and scroll or read Elon's tweets or the press coverage if you like.
It's not clear you do need to show ID, it's initially rolling out on iOS and will use your apple ID, I guess this could change in the future though the immediate tougher penalty for breaking impersonation rules make it a more costly endeavour at least. Currently, impersonation impacts more than just the blue checkmark accounts and in the case of the non-checkmark accounts it's super easy.
Twitter begins advertising a paid verification plan for $8 per month
Twitter is advertising a new paid feature: receiving a blue check mark noting account verification. The company is delaying launch until after midterm elections over misinformation fears.
www.npr.org
The current system is a bit of a mess, he's proposing this to solve it, it removes the value of the blue checkmark as a status symbol but opens up broader access too it as there are clearly features there that other people (including big accounts currently without one) would like to have.
Last edited:
Hey look dLockers, perfect score.
Refuses to give an honest answer of this value he vaguely attributed in the same post he was rubbishing its value. And completely hides from the value of verification which is being transformed to be another word for having $8 to spend.
Seems he's quite keen to stamp out the impersonators:
Eh? I've already discussed the very thing you're asking about in this thread as I already pointed out.
Where was I rubbishing its value in that context?
Do you not think the increased visibility of tweets/replies has value for example?
Eh? I've already discussed the very thing you're asking about in this thread as I already pointed out.
Where was I rubbishing its value in that context?
Do you not think the increased visibility of tweets/replies has value for example?
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
Elon Musk is going to be rolling in it. All those Blue ticked verifications that get banned over and over and over.
Perfect money stream.
Perfect money stream.
Soldato
Yes yes its against the rules.
They aren't really impersonanting him, they are mocking him. A true impersonation is opening an account @eIonmusk or @el0nmusk etc. No one would serious believe what they are tweeting is Musk and that is because it is satire.
I thought not long ago these new "verified" accounts would make things safer as you had to prove your identity, now it looks like you just need a payment method and no ID verification. So he's actually made it even less safe.
In US law satire is protected by the 1st amendment. A comedian could likely argue it was obvious it was satire. As for Twitter exposure, is Elon going to sue them?
I'm not arguing for people to be able to impersonate anyone but this is funny. He's completely over reacted and is now perma banning anyone that does it when a week ago perma bans were for the very worst offenders.
Caporegime
No. This is precisely what is being removed: there will be no verification. It's literally just a pay service. Even if it was only what you're suggesting (and, who knows, maybe Musk will back down) it'd be massively stupid. Verification improves the service for everyone; removing it to just those willing to pay for it makes it vastly less valuable and reduces the quality of Twitter.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
Pay $8 get a blue tick it's as simple as that.
You can impersonate people for satire though, you just need to label it as such. Why are you struggling with this?
Also you're just assuming there's no ID process or actual verification, but even if that were true someone impersonating someone would be breaking ToS with a check mark or not. You can't pay to impersonate.
Why do you always add these weird little digs to your post? lol
Caporegime
Oh no! Against the ToS! Wow! I'm sure that'll stop scammers using stolen credit card details! They wouldn't want to break the Terms of Service
Oh no! Against the ToS! Wow! I'm sure that'll stop scammers using stolen credit card details! They wouldn't want to break the Terms of Service
Yes online fraud is a thing, well done for spotting a problem not exactly unique to Twitter.
No of course he isn't going to sue them, there are literally existing rules to cater for satire, they dind't follow them so they got a penality, Because of the new system in place for verificaito he's taking impersonation seriously and has ramped up the penalty for it, he's publicly stated that.
Again just the other day there was plenty of emphasis on how blue checkmarks are needed because of some court case re: impersonation... yet now he's taken measures to tackle it and people will complain about that too.
Basically whatever he does some of you guys will find a new angle to rant about it.
Oh no! Against the ToS! Wow! I'm sure that'll stop scammers using stolen credit card details! They wouldn't want to break the Terms of Service
Stolen credit card details + stolen iOS/andorid ID + lose the blue checkmark as soon as they change the name on any account...
Whereas currently there are big accounts with no checkmark and people can impersonate them as simply as just changing display name, description and pfp.
Caporegime
Well done for ignoring the fact that what we're talking about is Twitter tearing up a system that helps to prevent fraud.
Seems more like they're broadening and improving it to help prevent fraud.
Right here.
You don't believe it was always a symbol of verification or notability. You stated that.
You specify an increase in some verification for "big accounts without the tick" and anyone who wants it as a good idea.
What is this increase in verification you seem to see over what it used to be? I say yet again I can obtain a blue tick with $8 of questionable source and that will get me everything that "big account" will get. So what is that verification you think they are getting with these changes.
No, I stated they're not all notable people.
Yes, it is.
It used to be 400k accounts now it's likely to be more... that's an increase no?
You can get a Netflix subscription with a stolen credit card too, it won't necessarily last. I'm not sure what your point is here? People can steal things?
You'd need credit card access, someone's apple iOS ID and you instantly lose verification if you change the account name... and people tend to report stolen credit cards or reset stolen iOS IDs.
I mean sure that will happen no doubt as it happens to any service, people steal things, defraud others etc..
It's space ship man/twitter man bad now basically... literally anything he does with twitter now people will be falling over themselves to get worked up about any potential downside.
He could have restricted verification and removed it from a bunch of accounts, real celebs and prominent journalists only and people would have complained about it being elitist because their favorite mountain bike journalist with 400 followers lost his blue checkmark, he could make no change and they'd complain he was lazy/couldn't innovate... as it happens he broadened verification and so that's what is being complained about.
- Status