I’m not sure if this is technically Technology news, but I can remove this post if it’s in the wrong community
Archive link: http://archive.today/3XM6s
Musk brought up the idea of charging all users of X/Twitter during a wide-ranging conversation focused on AI that featured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday. “[We’re] moving to a small monthly payment for use of the X system,” Musk told Netanyahu, claiming that it is the only way to eliminate the problem of bots, as reported by Bloomberg’s Dave Lee.
Musk didn’t mention timing of his plan to charge X/Twitter users, nor did he say how much it would cost.
Musk, who also is CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has said X/Twitter ad sales have plunged 50% since he bought the company. “We’re still negative cash flow, due to ~50% drop in advertising revenue plus heavy debt load,” Musk posted on July 15.
So I mean, if this was in lieu of data collection and tracking, this is what more of the software world should actually do. Running platforms isn’t free, and making the user the product is a malicious and unsustainable solution.
That said, I certainly wouldn’t pay Twitter - I think I’d rather donate to a Mastodon instance, or pay for some other private alternative. Musk is awful for so many reasons, holds way too much power, and deserves no money of mine.
I guarantee this isn’t in lieu of, it’s in conjunction with.
Yup. You can see this kind of stuff happening with ads in things you buy.
There was a model of “ad supported” and “pay to own”
But some exec figured out you could do both and double dip.
There is no world in which things get more consumer friendly unless it’s forced
That’s actually a good point about how some services do require payment to provide safe service to their users. A very close to home example would be your local Lemmy instance. In order to run the servers and keep it ad (and tracking) free, each instance needs donations from their users. The same is true for Mastodon, as you mentioned.
The problem is, I would be shocked if Twitter actually provided a safer (or improved in any way) service. There are a other issues at play as well, but they all basically boil down to most users not wanting too give money to Twitter, and if they were ok with that, they would already have purchased Twitter Blue.
One of those issues being the idiot child in charge. As long as Musk is running the place, there’s no such thing as safety for the users.
Fully agree.
I would love if there was a platform where they charged a very small amount monthly eg. I £1/€1/$1 in exchange for not using my data for anything. I love lemmy but I’m entirely at the mercy of the instance maintainers and there is no guarantee my data won’t be used
It’s always going to come down to trusting someone though right ?
Even with a larger corporation who tells you they don’t sell your data, it would only take 1 employee to see the opportunity to sell 1 billion email addresses or something.
Also in the fediverse your data is pretty much freely available to everyone. Instances need to publish the list of users who have upvoted a given post or comment. Anyone so inclined could build a profile of comments and posts you’ve liked from freely available data.
Lemmy still feels a bit wild - with lots of instances springing up in the last few months and not really any time for admins to demonstrate their attitudes to different issues.
Mastodon is a little more mature though, I’ve been at fosstodon.org for a few years now. The admins there are regular participants in the community. I think I’m on the “Elon” tier in their patreon - $11 a month.
This, I think, is actually the worst part about Lemmy. Instead of having more control and privacy you have less because everything is out in the open. Which is terrible for the users and could also have a chilling effect on the platform.
What’s worse is that this is never really communicated to the users.
I can understand your position but I don’t see it that way.
I think lemmy is a fairly early iteration of the fediverse and it’s still finding its own format and associated culture.
For example, maybe more people will start using multiple accounts, or use accounts only for a few months before discarding them.
A lot of redditors treated accounts like some kind of alternate self, to be manicured and maintained indefinitely, which might not be the right move in the fediverse.
Also, a lot of things aren’t really communicated to users on most platforms. The information is there if anyone cares to invest even the briefest moment in understanding the fediverse
But isn’t interoperability of instances kinda the main selling point of fediverse? If you really end up having multiple accounts across the site that seems like a drawback to me, not something to hope for. Besides, having “one self” is not a bad thing either. I’d rather have people use one account on which I can consistently see their views or behaviors or having tons of alts to hide behind and switch as the general opinion shifts. You can’t really have a proper community if it’s just smoke and mirrors of alts and throwaway accounts.
Perhaps, but all of these points rely on a subjective definition of what a community is, and I think that’s still emerging in the fediverse. A Facebook community is different to a reddit community which is different to a lemmy community.