That's an excellent idea, especially since a lot of them are probably so invested that they would pay even if they don't want to just to maintain the status.
I just hope he doesn't partner with Paypal for it.
The best part is that even if they pay, you can still call them out for paying $20 a month. It cheapens the 'honor' of being 'verified' and ruins the blue check's prestige, therefore I am all for it.
Paypal is a payment processor for small merchants that don't want to roll their own processing or want to crutch on the trust Paypal offers. Big actors like Twitter shouldn't have to kneel to Paypal's stupid fees and policies.
If verification was just a sign that you had verified your identity I might object, but since the previous owners of Twitter used it as a reward for being a good boy I don't care what happens to bluechecks.
This was one of his originally stated goals. I think it works out well. Remove a lot of the faggots and their status. It's like putting an idiot on television. Being allowed to say something on television gave them a lot of credence in the minds of the uninformed and tuned out, because, "otherwise why would they be allowed to say it on television if it wasn't true?"
Imagine if we got rid of all the licensing bullshit and all you needed was $20 to get a few minutes broadcast time and a "Journalist" tag. That's the world I want to live in. I mean, I don't watch TV or have any interest in being on TV, but it would be wild.
Exactly. Everything should be more like that. Established stations have too much authority which gives long-standing networks undeserved credibility. TV frequencies aren't "property" anyway. It's as vacuous a concept as IP. IIRC the FCC didn't even get as powerful as it is until FDR decided he wanted to clamp down on opposition voices.
Seems more like a challenge he can use to get rid of the lowest performers. If the organization is thoroughly corrupt, you can't exactly go by past Performance Reviews to compare workers. He probably knows the first version will be half-assed but wants to see what they can do.
lmao no it works the opposite way, the key is to be politically connected well enough to avoid being assigned to the disaster project to begin with. This means spending like 99% doing non-stop gossipping and politicking and avoiding doing any actual work that you might be held responsible for.
I’m an engineering lead at a large organization. I know exactly what kind of artificial barriers can be created to stop this kind of work. Architecture review boards, infrastructure police, all sorts of nonsense.
The engineering seems like displaying a GIF based on a boolean (in a database). And already done AFAIK. Maybe they need better internal tools for flipping that boolean?
The human engineering is what I'd worry about. Whatever they have been doing to verify blue-checks has probably been low volume.
I think that's doubling down on - or exploiting - the prior wrong-headed view of verification on Twitter. If he was implementing a one time fee to cover the cost of authenticating your identity, or a token fee every 3-6 months as a deadman switch to de-verify zombie accounts, I think that would be fair. But it shouldn't be a moneymaker in its own right, because verification should be to protect everyone else from imposters as much as it is for yourself.
Nah, not anymore. They've removed the blue checkmarks from ppl who were the actual ppl themselves, saying that it gave them some sort of validation as if twitter endorsed them
The "they" you're referring to are the previous woke management - the ones Musk just fired. I'm saying Musk should treat verification as verification, rather than what the wokes interpreted it as.
The first time in their career at twitter that these guys will actually do work!
Also, this is the Verge. They couldn't be more vague here than they were. Same people who can't even assemble a computer. This is likely both a reasonable task with a measurable goal intended to separate the competent employees from the incompetent.
Good, fuck each and every blue check. Time to put your money where your ego is.
That's an excellent idea, especially since a lot of them are probably so invested that they would pay even if they don't want to just to maintain the status.
I just hope he doesn't partner with Paypal for it.
The best part is that even if they pay, you can still call them out for paying $20 a month. It cheapens the 'honor' of being 'verified' and ruins the blue check's prestige, therefore I am all for it.
Paypal is a payment processor for small merchants that don't want to roll their own processing or want to crutch on the trust Paypal offers. Big actors like Twitter shouldn't have to kneel to Paypal's stupid fees and policies.
If verification was just a sign that you had verified your identity I might object, but since the previous owners of Twitter used it as a reward for being a good boy I don't care what happens to bluechecks.
Good point, you changed my mind. And, hopefully, anyone can get verified now (especially people who were denied for holding the "wrong" opinions).
This was one of his originally stated goals. I think it works out well. Remove a lot of the faggots and their status. It's like putting an idiot on television. Being allowed to say something on television gave them a lot of credence in the minds of the uninformed and tuned out, because, "otherwise why would they be allowed to say it on television if it wasn't true?"
Imagine if we got rid of all the licensing bullshit and all you needed was $20 to get a few minutes broadcast time and a "Journalist" tag. That's the world I want to live in. I mean, I don't watch TV or have any interest in being on TV, but it would be wild.
We already do and have for decades it's called Public Access.
Exactly. Everything should be more like that. Established stations have too much authority which gives long-standing networks undeserved credibility. TV frequencies aren't "property" anyway. It's as vacuous a concept as IP. IIRC the FCC didn't even get as powerful as it is until FDR decided he wanted to clamp down on opposition voices.
Don't worry, daddy Soros will make sure the usual trouble makers have their rent paid.
This is either going to work exactly as planned or fail so spectacularly that credit card companies will have to clean up charge errors.
I have no doubts that it can be done.
But it sure as hell isn't going to be done well.
Seems more like a challenge he can use to get rid of the lowest performers. If the organization is thoroughly corrupt, you can't exactly go by past Performance Reviews to compare workers. He probably knows the first version will be half-assed but wants to see what they can do.
This. Plus it gives him extra excuses to remove the problem employees.
lmao no it works the opposite way, the key is to be politically connected well enough to avoid being assigned to the disaster project to begin with. This means spending like 99% doing non-stop gossipping and politicking and avoiding doing any actual work that you might be held responsible for.
Okay that lowers the difficulty a couple steps.
If the organization cannot make this simple change in a week it needs to be dissolved.
It’s an aggressive target to be sure, but it will separate the hand wringing meeting engineers from the people who can get stuff done.
lol
I enjoy watching twitter be destroyed, but let's not b.s. about this being some magical fairy b.s.
The people who win are those with political connections to hear about the project and avoid being on it to begin with.
I’m an engineering lead at a large organization. I know exactly what kind of artificial barriers can be created to stop this kind of work. Architecture review boards, infrastructure police, all sorts of nonsense.
None of it helps the product.
The engineering seems like displaying a GIF based on a boolean (in a database). And already done AFAIK. Maybe they need better internal tools for flipping that boolean?
The human engineering is what I'd worry about. Whatever they have been doing to verify blue-checks has probably been low volume.
I think that's doubling down on - or exploiting - the prior wrong-headed view of verification on Twitter. If he was implementing a one time fee to cover the cost of authenticating your identity, or a token fee every 3-6 months as a deadman switch to de-verify zombie accounts, I think that would be fair. But it shouldn't be a moneymaker in its own right, because verification should be to protect everyone else from imposters as much as it is for yourself.
Nah, not anymore. They've removed the blue checkmarks from ppl who were the actual ppl themselves, saying that it gave them some sort of validation as if twitter endorsed them
The "they" you're referring to are the previous woke management - the ones Musk just fired. I'm saying Musk should treat verification as verification, rather than what the wokes interpreted it as.
Must should have 3 types of accounts for Twitter.
The default account which puts a Robot Icon near your name to indicate you could potentially be a "bot".
No icon (which is a verified regular user)
Blue checkmark which is a paid verified user.
Also officially rename the blue checkmark the "idiot mark" and we're good
"my fellow robots, we must allow the blue cheka to grind us under their boot, or else botdom will not survive"
i'm pretty sure charging would only be for brands and bots
I swear, everyone will be verified in due time. When everyone is special... Yada yada.
The first time in their career at twitter that these guys will actually do work!
Also, this is the Verge. They couldn't be more vague here than they were. Same people who can't even assemble a computer. This is likely both a reasonable task with a measurable goal intended to separate the competent employees from the incompetent.
That is pretty fast. The technical aspect doesn't seem that hard, but putting in place the infrastructure to verify millions does.
I wonder if they will outsource identity verification.