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.

    • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think he should seriously consider buying Meta so that we can watch it crash and burn just like Xitter. Facebook is the cancer of the internet and it deserves to go too.

      • detectivemittens@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately, Twitter was only up for sale because it wasn’t able to effectively monetize. On the other hand, Meta has figured out how to make money hand over fist.

        I think the easiest route to get Musk to own Meta is if we goaded him + Zuck into a pay per view fist fight over ownership of Meta.

        • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Twitter was profitable in the years before covid. They made a net income of $1.2 billion in 2018.

          They made a slight (compared to their revenue) loss during the pandemic, presumably because advertisers generally were willing to spend less, but they were still earning more than enough - simply cut a few costs and they’d be profitable again. Or just wait for the market to improve since from the sounds of it they had more than enough savings to ride it out (that appeared to be their plan).

          They didn’t sell to Musk because they were desperate, they sold to Musk because he signed a contract guaranteeing he would pay far more than the company was worth. If I owned a house that was worth a million dollars, and someone offered me ten million, hell yeah would I sell that house even if I wasn’t really interested in selling.

    • UrLogicFails@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      1 year ago

      It really feels like a lot of social media platforms are intentionally self-sabotaging themselves. I keep expecting them to die off every time something like this happens, but they appear to continue on regardless.

      I think that social media sites actually dying off is actually impossible with enough inertia (even if their base decreases) and that’s why they are emboldened to do such anti-consumer practices.

      All this to say that I’m sure Steve Huffman has immediately started furiously texting everyone he knows about his new idea to charge for Reddit as well as a boosted version of Gold called “Alien Orange” or something.

      • ChristianWS@lemmy.eco.br
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Even if a social network loses 99,99% of the user base due to charging to use it, those left are the ones that see no problem paying to use it, so they are more likely to eat up some insane pricing, which would help recoup losses from a smaller user base. Basically whales.

        I think the only way to try to kill a social network is by going full scorched earth on it. Remove all your comments, or change them to be an annoying copy pasted comment about why you’re getting off the platform. And even then I don’t think it is helpful, I did that with Reddit but was forced to leave technical posts intact because I feared I might prevent someone from solving their issue.

          • Bizarroland@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s the regenerative braking version of monetizing a website.

            It seems silly to not have actual physical brakes on a car and to rely on electric inertia to slow down, it works well in practice. When the pressure starts being applied it may seem like the vehicle is not slowing down but the process of slowing down has begun.

            Twitter has had financial brakes applied to it and you just got to wait a little while and it’s either going to slow to a crawl and then stop, a new conductor is going to be put on board, or it’s going to completely derail.

      • renard_roux@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe it’s like when email scammers intentionally leave in tons of spelling and grammar mistakes. Anyone that notices probably wasn’t going to fall for the scam, anyway, leaving only the weak after culling the strong.

        I’m not completely sure what the point would be, other than leaving you with a propaganda tool without dissenting comments built in, an idiot echo chamber. Who knows, maybe that’s worth the amount of financial loss he’s caused.

        Maybe he’s trying to revert back to Minimal Viable Product while keeping only the dumb and bigoted.

        Or maybe he’s just not as smart as everyone thought.

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sounds like a great idea!

    I mean, not for Xitter, but for the internet as a whole it would be amazing!

  • lonewalk@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      if this was in lieu of data collection and tracking

      I guarantee this isn’t in lieu of, it’s in conjunction with.

      • dom@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        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

    • UrLogicFails@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

    • christophski@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      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

      • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            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

            • Kaldo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

              • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                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.

  • HTTP_404_NotFound@lemmyonline.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    1 year ago

    So, I am starting to really believe his goal is to just drive a stake into the heart of twitter.

    Either that, or he is trying to prove a point regarding something.

    I don’t think there is any possible way, he is so dumb as to make all of these horrible decisions regarding twitter… This has got to be destroying twitter by design, on purpose.

    I mean, seriously… he has done literally everything that you SHOULDN’T do. Fire the majority of the company. Destroy over a decade worth of very good branding. Alienate all investors. Alienate the user base. Piss off the remaining users more. Drive away advertisers…

    FFS, the dude has a company that sends rockets into space, and previously, the world’s premier electric car company… What in the hell is his odd obsession with choking the life out of twitter, that has been costing him money left and right due to absolutely horrible publicity.

    • M. Orange@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      1 year ago

      Please remember that SpaceX and Tesla have entire teams dedicated to handling Elon and reversing his decisions. Twitter did not have the infrastructure required to handle the sheer level of stupid that is Elon Musk.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      If he wanted Twitter to fail, he could have just unplugged all the servers and be done with it.

      No need for him to change the policies so much everyone would leave, break his internet persona, and then declare Xitter bankrupt.

      No, I believe he bought Twitter in order to manipulate the US presidential election by spreading propaganda from what he considers a “left-wing bubble”. But because he has no idea how to run a social media, he is failing to keep it together and by now is throwing stuff against it to see what sticks.

      • Briongloid@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        He owes a lot of money to banks, etc, for the company.

        Explicitly closing Twitter would make him liable for destroying other people’s equity. Accidentally destroying twitter while pretending to drastically fix it, while pretending it’s failing against his will and his taking measures to save it, is the only way to kill it without being on the hook for it.

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Haven’t you heard the story about that one time when he literally unplugged a bunch of servers? He also had zero regards to the proper protocol for moving hardware like that.

    • Auzy@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      He’s probably losing money on it… So, it makes sense for him to kill it, before he digs a deeper hole.

      That being said, he’s an engineer who seriously got angry at cave divers when they told him his sub sucks.

      And I’m willing to bet many of the crappy design decisions for Tesla are made by him too

      So, possible he’s an idiot, but, equally possible, he’s trying to kill it in a subtle way which won’t instantly drive all traffic to a competitor

  • Nivekk@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 year ago

    That would finish off Twitter instantly.

    He’s not THAT dumb. Right guys?

    …right??

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know. Every time I think that there’s some level to which no sane human being would stoop, this guy manages to surprise me. And not in a good way.

    • DomSTR@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well… Twitter is gone already. For his envisioned Everything whatever thingy, this might be the way to go. We’ll see :)

  • dark_stang@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Musk is an absolute idiot. But I’d rather pay for a system than have it mine me for data. I’m guessing he wants to do both though. Because that’s what he does with Tesla cars.