A quick update to the drama around the potential Elon Musk takeover of the social media platform Twitter. The eventual outcome of this could carry large consequences, it is worth watching how it plays out.
This morning, Elon Musk indicated the $44 billion deal he’d agreed to “cannot move forward” until he sees the proof he’s looking for about its active user numbers or monetized Daily Active Users (mDAU’s). Musk does not believe there are less than 5 percent “fake” or “bot” accounts. [Tweet Link]
As we have mentioned from the outset of the purchase offer, the more Elon Musk demands transparency on the operations, the more Twitter is going to end up painted into a corner on the engineering and data-processing side of the platform.
If Twitter cannot publicly explain how they are making determinations for Daily Active Users, they are going to have major issues with; (a) fraud in their billing of advertisers, and/or (b) shareholder lawsuits for fraudulent operations. {Go Deep} Musk’s demands could take down Twitter and/or make the purchase price much lower. Stay tuned….
REMINDER – In the big picture of tech platforms, Twitter, as an operating model, is a massive high-user commenting system.
Twitter is not a platform built around a static website; Twitter is an interactive user engagement platform for comments and discussion that operates in the sphere of social media. As a consequence, the technology and data processing required to operate the platform does not have an economy of scale.
There is no business model where Twitter is financially viable to operate…. UNLESS the tech architecture under the platform was subsidized.
In my opinion, there is only one technological system and entity that could possibly underwrite the cost of Twitter to operate. That entity is the United States Government, and here’s why.
Unlike websites and other social media, Twitter is unique in that it only represents a platform for user engagement and discussion. There is no content other than commentary, discussion and the sharing of information – such as linking to other information, pictures, graphics, videos url links etc.
In essence, Twitter is like the commenting system on the CTH website. It is the global commenting system for users to share information and debate. It is, in some ways, like the public square of global discussion. However, the key point is that user engagement on the platform creates a massive amount of data demand.
Within the systems of technology for public (user engagement) commenting, there is no economy of scale. Each added user represents an increased cost to the operation of the platform, because each user engagement demands database performance to respond to the simultaneous users on the platform. The term “simultaneous users” is critical to understand because that drives the cost.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Twitter has approximately 217 million registered daily users, and their goal is to expand to 315 million users by the end of 2023. Let me explain why things are not what they seem.
When people, users, operate on a tech platform using the engagement features, writing comments, hitting likes, posting images, links etc, the user is sending a data request to the platforms servers. The servers must then respond allowing all simultaneous users to see the change triggered by the single user.
Example: when you hit the “like” button feature on an engagement system, the response (like increasing by one) must not only be visible to you, but must also be visible to those simultaneously looking at the action you took. If 100,000 simultaneous users are looking at the same thing, the database must deliver the response to 100,000 people. As a result, the number of simultaneous users on a user engagement platform drives massive performance costs. In the example above, a single action by one person requires the server to respond to 100,000 simultaneous users with the updated data.
As a consequence, when a commenting platform increases in users, the cost not only increases because of that one user, the cost increases because the servers need to respond to all the simultaneous users.
This is why most websites, even big media websites, do not have proprietary user engagement, i.e. commenting systems. Instead, most websites use third party providers like Disqus who run the commenting systems on their own servers. Their commenting systems are plugged in to the website; that defers the cost from the website operator, and the third party can function as a business by selling ads and controlling the user experience. [It also sucks because user privacy is non existent]
The key to understanding the Twitter dynamic is to see the difference between, (a) running a website, where it doesn’t really matter how many people come to look at the content (low server costs), and (b) running a user engagement system, where the costs to accommodate the data processing -which increase exponentially with a higher number of simultaneous users- are extremely expensive. Twitter’s entire platform is based on the latter.
There is no economy of scale in any simultaneous user engagement system. Every added user costs exponentially more in data-processing demand, because every user needs a response, and every simultaneous user (follower) requires the same simultaneous response. A Twitter user with 100 followers (simultaneously logged in) that takes an action – costs less than a Twitter user with 100,000 followers (simultaneously logged in), that takes an action.
If you understand the cost increases in the data demand for simultaneous users, you can see the business model for Twitter is non-existent.
Bottom line, more users means it costs Twitter more money to operate, and the cost to the user is “free.” The business model is backwards from traditional business. More customers = higher costs, because each customer brings more simultaneous users….. which means exponentially more data performance is needed.
User engagement features on Twitter are significant, because that’s all Twitter does. Not only can users write comments, graphics, memes, videos, but they can also like comments, retweet comments, subtweet comments, bookmark comments, and participate in DM systems.
That is a massive amount of server/data performance demand, and when you consider simultaneous users, it’s almost unimaginable in scale. That cost and capacity is also the reason why Twitter does not have an edit function.
With 217 million users, you could expect 50 million simultaneous users on Twitter during peak operating times. My back of the envelope calculations, which are really just estimations based on known industry costs for data performance and functions per second, would put the data cost to operate Twitter around $1 billion +/- per month. In 2021, Twitter generated $5.1 billion in revenue, according to the Wall Street Journal.
There is no business model, even with paying subscribers, for Twitter to exist as it is currently established. As the business grows, the costs increase, and the costs to subscribers would grow. So, what is going on?
The only way Twitter, with 217 million users, could currently exist as a viable platform is if they had access to tech systems of incredible scale and performance, and those systems were essentially free or very cheap. The only entity that could possibly provide that level of capacity and scale is the United States Government – combined with a bottomless bank account.
If my hunch is correct, Elon Musk is poised to expose the well-kept secret that most social media platforms are operating on U.S. government tech infrastructure and indirect data-processing subsidy. The Govt/CIA contract with Amazon Web Services (AWS), the cloud operation that most Big Tech social media platforms operate within, might hold a key part of the construction.
The U.S. technology system, the assembled massive system of connected databases and server networks, is the operating infrastructure that offsets the cost of Twitter to run their own servers and database. The backbone of Twitter is the United States government.
There is simply no way the Fourth Branch of Government, the U.S. intelligence system writ large, is going to permit that discovery. However, shareholder lawsuits or legal filings associated with the purchase/takeover of the platform, may force that operating information to the surface regardless of how hard the board of directors and background engineers need to fight to hide it.
Go Deep ~ “Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop“
Almost all other internet websites and social media have two structures: (A) Content, and (B) User Engagement.
Content represents a small part of any internet hosting expense for a platform and represents almost 100% of the platform’s ability to generate money. User engagement on the other hand, costs massive amounts of money – due to the need for data processing to handle the engagement and simultaneous users – and provides almost no revenue.
Many news and information content providers do not even host a user engagement commenting system any longer. User engagement is just too expensive and requires monitoring, moderation and massive amounts of data processing speed on the platform servers.
Twitter’s operating model only consists of ‘user engagement.’
The platform itself is a massive global commenting system – the ‘public square’ discussion.
♦CONTENT is the material that can be monetized easily. Content is the article, graphic, podcast, or video you would see and watch. Content is profitable based on advertising. Eyeballs on content means eyeballs on internet advertising. This is how websites and content providers are able to pay for expenses and operate as a business model for the continuation of content. Hosting costs for content, even on a massive scale of viewership/readership are low, and the income from advertising increases with more readers and viewers. This is the traditional business model of content providers.
♦USER ENGAGEMENT is the part that is not as easily monetized, and user engagement drives a higher cost. User engagement is the comments, likes, dislikes, pictures, images, videos and uploaded user data; and the discussion that takes place based on the users who view the content material and discuss.
More user engagement, particularly more simultaneous users, costs more money for the platform, because the random capability of the audience to interact with the server network creates exponentially more data processing demand. Data processing, not capacity, drives the cost.
Server capacity is a relatively easy issue to solve for content providers. In order to see the content, the host needs to ensure they have enough capacity for the audience to arrive and view, read, or watch the content without overwhelming the server network. Cache’s and static library services take the load off the primary server functions. Server processing speed and data performance are a part of the construct to ensure everything is smooth.
Server capacity is not the challenge for ‘user engagement.’ Processing trillions of simultaneous user-activated functions is the tech challenge for ‘user engagement.’ It’s not the capacity, it’s the data processing. As a result, it is far more expensive to operate social media than it is to operate a simple website construct, because user engagement is the entire premise behind social media.
Facebook and Instagram have a more viable business model because users provide the content they host. Content can be monetized, and in the case of Facebook, Google, Instagram and YouTube they can also monetize the user that provides it. Twitter does not host content at all.
Facebook makes money by selling advertising like a traditional website. Facebook and Google have also specialized in the micro-targeting of advertising to very specific tailored advertising audiences. Advertising agencies pay a premium for the micro-targeting of a specific audience.
Facebook also makes money by selling data on users. You may remember the reference of Cambridge Analytica purchasing micro-targeting user information from Facebook for use in elections and voter targeting efforts. More recently, Facebook has cut out the middlemen and started micro-targeting for politics and getting paid directly by political campaigns for their efforts.
In almost all social media, the user is providing the content that the platform can monetize. In the Facebook example above, the platform can offset the extreme increases in user engagement costs (data processing) by making money from the hosted content, and from selling the data of the user (there are many purchasers).
However, for Twitter the business model problem is: (a) the absence of content to monetize, and (b) the extreme costs of user engagement that dwarf the “simultaneous user” data processing costs for Facebook.
As Facebook grows, they can grow their revenue. As Twitter grows, it increases their expenses massively and only moderately increases their revenue.
Twitter did not initially make a decision to decline the generous offer by Elon Musk because of stewardship or fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. The financials of Twitter as a non-viable business model highlight the issue of money being irrelevant. Twitter does not, and as structured cannot, make money. Growing Twitter only means growing an expense. Growing Twitter does not grow revenue enough to offset the increase in expense.
There is only one way for Twitter to exist as a viable entity, people are now starting to realize this.
What matters to the people behind Twitter, the people who are subsidizing the ability of Twitter to exist, is control over the global conversation.
Control of the conversation is priceless to the people who provide the backbone for Twitter.
From that perspective, there are trillions at stake.
We know Bidens account is fake. It still says hes the President of the United States.
Should at least have a Fact Check there based on the undeniable and irrefutable amount of evidence which proves hes not.
Best comment of the day. You should add that clearly the account is fake since Biden can in no way comprehend a tweet let alone post one.
The last time he thought he was tweeting, he actually was tooting and I actually think he ended up with a load of trouser chili………………….
“Trouser chili” 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Its a polite way of saying the Hershey Squirts……………..
Perhaps he’s a bot! Fits the role he plays!
Elon Musk should add a pile of dung under sleepy Joe’s ‘verified’ Twitter birdie.
Using data and tech to mold and shape public opinion is an extension of a policy called ” Full Spectrum Dominance “.
It Musk backs out and Twitter winds up with severe reduction in legitimate ad revenue, the winner will be Trump and Truth Social.
There is no way this was an arranged deal but there is also no way Musk and Trump wouldn’t understand this outcome.
I have fun there, but Truth Social will always be a Right Wing Echo Chamber. There is no way to get around the fact “Truth Social”lacks the needed cool factor for broad appeal.
People should create an account and invite their friends to have discussions there instead of Twittler. Eventually the cool factor which is currently what the fake media says it should be, will be determined by real people again.
I have an account, but the only people I know on Truth Social are much like the people here. I like the fellowship and exchange of information but I don’t think people who are not involved in Conservative politics would feel welcome here or on Truth Social. The only non-MAGA people on TS would be spam, bots or trolls.
Yet…
I will be pleasantly surprised if Truth Social becomes the cool kids’ table.
Cool is what cool does (to paraphrase some movie somewhere).
I’ve said before that there is a lot potential technology which could make Truth Social an integrated platform that incorporates Youtube/Paypal/Search/Shopping all with a single account login.
You can bet the “cool kids” who like money would latch onto that and try to make a buck on such a platform.
That is a possible outcome.
Proving once again that all Marxists are liars. I hope Twitter dies a painful death.
I would prefer a rebirth that exorcizes duh gooberment.
I like seeing a global conversation.
I grew weary of seeing my now ex, but I didn’t gouge my eyes out over it.
It appears that Mr. Musk has the “gubmint” and Twitter by the short hairs.
I think its going to get interesting.
Neither the “Gubmint” nor any Twitter employees want the Musk Deal to go through at any price!
He’s screwed, aka “checkmated”, them again: they either cough-up that there isn’t less then 5% bots and face lawsuits from shareholders and advertisers or fail to provide the information causing the stock to collapse and face shareholder lawsuits (Elon is a huge shareholder FYI).
Screw them.
Where do I make a donation of paint to help with painting T into a corner?
How about sundance’s tip jar, since he is the one providing the delicate brushwork.
I’m sticking with my original prediction that Musk is going to back out of the deal.
One of the few ‘real’ accounts on Twitter was ‘Donald Trump’. thats why they had to remove it.
President Trump’s account was costing them too much money. Too many real users.
This MIGHT be a good time to buy Tesla stock. IT PLUMMETED when the Twitter deal was first announced, out of fears that the Twitter price would strain Musk’s wallet.
So, if the Twitter deal flops, will Tesla CLIMB again?
An audit and transparency is not what TWTR wants. Wreck TWTR.
Twitter is audited every year by Pricewaterhouse Coopers. Under federal law, the CEO and CFO are personally liable for the accuracy of its financial statements, including notes pertaining to “risks”.
I just LOVE this. Of course there are a ton of fake/bot accounts. But what’s most important is that we know the vast majority of those accounts are anti-Trump, pro-lockdown type accounts. The reason being, anything else, anything coming from the good guys (ie, people like US) was being banned or deleted. So once the itemized figures come out showing not just how many accounts were fake/bots, but what TYPE of accounts were fake/bots…. how cool will THAT be?! It’ll help prove what the TRUE public opinion about these issues really is. 😀
Totally agree! No matter if Elon buys Twitter or not, he is definitely exposing the fraud.
The fraud has been known for years. Twitter is currently facing numerous lawsuits for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty, etc. Last year alone, they paid out $800 million in settlements… and this is a company that only has $5 billion in revenue!
Twitter is the tip of the spear for “influence operations” globally, and domestically, of every western government intelligence community and their associated “governments”. They use NGOs to circumvent the rights of their own citizens as well as interfere in elections on a global scale. That’s what we’re going to find out.
And they carry a lot of those influence operations out on social media playforms. Example: the social media influence operations going on currently about the war in Ukraine.
Elon Musk just responded to the Project Veritas video, “Is this legit?”
I’m guessing that he knows it is. I hope that he will be able to expose the fake accounts and bots, which will infuriate share-holders and advertisers.
I just read Mr. Musk put a 💩 as a reply to Agrawal’s long, long tweet explanation of company bot control. It looked like his 💩 has a face that looked more like 😳, kinda like it was say “eeek”.
Shareholders have been “infuriated” for a long time with TWTR. The company paid out over $800 million in legal settlements last year alone (2021). There are numerous class action lawsuits pending right now.
This is a company that only has $5 billion in total revenues, and loses money from operations. Their current value of $30 billion is totally ridiculous!
Wouldn’t it be a surprise to many that the bot army (most of Twitter) is ran by the security state and activist groups…
He should ask how many ngos and Intel operations have access to Twitter code and operating bots/macros.
You’d be correct.
Why would it be any different than these “NGO’s” or non-profits campaigning for the left?
I suspect these groups not only have multiple accounts themselves, but each individual likely has multiple accounts they can use to repeat the group message.
Very similar to Antifa or BLM groups openly organizing on Twitter with Twitter fully supporting them.
https://freebeacon.com/latest-news/the-shape-shifting-dc-dark-money-group-disguising-liberal-campaigns-across-country/
So far Musk is looking like a real hero to me.
If, after exposing the fraud, and causing Twitter major problems with advertisers and everyone else, if he backs out and it costs him a billion I wonder i he can write off against his taxes. This could be the most incredible sting ever.
For sure, Scarlett. He knew about the bot problem when he began this dance. What if fraud exposure, and what ever else is yet to come, was the plan all along. Verrrrry interesting.
“The only entity that could possibly provide that level of capacity and scale is the United States Government – combined with a bottomless bank account…Elon Musk is poised to expose the well-kept secret that most social media platforms are operating on U.S. government tech infrastructure and indirect data-processing subsidy. The Govt/CIA contract with Amazon Web Services (AWS), the cloud operation that most Big Tech social media platforms operate within, might hold a key part of the construction.”
Excellent explanation! This is the only thing that makes sense.
Yep ^^^^
Twitter’s total revenue is only $5 billion. They lost almost $500 million from operations last year alone. They have over 7,000 employees on the payroll! They paid out $800 million in legal settlements last year. As a business model, it stinks.
I luv it when Elon plays hard ball.
Here lately, for every dollar TWTR has been going down (last $38.32), TMTG (DWAC) has been rising up (last $46.21). I know that can shift on a dime, but it’s been fun to watch. Trump saying he was not going back to TWTR, while Musk is saying TWTR is over valued and double dipping, is doing some good for the MAGA King this week. Keep the news coming Elon!
I wonder if his good friend Jack Dorsey, the marooned lighthouse keeper, had given Elon the inside scoop on these fake accounts.
Still being used as a reference point for information for some, poor twits all those likes are bots, and you are following even more bots, Musk is smarter he knew about bots when he bid twitter is a ghost town of people that are no existing.
Elon Mush and Jeff Bezos…do they represent a younger generation ready to take control in a much larger context? Are the Baby Boomers in government about to be displaced, run out of town? Will be a struggle for sure. However, Trump ushered in a direct awareness of the businessman’s approach to “running” an organization where profit is transposed into government actions/policies, etc. Musk and Bezos have thrown some serious shade toward Biden and his team.
Obama brought lying to American citizens to a new more damaging level than I have ever seen . Biden has always been a liar and a con man feeding at the government’s trough of gate keepers…you want “in” then pay the man! Obama left office getting circus barker jobs plus pimping for corporations, mostly in the entertainment/communication sectors.
Congress has been drunk on spending for years…no budget means what? Keep those dollar printing presses rolling pal!
Yet, it seems some are coming now to “collect” on what is owed from many directions. Durham may be looking for Hillary’s scalp, she is the totem for the hysterical democrats along with Nancy and many others. Johnny Depp told Amber he never wanted her to see his eyes again…and it looks like he is doing his best to keep that promise while trying to come out of his Hunter S. Thompson whacked out period.
But the voters, are they awake? Come this November we will see what’s what. After this summer of aborting love any way possible, of course! Is it time to go to the range and brush up on one’s shooting skills? Just how many coming through our southern border illegally will be voting this November? Paper ballots anyone? Put too much air in any balloon and it will surely burst, that is what inflation is always about…hot air being sold as truths and wisdom!
Personally I would like to see the Silent generation octogenarians booted out of government. Pelosi,Mcconnell, Hoyer, Feinstein, Waters et al.
I’m enjoying this story. Nice to see commies squirm for a change.
Haha!
Truth Social is open for browser users as of today. (no Android app yet; There are a couple fake apps in the Google Play store, so beware & watch truthsocial’s website for notification when (if) the real Android app launches)
Here is an article indicating that maybe only 25 percent of usurper Obama’s 18.6 million twitter followers were authentic in 2012. It states that at least 41 percent were fake. So maybe the 25 percent authentic factor is still a good ratio. The article goes on to say that for only $18 you can purchase 1,000 twitter followers.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:i2-5h97EdnYJ:https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/blogs/right-click/fake-followers-latest-battleground-political-arena-social-media-205708837.html
And here is an article explaining usurper Obama’s twitter followers: They are fake just like he is.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2013/09/obamas_fake_twitter_followers_explained.html
“Musk’s demands could take down Twitter and/or make the purchase price much lower. Stay tuned….”
What will be very interesting to see is how the SEC reacts. Twitter might get away with claiming a mistake if they update their report to 7%, but they will not get away with trying to update their report with anything at 10% or above.
The next thing that will be very interesting to see is how the Deep State reacts.
There is no easy way out of this pickle for Twitter and the Deep State. Either Twitter proves their numbers are accurate, and Musk’s tweets suggest they are not, or they are forced to show their fraud.
I can’t believe the SEC will just yawn and give them a pass with lots of lawsuits waiting.
Given the Project Veritas video with Mr. 4 hour per quarter engineer, I bet a few shareholders are not very happy right now.
If the SEC turns a blind eye to this it will be the end of Wall Street.
Did you catch the “we work 4 hours a week” comment? That can only happen if there are massive fake accounts that need no employees. I would dare to say they hired a bunch of people who don’t work just to support the massive fake accounts. Otherwise, if they just had 50 employees people would question how the company can operate.
I am going to predict the percentage of bots applies to employee bots too.
It explains why they freaked out over Musk’s tweet about work ethic.
Not sure what the SEC has to do with mDAU’s, but shareholders are not “waiting” to sue, as I’ve pointed out above… the company paid out $800 million in settlements last year alone (their total revenue is only $5 billion) and other class actions are pending.
If mDAUs are not important, why is Musk tweeting about their SEC reporting?
As for shareholders suing, I would think they would be rather upset over a share price inflated due to fraud.
How do we know this whole thing was not part of a Musk/Trump ploy from Day-one? Musk having no interest in owning twitter, but only interest in exposing twitter?
Now we all know Trump is dumb. /s
It has VSGDJT’s strategic thinking all over it.
We’ll see.
I wonder how long it will be before the SEC starts investigating for fraud in Twitter’s SEC filings?
But I won’t hold my breath.
Jim in TN: If SEC investigation could turn up evidence of government involvement, the SEC will be in a bit of a pickle.
So the bots are govt
Posted by COUNTrecount on Free Republic regarding that idea that Twiiter can face lawsuits from advertisers over the fake accounts issue:
There is another thing to consider as well.
Twitter claims to have 330 Million users. 66 Million of those are proven to be bots and fake accounts.
Imagine if 50% of Twitter’s “users” haven’t sent a single tweet in a year. They are possibly 165 Million inactive accounts.
Now imagine that the 66 Million fake accounts and bots make up more than 50% of Twitter’s daily postings. They might be only 20% of Twitter “users”… but they may be the most active, spamming Twitter with political messages and such. When they get to checking, the actual daily real users to Twitter may be far less than people think… perhaps as few as 60 Million +/- real active users.
Now think about how easy it would be for them to suppress the prevalency of vaccine adverse events and miscarriages.
Just suspend all the real people sharing their experiences and program the bots to all call them liars and anti vaxxers.
Sounds like a genius way to hide evidence of a government sanctioned depopulation scheme. Evil. But genius.
Evil genius is so true! . They’ve managed to convince many to stand down for, if not actively participate in, their own country’s infiltration and downfall. Obama meant it when he said he wanted to fundamentally change our country. And he’s still in the process of doing that through Biden, unfortunately.
When a service is free to use, then you are the product. Twitter isn’t designed to make money, it is designed to gather intel and spread propaganda.
A website run by twits= Twitter
Really toasts my almonds that my hard earned money is paying the salaries of POS like the POC exposed by Veritas. Works 4 hours a week Commie AF making 6 figures courtesy of the Fourth branch ?
So if Twitter costs are ~1 billion and revenue is $5 billion, what do they say is the source of the $5 billion revenue (public company)? The WSJ article is behind a wall. Seems easy enough to look into. The article implies Twitter has NO possible income, only expenses.
Rush Limbaugh investigated and found out that the thousands and thousands and thousands of twitter “users” that were threatening his advertisers were mostly just bots. He found there were 10 leftist radicals behind the StopRush blackmail ploy. #StopRush was not a grassroots consumer movement. It was created and developed by left wing political organization Media Matters for America Executive Vice President Angelo Carusone.
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/09/23/the_hidden_story_behind_stop_rush/
If Musk’s left fist doesn’t get Twitter then the right one will.
Clever reference to a great song (16 Tons).
The bluegrass group Della Mae does a fine version.
(I copy it too.)
Sundance has taught us how long we’ve “owed our souls to the company store.”
There’s millions of democrats that will vote Republican as today’s democrats are unrecognizable as belonging to our country and it’s laws.
Question, seeing that I have never used twitter, why would one want a fake account? I can’t understand that part.
Here is your answer; this was posted above:
CheshireTheCat
May 17, 2022 4:42 pm
Posted by COUNTrecount on Free Republic regarding that idea that Twiiter can face lawsuits from advertisers over the fake accounts issue:
There is another thing to consider as well.
Twitter claims to have 330 Million users. 66 Million of those are proven to be bots and fake accounts.
Imagine if 50% of Twitter’s “users” haven’t sent a single tweet in a year. They are possibly 165 Million inactive accounts.
Now imagine that the 66 Million fake accounts and bots make up more than 50% of Twitter’s daily postings. They might be only 20% of Twitter “users”… but they may be the most active, spamming Twitter with political messages and such. When they get to checking, the actual daily real users to Twitter may be far less than people think… perhaps as few as 60 Million +/- real active users.
Now think about how easy it would be for them to suppress the prevalency of vaccine adverse events and miscarriages.
Just suspend all the real people sharing their experiences and program the bots to all call them liars and anti vaxxers.
Sounds like a genius way to hide evidence of a government sanctioned depopulation scheme. Evil. But genius.
The Twitter ‘Fake Bot Accounts’ are not constant.
They move around in the interval 15% < Fake Bot < 65%.
This explains how twitter was interfering in elections:
https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/02/12/twitter-gearing-interfere-election/
… Twitter wants to become the de facto, worldwide platform for politicians to reach the masses, usurping broadcast media. Unlike broadcast media, however, it’s currently difficult for Twitter to control the message. If FOX wants to give Donald Trump a tough time, they’ll appoint Megyn Kelly to moderate their presidential debates. If MSNBC wants a liberal slant on the news, they’ll put Chris Matthews on the story. Twitter, where users control the flow of information, currently lacks that ability. But an algorithmic timeline, coupled with the company’s horrifically politically biased support teams and terms of service, look set to change all that.
For political partisans, control over Twitter is the Holy Grail. Even uncontrolled, Twitter has proven formidable in its influence over elections. And, as a report from Voanews highlights, this influence is set to increase as the digital generation grows up. Voters are increasingly turning to their smartphones to read political news and follow political figures, according to a 2014 Pew Research survey. Those numbers are highest among young voters, who value making personal connections with politicians.
… If Twitter is already polling in real time, there is no reason why it wouldn’t be able to tweak its algorithm in real time to manipulate elections by controlling what political messages people end up seeing. For instance, it could instantly track when an undesirable candidate was starting to see growth, and then change the algorithm to nip it in the bud. And of course, they will be able to do this not only in the US, but worldwide.
This is already happening in real time today.
“What matters to the people behind Twitter, the people who are subsidizing the ability of Twitter to exist, is control over the global conversation.”
And you thought Skynet was just a movie thing. Musk may very well destroy Twitter. If you think back to all the big tech stuff of recent past, you should know they don’t last. Remember AOL, Netscape, Yahoo groups, America Online, Myspace, Compaq, Wang, and more.
His strategy from the start seems to be to kill Twitter, destroy it, gut it, then resurrect it as a free speech platform.
In most respects, his strategy is what Trump and MAGA should be doing to the GOP. Destroy it. Gut it. Resurrect the carcass as something worth having.
Just like government… They don’t earn.. FJB.and the rest of them
perhaps musk just saw a way to end twitter’s control of the ‘conversation’ without spending any real money. if it works, kudos to him.
no matter, i won’t be returning to that cesspool website any sooner than i’ll be watching FauxNews, CNN, MSLSD or any of the others on the COVidiot box. (though i will watch some baseball or F1 racing)
they call it PROGRAMMING for a reason.
Nicely laid out and dead on. Their structure also eliminates the need for marketing, quality, real time tech support, and the overhead of equipment and maintenance. Else, they’d be reporting financials as required by analysts for justifying stock price. Aside: autocorrect saved me on ‘anal****s’.
Ann Coulter wrote a funny column, long ago, about the sad truth that all the black radical groups in the country were mostly populated with FBI spies and informants.
The hoax kidnapping of Whitmer showed nothing has changed.
The leftist foundational idea of post-modernism (it’s your right to invent your own reality) never wavers.
Common sense. Tweeter had to know this would come about. If they are not prepared to provide the proof then we all know what they are hiding.
I understand the point you are trying to make but it does not completely fly here. It is not exponentially more expensive to run a large engagement model. It is linear and it can be cost effective if you do have paying subscribers and that number is accurate. Impressions are impressions on real people and can be monetized.
There is nothing that is instantaneous in the computing or even quantum world so arguing cost of 100k people doing the same thing is not accurate. Similarly, if 100 people all go the the 7/11 and all buy coffee at once, guess what, you queue up. They do not open 100 registers on demand. Same thing in platforms and system but on a different scale. It is a balance between perceived speed, real speed, and what the users will put up with at that cost. I can make almost any web site super fast (scale) for a cost…but do i need to? No.
You make it sound like it is impossible ergo a conspiracy theory. It may just be a bad business model propped up by investors.
Again, I get your point and you may be right but you also may be reading more into that is there. Keep in mind Occam’s Razor.
It’s worse than just bots.
I, like a lot of people, don’t have twitter account. I do however read a lot of twitter content. There is a lot of interesting content and I get a laugh out of some of the stupidity posted bot or not.
I also use and alternate OS, browser, ABL adblocker, and NoScript. I’m not seeing any ad content and it doesn’t appear shadow banning works against me or any timeline BS.
(I don’t see any ads here but then I do donate every now and then)
Therefore I conclude I am all drain with no possible income to twitter. Breaks my heart LOL.
If twitter’s function is to spy the feds already know all about me so that doesn’t concern me.
Of late there is a popup that tries to block my access and force me to open an account after loading a certain amount of content but it’s easy to bypass.
Allow me to play devil’s advocate…
The official claim of “<5%” bots has been good enough, so far, to secure Twitter’s fiduciary status before the SEC and advertisers. What’s to prevent them from just stonewalling and sticking to this claim, with the assertion that since it has been satisfactory for all stakeholders until now, no further action on their part is necessary for any new stakeholders such as Musk, and he can just go pound sand where this matter is concerned? They could say, “Our public disclosures have always been sufficient for all concerned, and now they’re sufficient for you, Elon. Take it or leave it…”, and if he leaves it as he rightly should, why would they not then just go right back to business as usual?
In other words, I don’t understand the leverage Musk has here to force Twitter to provide an ostensibly more rigorous reckoning of their bot count than the standard they have always been allowed to promulgate.
Possibly because current advertisers may now examine their ad buys with twitter, future buyers might not, and instituional investers might reevaluate their positions with twitter.
On what grounds would any of those actors do those things? Twitter’s declarations have always been good enough for them, and now suddenly they are not because of a skeptical Elon Musk? What has changed, materially? Nothing has changed materially, and nothing will change so long as Twitter does not produce material evidence contrary to their past claims.
So again, what incentive does Twitter have to capitulate, and what leverage — other than skepticism — does Musk have to force their capitulation? As far as I can see, all Twitter has to do here is tell Musk to take their public declarations as-is, or buzz off. And if it’s the latter, then it’s right back to the status quo. Because…nothing has changed.
What am I missing here?