pull down to refresh

27 sats \ 6 replies \ @028559d218 OP 1 Feb \ parent \ on: How do i know that 'social media' accounts and posts... aren't mostly Bots? lightning
The bots have to pay. A Nigerian Prince will need 100s of thousands... maybe millions of spam posts to find victims to scam.
And the % actually scammed by Nigerian Princes is incredibly small... meaning that Nigerian Prince scammers and spammers will need to pay lots of sats and I mean LOTS to continue spamming the internet.
Twatter has no pay-to-post anti-spam mechanisms and it is a disaster. Youtube too. Facebook also.
Reddit has 'moderation' which is different.
Only Stacker News really has the pay-to-post qualities derived from 'proof-of-work' and that alone makes it special IMO.
write
preview
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @random_ 1 Feb
I'm not arguing whether the pay-to-post mechanism would work, I'm questioning how you prove a post was paid for?
Like, this comment could have been free for me to make because I have special privileges. How can you prove otherwise?
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @028559d218 OP 2 Feb
Well... how would the platforms sustain themselves if they dole out "special privileges" to too many users?
They wouldn't. Platforms will take a small percentage of the posts and the 'fees' in sats that people pay to post... and use them to fund the platform.
As opposed to doing it today through advertising/data collection.
How can you "know" that people aren't bots today? Or that their posts don't have 'special privileges' on Twatter?
reply
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @random_ 2 Feb
Or that their posts don't have 'special privileges' on Twatter?
That's exactly what I'm saying 🙄
You'll just end up paying to talk to bots.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @028559d218 OP 2 Feb
Bots don't pay
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @random_ 2 Feb
It's like you agree with me but you don't even realize it.
Are you a bot?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 OP 2 Feb
lol beep beep boop boop
reply