Twitter handles engaging in impersonation will be permanently suspended(twitter.com)
twitter.com
Twitter handles engaging in impersonation will be permanently suspended
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589390597798125568
73 comments
Total and utter nonsense, the Onlyfans empire will outbid Automattic paying just under $20 million.
> - Even some legitimate users who'd be willing to pay for a checkmark are reluctant, since it acts as something like tacit approval for Musk himself, in a time when public opinion is low.
The virtue signalling will go both ways - some will pay $8 in the sad hope that Elon will notice them. Some will refuse for the reasons you outlined above. Nobody sane will actually give a shit.
> - Even some legitimate users who'd be willing to pay for a checkmark are reluctant, since it acts as something like tacit approval for Musk himself, in a time when public opinion is low.
The virtue signalling will go both ways - some will pay $8 in the sad hope that Elon will notice them. Some will refuse for the reasons you outlined above. Nobody sane will actually give a shit.
The incoming wave of crypto spammers with blue checkmarks is going to be impressive in size.
already happening. scams arent being taken down anymore. this "Tesla Live" scam has been running all day. https://twitter.com/joememmel?lang=en
This one looks like a hacked account of a musician called Joe Memmel. I hope at least hijacked accounts will still be taken care of by Twitter.
I bet it’s still up as of this time tomorrow.
I need a Twitter bingo card. These plus many other predictions seem completely plausible.
One factor not talked about enough is the bullying. Twitter is notorious for clowning on certain things deemed lame. One example are twitter users coming together to clown users who have NFT as their profiles.
I suspect the same to happen for people who obviously are not famous enough to have pre-bought check marks.
I suspect the same to happen for people who obviously are not famous enough to have pre-bought check marks.
I hope that whatever they decide, they don't flap in the breeze and update their policies based on every bit of media attention. Doing that is worse than making almost any policy / product bet and actually seeing it through
> countries where checkmarks are cheap
This is a great point that I hadn’t thought of. $8 is already not a lot for scammers, and it could be even less.
This is a great point that I hadn’t thought of. $8 is already not a lot for scammers, and it could be even less.
> Many people don't care enough to pay $8
No one said most would, not even Elon. But twitter has 450 million active users. If 5% of people care, we are talking additional yearly revenue of 2 billion dollar. Obviously 5% number isn't backed by anything and could be one order of magnitude smaller or larger.
No one said most would, not even Elon. But twitter has 450 million active users. If 5% of people care, we are talking additional yearly revenue of 2 billion dollar. Obviously 5% number isn't backed by anything and could be one order of magnitude smaller or larger.
But what Elon did say is that 95% of the 450 million active users are bots.
Source?
> Like I always say with content moderation, every social media site owner who is “pro free speech” meets their line eventually.
For 4chan, it was anime child porn. For Facebook and YouTube, it was white nationalist terror. For Elon, it was people making fun of him.
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/15893968441317826...
https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/15893968441317826...
That's fanciful, but I disagree, Chris Poole was getting old and didn't want to be stuck in a career as an admin running a scary hellsite with no path to profitability as it was time consuming so he sold it for profit, did a quick spit-shine of his reputation with a media tour, spun it all as some big free speech experiment and landed a job at google.
If he really had a problem with depictions of minors in hentai he would have done something about it a long time ago.
If he really had a problem with depictions of minors in hentai he would have done something about it a long time ago.
What a terrible take. How do you equate sharing child porn with speech though? That’s literally complicity in illegal activity. Speech would be more like discussing the merits of such a law and what not.
> For Facebook and YouTube, it was white nationalist terror
Or you know, colluding with the government to censor facts they don’t like.
> For Facebook and YouTube, it was white nationalist terror
Or you know, colluding with the government to censor facts they don’t like.
> Speech would be more like discussing the merits of such a law and what not.
what a ridiculously narrow view of what constitutes speech! is this message, which isn't discussing the merits of any law, not speech? speech is all encompassing, not just the limited topics you personally approve of.
what a ridiculously narrow view of what constitutes speech! is this message, which isn't discussing the merits of any law, not speech? speech is all encompassing, not just the limited topics you personally approve of.
“more like” as in, it was meant as example, not “all encompassing”.
"Comedy is now legal on Twitter" – Elon on 10/28/2022
"Going forward, any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying “parody” will be permanently suspended" – Elon on 11/6/2022
I don't think he has a good grasp on the concept of comedy and satire.
"Going forward, any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying “parody” will be permanently suspended" – Elon on 11/6/2022
I don't think he has a good grasp on the concept of comedy and satire.
> "Going forward, any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying “parody” will be permanently suspended" – Elon on 11/6/2022
He doesn't even seem to have a good grasp of communication these rules to Twitters moderation team
https://twitter.com/xor/status/1589402790732128256?s=20&t=K4...
Edit: Also appears only for Elon Musk parody accounts
https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/15894167789205053...
He doesn't even seem to have a good grasp of communication these rules to Twitters moderation team
https://twitter.com/xor/status/1589402790732128256?s=20&t=K4...
Edit: Also appears only for Elon Musk parody accounts
https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/15894167789205053...
no I disagree this is comedy, the whole charade
Care to elaborate?
Parody is a genre of comedy.
Most SNL skits are comedians pretending to be real people. There’s no need for SNL to declare that “the following skit is a parody”, it’s obvious.
On Twitter, it’s certainly less obvious, but the absurdity of the parody should give it away without having to state “parody ->”, which punctures the whole setup.
Plus, there’s all kinds of other comedic speech that’s not parody that can have similar misleading connotations for comedic effect. If those have to be clearly labeled “jokes”, then you’ve neutered comedy.
Most SNL skits are comedians pretending to be real people. There’s no need for SNL to declare that “the following skit is a parody”, it’s obvious.
On Twitter, it’s certainly less obvious, but the absurdity of the parody should give it away without having to state “parody ->”, which punctures the whole setup.
Plus, there’s all kinds of other comedic speech that’s not parody that can have similar misleading connotations for comedic effect. If those have to be clearly labeled “jokes”, then you’ve neutered comedy.
> "...Musk reiterated his stance that the platform should allow all legal speech..."[1]
We all knew Musk wouldn't actually allow all legal speech. He censors Tesla owners trying to show people how "FSD" breaks in alarming ways. He also knows Twitter can't have rampant racism.
But now we have to wonder where his arbitrary line really is, since he has no discernible principles.
As long as the media keeps treating Twitter like the most important discussion platform, we should be worried about where exactly Musk will draw the line.
1. https://www.npr.org/2022/06/16/1105608659/elon-musk-twitter-...
We all knew Musk wouldn't actually allow all legal speech. He censors Tesla owners trying to show people how "FSD" breaks in alarming ways. He also knows Twitter can't have rampant racism.
But now we have to wonder where his arbitrary line really is, since he has no discernible principles.
As long as the media keeps treating Twitter like the most important discussion platform, we should be worried about where exactly Musk will draw the line.
1. https://www.npr.org/2022/06/16/1105608659/elon-musk-twitter-...
Does the Twitter Chief Hotline Operator not have a sense of humor?
Parody works because you don’t signal ahead of time.
Parody works because you don’t signal ahead of time.
You don't have to signal the actual tweet, you can just add something to the profile - how many people check the profile for every tweet?
And I know you are echoing what The Onion wrote - and guess what, if you go to The Onion about page, it's pretty obvious they are satire.
And I know you are echoing what The Onion wrote - and guess what, if you go to The Onion about page, it's pretty obvious they are satire.
> and guess what, if you go to The Onion about page, it's pretty obvious they are satire.
Obvious, yes, but not explicitly called out. That's kind of the point.
Obvious, yes, but not explicitly called out. That's kind of the point.
You can't even name yourself "Elon Musk (Parody)" - you'll get suspended. https://twitter.com/xor/status/1589402790732128256
I think history has shown that twitter had no sense of humor. It seems like the intention here is to prevent deliberate impersonation (which is not parody), though it definitely has not been made clear in the referenced Elon Musk tweet
Parody is not impersonation and impersonation is not parody.
It’s always been bonkers that Twitter let verified users change their name while keeping the checkmark. Lots of famous accounts have verified users with the same name and profile pic in the replies shilling crypto crap, clearly hacked from some random journalist or whatever.
I guarantee someone with a checkmark impersonating AOC would be defended by Elon in the name of ‘free speech’
> Previously, we issued a warning before suspension, but now that we are rolling out widespread verification, there will be no warning.
> This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue.
Okay, what's wrong with giving a warning though? Are people supposed to be afraid now?
I don't see what this meaningfully changes, except to serve as a demonstration of how heavily the new management relies on authoritarianism as his only source of power and influence.
> This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue.
Okay, what's wrong with giving a warning though? Are people supposed to be afraid now?
I don't see what this meaningfully changes, except to serve as a demonstration of how heavily the new management relies on authoritarianism as his only source of power and influence.
honestly, after seeing how badly twitter has handled all the crypto attacks any change is a good change at this point.
i know people love hating on elon but twitter has always been a terribly run company. they've been a joke for a long time. why not give the guy 3-months and then we can judge?
i know people love hating on elon but twitter has always been a terribly run company. they've been a joke for a long time. why not give the guy 3-months and then we can judge?
[deleted]
> why not give the guy 3-months and then we can judge?
We've got no say in the matter :) waiting and watching is the only option on this ride.
Up to this point it's been a spectacular and entertaining disaster to observe. I do feel bad for all the Twitter employees, didn't expect he'd really lay so many off, because it's an insane (and monumentally short-sighted) move. People are a hugely valuable resource, the most valuable a company can have!
We've got no say in the matter :) waiting and watching is the only option on this ride.
Up to this point it's been a spectacular and entertaining disaster to observe. I do feel bad for all the Twitter employees, didn't expect he'd really lay so many off, because it's an insane (and monumentally short-sighted) move. People are a hugely valuable resource, the most valuable a company can have!
I don’t condone the way he laid off his staff, but I believe a lot of these cushy FAANG roles are useless e-mail sending, PowerPoint collaging, pencil pushing.
I think those roles are put in place simply because the companies are already successful so they can afford to reap whatever little rewards the jobs provide. Based on SpaceX and Tesla, Elon doesn’t work that way.
I think those roles are put in place simply because the companies are already successful so they can afford to reap whatever little rewards the jobs provide. Based on SpaceX and Tesla, Elon doesn’t work that way.
With appropriate management, people are capable of many amazing feats, and can move mountains. Few humans behave this way by default, it's takes more than just capital and org chart hierarchies. It requires having a dedicated and inspired leader who people can relate to and rally behind, and who communicates clear shared goals and vision. It also requires competent middle management and project management to get a smooth operating machine.
The art of persuasion (and inspiration) is an effective tool when competently employed. Being a strong / good leader requires self-control and mastery.
The art of persuasion (and inspiration) is an effective tool when competently employed. Being a strong / good leader requires self-control and mastery.
Not very absolute in the freedom to speak whatever twitter handle you desire.
This looks like another case of speech that is clearly legal in many jurisdictions (like the US) and yet is being restricted by Twitter.
In a related note, the Onion filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court on this specific issue of the necessity of labeling a parody.
The argument is that the setup of believing the content is true is essential to parody comedy which then pulls the rug out from underneath the reader with an absurdity, and that an average reader would understand the absurdities to be comedy. But that labeling it as a parody defeats the comedic effect.
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33481989
Highly recommend reading the hilarious brief as well: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...
The argument is that the setup of believing the content is true is essential to parody comedy which then pulls the rug out from underneath the reader with an absurdity, and that an average reader would understand the absurdities to be comedy. But that labeling it as a parody defeats the comedic effect.
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33481989
Highly recommend reading the hilarious brief as well: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...
Charging for verification was a good idea - $8 per month is worth it if you're semi-famous enough to be at risk of impersonation. What's he thinking giving out the checkmarks but not doing verification at all? It removes the incentive and when combined with upranking anyone who buys the subscription turns it into a "I've paid to win" badge.
This looks like it applies mostly to the blue checks. Having an unobvious verified parody account does raise issues, but its hard to know exactly where to draw the line.
Normally I don't think you'd have many people against this, it's just amusing that he's doing this now with so many making fun of him using this after his comments about comedy and free speech.
The $8 program giving the same checkmark has NO verification except a valid credit card. None. Zero. Zilch.
Omg, that’s what I interpreted it to mean when I read the most recent Twitter app patch notes, but I thought surely there was no way the implementation could be that stupid because that is quite evidently the dumbest fucking thing I’ve ever heard. Yet… here we are.
What if you want to parody the blue checks program?
So much for ‘free speech’, LOL
He said you can still impersonate as long as “parody” is included in the handle.
I don’t understand the issue with evading fraudulent accounts. Do you people really think 1000 fake Kanye’s floating around makes Twitter a better place simply because it’s more free?
I don’t understand the issue with evading fraudulent accounts. Do you people really think 1000 fake Kanye’s floating around makes Twitter a better place simply because it’s more free?
One of the points I found most interesting in The Onion's Supreme Court amicus brief[0] is the notion that parody loses its power when the reader knows up front that it's all fake. I found the whole brief quite readable, but the paragraph starting at the bottom of page 3 directly discusses this.
Interestingly, the case the court is deciding is about a parody police department account on Facebook, which I assume would run afoul of Twitter's rule.
[0]: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...
Interestingly, the case the court is deciding is about a parody police department account on Facebook, which I assume would run afoul of Twitter's rule.
[0]: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...
[deleted]
free speech means exactly that. let a thousand fake kanye accts bloom.
Doesn't mean that to me.
To me, free speech means anyone can say anything they like. Not anyone can pretend to be anyone they like.
To me, free speech means anyone can say anything they like. Not anyone can pretend to be anyone they like.
Depends on your definition of pretend I guess. Actors pretend to be people they’re not. Comedians pretend to be people all the time to make fun of them.
Identity theft is using someone else’s identity for the purpose of committing fraud. I think the fraud is the actual crime, not impersonation.
For example, there are professional impersonators of famous actors. I don’t think it’s illegal in any way.
Identity theft is using someone else’s identity for the purpose of committing fraud. I think the fraud is the actual crime, not impersonation.
For example, there are professional impersonators of famous actors. I don’t think it’s illegal in any way.
Yes, context matters. Actors on a stage or in a film are clearly 'playing a role'. But when they play the role of a real person there is usually (always?) a disclaimer on the film. Quoting from an interesting article on the origin of this disclaimer [1], it runs :
> “This is a work of fiction. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events, is purely coincidental.”
I don't believe comedians use any disclaimer, but the context of their show and usually the exaggerated portrayal of the real life person caricatured makes it clear that it is a parody.
In an online forum where some people are representing themselves under their real names, and where verification is offered on those real name accounts, then I think it's reasonable for people who are using the real name of a person so as to parody them are required to make the parody explicit, and people who don't can be removed to prevent fraudulent impersonation. And I don't see that as a restriction of free speech (anyone can still comment, including pseudonymously, but not by fraudulently pretending to be another, real life, person).
[1] https://slate.com/culture/2016/08/the-bizarre-true-story-beh...
> “This is a work of fiction. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events, is purely coincidental.”
I don't believe comedians use any disclaimer, but the context of their show and usually the exaggerated portrayal of the real life person caricatured makes it clear that it is a parody.
In an online forum where some people are representing themselves under their real names, and where verification is offered on those real name accounts, then I think it's reasonable for people who are using the real name of a person so as to parody them are required to make the parody explicit, and people who don't can be removed to prevent fraudulent impersonation. And I don't see that as a restriction of free speech (anyone can still comment, including pseudonymously, but not by fraudulently pretending to be another, real life, person).
[1] https://slate.com/culture/2016/08/the-bizarre-true-story-beh...
Fair points if you’re talking about fraud, but this is comedy. And comedy traditionally has greater latitude as misleading the viewer is the intent.
This issue of being required to label parody is headed to the Supreme Court, so perhaps it’ll be settled there (on a public level — Twitter is a private company and can implement whatever custom rules they want).
The Onion filed an amicus brief on this specific issue of the necessity of labeling parody.
Their argument is that believing the content is true is essential to the comedic function of parody. Parody progresses into a mocking absurdity and the force of this pivot can only happen to its maximum extent if the viewer thinks if only for a brief moment that the content might be real. Labeling it as a parody effectively takes all the energy out of the joke to follow.
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33481989
And the hilarious Supreme Court brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...
This issue of being required to label parody is headed to the Supreme Court, so perhaps it’ll be settled there (on a public level — Twitter is a private company and can implement whatever custom rules they want).
The Onion filed an amicus brief on this specific issue of the necessity of labeling parody.
Their argument is that believing the content is true is essential to the comedic function of parody. Parody progresses into a mocking absurdity and the force of this pivot can only happen to its maximum extent if the viewer thinks if only for a brief moment that the content might be real. Labeling it as a parody effectively takes all the energy out of the joke to follow.
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33481989
And the hilarious Supreme Court brief: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-293/242292/2022...
Well all the good handles on Mastodon are taken. Currently there's a land rush to register as many accounts on Mastodon as possible and squat on important usernames that should be claimed by those who go under that handle.
Let me bring out the same argument people have been using for the last few years while disagreeing voices were silenced on Twitter and elsewhere on the internet: Twitter is a private company. It has no obligation to let you post your opinion on its platform. If you don't like it, go make your own Twitter, or buy it from Elon Musk.
But Elon caller Twitter a de facto public town square, something being public is the opposite of private
*https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1507777261654605828?s=20...
*https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1507777261654605828?s=20...
It doesn't matter. It's his company. He's free to change his mind about it. If you don't like it, don't use it.
And I'm free to call him a hypocrite over it. And all the others fine with this but complained previously when people where banned for ToS violations before Musks takeover.
leadership you can believe in /s
[deleted]
No one is saying that Twitter can’t make these rules.
They’re saying that the free speech emperor has no clothes.
They’re saying that the free speech emperor has no clothes.
That would be a valid viewpoint if Musk hadn't bought the Twitter pig in a poke to bring back free speech. I guess the word I'm searching for is a "hypocrisy".
It's completely valid. Musk is allowed to be a hypocrite when it comes to his company. Anybody who doesn't like it can simply leave.
I'm pretty sure we're also allowed to discuss and even criticise it to our hearts' contents.
He's just pissed because the "Italian Elon Musk" guy didn't get perma-banned.
This has always been the case on Twitter.
The fact you'd so rarely see parody accounts that looked too real shows they always enforced that. (TikTok could do this better)
Musk has clarified the rules now everyone can be a blue check. Obviously they can't verify someone that's ambiguous.
> This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue.
That fact most comments here can't think this through shows HN could do with some Blue Checks. (And since the comments are of so low quality, I'll clarify for them that was parody)
The fact HN defends an era where Julian Assange was not verified despite his requests and next week will support Wikileaks shows a real lowbrow IQ here. Remember the days it was frowned upon to be middlebrow?
The fact you'd so rarely see parody accounts that looked too real shows they always enforced that. (TikTok could do this better)
Musk has clarified the rules now everyone can be a blue check. Obviously they can't verify someone that's ambiguous.
> This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue.
That fact most comments here can't think this through shows HN could do with some Blue Checks. (And since the comments are of so low quality, I'll clarify for them that was parody)
The fact HN defends an era where Julian Assange was not verified despite his requests and next week will support Wikileaks shows a real lowbrow IQ here. Remember the days it was frowned upon to be middlebrow?
Who could have predicted that Elon Musk’s latest persona would be a less interesting and thinner-skinned reincarnation of Lowtax.
- Many people don't care enough to pay $8, and with their content downranked, just mostly stop posting.
- Even some legitimate users who'd be willing to pay for a checkmark are reluctant, since it acts as something like tacit approval for Musk himself, in a time when public opinion is low.
- Spammers on the other hand all have blue checkmarks and are sorted to the top, having bought them from countries where they're dirt cheap[0].
- Remaining users get into the habit of scrolling past blue-checkmark responses altogether, as if they're a series of banner ads before the real content.
- Twitter briefly tries to fix the new spam issue by downranking countries where checkmarks are cheap, generating outraged headlines.
- Twitter briefly tries to fix the issue by making checkmarks $8 worldwide, generating outraged headlines.
- Twitter tries again to fix the issue with some sort of multi-tiered subscription system or something but it doesn't matter because the site is a shell of its former self by now anyway.
- Twitter messes with the UI a bunch of times.
- Twitter sells for $18.3 million to Automattic.
[0] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1587499283573530625