4 ms·
The problem isn't that they lack incentives, it's that by expelling bots they'll inevitably expel some real users. The cure isn't worth the side effects.
by seizethecheese 9y ago
The problem isn't that they lack incentives, it's that by expelling bots they'll inevitably expel some real users. The cure isn't worth the side effects.
- komali2 9y agoIf gmail can spam filter emails, why can't Twitter do the same for bots?
- porfirium 9y agoGmail gets a big amount of metadata with each mail which they run lots of checks against.
- BoiledCabbage 9y agoHow do we know if they won't report the extent of the disease? And we're not even confident they know the extent. If they don't know the extent, they couldn't have made an informed judgement.
- jpttsn 9y agoSo you’re saying that instead of trying to rescue their stock price, Twitter are looking to treat everyone fairly, cost no object?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- stale2002 9y agoWell apparently so, as they are choosing not to do so. Or maybe it isn't costing them much money.
- jpttsn 9y agoNo, I think the difference gp ignores is that they could either protect false negative real users, and eat a loss for the good of those, vs. ignore real users getting squeezed and boost stock price by...? This is where it gets fuzzy.