19 ms·
This quote from the CMU article lines up with the headline on this HN discussion thread (200M, 62%, bots, COVID-19): > CMU researchers since January have colle
by mch82 6y ago
This quote from the CMU article lines up with the headline on this HN discussion thread (200M, 62%, bots, COVID-19):
> CMU researchers since January have collected more than 200 million tweets discussing coronavirus or COVID-19. Of the top 50 influential retweeters, 82% are bots, they found. Of the top 1,000 retweeters, 62% are bots.
Fascinating article. Thank you for taking the time to find it.
- leereeves 6y agoThat suggests an entirely different conclusion: that bots are better at becoming influential on Twitter than people are.
- dmix 6y agoInfluential if you want your audience to be entirely made of other bots.
- zaxm 6y agowithout peer review or even an arxiv link these numbers might as well be pulled out of thin air
- mch82 6y agoCarnegie Mellon University has credibility and is highly ranked (https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/carnegie-mellon-university-3242 https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/carnegie-mellon-univers...), so a press release from them is more credible than thin air or a random blog.