4 ms·

Even if you get reliable bot ID, there's a difference between a zero- or negative-value bot that just spams or tries to inflame social tensions and positive-val

Even if you get reliable bot ID, there's a difference between a zero- or negative-value bot that just spams or tries to inflame social tensions and positive-value bots that automatically propagate things like weather or traffic updates. Some accounts are a mix of human and "bot" updates--and you can get a very different impression of their nature depending on your sample. https://twitter.com/JeffLindner1 https://twitter.com/JeffLindner1, for example, posts automatic alerts from the Harris County flood warning system (such as https://twitter.com/JeffLindner1/status/1529386618938920960 https://twitter.com/JeffLindner1/status/1529386618938920960). If you look at his account when it isn't pouring outside, you'll see human updates and retweets. If you look during a three-day downpour, you may see dozens of automatic tweets per human post.

nightski 4y ago
It feels like bots should be treated differently entirely than users. They should not look like a normal user and it should be completely up to the user to turn bots on/off or subscribe to specific ones. Maybe with it's own UI and feed entirely. NOTE: For the ones operating legitimately I mean.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  (Legitimate) bot accounts are labeled. https://twitter.com/TwitterSupport/status/1494041387880304645 https://twitter.com/TwitterSupport/status/149404138788030464...
  - nightski 4y ago
    Oh good to know. I think it's amusing that I have been using Twitter for over a decade and never knew this. Maybe it's because there are so few legitimate bots. Although I will say that UI hint is extremely subtle.
    - abathur 4y ago
      I hadn't heard of it either. Only for the last ~9 months, it seems. And from the comments, it required proactive action.
Turing_Machine 4y ago
> Even if you get reliable bot ID, there's a difference between a zero- or negative-value bot that just spams or tries to inflame social tensions and positive-value bots that automatically propagate things like weather or traffic updates. While I do understand your point about the difference, neither type should be measured for things like (e.g.) advertising revenue. Weatherbots don't buy goods or services.
- abathur 4y ago
  Unless they're intentionally using UI scripting to create ad impressions, weatherbots aren't viewing tweets--they're posting them. If people aren't viewing those tweets or deriving value, they're consuming resources without adding much to the ecosystem. If people are viewing those tweets and deriving value from them, the bot is increasing ad revenue.
- querulous 4y ago
  weatherbots also don't ever check the feed so they don't see ads
numpad0 4y ago
Somewhere in this trainwreck there must be an aspect that Twitter is full of sockpuppet/alternate persona accounts partly because of its loose-cannon hard bans and nonexistent ban evasion policy. It's not rare for kids to have half dozen accounts just because. That exists parallel to bot problems but is easier to explain as a fake/bot problem.

nightski 4y ago

It feels like bots should be treated differently entirely than users. They should not look like a normal user and it should be completely up to the user to turn bots on/off or subscribe to specific ones. Maybe with it's own UI and feed entirely. NOTE: For the ones operating legitimately I mean.

ceejayoz 4y ago
(Legitimate) bot accounts are labeled. https://twitter.com/TwitterSupport/status/1494041387880304645 https://twitter.com/TwitterSupport/status/149404138788030464...
- nightski 4y ago
  Oh good to know. I think it's amusing that I have been using Twitter for over a decade and never knew this. Maybe it's because there are so few legitimate bots. Although I will say that UI hint is extremely subtle.
  - abathur 4y ago
    I hadn't heard of it either. Only for the last ~9 months, it seems. And from the comments, it required proactive action.

Turing_Machine 4y ago

> Even if you get reliable bot ID, there's a difference between a zero- or negative-value bot that just spams or tries to inflame social tensions and positive-value bots that automatically propagate things like weather or traffic updates. While I do understand your point about the difference, neither type should be measured for things like (e.g.) advertising revenue. Weatherbots don't buy goods or services.

abathur 4y ago
Unless they're intentionally using UI scripting to create ad impressions, weatherbots aren't viewing tweets--they're posting them. If people aren't viewing those tweets or deriving value, they're consuming resources without adding much to the ecosystem. If people are viewing those tweets and deriving value from them, the bot is increasing ad revenue.
querulous 4y ago
weatherbots also don't ever check the feed so they don't see ads

numpad0 4y ago

Somewhere in this trainwreck there must be an aspect that Twitter is full of sockpuppet/alternate persona accounts partly because of its loose-cannon hard bans and nonexistent ban evasion policy. It's not rare for kids to have half dozen accounts just because. That exists parallel to bot problems but is easier to explain as a fake/bot problem.