4 ms·

Bluesky would really benefit from a notional ($1/year) signup fee. That small bit of friction makes a vast difference in knocking down all kinds of spam, at the

Bluesky would really benefit from a notional ($1/year) signup fee. That small bit of friction makes a vast difference in knocking down all kinds of spam, at the price of being considered a bit uncool (for having a revenue stream).

hobobaggins 2y ago
not sure why you're being downvoted. It's what Metafilter and Whatsapp did (but delayed until the following year, IIRC). Maybe Metafilter isn't the best example :)
squigz 2y ago
And at the price of anonymity, and making the platform inaccessible to those who can't afford the signup fee (which will certainly stay 1 USD per year forever, right?) (inb4 someone tells me how everyone can afford $1) Not to mention that this won't solve the spam that actually matters. What's dropping a few thousand dollars to a dedicated attacker?
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  no, $1, one time. Despite the owner, this was one thing SomethingAwful seemed to do right over 20 years ago. The goal isn't to make money, but discourage botting. any paywall works and $1 is about as low as you can go in a digital transaction without credit card brokers making it difficult for you. And yes, it really shouldn't go up. SomethingAwful was 10bux back in 2005, and is still 10bux in 2025 (they monetized other things over the decades, but not the entry cost). Can it be exploited? Sure, about as much as Bluesky can add "Bluesky Gold" at any time. When it enshittifies I hope it takes a shorter time to leave than Twitter. >inb4 someone tells me how everyone can afford $1 if you have the time to be commenting on social media, you can afford $1. The cost of electricity to run your phone for a month is probably $1.
  - squigz 2y ago
    I like how nobody on HN seems to understand how poverty works.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      I'm open to hearing others' viewpoints with it. I had to slash a bunch of my expenses this year, but any issues with social media costs would be more of a time issue for me, not a cost issue.
    - jaredklewis 2y ago
      Enlighten us? I don’t see the issue. Lots of things (most much more important than a bluesky account) cost money. Is having a Bluesky account like a fundamental human right or something?
      - orangea 2y ago
        When something costs $1/year, the primary barrier isn't being able to afford it, but having a valid payment method. Depending on the requirements, it can be an issue if you don't have a credit card, don't have a bank account, etc. And not having those things is slightly correlated with poverty. In addition, it makes it harder for children to sign up (not necessarily a bad thing, just saying).
    - idlewords 2y ago
      I like how everyone understands the concept of paying for a good or service right until they get online.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      Are you sure you do? You seem to be trying to argue that a $1/year fee for a 2nd tier messaging service would be a great hardship.
  - akurtzhs 2y ago
    Ages ago Metafilter was $5 for a lifetime registration. It was a great site and community for a long time.
johneth 2y ago
I doubt it would change anything. One of the first things Elon did after taking control of Twitter was to make verification pay-to-play. Now the blue checkmark is basically a sign of either a bot, grifter, or engagement farmer. Putting up a paywall hasn't deterred bots, and it won't work.

hobobaggins 2y ago

not sure why you're being downvoted. It's what Metafilter and Whatsapp did (but delayed until the following year, IIRC). Maybe Metafilter isn't the best example :)

squigz 2y ago

And at the price of anonymity, and making the platform inaccessible to those who can't afford the signup fee (which will certainly stay 1 USD per year forever, right?) (inb4 someone tells me how everyone can afford $1) Not to mention that this won't solve the spam that actually matters. What's dropping a few thousand dollars to a dedicated attacker?

johnnyanmac 2y ago
no, $1, one time. Despite the owner, this was one thing SomethingAwful seemed to do right over 20 years ago. The goal isn't to make money, but discourage botting. any paywall works and $1 is about as low as you can go in a digital transaction without credit card brokers making it difficult for you. And yes, it really shouldn't go up. SomethingAwful was 10bux back in 2005, and is still 10bux in 2025 (they monetized other things over the decades, but not the entry cost). Can it be exploited? Sure, about as much as Bluesky can add "Bluesky Gold" at any time. When it enshittifies I hope it takes a shorter time to leave than Twitter. >inb4 someone tells me how everyone can afford $1 if you have the time to be commenting on social media, you can afford $1. The cost of electricity to run your phone for a month is probably $1.
- squigz 2y ago
  I like how nobody on HN seems to understand how poverty works.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    I'm open to hearing others' viewpoints with it. I had to slash a bunch of my expenses this year, but any issues with social media costs would be more of a time issue for me, not a cost issue.
  - jaredklewis 2y ago
    Enlighten us? I don’t see the issue. Lots of things (most much more important than a bluesky account) cost money. Is having a Bluesky account like a fundamental human right or something?
    - orangea 2y ago
      When something costs $1/year, the primary barrier isn't being able to afford it, but having a valid payment method. Depending on the requirements, it can be an issue if you don't have a credit card, don't have a bank account, etc. And not having those things is slightly correlated with poverty. In addition, it makes it harder for children to sign up (not necessarily a bad thing, just saying).
  - idlewords 2y ago
    I like how everyone understands the concept of paying for a good or service right until they get online.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    Are you sure you do? You seem to be trying to argue that a $1/year fee for a 2nd tier messaging service would be a great hardship.
- akurtzhs 2y ago
  Ages ago Metafilter was $5 for a lifetime registration. It was a great site and community for a long time.

johneth 2y ago

I doubt it would change anything. One of the first things Elon did after taking control of Twitter was to make verification pay-to-play. Now the blue checkmark is basically a sign of either a bot, grifter, or engagement farmer. Putting up a paywall hasn't deterred bots, and it won't work.