Re: Banking apps
Here in the land of the check, the USA, passbook accounts have been passe for decades.
596 publicly visible posts • joined 31 Jan 2012
The US Department of Energy overseas American energy policy. In what way is it all qualified to issue findings on viruses?
The DOE doesn't actually oversee American energy policy, but it does run the "National Laboratories" that do research in a variety of areas, including biology.
"Is there really that many people willing to pony up $96[**] per year, for the privilege of having a blue badge by their name, an edit button and a slight boost to their visibility ranking? Especially since if Twitter does actually manage to get that many people to sign up to the blue badge, that'll effectively render the boost mechanism utterly meaningless..."
For those that use Twitter for business purposes, to reach an audience, etc, then paying to increase your relative tweet visibility makes sense. You pay for visibility in most mediums. A "regular" user who uses Twitter within their own sub group and doesn't want to expand that has no real reason to pay. The question is how many people are in which group.
"So in theory, moderation should be pretty simple. Is this comment legal? Yes/No."
Great theory, but it doesn't work in practice. What is legal? Where is legal? When is legal? A post legal in one jurisdiction might not be in another, whether a post is legal can change over time, and maybe a post cannot be actually determined to be legal until a court has ruled on it, years after the fact. So "legal" is not a useful determining factor in practice.
Twitter requires money to work, and that comes from advertisers. Much of the moderation effort is to keep the cash sources happy. Some is to keep the users happy so they stick around to see the ads. The rest is to keep the courts and governments happy so Twitter stays open, and in some cases, the execs out of jail.
And the Hunter Biden laptop story is so crazy, it is hard to believe. It was also from the New York Post, not the most reliable of outlets. Twitter deciding to reduce the story's presence on the site is relatable and presumably totally legal in the US. The government telling Twitter to remove it, or alternatively, forcing them to carry it, would be a 1st Amendment issue, but that apparently didn't happen.
The most surprising fact is how little this is covered in main media.
Maybe not your main stream media, but the New York Times has had at least 10 stories on FTX since Nov 22.
But your are correct about the difference in how blue collar and white collar crimes are treated.
"Musk took it upon himself to personally call CEOs to chastise them, one industry figure told the FT" is from https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/elon-musk-personally-called-ceos-of-companies-that-stopped-advertising-on-twitter-to-complain-report-says/ar-AA14BPiU?li=BBnb7Kz citing a Financial Times article I don't want to pay to read.
Journalists cite lots of sources who don't want to be named. You also apparently don't want to be named, are you publishing dubious claims in an attempt to shape the narrative?