Twitter/X new ID Verification - First Look
Twitter/X new ID Verification - First Look
Thanks to Popcrave https://twitter.com/popcrave/status/1691852136236327316?s=46&t=lcH0dp9biwkMEBKsRQeVeQ
Who here is going to put their ID and photo on X/Twitter
You're viewing a single thread.
✅ Biometrics and ID stored forever who-knows-where
✅ Continued data mining and exploitation
✅ Total surveillance state
💩 The enshittification continues. Gotta love it.
Seriously though... I'm not bullish on this platform. I don't know what it's turning into, but if it truly is a "WeChat of the West," it's not something I'm interested in participating in. And I don't wanna have a hand in building it.
In this route, it means that X would really become an identity platform.
And us being on this platform gives it value. Gives it validity.
I wonder every single day if it makes sense to leave the platforms in protest, or stay in the belly of the beast and raise awareness from within.
I see value in both, but I don't think there's a way to know which is the "correct" or "best" approach until you have hindsight.
Either way, it's clear that we don't matter for anything other than exploitation. The business model doesn't allow for anything else, really.
Side note: Here's a clean version of the URL: https://twitter.com/popcrave/status/1691852136236327316
(Remember to delete everything after the ampersand. Everything after it is an identifier.)
I wonder every single day if it makes sense to leave the platforms in protest, or stay in the belly of the beast and raise awareness from within.
Staying there is called "engagement" and it's exactly what the platforms want. They thrive on your attention, report that as engagement metrics, and turn that into money. "Raising awareness" feeds the beast.
Nobody is surprised when shitty people running companies do shitty things. They stay until it meets a certain threshold of shitty, or they go to a competitor.
Drive engagement at the competitor instead of railing against the toxic site from within. People will move toward something better more readily than they'll move away from something bad but comfortable.
I agree. What I keep coming back to, though, is that these platforms do have more eyeballs on them. So the irony of it is that if that's where the attention is, that's where you need to be, but only in order to raise awareness.
Unfortunately, like you said, building a network of followers on these platforms ironically makes these platforms more powerful.
I think about this when it comes to YouTube channels as well. Think about privacy channels. There's lots of good/useful content on there, but I don't wanna have to follow that person on YouTube. And I don't wanna have to make a Google account to comment or otherwise engage with that person/channel. Yet, YouTube is too large of a distribution platform to ignore. So I don't blame them for being on there. Do I like it? Course not. But I can understand the (perceived?) necessity of it.
The goal is to funnel off these proprietary/exploitative walled ecosystems.