[Tell It Right]

This is the same Twitter that claims it has the righteous indignation to declare other people as “fake news”.

[Quentin Quarantino]

House of cards and empty suits. Twitter? Bah, humbug!

[Jonny7797]

SEC reply: ok sounds good to us.

[Moorings]

Making an appearance of investigating.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

In order to manage all of the traffic they receive Twitter has to have a massive number of servers with a massive number of processors.

It should be able to analyze more than 5% of the traffic to see what is fake and what is real.

[noiseman]

5%? Such a lie. Maybe add a zero to that number, at a minimum.

Just check out how any prominent conservative who tweets, especially Trump in the past, has their tweet absolutely flooded with crazy, taunting leftist replies within a millisecond of posting. It’s an obvious botnet-driven effort to crowd out any replies from normal people and to drive them away from conservative tweets.

[pepsi_junkie]

It added that fewer than 5% of Twitter’s “Monetizable Daily Active Usage or Users,” or mDAU, were fake accounts

What makes an account monetizable?

[Boogieman]

“Twitter makes its estimates of false accounts with an internal review of sample accounts...”

The real question is HOW does Twitter make its estimates? How does Twitter distinguish an active bot from a real account? That’s the million (or billion in this case) dollar question.

[EVO X]

I hit Twitter on a fairly regular basis with an add blocking browser. I don’t have a logon with them. The only way they are going to make money from me is if they sell my browsing habits via an IP number. I change that periodically...