On Twitter Usernames With Lots of Numbers (tinysubversions.com) 49
Darius Kazemi: There's a common belief that Twitter accounts with usernames like @jsmith12345678 must be bots, or trolls, or otherwise nefarious actors. The thing is, since at least as far back as December 2017, the Twitter signup process has not allowed you to choose your own username! It instead gives you a name based on your first and last name, plus eight numbers on the end. You aren't prompted to pick a more distinctive username after that, and you can change it but you need to figure out how to do it yourself. (The December 2017 date was confirmed to me privately by someone who works at Twitter Design.) This means that when you see a reply from someone with a username with a bunch of numbers in it, it's actually pretty likely that the user is simply someone who joined Twitter after December 2017 and either doesn't care to change their username, or doesn't know that they can change it, or doesn't know how to change it. In other words, it's probably a user who isn't very technically savvy.
Anecdotes that matter. (Score:2)
Maybe.
Re: Anecdotes that matter. (Score:5, Informative)
'they only add numbers if your name isn't unique enough by itself.
Sucks to be Jonn Smith or Jane Brown, I guess.
Anyone making significant use of Twittter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
seems like it would be trivial for a bot to change the username to not have the numbers on it.
npc's are pretty hard to distinguish from bots of course, so you're working against that. the real winning move is of course to simply not use twitter. it's not only that twitter is a cesspit it's that it's technically very shitty way to communicate or even to try to asses what public opinion on some issue is.
They're trying to hide the bots. Curious behavior. (Score:2)
Don't you think? It's almost as though they have a vested interest in hiding nefarious activity from even themselves! I wonder why that might be...
Wow. That's heavy (Score:2)
What an amazingly important issue to address on Slashdot.
Re:Wow. That's heavy (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"Well that was fast."
BTW, what's the name of the law when Trump gets mentioned, Hitler has his Godwin's law so I guess it's more than fair that he gets one too.
Re:Wow. That's heavy (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
BTW, what's the name of the law when Trump gets mentioned,
Lots of them. He's broken lots of them.
Re: (Score:2)
So, that would be "Broken Law" ... sounds about right!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
What's so heavy? Have the laws of physics been altered in your reality?
Re: (Score:2)
It's an oddity of Twitter... Slashdot has covered that site since its public release. No censorship squabbles like Facebook... so little to talk about.
Twitter., (Score:1)
just for Twats.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Quitter
Technically savvy? (Score:3)
I can program, I can do system and network management.
If I don't know how to change my user name or simply don't care, I am a techno moron.
Koel!
Re: (Score:3)
You might just be windows "admin."
I'm glad to have learned this (Score:1)
Last line says it all (Score:2)
No (Score:1)
I'm sorry, but no... this does not follow... You fail at logic.
Wait, what? (Score:2)
*And* they're on Twitter? [head spins] :-)
It's still a good filter, though. (Score:4, Insightful)
Any real person who signs up on Twitter and doesn't care enough to change that numpad-mashing username to something more personal and distinctive is probably less worth listening to. Whenever I see an account that still has those numbers I feel, "They don't really care about their online presence even the bare minimum to come up with a better username. Why should I care so much about what they have to say?"
Re: (Score:1)
The same goes for phone usernames. I don't even bother with people with usernames made of nothing but 10 digits. /s
Here's news: It's nearly impossible to keep a username across all the social medias you will ever sign up for. Eventually, you'll try to create an account and your favorite name will be "taken". I've long given up and now just spam the number pad until I get a random digit string that passes. Maybe I'll add a letter at the start if I'm feeling frisky. It was good enough when sysops assigned you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: It's still a good filter, though. (Score:3)
The format simply doesn't lend itself to the dissemination of complex ideas or allow reasoned discussion and argument. The whole algorithm is designed to facilitate rage scrolling in order to keep it's users emotionally engaged. Most people can't even recall what they read a few minutes later. Any information there is better and more easily accessed elsewhere.
I care about my Twitter "online p
Re: (Score:1)
Re: It's still a good filter, though. (Score:2)
I don't usually make fun of millennials, but when I do ...
"They don't really care about their online presence even the bare minimum to come up with a better username."
Are you the punchline in an old Internet For Dummies book? Internet babies that cut their teeth on AOL are all laughing at you.
So... (Score:1)
Low effort identity adds liklihood it is a bot. (Score:2)
it's actually pretty likely that the user is simply someone who joined Twitter after December 2017 and either doesn't care to change their username, or doesn't know that they can change it, or doesn't know how to change it.
A "social media image" company mass-making accounts to create a large astroturfed following for a client would not care enough to go to the trouble of changing all those identities to more "legitimate" looking ID names. The number of accounts are the only important part. Likewise for people making a throwaway account for spamming or harassing a target person/group for non-commercial gain.
Even if the stupid username formula is compulsory when you sign up, people not trying to personalize their identity only
Not true (Score:2)
This is simply not true. I created a new Twitter account this afternoon (for dubious reasons :p) and the handle became firstname_lastname. I was not prompted for that handle nor could I change it, but there wasn't a single digit in it.
Simply Incorrect (Score:2)
Just NPC's not Bots? (Score:2)
Glad we cleared that up, then.
"Probably" (Score:2)
When you say "probably," what exactly do you mean?
Gonna need to see the math on that, cowboy.
Re: "Probably" (Score:1)
When you exist, what exactly are you?
Gonna have to see the math on that.
</replying-to-nonsense-with-nonsense>
Bot Sentinel... (Score:2)
...is a browser extension and web site that can help identify "problematic" posts from possible bots and trolls. I find it to be quite useful for getting a handle (sorry) on who to avoid/block/mute.
https://botsentinel.com/ [botsentinel.com]
Zip Code (Score:1)
It's on Twitter. What's the difference? (Score:1)
It's already implied that the user isn't very savvy, and any distinction from a bot is de-facto negligible. :)