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?

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.

I like how nobody on HN seems to understand how poverty works.

I like how everyone understands the concept of paying for a good or service right until they get online.

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?

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).

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.

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.

Ages ago Metafilter was $5 for a lifetime registration. It was a great site and community for a long time.

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.

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 :)