# Сопутствующие статьи по теме Monetization

Новостной центр HTX предлагает последние статьи и углубленный анализ по "Monetization", охватывающие рыночные тренды, новости проектов, развитие технологий и политику регулирования в криптоиндустрии.

X Platform's New Monetization Rules: Farewell to Invalid Exposure, Focus on High-Quality Engagement

"X Platform's Monetization Shift: Prioritizing Quality Engagement Over Vanity Metrics" An author details a personal experiment revealing the inefficacy of chasing high exposure for monetization on X (formerly Twitter). Despite generating 29 million impressions and significant engagement (267.7k interactions, 119.5k likes) through an aggressive strategy of posting 200+ daily comments on popular accounts, the revenue earned was only $71.49. The article argues that in 2025, exposure is a "vanity metric" and a misleading indicator of earnings. The platform's monetization rules now primarily reward genuine interactions from paid, verified users (comments, reposts, likes, bookmarks), while filtering out interactions from free users and bots. The author explains that their strategy, while boosting raw numbers, primarily attracted bot traffic, which diluted their follower base, lowered their verified user ratio (~41%), and potentially triggered algorithm penalties for spam-like behavior. The key takeaway is a fundamental shift in strategy: focus on building a quality community rather than chasing empty exposure. The new recommended approach involves aiming for a 3-5% engagement rate, fostering high-quality comments, maintaining a 45-50% verified user ratio, and creating original content. The conclusion is that X now rewards "content builders" with a dedicated, paying audience, not "traffic speculators" chasing meaningless impressions.

比推12/26 14:18

X Platform's New Monetization Rules: Farewell to Invalid Exposure, Focus on High-Quality Engagement

比推12/26 14:18

How Twitter Creates 'Fake Traffic'

This article investigates the perceived "fake traffic" on X (formerly Twitter) by comparing engagement metrics. It notes a significant discrepancy: a Binance YouTube video with 1.22 million subscribers received only 160k views, while a tweet from an account with 250k followers garnered 517k views. The core explanation is X's method of counting "impressions." A view is counted each time a tweet appears on a user's screen, even if they scroll past it without engaging. This applies to the timeline, search results, and profile views, with multiple appearances from the same user also counted. This system prioritizes measuring exposure over genuine interaction (likes, replies), a practice also used by Threads and TikTok, unlike YouTube's stricter 30-second watch time requirement. The article suggests this approach, implemented by Elon Musk to publicly display view counts, aims for maximum visibility rather than deep engagement. However, to counter potential low-quality content, X uses its "Creator Ads Revenue Sharing" program as a truer measure of influence. Payouts are based on verified user interactions (likes, replies from Premium subscribers) and content type, not just raw view counts. Additional features like "Bangers," which highlights high-engagement tweets, further help identify genuinely valuable content. The conclusion frames high view counts as a starting point for creators, emphasizing that bravery in self-expression is the first step, but real success and monetization come from fostering authentic engagement.

marsbit12/23 01:16

How Twitter Creates 'Fake Traffic'

marsbit12/23 01:16

Why Does Hyperliquid Earn Less Than Coinbase?

Hyperliquid, a decentralized exchange, processes near-Nasdaq-level perpetual trading volumes but captures significantly lower fees compared to centralized platforms like Coinbase and Robinhood. While Hyperliquid cleared $205.6 billion in notional volume over 30 days, it generated only $80.3 million in fees—an effective take rate of ~3.9 bps. In contrast, Coinbase and Robinhood achieve take rates of ~35.5 bps and ~33.5 bps, respectively, by operating as retail brokers that monetize multiple layers: distribution, balances, subscriptions, and order flow. This gap stems from a structural difference: Hyperliquid positions itself as a low-fee *market layer* (like Nasdaq), providing high-throughput execution and清算 infrastructure, while brokers like Coinbase control user relationships and extract value through higher-margin activities. Hyperliquid’s model includes permissionless distributor frontends (Builder Codes) and product deployment (HIP-3), which drive ecosystem growth but also create long-term fee compression risks by outsourcing high-value distribution. To defend its economics, Hyperliquid is taking steps to retain distribution control, integrate HIP-3 markets natively, and introduce balance-driven revenue streams like USDH (a native stablecoin with 50% reserve收益 sharing) and portfolio margin (10% interest fee on borrows). These moves aim to shift its model from pure exchange-level execution toward a hybrid approach that captures broker-like profit pools—without sacrificing its core infrastructure advantages. The key challenge remains balancing open ecosystem growth with tighter economic integration to avoid being commoditized as a wholesale execution venue.

marsbit12/18 07:03

Why Does Hyperliquid Earn Less Than Coinbase?

marsbit12/18 07:03

活动图片