Thanks for this - I've had a fuzzy assumption this was occurring over the last decade. I've noticed variations of this strategy to swarm certain trending posts on various platforms (particularly reddit) with an assortment of low-effort, vaguely positive and pro-CCP comments. Lately I've seen this frequently on Shanghai posts about the extreme situation unfolding there.
Funny, I've also noticed this strategy is very common in the cryptocurrency space, especially in Telegram groups. Signal-to-noise is abysmal.
Anonymity goes directly against Twitter's advertising revenue model that requires targeted advertising. Platforms want to know who you are so they can collate data from disparate sources and appease their partners.
Twitter could verify that you're a human in order to let you use the platform, but they don't, they instead verify your identity. Google does the same thing, and Facebook, too. They want a phone number tied to real accounts with cell providers or photo IDs.
It's not just about bot prevention, it's about monetizing their user base.
Of the three accounts I’ve created — one as recent as 2020 — I can’t recall any verification process which so much as required me to put in a real name.
I had to give Twitter my phone number on a relatively new account after a few days. Couldn't do anything on the platform until I verified my phone number, and they wouldn't take a throwaway number.
At one point Facebook wanted my driver's license to use the platform after a while, so I just stopped using it.
No, I think what they're suggesting is preventing actors from creating thousands of accounts and having bots run them. Although it's not as easy as accounts can still be bought or hacked of course.
There are some approaches that suggest something similar as you say, not for every post but an occasional proof that you're human, like once a month. Check out IDENA.
Keeping things as human only as possible means that you can't scale-up apparent vocality of opinion via automation.