- cross-posted to:
- news_tech@lemmy.link
- cross-posted to:
- news_tech@lemmy.link
Instagram’s new Twitter competitor, Threads, is off to a rocket start. Mark Zuckerberg announced 30 million activated profiles, while internal data shows over 95 million posts and 190 million likes in less than one day,
You must log in or # to comment.
-
Everyone move to Threads
-
Elon is forced to sell Twitter for $50k
-
Everyone leave Threads and go back to Twitter
I’m lowkey pumped about Threads even though I’ll never use it because of the prospect of Elon having to sell cheap
Or
- Everyone move to Threads
- Elon is forced to sell Twitter for $50k
- Everyone leave Threads and go to BlueSky
- Profit
- ???
- Repeat
- Lather
- Kiss
- <Redacted>
- [ Removed to preserve Lemmy’s ad revenue ]
-
See, this is why capitalism trends toward monopolies.
A small developer could create the exact same app down to the semicolon, but wouldn’t get even a quarter of the traffic on release.
But because it’s Meta (and somehow despite their awful record of privacy violations), the app gets over 30 million signups.
The internet is controlled by 4 companies and there’s nothing we can do about it.
Except it is nowhere near a monopoly in the social media space. There are so many general options, and specific forums for topics, etc. That’s not even to mention the fact that just because something doesn’t provide the exact same service doesn’t mean it’s not a competitor. In person communication, VoIP, etc are also competitors to social media.
You mean going out clubbing is praxis? 🍒
Unfortunately that is the power of marketing, an already established user base and a low barrier of entry. People who have Instagram accounts already have a Threads account, and people who have a Facebook account already have an Instagram account. It’s much easier to get them to try than it is to get people to sign up for any Fediverse instance.
I just hope that once it opens to the Fediverse, people who are already there can feel more comfortable to make the leap and drop Meta. Because Meta is not going to let the users drive the experience anyway.
Bots. Lots and lots of bots.
A new social network from Meta, without any privacy, with algorithms to show us what they want?
No, thanks. I love Mastodon.
Yeah, I really don’t get it. I understand people staying on Twitter because that’s sunk cost. They don’t want to lose their notoriety. But what the hell is the point of using Threads? Everything I’ve read about it makes it sound awful.
This article said all I needed to know:
Imagine an active comment section on an Instagram post on someone you follow. Not great, eh?
Now imagine that same comment section, make it infinitely long, AND give users the ability to include images, videos, and links that you can’t avoid seeing.
That’s Threads.
What’s there to not get. To you, the word “Privacy” is a concern. To most people, it’s “that shit that never bothered me, why care?”.
You’re here, on this platform, you’re already not most people.
Am I the only one who finds those numbers abnormally high? The sourcing also seems suspect - going through the verge posts, they’re just quoting internal numbers with no sourcing.
Here’s my question - it says activated profiles, not 30 million signups. If a large chunk of those are Insta and FB users, it seems more than likely that a lot of those profiles could be activated internally (I work with databases, this could be as easy as changing a 0 to 1 in a field in the profile table if they’ve got it integrated right). I’m also curious as to the content of the 95 million posts - how many of those are an automated “Hi I’m on threads!” message when the profile starts up?
That being said, I’m not curious nor stupid enough to actually signup and let them Zuck my data, but this smacks of astroturfing.
What are usual numbers on Facebook and Instagram? These numbers sound extremely high. Is the app being heavily talked about in your circles?
Instagram has 2 billion active users. So only 1.5% of users have activated Threads.
These numbers aren’t extremely high, we just don’t realize the scale of the world outside our little fedi-bubble.
Yes, makes sense. I didn’t fully realize how they rolled it out.
It’s not sign ups “activated profiles”. It’s people using their same insta account to use Threads.
That is literally how you sign up to use Threads, so I’m not sure this is a meaningful distinction.
The low barrier to entry was a very clever idea on their part.
It’s very much a distinction. It’s deceitful to claim there’s “millions of users who signed up/activated” It’s implying or coyly trying to say these are new accounts, especially to people who are on the outside and don’t know. Better to just say, “Millions went back to Instagram to activate their Threads account.”
