Most of the 100 million people who signed up for Threads stopped using it
Most of the 100 million people who signed up for Threads stopped using it
arstechnica.com
Most of the 100 million people who signed up for Threads stopped using it
28 comments
-
-
Doesn't help that you can't use it on desktop.
-
At this point it has to be intentional from these companies.
Because some basic data analysis should show that while the majority of content are comments and shorter posts made from mobile devices, but posts with self-created media beyond meme-templates, longer text posts, etc. tend to be more from computers. And more extensive moderation also often comes from desktop.
-
-
-
A half-life of 7 days. Impressive.
-
-
It’s what should have been expected though. Lots of people check it out during the hype, and later only those who actually found it useful/interesting/fun remain.
Most of the hype-launched services should have similar numbers.
-
It was absolutely expected, look at how Zuck frames it in the article. "More than they expected" stayed. They were parading the 100Million sign ups to brag, nobody thought all those people would stay.
-
-
-
This is expected. Fox News has about 1 million daily viewers. Threads can be just fine at 30 million people retained after the hype died down.
-
“we'll focus on growing the community to the scale we think is possible. Only after that will we work on monetization. We've run this playbook many times before—with Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Stories, Reels, and more—and this is as good of a start as we could have hoped for, so I'm really happy with the path we're on here.”
Enshitification in progress.
-
I can picture the progress bar labeled 0% on one side and a piece of shit on the other.
0%…….IN.PROGRESS…….💩
-
-
Well, it's still Facebook owned after all, and given that Facebook still exists, it's kind of redundant with it. Many of the people who were on Twitter (like myself) were on it because it WASN'T Facebook or Facebook owned, and so we wouldn't go to that platform anyway.
Plus, it's not the only competitor out there, although to be fair, there's way too many competitors right now, and it needs to whittle down to like 3 big ones or so. And these ones should be friendly to apolitical types, moderates, and sane conservatives.
Like it or not, online liberals such as ourselves are the vocal minority. Most people in life (and even on the net, even though the internet trends more liberal) aren't as politically motivated as some in the Fediverse would assume. We're in a bubble / echo chamber. Especially on Lemmy / Kbin and Mastodon.
-
Reddit and Twitter are both heavily liberal, as is here in the fediverse. FB is a mixed bag, but I think you're assumption that liberals are the vocal minority is incorrect. More liberals use the internet than the dying breed of conservatives.
-
-
The collective noun for threads users is 'a pot of turds'
-
Knowing how much personal data they harvest, why on Earth would you download this malware ?
-
Because most people don't care about privacy.
-
While this is true, early adopters—those who stay, use, promote new services and keep them active— tend to belong to the nerd and techies subgroups. Who are the most likely to care about privacy. Threads simply didn't offer anything of value and demanded to take your soul and life for eternity. Ultimately, if the tech savvy people don't stay to explain and ease the adoption of the platform, that's when the people who don't care about privacy leave.
-
-
-
Haven’t gotten any notification messages about it. I don’t think I turned them off either.
-
Because it lacks a lot of features.
-
😢
-
-
-
Why does the link shortener a.co exist, just to make life harder for poor bot devs?
-
-
Bot saying comrade is cringe af.
-
28 comments
I was ahead of the curve and didn't sign up
I’m an early adopter.