Threads may have signed up 100 million users in its first week, but that doesn't mean 100 million people are actually using it:
Generally speaking, everyone seems to agree that lack of features is the main reason for the drop in engagement. It's certainly the reason I haven't signed up in the first place. Threads is pretty useless to me until they release a browser client, since I'm not going to fat-finger my way through a phone interface. Beyond that, I have little interest in an app that decides for itself which posts to show me. A bare minimum requirement is that I can follow whoever I want.
I can only assume that lots of people agree about the lack of critical features. Either that or they find Threads terminally boring. I'm not sure which would be worse.
I follow lotsa people of my choice, and I see their posts. Granted it’s in a phone client. For me, it’s twitter without the negatives.
Real on the web home based work to make more than $14k. Last month I made $15738 from this home job. Very simple and easy to do and procuring from this are just awesome.For more detail visit the given interface.. http://incomebyus.blogspot.com
Could it be as simple as this? There is only a limited market for Twitter-style social networks. Just look at the struggles with profitability at Twitter itself. Can text ever be as engaging as images or video to a mass market?
"I have little interest in an app that decides for itself which posts to show me. A bare minimum requirement is that I can follow whoever I want."
Bingo. That's why I stopped using Facebook, and am struggling to find a new social media. Fb reached the point where 80% of my news feed was either ads or "suggested content", and the only way I could see what my friends were posting was to specifically search for them. Instagram and TikTok were actually designed to offer purely suggested content from the beginning. I might have migrated to Twitter, but then Elmo took over and started trashing the place.
*sigh*
They need to get a life. Social media is a social disease.
I don't know. I see you here everyday posting. I assume you have a life. I know I do.
I just think it is funny that Facebook lets you post pictures, links and text, but Facebook felt they had to buy Instagram where you can only post pictures and then many years later had to allow the Insta users to post text and links with a new app called Threads.
FWIW I mostly read Facebook on desktop computer in chronological order and use the Social Fixer plugin to remove some of the other UI annoyances. What I see is mostly just posts from my friends with a few things from pages I have liked thrown in. It's perfectly fine. I don't use Insta much because the UI offends me and again I mostly view things using a desktop computer where the UI is even worse than on mobile -- which is saying a lot. Twitter also has a pretty deficient UI and I have always found the signal to noise ratio to be poor. News I get through either RSS feeds or the Apple News app.
I wouldn't be shocked if usage is dropping - there was a ton of hype at the start - but I used Sensor Tower regularly and it was notoriously inaccurate on actual values.
I've seen Twitter become much less populated of late two so it's possible Twitter-style social media is just bifurcating along political lines.
I just don't understand the point of a non-chronological interface. if you can't follow a discussion, why have Threads? It's really strange to me
i'm hoping it stays growing again. I don't want to go back to Twitter
Josh Marshall on RFK jr,
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/into-the-kennedy-bullshitosphere-now-with-bonus-anti-semitism
It's a weird fail.
You had one job: Clone Twitter.
Not that tough for an org the size of Meta, one would think. And visually, they certainly did, but seriously: no web interface? no screen names? And whatever their algorithm is -- I have no idea what they're thinking with this.
I started to sign up for it, but without either a web app or a Mac app, I don't have a way to use Threads with a device having a keyboard. What's the point of having a twitter-like discussion system when you can't actually input text efficiently?
Also, it's a little hard to get excited about a twitter-like app that doesn't let you see only the people you follow. My experience with FB, which I almost never use at this point, is that it has an almost 100% reliable algorithm for finding posts that I have absolutely no interest in seeing, while suppressing the ones I'd find interesting. If Threads manages to match this, it sounds like it will be a giant waste of time.
I've also read (but don't have experience with, obv.) that replies to Thread posts aren't treated as Thread posts themselves, which sounds like a generally bad idea.
I see that all I did is echo KD's comments. But still, what type of moron releases such an incomplete product? People's trust is incredibly valuable in the Internet world, and Zuck just burned a bunch of good will for no good reason (but still not $44B worth, to his minimal credit).
To point out that Threads traffic is plummeting in order to defend one's choice in staying on birdsite is curious.
Cloudflare still has birdsite as 58th highest in the US, by DNS traffic. That's lower than MSN, and nowhere what it used to be, pre-Musk, when it was in the top-10.
It's like I said weeks ago, I was holding off because Threads looked like it was in beta. Why did they open up now? Because they thought it opportunistic to open while birdsite endured its latest instability problems.
Was that a mistake? If your sole social media account is birdsite, don't go blaming anyone for being locked out. Most people have at least Bluesky, Threads, or Mastodon accounts in addition to birdsite.
The users make the app - not literally. But it's a social site, and therefore the app, the society needs to proceed organically from social structures, not from an algorithm constructed by maladapted capitalists harnessing it for clicks.
What’sTwitter?
Maybe if they put it into the form of a VR MUD. Then they'll be stylin'.