Official Twitter Thread (2 Viewers)

[Ilov80s]

Well let’s see what this Threads app from IG is all about…

 

[Desert_Power]

every time I open that tab, I'm inundated with videos involving people getting into fights, road rage incidents, police shootings, etc.

Same here . It’s crazy how much violence is being “suggested” for me

Same here and I really don’t follow that much political stuff. I’ve had to block several large accounts because I don’t want to see violence like that. A funny but harmless brawl at a Waffle House here and there is funny but I don’t want to see dogs being hit by cars, serious fights with weapons, etc.

Weird. I have not seen any of this type of stuff on the For You.

 

[The Z Machine]

every time I open that tab, I'm inundated with videos involving people getting into fights, road rage incidents, police shootings, etc.

Same here . It’s crazy how much violence is being “suggested” for me

Same here and I really don’t follow that much political stuff. I’ve had to block several large accounts because I don’t want to see violence like that. A funny but harmless brawl at a Waffle House here and there is funny but I don’t want to see dogs being hit by cars, serious fights with weapons, etc.

Weird. I have not seen any of this type of stuff on the For You.

You only get Sergio pics and stories.

 

[Desert_Power]

every time I open that tab, I'm inundated with videos involving people getting into fights, road rage incidents, police shootings, etc.

Same here . It’s crazy how much violence is being “suggested” for me

Same here and I really don’t follow that much political stuff. I’ve had to block several large accounts because I don’t want to see violence like that. A funny but harmless brawl at a Waffle House here and there is funny but I don’t want to see dogs being hit by cars, serious fights with weapons, etc.

Weird. I have not seen any of this type of stuff on the For You.

You only get Sergio pics and stories.

It's a lot of local stuff, at least since I blocked all the AllinPod guys.

 

[rockaction]

I have gotten lots of violence, too, and I have no idea why. I also have some political accounts that I follow, and that seems to be the thread that is tying this together.

Mostly all my accounts are fantasy football ones, so I find it truly odd they've recommended just awful violence for me. I hate it.

 

[bigbottom]

Is this a new development or was it always that way? Sounds disturbing. I’ve only just recently dipped my toe in the Twitterverse and for now only follow a few sports people.

 

[rockaction]

Is this a new development or was it always that way?

I've only been using it about a year, but it's a new development as far as I can tell. I used to get a lot of unfunny Barstool Sports in my "For You" section, now it's gross violence.

 

[massraider]

Is this a new development or was it always that way? Sounds disturbing. I’ve only just recently dipped my toe in the Twitterverse and for now only follow a few sports people.

Under previous leadership, they had "Home", where the posts you follow that received most engagement were. "Latest" was the tab where the real time tweets were.

The For You tab is supposedly recommended based on an algorithm, and Musk has said only people who pay to be verified will appear there. The 2nd half of that is definitely not true, as people I follow appear there who are not Verified.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I never went to the For You tab and that will continue (the rare times where I am actually on the site.)

 

[Ted Lange as your Bartender]

I would consider paying the $8 a month if it would allow me to opt out of or block the For You tab. The problem is on the phone app it now always defaults over to that tab.

And I read somewhere that Threads doesn’t even have an option for a follower timeline, it’s only an algo-driven feed. I hope that’s not true.

 

[massraider]

I would consider paying the $8 a month if it would allow me to opt out of or block the For You tab. The problem is on the phone app it now always defaults over to that tab.

And I read somewhere that Threads doesn’t even have an option for a follower timeline, it’s only an algo-driven feed. I hope that’s not true.

Do some looking around online, Twitter says they default to last tab you were on, maybe restart or update app.

 

[massraider]

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technol...p-launched-5-million-users-elon-musk-responds.

10 mill downloads for Threads. The money quote:

Musk responded to the platform’s launch in several posts on his own platform, tweeting: "It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram."

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

On algorithms….

A few months ago I was at a work function, talking to a much younger associate. We were both lamenting on how much time we waste on social media, and I jokingly said that all I see is basketball highlights, fights, and people arguing over tranny stuff.

He replies back with “Really? Mine is all boats and ****!“ (boobs)

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Is this a new development or was it always that way? Sounds disturbing. I’ve only just recently dipped my toe in the Twitterverse and for now only follow a few sports people.

For me it's new. I can't give you a specific date or anything, but probably like the last couple of months or so.

The irritating thing is that when I block these accounts or otherwise tell Twitter that I don't want to see them, the algorithm doesn't seem to update its priors. I won't see the exact particular account that I just blocked, but it's replaced by some other bot-driven engagement farm that serves up the exact same violent content. If I was conspiracy-minded, I would say that Twitter was force-feeding me this stuff, but I'm sure it's just a busted algorithm.

I'm sure people here know this already, but I don't intentionally follow any accounts that promote violence, and I don't follow accounts that wink and nod at violence. If you looked at the accounts I follow, you would see a lot of Megan McArdles and Noah Smiths in there, not antifa or MAGA types. That tells me that there's just something about "follows politics" that the algorithm links to "violent psycopathy." On one hand, that's an interesting thing to know. But I do wish I could tell the algorithm that I mean it when I say that I don't want this stuff.

 

[caustic]

Well let’s see what this Threads app from IG is all about…

Pretty slick app IMO. Need to rebuild my following list so the feed is less generic content, but I'll still take generic content over the extreme violence and graphic animal abuse that was popping up on my Twitter feed.

 

[Capella]

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technol...p-launched-5-million-users-elon-musk-responds.

10 mill downloads for Threads. The money quote:

Musk responded to the platform’s launch in several posts on his own platform, tweeting: "It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram."

God he’s such a weirdo

 

[HellToupee]

Look at this crazy crap in my for you tab
My link ——-it’s highway violence in South Africa. I feel like the algorithm is trying to program me

 

[The Commish]

On algorithms….

A few months ago I was at a work function, talking to a much younger associate. We were both lamenting on how much time we waste on social media, and I jokingly said that all I see is basketball highlights, fights, and people arguing over tranny stuff.

He replies back with “Really? Mine is all boats and ****!“ (boobs)

Lightbulb moment right? For anyone wondering why they are seeing what they are seeing in their feeds, it's because the algorithms have detected that content is what keeps your attention the longest. There are virtually no exceptions to this. It could be a "broken" algo as IK says, but I'll suggest that algos are programs. One man's "broken" is another's "by design".

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

On algorithms….

A few months ago I was at a work function, talking to a much younger associate. We were both lamenting on how much time we waste on social media, and I jokingly said that all I see is basketball highlights, fights, and people arguing over tranny stuff.

He replies back with “Really? Mine is all boats and ****!“ (boobs)

Lightbulb moment right? For anyone wondering why they are seeing what they are seeing in their feeds, it's because the algorithms have detected that content is what keeps your attention the longest. There are virtually no exceptions to this. It could be a "broken" algo as IK says, but I'll suggest that algos are programs. One man's "broken" is another's "by design".

I agree but it’s not that innocent. You could look at rainbows and butterflies all day and they will still show you a reel of a street fight to try and draw you in.

 

[McBokonon]

My For You tab is mostly Newcastle United/Soccer stuff and financial news, but the algo also tries to put in some political stuff from a certain political disinformation ecosystem. I do follow some political stuff but I don’t see the violence others are describing. I do notice that the people mentioning this problem here tend to be on the opposite side of the aisle than me, generally speaking, so wondering if the algo assumes one side is more likely to engage with that content than the other. (tried to be generic don’t ban me)

 

[The Commish]

On algorithms….

A few months ago I was at a work function, talking to a much younger associate. We were both lamenting on how much time we waste on social media, and I jokingly said that all I see is basketball highlights, fights, and people arguing over tranny stuff.

He replies back with “Really? Mine is all boats and ****!“ (boobs)

Lightbulb moment right? For anyone wondering why they are seeing what they are seeing in their feeds, it's because the algorithms have detected that content is what keeps your attention the longest. There are virtually no exceptions to this. It could be a "broken" algo as IK says, but I'll suggest that algos are programs. One man's "broken" is another's "by design".

I agree but it’s not that innocent. You could look at rainbows and butterflies all day and they will still show you a reel of a street fight to try and draw you in.

Sure...if you spend any time looking, they'll show you more. If you don't, they move on to train wrecks. They will present you all kinds of things (legal phishing) until they find what grabs your attention the most.

ETA: Everyone joining these sites needs to remember they grant access to their browser history as well. It's in every single ToS I've seen written in the last decade+ so it's not just about what you're viewing on that site (say twitter) and what you're clicking on there. They also have access to your browser history too...another reason not to keep browser data.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

On algorithms….

A few months ago I was at a work function, talking to a much younger associate. We were both lamenting on how much time we waste on social media, and I jokingly said that all I see is basketball highlights, fights, and people arguing over tranny stuff.

He replies back with “Really? Mine is all boats and ****!“ (boobs)

Lightbulb moment right? For anyone wondering why they are seeing what they are seeing in their feeds, it's because the algorithms have detected that content is what keeps your attention the longest. There are virtually no exceptions to this. It could be a "broken" algo as IK says, but I'll suggest that algos are programs. One man's "broken" is another's "by design".

I agree but it’s not that innocent. You could look at rainbows and butterflies all day and they will still show you a reel of a street fight to try and draw you in.

Sure...if you spend any time looking, they'll show you more. If you don't, they move on to train wrecks. They will present you all kinds of things (legal phishing) until they find what grabs your attention the most.

ETA: Everyone joining these sites needs to remember they grant access to their browser history as well. It's in every single ToS I've seen written in the last decade+ so it's not just about what you're viewing on that site (say twitter) and what you're clicking on there. They also have access to your browser history too...another reason not to keep browser data.

I wonder when the Luddite revolution is going to kickoff. I was hoping my kids would be the generation to turn their backs on technology but that didn’t happen.

 

[thecatch]

On algorithms….

A few months ago I was at a work function, talking to a much younger associate. We were both lamenting on how much time we waste on social media, and I jokingly said that all I see is basketball highlights, fights, and people arguing over tranny stuff.

He replies back with “Really? Mine is all boats and ****!“ (boobs)

Lightbulb moment right? For anyone wondering why they are seeing what they are seeing in their feeds, it's because the algorithms have detected that content is what keeps your attention the longest. There are virtually no exceptions to this. It could be a "broken" algo as IK says, but I'll suggest that algos are programs. One man's "broken" is another's "by design".

I agree but it’s not that innocent. You could look at rainbows and butterflies all day and they will still show you a reel of a street fight to try and draw you in.

I've never had a tweet or video in my "for you" tab that is violent or even suggestive of violence. It's basically a list full of tweets from people that are similar to who I follow.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

I still haven't perceived a significant change from pre-Musk days. Maybe its just because the changes are incremental and not noticeable. I don't spend much time on the "For You" tab but when I have it seems like pretty much the same stuff in my normal feed - sports, business, entertainment and politics. There are more bots but it doesn't effect me much. On the rare occasion I engage with someone by replying to a tweet, I typically wake up the next day with a few new bot followers, most of which are young women avatars selling crypto or something similar.

 

[Desert_Power]

I still haven't perceived a significant change from pre-Musk days. Maybe its just because the changes are incremental and not noticeable. I don't spend much time on the "For You" tab but when I have it seems like pretty much the same stuff in my normal feed - sports, business, entertainment and politics. There are more bots but it doesn't effect me much. On the rare occasion I engage with someone by replying to a tweet, I typically wake up the next day with a few new bot followers, most of which are young women avatars selling crypto or something similar.

Other than some pretty interesting follows that left the platform, I agree. Some noticeable over-promotion, but that is fixed by a block or mute.

Going to love to read the business cases on this one.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I would consider paying the $8 a month if it would allow me to opt out of or block the For You tab. The problem is on the phone app it now always defaults over to that tab.

And I read somewhere that Threads doesn’t even have an option for a follower timeline, it’s only an algo-driven feed. I hope that’s not true.

No follower timeline seems to be the case for me. Lots of stuff I did not choose to follow. Not a big fan so far.

 

[The Commish]

I wonder when the Luddite revolution is going to kickoff. I was hoping my kids would be the generation to turn their backs on technology but that didn’t happen.

They learn from us. We have a mixed bag in our house. Most of the time, I can't tell you where my phone is while my wife is pretty plastered to hers. I now have my oldest who is like me and my middle one, like her mom. Our youngest is limited to ABC Mouse.....

 

[mr. furley]

Elon suing Meta for IP theft because Meta has hired many former Twitter employees.. and is suddenly unveiling their new twitter-like app.

welp, who would have seen this coming?

 

[Runkle]

Elon suing Meta for IP theft because Meta has hired many former Twitter employees.. and is suddenly unveiling their new twitter-like app.

welp, who would have seen this coming?

Shocking that he fires 90% of his workforce and they went on and found new jobs somewhere else instead.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Twitter Is Now Worth a Third of What Musk Paid for It, Fidelity Says
Social-media company’s value sinks to around $15 billion; Fidelity cuts its valuation for a third time

 

[massraider]

Twitter Is Now Worth a Third of What Musk Paid for It, Fidelity Says
Social-media company’s value sinks to around $15 billion; Fidelity cuts its valuation for a third time

I would love to see how they arrive at this figure. It's not even worth close to that. Two years of profits in their history. Competitive market.

There is no value calculator anyone has that makes it worth that. You have to just just trust that they will someday monetize their users enough.

 

[McBokonon]

Twitter Is Now Worth a Third of What Musk Paid for It, Fidelity Says
Social-media company’s value sinks to around $15 billion; Fidelity cuts its valuation for a third time

I would love to see how they arrive at this figure. It's not even worth close to that. Two years of profits in their history. Competitive market.

There is no value calculator anyone has that makes it worth that. You have to just just trust that they will someday monetize their users enough.

And Twitter struggled to do this consistently even before Musk took over. Dorsey has some Howard Hughes qualities himself but it was generally adults running it and they still had a difficult time nailing down the monetization piece. You can forget about it with this gutted clown show.

 

[Mister CIA]

Twitter Is Now Worth a Third of What Musk Paid for It, Fidelity Says
Social-media company’s value sinks to around $15 billion; Fidelity cuts its valuation for a third time

I would love to see how they arrive at this figure. It's not even worth close to that. Two years of profits in their history. Competitive market.

There is no value calculator anyone has that makes it worth that. You have to just just trust that they will someday monetize their users enough.

I don't know how the Substack revenue model is working out, but Twitter whiffed not catering to their stars and offering the similar platform. Let the content generator reel in cash and then skim off that.

Maybe that would not have amounted to much, but there's no reason not to have tried.

 

[thecatch]

Twitter Is Now Worth a Third of What Musk Paid for It, Fidelity Says
Social-media company’s value sinks to around $15 billion; Fidelity cuts its valuation for a third time

I would love to see how they arrive at this figure. It's not even worth close to that. Two years of profits in their history. Competitive market.

There is no value calculator anyone has that makes it worth that. You have to just just trust that they will someday monetize their users enough.

And Twitter struggled to do this consistently even before Musk took over. Dorsey has some Howard Hughes qualities himself but it was generally adults running it and they still had a difficult time nailing down the monetization piece. You can forget about it with this gutted clown show.

Twitter was generally considered to be pretty badly managed pre Elon.

 

[Capella]

Twitter Is Now Worth a Third of What Musk Paid for It, Fidelity Says
Social-media company’s value sinks to around $15 billion; Fidelity cuts its valuation for a third time

I would love to see how they arrive at this figure. It's not even worth close to that. Two years of profits in their history. Competitive market.

There is no value calculator anyone has that makes it worth that. You have to just just trust that they will someday monetize their users enough.

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

 

[Jayrod]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

 

[mr. furley]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

show your math

 

[Jayrod]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

show your math

I have none. This is a philosophical debate, not a mathematical one.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

show your math

I have none. This is a philosophical debate, not a mathematical one.

Business valuation is somewhat of an inexact science and reasonable opinions can vary substantially, but I think most professionals would have to at least consider the purchase price from an actual cash transaction that closed less than 10 months ago a strong indicator of value. We can all laugh at the $44bln acquisition price but that can't be ignored when valuing a company.

 

[The Commish]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

These are completely different topics to be addressed by Twitter (unless you're asserting that the bots are somehow "using" the system in a way different than a user does....I'm open to hearing how that might be true, but am pretty sure that's incorrect too)

 

[Jayrod]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

These are completely different topics to be addressed by Twitter (unless you're asserting that the bots are somehow "using" the system in a way different than a user does....I'm open to hearing how that might be true, but am pretty sure that's incorrect too)

I'm saying that the remedies to get rid of bots makes the application less desirable from a user standpoint, i.e. view limits.

Why is what I'm saying that controversial? This is the second person to question me on it.

 

[The Commish]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

These are completely different topics to be addressed by Twitter (unless you're asserting that the bots are somehow "using" the system in a way different than a user does....I'm open to hearing how that might be true, but am pretty sure that's incorrect too)

I'm saying that the remedies to get rid of bots makes the application less desirable from a user standpoint, i.e. view limits.

Why is what I'm saying that controversial? This is the second person to question me on it.

Probably because what you say here is not the same as what you said in the bold to those of us not in your brain. They appear to us (or me anyway) as completely different thoughts/comments/positions.

What you're witnessing with twitter is really poor choice in approach to dealing with bots....like REALLY bad. But it's still a CHOICE and that CHOICE ties them together. They don't have to go that route. You can handle bots without impacting regular user experiences.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Yea I can’t imagine Twitter is even worth 5B right now. Shell of the company they used to be. Horribly run, just a joke. Threads is right there with like 10M signups on day 1. If they can even figure out how to give people 75% of what they want without all the spam and hate bots they’ll blow Twitter away.

Meta is a lot of things, namely evil, but they are very competently run. Instagram is a powerhouse. Facebook blows but it’s a money machine while the boomers hang on.

I don't agree with the bolded, at all.

They are actively going after bots, which was the whole point of the changes that started this thread.

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

Also, it appears that Threads is going to be have the same heavy handed moderating as the old Twitter, which has been a nice improvement to the new Twitter.

FWIW, I mostly agree with you. Twitter has been pretty refreshing post-Elon up until fairly recently. Even then, it's nothing a tweak to the algorithm can't fix.

Then again, I have to admit that I'm not even entirely sure what people are talking about with the whole "bot" thing. I'm pretty sure the people that I follow are real people, and I don't mind if bots show up into the algorithm feed as long as they're interesting and not posting violent garbage. Again, the algorithm out to be able to understand that I don't want that content after the sixth or seventh time I block one of those accounts. Automated funny-dog videos are fine.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Threads has 70MM sign-ups in two days. That's a pretty big percentage of the # of accounts Twitter has IIRC.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Threads has 70MM sign-ups in two days. That's a pretty big percentage of the # of accounts Twitter has IIRC.

Being able to port over your IG followers is a pretty big deal. Folks don't have to start their brand all over again on the platform.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I just read Twitter is at 450MM, so not as big a % for Threads as I was thinking. But ~15% is still a lot for 2 days.

 

[Dezbelief]

I just read Twitter is at 450MM, so not as big a % for Threads as I was thinking. But ~15% is still a lot for 2 days.

Including bots

 

[massraider]

I just read Twitter is at 450MM, so not as big a % for Threads as I was thinking. But ~15% is still a lot for 2 days.

Including bots

Yeah, that number tells us very little.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I just read Twitter is at 450MM, so not as big a % for Threads as I was thinking. But ~15% is still a lot for 2 days.

and IG has over a billion uses IIRC.

 

[Capella]

You can either have something run smoothly all the time and deal with bots, or you can get rid of all of the bots, but have a clunky difficult to navigate system. They are directly competing interests.

What? They shut down last weekend because Elon didn’t pay his Google cloud bill lol. The clunkiness of the system has nothing to do with the bots, which seemingly have multiplied 10x since he took over and fired everybody.

Also I liked the moderation. My kid sits next to me all the time. I can’t scroll and see people’s heads being blown off and totally naked chicks. It’s ridiculous.