Threads is Now 'Booming', With 130 Million Active Users - Slashdot

Posted by EditorDavid

• • Re:

    I don't know... I think he did bite off a little more than he can chew when he bought it, and I have no idea if he can still turn X around in terms of revenue. But I rather like the idea of offering free speech rather than playing the censor, or kowtowing to our EU government's threats about "fake news" and such, with Elon refusing to censor X for them by proxy. I have seen what that looks like in EU vs Disinfo [euvsdisinfo.eu], which has a terrible track record in misidentifying fake news, versus the latest addition to X
    • I'm curious. By "free speech", are you referring to Elon reinstating people who were banned for posting CSAM and allowing them to post more of it? Or the refusing to remove hate speech and threats of violence?

      • Re:

        These are the people who think everyone else's face infringes on their 'right' to swing their fists.

        • Re:

          The analogy doesn't hold - hitting someone with a fist is an active, physical act. Despite what the chronically online may be pushing these days, words are not violence, and they cannot hurt.

          You don't want the government or another entity determining what information is "harmful". I can promise that had we gone down that route they would have deemed most of the Civil Rights Movement or the Vietnam War protests "harmful misinformation". Every piece of knowledge in our future to be gained is "misinformatio

    • • Re:

        Sorry?

        Those articles are about government censorship on Twitter, not the total amount of censorship by Twitter.

        More government censorship is a natural consequence of Twitter itself doing *less* censorship of its own, and I'd argue a much better place to be. If there is censorship it is better for it to be explicitly government driven (and tracked and reports), rather than the way it was before -- a private company doing it directly and then colluding with the government without any explicit legal requests o

• ›

  > This flurry of activity around Threads is helping to tell Elon Musk “ Go #&$% yourself”
  >

• Anybody have access to active daily users across these platforms?

  I see poof pieces in popular media and paywall sites for advertisers. I get it, ADU is the metric they actually care about.

  Facebook brags about 2.3B ADU which is quite impressive.

  • 1 hidden comment

  • Re:

    Not really. The vast majority of internet services do not publish daily users as it's a wildly varying an inaccurate metric. Monthly active users are what matter to virtually all, this includes Meta about Facebook who publish first and foremost the 3.049 billion monthly active users at their earnings call and didn't even mention daily users.

• by pureevilmatt ( 711216 ) on Saturday February 03, 2024 @05:10PM (#64211440)

  I don't doubt that 130 million is the app install base since they've been aggressively pushing it via links in Instagram, but I'd bet that most of those "active users" barely use it.

  • Re:

    Speaking of buying:

    It's a multi-billion dollar global mega-corp. As if they couldn't afford to buy and sell a few "trackers" out there.

  • I can see it

    more sites are starting to link to Threads instead of X.com. It takes ages to build up a social media presence and tons of work to maintain it. The current state of X means that work has a high probability of being all for nothing. Anyone starting a new venture of any kind isn't going to put a lot of effort into X, but they're going to need an equivalent.
    
    Remember what X really does is let you contact, follow and stay in touch with organizations and celebrities easily. It's a blogging platform. Yes, it's

  • Re:

    You don't need to buy anything. You can ignore it, but MAU is the standard metric that is used across all social media / internet services. If they are lying about this number they can find themselves getting fucked by lawyers and regulators the world over as this figure actively drives investment and purchase (from ad companies) decisions.

• • Re:

    Yeah, I've got some stats. As per Axios:

    So it's a loser, hugely.

    • 1 hidden comment

  • Re:

    Both users are still happy with it.

• by Berkyjay ( 1225604 ) on Saturday February 03, 2024 @05:32PM (#64211462)

  Because everytime I look at Instagram they show me Threads posts and I get notifications from Threads made by people I follow on IG. My guess is that they're counting a lot of unwanted participants.

  • Re:

    It's equivalent to 130 million people clicking on a link to something they wanted to see, and then closing out.

  • by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Saturday February 03, 2024 @07:27PM (#64211658)

    Because everytime I look at Instagram they show me Threads posts and I get notifications from Threads made by people I follow on IG. My guess is that they're counting a lot of unwanted participants.

    Instagram has 2 billion monthly active users [socialpilot.co], so that's not it.

    It's basically people clicking some link, which is probably most of Twitter's traffic.

    The dangerous thing for Twitter is when Musk pisses off enough folks that bloggers and folks looking to make a public announcement of some kind start putting up Threads links instead. Then the numbers could shift very quickly.

  • Re:

    And? Does it matter? If you click on it and end up in Threads, you're active. Your eyeball gets targeted. Your data gets logged. Simply ignoring a notification doesn't make you active (otherwise that number would be an order of magnitude higher), and any other action you do is already enough to sell you to someone else which is ultimately the name of the game.

  • Re:

    Well I mean I'm pretty sure Facebook video "views" always counted people scrolling past it (because of auto play), so I wouldn't put it past them.

• I'm a editor who bought meta after the 20% bump. This is my pumping article hopping meta goes up another 20%!

• Any competition is good competition.

  I won't use Threads any more than I use Facebook, but I welcome anything that breaks a monopoly. No matter whether I agree with the person doing it.

• The article doesn't mention that Threads finally launched in the EU in December 2023, which would have given them a decent download boost. Bigger than the boost from "fediverse" I'll bet.

• I used it to post my photography and managed to only have photo related stuff in my feed so was cool but after a few weeks its like eh bunch of people posting for reach around's. The amount of "if I didn't ask you to critique don't comment on my art work " "Unsolicited criticism in now welcome here..."

• I dunno, I still think of Threads as a discount clothing outlet.

• Twitter is trying to rid itself of bots, Threads needs them to prop up its numbers.

  • Re:

    They didn't need to - last I saw an estimate, over 20% of Instagram traffic is bots and in reality it's most likely a lot more.

    Personally I made an account for commenting some of my friends pictures and I had over 300 followers without posting a single picture in less than a week until I made it private.

• All Facebook services are boomering. The kids left long ago.

• They went on and on about how they only think in terms of BILLIONS of users. After multiple micro-soliloquies from their staff during my interview, I'm going to conclude that 130 million users is a horrible failure by their own metric.

• Why hop from one social media controlled by a lizard person to another social media controlled by another lizard person?
  Nostr fixes this