Looks great. But maybe the effort should be going towards scaling up so they can remove the invite only requirement, Threads is going to actively eat Bluesky’s lunch while it remains.
90% of my timeline is on Threads is all stuff I don't even follow, while Bluesky is exactly what I ask for. Decentralized platforms are the only way to go, even if it's the centralized version and vision. The Zucc way of ramming (overly) suggested content and ads down your throat will die if there are alternatives.
Just federated identity, like OpenID. It doesn't necessitate distributed systems with communicating backends, like Mastodon or Usenet, just that it allows the user to bring their own IdP and therefore to have "sovereignty" to verify their own identity across platforms. The alternate route is to have users cryptographically certify their registrations post-hoc, e.g. Keybase
They've launched the 'sandbox' which is the federated/decentralised dev/staging environment. So yes, you can run your own PDS (server) and have it federate with others, but it's still very much in development and 'here be dragons'
Considering that "followed only" is far simpler to build, that's a pretty lame excuse and doesn't do anything to change my opinion about whether they're priorities are healthy.
I’m not a fan of that decision either. But I can understand why they added it first. Otherwise, when you sign up, you have empty feed and it’ll take a long time for you to get enough of content, as others subscribe, you follow them and they start posting.
With this decision they ensured you have content from the day one. Often irrelevant (which is risky), but TBH, I’ve found their algorithm to be ok. I’ll drop it as soon as possible, but for v0, I’m ok with it.
A less uncharitable interpretation of the parent comment is that decentralized platforms are the only way to guarantee personal freedom, save a saintly BDFL or government regulation. Not likely to happen.
The “even if it’s the centralized version” is an acknowledgement that some users may prefer centralization, or the platform is still too young to usefully decentralize. As long as there is a way out, or a credible plan, freedom is preserved.
The third Matrix succeeded due to choice—even at the subconscious level.
> The real test is not if we can build up a lot of hype, but if you all find enough value in the app to keep using it over time. And there are tons of basics that are missing: search, hashtags, a following feed, graph syncing, fedeverse support, messaging maybe…
>Wait, what does Threads show you if it doesn't have a following feed?
its like tiktok and twitter had a baby. it shows you content it thinks you will like based on how you use the app. i think? it's good at surfacing what i want to see based on my initial follows
IMO the jury is still out. Twitter was always more than just a UI format, Twitter-shaped text posts with my Instagram friends doesn’t scratch the same itch.
To sign up you need to choose to download the app and click sign up (it isn’t automatic from using your Instagram) so while integrating it with Insta gives it an easy leg up I don’t really see your comparison.
Let’s see how many stick around. Don’t get me wrong, I suspect you’re right. But given the promotion and ease of login I’m not at all surprised to see huge day one login numbers. The question is whether people like what they see enough to stick around.
I'm certainly not sticking around. I signed up, pulled over my follow list from IG, muted a bunch of brand accounts I didn't follow, realized the feed was 100% algorithmic, and haven't launched it again since.
Even if Threads is crap, it’s pretty obvious it’s gonna steal all of Twitter’s advertisers the moment they start showing ads, because the ad money generating users are moving onto Threads.
Heck, Threads doesn’t even need to show ads and the displacement of ad money away from Twitter will benefit Meta as much of that Twitter ad money will get redirected to Meta properties like FB and IG instead.
My Threads feed is full of massive brands promoting itselves already. Since you can't control the feed those are basically free ads. The only major difference will be that in the future those brands will be paying Meta for the privilege. Get the brands addicted with free engagement early on and then once they're good and hooked you start charging.
You can block them, which I’ve been doing more than I’d like today. I blocked Gary Vee, Wendy’s, the UFC, The Verge, Khloe Kardashian, and about a dozen more accounts I would never follow.
Also there's a bigger difference which is that FB/Meta ads are in an entirely different league of quality. The only ads I hear people IRL talking about actually buying and liking the products advertised to them are IG.
Sure, but those 1 billion people could have signed up for Twitter at any point in the last 17 years if they were interested. Twitter already maxed out its user base, so I'm skeptical that there's a 1 billion potential here.
Personally I signed up for threads and have been liking using it so far even though I never really used twitter. I think it has lower startup cost than Twitter because the algorithmic feed really works well without having to manually follow a lot of people. So I think there is reason for Zuck to dream big.
I've heard absolutely no one say anything positive about Threads. Mostly just that it shows you irrelevant content because there's no chronological timeline.
