"I’m on Threads" meta thread

[Patricio Swayze 17,058]

That’s not what I’m saying. Of course it makes sense to tap into an install base of 2.35 BILLION customers to launch a new product.
I’m saying that a user (like Patricio) lamenting that their insta followers aren’t following them on threads misunderstands what threads is/isn’t.

That isn’t what I am lamenting. I made a comment about how many came over.

What I was lamenting is pretty much what you are lamenting: why do I need two instagrams?

Therefore I am trying to find the reason to use it. Celery had a good suggestion.

[Celery Man 20,607]

11 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

That’s not what I’m saying. Of course it makes sense to tap into an install base of 2.35 BILLION customers to launch a new product.

I’m saying that a user (like Patricio) lamenting that their insta followers aren’t following them on threads misunderstands what threads is/isn’t.

I agree but I would also expect him to see more than 2% or whatever it was come over. I'm still not 1000% convinced he doesn't have his threads profile on private.

I wouldn't expect this to be the thing either (even if he does have a lot of followers down south america way) but Threads may only be in the US at this point. The Threads guy commented earlier that they are a ways off from launching in the EU (presumably because GDPR). It may be that they are US only right now.

[Patricio Swayze 17,058]

[Chuckie Finster 22,342]

What did your Twitter account look like on March 23, 2006?  Maybe we should give it a few weeks before we treat this like a finished product.  

They've got celebrities, newspapers, and sports teams already signed up.  The rest will sort itself out.  (Although Followers Only tab and search functions need be added sooner rather than later and Chronological sort by football season should be an important goal, IMO.)

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

1 minute ago, Patricio Swayze said:

That isn’t what I am lamenting. I made a comment about how many came over.

What I was lamenting is pretty much what you are lamenting: why do I need two instagrams?

Therefore I am trying to find the reason to use it. Celery had a good suggestion.

It isn’t trying to be instagram. It’s trying to be twitter, which isn’t something of interest to you (you’ve made clear you don’t utilize text as a medium and don’t even want others engaging with you via text). 

I wonder what % of these 50MM signups are like you and will never becoming active users on Threads? I’m guessing pretty high.

[Patricio Swayze 17,058]

It isn’t trying to be instagram. It’s trying to be twitter, which isn’t something of interest to you (you’ve made clear you don’t utilize text as a medium and don’t even want others engaging with you via text). 
I wonder what % of these 50MM signups are like you and will never becoming active users on Threads? I’m guessing pretty high.

Dude, I like you, but you don’t seem to be following.

I know that it’s a replacement for Twitter. I explained how I used Twitter. What I was saying is because threads is being easily launched via IG, I think that many people are struggling with redundancy. That’s all.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

1 minute ago, Patricio Swayze said:

Dude, I like you, but you don’t seem to be following.

I know that it’s a replacement for Twitter. I explained how I used Twitter. What I was saying is because threads is being easily launched via IG, I think that many people are struggling with redundancy. That’s all.

I am following you. It’s clear you aren’t the ideal user for threads or twitter. But yes, I think lots folks that were power users on insta but never adopted twitter joined Threads and were like “wait why did I do this?”

[Celery Man 20,607]

yeah your profile is public, I am wrong. I do think that people struggle a bit with the difference. I also hope that.... meta does a good job of normalizing the algorithm - currently it is heavily tilted towards the kinds of celebrities who do well on instagram (because huge imported follower lists = huge engagement). Hoping that balances out soon as more people get established.

Certainly a large percentage of the users who have signed up over the past few days will never go back in. Probably more than average for a new platform given the ease to set up a new account, although it is still notable that nobody has been pushed to Threads from Instagram.

[Celery Man 20,607]

7 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What did your Twitter account look like on March 23, 2006? 

['stache 21,589]

The interesting question will be whether people who only had Twitter will sign up for instagram solely for threads. I’ve been part of conversations about what’s the real difference between Facebook, Instagram, and twitter/threads and have a rough idea. My guess is that most people who were on both insta and Twitter will make the jump to threads or already have. New sign ups will show if it will truly kill Twitter, by gaining people who only used Twitter and will replace it with threads. I’m sort of the opposite, I use Facebook and Instagram but not Twitter. I’m using this new threads platform to see if I like it and so far I do.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

5 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The interesting question will be whether people who only had Twitter will sign up for instagram solely for threads. I’ve been part of conversations about what’s the real difference between Facebook, Instagram, and twitter/threads and have a rough idea. My guess is that most people who were on both insta and Twitter will make the jump to threads or already have. New sign ups will show if it will truly kill Twitter, by gaining people who only used Twitter and will replace it with threads. I’m sort of the opposite, I use Facebook and Instagram but not Twitter. I’m using this new threads platform to see if I like it and so far I do.

Can’t you sign up for Threads directly without having an insta account?

[Patricio Swayze 17,058]

Can’t you sign up for Threads directly without having an insta account?

That would be really dumb if one couldn’t.

[NoName 16,241]

3 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Can’t you sign up for Threads directly without having an insta account?

 

2 minutes ago, Patricio Swayze said:

That would be really dumb if one couldn’t.

right now, no.

it's an instagram account which uses threads as a " new, separate space for real-time updates and public conversations"

you can't delete a threads account without deleting your instagram account either btw.

[Rimbo 25,247]

['stache 21,589]

4 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Can’t you sign up for Threads directly without having an insta account?

For now I read you have to sign up for instagram, but there’s no requirement that you use it, you can use only threads if you want. They seem to be making changes pretty rapidly and my guess is that within a few months you’ll be able to sign up separately, it’ll be available on a web browser, and people’s feeds will be what they want. They openly admit that it’s a startup process and it seems the first wave is to build a critical mass of users by allowing instagram users to sign on by a single click. Once there are a few hundred million on threads primarily from those who used both instagram and Twitter it’ll be more attractive for those who only like Twitter and they can set up a separate login processes.

[Lurch 5,916]

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe go fuck yourself.

But seriously, that is a valid approach. Although it can also be done on IG. I just get tired of interacting. In fact, since returning to IG after a break, I have turned off comments on my posts. I don’t need to see the fire emoji. Since photography is not my career, nor do I want it to be, at a base level I don’t really care if I am growing a following. It’s nice and feels good to be appreciated, but not needed.

I guess my issue is, I used Twitter for news and I used IG for photography (and following other photogs and artists). But since Threads is woven together with IG, it feels like I am compelled to follow everyone that was on my IG. When in reality, if I want it to be a substitute for Twitter, I would only follow a handful of news accounts and some UT related accounts. I am sure others are struggling with this as well.

Create an alt (but connected) IG account in IG, then use the alt for threads

[Da Fino 2,670]

56 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

You have a stronger opinion on the precision of political labels than I do.  My view on the history of Twitter is that some people didn't like the climate of twitter, feigned to leave, and came back.  Then other 'opposite' people didn't like the climate twitter, feigned to leave, and came back.  Nobody left on account of a technical reason. So it's self evident whatever stickyness Twitter have remains to be sticky.

What is your understand of what is happening to Twitter that would cause a mass exodus now.  The people who don't like each other all simultaneously migrate to the same place? People who dislike Elon will now embrace Zuck?  Or people start downloading Threads (which has no web interface), because of frustration over their Tweetdeck?

I actually just deleted the app last week due to frustration. I could no longer see any replies or retweets on my browser or my app. Maybe there was an easy fix, but it was enough for me to say "fuck it" and bail. There could be dozens of us. 

[Apep 644]

32 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

yeah your profile is public, I am wrong. I do think that people struggle a bit with the difference. I also hope that.... meta does a good job of normalizing the algorithm - currently it is heavily tilted towards the kinds of celebrities who do well on instagram (because huge imported follower lists = huge engagement). Hoping that balances out soon as more people get established.

Certainly a large percentage of the users who have signed up over the past few days will never go back in. Probably more than average for a new platform given the ease to set up a new account, although it is still notable that nobody has been pushed to Threads from Instagram.

Looks like the algorithm is doing better today, but I still wish there was an easy way to view posts only from people I am following like on Twitter. 

[Neonmoon 38,126]

1 hour ago, immamac said:

https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/

 

Everyone should read this if you haven't - we are experiencing the golden days of Threads right now, lets hope they can avoid a lot of the enshittification which they know is a thing now.

That is every business. Innovate or die

 

[Patricio Swayze 17,058]

Create an alt (but connected) IG account in IG, then use the alt for threads

So to follow up on this and Celery’s suggestions for anyone else navigating this issue:

It’s actually much simpler than suggested, if you had an alt IG account already. Simply log out of threads, it then prompts you if you would like to log back in or switch accounts. Click switch accounts and choose your alt account. No need to log out of IG.

[52-80 19,000]

6 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

I don't, it's really not a lot of precision I'm talking about. Based on our conversation, I can understand how, if Elon shares your view that Nazis and insurrectionists are simply "right wing", then breaking verification/moderation/amplification would be a way to give them an equal voice without saying all of the "politically incorrect" stuff that most of society finds intolerable out loud. And so breaking Twitter could be understood as simply changing the climate. I mean I think that's stupid, but I can see how one might get there. But, that's not my opinion - I think that removing verification and paying for visibility are technical changes that Elon made and are central (both the changes and that now there's one asshole in charge making changes like this) to why people have left or have wanted to leave. And that's again separate from the difficulty Twitter is experiencing in keeping the servers online and the advertiser dollars coming in. Twitter has remained sticky because it is hard to unseat social media platforms that have critical mass and there hasn't been a good equivalent available. That changed on Wednesday, which is what is being discussed in this thread.

Would you not say the line defining what "society finds intolerable", clearly segregated the people on attempted exodus to gab et al vs mastodon?  That they constituted a small fraction of the total user base, makes them relatively fringe, and I'm not personally interested in the accurate labeling of those people.

Or was the central driver of people wanting to leave based on difference of opinions on the blue checks? You're saying people have left or wanted to leave because those they followed lost/gained checks, OR its the tiny number of people who originally held checks ended up leaving when it was lost?  That doesn't hold muster.

Twitter with its already small (smaller than Snapchat) base had high individual engagement due to its nature.  If Zuck wants a happy sanitary place, that's basically Instagram with threaded replies.  That's not quite the same animal.

I'm OTR as being positive on Facebook and Zuck.  I don't think he'll fail, but I don't think this hot new toy of his is what subsumes Twitter permanently.

[elfenix 34,123]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

You have a stronger opinion on the precision of political labels than I do.  My view on the history of Twitter is that some people didn't like the climate of twitter, feigned to leave, and came back.  Then other 'opposite' people didn't like the climate twitter, feigned to leave, and came back.  Nobody left on account of a technical reason. So it's self evident whatever stickyness Twitter have remains to be sticky.

What is your understand of what is happening to Twitter that would cause a mass exodus now.  The people who don't like each other all simultaneously migrate to the same place? People who dislike Elon will now embrace Zuck?  Or people start downloading Threads (which has no web interface), because of frustration over their Tweetdeck?

it can't be as simple as people figuring out that a guy needing to make half a billion dollars a month in interest payments trying to run off advertisers, content producers, and the engineers that keep the stack working looks like he's going to make the thing implode, and so everyone was trying to get ahead of that apparent eventuality.  no, it definitely has to be politics. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

29 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Stupid shit on Facebook thread ----------->

[ConferenceRoom 6,080]

10 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Stupid shit on Facebook thread ----------->

Tilted. 

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

1 minute ago, ConferenceRoom said:

Tilted. 

The billionaires are fighting? 

[Js1 83,620]

I guess I got so used to not having a Twitter after I deleted it, I downloaded Threads on Wednesday and have only opened it about 4 times 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Js1

[52-80 19,000]

22 minutes ago, elfenix said:

it can't be as simple as people figuring out that a guy needing to make half a billion dollars a month in interest payments trying to run off advertisers, content producers, and the engineers that keep the stack working looks like he's going to make the thing implode, and so everyone was trying to get ahead of that apparent eventuality.  no, it definitely has to be politics. 

if you are a content consumer, the site's financials is not your concern.  i have no idea whether immamac is poor or rich from running this site, and knowing that doesn't change my participation here.

if you are a content creator, your incentive is maximum reach.  that means now cross-posting on twitter AND threads.  what's the cost of doing that, and why would have you exited one prematurely ("get ahead") or even at all?

[atomheartbevo 89,044]

12 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

if you are a content creator, your incentive is maximum reach.  that means now cross-posting on twitter AND threads.  what's the cost of doing that, and why would have you exited one prematurely ("get ahead") or even at all?

If your incentive is financial in nature, you'll eventually end up on Threads only if things continue to go to shit on twitter, because people tune out when they see the same fucking ad for eyeglasses with a blue filter 6 times in a row. Or because their feeds are fucked up or full of shit.  Or because Musk is limiting them to only being able to use twitter for 15-20  minutes a day before they go over their limits.

[atomheartbevo 89,044]

2 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

Also, 2 days in and the Austin American Statesman isn’t aware Threads exists and has no presence. Maybe they don’t want to piss off Elon on the slim hope he gives them some access in the future.

They have no problem running stories highlighting the problems with Tesla.  Me thinks it's because they have a tiny staff these days and they seem to be behind on a lot of things.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

If your incentive is financial in nature, you'll eventually end up on Threads only if things continue to go to shit on twitter, because people tune out when they see the same fucking ad for eyeglasses with a blue filter 6 times in a row. Or because their feeds are fucked up or full of shit.  Or because Musk is limiting them to only being able to use twitter for 15-20  minutes a day before they go over their limits.

Also first adopters are more likely to reach critical mass and monetize their reach.

Anyone monetizing their content joined Threads the first second they could if they are smart.

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

20 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Also first adopters are more likely to reach critical mass and monetize their reach.

Anyone monetizing their content joined Threads the first second they could if they are smart.

100%. There is zero risk to joining at this point so early adopters are going to make sure they are in. So you can expect Networks/Politicos/Sports Clubs/Artists/Hoors/etc. to jump in.  We'll see if it has staying power.

[Celery Man 20,607]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

Would you not say the line defining what "society finds intolerable", clearly segregated the people on attempted exodus to gab et al vs mastodon?  That they constituted a small fraction of the total user base, makes them relatively fringe, and I'm not personally interested in the accurate labeling of those people.

Or was the central driver of people wanting to leave based on difference of opinions on the blue checks? You're saying people have left or wanted to leave because those they followed lost/gained checks, OR its the tiny number of people who originally held checks ended up leaving when it was lost?  That doesn't hold muster.

Twitter with its already small (smaller than Snapchat) base had high individual engagement due to its nature.  If Zuck wants a happy sanitary place, that's basically Instagram with threaded replies.  That's not quite the same animal.

I'm OTR as being positive on Facebook and Zuck.  I don't think he'll fail, but I don't think this hot new toy of his is what subsumes Twitter permanently.

Outside of this discussion, I don't care if you are interested in accurately labelling nazis and insurrectionists. I suppose it is informative generally for how to understand your perspective as a person whose posts I see on this website. There's also a difference in comprehensively categorizing what it is that society finds intolerable and individually categorizing "traitor" and "nazi" as intolerable.

If you order an apple pie in my restaurant and I give you a plate with a turd on it and you leave the restaurant, you didn't leave because we had a disagreement about apple pies. It would be either dishonest or stupid to describe it in that way, which is what you are attempting to do with verification. Verification served a purpose, it was central to how Twitter is used, "verifying" anyone who pays whatever the fee is for a blue check is not verification (it is a little turd on a plate). It's not a disagreement about checks, it is a degradation of the platform. As are the other changes that we've talked about. If you're engaging honestly here it seems like you don't understand how verification and amplification are important on Twitter - again if you have a static and established follower list and you only read posts from those people, I suppose it makes sense.

Actually, I do remember one exchange in some dumb thread forever ago which may have been from you where I was accused of dismissing information without reading it because of its source (in that instance, The Epoch Times). If that was you, it kinda clicks a little bit for me.

Edited July 7, 2023 by Celery Man

[G650 13,334]

2 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

The Epoch Times

Yikes

['stache 21,589]

I'm curious how it'll work during the next big cultural event like a mid-east uprising, a Russian coup, or a couple millionaires lost in a submarine. It'll probably take some time for threads to have the real-time information feel like Twitter, but I think they'll get there eventually. 

[elfenix 34,123]

if you are a content consumer, the site's financials is not your concern.  i have no idea whether immamac is poor or rich from running this site, and knowing that doesn't change my participation here.
if you are a content creator, your incentive is maximum reach.  that means now cross-posting on twitter AND threads.  what's the cost of doing that, and why would have you exited one prematurely ("get ahead") or even at all?

Claiming your name on a mastodon isn't leaving, it's being prepared.

[52-80 19,000]

15 minutes ago, elfenix said:

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

if you are a content consumer, the site's financials is not your concern.  i have no idea whether immamac is poor or rich from running this site, and knowing that doesn't change my participation here.
if you are a content creator, your incentive is maximum reach.  that means now cross-posting on twitter AND threads.  what's the cost of doing that, and why would have you exited one prematurely ("get ahead") or even at all?

Claiming your name on a mastodon isn't leaving, it's being prepared.

if people signed up for mastodon on grounds wholly independent from those who signed up for gab/parler, should there be an overlap of those demographics and names?

[Js1 83,620]

35 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Outside of this discussion, I don't care if you are interested in accurately labelling nazis and insurrectionists. I suppose it is informative generally for how to understand your perspective as a person whose posts I see on this website. There's also a difference in comprehensively categorizing what it is that society finds intolerable and individually categorizing "traitor" and "nazi" as intolerable.

If you order an apple pie in my restaurant and I give you a plate with a turd on it and you leave the restaurant, you didn't leave because we had a disagreement about apple pies. It would be either dishonest or stupid to describe it in that way, which is what you are attempting to do with verification. Verification served a purpose, it was central to how Twitter is used, "verifying" anyone who pays whatever the fee is for a blue check is not verification (it is a little turd on a plate). It's not a disagreement about checks, it is a degradation of the platform. As are the other changes that we've talked about. If you're engaging honestly here it seems like you don't understand how verification and amplification are important on Twitter - again if you have a static and established follower list and you only read posts from those people, I suppose it makes sense.

Actually, I do remember one exchange in some dumb thread forever ago which may have been from you where I was accused of dismissing information without reading it because of its source (in that instance, The Epoch Times). If that was you, it kinda clicks a little bit for me.

52-80 doesn't support Elon, he just is here for the lulz.  He just also happens to also defend Twitter/Elon/nazis/insurrectionists while getting in the lulz. 

[G650 13,334]

Just saw 70 million signups in a day and a half.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

52-80 doesn't support Elon, he just is here for the lulz.  He just also happens to also defend Twitter/Elon/nazis/insurrectionists while getting in the lulz. 

I mean, is national socialism really a problem?

<insert chart with selected data here>

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

2 minutes ago, G650 said:

Just saw 70 million signups in a day and a half.

It’s all about engagement at this point. Do users stick around and engage?

Will be interesting to see if Meta shares any early engagement data.

[immamac 41,747]

@BornAndRaised killing it hahaha. 

[Neonmoon 38,126]

28% of Twitter followers in 1.5 days

And won't be available in Europe for a while. 

Yeah...Twitter is in danger

[Celery Man 20,607]

^^^(aggy reply) bravo

 

this is interesting- seeming to want to walk a fine line

https://www.threads.net/t/CuZ3LjhNl0m/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

Edited July 7, 2023 by Celery Man

[Sawbonz 26,892]

5 hours ago, 52-80 said:

you mean the old site administrators whom the parler/gab/truth people didnt like werent literal marxo-communists?

point is these groups all split off due to grievances vs the then-status quo of the site, and by all means the political alignment of those groups mirrored each other in opposition.

Twitter Brought Back More Nazis Than Just Nick Fuentes

 

grievances lol 

Edited July 7, 2023 by Sawbonz

[G650 13,334]

42 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

^^^(aggy reply) bravo

 

this is interesting- seeming to want to walk a fine line

https://www.threads.net/t/CuZ3LjhNl0m/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

[Cheeseweasel 26,437]

48 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

^^^(aggy reply) bravo

 

this is interesting- seeming to want to walk a fine line

https://www.threads.net/t/CuZ3LjhNl0m/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

[Sawbonz 26,892]

1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

I mean, is national socialism really a problem?

<insert chart with selected data here>

At least it’s an ethos 

[Ted Lange 15,934]

As for "technical reasons" why twitter is declining (and I am looking for an alternative).   

 

The promoted ads, every 4 or 5 tweets, by absolute bottom bin unappealing companies, are outrageous.   I just scrolled thru the app, 4 ads in 20 tweets, some candle company you can add a picture of your cat,  some weird mattress company, some Automotive company that offers "appearance protection" for your car, and some activewear company I've never heard of.    It is fucking ridiculous how many promoted ads there are, it is fully 1/5 of the platform/experience now.    Which of course is Elon's fault for running off the big advertisers, by being a piece of shit, now he has to take on these tiny companies with little ad budget.

Then there is the whole buy a blue checkmark.  Now Elon's "town square" is basically Texags or SECRant's political board.   Click on any topic and boom, you are overrun by boosted accounts that are screaming about absolute BS.   It is as much a town square as Elon is sane.   It is awful.    And Elon is actively encouraging that (for $8 a month).

Then there are the bots.   EVERY SINGLE post from any account with more than say 10K followers, is littered with these gambling and porn bots.   TOWN SQUARE!

 

G T F O 

 

 

[52-80 19,000]

10 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Twitter Brought Back More Nazis Than Just Nick Fuentes

 

grievances lol 

According to this article: Musk resets the site. This guy comes back, spouts Hitler stuff, and gets immediately banned. As does Kanye West, and whoever the fuck Andrew Anglin and Ali Alexander are (actually his looks locked). 

So your point is… it was wrong for the site to boot them?  Or others didnt try to leave in opposition of these people? 

and Kanye has an active account on Instagram lol. 

[Sawbonz 26,892]

1 minute ago, 52-80 said:

According to this article: Musk resets the site. This guy comes back, spouts Hitler stuff, and gets immediately banned. As does Kanye West, and whoever the fuck Andrew Anglin and Ali Alexander are (actually his looks locked). 

So your point is… it was wrong for the site to boot them?  Or others didnt try to leave in opposition of these people? 

and Kanye has an active account on Instagram lol. 

Are you really this dumb?