Threads users down by more than a half
541–550 of 566 posts
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#542Earlier quoted context omitted.
I worked there, I think i know what I'm talking about
So is the information of Twitter having a contract with Google a complete fabrication?
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#543Earlier quoted context omitted.
People do in fact stop coming at some point. As an example, Facebook (the site, distinguished from other aquisitions) has seen stagnant or falling usage in certain markets, notably the US and EU, as of about 5--6 years ago: https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/31/16956818/facebook-q4-2017... > http://www.businessinsider.sg/facebook-hits-wall-usage-falls... >
So, did the number of active Facebook users ever go down before it was a dominant player on social networks? Or are you claiming that Threads is ok because it's as big as it is ever going to be and it is all downwards from now on? What part of my comment exactly is wrong?
Facebook is one case, and is still the largest (or among: TikTok and a few newer entrants may be giving it a run for its money).
But if you want to look at multiple platforms over time, it helps to ... well, consider other cases.
I've been something of a purveyor of niche and smaller social networks, from the beginning (Usenet). What I've observed of these is that even among those which continue for a considerable period as a viable option there is the tyre-kicker uptake, a fade back, and then ... several possible trajectories. One of those is straight to the floor, but another is to have either a steady base or a longer and slower growth.
Sure, both of those are death for a venture-backed site or service. But if that's not the foundation, then steady-state or long-steady-growth is a viable option.
And I've seen the pattern:
- On Google+: there was an initial excitement, then the site got stale (2011--2013 or so), then I (and from what I can tell, others) came back. The forced integration with YouTube annoyed a lot of people (on G+, on YouTube, and of course, Not On Either). After about 2015 things seemed to go into a long slow fade, which turned into a race for the exits after the planned shutdown was announced in 2018.
- On Diasapora*: Similar pattern, though I'd participated early on (2011-ish), after leaving G+ for a spell (around 2013--14), and then returned to the site with the G+ shutdown announcement. Some long-standing gripes and personal hardware failures had me lose interest about a year ago, though there quite honestly still is a good community there.
- Ello: It was (somewhat poisonously) plastered with the "Facebook Killer" label in 2015, and saw a few periods of excitement buzz. The site remained small (a few hundred thousand MAU, low millions of total accounts, by my own guess, verified in person with Ello staff), but had a vibrant community. The killer was sale of the site to a VC with the original staff gagged as part of the agreement. Various protections (B-Corp organisation and highly member-friendly policies) seemed to disappear at that point, and most of the small crowd I'd followed there drifted elsewhere.
- Mastodon: I'd joined in 2016/7, participated a bit, faded off, then came back. After HN it's my most active online presence. Mastodon's long-term growth has shown numerous large-influx phases where a significant influx of new members arrive, some of whom remain active. The trend is episodic but positive.
- Tildes.net: Launched by an ex-Reddit staffer, deimos, the site's been ticking along as an invite-only beta since 2016. I've given more invites in the past three months than the previous seven years, so far as I can recall. As with other sites, it seems to gain and lose activity on phases, though overall seems to be growing.
- Imzy: An ill-fated venture which followed the "crater rapidly" phase. It remains the most socially-dysfunctional online network I've ever participated in directly, strongly at odds with its "kinder, gentler Reddit" labeling.
- Hacker News: The site has seen a long steady slow growth since opening to the public in 2007. I've been studying front-page activity for the past few months, one element of which is looking at total activity (votes and comments) on those front-page stories and how that's changed over time. It's an interesting dataset as there are a fixed number of items per year (10,950, 10,980 in a leap year, based on 30 per day), but as participation increases we'll see more activity on the page, and metrics such as distinct sites and distinct submitters can vary. Votes per story have actually held relatively constant for 2020--2022 (most recent full years), comment activity continues to rise, see below. According to dang, MAUs have held steady at about 5 million for years, as have other indicia of site activity (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36146958> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18150721> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33454140>).
Hacker News isn't dying. Sites such as Metafilter remain not only reasonably vital (in terms of on-site activity), but have high quality discussion, as opposed to the plunge to the bottom of Reddit and Twitter. Diaspora* ... continues to tick along. Mastodon and the Fediverse are growing fairly rapidly (particularly for a non-venture-funded platform). Ello succeeded ... for a while. Google+ made it to just shy of the 8-year mark, and for much of that time did have quality discussions and engagements in my experience. Sometimes small scale is a virtue.
HN runs on a single server and with a single public moderator. I suspect it's pressing the edge of viability with both, but the results are ... pretty good.
As with another thread I'd participated in yesterday, one challenge is that there aren't a whole lot of major social network initiatives, most especially not by existing major players. Facebook's Threads is the first sui generis effort by that company since its original The Harvard Facebook launch (all others have been acquisitions). Last year's Bluesky launch by ex-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey was the first significant new launch in years. The most recent major launch by an established company before that, so far as I'm aware, was Google+ itself. There've been other social media efforts, obviously, but most of those were not by an incumbent major player in the field, and were instead new ventures.
Checking myself, HN search lists 677 results for "new social network": https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...>
Among prominent mentions, with "name" (affiliation) YYYY:
- Google+ itself (Google) 2011
- "Hello" (Orkut) 2018
- "Friended" (?) 2019
- "Slyde" (?) 2020
- "So.cl" (Microsoft) (2012)
- "Inside.com" (Jason Calacanis) 2022
- "WT.social" (Jimmy Wales) (2021)
- Entries named or by: Hipstamatic, Frontpile, and Coccoon, on the first results page.
- LinkedIn, Skype, Pinterest, WeWork, and Slack are all mentioned.
Overall, though, I'd say my characterisation is accurate: there aren't many new large entrants, especially not by incumbents, and those that do emerge tend to see a rapid initial "testing the waters" bump, followed by some subsequent trajectory either up or down.
On Hacker News front-page story activity 2007--2022:
Year Stories Points ( mean ) Comments ( mean ) Sites Submitters
---- ------- ------ --------- -------- --------- ----- ----------
2007 9382 92264 ( 9.83 ) 61207 ( 6.52 ) 2644 1163
2008 10980 294775 ( 26.85 ) 186339 ( 16.97 ) 3458 2021
2009 10950 608603 ( 55.58 ) 303962 ( 27.76 ) 4157 3017
2010 10950 1062763 ( 97.06 ) 491718 ( 44.91 ) 4397 3987
2011 10949 1657004 ( 151.34 ) 632724 ( 57.79 ) 4830 4889
2012 10980 1829402 ( 166.61 ) 778634 ( 70.91 ) 5047 5537
2013 10950 2132819 ( 194.78 ) 998387 ( 91.18 ) 5250 5975
2014 10905 2057628 ( 188.69 ) 916438 ( 84.04 ) 5338 5920
2015 10950 2001269 ( 182.76 ) 845719 ( 77.23 ) 5301 5313
2016 10977 2521394 ( 229.70 ) 1137575 ( 103.63 ) 5238 5341
2017 10950 2776064 ( 253.52 ) 1259899 ( 115.06 ) 5236 5274
2018 10950 2762928 ( 252.32 ) 1262654 ( 115.31 ) 4986 5038
2019 10950 3051011 ( 278.63 ) 1447141 ( 132.16 ) 5302 5123
2020 10980 3338150 ( 304.02 ) 1734703 ( 157.99 ) 5938 5564
2021 10950 3376829 ( 308.39 ) 1859933 ( 169.86 ) 6178 5339
2022 10950 3308025 ( 302.10 ) 1986265 ( 181.39 ) 6446 5443
Note that mean votes doubled from 2011 to 2020, and has held steady since. Mean comments doubled 2011--2017, though have continued to rise about 157% since (over the 2017 baseline). The overall site count has also increased, suggesting that submissions are more diverse.Per HN's "flamewar" metric (or what I prefer to call "spiciness"), that would suggest that spice has increased especially 2020--2022, that is, the ratio of comments to votes is up. HN views that as a possible sign of discord, though it could be more interest in discussion.
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#544Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon is trying to turn Twitter/X into the wests WeChat. So at least he’s doing something interesting? I’m back in the Elon corner. Is he goes down, it’ll be doing something interesting at least. Meta might have a head start with WhatsApp, but I don’t see them doing anything interesting or well.
There is no feature Twitter/X could bring to chat that would take users away from WhatsApp. It already covers 100% of it's users needs, is free, and has near complete market penetration in many regions. (If you are talking to anyone in Europe by text, you will always use WhatsApp)
It could take a while, but look at all the social media messaging apps from the past: ICQ, MSN, Yahoo, My Space, GChat, Orkut, Tumblr, Snapchat, FB messages etc
They come and go. I sure don’t know what the ultimate chat/social media app looks like.
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#545I don’t use Twitter because I like Twitter, but because that’s where the people that I like to interact with (mostly writers) are. It’s becoming increasingly obvious that Twitter isn’t going to be that place with each new chaos monkey attack from Musk, but what the successor place is going to be remains to be seen. Threads failed the smell test early on because it started out with algorithmic feed only and the algori…
I think you can now disable algorithmic feed, which was my main gripe as well. But the lack of website is still a show-stopper for me.
Agree on the need for a proper website that isn’t read-only. I get that most usage will come from mobile, but for the more interesting and prolific posters, tapping out blurbs and interacting with others on mobile is a second-rate experience that doesn’t feel as rich when compared to using a web app.
Meta’s working on it, so hopefully we’ll see if the culture of the service shifts away from that Instagram feel.
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#546Earlier quoted context omitted.
A super app presumably has a dedicated product manager with some sort of vision and control of what goes into what features are available. You could hardly say the same of iOS+AppStore or Android+Playstore. Note that I'm not the least bit convinced we would benefit from a super app, but WeChat seems to fill a need for however many millions of users it has.
Could you elaborate on that? It sounds like you’re saying that Google and Apple have no product management and they’re just shipping random features every year, but that sounds bonkers so I must be misunderstanding.
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#547It’s super funny to see people framing that as Threads failing. They totally may fail. But even after that initial drop (which is expected, for something that managed to get so much hype) they’re likely still the biggest app in the history in terms of DAU in few weeks after the launch. And if there’s one thing Meta knows how to do is to copy successful idea and slowly grind the growth till it dominates market.
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#548Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, did the number of active Facebook users ever go down before it was a dominant player on social networks? Or are you claiming that Threads is ok because it's as big as it is ever going to be and it is all downwards from now on? What part of my comment exactly is wrong?
I'm saying that Facebook's specific history (the OG FB site/app) is not a great basis for comparison as it's such an extreme outlier. Launching new social networks is fraught, but an uneven start is not a necessary kiss of death. And even Facebook has seen growth plateaus. Facebook is one case , and is still the largest (or among: TikTok and a few newer entrants may be giving it a run for its money). But if you want…
Year Stories Points ( mean ) Comments ( mean ) Sites Submitters Spice
---- ------- ------ --------- -------- --------- ----- ---------- ------
2007 9382 92264 ( 9.83 ) 61207 ( 6.52 ) 2644 1163 66.339
2008 10980 294775 ( 26.85 ) 186339 ( 16.97 ) 3458 2021 63.214
2009 10950 608603 ( 55.58 ) 303962 ( 27.76 ) 4157 3017 49.944
2010 10950 1062763 ( 97.06 ) 491718 ( 44.91 ) 4397 3987 46.268
2011 10949 1657004 ( 151.34 ) 632724 ( 57.79 ) 4830 4889 38.185
2012 10980 1829402 ( 166.61 ) 778634 ( 70.91 ) 5047 5537 42.562
2013 10950 2132819 ( 194.78 ) 998387 ( 91.18 ) 5250 5975 46.811
2014 10905 2057628 ( 188.69 ) 916438 ( 84.04 ) 5338 5920 44.539
2015 10950 2001269 ( 182.76 ) 845719 ( 77.23 ) 5301 5313 42.259
2016 10977 2521394 ( 229.70 ) 1137575 ( 103.63 ) 5238 5341 45.117
2017 10950 2776064 ( 253.52 ) 1259899 ( 115.06 ) 5236 5274 45.384
2018 10950 2762928 ( 252.32 ) 1262654 ( 115.31 ) 4986 5038 45.700
2019 10950 3051011 ( 278.63 ) 1447141 ( 132.16 ) 5302 5123 47.432
2020 10980 3338150 ( 304.02 ) 1734703 ( 157.99 ) 5938 5564 51.966
2021 10950 3376829 ( 308.39 ) 1859933 ( 169.86 ) 6178 5339 55.079
2022 10950 3308025 ( 302.10 ) 1986265 ( 181.39 ) 6446 5443 60.044
The low-water (or low-spice) mark was 2011, at 38.185. High-spice was 2007, though in the post-2010 world (after HN has more-or-less stabilised, and after the flamewar detector was implemented), it's reached in 2022.For those who think discussion's getting more heated, there's some evidence of that.
Note that HN's "flamewar detector" is triggered for comments > 40 and comments/votes > 1 (or 100 as I calculate it above), best as I understand.
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#549Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t know a single person who uses “WhatsApp”. I have never had anyone, personally or professionally, give me a “whatsApp” username. In the US, if you met someone via online dating and said “here’s my whatsapp” 99% of people would think you are a scammer or something.
I’m in the bay area and everyone uses whatsapp, and after that telegram or signal or insta
Re: Threads users down by more than a half
#550Earlier quoted context omitted.
100%, once Twitter falls, I would probably just leave it all. Maybe LinkedIn for the professional stuff.
That’s called growing up, but there’s a new one of you born every minute
And soon my army of clones will be ready!!!