How meta built the infrastructure for Threads • Hacker News Board

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#21

Post by realprimoh » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:36 AM UTC

wayfinder wrote: post #20

realprimoh wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dead on delivery? That’s pretty dramatic (and incorrect). 100M users in 5 days and it’s quite active today - very far from dead on delivery.

Instagram has like 2 billion users and I got spammed the shit out of to open a Threads account. That’s like saying it’s impressive I made a million dollar company after my dad gave me 2 billion.

That’s cool and all, but I never commented on if it was impressive or not.

Just was pointing out user numbers and that the average Hacker News commenter’s bubble is not representative of how most of the world uses social media.

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#22

Post by vik0 » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:36 AM UTC

o10449366 wrote: post #18

[flagged]

The stock market isn't representative of how real world actors are doing at any given moment. I'd recommend reading Nassim Nicholas Taleb. But I'm glad you made money

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#23

Post by kmlx » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:39 AM UTC

Researcherry wrote: post #2

Isn't thread dead yet?

on the contrary. more and more people are signing up and leaving twitter.

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#24

Post by blensor » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:40 AM UTC

o10449366 wrote: post #18

[flagged]

I see some growth since they opened to European users late last year.

It's going to be interesting if they really enable full ActivityPub integration

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#25

Post by saberience » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:40 AM UTC

o10449366 wrote: post #18

[flagged]

I don't want to seem overly critical, but why is this comment relevant to an engineering focused article on how Threads was built?

This article isn't FUD and your comment adds nothing to the discussion except setting up a strange strawman to attack for some reason I can't quite fathom.

I don't want to see HN become more like Reddit where comments like this tend to dominate, they don't add to the community and only promote negativity and ill-will between community members.

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#26

Post by rglullis » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:41 AM UTC

o10449366 wrote: post #18

[flagged]

Let me try to ask you in the most neutral way possible: how do you feel about being an investor in a company with such a troubled history of privacy violations and one of the key enablers of Surveillance Capitalism?

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#27

Post by JW_00000 » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:45 AM UTC

puttycat wrote: post #5

The amount of (very impressive) human labor that went into building something that was dead on delivery. Kudos to them for being able to incentivize engineers to pull through this.

The article states the exact opposite: "A small, nimble team of engineers built Threads over the course of only five months of technical work" while it "garner[ed] over 100 million sign ups in its first five days". According to the article linked there, there were (up to) 60 engineers in the team. That's 300 person-months, or 25 person-years.

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#28

Post by threeseed » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:46 AM UTC

wayfinder wrote: post #20

realprimoh wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dead on delivery? That’s pretty dramatic (and incorrect). 100M users in 5 days and it’s quite active today - very far from dead on delivery.

Instagram has like 2 billion users and I got spammed the shit out of to open a Threads account. That’s like saying it’s impressive I made a million dollar company after my dad gave me 2 billion.

Threads reached 100M users well before they turned on Instagram promotions.

And now they have reached 100M MAU which shows that people are coming and staying.

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#29

Post by rglullis » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:46 AM UTC

jonathanstrange wrote: post #16

adonese wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually okay-ish so far. The people and the news are still on twitter but with the bots (twitter) and Facebook support (infrastructure, integration with existing fb products and the leaner upselling) I can see that it does have a good product market fit

Honestly, I can't believe any real person still uses Twitter. I haven't subscribed to anyone and have no subscribers. Nevertheless, whenever I open it, I'm swamped with US Neo-Nazi tweets, as well as pro-Russia and pro-Hamas content. I'm not saying it's the only content I see, but enough to make Twitter look like the front page of a terrorist organization. Apparently, the Twitter algorithm has learned that I'm using…

> I haven't subscribed to anyone and have no subscribers.

That's your problem, right here. The social graph is the strongest signal there is.

Try following the people that are more interesting to you and your recommendations will vastly improve. Or don't, and just come to the Fediverse and use a nitter frontend for the occasional twitter link.

Re: How meta built the infrastructure for Threads

#30

Post by cactusplant7374 » Mon, Jan 08, 2024, 9:47 AM UTC

rglullis wrote: post #26

o10449366 wrote: post #18

[flagged]

Let me try to ask you in the most neutral way possible: how do you feel about being an investor in a company with such a troubled history of privacy violations and one of the key enablers of Surveillance Capitalism?

Investing and not investing in the company mean exactly the same thing. Unless FB issues more shares you aren't buying shares from the company. You're buying from someone else.