201–210 of 356 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are well over 100m MAU so a lot of people are using it. And it has reached the #1 position in most of the App Stores around the world.
I heard before that Threads is the number one in app stores. If I look right now (23.12) in the Apple App Store then I can’t find it at all in the top 200 (unless I missed something). I see X on 165 and Telegram for example, but no Threads. Is it really no. 1 or nearby on Android ?
But whenever I try Bluesky, Mastodon, Threads as a brand new account without anyone to follow it’s just same US politics shit. Trump, Trump bad, nazis, AOC, Trump, gender, trans rights, nazis, republicans, Trump, gender etc. This is what I see right now on Bluesky What’s Hot, this is what I see right now on Mastodon Explore.
The fact that even Mastodon pushing the rage bait (“ These are posts from across the social web that are gaining traction today”) which is supposed to be the ‘healthy’ and ‘better’ social media site shows how deep problems we have.
If really that’s what an average Joe and Jane sees when they just want to try out these services then no one wonder the world is going worse by each passing day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel much the same way. Facebook tried to sell me on threads by showing me an ad with 2.5 threads visible: one of them was clearly a racist post that I didn't want to see the conclusion of, the other was clearly a liberal outrage thread about how much money Jeff Bezos makes that I ALSO didn't want to see the end of, and the third was a mostly-obscured post by a ceramic artisan I follow. They don't seem to have any…
This experience always shocks me because it’s not aligned with my own. Even on Twitter I never saw that junk. I followed almost exclusively tech folk, AWS community heros, NodeJS developers, Architects and Platform Engineers. I’m not even a developer, but I followed them to be exposed more to that topic. As a result, my feed was 99.9% technical content and product management content. I got the same result in under an…
Social Media Companies that can't get their sign-up funnel in order have already failed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of my people seemed to have landed on bsky. Discussions there get shares and likes, unlike mastodon where for me it's just a few void-shouts per day. Threads appears to be 100% mid celebrities who I am sure Facebook is paying to hang around.
Yeah, I haven't even bothered trying Threads (and don't plan to) Mastodon puts too much onus on the user to pick a home server Bluesky got it right by saying "we're going to be exactly familiar to people who like twitter, just open and better". The concepts are an almost exact drop-in replacement, for practical purposes, other than which one your friends are active on I don't use it much right now because most of my…
So don't. There are multiple services you can pay a small fee to to host your own instance with only you on it.
Yup. Bluesky is trash.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> which is what I'm really interested in. Whenever I see comments like these, my immediate thought is "How interested are you, if you had to put a dollar figure on it?" Also, you are missing alternative (e): availability bias. Maybe you haven't seen a lot of innovation around UX not because people are not trying, but because those who tried to experiment with different UX were aiming at such a niche that completely f…
>failed as social network Is that the case? Serious question, I'm curious about any social networks that have tried some new UX? The twitter clones seem to play things very close to twitter's style. At least it looks that way to me as someone who isn't a heavy twitter user. Also what is "failed as a social network" when Twitter, one of the biggest bleeds money as it is? Is the market just messed up? Or maybe UX where…
A lot of this is they're trying to capture the user base of an incumbent and users like familiarity.
> Also what is "failed as a social network" when Twitter, one of the biggest bleeds money as it is?
Twitter has millions of users and it doesn't cost a lot in infrastructure to host tweets. Twitter bleeds money because the company has been mismanaged (going back long before its current ownership), not because putting ads on a social network with that number of users couldn't turn a profit.
A "failed social network" is one that nobody uses.
> Or maybe UX where I actually feel like I can find or interact with things I want just doesn't work for profitability (Facebook doesn't show me what I want)?
There's probably a short-term/long-term thing here. Big companies run on metrics, so they make a change and the number goes up so they keep the change. But the way the change works is by frustrating people into spending more time on the site, which short-term increases the metrics and long-term makes people hate you and be eager to switch away at the first opportunity.
What you probably want here is a service with a single owner who actually uses it and cares about making the service good (and, most importantly, is competent), but what usually happens instead is it becomes a publicly traded company controlled by shareholders who institute the aforementioned metrics-based bureaucracy.
The key is somehow getting the one with benevolent leadership and the one with millions of users to be the same one.
RSS feeds of user accounts was another addition. They're a bit average though in that they don't have media (i.e., images) in the feed. I'll keep using https://bluestream.deno.dev/ for now.
Then just make it an MRSS feed. Seems very strange not to provide a feed with links to the media. Unless it's a deliberate crippling
I've tried a few twitter alternatives (including Bluesky) as someone who hardly ever uses twitter anyway. I was a little disappointed how it just felt like ... more twitter. I'm browsing around finding mostly memes or outrage that doesn't have context to me. I fairly quickly get exhausted trying to find / curate content. I guess I should have expected it, but I hoped that somewhere a different network would have a di…
I feel much the same way. Facebook tried to sell me on threads by showing me an ad with 2.5 threads visible: one of them was clearly a racist post that I didn't want to see the conclusion of, the other was clearly a liberal outrage thread about how much money Jeff Bezos makes that I ALSO didn't want to see the end of, and the third was a mostly-obscured post by a ceramic artisan I follow. They don't seem to have any…
They kind of did. The optimal solution of 'just show rage bait' can't take all that long to discover.