I could be wrong but "the future of microblog social media is going to be just like the past - guy with a big social network will have another one" seems like a questionable bet. Imo Twitter only really mattered because elite media types thought it did. It's quality not quantity. I don't see why they naturally migrate to Facebook threads instead of other places like blue sky or post or mastodon (or something else entirely). Honestly the fact that it's a Facebook company already hurts adoption quite a bit imo.
Twitter works because (1) there's lots of content and (2) lots of people to read the content. No one joins Blue Sky or Mastodon because most of the people they follow aren't there, and most of the people they want following them aren't there. With Facebook, they already have their existing networks in place and since everyone is on it, they can get all their current twitter followers to switch over. Post a tweet to your followers saying "I'm move to Mastadon, follow me there" and it would require people to sign up for Mastodon accounts to follow one person. Post a tweet saying "I'm moving to Threads, follow me there" and just about everyone already can be on it easily using their FB/Instagram accounts. As the earlier post said, if 1 in 10 Instagram users try it, they already have the reach of Twitter. The only real downside is the name is pretty poor - Twitter and "tweets" is part of the culture, so getting people to switch out of that will be tricky. What Threads really needs though is a way to link your Twitter username to it, and then it can automatically have you follow everyone you previously followed and vice-versa. That would make transitioning super-easy. You also have your Instagram users with thousands of followers who might have wanted to tweet but would have had to start over and build an audience from scratch. Now they can have thousands of twitter-equivalent followers overnight.
I don't think enough/the right/enough of the right people still use Facebook enough for this to work - but i guess we'll see.
SG's favorite person. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/twit...bitration-stalling_n_64a58e7ae4b0035bc5ca5f88 Former Twitter employees allege that the once-mighty tech giant is stalling arbitration in almost 900 cases by refusing to pay its legal bills, according to court records filed Monday. After taking over the company in October, Twitter CEO Elon Musk terminated thousands of people; Musk himself said he had axed 80% of the payroll as of mid-April. Many of these former employees had signed contracts agreeing to resolve any disputes arising from their employment at Twitter through arbitration, which corporations largely prefer in order to avoid potentially embarrassing and costly trials. But Twitter is now refusing to pay the arbitrator, according to a proposed class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The result is that 891 cases are currently stalled, barring many former employees from compensation allegedly owed to them. Under many Twitter employment agreements, the ex-employee is supposed to pay a nominal filing fee to Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS), and all other costs must be paid by Twitter, court documents say.
Often imitated, never duplicated Spoutible Threads Hive BlueSky Mastodon CounterSocial Post Tribel Cohost Clubhouse Substack Notes Tumblr Linkedin Reddit Instagram TikTok Snapchat Facebook Discord WhatsApp
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66112648 Ten million users signed up for Meta's newly launched Threads app in its first seven hours, the company's chief Mark Zuckerberg says. He pitched the app as a "friendly" rival to Twitter, which was bought by Elon Musk in October. Experts say Threads could attract Twitter users unhappy with recent changes to the platform. Threads allows users to post up to 500 characters, and has many features similar to Twitter. Earlier, Mr Zuckerberg said keeping the platform "friendly... will ultimately be the key to its success". But Mr Musk responded: "It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram." When asked on Threads whether the app will be "bigger than Twitter", Mr Zuckerberg said: "It'll take some time, but I think there should be a public conversations app with 1 billion+ people on it. "Twitter has had the opportunity to do this but hasn't nailed it. Hopefully we will." Competitors have criticised the amount of data the app might use. This may include health, financial, and browsing data linked to users' identities, according to the Apple App Store. Threads is now available to download in over 100 countries including the UK, but not yet in the EU because of regulatory concerns. 'Initial version' Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, called the new app an "initial version", with extra features planned including the ability to interact with people on other social media apps like Mastodon. "Our vision with Threads is to take what Instagram does best and expand that to text," the firm said prior to its launch. Despite Threads being a standalone app, users log in using an Instagram account. Their Instagram username carries over, but there is an option to customize their profile specifically for Threads. Users will also be able to choose to follow the same accounts they do on Instagram, Meta says. The app allows users to be private on Instagram, but public on Threads. The new app's release comes after criticism of Meta's business practices. Last year, Meta whistleblower Frances Haugen said the company had put "profits over safety" and criticised how the platform was moderated. The company was also rocked by a scandal in which it allowed third parties, including British political consultancy Cambridge Analytica, to access Facebook users' personal data. In an apparent reference to this controversial past, Mr Musk joked on Monday "thank goodness they're so sanely run". There are several alternatives to Twitter available, such as Bluesky and Mastodon, but these have struggled to gain traction. Threads has a significant advantage because it is connected to Instagram, and the hundreds of millions of users already on that platform. How does Threads work? On Threads, posts can be shared to Instagram and vice versa and can include links, photos, and videos of up to five minutes in length. However, some early users on Wednesday reported problems when uploading images, hinting at teething problems. Users see a feed of posts, which Meta calls "threads", from people they follow as well as recommended content. They are able to control who can "mention" them and filter out replies to posts that contain specific words. Unfollowing, blocking, restricting or reporting other profiles is also possible, and any accounts users block on Instagram are automatically blocked on Threads. While Meta stresses ties to Instagram, media coverage has focused on its similarity to Twitter, with some investors describing the app as a "Twitter killer". … While Threads will be available in the UK, it is not yet available in the EU because of regulatory uncertainty, particularly around the EU's Digital Markets Act. But the company says it is looking into launching in the EU. That act lays down rules on how large companies such as Meta can share data between platforms that they own. The sharing of data between Threads and Instagram is part of the issue. Meta maintains protecting privacy is fundamental to its business.
It won't be successful. Meta has reached peak network effect. Keep in mind facebook gobbled up the competition much like Musk bought twitter for its user base. The original short message idea is more of a feature than a platform, thus why Twitter has always struggled. At this point, it's a novelty. Meta has issues going forward and Threads (terrible boring name like Meta) is not going to save it.
What is your definition of success? To me, an actual competitor to Twitter (with over 200M users) is success. I think they'll get there. It will to good to have credible text options other than Twitter. To meta, it looks like they are aiming for 1B users.
I would define success as the decimation of Twitter’s active users. As evil as Meta is, they’re profitable and Twitter is an unprofitable threat to their bottom line. Only TikTok seems unstoppable.
Social media in general is struggling. A few years ago, we observed a trend where people were abandoning social media. I believe this will be a slow gradual trend for a race to the bottom. Zuckerbergs vision worked well to birth what we call modern day social media. However his vision (keep in mind how Facebook was started) is largely toxic...in other words, keep people engaged with each other at all cost. I tend to agree with Musks vision with the 'Everything App'. Whether this is possible is unknown. I want access to the same content as everyone else. I don't want an interest split across multiple apps. I have 7 messaging apps, half are owned by the same parent company. I shouldn't have a hundred different apps, all uniquely configured in their own manner with constant updates all the time. Perhaps I am asking too much.
Wait until the AcitivityPub protocol takes over! Having one app for everything is okay, as long as I have the ability to easily disable certain features. I don't use Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok. I use WhatsApp, Twitter, and Discord (and hopefully Thread instead of Twitter once it becomes established and is used by local schools, clubs, governments, etc.). I also prefer to keep my multiple payment platforms separate from my social accounts, even if it requires more effort on my part (which it doesn't, since my social network is significantly different from my payment network). However, I understand the vision of having a single app for all purposes, especially in a world where a dominant controlling player exists. It probably makes a lot of sense in a country with a powerful, controlling centrist government. In a free-market society that places a strong emphasis on privacy, laws, and anti-monopoly regulations, it is unlikely that an 'everything app' would be accepted.
