It seems like due to the downfall of Twitter and Reddit, people will be moving to the Fediverse instead, and since there is not much here, people won’t be addicted to it anymore.

Additionally, it’s open-source and de-centralized as well, which omits censorship. What do you guys think?

  • Peruvian_Skies
    link
    fedilink
    7
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’d share your optimism if Zuck hadn’t come out with Threads to the apparently very positive reception it’s had. A lot of people who are on Twitter are also on Facebook/Instagram and the ease of extending those accounts to Threads means that most of them, when they get fed up with Musk, will just trade one giant social media corporation for another and nothing will change.

    • all-knight-party
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Well, something will change, which is that Meta will be strengthening their monopoly over most major social media sites

      • Peruvian_Skies
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Meh. Does it really matter which psychopathic, emotionally stunted billionaire steals your personal data and controls your access to information? It’s not like they won’t sell it all to each other under the table for the right price anyway. What people have to do is get out from under the thumbs of anyone in Zuck or Musk’s position.

        • all-knight-party
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Well, no, it doesn’t really matter who it is, Meta happens to be the one in that position, it’s more the idea that monopolies are bad for basically anything.

          • Peruvian_Skies
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            I agree. Cartels, which are what we have now between Meta, Twitter and Google, are just as bad as monopolies.

    • Spaceman Spiff
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      Regarding Threads, It’s hard to see through the bullshit right now. End user reports are pretty abysmal, while media coverage remains glowing. Meta has clearly sunk a lot of money into promoting the launch, complete with a ton of astroturfing, paid endorsements, paid content creators, etc.

      On the flip side, people have been absolutely desperate for a realistic Twitter alternative. Too many tried (and abandoned) Mastodon. It’s entirely possible that Threads will be a just-barely-good-enough Twitter alternative to abandon the Musk abuse.

      I won’t even make a prediction on it until next month, at the earliest. Let the launch hype fade, and see if it has staying power.

      • Peruvian_Skies
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        What’s so bad about Mastodon that so many people gave up on it? Microblogging isn’t really my cup of tea, but I had a look out of curiosity and it seemed to have all the right ingredients, including several large media/celebrity accounts to follow.

        • Spaceman Spiff
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          It’s not that it’s bad per se. The whole federation thing is confusing enough that it’s a barrier to entry. There’s also the fact that change is hard. Mastodon has a different interface, with the associated learning curve. Beyond that, it’s not just having a certain number of celebrities/etc, but the right ones. That leads to a chicken and egg problem for a lot of users. Eventually enough people would sign up (and content creators posting to both) that it would trigger a mass migration, but that has not happened yet.

          So, after all that, most users decide that Twitter is ok enough for now.

          • Peruvian_Skies
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Oh, so it’s not Mastodon itself that was rejected, just that the network effect isn’t big enough yet. That makes a lot of sense.

      • @DarienGS
        link
        English
        01 year ago

        Are end user reports abysmal? I’m having a lot of fun on there, and my colleagues and acquaintances all seem to be enjoying it too.