5 ms·

Most people are already overly fatigued by Mark and Meta in general. I don't think marketing will help much. Very few people trust the company anymore.

phyrex 3y ago
I know that’s the general feeling on HN, but the numbers don’t seem to bear that out. Facebook has over 3B monthly active users, and instagram and WhatsApp are getting up there too
- stavros 3y ago
  How is it possible that half the Earth's population is on Facebook? It boggles the mind.
  - wongarsu 3y ago
    They did a lot to establish themselves in third world countries and try to be "the internet" over there.
    - stavros 3y ago
      Ah, I didn't know that, and I was wondering how much they were used in third world countries, thanks.
      - johannes1234321 3y ago
        In a really evil way: they have the internet.org and "Free basics" initiative where in some countries they pay mobile phone providers to not rate limit access to Facebook&Co (and Wikipedia) which makes access to them free, but for all else of the internet people have to pay. When I was in Indonesia quite many years back, the strategy worked in the regard that all communication with landlords for apartments, taxi drivers, ... went via WhatsApp. As that was free. (If it worked for Facebook to make profit via ads I doubt). Some countries, like India, created regulation to prevent that.
        stavros 3y ago
        Ah yeah, I've seen something like that here in Greece too, where we have (had?) a really cheap "social media" package with only Facebook and WhatsApp.
        johannes1234321 3y ago
        Those "zero rating" programs (which aren't allowed in EU) still require a subscription fee. In internet.org Land, you have to get a device somehow and activate a sim card and then never pay a thing (unless you want phone calls (besides WhatsApp calls), SMS or "true" internet) It's a massive project to lock in a society disguised like a NGO doing development aid programs. ("Internet access is a human right" - Zuckerberg)
        stavros 3y ago
        Jeez, that's evil.
- rightbyte 3y ago
  Zuckerberg claims FB has 3B monthly users. Why would you trust dishonest people on the first place. It would not surprise me at all if 4/5 of them or more are bots.
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    I said this before and was down voted to oblivion, but I do agree, who actually knows how many users they really have? Actual valuable users. There is truly a difference between an occasional lurker and someone who actually engages in the product.
onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
The average person doesn't know much about Mark Zuckerberg or know that Meta is a parent company that owns Facebook and Instagram.
- dazc 3y ago
  This may be correct but I think most of Threads early adopters do know it's a facebook/meta product. There is a market for a Twitter kind of app that isn't Twitter and Meta were slow off the mark (no pun) when you think abut it?
LapsangGuzzler 3y ago
Most of the people I know that feel that way about Zuckerberg trust Musk even less. Musk is in way over his head since the acquisition.
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  It's a fair point, I guess it's now the lesser of two evils? I supposed some people are so addicted to twitter, they will just go for one or the other just to have their text based social media itch satisfied.
  - LapsangGuzzler 3y ago
    Absolutely it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils. It sounds kinda silly, but I’ve personally found a lot of value in the fact that Threads feels largely like a total reset. I started a personal twitter account about 4 years ago and had a really hard time getting traction. Threads has been much easier in this regard since it’s less crowded. Whether it stays that way or not, there’s something refreshing about it. I guess I’m way more interested in what Threads could be tomorrow than I am about what Twitter is today.
    - ChatGTP 3y ago
      Probably too late now, but if someone did make a Twitter / Threads alternative, who wasn't a dickhead...who was trustworthy and cared about users, they would probably kill it right now.
      - LapsangGuzzler 3y ago
        Maybe, but unfortunately I see the adoption of Threads as further proof that owning the social graph is key to rapid adoption of a competitor platform. There’s no one else on the planet that could get to 100M users in a matter of days and Zuckerberg knows this very well. Threads was an opportunity for him to do what knows best: capturing a user base. Hard to see how anyone seriously competes on that front.
fallingknife 3y ago
Most people in HN/Reddit bubbles. Most people IRL couldn't tell you anything more about Mark Zuckerberg than that he is the CEO of Facebook. A lot of people don't even know that Instagram is owned by Facebook (or actually Meta, but that's another thing that most people don't know or care about). edit: and to be clear, I'm not insulting these people for not knowing. I actually think it's much better not to care about CEO drama.

phyrex 3y ago

I know that’s the general feeling on HN, but the numbers don’t seem to bear that out. Facebook has over 3B monthly active users, and instagram and WhatsApp are getting up there too

stavros 3y ago
How is it possible that half the Earth's population is on Facebook? It boggles the mind.
- wongarsu 3y ago
  They did a lot to establish themselves in third world countries and try to be "the internet" over there.
  - stavros 3y ago
    Ah, I didn't know that, and I was wondering how much they were used in third world countries, thanks.
    - johannes1234321 3y ago
      In a really evil way: they have the internet.org and "Free basics" initiative where in some countries they pay mobile phone providers to not rate limit access to Facebook&Co (and Wikipedia) which makes access to them free, but for all else of the internet people have to pay. When I was in Indonesia quite many years back, the strategy worked in the regard that all communication with landlords for apartments, taxi drivers, ... went via WhatsApp. As that was free. (If it worked for Facebook to make profit via ads I doubt). Some countries, like India, created regulation to prevent that.
      - stavros 3y ago
        Ah yeah, I've seen something like that here in Greece too, where we have (had?) a really cheap "social media" package with only Facebook and WhatsApp.
        johannes1234321 3y ago
        Those "zero rating" programs (which aren't allowed in EU) still require a subscription fee. In internet.org Land, you have to get a device somehow and activate a sim card and then never pay a thing (unless you want phone calls (besides WhatsApp calls), SMS or "true" internet) It's a massive project to lock in a society disguised like a NGO doing development aid programs. ("Internet access is a human right" - Zuckerberg)
        stavros 3y ago
        Jeez, that's evil.
rightbyte 3y ago
Zuckerberg claims FB has 3B monthly users. Why would you trust dishonest people on the first place. It would not surprise me at all if 4/5 of them or more are bots.
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  I said this before and was down voted to oblivion, but I do agree, who actually knows how many users they really have? Actual valuable users. There is truly a difference between an occasional lurker and someone who actually engages in the product.

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago

The average person doesn't know much about Mark Zuckerberg or know that Meta is a parent company that owns Facebook and Instagram.

dazc 3y ago
This may be correct but I think most of Threads early adopters do know it's a facebook/meta product. There is a market for a Twitter kind of app that isn't Twitter and Meta were slow off the mark (no pun) when you think abut it?

LapsangGuzzler 3y ago

Most of the people I know that feel that way about Zuckerberg trust Musk even less. Musk is in way over his head since the acquisition.

ChatGTP 3y ago
It's a fair point, I guess it's now the lesser of two evils? I supposed some people are so addicted to twitter, they will just go for one or the other just to have their text based social media itch satisfied.
- LapsangGuzzler 3y ago
  Absolutely it’s a choice between the lesser of two evils. It sounds kinda silly, but I’ve personally found a lot of value in the fact that Threads feels largely like a total reset. I started a personal twitter account about 4 years ago and had a really hard time getting traction. Threads has been much easier in this regard since it’s less crowded. Whether it stays that way or not, there’s something refreshing about it. I guess I’m way more interested in what Threads could be tomorrow than I am about what Twitter is today.
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    Probably too late now, but if someone did make a Twitter / Threads alternative, who wasn't a dickhead...who was trustworthy and cared about users, they would probably kill it right now.
    - LapsangGuzzler 3y ago
      Maybe, but unfortunately I see the adoption of Threads as further proof that owning the social graph is key to rapid adoption of a competitor platform. There’s no one else on the planet that could get to 100M users in a matter of days and Zuckerberg knows this very well. Threads was an opportunity for him to do what knows best: capturing a user base. Hard to see how anyone seriously competes on that front.

fallingknife 3y ago

Most people in HN/Reddit bubbles. Most people IRL couldn't tell you anything more about Mark Zuckerberg than that he is the CEO of Facebook. A lot of people don't even know that Instagram is owned by Facebook (or actually Meta, but that's another thing that most people don't know or care about). edit: and to be clear, I'm not insulting these people for not knowing. I actually think it's much better not to care about CEO drama.