The graph shows a decline in Daily Active Users worldwide, not just in the US.

I followed a few accounts on Twitter and their interactions are all way down compared to a few years ago; this has been something of a trend on every network, though, so it might just be that the demographic that followed these accounts aged out of being high engagement users and there are other profiles that account for a greater proportion of overall engagement.

Fascinating my anecdotal experience is the opposite. I’ve also been using Twitter for the last 17 years and I’ve finally got the opportunity to purchase the dead username I want.

It doesn't surprise me at all, after reading "Character Limit: How Elon Musk Destroyed Twitter" by Kate Conger and Ryan Mac. Interesting behind the scenes of what happened to Twitter.

Honest question: how does 561 million active users should feel?

There are tons of real people using that site, who I suspect to be the ones they're trying to get rid of, and also by far the least affected by this chemotherapy. It's always been that way.

It's funny that you're making the same fundamental mistake that Elon made when he tried to get out of buying Twitter.

I've tried threads. Moderately engaging. Took nothing from it. Twitter has a HN like quality where there's a lot that's unimportant and occasionally you see something you'd see nowhere else.

This is a weird metric to determine informational accuracy, as you're talking about a specific use case (reposting content on a 3rd-party platform), you're not accounting for user selection (is the average HN dude more likely to use X or Threads as their primary mico-blogging?) and it doesn't account for the fact that the entire FB/Threads/Instagram ecosystem feeds into itself (I'm never stumbling across X content that I want to engage with because that's now how I use the internet, but I'm constantly clicking something on IG that prompts me to give in and sign up for Threads)

Anything X says at any point about itself is likely to make me very skeptical because I think it's a dogshit site run by a bald, nepotic loser capitalist, that says nothing about the quality of the reporting or how accurate it is though.

It's like saying you don't see any Instagram posts on HN, so Instagram must be tiny. Its more likely the subcommunities that post on Threads don't have overlap with HN.

One of the more pleasing things about threads is that the "for you" page doesn't appear to push stuff that is rage bait _for you_, (what ever your bias is)

There seems to be a weighting in favour of stuff that isn't angry. There is stuff, but it seems to ask for actual confirmation that you want to continue to see it.

Its not all roses though, they are busy fucking up notifications like they did on facebook.

They way I would describe Threads is TikTok but with text. Actual people posting things are surfaced on my default feed, not corporations or engagement chasing influencers.

Meh, I've seen it before and after. It used to have a lynch mob mentality, but now it doesn't show me the accounts I follow but other people's.

Bluesky occasionally gets a boost of posts but then dies off. This last week's transition has been more vibrant. Simonw, danabramov, natolambert post regularly. (If you're into to the tech things I think it's finally growing. Bluesky is still pretty nasty but blocklists + sentiment changes making it less toxic.)

I think I'd like private likes and other features atproto doesn't currently allow that I think would improve algorithm signal. Currently too easy to pollute bluesky's discover with likes from too many topics.

It doesn't have all the bad x features introduced since 2022 which is nice. Bluesky recreates the active conversation feel twitter has. Does threads, or does it feel like 'comments'?

I still remember my own shock at learning how huge of a Brazilian user base Google+ had years after falling into obscurity in the english speaking world.

I only ever hear this stuff from people that don't use Facebook. It's a self-selecting crowd and they have their fingers in their ears and theirs eyes closed shut while yelling into the void trying to convince themselves everyone else is just like them. Except all that's out there is the same echo chamber of people that also are doing the exact same thing.

Your comment remind me of the ~15 year old hype around Q&A sites. You have VCs say things like "everyone I know uses Quora" and that helped hype it up. But for anyone a little removed, Quora was just Yahoo Answers 2.0. And still is. This was a couple of years after Stackoverflow came out.

Remember the hype around location and Foursquare?

Anyway, it is important to remember that if you're actively on HN, you're not a normie and you probably have a very skewed view of what normies do and use.

Another example of what you're talking about (with essentialy isolated communities) was Orkut, which was hugely popular in Brazil and a couple of other places.

"TIL Yahoo still exists"

or

"What? There's still a Yahoo?".

It's almost like there's a bot that adds these comments.

Apparently, there is no overlap between Yahoo users and people into cool tech. (I am still a Yahoo email user, so I guess I don't like cool tech).

I know tons of people who use Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, etc. I don't know a single person who uses Threads.

There's no going back to what it was in the late 90s/early 2000s, the audience is different, the way the content is consumed is different, the content itself is very different. Blog networks where you follow through links are not going to be the future.

> Not so long ago, if you had to share something with the world, you hosted your own webpage.

This is long ago in Internet terms, it's been 15+ years it's not the case, it's unfortunately long in the past.