The Threads Creator Paradox(augment.ink)
augment.ink
The Threads Creator Paradox
https://www.augment.ink/the-threads-creator-paradox/
48 comments
Honestly, I believe that facebook is already on the myspace path of slow and long decay. And their nail coffins will be all the shenanigans with content. There are unbearable ads on instagram - whenever I have a chance to glimpse what happens there, there's more content that doesn't belong to my friends. Same goes for facebook: earlier this year, there was a constant flood of AI generated content; messenger had same thing - my contacts list shows me people I don't know or I don't want to get in touch with, or some old-fashion celebrities and influencers.
fb feed in general tend to show stuff out of order for years and even if you manage to get into the old chronological sorting, it will keep you from scrolling further into the past giving you impression that in order to be up-to-date with what happens there you should be there.
I really believe that entering ActivityPub is anything else but a grab on freely available data they can use to train their algorithms. Neither I won't be surprised when they decide to leave fediverse - because that will eventually happen. They just need to figure out how to turn time spent there pretending to be "open", profitable.
---
And as a fun thing: I was scrolling yesterday mastodon and bumped on a few posts from an user who seems to be dealing with threads moderation system suggesting removal or edit of some of his posts [1], and a weird "scratchie" approach to unlock additional icons for the app. This feels as both overly sanitized and quite childish approach.
[1] - https://mastodon.world/@countercultureo/112783533143256553 [2] - https://mastodon.world/@countercultureo/112777883481257176
fb feed in general tend to show stuff out of order for years and even if you manage to get into the old chronological sorting, it will keep you from scrolling further into the past giving you impression that in order to be up-to-date with what happens there you should be there.
I really believe that entering ActivityPub is anything else but a grab on freely available data they can use to train their algorithms. Neither I won't be surprised when they decide to leave fediverse - because that will eventually happen. They just need to figure out how to turn time spent there pretending to be "open", profitable.
---
And as a fun thing: I was scrolling yesterday mastodon and bumped on a few posts from an user who seems to be dealing with threads moderation system suggesting removal or edit of some of his posts [1], and a weird "scratchie" approach to unlock additional icons for the app. This feels as both overly sanitized and quite childish approach.
[1] - https://mastodon.world/@countercultureo/112783533143256553 [2] - https://mastodon.world/@countercultureo/112777883481257176
Precisely. I refuse to get invested when we know it will end up like Facebook - completely useless with no posts from anyone you actually follow.
Amazingly, the only notification switch that doesn't exist on Instagram is that of disabling Threads notifications.
The probably forgot about it.
The probably forgot about it.
> start shoving ads down your throat, just like they've done with Instagram
I've never seen an ad on Instagram when using the browser version from my desktop. Is this universal, and if so, why?
I've never seen an ad on Instagram when using the browser version from my desktop. Is this universal, and if so, why?
Are you using an adblocker on desktop while not using one on a phone?
not on every browser, but it is Linux. perhaps Meta doesn't show ads to browsers with Linux user agent strings as they assume all are bots.
Still happens to me on Linux - despite of the distro and browser used, and extensions. I guess it's account based thing independent to some degree from browser cookies
> I barely know anyone from real life that actually participates on Threads. In general, the tools for discovering interesting or new people don't seem to be there for Threads.
Yep, that is why I continue to use Twitter. The people I've met there (usually other solo founders and indie hackers) simply are more interesting that anyone on Threads, and I can actually interact with them whereas Threads feels more read-only, people post there but don't actually engage with the replies.
> anti-Elon / anti-Twitter slop or political slop
Twitter has an opposite problem, too much Elon slop that I don't want to see. If not for that, Twitter would be perfect.
Yep, that is why I continue to use Twitter. The people I've met there (usually other solo founders and indie hackers) simply are more interesting that anyone on Threads, and I can actually interact with them whereas Threads feels more read-only, people post there but don't actually engage with the replies.
> anti-Elon / anti-Twitter slop or political slop
Twitter has an opposite problem, too much Elon slop that I don't want to see. If not for that, Twitter would be perfect.
Zuckerberg bets that Twitter will collapse under's Musk's management and that Threads would then fill up the void. But my assumption is, Threads will close sooner or later because in the long term, it is simply not viable business for Meta. How will Meta monetize Threads when growth starts to stagnate and when engagement starts to drop? Zuckerberg even introduced ActivityPub compatibility for Threads in order to improve network effect but is that enough?
We can even end up in the situation where both Threads and Twitter collapse and people start to move to Mastodon. That would actually be great. More power to the people!
We can even end up in the situation where both Threads and Twitter collapse and people start to move to Mastodon. That would actually be great. More power to the people!
> Threads will close sooner or later because in the long term, it is simply not viable business for Meta. How will Meta monetize Threads when growth starts to stagnate and when engagement starts to drop?
This is tautology. And monetising a 175-million user base [1] is not dependent on growth.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/3/24191074/meta-threads-user...
This is tautology. And monetising a 175-million user base [1] is not dependent on growth.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/3/24191074/meta-threads-user...
>monetising a 175-million user base is not dependent on growth
Sure but engagement of that userbase will eventually start to drop because there are so many social networks out there and Threads is not that much different than your average XY network. Zuckerberg's chain of thought was "Twitter is a mess, we can do it better and we have the power of Facebook's and Instagram's distribution", but is that enough? What special and hot features Threads has? And just look at Google; how many products they shut down because of slow user growth and low engagement? killedbygoogle.com is the testemony....so many good products killed, just because they weren't cost-effective for Google.
Sure but engagement of that userbase will eventually start to drop because there are so many social networks out there and Threads is not that much different than your average XY network. Zuckerberg's chain of thought was "Twitter is a mess, we can do it better and we have the power of Facebook's and Instagram's distribution", but is that enough? What special and hot features Threads has? And just look at Google; how many products they shut down because of slow user growth and low engagement? killedbygoogle.com is the testemony....so many good products killed, just because they weren't cost-effective for Google.
> engagement of that userbase will eventually start to drop because there are so many social networks out there and Threads is not that much different than your average XY network
This is the unsubstantiated pillar of your argument. From all objective measures, Threads is doing fantastically. It being undifferentiated is less of an argument now than it was at launch. They could die. But right now they’re a strong No. 2.
This is the unsubstantiated pillar of your argument. From all objective measures, Threads is doing fantastically. It being undifferentiated is less of an argument now than it was at launch. They could die. But right now they’re a strong No. 2.
I hope they survive because more competition the better. Time will tell what will happen. I also wish Google+ survived but unfortunately it didn't.
Zuckerberg bets that Twitter will collapse under*
Zuckerberg copied me. I created a threads-based app and the next thing you know he creates one. I was trying to create a twitter, message board hybrid. If you want to see the latest iteration, its here: https://asiaviewnews.com/gigabots/threads I turned into into a AI/tech news summary website with post/reply functionality.
[deleted]
> This isn't inherently bad - Twitter wasn't a great place for anyone's mental health *and is even less so now.*
This kind of thoughtless, evidence-free garbage undermines everything else in the post.
This kind of thoughtless, evidence-free garbage undermines everything else in the post.
My main issue with threads is that O can’t browse without signing up. Thus, it fails to form a value proposition.
don't blame threads for that, that was decided for Twitter and threads and the rest of the Internet by the LinkedIn vs HiQ web scraping case which said that content available outside of a login wall is fair game.
> that was decided for Twitter and threads and the rest of the Internet by the LinkedIn vs HiQ web scraping case which said that content available outside of a login wall is fair game
Q: Remind us who are the creators of all this valuable content that needs to be protected against scrapers?
(Spoiler: not the platforms that are blocking anonymous access to it)
Q: Remind us who are the creators of all this valuable content that needs to be protected against scrapers?
(Spoiler: not the platforms that are blocking anonymous access to it)
I just now opened and browsed threads.net without logging in.
> main issue with threads is that O can’t browse without signing up. Thus, it fails to form a value proposition
This is conserved across billions of dollars of social media. I’m not on most social media. But a paywall clearly works.
This is conserved across billions of dollars of social media. I’m not on most social media. But a paywall clearly works.
the open internet demolished aol and compuserve. a paywall doesn't always work; it depends on circumstances
It is federated to an extent now though, can't you use a mastodon client without a meta account? I believe you can, iiuc.
Threads has defeded many Fedi instances for not being advertiser friendly and many Fedi instances rightly defeded Threads to protect their users from their scraping.
> Why are native creators who bet your platform on day one not getting financially incentivized
I really hope this never happens.
It was one of the key decisions that ruined Twitter as it motivated people towards engagement above all else. Which is why even in sub-communities like startups or tech everyone is posting clickbait and controversial takes.
One of the smartest things Threads has done that is unique is that it rewards users who reply and engage with the community versus posting popular content. It means all of the Instagram influencers have not been able to get much traction.
I really hope this never happens.
It was one of the key decisions that ruined Twitter as it motivated people towards engagement above all else. Which is why even in sub-communities like startups or tech everyone is posting clickbait and controversial takes.
One of the smartest things Threads has done that is unique is that it rewards users who reply and engage with the community versus posting popular content. It means all of the Instagram influencers have not been able to get much traction.
Monetisation in general is a double-edged sword for any and all platforms and communities. Letting users make money from their work is great in theory, but the end result is that everyone becomes significantly more greedy and selfish, hucksters and spammers run rampant, and the changed incentive structure destroys whatever value the platform might have.
It happened with every forum that attempted revenue sharing, it happened with YouTube and Twitter and Instagram and TikTok, and this rate it'll probably happen with Threads too.
It happened with every forum that attempted revenue sharing, it happened with YouTube and Twitter and Instagram and TikTok, and this rate it'll probably happen with Threads too.
This is what finally drove me off Twitter. Not the acquisition, not the bots, not even the crypto-spam. It was the monetisation destroying any sense of good faith or genuine opinion. Just self-serving hot takes and engagement bait.
I still do not understand why people feel that they are subjected to voodoo algorithms forced on them by Twitter. The only things I see on Twitter are written by, reposted by, or replied to by people I actually know in real life. You do not have to be subject to random content on Twitter! The only things that appear unbidden in my feed are ads, and in 2024 their inventory is so thin that there's hardly any of those.
Vanishingly few people I know in real life use Twitter. The issue I had mostly wasn't random algorithm stuff - I used the mute button a _lot_ - it's people I previously respected and enjoyed reading the content of falling further and further into the "post hot takes and controversial opinions for engagement" trap.
For many years, Twitter would revert the setting to see a timeline made up of tweets only from those you followed, preferring to reset you to their algorithmic feed (“For you”). They stopped this at some point (pre-acquisition) but the damage to perception was done by then.
It might not be a lot but I certainly saw tweets from Elon frequently until I muted him. I didn't follow him. I noticed this explicitly because he is so prominent but I feel that my feed has plenty of tweets from people I don't follow.
There’s two explicit feeds on Twitter. “For you” and “following”
One is theoretically good for discovery of content that “the algorithm” thinks is suitable for you
The other is what you are asking for a stream of content _only_ from people you follow
One is theoretically good for discovery of content that “the algorithm” thinks is suitable for you
The other is what you are asking for a stream of content _only_ from people you follow
Author of the article here!
I think you misunderstood the point I was making there - the "creators" I'm referencing here are the community builders who reply and engage, not the creators they're currently financially incentivizng from IG to post on Threads who "spam and scram."
I completely agree with you - incentivizng posting is a terrible method to push good practices. But incentivizng those who are already invigorating the community (like helping with events, promoting other community member work etc.) is what I'm pointing at here.
I think you misunderstood the point I was making there - the "creators" I'm referencing here are the community builders who reply and engage, not the creators they're currently financially incentivizng from IG to post on Threads who "spam and scram."
I completely agree with you - incentivizng posting is a terrible method to push good practices. But incentivizng those who are already invigorating the community (like helping with events, promoting other community member work etc.) is what I'm pointing at here.
Twitter rewards replies and engagement, and all that happened is people starting posting stuff that made other people angry, and then fanned the flames in the comments. It's what got me to leave Twitter permanently.
i am with you on this. A lessons learned from working on a web3 platform where people could earn to moderate posts, it doesn't bring the right incentives into a social graph.
MOnetization on a social media platform is a tricky beast. It's so easy to screw the whole thing up.
Take Tiktok for example. Now you have the Tiktok Shop 1 in 3 posts is just "I'm sorry to all the people who paid $20 for this $1 piece of junk from Alibaba because it's $10 now" posts. I guess its lucrative but it really lowers the value of posts. "Creators eligible for commision" videos aen't as obnoxious but still aren't great.
Paid partnership videos likewise are 99% hollow and disingenuous.
As a user I've been trained to look at the bottom left and if I see any of these ad signifiers, I just immediately scroll up.
The creator fund tends to work better because it doesn't tend to really change someone's content. That's not strictly true. For example, stitches are ineligible for the creator fund so you'll find those in the fund will just screen grab instead.
But you also hear of cases of creators getting almost shadowbanned while in the creator fund and it's resolved by leaving it. We can only speculate why. Perhaps Tktok decided to push other creators on the the fyp who it thought would genreate better ad revenue. ' But it's so easy to ruin the entire ecosystem with monetization.
Take Tiktok for example. Now you have the Tiktok Shop 1 in 3 posts is just "I'm sorry to all the people who paid $20 for this $1 piece of junk from Alibaba because it's $10 now" posts. I guess its lucrative but it really lowers the value of posts. "Creators eligible for commision" videos aen't as obnoxious but still aren't great.
Paid partnership videos likewise are 99% hollow and disingenuous.
As a user I've been trained to look at the bottom left and if I see any of these ad signifiers, I just immediately scroll up.
The creator fund tends to work better because it doesn't tend to really change someone's content. That's not strictly true. For example, stitches are ineligible for the creator fund so you'll find those in the fund will just screen grab instead.
But you also hear of cases of creators getting almost shadowbanned while in the creator fund and it's resolved by leaving it. We can only speculate why. Perhaps Tktok decided to push other creators on the the fyp who it thought would genreate better ad revenue. ' But it's so easy to ruin the entire ecosystem with monetization.
> a platform can't exist to be "an alternative." It should be able to stand alone
A good summary of why so many competitors fail to reach critical mass
A good summary of why so many competitors fail to reach critical mass
Nobody has ever linked me or talked to me about something on Threads, and the only reason I know it still exists is because of annoying ads on Instagram.
Is it a ghost town or am I just not the target demographic (what is the target demographic)?
Is it a ghost town or am I just not the target demographic (what is the target demographic)?
Seems like people submit stuff from Threads about once every few weeks, but they just don't get much attention.
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=threads.net
Unlike twitter where we see a lot more submissions, and many get voted up.
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=twitter.com
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=threads.net
Unlike twitter where we see a lot more submissions, and many get voted up.
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=twitter.com
A big part of what made Twitter influential was that twits could be easily shared widely on other platforms. That doesn’t happen with Threads, and happens less now with Xitter.
Its garbage
The tweetdeck link redirects to a pricing page - I thought it was free?
Weird story, but when I first used twitter ~2 years ago, it was to follow one specific current event, so my entire feed was one single-issue. I loved it! Over time I've obviously clicked on content on other topics and the feed got all mixed up with 20 different topics, which feels so gross and disorganised.
If anyone remembers 'Zite' app (which unfortunately got acquired and disbanded ~2014), it was basically a bunch of news feeds sorted per topic - super handy at the time for the things I was interested in: I could read 50 notes/articles on blockchain (then in its infancy), then on airbnb, then uber etc. I could read exactly one topic at a time without any distractions mixed in. It felt so organised. I really like single-issue feeds like what tweetdeck is (I think, I don't pay for it).
Weird story, but when I first used twitter ~2 years ago, it was to follow one specific current event, so my entire feed was one single-issue. I loved it! Over time I've obviously clicked on content on other topics and the feed got all mixed up with 20 different topics, which feels so gross and disorganised.
If anyone remembers 'Zite' app (which unfortunately got acquired and disbanded ~2014), it was basically a bunch of news feeds sorted per topic - super handy at the time for the things I was interested in: I could read 50 notes/articles on blockchain (then in its infancy), then on airbnb, then uber etc. I could read exactly one topic at a time without any distractions mixed in. It felt so organised. I really like single-issue feeds like what tweetdeck is (I think, I don't pay for it).
TweetDeck (now "X Pro") is no longer free and they removed the good old version. The new version completely misses the point of what TweetDeck was. You can no longer use multiple accounts at the same time for example.
Maybe you can try lists on Twitter/X?
During the initial release, Threads seemed like a sanitized corporate playground for various big-name organizations to share their slop and promotions. Right now I get a lot of anti-Elon / anti-Twitter slop or political slop despite never engaging with such content. Most of the famous people I follow on Threads are just cross-posting the same content on every major social media platform anyway. I barely know anyone from real life that actually participates on Threads. In general, the tools for discovering interesting or new people don't seem to be there for Threads.
Finally, this current version of Threads is probably the best it's ever going to be. Once enough people are using the platform Zuck is going to start shoving ads down your throat, just like they've done with Instagram.
Edit: Instagram also keeps giving me notifications when certain people make posts on Threads, to try and get me to use the platform more often. And even Threads will randomly send me a notification that Yann LeCun made some post on Threads which it thinks I will really love, despite it being incredibly generic and uninteresting.