you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 8 points 3 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    It's been a bit disappointing to see how quickly reason and facts are going out the window on Kbin just because "Meta bad". I genuinely expected a little better.

    Meta can be bad, and Threads can genuinely be popular. These aren't contradictory, and it's been funny, if sad, to see the mental hoops people are jumping through to try to explain away how Threads clearly must be a terrible failure actually.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    "had to be true, I saw it on the news" is an extremely naive take.

    Journalist's are experts in one thing. It isn't technology or social media. Go hop on threads, there's not half the population of the US participating FFS. It's patently obvious. Moreover it isn't illegal. Why wouldn't they misreport?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    participating =/= signed up at check it out at one point

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (1 child)

    Being followed by an idiot != Signing up an account

    I can create a billion accounts on my social media instance. Should that matter? No? So why does it matter that Meta did?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago

    Do you have any evidence at all that Instagram accounts who have a follower that signed up for Threads are being included in this number?

    Also, lying to your investors is very illegal, actually, and just about the single most reliable way for a rich person to actually go to jail. Just ask Elizabeth Holmes.

  • source
  • parent