Evan Urquhart 🏳️⚧️Do people actually believe the 70 million Threads users number?
Iisn't this the company known to have lied about video's popularity. casually destroying an entire industry?
Jérôme@e_urq yes I believe the number. And blatant lying would have consequences for a public company with the regulators
@jerome Oh, is there a different legal reason these numbers have to be correct that their previous false numbers didn't?
@e_urq you’re the one accusing them of lying and creating a conspiracy theory. You’d need to bring the burden of proof.
@jerome No, you've misunderstood.
I'm saying that their past lies should have consequences, such as not giving them the benefit of the doubt when they make similar types claims without providing evidence.
You know, punishing known liars by being skeptical. I don'tclaim to know the real numbers, just saying known past lies should have consequences to credibility.
nhan#Instagram has 2.35 billion users, and 70 million of #Threads is just 3% of them. Does that sound too unreasonable to you so that you have to doubt that number?
Do you think it's reasonable for conspiracy theorists to go around telling people to doubt everything their government says because the government has a proven track record of breaking social contract multiple times, especially when there isn't any evidence?
Evan Urquhart 🏳️⚧️ (@[email protected])
@[email protected] I have an instagra account, but I haven't signed into it since Threads launched. And, it hasn't been active for a month yet. How many daily active users does instagram have? What percentage of those are they saying have installed this? My point is primarily that known liars ought to lose the benefit of the doubt. They broke the social contract once, there should be consequences in the form of always doubting their numbers going forward and mentioning the lying they did previously.
@nhan @jerome Meta is known to have lied in a similar situation. Their worldwide daily active users are around 500 million. Europe doesn't have Threads. Still, let's be charitable and say it was in the neighborhood of 10 percent of their users on the first day.
That seems possible, but not so obviously reasonable that a company known to have inflated their numbers in the past should be trusted without question.
@e_urq @jerome DAU of Facebook is 2 bil, DAU of Insta is 500 mil. Sign up is as easy as a few clicks. The #Threads launch has been hyped up by the media a week before that. Plus the recent debacle at Twitter. In fact, they rushed it out of the door to capitalize on it. Many, many of the big celebrities, YouTubers, News Orgs are there in the first day.
Subtract the MAU of Insta in Europe, the number I gave you before jump to 3.3%. Evidence of hype: https://mastodon.social/@YupYupp/110680447590078159
Still unreasonable?
@nhan @jerome I don't think I said it was ureasonable. It's not so obviously reasonable it should be accepted unquestioningly from a company who lied in similar circumstances. I've asked if they've provided evidence, and no one claims they have. Media covering the number should mention past lies.
This is about past lies having consequences, not my belief or disbelief in the number. It may be true- I think they've lost the right to have numbers they're hyping believed w/o proof.