Instagram Threads hits 100M users, becoming the fastest growing app | Hacker News Reader

Instagram Threads hits 100M users, becoming the fastest growing app

independent.co.uk

50 pointsdoener75 comments

Threads feels like a rehash of the same old social media features, with the added frustration of being force-fed content from brands and influencers, rather than a feed of people I actually _want_ to follow. And while the initial surge in signups is impressive, it's largely due to Meta's captive billion people audience and the novelty factor. The real test will be retention, particularly as the user experience leaves much to be desired. Also, the idea of having one identity across all platforms feels restrictive and dismissive of the different facets of living. Having separate identities for different aspects of life isn't a "lack of integrity" as zuck calls it, it's a necessity. I fear we're headed towards a future where we're all bland versions of ourselves, carefully crafting simplistic, unified public identity that's easy for marketers to target while limiting the freedom of expression.

> Threads feels like a rehash of the same old social media features

Because it is... It's very clearly just a knock off twitter for people that are fed up with Musks' shenanigans.

Maybe I'm becoming a Luddite as I get older, but it seems to me we've passed peak social media. All these apps are just a spin on the same core set of features. I can friend/follow someone, I can post text/image/video, I can comment on someone's text/image/video, I can like/share someone's text/image/video, and others can do all of the same to me. On the flipside, all my data gets hoovered up and sold to people who want to show me ads they think I will click.

Core features are the same, but the pretense is different. What else matters now? It will take a long while for excellence to win out again.

There is not much wrong with doing a competent job of consolidating a trailing-edge product category. Especially when you have the best ad tech and largest audience.

I agree with your sentiment in general, but Threads isn’t intended to be new, it’s supposed to be Twitter, competently run.

If we’re counting people using a feature of an account they already have as “growing,” WeChat has surely done this faster many times, and many times over. They regularly release apps.

Or iMessage, which was released in 2011 when there were 115m iPhone users. That year, iMessage gained 115m users, since it was bundled with the phone.

The metric is kind of contrived.

The "feature" happens to be a full app that you must consciously download. You must then go through the onboarding flow before finally the number of users is incremented. That's just like downloading any other app. These are not trivial numbers.

To add to that, these numbers don't include EU folks, who cannot download the app and onboard.

>That's just like downloading any other app.

Any other app that is being actively promoted inside an app you've already downloaded and using.

https://twitter.com/GUMBastard/status/1677386533312012305

TikTok, Pinterest, Spotify, etc. all bootstrapped off Facebook and Instagram. These are common growth tactics.

Facebook sent out push notifications to their users, suggesting them to try out TikTok, Pinterest and Spotify?

I don't think this is contrived at all. It is not a "feature." It's not like you open the Instagram app and you can access Threads. You have to download the Threads app. Sure, you can sign in using your Instagram account, but you can't just use an already existing app, therefore I don't see it as a "feature" as you're describing. This is not bundled with Instagram.

By their metric of what an app is versus a feature, Google never releases apps since you always use your existing Google account.

Maybe Google should embrace this so they can rid themselves of bad PR from shutting down apps.

It’s not that Meta didn’t release an app, it’s that Meta releasing an app and having it get 100m users isn’t a clear signal of anything other than what we already knew — that Meta is a massive force in social media.

The “fastest growing” metric is only interesting when it points to a new phenomenon. For example, when TikTok hit the scene, I’m sure it was the fastest growing app at the time. That was interesting because it’s a different format and company.

>It's not like you open the Instagram app and you can access Threads

Well, you almost can. My Instagram account that was previously established, and the linkage was immediate and felt automagical. Almost no friction.

It's no different than using sign in with Google. And there are bajillion apps out there that offer sign in with Google, doesn't mean every Google user is subscriber of the app. Same thing with threads.

> It's not like you open the Instagram app and you can access Threads. ... This is not bundled with Instagram.

uhh have you looked at IG profiles now? There's literally a link to threads on every profile of every user that signed up! Even on desktop! see top center: https://instagram.com/simonsarris

Dedicated links from profiles with an icon is as close as you get to being bundled while still technically being two apps.

Also threads glitched yesterday and gave me the follower count and bio from Instagram on my profile page for a while, which was... very odd. The profile part makes sense, since it asks if you want to import that. The follower count being swapped was something else. But it suggests a maybe even too-tight integration.

Clicking that link doesn't create a user.

> If we’re counting people using a feature of an account they already as “growing,”

We're not, that's not how Threads works.

Threads isn't a feature of Instagram but a completely separate app. Yes you can sign in to that app with your Instagram account, but that's no different than using Sign in with Google/Facebook/Twitter/Apple etc. anywhere else.

I hate the Threads user experience.

You're force fed content from brands, divisive political figures, meme pages, and influencers, and given no way to discover accounts you actually want to follow. At least on Twitter it's easier to find accounts to follow.

I get it's an MVP, but the current format of being designed as a totalitarian app that controls all the content you see makes it unusable to me.

Yeah.

Please, FFS, I just want a chronological feed of people I follow -- not something that's been growth-hacked to death from the very beginning and stuffs my face with a ladbible and a memeczar and random brands with their Gen Z social media interns posting hot takes :'(

Yup, totally repulsed by that, too. I wish they just had a paid option to remove all that crap, but noo, it's mandatory you get fed that daily. So i end up going there once a month or so, just to check on my remote friends still on FB/IG.

Is it possible to use threads without connecting it to my existing Instagram account?

I know that Zuckerberg said: "You have one identity. The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly. Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity."

But I use Facebook + Twitter to talk mainly about work, science, tech, etc.

I use Instagram for a completely different audience and post about music, art, etc.

Does my threads account link to my Instagram account?

I think the easiest solution is to create a second Instagram account. That’s what I did. Instagram supports having multiple accounts signed into the app at once, so it’s not much of a pain once you’ve set it up.

I had an issue where I opened threads before realizing I wanted to create a new Instagram account for it. I had to hard quit the threads app, create the new account on Instagram, sign in with it, then re-launch threads.

You need a second phone number to do that correct? As I recall, there are very strict protections and verifications in place by big social networks to prevent bot and spam accounts.

Is this actually allowed by the TOS? For individuals, not brands, to have multiple accounts?

It is very much supported. Top left, click on your name, 'Add account', and go from there. I think in the backend the accounts might be associated for security/abuse purposes, but Instagram actively wants you to be able to have more than one account.

I'd imagine it would be a lot harder to avoid being 'thirsty on main' without these features.

Just checked, and signed up with a random second account. They add the phone number from the previous account you were on by default, and mention copying your other non-public information over from the previous account you were signed in to.

You can use the same number fine. You can even create different accounts based on your main one too.

OT, but:

Having one identity also means putting all your eggs in one basket, which in turn means you'll get banned from all products under the umbrella ownership, should you screw up something. Or get compromised. Or just have bad luck.

Sorry I don't have a answer for your question. But wow, I was not aware of that quote. The audacity of Zuckerberg lecturing people on lack of integrity is amazing. Shaming customers to further tighten his companys lock-in strategy seems... fittingly dystopian.

On the one hand I agree with you - I don't like Meta's black-hole-like gravity trying to pull everyone into their ecosystem.

On the other hand, I agree with him - the era of having multiple identities is coming to end, or rather, has come to an end. I don't like that he coaches as "having integrity", but rather it is a simple fact that you can no longer hide multiple identities of any significance, so owning up to who you are is probably good. I'd still like our culture(s) to evolve to allow people to keep work and home and whatever else interests separate.

To say it another way, I really like having separate identities, but it is no longer feasible to actually prevent 3rd parties from connecting them.

I guess no one you care about has a relentless abusive stalker ex.

Or is a schoolteacher who wants to post their opinions freely on Facebook to their old friends.

And those are “mainstream” folks, without even starting on people who are possibly subject to religious persecution in their physical communities, people considering a gender transition, etc.

It may very well be true that 3rd parties can easily connect my identities. However I still see no reason to share my private identity with Bob from accounting.

> You have one identity. The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly. Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.

Billionaires live on a completely different planet.

The things I will say, and share with my girlfriend is very different from what I will say and share with my coworkers. And that’s the way it should be.

And that’s the most trivially obvious example of how wrong he is.

Forcing everyone to commit to a single identity would mean forcing them to become the most bland, restricted version of themselves that they could be.

Thank heavens we still have forums outside of the claws of mr Zucc and his ilk. I would rather unalive myself than to live in a world where Meta controls identity fully.

I deleted my Facebook years ago.

I use Instagram a bit. I use WhatsApp a bit. But that’s about it for what I am willing to give to Meta.

And frick Twitter too.

I will rather scroll past a hundred senseless shitposts on some board on 4chan than to become a user of Threads or any other new product from Meta. At least on 4chan you can express yourself freely without these crazy ideas that everyone has to carefully form some kind of unified identity that they will publicly hold for eternity.

In fact, even reading this quote from Zuckerberg makes me strongly want to delete my Instagram and WhatsApp too.

> Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.

So he would say that the Founding Fathers of the US had a lack of integrity? There’s many examples of them authoring works under pen names.

> I know that Zuckerberg said: "You have one identity. The days of you having a different image for your work friends or co-workers and for the other people you know are probably coming to an end pretty quickly. Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity."

He himself is always just the same down-to-earth guy who called people "dumb fucks" for trusting him with their data.

Yes, if you launch a new product and promote it heavily to an already captive audience, you can easily convert a lot of them to try the new product.

Hardly new science here?

I must admit, I find threads quite enjoyable.

Perhaps it is the novelty factor, but I find myself establishing contact with individuals (and even them contacting each other for the first time) whom I rarely engage with otherwise, as they tend to frequent different social platforms (Twitter vs IG vs TikTok vs Snap).

Typically my social networking engagement is almost strictly HN, so witnessing everyone I know engaged in vibrant interactions has proven to be a fascinating experience after a prolonged period of relative quietness for myself.

This has also been my experience, and as you I suspect it might be related to the novelty factor. Let's see if engagement remains the same.

Are they new users, or just IG users that login with their previous account into a new feature that lives in a separate app?

GG number crunchers at meta I guess

Well they still got that amount of people to download a new app, but yes, they are all IG users.

These are new or existing IG users. Either way, the user must download the app and go through a full onboarding flow to increment the count, which is how publications are tracking. The count is public for anyone to see.

I wonder how many of those are already bots tho

lmao

https://github.com/junhoyeo/threads-api

I joined Threads and followed the same people I follow on Instagram.

Real slick signup process.

What's everyone talking about? Mostly a combination of Hello, World! type posts, and "why is Threads showing me random celebrity crap? I don't care what kind of weird tree Paris Hilton just saw."

For that reason, I remain sceptical of retention.

Besides, my audience on Instagram, i.e., not programmers, is so different from the audience I had when I had Twitter.

Impressive considering it is unavailable in the EU

What do we thinking retention will be like?

Still US-only, I think.

Not correct, it's live in many countries (including the UK). The main area it hasn't launched is the EU due to legal concerns.

Legal concerns = It can't work without violating rudimentary privacy and tracking restrictions mandated by the EU.

It doesn’t work in China for the same reason.

I *highly* doubt that the reasons are the same for EU and China.

I suspect the reasons are the same (privacy), but the motivation behind them to be quite different…

Note that while it's officially banned, there are ways to access it and people are doing that.

> Threads, launched on Wednesday evening US time, already ranked fourth among free social media apps in Apple’s iOS store in China

> The app has gained traction even though users based in China must use virtual private networks to access the platform.

Source: https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/article/3226962/metas-twi...

I'm assuming retention and participation numbers will be gamed.

Comparable to the Metaverse I'm thinking

Here's my experience - the only social media site that has ever censored me is Facebook. Whenever I say Trump should get whatever is coming to him through the process of law I always get put in FB jail and told I "violated community standards on hate speech" - then they go on to define their standards on hate speech:

- Attacking people due to sexual orientation

- Attacking people due to their religious affiliation

- Attacking people due to the gender identity

- Attacking people due to their disabilities

- Attacking people due to their political affiliation

- Attacking people due to their race

I have done none of these things. I make it clear Trump should have the long arm of the law applied to him for his crimes against the United States and if he in fact committed treason, which should be determined thru due process in court, then he should be hanged. That's not hate speech - that's how I believe anybody committing treason should be treated.

Oh, and where do I make these comments on Facebook? On Trump's sponsored adds where he's whining about Joe Biden and the DOJ "politicizing" justice and attacking poor, innocent Donald - and hey, can you send me some money to pay the legal bills for these unjust attacks? I think my comments are warranted on these kinds of sponsored adds.

So no, I won't be using Threads. Twitter is a far sight better for allowing freedom of expression, regardless of what Elon Musk's detractors may say. Zuckerberg has shown time and again he's the much worse option to Musk.

Their definition of 'signups' is very, very liberal.

How so? I thought they had to download a new app, which for me is a huge barrier.

yeah, I won't be joining until (if?) they open up the web app

Who on the planet needs to sign up for yet another social network? Plus now you need to have the teenage girl app to use it?

It's a no from me dawg.

>Who on the planet needs to sign up for yet another social network?

The people flooding out of Twitter:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-rapid-rise-of-threads-appea...

'people are leaving twitter, trust me bro' - wsj

CloudFare has the data:

https://www.threads.net/t/Cue0QR5LAV2/

So why don't they say 'we have 100,000,000 app downloads'?

Because there is a huge difference between downloading an app and downloading launching logging in going through onboarding.

There's a whole bunch of reasons why, and you got one answer below. But what does that have to do with answering the question that was asked of you? You made an accusation about how the definition of signups was "very, very liberal", and then when called out on it and asked to explain you just started talking about something completely different. But, of course, you had to since your original claim was complete bullshit.

The enshittification also seems to be growing the fastest too.

The first day or two was great. It was only content from the immediate network, or things they liked or reposted.

Now? So much low-effort content. Like "memezar" posting "lost my girl but won the argument". Or other accounts like "wasted" (ironic) and others.

Perhaps threads is trying to Speedrun the Twitter algorithm, and next week we'll see more outragey political and news based items. You know, for engagement.

I downloaded but haven't used yet cause all my followers are still on Twitter. I was curious how the app looks like and can tell that they weren't joking when they said it's a Twitter clone. I'm a bit surprised that a company like Meta has no shame in copying another product one to one. (Not sure how this phrase sounds in English)

I never found Twitter's interface to be good to begin with, so it's always struck me as a little silly that apps like Mastodon and now Threads are copying it whole-cloth.

(your use of "one-to-one" is perfect English by the way)

and it's 90% influencers / brand advocates. meaningless noise. 80% of the time I'm muting accounts. also, 100% of those "new users" are instagram accounts that have simply enabled the integration...

Yet another piece that totally avoids mentioning Facebook. Almost as if instructed…

Or WhatsApp or Quest, or Messenger. Must be some kind of huge conspiracy.

You mean Instagram Threads, a subset of Instagram, purchased by Meta which was formerly know as "The Social Network That Shall Not Be Named"?

I bet Facebook Messenger grew faster.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com