Really does seem like it came down to this point. Musk hoped Brazilian users would get angry with the government, and they just downloaded bluesky instead. Musk lost a month of Brazilian revenue and gained nothing.
I followed some Brazilians on my (mostly unused) bluesky account. Will be interesting to see if they stick around there, return to twitter, or use both.
It’s like when he claimed he’d “document in great detail” how the boycotting advertisers would kill Twitter, and was smugly confident “Earth” would care. Absolutely delusional. The interviewer even understandably struggled with that line of reasoning.
Those are not mutually exclusive. Brazilians straight up protested this judge and his actions.
Is that really true? I think platforms have strong network effects that make migrations to alternatives (like Bluesky) very difficult.
The network effect has negative value to the user; if the platform went away, everyone would migrate to a better platform, and everyone would be better off. The network effect is an artificial barrier to competition that only benefits the owner of said network, and it only works because collective action is harder than collective inaction.
I’m also equating these kinds of network effects with other artificial barriers to competition, like price fixing or mandatory non-compete agreements.
Oh, he lost more than that.
Twitter is big because of the network effect, and the network just got smaller.