Bluesky sees record signups day after Musk says X will go paid-only
Just around 24 hours after Musk made his comments, more than 42,000 new users joined Bluesky, making it the biggest signup day yet for the currently invite-only platform that launched earlier this year.
Bluesky saw a total of 53,585 new signups by the end of Tuesday, September 19. The new users gained in that single day make up 5 percent of the platform's entire user base of 1,125,499 total accounts.
The new user signups are tracked via the third-party website "Bluesky Stats." Looking over Bluesky signup numbers on the tracker for the past month, it appears that the platform usually sees from 10,000 to 20,000 new signups per day. Bluesky has doubled its usual daily new user numbers already, with many more hours left in the day still to go.
It's impossible to know whether Musk's comments about charging users to post on X really played a role in this, but it almost certainly had some effect.
I wonder why people aren’t going for mastodon.
Mastadon (and the Fediverse in general, to some extent) has problems with discoverability and the average user finds federation confusing. People tend to either use microblogging to see what's going on with people they're interested in or to broadcast their activities to a large group of people, and Mastadon currently doesn't fit that niche very well.
Pretty much this. It's why I love it for my use case (microblogging journal that only I can see), but it's definitely not for everyone else.
It's why if your average influencer or news consumer wants a Twitter alternative, it's likely Threads or perhaps BlueSky, not Mastodon.
The same reason people aren't going for Lemmy.
Aside from the fact that the Fediverse is an incredibly confusing concept to the average user, those same users are entrenched and connected to everyone they already want to be connected to on the same platform. Until they are essentially forced to move, they'll stay on Twitter. The people on Lemmy and Mastodon right now are a tiny but vocal minority compared to the massive userbases of the platforms they abandoned.
Yeah there really needs to be a rethink of how the Fediverse works.
I don't want to have to subscribe to 8 different "Games" subs each with under 3000 users.
It really should be like "topics" more than "sublemmys" (or whatever) where every post on the Fediverse tagged "games" will appear on your feed when you subscribe to the topic.
The topics still get moderated by the local instance topic moderators and instances can defederate from troubled instances, but discoverability would improve exponentially.
Maybe how it could work is sublemmies could agree to link up and share posts so for example the posts from one games sub would appear in the other games sub and vice versa.
It seems the limitation with the topics idea is who would decide what the topics are? Would there just be a list of like 20 topics baked into Lemmy and people that create sublemmies would tag their sub with a topic? I think the only limitation with that is there would be so many niche subs that don't fit cleanly into one topic, or will be drowned out by the big subs in there maybe. Maybe it could work though if anybody could create new topics, then there could be a Fallout for example with the Fallout subs being in that rather than having to be in the games topic and being drowned out
Yeah it sorta needs to be back to hashtags to tag content so that it can all be in a community despite being in different instances and subs. It's really disjointed and currently the fediverse feels like we went back to AOL chat rooms where it's a lot of people waiting in their own room for someone to come in and talk to them.
It doesn't work and it doesn't really inspire conversation anymore.
Yeah it is like that unfortunately. I mean the larger subs are fine but the niche ones just aren't working on Lemmy atm and some way of addressing the sub splintering would help a lot. And yeah hashtags would probably be a solid way of addressing it.
How did the average user ever figure out email?
They are as well!
Was a open source platform run on donations entirely ever be a competition for something huge like Twitter? This is a first afaik.
I’d say Bitcoin is a bigger example.
yeah but like yesn't. bitcoin isn't a good example imo
How so? A decentralized open source platform with no owner which has a 500B market cap and 220 millions users.
I feel like that’s exactly what we are talking about. I understand the negative sentiment over crypto, but this is a fact.
Or maybe the difference is that it hasn’t stifled some competitor platform yet. I can agree with that because it’s not a parallel in that it’s competing with nothing.
Do people either make money or think they'll make money simply by using the Fediverse? One can certainly advertise via guerrilla marketing on a Fediverse platform but it's far more lucrative to advertise on mainstream social media.
Are you saying brands don't want to come to the fediverse to market their products? I mean if that's true that seems like a good thing, and even if it wasn't I'm sure they would once Lemmy/Mastadon are big enough
No I'm pointing out why the comparison to Bitcoin is inaccurate. It's like saying that your open-source software project will work because the Linux kernel worked. The sole point of similarity has little relevance.
The Fediverse isn't asset speculation, Bitcoin is.
I'm on there, but I use Twitter and mastodon as a follower, I don't post. So until most of the 40ish people I follow move I'm stuck with Twitter if I want to see their posts. And I do.
depending on how popular the user is on Twitter, you may be able to follow them on Mastodon via https://bird.makeup/. I use it to follow things like larger content creators, NHL teams, stuff like that.
Oh interesting. I was unaware.
different features and scalability