Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
I was just repeating what I've seen said here several times. Should I have taken steps to verify it before repeating it? Yes. Do I dislike and distrust Facebook enough to believe they'd do something like this without giving it a second thought? Also yes.
For the record, the numbers they reported were based on the number of Instagram users that downloaded the Threads app and took the active step of activating their account there. Threads and Instagram share accounts, so it's a very seamless process. What Meta very much did not do was take the number of Instagram accounts, which is around 1 billion, and say "We have a billion Threads signups!".
Sharing accounts and thus making it extremely easy to sign up for was, if anything, a very clever and smart move.
My understanding of it was that if anyone who had signed up followed one of their Instagram friends who hadn't signed up, then that followed friend was also included in the statistic. Was that not the case? Does Meta actually give an explanation of the metric they used?