Technology

60070 readers

3537 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

974

Bluesky sees record signups day after Musk says X will go paid-only (mashable.com)

submitted 1 year ago by geosoco@kbin.social to c/technology@lemmy.world

288 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] evatronic@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

G+'s downfall was they kept it invite-only too long. Demand was there, people wanted in but Google was like, "Nah..."

By the time it was open-access, everyone had moved on or back to their old social media platforms. It could've been great, but Google, in typical Google fashion, got distracted by something shiny and killed it.

[–] wjrii@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The sad thing is, if they'd thought even a tiny bit laterally and leveraged the fact that Google Reader was getting a lot of traction and a core of people were beginning to use its social functions, they could have backdoored themselves into being Digg/Reddit/Etc. and had the social media userbase to take on Facebook organically.

Instead, they fought the last war (Gmail vs Hotmail), intentionally eroded and then killed Reader, and with G+ they completely fucked up what was a cleaner interface (if not all that special) and a better technological experience, all while they were a brand that was at that time more trusted than their competitors.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yep. Once they screwed up G+, I committed to never becoming dependent on any Google service beyond Drive and Gmail, and only those two because they're completely untouchable - Google couldn't break those without having a mass rebellion on its hands.