←back to thread

Maybe Bluesky has "won"

(anderegg.ca)
461 points GavinAnderegg | 1 comments | 15 Nov 24 19:56 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
throwaway48476 ◴[15 Nov 24 20:22 UTC] No.42150518[source]▶
n=1 but I've never seen a bluesky content link in the wild. I've seen lots of people talking about bluesky or moving to bluesky though.
replies(11): >>42150599 #>>42150615 #>>42150664 #>>42150717 #>>42151522 #>>42151526 #>>42151689 #>>42152716 #>>42153726 #>>42156258 #>>42156687 #
af78 ◴[15 Nov 24 23:53 UTC] No.42152716[source]▶
Another data point. When Musk bought twitter and started wrecking it, several people I followed created an account on blue sky but most did not use it that much. This seems to have changed over the past week (i.e. after the US election). Dozens of users have moved, pro-Ukraine people in particular. Some double post. As certain content creators move, others do the same, amplifying the trend. It's interesting to see network effects at play.
replies(1): >>42153850 #
1. prisenco ◴[16 Nov 24 03:20 UTC] No.42153850[source]▶
Feels like the early days of the digg -> reddit migration in 2010 or so.

Network effects are so powerful at keeping people in, but they have the ability to turn a trickle into a flood when it comes to depopulating a service. The big social networks were so big we thought they were unstoppable, so I'm interested to see if we can still see a shift like that in this day and age.