NY Post:

Threads, the new “Twitter killer” app rolled out by Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, has surpassed 100 million users in less than a week while Elon Musk’s micro-blogging site has seen traffic “tanking,” according to a tech executive.

The initial burst of success for Threads has fueled a war of words between Musk and Zuckerberg.

The Twitter boss referred to his tech rival as a “cuck” and challenged him to a “d–k measuring contest” over the weekend.

Yeah, that really happened. Elon “Big Fag” Musk really did that. 

I considered calling this piece “Cuck Wars,” but then realized that was a bit lowbrow for this site. I’m not a billionaire who spends 14 hours a day tweeting. I have standards.

Not only have users been signing up to Threads through their Instagram accounts, but they have also been posting prolifically.

Since the system went online Wednesday, Threads users have written more than 95 million posts and clicked “like” on 190 million posts, according to the Verge.

NYPost claims in another article that Threads got 100 million users in the very first day, something echoed by others. Methinks those numbers are highly bot influenced, but it’s apparently linked to Instagram, so I could easily see tens of millions of real users. 

“Threads,” looks almost identical to Twatter, something I’ll touch on later. 

While Threads has gained momentum in its first few days of operation, Twitter’s traffic has reportedly been “tanking,” according to the head of cybersecurity firm Cloudfare.

Matthew Prince, the company CEO, posted a graph to both his Twitter and Threads accounts on Sunday showing the steep decline in traffic.

Prince’s data dovetails with figures released by Similarweb, the web analytics company that said web traffic to Twitter was down by 5% over the course of the first 48 hours after Threads went online.

According to Similarweb, Twitter’s web traffic is down 11% compared to the same period last year.

Zuckerberg said Friday that the launch of Threads has been “way beyond our expectations.”

Zuckerberg wrote on Threads that his service will be a kindler, gentler version of Twitter.

“The goal is to keep it friendly as it expands. I think it’s possible and will ultimately be the key to its success,” he wrote.

“That’s one reason why Twitter never succeeded as much as I think it should have, and we want to do it differently.”

The head of Instagram has said Threads won’t seek to mimic Twitter’s emphasis on breaking news and current events and that the new app will aim to be a “less angry” environment for users.

“Less angry,” means a few different things. First, it means even more political censorship, something that is confirmed by Instagram suit Adam Mosseri coming out and saying the following.

Mosseri added: “Politics and hard news are inevitably going to show up on Threads — they have on Instagram as well to some extent — but we’re not going to do anything to encourage those verticals.”

However, Musk’s twatter already censors everyone interesting, while artificially promoting users like Catturd2, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Ben Shapiro, and of course Musk xirself. He told us that he was letting everyone censored back onto the platform. Then he immediately cucked and censored everyone, most notably – as far as random people are concerned – by holocausting Brave Wakandian Schizo Kanye West last year. Twatter proceeded to get so terrible that I forgot about its existence for the past month, and only ever go on when a news link takes me there. 

In short, what Musk did was bring back the Republican Party Schizo crowd, and maybe prune a touch of the most venemously anti-White groomer antifa types, as part of an op to get Ron DeShabbos elected. He did all that while upping the censorship for real political actors, to the point of auto-censoring NJP, PA, and Justice Report links.

Not only is this politically a massive negative for us, it also makes Twatter an exhausting and tedious experience. Imagine wanting to share space with these annoying fags.

Purely in a business sense, and taking ADL censorship as a given, Musk’s Twatter could easily be outcompeted just by someone toning down the political content, and not artificially promoting misinformation spreading dipshits like Catturd2. However, due to the nature of winner-take-all markets, it would take someone with big pockets to step in and get some competitor off the ground. Enter the trillion dollar conglomerate known as “Meta.”

Or rather, the $250 billion conglomerate. They used to be a trillion dollar outfit, but then Marcus Zuckersperg got so fixated on the moronic idea of “the Metaverse,” that he singlehandedly wiped out three quarters of a billion trillion from the companies valuation. However, he appears to have finally found himself with a good idea.

Musk, however, was having none of it.

“It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram,” Musk tweeted over the weekend.

Early Monday, Musk tweeted: “You will get more laughs from this app than everything else combined.”

“But I have to warn you … don’t be shocked … there’s some negative stuff too.”

Yeah you’re right. There is some naughty stuff, like links to the national justice party website which you won’t find on –

Elon Musk is in a brutally bad spot here. I’ve written so many pieces on his idiotic takeover of twatter that I can’t find where I first laid this out, but let me repeat myself. The value of twatter is not the non-existent technology behind twatter. The value is the userbase. The same is true for Facebook, and most of these “tech” companies. Their large size gives them unfair advantages which protect them from any competition.

That’s why you don’t see any direct competitors to any of their products. There is no other version of Facebook, twitter, Instagram, etcetera. There is no point, since no one wants to sign up just to be the only person on the platform. It’s not because it’s technically difficult to do what they do, because it’s trivially easy. 


I put on a face of optimism, but was actually fairly concerned with Musk’s takeover, even before we knew what a little ADL toady he was. Let me quote from a piece I wrote in July of last year, when it looked like Musk’s twitter purchase was falling through, and he was serious about lifting the censorship.

My honest analysis is that Musk not buying twatter is actually good for us. With Orange Faggot Trump being banned these platforms have delegitimized themselves. Anyone, especially a politician, who is still on twitter is simply allowed to be. And that’s not just us saying that, everyone in the public knows it as well.

Musk was talking about bringing back Bloviating Orange Zionist, while potentially not allowing the “far-right and far-left.” That would have been a worst case scenario for us, where these censorious companies gain more legitimacy, while still censoring legitimate populists. Best case scenario for us was us all getting our accounts back without censorship, but even then I’m not so sure that’d be the godsend that many people believe.

Social media was always mostly a waste of time, with very little productive purpose. Everyone recognizing that it’s an astroturfed echo chamber for the privileged class is politically useful to us, and actual political organization never required twatter anyway. So we can skip the timesink that is twatter, and then point to our political opposition as a means of delegitimizing them.

Before bloviating ADL bitch Elon Musk purchased twatter, it was going the way of Reddit. That’s when a site becomes so absurdly censorious that everyone, even relatively apolitical average people, recognize it as a playpen for retards that you should be embarrassed to be on. 

Censorship has massively diminishing marginal returns. If you censor just the lampshadocaust fact-checkers, you can help ostracize and punish those people. If you start censoring soccer moms who get mad about absurdly sexualized kids curriculum, you start getting critical mass of censored people in the opposite direction. 

What’s more, these social media companies are extreme examples of winner takes all markets. Twitter and Facebook aren’t actual tech companies, they’re shitty websites where the userbase is 99.99% the value and the “technology,” is 0.01% of the value. Musk could easily start up a twatter competitor that is technologically just as functional, and get a critical mass of users.

I need to keep hammering this home. It’s not hard to build twatter. What Musk really purchased was the userbase, not the non-existent technology. That’s why he’s so assblasted over this “clone.” 

If he was really serious about censorship, he’d be doing the same for YouTube and Facebook. YouTube is a bit different, being something of an actual tech project, but Facebook is just a shitty website. Even with YouTube he could get some software developers to cook something up in a few months and improve it from there.

YouTube was made by a tiny company with just three employees in 2005. Google made a competitor called “Google Videos,” a few months later, but had to buy the company in 2006, since the first to market guys had a larger userbase. This meant that (((Google))), for all their money, couldn’t compete, so they bought the company for $1.6 billion. 

I really can’t stress enough how not technologically difficult it is to make a video sharing site. This. Is. Not. Hard. Nor is it a long term project. Even the servatives over at Rumble figured out how to do this.

What’s hard is funding the operation, especially without ad revenue. Google famously loses $2 billion per year on YouTube. Most people can’t even consider funding that, but Musk isn’t most people. Instead of spending $44 billion to buy twatter, he could have funded a politics focused YouTube competitor for 22 years. Actually, he could have undoubtedly funded the competitor for a lot longer, because the massively smaller userbase would have lowered the ongoing costs, probably by more than an order of magnitude.

But Musk didn’t do that. Why not? I’ve come to the conclusion that the most likely explanation is that he’s an unserious assclown who really likes twatter, and felt like a bigshot through buying the platform. At this point I honestly don’t think there’s anything else going on. Yes, he’s controlled by Schlomo, but he had to spend $44 billion of his own money just for Twatter to be still run by Jonathan Greenblatt. He’s like a petulant and spoiled child who got bullied back into his lane, but only after becoming $44 billion richer. 

This man is one of the biggest frauds in the world. Just look at his retarded Tesla truck if you don’t believe me, or his Hyperloop “idea.”

The latter was so frustratingly stupid that he’s managed to give the traffic trannies, in this case the retard known as Adam Something, their only real W’s. And I say “was,” because he just quietly abandoned the idea, just like he did with his “boring company,” and his solar panel rooftop dumpster fire. Or his 2017 promise of Mars by 2024. Or his ICBM intercontinental airliner. 

Even when I somewhat believed in Musk I was still worried about his twatter takeover. After all, since the value is the userbase, someone with deep pockets could potentially swoop in and poach all the celebrities, “influencers,” and other people with big follower accounts and get them onto a competitor. Facebook appears to be doing exactly that.

NY Post:

Kevin Durant is working on his game –– social media one, that is –– this offseason. 

After Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook’s parent company, Meta, announced the launch of their new app Threads on Wednesday, Durant posed a challenge for his Twitter followers. 

“On threads with the burner. Come find me,” Durant wrote in the tweet on Thursday.

The 13-time All-Star has been known for interacting with fans, and critics, from burner accounts on Twitter and is taking his antics to a new platform. 

“Our vision with Threads is to take what Instagram does best and expand that to text, creating a positive and creative space to express your ideas,” Meta said in a blog post.

I don’t care about Kevin Durant, and I don’t care about Instagram. Having said that, Instagram is objectively massive, and if there’s some linking they can do between the two it will be a popular product with the social media dopamine addicts. The same is true for getting all these annoying celebrities on their platform. Sorry for the annoying music in the below video, but it shows clearly how all the most popular instagram accounts are celebrities who are used to endorsement deals, some with enormous follower counts. Do you think if a competitor managed to lure them away to a different platform that they wouldn’t bring a huge amount of fans with them?

A similar story is found with Twatter. Does anyone really think that if all the celebrities not named “Elon Musk” leave Twatter that won’t create a huge rush of excitement and buzz around Threads? Hell, even if they just join Threads, that would arguably be enough in and of itself. As Facebook once showed with MySpace, once something that relies on network effects becomes “not hot,” it’s over.

No story about fraudulent “tech” companies would be complete without a mention that yes, the Threads app is terrible and absolutely holocausts the battery life of whatever phone is unfortunate enough to be tasked with running it. We’ve become so used to this technical incompetence from these companies that it’s almost not worth mentioning, but it still annoys me.

I won’t make a strong prediction either way, but it’s looking extremely grim for the Fake Free Speech African-American. I wouldn’t be surprised if Threads outright surpasses twatter, and everyone migrates over to them. It’s not like Musk has anything to offer, considering that the one advantage he might have, lack of censorship, is something that he’s made sure to throw away for good.

You may also like


  1. I’d like to say I care, but I’d be lying.
    Maybe they will flog each other to death with a sack of pink feathers.

  2. Social networking is nothing more than a data mining operation.
    The only thing it “produces” (data that can be sold to advertisers, or intelligence organizations) is handed over freely by its userbase. Take that away, and you are left with something that consumes considerable resources (electricity, bandwidth, server rack space) and produces absolutely nothing. It’s a colossal economic bubble just waiting to go pop.

    Facebook, Instagram, Twatter…..all of these would vanish in less than a year if people were to wake up from their dopamine-induced stupor en masse and stopped feeding these parasites.

    1. I just remembered an idea I had come up with, and honestly I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s something that happens within the next 5 years or so.

      I believe it’s only a matter of time before somebody tries to build a social media-style website with a fake user base that is almost entirely AI-generated. You’d want to have some real users thrown into the mix for authenticity, but you could slowly build up a head of steam, and once you’ve generated enough buzz the creators could then sell site off to venture capitalists and live very comfortably.

      And for those of you who say that VC’s would never fall for it, I would like to point out that Theranos received nearly $700 million in VC funding, and at one point was valued at ~10 billion – all of which was built on a foundation of pure fraud.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *