51–60 of 371 posts
I still can't believe it's app-only, that there's no desktop version. I refuse to wall off parts of the internet into silos that I have to enter through downloadable portals.
People jumping ship from Twitter for this thinking they're going to be treated any better are probably in line for a nasty surprise.
I thought the quotes on the BBC article were quite revealing: > Mr Zuckerberg said keeping the platform "friendly... will ultimately be the key to its success". > But Mr Musk responded: "It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram." If Threads is a fractionally less toxic version of Twitter, it’ll do quite well.
It will eventually be equally as toxic. Twitter started in a calm setting until the ads, politics, outrage filled it up. Threads will have ads soon and will apply the same Instagram algorithms it had before to promote verified outrage.
Trump is also on both Twitter and Threads. As long as he and other Instagram users are on Threads, then the outrage town hall will continue and will be no better than Twitter.
So, if the accounts are linked closely to each other, and an Instagram account is a necessity for a Threads "account", are those really "signups" or more like... logins into another view of the same service? These numbers seem overblown.
Meta will nuke your Instagram account for basically anything, including for no reason at all. I have like 50 followers, 10 photos, and check my IG once every week or two - haven't posted anything in months. Meta has banned me twice for unspecified policy violations (both times I had to send them a selfie and got reinstated, and there was no way to ask a human what these policies were). I suspect they'll ban/unban me…
> Meta will nuke your Instagram account for basically anything Opened the app last week and had to click through an accept gate warning me if I keep using "Scraping tools" I'll lose my account. The only "scraping" I've been doing is copying the direct image links and posting them to slack and my bookmarking service a few times a month. Insane to me that they're red in the face threatening me to lose my account over h…
As long as you(and others) keep using it, theres really no reason for them not to
Meta will nuke your Instagram account for basically anything, including for no reason at all. I have like 50 followers, 10 photos, and check my IG once every week or two - haven't posted anything in months. Meta has banned me twice for unspecified policy violations (both times I had to send them a selfie and got reinstated, and there was no way to ask a human what these policies were). I suspect they'll ban/unban me…
They want your selfies for facial recognition in order to track you better across the web and possibly resell that information to third parties. Also a great dataset for "AI" training, so your face can appear in modified form in laundered pictures.
How on earth does facial recognition help with tracking someone across the web?
Much as I despise Meta, I have to say that the article doesn't really say the same thing as the headline and it appears to be pure clickbait to me. Compare: > Meta will nuke your Instagram account if you delete Threads profile with > Meta explains: “You may deactivate your Threads profile at any time, but your Threads profile can only be deleted by deleting your Instagram account.” The title seems to imply that a use…
I don't see it Meta will delete Threads profile only if you nuke your Instagram account and Meta will nuke your Instagram account if you delete Threads profile mean exactly the same. In fact they are logically the same. It's like A iff B, means the same as B iff A.
"Meta will nuke your account" and "you nuke your account" is different. It might not even be possible to perform one of these (nuking your thread profile).
Your Instagram account is deleted (the state not the action) iff your thread profile is deleted.
Your thread profile is deleted iff your Instagram is deleted.
Those are the propositions that are logically equivalent.
People jumping ship from Twitter for this thinking they're going to be treated any better are probably in line for a nasty surprise.
I thought the quotes on the BBC article were quite revealing: > Mr Zuckerberg said keeping the platform "friendly... will ultimately be the key to its success". > But Mr Musk responded: "It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram." If Threads is a fractionally less toxic version of Twitter, it’ll do quite well.
I still can't believe it's app-only, that there's no desktop version. I refuse to wall off parts of the internet into silos that I have to enter through downloadable portals.
I still can't believe it's app-only, that there's no desktop version. I refuse to wall off parts of the internet into silos that I have to enter through downloadable portals.
All other platforms allow users to block ads and other malware on its platform. iOS is the only one that is actively anti-hacker. That's the difference.
anti-hacker? I think on the hierarchical scale of hackers, people who download and deploy adblockers should be rated "script kiddy" :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They want your selfies for facial recognition in order to track you better across the web and possibly resell that information to third parties. Also a great dataset for "AI" training, so your face can appear in modified form in laundered pictures.
> They want your selfies for facial recognition in order to track you better across the web How on earth does facial recognition help with tracking someone across the web?