Threads profile can only be deleted by deleting Instagram account, Meta says

Post by passwordoops » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 10:39 PM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #242

paxys wrote: post #204

From what I have seen so far Threads seems to have been an incredibly rushed and premature launch, done directly to counter Twitter's missteps from the last few weeks. And the decision is proving to be the absolute correct one. What I don't understand is why Bluesky didn't seize the opportunity first. People were literally banging on their doors begging to be let in and they continued to go "sorry we are exclusive, i…

A social network being invite-only is such an obvious non-starter that I genuinely can't imagine the conversation that went into that decision. Assuming the basic underlying tech works more often that not (and ideally some story for community moderation), there's literally nothing I want from a Twitter competitor other than having everyone on it . My interest in a Twitter competitor that is invite-only is and will al…

Post by cmcaleer » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 10:43 PM UTC

shmde wrote: post #226

Solvency wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why has everyone on here been comparing Threads to Twitter when threads.com literally says its a Slack alternative for makers ? The product has absolutely nothing to do with a Twitter style social network. Edit: lol so FAANG just steals any and all actively used product names now. Got it.

Threads.com != Threads( twitter clone ) by meta

Post by mustacheemperor » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 10:46 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #204

From what I have seen so far Threads seems to have been an incredibly rushed and premature launch, done directly to counter Twitter's missteps from the last few weeks. And the decision is proving to be the absolute correct one. What I don't understand is why Bluesky didn't seize the opportunity first. People were literally banging on their doors begging to be let in and they continued to go "sorry we are exclusive, i…

Post by paxys » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 10:47 PM UTC

passwordoops wrote: post #261

tshaddox wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A social network being invite-only is such an obvious non-starter that I genuinely can't imagine the conversation that went into that decision. Assuming the basic underlying tech works more often that not (and ideally some story for community moderation), there's literally nothing I want from a Twitter competitor other than having everyone on it . My interest in a Twitter competitor that is invite-only is and will al…

Gmail's initial period was brilliant from a social network period before social networks. After the initial beta phase, once the bugs were worked out, it was invite only from existing Gmail users

Post by gonzo41 » Thu, Jul 06, 2023, 10:52 PM UTC

dmonitor wrote: post #212

paxys wrote: post #204

From what I have seen so far Threads seems to have been an incredibly rushed and premature launch, done directly to counter Twitter's missteps from the last few weeks. And the decision is proving to be the absolute correct one. What I don't understand is why Bluesky didn't seize the opportunity first. People were literally banging on their doors begging to be let in and they continued to go "sorry we are exclusive, i…

It’s actually crazy how slow bluesky’s rollout has been. I can see why they want some level of exclusivity (so that people want to join, and when they join can immediately hook up with their friend who invited them), but they really need to open the faucet a bit.