So now if you say something on Threads that gets your account suspended what happens to your IG/FB account?
Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
191–200 of 204 posts
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#192I say this as someone who loves twitter: it's cooked. I spent time on threads earlier today and it is the answer people have been looking for. Nobody has a better track record of giving the users the features they want, even if that means cloning them wholesale from competitors. And more importantly, nobody does hyperscale content moderation better than Meta. If you're a public figure and can get the same/larger enga…
> Nobody has a better track record ... than Meta * Data breach of 533M users * Record-breaking €1.2bn fine in Europe for illegal data transfers * Record-breaking $5bn FTC fine for privacy violations * Psychological experiments run on unconsenting users in 2012 https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jul/02/facebook-... * Cambridge Analytica
None of those have anything to do with the part that you quoted, where you conveniently cut out the meaning of the sentence (which was "Noboday has a better track record of giving users the features they want"), presumably so you could just go off and harp about whatever particular thing you wanted.
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't they aggressively fight this? I think all your accounts can get banned if you use multiple accounts. I know they demand a working phone number and other identification data. Not saying there are no multiple accounts, just that it is not a wide-spread thing like on reddit/twitter/mastodon.
Facebook itself is very aggressive about the one account thing. But Instagram is not. It's common enough within my friend group to have multiple accounts, and bots are also kinda common.
> But Instagram is not.
I don't think that's an accurate description. Not only is Instagram not aggressive about the one account thing, they are actively supportive of multiple accounts. You can in fact not only be logged in to multiple accounts at the same time, you can have an Instagram feed that shows combined content for multiple accounts.
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#194That is already twice as much as the Fediverse has currently. It will be interesting to observe what happens when Threads flip the switch and becomes compatible with the ActivityPub protocol. As a long time inhabitant of the Fediverse, I do not like the idea of Meta slurping up my public posts hosted on my own server. Would it help to put my profile and public posts under a Creative Commons Non-Commercial license? I…
> As a long time inhabitant of the Fediverse, I do not like the idea of Meta slurping up my public posts hosted on my own server.
The whole point of the Fediverse is that any random person or company can come along and start slurping up your public posts (which, of course, is just another reason that it's a terrible idea).
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt they will keep it app only. If they want to attract news outlets from twitter they will need to support embedding somehow
threads already have embedding, on web click on share button and there is a "get embed code" button.
Ah OK, I hadn't (still haven't) downloaded the app so presumed it wasn't at all accessible without the app.
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#196I say this as someone who loves twitter: it's cooked. I spent time on threads earlier today and it is the answer people have been looking for. Nobody has a better track record of giving the users the features they want, even if that means cloning them wholesale from competitors. And more importantly, nobody does hyperscale content moderation better than Meta. If you're a public figure and can get the same/larger enga…
> The first time a blog post is written about the Epic Dunk that AOC had on Ted Cruz and the screenshots are of Threads, you'll know I was right.
Oh boy, sign me up! I need a space where I can cheer my team on and we can dominate the conversation through censorship and shadow banning of the opposing team like twitter used to be. Echo chambers make me feel good because it's a fun, friendly place where you never have to engage with opposing arguments and we all upvote each other.
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly! I'm sure lots of people will stay on Twitter. But ad buyers, celebrities and brands are not very interested in the niche communities, and thus Twitter as business will be extremely hurt.
This made me think of the ad business on Twitter which I think might be its real killer. If a community builds up on Threads (and why wouldn't it, reserving spots for 2B Instagram users?), the ad value will then probably be much greater there, and businesses (and thus influencers) will see a more lucrative environment there. Why? 1. Meta harvests more data from your phones than Twitter which provides more accurate ad…
> Twitter is poorly ran and struggles even with basic things like not pissing advertisers off as they keep making controversial decisions for the network.
This trope of "pissing advertisers off" is repeated ad nauseum, but there is no evidence that rational advertisers have preferences regarding which content surrounds their advertisements. They only care about paying less money for advertisements than they make in revenue attributable to those advertisements. And therein lies a Yogi Berra-esque paradox: if all the advertisers leave Twitter, then the advertising prices will decrease, and advertising to Twitter users will become cost-effective ("Republicans buy sneakers too.")
What advertisers do care about is angry mobs of people harassing them about all the wrongthink their ads are appearing next to. It would be more accurate to say that "advertisers don't like being harassed by a mob of people who are pissed off at the platform that hosts the ads."
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#198I say this as someone who loves twitter: it's cooked. I spent time on threads earlier today and it is the answer people have been looking for. Nobody has a better track record of giving the users the features they want, even if that means cloning them wholesale from competitors. And more importantly, nobody does hyperscale content moderation better than Meta. If you're a public figure and can get the same/larger enga…
> Nobody has a better track record ... than Meta * Data breach of 533M users * Record-breaking €1.2bn fine in Europe for illegal data transfers * Record-breaking $5bn FTC fine for privacy violations * Psychological experiments run on unconsenting users in 2012 https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jul/02/facebook-... * Cambridge Analytica
Users don't give a shit about any of this
Re: Threads has 10M sign ups in seven hours
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Right now my For You tab is filled with content I wouldn't have dreamed of a year or two ago, fight videos, videos of people dying, race war, gender war, you name it. I don’t know anyone with a “For you” tab like that. What’s the explanation? Are you engaging with that kind of content?
How many other people's "for you" tabs do you regularly look at?
I’m talking about self reporting by people I know, as well as what I hear in public online. I think it’s quite obvious I don’t literally look at anyone else’s Twitter feed.