It definitely seems rushed. Did anyone ever figure out what was really going on with the rate limit deal? I just assuming Elon was telling a half truth. Who knows with that guy.
Im referring to the hype. Threads is a very bland unimaginative name and its a separate app. The logo looks like a toddler drew it. Twitters market share is too small to make any real impact. IG and Twitter are two different crowds.
Disagree. ‘Threads’ is a very good name from a marketing perspective. Easy to spell, easy to remember. Everyone has FB, therefore everyone has an Insta account even if they don’t know it. Threads was super easy to sign up for. I think it’s a golden opportunity timing-wise for Threads to demolish Twitter. They just need to develop those new features fast. Do I want Threads to succeed? Not really. I’d prefer a good alternative to Twitter that’s run by a different, better company than FB/Meta.
Never cared for Twitter, and not being able to view embed tweets anymore led me to sign up for Threads. So the rate limit is working.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/7/2...eads-news-politics-adam-mosseri-meta-facebook Instagram’s new Threads app is “not going to do anything to encourage” politics and “hard news,” Instagram boss Adam Mosseri said in a Threads conversation with The Verge’s Alex Heath. The additional scrutiny, negativity, and integrity risks that come with politics and hard news aren’t worth the “incremental engagement or revenue,” Mosseri wrote. “There are more than enough amazing communities — sports, music, fashion, beauty, entertainment, etc. — to make a vibrant platform without needing to get into politics or hard news.” (Mosseri’s strong point of view here is likely informed by his time running Facebook’s News Feed.) While Threads is assuredly a take on Twitter, a platform tying itself in knotsunder new ownership, Mosseri is apparently thinking much bigger. Following along with his boss, Mark Zuckerberg's statement about finding a “clear path to 1 billion people,” Mosseri said: The goal isn’t to replace Twitter. The goal is to create a public square for communities on Instagram that never really embraced Twitter and for communities on Twitter (and other platforms) that are interested in a less angry place for conversations, but not all of Twitter. Threads launched on Wednesday and has proven to be a big hit; it’s already surpassed 70 million signups. But the vibe, so far, is decidedly not like what you might be familiar with from Twitter: the only available feed is an algorithmic one, and that feed is already flooded with celebrities and brands. Still, it seems inevitable that politics and news will trickle onto Threads in some way, especially if politicians and journalists use the platform during the 2024 presidential election cycle. And Instagram is working on a feed just for people you follow and a chronological feed, which, at least for me, should make Threads a much more useful place to find news. But it sounds like Instagram won’t be going out of its way to make Threads what Twitter once was — so don’t get your hopes up for some kind of Thread-Deck.
I understand the politics part, but not having "hard" news (waiting to see what that is) sucks. That just about kills that for me because, for me, Twitter was the best place to find breaking news faster than you were going to see on tv or pretty much any other medium. Not to mention it opened up the world in realtime. But I get it. Political "debate" sucks in most places and I'd rather not get involved in that, either. I don't know how they're going to separate things like Kyrie and COVID takes, for example, but whatever. I'll still hang out and see what's going on. If they integrate with other social media like Mastadon via ActivityPub, it still may work out alright - assuming they do choose to go that route. I hope they can limit the bot issue a bit better than Twitter ever did, though.
This is the company that pushed political posts into Facebook feeds, so pardon me if I don't trust them. It's a silly position anyway. People will talk politics in part because politicians try to politicize everything from children's books to the NFL. More concerning to me is the search and feed operations on Threads. If there's an emergency or disaster or warning, how is it accessed on Threads? Do you depend on the algorithm to show you that the plant next door just blew up? If you find out about it, where do you go for info on what to do next? Twitter was great for those of us in emergency management and response. Not the biggest reach, but the capabilities allowed us to message a good number of the public and the Twittersphere included every agency and most journalists who could amplify the message--and it was more immediate than other social media sites. Now, with Twitter broken, you can't trust it in those situations and people are struggling to know where to put their energies. Emergency management and large scale response in this country is both underfunded and based on response, not planning or prevention. Most agencies, including local police and fire, do not have the capacity to manage multiple social media sites. Because of info security issues, many state and federal agencies are limited to what sites they can use. (No TikTok.) The next big disaster we have will be the first one since roughly 2010 without Twitter as the go-to app. We're in for a few years of uncertainty and that uncertainty will not be pretty. It also seems that much of the discourse is about the power users. I just want an app that is like Twitter in 2020--one where I can wall off my little garden of interests and interact with new people of my choosing. I don't care how many followers I have and I just want to follow people who interest me, even if they only have 55 followers. It's amazing that nobody can make this happen. Of course, that means it is difficult to sell me something through an algorithm, so that's probably why.
My guess is they won't do anything to amplify politics and news, but they won't suppress it either (at least for now). It sounds like their current priority is to amplify entertainment and then leave everything pretty much neutral. So, it's up to the user base if politics or hard news (whatever that means) becomes a staple of the platform. I noticed that some of the first accounts were news organizations, including local Houston news, so I really don't see how 'breaking' news will not become a major and regular thread. One thing I'm looking forward to is local emergency threads on weather, active crimes, etc. I will certainly be following those accounts, and I'm glad they will be adding a 'your followers' feed. The 'for you feed' (which is just the company pushing their desired feed) was never something I care about. But the 'your followers' feed is limited (since it's only limited to what you follow). What I want is a 'for you feed' that I get to prioritize what I want to see, such as local emergencies, sports, politics, entertainment, space, dinosaurs, cats... That would be a feature I would use immediately.
I mean, we had to kind of expect this to happen. It's a Zuck platform, of course it's going to be heavy on censorship and data harvesting...that's how Zuck has made ALL of his money. That's also why it's doomed to fail. It's attempting to appeal to the most boring, bland, milquetoast, mainstream types....but those types already have Instagram and Facebook, they don't really need a Twitter knock off for the same boring BS they talk about. Twitter will still be the place for any kind of serious news or conversation because it's the only place something like that could exist relatively free of heavy handed censorship.
IG and Tiktok are all I'm interested in. Don't need a twitter version of my instagram. Never used twitter, its always been terrible
What's wrong with Twitter? I don't really use it that much, but are there better features on Threads? Or does it just integrate with Facebook and Instagram easier?
Meta executive claims goal of Threads is to create a ‘less angry place,’ not replace Twitter https://thehill.com/policy/technolo...l-of-threads-is-to-create-a-less-angry-place/
