4 ms·

> There are more than enough amazing communities – sports, music, fashion, beauty, entertainment, etc – to make a vibrant platform without needing to get into p

by lapcat 3y ago

> 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. So it's literally nothing more than text-based Instagram. If "The goal isn't to replace Twitter", then what's the point, and why rush the launch, with a ton of missing features, just to take advantage of Twitter's latest problems? ("This was a lot more of a yolo launch than anything we've done in a long while." https://www.threads.net/t/CuZpfirN81T https://www.threads.net/t/CuZpfirN81T)

majani 3y ago
If this is a YOLO launch, then Facebook have scale and moderation down to a science now. Hats off, those were very hard challenges in the early days of web 2.0
ribosometronome 3y ago
> sports, music, fashion, beauty, entertainment As if these industries aren't often political
- trowawee 3y ago
  Right?! This is the dumbest bit from a pretty dumb statement. Politics is just people working out how they're going to interact with each other. There's no way to cordon that off from anything else. You can certainly pretend that those industries don't interact with politics, but that's just another form of politics.
nicce 3y ago
> If "The goal isn't to replace Twitter", then what's the point, and why rush the launch, with a ton of missing features, just to take advantage of Twitter's latest problems? ("This was a lot more of a yolo launch than anything we've done in a long while It is just a narrative to counter Twitter’s lawsuit. https://www.npr.org/2023/07/07/1186367564/threads-meta-twitter-lawsuit https://www.npr.org/2023/07/07/1186367564/threads-meta-twitt...
- lapcat 3y ago
  > It is just a narrative to counter Twitter’s lawsuit. There's no lawsuit. There was a letter sent from Twitter's lawyer, and it's a complete joke. Meta has already denied that any former Twitter employees worked on Threads.
  - nicce 3y ago
    > There's no lawsuit. There was a letter sent from Twitter's lawyer, and it's a complete joke. Meta has already denied that any former Twitter employees worked on Threads. You can also counter lawsuit by preventing it to happen. (Letter was threat) And it does not matter what Meta says. If someone wants to sue, court it is. And it would be interesting case, since they are quite identical apps.
    - lapcat 3y ago
      > It is just a narrative to counter Twitter’s lawsuit. > And it does not matter what Meta says. If someone wants to sue, court it is. You just contradicted yourself.
      - nicce 3y ago
        … You are either implying that either it is impossible to influence things by saying things or that countering cannot also happen beforhand if the lawsuit happens (while also helps in preventing that). Why people argue about everything.
pietervdvn 3y ago
> then what's the point Killing the fediverse: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-netwo...
- lapcat 3y ago
  > Killing the fediverse So Meta launched Threads without fediverse support, for the primary purpose of killing the fediverse? That makes a lot of sense... Not to mention that the fediverse was never a threat to Meta.
rvz 3y ago
> If "The goal isn't to replace Twitter", then what's the point To corrupt and destroy the Fediverse, with a 'Twitter killer' narrative to the point where not even the anti-trust enforcers can begin to argue that Threads has lock-in since the users can move off of Threads. (Which they won't move anyway.) But we'll see when Meta eventually begins to screw over their users. I doubt they would care. But at this point, they are the new Fediverse.
- jacooper 3y ago
  The fediverse is irrelevant here, threads is already much larger than it, multiple times in fact. If anything, threads proved how slow mastodons growth was, and how small the fediverse is.
- lapcat 3y ago
  > To corrupt and destroy the Fediverse Threads launched without Fediverse support, so this makes no sense.
  - rvz 3y ago
    Threads (Instagram) already confirmed that they will federate and has the resources and money to do it, so the likelihood is almost certain. With 90M users, they are essentially the new Fediverse. All other Mastodon instances see that as a threat and banned it in advance. Otherwise those NDAs would never have been signed or sent in the first place to those admins of large instances. Might as well have been a blank document if they were joking. In reality, it has already split and corrupted the Fediverse. (Thanks to the signed NDAs.)
    - lapcat 3y ago
      The question here isn't whether Threads will corrupt and destroy the Fediverse, the question is why does Threads exist? To corrupt and destroy the Fediverse is a nonsense answer. Why would Meta care about corrupting and destroying the Fediverse, which is extremely tiny compared to Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook? You mentioned Fediverse support as somehow protecting Threads from antitrust regulators (a dubious notion itself), but there wouldn't be any need to protect Threads from antitrust regulators if threads didn't exist! What exactly is the raison d'être of Threads, if not to replace Twitter? I know you love to bash Mastodon, but it's a red herring to this discussion. The bare-bones launch of Threads seems to reveal Meta's priorities: the algorithmic feed, and the promotion of brands and influencers.
joker_minmax 3y ago
>So it's literally nothing more than text-based Instagram. Instagram is very political. It's like half political action related infographics at this point.
- jacooper 3y ago
  What? Its mostly influencer BS with some memes and random dances on Reels and stories to share what you ate today, also out of date news because of an algorithmic timeline. The algorithm is probably showing you political stuff, but its definitely not the majority of content.

by lapcat 3y ago

majani 3y ago

If this is a YOLO launch, then Facebook have scale and moderation down to a science now. Hats off, those were very hard challenges in the early days of web 2.0

ribosometronome 3y ago

> sports, music, fashion, beauty, entertainment As if these industries aren't often political

trowawee 3y ago
Right?! This is the dumbest bit from a pretty dumb statement. Politics is just people working out how they're going to interact with each other. There's no way to cordon that off from anything else. You can certainly pretend that those industries don't interact with politics, but that's just another form of politics.

nicce 3y ago

> If "The goal isn't to replace Twitter", then what's the point, and why rush the launch, with a ton of missing features, just to take advantage of Twitter's latest problems? ("This was a lot more of a yolo launch than anything we've done in a long while It is just a narrative to counter Twitter’s lawsuit. https://www.npr.org/2023/07/07/1186367564/threads-meta-twitter-lawsuit https://www.npr.org/2023/07/07/1186367564/threads-meta-twitt...

lapcat 3y ago
> It is just a narrative to counter Twitter’s lawsuit. There's no lawsuit. There was a letter sent from Twitter's lawyer, and it's a complete joke. Meta has already denied that any former Twitter employees worked on Threads.
- nicce 3y ago
  > There's no lawsuit. There was a letter sent from Twitter's lawyer, and it's a complete joke. Meta has already denied that any former Twitter employees worked on Threads. You can also counter lawsuit by preventing it to happen. (Letter was threat) And it does not matter what Meta says. If someone wants to sue, court it is. And it would be interesting case, since they are quite identical apps.
  - lapcat 3y ago
    > It is just a narrative to counter Twitter’s lawsuit. > And it does not matter what Meta says. If someone wants to sue, court it is. You just contradicted yourself.
    - nicce 3y ago
      … You are either implying that either it is impossible to influence things by saying things or that countering cannot also happen beforhand if the lawsuit happens (while also helps in preventing that). Why people argue about everything.

pietervdvn 3y ago

> then what's the point Killing the fediverse: https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-networks.html https://ploum.net/2023-06-23-how-to-kill-decentralised-netwo...

lapcat 3y ago
> Killing the fediverse So Meta launched Threads without fediverse support, for the primary purpose of killing the fediverse? That makes a lot of sense... Not to mention that the fediverse was never a threat to Meta.

rvz 3y ago

> If "The goal isn't to replace Twitter", then what's the point To corrupt and destroy the Fediverse, with a 'Twitter killer' narrative to the point where not even the anti-trust enforcers can begin to argue that Threads has lock-in since the users can move off of Threads. (Which they won't move anyway.) But we'll see when Meta eventually begins to screw over their users. I doubt they would care. But at this point, they are the new Fediverse.

jacooper 3y ago
The fediverse is irrelevant here, threads is already much larger than it, multiple times in fact. If anything, threads proved how slow mastodons growth was, and how small the fediverse is.
lapcat 3y ago
> To corrupt and destroy the Fediverse Threads launched without Fediverse support, so this makes no sense.
- rvz 3y ago
  Threads (Instagram) already confirmed that they will federate and has the resources and money to do it, so the likelihood is almost certain. With 90M users, they are essentially the new Fediverse. All other Mastodon instances see that as a threat and banned it in advance. Otherwise those NDAs would never have been signed or sent in the first place to those admins of large instances. Might as well have been a blank document if they were joking. In reality, it has already split and corrupted the Fediverse. (Thanks to the signed NDAs.)
  - lapcat 3y ago
    The question here isn't whether Threads will corrupt and destroy the Fediverse, the question is why does Threads exist? To corrupt and destroy the Fediverse is a nonsense answer. Why would Meta care about corrupting and destroying the Fediverse, which is extremely tiny compared to Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook? You mentioned Fediverse support as somehow protecting Threads from antitrust regulators (a dubious notion itself), but there wouldn't be any need to protect Threads from antitrust regulators if threads didn't exist! What exactly is the raison d'être of Threads, if not to replace Twitter? I know you love to bash Mastodon, but it's a red herring to this discussion. The bare-bones launch of Threads seems to reveal Meta's priorities: the algorithmic feed, and the promotion of brands and influencers.

joker_minmax 3y ago

>So it's literally nothing more than text-based Instagram. Instagram is very political. It's like half political action related infographics at this point.

jacooper 3y ago
What? Its mostly influencer BS with some memes and random dances on Reels and stories to share what you ate today, also out of date news because of an algorithmic timeline. The algorithm is probably showing you political stuff, but its definitely not the majority of content.