Threads.net(threads.net) |
Threads.net(threads.net) |
"Threads, Instagram's text-based conversation app, is expected to be released on Thursday and will allow users to follow the accounts they follow on the photo-sharing platform and keep the same username, a listing on Apple's App Store showed."
https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2023-07-03/...
Couple days later I tried again but used my own domain for email instead of gmail this time. Entering the code worked but I was immediately greeted with "your account has been banned because of suspicious activity". They wanted my phone number so I could appeal. Fuck you Mark Zuckerberg.
how is that so restrictive and yet Instagram is full of bots?
Presumably at some point the trackers list Firefox uses will be updated to mark Threads as a Facebook property and allow those [fbcdn.net] resources to be loaded [there].
[edits]
As you say, Hack (and Go...) were both more problematic names.
This might turn into another Clubhouse/Shortcut situation
Stay strong, Threads (.com)
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com Registrar URL: https://www.godaddy.com Updated Date: 2023-04-07T13:53:29Z Creation Date: 1997-05-27T23:00:00Z
Did they buy it from a squatter? Somebody with historical whois wanna take a look?
Looking at DNS history, there have been several DNS delegation updates this year (potentially between AWS -> GCP -> AWS) until it finally made its way to Facebook less than a month ago. There was no update in 2022, so such migrations are not typical for this domain.
Now, it's Facebook, so I don't have particularly high hopes for it being any good. But they really were handed a remarkable opportunity by Twitter's... recent decisions.
If this is dropping in 3 days, I foresee a rough return from the holiday weekend for Twitter employees. Musk will be reaching "my kingdom for a horse" levels of desperation at terminal velocity.
On a mobile browser it just has a "Get the app" button.
Love it.
But, I generally feel social media is dying in far bigger ways than just these dilutions.
People don't trust it, and are caring far less.
The hey-day and the novelty has completely worn of for the majority who are not narcissistic enough to put the energy in to arguing or self-promoting.
Reality is king! Musk and Zuck and Xi are just all jostling for slices of a crusty, smelly pie.
- 500 million - Instagram
- 150 million - Snapchat
- 50 million - TikTok
The days of simple joy when connecting with friends on Facebook are well behind us.
People understand it's a certain type of person who actively posts their photo on Facebook and their opinion on twitter. While the majority of normal people remain lukewarm at best.
not trusting or caring so much about social media is the absolute best thing that can happen to social media. and i don't mean that in a negative way, i don't hate social media. it should be a fun thing, people blindly trusting it or caring too much about it makes it less fun.
Are the targets of this professional influencers and narcissists?
Threads is not the first server being blocked because moderator x don't like the owner of that server. Imagine if signing up for a @gmail.com email meant that you can't send or receive emails from @outlook.com addresses because the owner is mad at Microsoft.
They could have taken this as a big opportunity to make ActivityPub mainstream but nah, let's keep gatekeeping our bubbles. They're the only losing.
This already happens for certain addresses / domains / source ranges. Although most of the time it's some big email provider ignoring a small one.
And your example isn't even accurate to what is happening.
Imagine signing up for @gmail.com meant you can't send to anyone at @outlook.com because like 2 users on Outlook said something "kind of rude" if you take it out of context and get over sensetive about EVERYTHING.
Like, I am all for inclusion, and fuck rude people etc, but you can see an e tire instance blocked because one user was a jackass to one tiny server admin who stuck the offending instance on some unmoderated blacklist website with something vague like "hate speech".
Its over the top.
Just curious, what do you mean by "mainstream?" Did you really mean widespread adoption of ActivityPub (AP) or did you mean "one additional instance of an AP instance that has millions of users?"
Meta getting into the Fediverse doesn't do anything to make AP "mainstream," rather it exposes the existing users of the Fediverse to a single instance that has the users that many of those in the Fediverse setup/joined instances to get away from.
What's more, Meta's business model (hyping conflict and clickbait to drive engagement and ad revenue) is antithetical to many in the fediverse.
As such, it's not surprising that many admins don't want anything to do with them, as they've shown themselves to be bad actors on their own platform. And that's the main reason admins ban instances -- because they're (at least from the admin's point of view) bad actors.
It's almost enough to get me to federate my AP instances just so I can ban/block Meta. But I don't even want to federate with extant AP instances, so I won't bother.
With the fediverse, the most likable servers I've interacted with all just let people do whatever they want as long as it isn't illegal and doesn't overload the server. It's great not having to see the moderators and admins freaking out over yet another perceived slight against their ideology every other day.
And I can choose the ones that moderate the way I want?
They wanted Google to federate. They still want Apple to open messages (xmpp)... And this? Block it before we see it.
(b) The mechanics of XMPP vs ActivityPub (ie point to point messages vs social media stuff) are very different.
(c) It's Facebook, and a lot of people really, really, _really_ don't trust Facebook, particularly on the privacy side. I think if this was, say, Tumblr/Automattic, or even Google bringing Buzz back from the dead, the knee-jerk reaction would be lesser, even if the potential _problems_ would be similar; Facebook just has a horribly compromised reputation (note that they _renamed_ themselves, which is not generally what you do when you have a well-regarded brand).
First off, "they" is a diverse group of people with different opinions on all three of these topics. Secondly, assuming you're talking about RSS, what people wanted from Google wasn't federation but syndication. Google broke the deal and moved to their own solution, acting like they were never a part of RSS in the first place. They later admit they were wrong and added RSS functionality back. Third, people less want Apple to open messages and more want them to make a version of it that doesn't rely on Apple as a single point of failure. It makes iMessage functionally incomplete as an SMS successor.
And this? People will do whatever they want, across thousands of instances, and eventually people will decide whether they were right or not. The fact that these users even have the freedom to reject Meta outright is worth celebrating.
I'm keeping an open mind, for now (though I'm pessimistic, because, well, it's Facebook, and Facebook are _bad_ at this), but I may end up moving instance over this (either direction; maybe threads is a net benefit but my instance defederates, maybe it's bloody awful but my instance doesn't).
I actually see this as an upside of the federated approach; I get to choose whether I want exposure to this.
An impasse if you care about privacy, but less so if all you care about is staying on the site.
If that’s losing, then so be it. I’ll happily lose in a smaller community, with people I’d rather talk to.
Thus my emphasis on why most people would rather just deal with centralized social media than the fediverse. That way there isn't any additional research to do, you just make an account and tolerate the terrible moderation. No additional steps about worrying about if the specific server you're on is agreeable, no need to worry about self-hosting.
Eg none of my friends were interested in doing all that research, so the only way to get them into the fediverse was on my server. Now that they're there, they're able to use it however they want and just block for themselves whatever they personally don't want to see.
Of course servers have the option to do whatever they want, which is great, but that doesn't mean they can't be criticized.
It's just that to a lot of us, that isn't a thing that makes much sense to be criticized. Like complaining that there's no lovely exhaust smell from an electric car.
To a lot of us it not being a massive central server that is instantly viable for everyone on the planet is the good thing.
Many of us don't want everyone on the Fedi. We want people interested in the premise of what the Fedi gives. Which inherently is tied to being okay with uninterested people not joining.
I've been on Mastodon for ~8 months (or w/e). Back in November, all the people claiming it was just a fad, that it would never exceed Twitter, were doom saying all through Jan/etc when the flood didn't cripple Mastodon. Yet there i and everyone i knew on it was, just using it.
The only interesting/concerning thing here is just having Facebook on ActivityPub.
They was generally speaking. Nothing about mastodon, Fediverse, pixelfed, or any of the other communities or platforms.
The concerns were about them seeing your messages. Well, they can scrape or use RSS anyway to get your info. Threads isn't eveb needed for this.
Thr name change didn't do much. They are still colloquially known as Facebook. And meta also this bad vibe because of the failed metaverse.
It is smart they choose IG to use for this. It has a different user base. More around communities and interests, and less toxic?