Threads

[Tessa K]

Has anyone tried it yet? Is it a flash in the pan or a good alternative to tw.tter?

[El Pollo Diablo]

I've looked at other people's stuff on it. Videos are annoying just like on instagram. Otherwise, I'm sure it'll turn out just as toxic and ruinous and sh.t as twitter has.

[bob sterman]

Threads?

Bleak, horrifying, apocalyptic - and the 1984 film with the same name was quite disturbing too.

[TopBadger]

Never tweeted, ain't gonna thread either...

[dyqik]

It's a great way to enable tracking of all your online activity, to enable the next Cambridge Analytica.

[shpalman]

I'm in the EU so locked out of it.

[Formerly AvP]

yes, but will joining it (even if you don't use it) annoy Elon?

[nekomatic]

Problem: Twitter is run by a malignant billionaire and is starting to show me a bit more crap I don't want to see instead of stuff I do

Solution: Move to a similar platform launched by the malignant billionaire who runs Facebook, which shows me ten times more crap I don't want to see than stuff I do and whose business model is based on industrial scale privacy invasion

Well I'm certainly convinced

[jimbob]

It's a great way to enable tracking of all your online activity, to enable the next Cambridge Analytica.

From what I have gleaned, possibly even worse

[dyqik]

Problem: Twitter is run by a malignant billionaire and is starting to show me a bit more crap I don't want to see instead of stuff I do

Solution: Move to a similar platform launched by the malignant billionaire who runs Facebook, which shows me ten times more crap I don't want to see than stuff I do and whose business model is based on industrial scale privacy invasion

Well I'm certainly convinced

Alternative: move to Bluesky, run by the malignant tech-bro who created Twitter, forced the malignant billionaire to buy it, and who hangs out with far-right activists talking about freedom of speech.

[Tessa K]

Meta is already banning sex positive posts which doesn't bode well for Threads

https://www.standard.co.uk/insider/inst ... 92893.html

[lpm]

Blimey, "sex positive", haven't heard that BS in a while.

Sexual content and social media doesn't mix. You can either have

- a social media site with low levels of sexual material, while having plenty of misogyny and attempts to bully women out of the space

or

- a social media site with packed with p.rnography and sexually abusive material, while being horrifically misogynistic and successfully driving out women with violent and sexual threats

Choose.

[EACLucifer]

Blimey, "sex positive", haven't heard that BS in a while

Stop being a tedious neopuritan. Perhaps you might try reading the story linked, or if that is too difficult for you, take a look at the identity of the people demonstrating against censorship.

[lpm]

Facebook has been at the most restrictive end of the spectrum for ever. They are permanently against anything vaguely linked to sexual content. It must be over a decade since rows about breastfeeding, free the nipple, mastectomy photos and all the rest.

If you actually read the article you would see it was people thinking the Meta/Facebook eco system was the right place to build sexual activity related communities. It's not censorship that's causing them problems, it's their own stupidity.

[Grumble]

Twitter is awash with prostitution and p.rn adverts, as I discovered when I clicked to reveal a hidden response to a post I was reading. There was no warning it was going to be an advert for a prostitute. That’s what free speech absolutism gives you. There’s an argument that Meta are too restrictive but they are under no obligation to host sex related stuff. I doubt you can successfully allow sexual activity related posting and weed out prostitution.

[Tessa K]

Twitter is awash with prostitution and p.rn adverts, as I discovered when I clicked to reveal a hidden response to a post I was reading. There was no warning it was going to be an advert for a prostitute. That’s what free speech absolutism gives you. There’s an argument that Meta are too restrictive but they are under no obligation to host sex related stuff. I doubt you can successfully allow sexual activity related posting and weed out prostitution.

Surely it's not too hard to distinguish between educational material and p.rn though.

[dyqik]

Twitter is awash with prostitution and p.rn adverts, as I discovered when I clicked to reveal a hidden response to a post I was reading. There was no warning it was going to be an advert for a prostitute. That’s what free speech absolutism gives you. There’s an argument that Meta are too restrictive but they are under no obligation to host sex related stuff. I doubt you can successfully allow sexual activity related posting and weed out prostitution.

Surely it's not too hard to distinguish between educational material and p.rn though.

It is hard if you business model relies on not being able to afford employing humans to moderate things properly.

[noggins]

It is hard if your business model relies on not being able to afford employing humans to moderate things properly.

...while monetising the data


sh.t thats an ugly term

[noggins]

Twitter is awash with prostitution and p.rn adverts, as I discovered when I clicked to reveal a hidden response to a post I was reading. There was no warning it was going to be an advert for a prostitute. That’s what free speech absolutism gives you. There’s an argument that Meta are too restrictive but they are under no obligation to host sex related stuff. I doubt you can successfully allow sexual activity related posting and weed out prostitution.

Sex work ads seems an odd thing to worry about, in a world of paedo rings, revenge p.rn, rape, incel terrorism, etc

[lpm]

Twitter is awash with prostitution and p.rn adverts, as I discovered when I clicked to reveal a hidden response to a post I was reading. There was no warning it was going to be an advert for a prostitute. That’s what free speech absolutism gives you. There’s an argument that Meta are too restrictive but they are under no obligation to host sex related stuff. I doubt you can successfully allow sexual activity related posting and weed out prostitution.

Surely it's not too hard to distinguish between educational material and p.rn though.

It is hard if you business model relies on not being able to afford employing humans to moderate things properly.

Are you implying it's easy if you do employ loads of people? This famous problem of defining what is p.rnography?

[noggins]

Threads? a bleak drama set in a hopeless desolate urban hellscape, which then gets worse when the ruskies nuke it.


_{sorry sheffield i love you really}

[dyqik]

Surely it's not too hard to distinguish between educational material and p.rn though.

It is hard if you business model relies on not being able to afford employing humans to moderate things properly.

Are you implying it's easy if you do employ loads of people? This famous problem of defining what is p.rnography?

It's easier if you employ enough people to apply your rules than if you don't.

[Grumble]

Twitter is awash with prostitution and p.rn adverts, as I discovered when I clicked to reveal a hidden response to a post I was reading. There was no warning it was going to be an advert for a prostitute. That’s what free speech absolutism gives you. There’s an argument that Meta are too restrictive but they are under no obligation to host sex related stuff. I doubt you can successfully allow sexual activity related posting and weed out prostitution.

Sex work ads seems an odd thing to worry about, in a world of paedo rings, revenge p.rn, rape, incel terrorism, etc

Does it? Why? Pretty sure I can be concerned about all of those things, I just happened to accidentally open a sex work ad, I’ve never - accidentally or otherwise - opened a paedo ring post on Twitter, so maybe they have some standards.