Threads profile can only be deleted by deleting Instagram account, Meta says
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
I really hope all the developers and artists I follow don’t move to Threads. I’m not exactly jumping at the chance to use an Instagram product again.
My twitter account is banned. Not sure why as I've never used it. I can neither activate it or delete it, or contact support, as they all require a working account.
Their entire system is falling apart, but maybe this one is intentional.
If you are an adult and they don't have any record of you, then you're probably a fraudster, bot, scammer, or someone else they don't want, so they ban you.
The way to get unbanned is to make sure at least 30 or so friends have your phone number in their contacts list synced to facebook, all with similar names, and then sign up to instagram with that phone number.
I'm guessing you signed up with a burner phone and email address... Well thats not what they want...
When these companies are actively trying to trick their users, can you really blame the users?
edit: This is a lot like getting signed up for some multilevel marketing scam by a friend. They better be really sorry and you better reevaluate the spare key you gave that stupid person with low self control. Which you should have realized earlier.
Yes, it's entirely on the people who decided it's OK to share my data with FB.
That one plumber you called that one time, who added your number to their phone could have added everyone in their contact list to WhatsApp.
Maybe you did a favour for someone and helped out their cousin and you gave the cousin your number and never talked to them again.
Maybe you had a friend you lost touch with and their number changed but they kept their address book.
You told absolutely everyone? Are you sure? Absolutely everyone and stressed to them how important this was to them?
Worse, are these replies which completely lack empathy. Such a lack of imagination as to how your number could leak. And a tone as if no one has anything else going on in their lives or more important things to do.
Its something worth considering, seeing as it has been two days and unsurprisingly nobody could come up with an actual justification for such behavior.
It wasn’t the over controlling socialist government of Ingsoc in a one party state which managed to change our thought by makinging 2+2=5, but rather a social media company Bourgeoisie in a highly corporatocratic government which fulfilled this newspeak.
OP never even had a chance to engage in thought crimes.
a 1 out of 10
That requires someone with a whole lot more motivation than me. I'll pass.
They required I scan my photo id with address to unlock the account. I told them to go fuck themselve
What I don't understand is why Bluesky didn't seize the opportunity first. People were literally banging on their doors begging to be let in and they continued to go "sorry we are exclusive, invites only". Now no one gives a shit.
He is definitely sympathetic to unfettered free speech and allowing misinformation to proliferate.
1. Generate hype
2. Launch the MVP
3. Focus on growth and scaling
4. Add new features
5. Figure out trust & safety and the rest of the long tail of problems
Diverting resources to focus on problems before they become problems is the #1 recipe for failure for startups, and bluesky seems hell bent on it.
I actually figured that this was the strategy, but now that they let that golden moment pass them by I now realise that nobody there has any idea what the fuck they’re doing.
Guess Jack just wants it to be a haven for all the worst blue checkmark behaviour of Twitter, in which case I commend him for creating a containment website.
They aren't failing due to privacy, or invite strategy, or anything else. They are failing because there's no differentiation whatsoever. It's so simple, and it's been true since forever.
The meme that Twitter is burning down is cope. The only people for whom it's burning down are extremely online liberals. And even they are not leaving Twitter. They are the only ones praying for these alternatives to succeed, or in recent HN threads asserting the downfall is assured and imminent. The actual ground truth of using Twitter if you aren't extremely online and praying on political rivals' downfall is that it basically hasn't changed much at all.
You need to differentiate, be cool, and be fun in some new way to leap past immense network effects. And probably also guarantee revenue share through a sort of decentralized network.
Threads is going to do well.
Edit: lol so FAANG just steals any and all actively used product names now. Got it.
One Google Play Store, Threads the chat app has "not affiliated with Threads by Instagram" in their listing. I wonder if they are getting lots of downloads by confused people.
b) Threads.com raises Seed round back in Oct, 2018. [2]
c) Meta acquires Meta Threads trademark in Nov, 2021.
d) Threads as a trademark itself has been widely used well before Threads.com. [3]
[1] https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/threads-aa50/company...
But D is relevant because of course trademarks are highly specific to a category.
And so Threads (social network) would be considered different to Threads (business chat).
It would not surprise me if two weeks ago they were not planning on this release and t was only the recent drama that influenced them to release.
There is absolutely no content. Not as in “blank page nothing here” type of no content, I mean as in the “open the fridge, look around, and decide there’s nothing to eat” type of no content.
Meanwhile, Threads is content rich and there’s already people I know posting cool stuff to see and interact with.
The result, is that I don’t give a fuck about Bluesky, and I’m not going to bother spreading invite codes.
If I get at least 20 upvotes on this comment though maybe I’ll consider it since it means the interest is there.
Speaking from experience working on a social site with loads of signup flow experiments: the results are consistently wild. It's no competition on all the normally-valued metrics like interactions and retention.
*for some degree of "know" anyway. Better in most cases than "the news talked about this tweeter thing"
(edit: I do think they may have missed what might be the biggest boat sailing party, which was probably a mistake. But invite-only is quite reasonable.)
Threads solved the cold start problem by not having a personal feed at all at launch. There is only a single algorithmically curated one, prioritizing first/second/third/etc degree connections and otherwise showing content from everyone else. So the place always felt alive from day 1.
Nothing very special about those shortcuts. Had they had a standalone system, it's not be much better than all the other attempts. This is akin to how Snoy launched the playstation.
I kind of feel like Google was onto something with the "circles" idea and it's not clear to me why something like that didn't catch on. I don't want to share everything with the whole world. My college friends, my professional contacts, my family - these are all social circles that I'd want to be connected to with a service like this, but in separate buckets that don't overlap (or only somewhat overlap).
So from a user's point of view, exclusive/invite-only can be really appealing. But if you're thinking from a "make as much money for the company as possible" point of view then yeah anything that limits the number of potential customers you can attract is going to hurt.
What about one invite to create an account, a second to participate?
It's the sound of Zuckerberg whipping the carpet out from under Twitter and all the new upstart platforms.
And I'm no Zuckerberg fan. The contrary.
The ony plus point is seeing Elon get made. I heard he's now threatening to sue Twitter.
Hey Elon, you cannot sue your way to an excellent social media platform, no matter how good your lawyers are ...
The odds are so wildly against Threads that I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.
2) Zero downtime on a day 1 launch at the scale is a very impressive technical feat. If it had been rushed or released prematurely, this level of app stability would not have been the case. If I had to guess, this would be the reason why Bluesky hasn't been able to release to the general public
In terms of the app being a foundation that will be built on and cannibalize Twitter, I'm very bullish on the future for Threads!
After seeing Bluesky so far, it may be higher than what most thought…
Also Zuckerberg wanted to acquire Twitter in the 2008 for $500m because in his paranoid head, he was scared that perhaps Twitter could overtake Facebook. Let me be clear, Zuckerberg is cutthroat competitor that doesn't care about anything except success. And looking at the Zuckerberg's track-record he won't let go this massive opportunity which is basically to kill off Twitter with Threads without much effort because Twitter is and was imploding for a very long time.
One side-note about Kevin Systrom; he said that back in the day when he co-founded Instagram, he didn't hear and know about AWS. So I must come to the conclusion in this ad-hoc way that not all successful founders know what they are doing and yea there is a lot of luck involved. And btw he is a Stanford graduate?! What is Stanford teaching these "kids"?
I have like 50 followers, 10 photos, and check my IG once every week or two - haven't posted anything in months.
Meta has banned me twice for unspecified policy violations (both times I had to send them a selfie and got reinstated, and there was no way to ask a human what these policies were).
I suspect they'll ban/unban me again someday, oh well, it's Meta and I don't care, I just make sure not to use them for anything essential...!
Also a great dataset for "AI" training, so your face can appear in modified form in laundered pictures.
When it will be enforced ...
How on earth does facial recognition help with tracking someone across the web?
If your face appears in a riot, they can resell the information to the government.
Right, it's not like they gather location data and insist on real world names or buy data from brokers or use cookies. Facial recognition is the missing piece of in the puzzle!
> If your face appears in a riot, they can resell the information to the government.
It's not like governments have databases with photo identification.
"Welcome back Jim!"
Opened the app last week and had to click through an accept gate warning me if I keep using "Scraping tools" I'll lose my account.
The only "scraping" I've been doing is copying the direct image links and posting them to slack and my bookmarking service a few times a month.
Insane to me that they're red in the face threatening me to lose my account over having the audacity to just share a direct image link.
Garbage service.
As long as you(and others) keep using it, theres really no reason for them not to
Does it have some kind of opportunity cost? it probably does. I know people that got exciting job offers that would not have happened had they not been on linkedin, so I would guess I have lost out to some. Its the price I pay. Not going on linkedin
So far that's the best theory for why Reddit recently plunged my 13-year account into Kafkaesque censored limbo. And then did it again after a month of seeking answers on another account.
And there might be a person specific id in the link you get, which other people copying the image don't get.
For example edge did for a while scrap any link you visited with it, even if you logged out of exactly this feature, not running any heuristics about weather it might a a magic link and then skipping it and AFIK also not stripping query parameters (through it did respect robots.txt I think).
Similar a lot of apps do similar, sometimes not even respecting robots.txt.
Through in any case it's still Meta being rediculous, because it's a known issue and you can't fault your user for doing perfectly normal things in a world where even one of the major browsers behaves like malicious spyware wrt. urls/web scrapping without user explicit consent.
This is how they know I'm doing it, each url seems to be custom generated for the specific view of the post from an account because they actually expire too eventually. But you know "scraping" is like sharing what? 15 image links off the walled garden a month?
Just think it's an insane amount of effort to go to for them to try to make the internet stop working like the internet.
Upsets me this is where we got to with image sharing vs the open and remix culture of pre-yahoo Tumblr.
But you are using scraping tools? Why the quotes?
Or maybe I misunderstood and you are manually copying?
Maybe they're picking up on that somehow and getting ornery about it.
IG was an app before they were a website and they have never embraced the open architecture of the web, nor been entirely comfortable with the browser as a user agent.
That raises another interesting topic, the US DoJ is becoming increasingly aggressive about applying the Americans with Disabilities Act toward websites. I wonder how well IG complies with the relevant standards like WCAG. Probably not well. We have noticed that any website which implements a lot of anti-user features tends to be extra bad in terms of accessibility for the disabled. I wonder if we will at some point see a Big Tech like Meta start to come under fire from the US government because their user-hostile features are also hostile toward the disabled and/or this results in them skirting ADA compliance.
They promise to delete images within 30 days (yeah they may delete images, but for sure not the metadata).
That is why they often demand your phone number later too. If the demanded it during signup you'd know the deal you were making and would probably back out. So they do it after you're invested so you have something to lose instead of them.
1. there are other, better ways to stay in contact with with people I care about than through group messages and posts (which is actually an insidious sort of indirect messaging when you think about it).
2. as users of these mega-services we are largely like puppets on a string, victims of the latest fads among governments and advertisers.
3. Meta is, and always was, an unethical service that profits off the wide dissemination of our most private information. And profiting off pure scams, for example those that target poor and naive people with promises of untold riches through crypto schemes as testified by various celebrities (that have had their pictures stolen). [0]
We are nearing the point where we can, nay should, en masse desert these manipulative megaservices like Meta, Twitter, Youtube et al. They represented a certain phase in the history of internet, and as all things, their hegemonies must come to an end. We can for example willfully trigger the algorithms that shut our accounts down, as it is just about the only statement we are left with.
For the sake of our own serene peace of mind if nothing else.
[0] https://www.smh.com.au/technology/facebook-pulls-out-all-sto...
You're right, but, ironically, that's why this new products exists. CIA and NSA needs twitter and when Elon pulled the plug, they just found another provider.
People clutching their pearls on social media need to stop.
If an address book is a slot machine that dispenses anxiety, shitty memes, and unwanted attention from your worst uncle.
It's just a useful ubiquitous app. You can use the features you like. I don't see what the point of taking such an absolutist stance decrying the app as evil. Im just trying to raise a few kids, go to some parties and sell some junk around the house
None of these things should require selling your soul or firstborn rights to Facebook, right? But somehow it does, and we should be angry at this.
> Meta will nuke your Instagram account if you delete Threads profile
with
> Meta explains: “You may deactivate your Threads profile at any time, but your Threads profile can only be deleted by deleting your Instagram account.”
The title seems to imply that a user deleting their Threads profile may more-or-less inadvertently delete their Instagram account. This is not supported by the quote from Meta, and there is no indication that there's any procedure to initiate deletion of the Threads profile which would then trigger the Instagram deletion. An accurate headline would be, for example, «Meta will delete your Threads profile only if you nuke your Instagram account». Is that shitty user-hostile behaviour from Meta? Absolutely yes — but not that shitty.
Meta will delete Threads profile only if you nuke your Instagram account
and
Meta will nuke your Instagram account if you delete Threads profile
mean exactly the same. In fact they are logically the same. It's like A iff B, means the same as B iff A.
> Meta will nuke your Instagram account
> exactly the same
"Meta will nuke your account" and "you nuke your account" is different. It might not even be possible to perform one of these (nuking your thread profile).
Your Instagram account is deleted (the state not the action) iff your thread profile is deleted.
Your thread profile is deleted iff your Instagram is deleted.
Those are the propositions that are logically equivalent.
I think you're reading too much into it. "Shitty user-hostile behaviour" would be "Muahahahaha, if anyone ever wants to get rid of their Threads account they must also *delete their Instagram account*, hahahaha, the world is MINE! MINE, I TELL YOU!" <fx: thunder crash, up grams dramatic music>
Is that scenario more or less likely than "fuck it, just use the Insta signup server for auth, we need to ship something *today*" "yeah okay, that'll take me ten minutes"?
My bet is that the decision to not allow the user to delete only their Threads profile has been fully intentional. The last thing Meta wants is for the fleeting users who quickly jumped on the latest Threads fad to eventually delete their profile once they become bored. That would be embarrassing to Threads and reduce its sticking power if it were a common enough phenomenon. Much better for them to keep the users' content hostage under their desire to keep their Instagram account.
Throw enough highly paid engineers at it and it will take 10 months.
Also, note the word “should”.
The relevant bit is the completely non-intuitive (and one could assume unnecessary) marriage of the two profiles.
As written, it seems to be completely wrong.
The article title is absolutely written in a misleading and inflammatory way to sort of imply, without outright lying, that someone might run into a screen that causes them to accidentally delete their Instagram account. (I get a different title in yc and tc, not sure if tc is showing multiple headlines to different people depending on factors.)
The “The discovery of this stipulation has surprised many users” line in the article is one of those staples of modern journalism where they take a couple tweets or threads now, and make them out to be prevailing sentiment. Cite your sources on who is surprised TechCrunch.
For the user though threads is a separate app.
And the login is a form of single sign on.
It is unacceptable because it’s entirely intentional and avoidable, and in no way a best practice that benefits the users but instead the platform.
For the non technical - It’s interesting that a new profile can be generated from an Instagram account but all those fields are intentionally not being made to be removed.
It's an interesting strategy, the app on the Apple App Store is published by "Instagram Inc" rather than Meta, prominently named as "Threads, an Instagram App". They could have launched it as a completely separate brand, but that would have required marketing such as "the new app from Meta", and everyone more closely associates Meta with Facebook.
It's quite surprising they never launched a microblogging network before, but I suppose they have never really launched a new network, only ever acquired them... does that show that they feel threatened, have weakening market position, and need a new direction?
> does that show that they feel threatened, have weakening market position, and need a new direction?
It shows they are trying to capitalize on Twitter’s dumpster fire, and for the first time there is a mainstream competitor. Sorry Mastodon. Every time Twitter bugs out, people will go to Threads. Some may never go back to Twitter.
Wait, I thought it's supposed to be Bluesky? Three months ago they were totally probably maybe going to incinerate Twitter.
"To clarify, you can deactivate your Threads account, which hides your Threads profile and content, you can set your profile to private, and you can delete individual threads posts – all without deleting your Instagram account. Threads is powered by Instagram, so right now it's just one account, but we're looking into a way to delete your Threads account separately."
> Mr Zuckerberg said keeping the platform "friendly... will ultimately be the key to its success".
> But Mr Musk responded: "It is infinitely preferable to be attacked by strangers on Twitter, than indulge in the false happiness of hide-the-pain Instagram."
If Threads is a fractionally less toxic version of Twitter, it’ll do quite well.
It will eventually be equally as toxic. Twitter started in a calm setting until the ads, politics, outrage filled it up. Threads will have ads soon and will apply the same Instagram algorithms it had before to promote verified outrage.
Trump is also on both Twitter and Threads. As long as he and other Instagram users are on Threads, then the outrage town hall will continue and will be no better than Twitter.
I don't know, I'm in Europe, I follow zero explicitly political people yet US politics dominates my Twitter feed. I don't get that on Instagram which is all I need to make the service more enjoyable and to feel less toxic than Twitter. The outrage town hall will of course continue on Threads, but hopefully with only those who are activley seeking it.
Toxicity is Twitter's moat.
Its like people going to watch UFC fight, or boxing or something like that. Niceties aren't addictive. You need controversies, trolling and fighting all over to attract people.
That's why people go to Twitter. Not to post Birthday and Vacation pictures.
Lots of instances are anti-meta integration. But imo the protocol is open specifically for this kinda thing. I don’t have to use Facebook’s garbage, but I can still get content from people who do.
At that point, suddenly the activitypub feeds will start mysteriously getting unreliable/ratelimited and eventually support will be dropped and it'll be back to a silo.
You only build the walls high after you have captured everyone...
I think privacy is bigger issue here.
If you believe that, I'd like to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge. It will eventually have activitypub too!
anti-hacker? I think on the hierarchical scale of hackers, people who download and deploy adblockers should be rated "script kiddy" :)
Hell I know someone who bought one of those Samsung foldable phones so that he could ditch his laptop.
Is the website read-only or something?
I suppose this is so it can, like Twitter, be shared and embedded elsewhere for reference.
There is no general landing page if you go to threads.net.
The purpose of deleting an account (versus deactivating) is to remove your records with that company so what would the purpose of deleting just a Threads account be?
... to delete your records on Threads.
So it really depends on whether you think you have a separate Threads account, or just an Instagram account that Threads uses. It seems like the latter is the case though.
(There actually seems to be a bug in this whole scheme btw wherein there is a window during the onboarding where your account is Private and if people follow you during that moment they become Requested follows you have to Confirm even if your account is immediately public and is swarmed with hundred of followers. I thankfully noticed and dug out this stragglers.)
The users and accounts are definitely otherwise the same, though: you can't even AFAIK sign up in the Threads app... you can only log in using an existing Instagram account that is already logged in on that same device, which seems to just use shared keychain access to the login tokens from the other app. I had an old version of Instagram installed and realized I couldn't even log in to Threads until I upgraded it.
Apparently this also spams them with an invite, which may be unpopular.
Which seems like a misstep because now my "Threads" account has 10% of the followers of my IG/Twitter.
Threads still takes you through the expected signup loop of adding bio/description, finding follows and what not. It's just missing an email verification because it goes through IG.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36621778
PS: How dare you reason with the lynch mob ;) https://youtu.be/Q3eTSbC3neA?t=90
Or, why doesn't Meta make the Facebook platform better at doing the things that Instagram and now Threads do, instead of creating separate platforms for each? If the goal is to get people to sign up and connect with each other, doesn't network theory tell us that one platform with 100% of the users is more valuable than two networks each with 75% of the users and a 50% overlap?
As a user, if you know a bunch of people on one platform, why not just post your text thoughts, pictures, and videos, all to the same place?
OK, maybe your goal is to get as many total people following you as possible, and there are some people on platform A who aren't on platform B, and vice-versa, so you're on both. But why post half your stuff to A and half to B, rather than posting everything to both?
10 years ago, Facebook was where young people would post PG-rated pics (family members in the network). IG would be where they'd post themselves acting stupid. 20 years ago, they'd have used Facebook for this, because it was restricted to university students, no real risk of leakage to the outside world.
“It just worked” and it was stripped down and simple. Take a photo, post it.
Now Instagram is feature bloated, so it’s time to launch a primitive stripped down platform again to see what direction this one grows in, instead of trying to redesign the old one. It’s a soft reboot.
You and your mates create a private group for pics of each other acting stupid, and that's where you post them. How is the leakage risk different from using a different walled garden?
Not the three clicks in experience, or the I changed a bunch of settings experience. Each platforms identity, the people it draws, the social norms, it’s purpose; is derived from its default experience.
Each identity creates a brand, and the brand is the meme communicated between people. What’s hip and in is a function of brand awareness.
It just bolsters the fact that I'm not install threads, ever.
https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/no-instagram-...
it seem like the Irish Authority isn't happy at all with the way the data is "commingled" with Instagram. Could the fact that deleting the Threads account will also remove the Instagram one be connected to having this Threads thingy appear as a part/feature of Instagram instead of a self-standing platform?
It's pretty much the complete opposite of Google+.
As such, adding a dying social-media activity ("short" texting) to a fading social-media property (IG) is also less than ideal for Meta the company.
The over moderation by modern platforms makes the Internet pretty worthless. There's frank discussions I simply can't have on them because the topic is too sensitive and invites trolls from all sides to abuse the content moderation system.
I have no idea what to think or suggest, but I say ugh to Big Social.
First it prompts you with the usual consent banner but of course doesn't provide a button to refuse all unless you click through to a second screen (this is in violation of the GDPR and ePrivacy guidelines btw, the "reject all" button needs to be front and center and must be given as much weight as an "accept all" button if present).
Then it shows me the article but the article embeds something (presumably a tweet or a Facebook post or something else) and tells me "To view this this content, you'll need to update your privacy settings. Click here to do so.". So instead of letting me decide in place that I want to agree to that one embed or even all embeds from the same source, I have to go somewhere else. And I don't even know what I'm missing out on and of course there's no direct link to whatever is being included either.
Finally if I click the link it takes me to a page with a big toggle switch that asks me to agree to all social advertising partners. Not just social networks either, most of these are just advertising and analytics. And I can't pick and choose either, I have to give a blanket consent without being informed of the details and purposes, which, again, blatantly violates the GDPR and ePrivacy guidelines.
I'm not pointing out that these are in violation because I think US companies should be beholden to EU law. I'm pointing this out because it demonstrates how blatantly user hostile this is.
US companies doing business in the EU should be and are beholden to the EU law.
Also this is quite clearly stated inside the Threads app: “Some settings, such as deleting your account, apply to both Threads and Instagram and can be managed on Instagram”.
Deactivating your Threads account, on the other hand, will not affect your Instagram account in any way, this warning is there in the corresponding Settings section as well.
"To clarify, you can deactivate your Threads account, which hides your Threads profile and content, you can set your profile to private, and you can delete individual threads posts – all without deleting your Instagram account. Threads is powered by Instagram, so right now it's just one account, but we're looking into a way to delete your Threads account separately."
1. You've trapped people who don't want Threads on Threads, where they can complain about it.
2. And meanwhile people curious about Threads can't try it because they don't want to be stuck having it.
Let's see how it works out.
I did give mastodon a go, but I found it confusing, when I make account is that for that specific instance? If I choose one instance, can I see things from a different instance?
>> When you first create your account, you choose a server — similar to how you choose to open an email account on Gmail, Hotmail, Yahoo or wherever — which generates your profile’s address. So, for example, if you sign up for Mastodon via the climate justice server, then your address will be @[your username]@climatejustice.social. But no matter which server you sign up with, you will be able to communicate with users from any other server, just like how Gmail users email Hotmail users and vice versa. However, some servers might have blocked other servers (perhaps if it’s an unsavory group), which would mean you can’t communicate with anyone from the blocked server.
Microsoft is the only company that i know of with a true EEE approach eg with Java
You can "deactivate" your account and delete all of your posts individually, which is effectively equivalent to deleting your Threads account.
From a practical sense it isn't equivelant either, because if I want to reduce my risk of being affected by a Threads data breach, totally valid reason to delete an account you don't use, then my data would need to be removed entirely.
Might be some anti-trust interest in this. :)
Pity that didn't happen, so yeah... they got away with it. :(
I wonder how much of the decision to link Threads so tightly with Instagram was for technical reasons and speed to launch. Because I could also see them wanting to use their Instagram user base to seed the new app, as opposed to their older and probably more conservative Facebook user base.
This has become common in social media. And we seem to be ok with it.
It's clearly a very fucked up thing. The only time I ever saw it irl was from a legit crazy person.
So are we all crazy now?
I also imagine their accounts infrastructure is more app-driven on Instagram and was easier to integrate into a new platform without inheriting ~20 years (wow!) of tech debt from FB.
They wanted Twitter users many of whom use pseudoynms to migrate across.
Nothing offers a way to control data once you post it publicly though? You could host a public mastodon with federation off and the amount of data exposed is not really going to be different than if you federate.
Facebook especially is a content propagation platform for right wing ideology, almost as much as TikTok.
At least if you're in Germany. The amount of racist, black people hating, pro AfD propaganda, directly or indirectly is absurd. And all reports of those get rejected.
There are Facebook groups, public, with post after post of foreigner and ethnic hate. Meta does absolutely nothing. In fact, it even suggests me more of content like it.
Instagram has hardcore porn, when reported, the report is rejected.
The while company needs to be sued into bankruptcy.
that way social media will never have leverage over you.
threads app gathers more data than TikTok ( https://twitter.com/deepaksonar911/status/167674841107126681... )
> threads app gathers more data than TikTok
Now you need a credible source for that claim. Not defending either of them but such claims require credible evidence.
https://twitter.com/deepaksonar911/status/167674841107126681...
At least I try not to be the lowest hanging fruit in deanonimyzation problem