Yup.
Just another billionaire welfare program posing as a "Musk pulled himself up from the bootstraps" bravado.
If my daddy owned an emerald mine, I would not take welfare that's for sure.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Threads Social Network Expands to the Web
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yup.
Just another billionaire welfare program posing as a "Musk pulled himself up from the bootstraps" bravado.
If my daddy owned an emerald mine, I would not take welfare that's for sure.
As someone who used to attend raves in Detroit in the late 90s/early 00s...this is making a whole lot more sense lol
In terms of Threads, I wanna like it but I don't like Facebook and use Instagram begrudgingly, so just not a great streak for me with Meta apps. It's ok, but I think I'm just becoming sick of social media in general.
Did get a Bluesky invite tho, I could see using that more if there was people on it, everything seems to have 5-10 likes right now tho so kinda dead for now too.
> Post about Threads
> Brings up gov subsidies and emerald mine
Extraordinary.
> Brings up gov subsidies and emerald mine
Extraordinary.
Disappointing to see so many Musk zealots/apologists on here.
In any case, I just tried to access Threads from the website. I was able to fill in the login from an old Instagram account, but when I clicked the login button, it took me to a page with a QR code to download the Threads iOS/Android app and said I would have to setup an account through that before I could continue.
So, no, Threads is not fully available on the web yet.
In any case, I just tried to access Threads from the website. I was able to fill in the login from an old Instagram account, but when I clicked the login button, it took me to a page with a QR code to download the Threads iOS/Android app and said I would have to setup an account through that before I could continue.
So, no, Threads is not fully available on the web yet.
Insta and FB are so regulated in what you can say. Nope.
Something that might interest you both. If you google search for WhatsApp iPad here in the UK you got this resultThe funny thing is, the head of WhatsApp uses an iPad himself
Still doesn’t bring up a version for iPad but interesting all the same
Why is this even covered by macrumors? It's the ninth article here about this non-Mac/Apple related app. I'm pretty sure macrumors is getting paid a lot of money to cover this, but it's really not doing your readers any favours.
While I don't disagree about the relevance, seeing how many people post in threads about these articles, it's not hard to see why they cover them...
As long as Threads cannot reach the 447M in the EU, it will never be able to replace Twitter.
You have to wonder how bad privacy and data mining is that they can’t even release it.
It's controversial, so they get interaction and ad revenue (+ sponsorship money), but for me personally it's really annoying to see these unrelated posts. Shouldn't macrumors flag posts that are paid for?
> Post about Threads
> Threads is a Twitter/X competitor
> Twitter/X is owned by Musk
> Musk fans and critics get into fame war
Expected.
It's covered in part because a lot of Threads users likely access it through an Apple device.
It's covered repeatedly because topics related to Meta products and Zuckerberg generate a lot of "opinions" especially if Musk/Twitter/X is brought into the discussions. This can generate increased posts/traffic for the site which equals increased ad revenue. It's the same reason why Twitter/X/Tesla is covered so much here.
Which posts do you think are "paid for"?
When you used to read a newspaper was it really annoying that they printed articles that didn’t interest you?
I never thought I’d wish any degree of success to Meta, but I’d love to see Threads replace X.
This argument would justify a lot of content, such as bananas, because you can eat a banana while holding an iPhone.
I'm pretty sure that all these articles about threads here on macrumors are paid articles. They come from agencies that work for Meta to get more reach on their platform. Anyone who thinks macrumors would cover this on their own is naive. Come on.
If it is a themed newspaper and there is off-topic stuff in it, of course. Or if it was a daily newspaper that also had categories, and those categories contained off-topic stuff. Sure. Why wouldn't I be annoyed?
Especially when it is pretty clear that it is only covered because it is paid for.
yeah, he's mastered the art of grifting
Still less than zero interest.
I spend about 5 minutes a day at most on any social media. The only "friends" I have are family and people I know in person.
Meantime I have ad blockers as well as a host file that blocks trackers.
My privacy is worth more than what they are offering.
I even set up my own FTP/Web server so that family could download wedding photos, they were NEVER going to be put on the web.
I spend about 5 minutes a day at most on any social media. The only "friends" I have are family and people I know in person.
Meantime I have ad blockers as well as a host file that blocks trackers.
My privacy is worth more than what they are offering.
I even set up my own FTP/Web server so that family could download wedding photos, they were NEVER going to be put on the web.
Threads. X/Twitter. I will not use either.
The reality is that you are the product that they, the social media companies, want to sell to advertisers. Your data and your presence is the good stuff that advertisers want. The algorithms are designed to keep you engaged so that you keep your attention on the advertising, give up more information about yourself so that they can accurately create accurate consumer marketing profiles for yourself.
What’s the result? In addition to late stage capitalism running amok, users must constantly be on the lookout for what they want you to see… the most engaging content may be rampant misinformation, or cyberbullying, or an algorithm that is constantly evolving to suit their goals of keeping you interested in remaining a daily active user.
Neither company is going to be interested in doing anything to address the ills of social media. They mustn’t do anything to disrupt their revenue streams. The result of this is easy to see. Our continued use in commercial social media equates to not more than convenient complacency. People are addicted to this, by design, change is not easy and they know it. It’s working and the lemmings continue to engage.
The only people who are able waive their arms to make change happen are the ones who control the purse. Nobody else matters, as seen by actions at X like potentially removing the ability to block another user. If they do this action, will it be because they care about your health and safety? Absolutely not. It’s not about your health, it’s about your capacity to be a revenue stream.
If we want to continue being a profitable product keeping two tech bro billionaires relevant, I won’t judge anyones’ individual reasons… you do you!
Though we have choices. Want a better place where you can set the rules, control your own data, and engage in better social media interactions, and not advertised to? Great, you’re welcome to join us on Mastodon.
The reality is that you are the product that they, the social media companies, want to sell to advertisers. Your data and your presence is the good stuff that advertisers want. The algorithms are designed to keep you engaged so that you keep your attention on the advertising, give up more information about yourself so that they can accurately create accurate consumer marketing profiles for yourself.
What’s the result? In addition to late stage capitalism running amok, users must constantly be on the lookout for what they want you to see… the most engaging content may be rampant misinformation, or cyberbullying, or an algorithm that is constantly evolving to suit their goals of keeping you interested in remaining a daily active user.
Neither company is going to be interested in doing anything to address the ills of social media. They mustn’t do anything to disrupt their revenue streams. The result of this is easy to see. Our continued use in commercial social media equates to not more than convenient complacency. People are addicted to this, by design, change is not easy and they know it. It’s working and the lemmings continue to engage.
The only people who are able waive their arms to make change happen are the ones who control the purse. Nobody else matters, as seen by actions at X like potentially removing the ability to block another user. If they do this action, will it be because they care about your health and safety? Absolutely not. It’s not about your health, it’s about your capacity to be a revenue stream.
If we want to continue being a profitable product keeping two tech bro billionaires relevant, I won’t judge anyones’ individual reasons… you do you!
Though we have choices. Want a better place where you can set the rules, control your own data, and engage in better social media interactions, and not advertised to? Great, you’re welcome to join us on Mastodon.
At last, now I can access Zuckified Twitter on my desktop; this is a new era in computing greatness. 🤡
Let's be real here. Twitter was going downhill years ago and Elon only sped up its demise. Before Elon became the insufferable edge lord that he is today, we all loved him and hated Zuck. Now we hate them both, we just hate Zuck less. I would hope someone else makes it through the cracks, but let's be real here. Every time something new comes along and gets popular, the guy behind it ends up being worse than the one that he replaced.
And for that reason I'm out. I'm over social media. I don't need it. I have more free time without it. I would rather spend my time on my hobbies and chatting with others about my hobbies online to learn and grow. Social media is a cess pool and a ticking time bomb. I'm not going to take the time to setup yet another online persona and accrue followers and find accounts to follow all over again and get all of the crap muted and blocked properly. I'm done with it all. It's over for me, and hopefully a lot of other people too. I'm tired of comparing myself to others and posting my stupid thoughts that will just change in another 5-10 years as I learn and grow as a person and make me look like an unemployable idiot because of all the pointless arguments I get into with people baiting me that have no impact on my life and I will never meet. It's stupid and I'm done.
And for that reason I'm out. I'm over social media. I don't need it. I have more free time without it. I would rather spend my time on my hobbies and chatting with others about my hobbies online to learn and grow. Social media is a cess pool and a ticking time bomb. I'm not going to take the time to setup yet another online persona and accrue followers and find accounts to follow all over again and get all of the crap muted and blocked properly. I'm done with it all. It's over for me, and hopefully a lot of other people too. I'm tired of comparing myself to others and posting my stupid thoughts that will just change in another 5-10 years as I learn and grow as a person and make me look like an unemployable idiot because of all the pointless arguments I get into with people baiting me that have no impact on my life and I will never meet. It's stupid and I'm done.
I logged in just to like this. It is exactly how I feel. The juice just ain’t worth the squeeze in so many ways.
Not comparable. You don't need a computer or mobile device to eat a banana but you do need a computer or mobile device to access Threads and Apple is a major player in the computer/mobile markets.
I don't think the MacRumors Threads articles are "paid for" by Meta but maybe someone from the MR staff can chime in here. I would hope that any articles directly paid for by the topic company/product would be identified as such similar to how MR includes a disclaimer about being "an affiliate partner with Amazon" for Amazon sale/discount articles.
