AI isn’t just being developed in the relatively free societies of the West, it is also being developed by the Communist Party of the People’s Republic of China.
I feel like there may or may not be a very specific narrative being pushed here. One that I don't think I am smart enough or as informed about to make any big statements here. It's just a hunch though.
but to use technology to build a system that actually solves the problem.
In order to fight back against whatever bad things people can do with this new technology, we shall use that exact technology to put a stop to them. Or at least try to put a stop to them. This moderation stuff can be a pain, if social media moderation is anything to go by.
The AI cat is obviously already out of the bag
It's essentially a pandora's box. Once it has been opened, the actions of it can never be undone.
I’m not aware of a single actual bad use for AI that’s been proposed that’s not already illegal. And if a new bad use is identified, we ban that use. QED.
What about using AI for hate speech and misinformation? Ever heard of that one?
Any technology can be used for good or bad. Fair enough. And AI will make it easier for criminals, terrorists, and hostile governments to do bad things, no question.
As with all things in life. There is good and there is bad. This is something touched upon earlier in the annotations, and within class discussions too. Things are not truly black and white. There is a hint of nuance in all things. If we do not take that into consideration than we are not going to really get anywhere beyond arguing extremes to one another
even ones that start by selling to the rarefied air of high-paying big companies or wealthy consumers – rapidly proliferates until it’s in the hands of the largest possible mass market, ultimately everyone on the planet
Maybe I'm too tired to think straight, but I do not see how this has anything to do with the topic at hand. I think maybe I am losing it.
This is not to say that inequality is not an issue in our society. It is, it’s just not being driven by technology, it’s being driven by the reverse,
What I believe is being said here is that inequality is not a result of technology, but rather a refusal to adopt said technology will be what creates the inequality. An argument over free will vs determinism.
But this time is different, you’re thinking. This time, with AI, we have the technology that can replace ALL human labor.
If corporations attempt to use AI to take over our jobs, in many cases they will outright try. We saw hints of this during last years WGA strikes, which had issues towards generative AI as one of the key points in the strikes happening at all. It feels idealistic to not expect big million billion dollar companies to not act in self interest.
These are such mindblowing ideas for people who have not been exposed to them that it may take you some time to wrap your head around them.
Something about the tone here gets me but I do not know what it is. It feels incredibly snarky to me.
The result is a larger economy with higher material prosperity, more industries, more products, and more jobs.
The argument here is that while jobs may be taken by machines, there will be new jobs created to care for these machines as a result. This is certainly a fair point to make. With there being example of this in the past. But these new jobs that come out of this will not be the same kind of jobs the machines took. There will be new skillsets required and there will be new hurdles to tackle. It may not lead to mass unemployment, but it may lead to significant road bumps along the way.
this is the time it will finally happen, this is the technology that will finally deliver the hammer blow to human labor. And yet, it never happens.
Not to be the exact kind of person this is referring to, but to return to the discussion on AI in creative spaces, we can see signs of this happening. I use the Coca-Cola AI ad as an example earlier, but I've seen a handful of others in the past too. Usually from smaller companies or things that look like they may just be scams. But one example I can vividly remember from recent was this one for Tyson chicken nuggets I saw on Instagram which looked exactly like it was made with AI. I've seen people try to push AI as a new cost effective way to generate things without needing to have people do it instead. There is an argument to be made that AI is taking jobs. Even if not to the level of everyone is out of a job and we all die and are homeless, there is something happening here. I do not think it can be ignored
In short, don’t let the thought police suppress AI. TABLE OF CONTENTS
I don't know. Maybe I'm set in my own ways of leaning more towards the "AI bad" than the "AI good," but I have a hard time accepting the thought process of "just let it exist and do not worry about it. Because there are concerns to be had, and we should be considering them, at least to some extent.
AI-generated speech and thought that are good for society, and to ban AI-generated speech and thoughts that are bad for society
What qualifies exactly as "good" and "bad" AI speech? Obviously hate speech falls under the bad, but once you move past that obvious subject it becomes increasingly ambiguous. Relying less of objective information and more on personal opinion and beliefs. Creating internal conflicts amongst regulators and lawmakers.
it’s an inevitability
Anytime something is set in stone to prevent something from happening. There will always be pushing for more and more limitations to be placed upon it. The argument being presented here is that this is the current path AI is going down. With people wanting to restrict AI's usage, it'll bring about people who want to continue pushing restrictions on it until there is no way for it to be used anymore.
And the same concerns of “hate speech” (and its mathematical counterpart, “algorithmic bias”) and “misinformation” are being directly transferred from the social media context to the new frontier of “AI alignment”.
I don't know how I feel about brushing off these concerns just like that. Obviously people will blow these issues out of the water, again returning to the moral panic discussions from before. But that doesn't mean there is nothing of substance here. That there isn't anything potentially concerning. I don't think something such as hate speech can be shrugged off like that.
“AI notkilleveryoneism”
That's a bit of a mouthful if you ask me.
Short version: If the murder robots don’t get us, the hate speech and misinformation will.
Hate speech and misinformation in regards to AI are certainly concerns to be had. I don't think it can be completely dismissed. Especially so when you consider we've already seen attempts at AI for malpractice.
This apocalypse cult pattern is so obvious that I am surprised more people don’t see it.
People getting swept up in moral panic tendencies make it hard for potential cracks in the foundation to show. I imagine this is what causes people to not see any potential flaws with the arguments of those shooting down AI in its entirety.
which has suddenly emerged into the daylight of global press attention and the public conversation.
Once again we can tie things back to the moral panic narratives discussed earlier. People taking potentially genuine concerns about AI and its consequences and running wild with it and having is spreading it like wildfire. Putting fear in one's mind is an easy way to get their attention
These questions go mainly unanswered apart from “You can’t prove it won’t happen!”
Nor can they prove it will happen. Arguments such as this get people nowhere.
It is math – code – computers, built by people, owned by people, used by people, controlled by people.
I think the fact we control it brings about these concerns much more than AI becoming evil in a way similar to that described above in the article. Humans are imperfect creatures. We make mistakes and are prone to bias in our actions. AI as a result will be built on our actions, including the mistakes and biases we have. It can already be observed in some ways. The reading "The Unseen Black Faces of AI Algorithms" we did for class discusses this in a rather direct fashion. Due to the algorithms we create for facial recognition being built on mainly white faces, it struggles to pick up faces of darker skinned individuals due to the lack of data the algorithms were provided in regard to differing races.
Will AI Kill Us All?
No. Probably not. if it does then it'll be the fault of humans using it in poorly thought out ways that lead to horrible consequences for all involved. But on it's own it probably won't do anything. We don't have machines with sentience like that.
and even when the Baptists are right – they are used as cover by manipulative and venal Bootleggers to benefit themselves.
I can definitely see the correlation between this and the current AI discussion. How those who see genuine good in these creations will tend to be outshined by those who view it in a negative way. Only for those who hold powerful positions to step in and continue to sway the conversation in their favor. I think that's what is being got at here, at least.
The Baptists are naive ideologues
Often people who advocate for "new thing" tend to do so in a way that acts as if it can do no harm and it is the greatest thing to ever exist in the history of ever. I think that may be in part why the "bootleggers win" mindset held by the article can ring true. They look at it through an "it's good no exceptions" mindset, which is much harder to maintain than a "it's bad no exceptions" mindset.
So it’s not that the mere existence of a moral panic means there is nothing to be concerned about.
It is always important to look at both sides of the coin when looking at any complicated subject. We do not live in a world that is merely black and white. A level of nuance is important to get anywhere in life. It kind of reminds me of discussions in class we had about activism when we read that section in Digital Keywords. While activism in the digital age has lead to many great outcomes, it has had the consequence of leading to means that have little to no effect (in some cases it can even be a detriment...). This doesn't undermine the good that comes from it though, it just means it's complicated. Just like AI. It's kind of really complicated.
The fine folks at Pessimists Archive
Pessimists Archive is a fun read. Also a funny one too.
Historically, every new technology that matters, from electric lighting to automobiles to radio to the Internet, has sparked a moral panic
Everything to ever be made is in some way controversial when it is new. It goes back to as early as the creation of writing itself. This is something that cannot be denied. I've personally seen a lot of talk about moral panics, especially since coming to Xavier. We talked about it in another class I had (that being COMM-247 Understanding New Media), but we also discussed briefly in this class too. I particularly remember it coming up when we discussed social media usage and its relations to mental health. The reading we did about a study going over the impacts alongside the narrative made out of it is one that sticks out to me the most. It's definitely important to tackle AI discussions with a similar mindset. It's something I could probably personally be better about too. The AI panic to someone like me is no different than that social media panic to someone who is older than I.
reducing wartime death rates dramatically
Personally I would think ending war in its entirety would be a better outcome than minimizing casualties but that's just me.
The creative arts will enter a golden age
Like mentioned earlier, I think it greatly depends on the context. if it is used as a tool to help creatives, then I agree! If it's being used as a replacement for said creatives, then no. I don't think that's even up for debate given how AI generated images, music, writing, etc. look as it currently stands. AI is only able to recreate what it is given. It could never create something original in the way a human could.
Scientific breakthroughs and new technologies and medicines will dramatically expand, as AI helps us further decode the laws of nature and harvest them for our benefit.
Allowing for technology to increase the rate at which we're able to learn and understand the world we live in is undoubtedly a good thing I would imagine. Especially given if it were fed the correct information, which given the context I would only imagine it would be provided with, it would likely lead to outcomes with minimal errors or incorrect garbage data. Which is an issue often seen in AI output. I agree with this assessment.
Every child will have an AI tutor that is infinitely patient, infinitely compassionate, infinitely knowledgeable, infinitely helpful.
The idea of everyone having something that allows for them to have instance access to any and all information to cite whenever they needed is an idea that sounds too god to be true. Like it's something that cannot be achieved. The internet, an already existing resource containing nearly all archived information is still not accessible to a third of the planet's population. How would we be able to let something such as this happen if we already don't have everyone on one of the most important resources in the modern day?
Killer software and robots that will spring to life and decide to murder the human race or otherwise ruin everything
Was a little concerned my computer would grow legs and kill me. Glad to know this isn't the case.
to the creative arts
Of all the places people are trying to incorporate AI into media, it's creative works that has me the most concerned. While it certainly can be useful for automating specific elements of creative work that would otherwise be seen as busywork, usually in the form of small, minute edits/tweaks, there is an alarming amount of those out there trying to use AI to outright replace human made work, which inevitably means a loss of job opportunities for those who do creative works. This actually can already be observed with how some major corporations are using AI generated content for advertisements.
AI will not destroy the world, and in fact may save it.
I understand that moral panics are a thing, and that they lead to severe overreactions towards anything new. Treating it as if it is a blight upon humanity. But doesn't think almost feel like exactly that, just on the opposite side? There is 100% good that can come from AI, we just need to make sure to use correctly, and not for other unethical purposes, but to act like this is THE SAVIOR THAT WILL BRING US ALL HOPE is a little much.
it may be a choice between two evils.
Very bold wording, but it's one I can completely understand. Makes you wonder if there's even any good guys in this story?
features not available in Threads currently include DMs, language translation, the ability to edit posts and the ability to easily switch among multiple accounts.
Lots of basic (and not so basic) things missing. Makes you wonder if this is even worth it?
No ability to search posts:
That's a basic feature missing!
That may give users pause about adopting Threads.
Easy to opt-in, not so easy to opt-out
“the priority is the mobile apps, but we are working on” the web version.
Considering its relationship to Instagram, an app with a similarly mobile focused design philosophy, this isn't too surprising.
Threads could be set to see only followed accounts, said it’s “on the list” for future enhancements.
Well that's a relief!
Out of the gate, this seemed to be the biggest issue users called out.
Outcry can imply the users aren't satisfied with the provided experience given.
other Twitter wannabe
They want to be Twitter, but they aren't able to match it.
It’s obviously early days.
Maybe this could change as time goes on?
That sounds like a big number, but it represents less than 1.5% of Instagram’s 2 billion-plus monthly active users.
Makes the numbers feel less impressive when contextualized that one
which looks quite a lot like a clone of Twitter?
Use of "clone" is notable. Implies it's nothing more than an imitation. It should be looked down on.
5 Ways Instagram’s New App Comes Up Short
Despite the fast rise in popularity, Threads might not be able to provide the same satisfactory experience provided by Twitter.
Meta has been inviting major celebrities to join an early version of the app. Already, big names like Malala Yousafzai, Shakira, and Gordon Ramsay have used it, Meta confirmed.
Those are some very big names.
For Threads to get that same effect, it will need those culture starters who can make compelling short, 500-character posts.
An interesting argument to make about what it needs to succeed. Most others pointed to keeping engagement. Here it points to needing the right people.
underlying trust in its parent company, which has faced controversy about how it handles user data since the Cambridge Analytica scandal of 2018.
Meta has lost the trust of a lot of its users. But the same could be said about Twitter. Who here would be able to come out on top?
Threads posts be visible on other apps like Mastodon or Wordpress, or vice versa, and have users comment on posts across the apps. And if you decided to stop using Threads altogether, you would hypothetically be able to port all your content over into a new app.
I saw another article talking about this, but not going as in depth on the subject. I wonder why some sites choose to omit this planned feature? Is it just something they see as not important?
Many users have complained about Twitter’s “For You” feed showing them too much content from random users they don’t want to see, and that they miss the old-school default-chronological feed on Twitter.
Possible issues for Meta to address with their app?
which you can now pay for
wait what
This is one of Threads’ biggest advantages over other Twitter replacement apps: Over 2 billion people already have a built-in social network on Instagram, so unlike with, say, Mastodon, you don’t have to completely recreate your follower base from scratch.
Easy integration into a new service means a higher willingness to convert over.
sn’t ready yet, according to Meta
oh...
a very different approach than Twitter, which has been limiting free API access to third-party developers.
Paints Threads as a more welcoming app to third party app developers than Twitter is. Allows people more options that forcing them into a single one.
Twitter gives you the option to toggle between an algorithmic and chronological-based feed of only people you follow
Sounds like an option that could be seen as an advantage Twitter has over Threads.
with some minor differences
It's not 100% identical... but it's pretty damn similar.
while the iron is hot
Metaphor for describing a topic or concept that is currently in people's minds. Topical discussion.
Mastodon and Bluesky, none have grown to surpass Twitter’s popularity with a critical mass of politically and culturally influential figures.
Twitter lacked a true competitor. One that is actually able to test its spot for popularity. Threads is being painted as an exception and not the rule.
limiting the number of tweets people can read, a questionable business decision that was widely unpopular with users
It's out of left field and seems antithetical to what Twitter is. That's the idea I'm gathering here.
ready — desperate even — for a solid Twitter replacement
Emphasis on criticism of Twitter's current landscape to boost the potential in Threads as a social app to take its place.
And it looks a lot like Twitter. Which is exactly the point.
It drives in a point that it is meant to be like Twitter and is trying to be Twitter
Twitter alternative
Much less charged than the other terminology used to describe the app. Terminology that also is used in the headline, possibly for gaining attention.
Meta announced last fall that Instagram had surpassed 2 billion monthly active users
A sizeable userbase that can easily be transferred over to the new app.
The launch of Threads comes as Musk’s Twitter has faced technical struggles of late.
More mentions of Twitter's inability to keep up a standard following Musk's acquisition
That said, it’s not clear how many Instagrammers will flock to Threads,
Uncertainty in Threads ability to succeed. This one is particularly interesting, as given when this article was written, information surrounding the apps userbase wasn't concrete
Right now, the app doesn’t include a direct-messaging feature.
Many write about this as a key element. It shows the importance of features like this to people.
By launching Threads through Instagram, the new app has a leg up on other would-be Twitter alternatives.
Threads is ahead of the curve. It has a chance at competing that many others outright lack.
its frontal attack on Twitter
Very strong language to use. Implies that these two apps are at war with each other.
will not initially be available
An implication that it will eventually be available there. Some articles have painted a different picture
has an extensive history of trying to stamp out social media rivals, partly by copying their features.
Instagram stories comes to mind. Was a very clear imitation of the (at the time) incredibly popular Snapchat.
is that Instagram wants to make it easier for Threads to operate seamlessly with other platforms
Make Threads easy and accessible to all. Have it be constant in our lives
Instagram Notes, where people can share short messages on the site, and a text-focused app using Instagram’s technology.
Interesting to note. Instagram's notes feature has since been implemented into the app.
began its effort to take on Twitter late last year, with dozens of engineers, product managers and designers pitching ideas on what a rival app could look like
Not too far off from when Elon Musk's Twitter purchase was finalized
“not just because of the ownership, but because of product changes and decisions” that Mr. Musk and others made to how the social platform works.
Suggests this might have happened regardless of ownership.
Mr. Mosseri added, especially at a tumultuous moment in the social media landscape.
A likely allusion to the current state of Twitter.
As part of that effort, he said, Threads was spun out into a separate app. That way, Instagram would not be too cluttered by trying to make public conversations work inside its existing app.
Interesting. This potentially could suggest Threads as an idea that spans long before Elon Musk's Twitter purchase
It does not currently support direct messaging, a feature that Twitter offers. Instagram said it may add features to Threads if new users ask for them.
Threads is lacking compared to Twitter
Threads looks nearly identical to Twitter in many ways.
Pointing out the similarities between the two apps
He later said that Threads achieved 10 million sign-ups within seven hours of its launch.
That's a lot of people
But Threads has a leg up, backed by Meta’s deep pockets and Instagram’s enormous user base of more than two billion monthly active users around the world.
Threads is different from the others.
changed the experience of Twitter by tinkering with its algorithm and other features, and most recently imposed temporary limits
Implication of a shaky road since Musk's Twitter purchase
The rollout of Threads ramps up the rivalry between Mr. Zuckerberg and Elon Musk
Mentions the existence of a preexisting rivalry between Zuckerberg and Musk.
with some techies referring to it as a “Twitter killer.”
Twitter killer mention
If Instagram executives get their way
Get their way? Interesting wording choice.
could have a real-time capability to launch different pages on Threads that could support different stores and have conversations relating to that specific location.
Very interesting. haven't seen much talk about this. Which is something I've said a lot here but it's true!
something Twitter seems to grapple with.
More comparisons to Twitter. They're making it seem rather incompetent in comparison to Threads here.
But, the data transfer from Instagram to Threads has limited the company’s release in the EU
Important clarification being made here.
Threads will import all the data from Instagram, including behavioral and advertising information, such as health and fitness data, financial information, browsing history and sensitive information.
if Instagram is ok for people, then Threads should be too right? Are people just flaming this to spark controversy and fear?
Meta is actively courting creators and celebrities to the platform,
A push is being made to get people on Threads. I've seen mentions of celebrities being on the app, but not the how or why they made it on there.
Threads will be compatible with other apps like Mastodon and is being made available in the U.S. and the U.K.
A point I haven't seen raised in other articles...
“Twitter is severely wounded and Meta’s Threads could deliver another major blow,” said Insider Intelligence principal analyst,
Credibility added to Threads' chances of surpassing its competitors.
Advertisers have been lukewarm about Threads given Meta’s history of data collection practices.
Interesting. Haven't seen this pointed out by other sources. I wonder what that's about?
“delete Twitter account” saw a staggering surge of 292% in the U.S. and 131% worldwide on July 1, compared to the previous seven days
Wow! People HATE Twitter huh?
Twitter began limiting the number of tweets people can view per day to deter third parties from scraping data off the platform
Interesting note, especially when other articles have pointed at all the data Threads needs from its users.
Threads bears a striking resemblance to Twitter, featuring the ability to create content threads, restrict responses, and add images.
Twitter's relationship to Threads is a constant in the discussion of the app. It's like it doesn't exist within its own merits.
More than five million users signed up in the first four hours.
Very noticeable growth in a short span of time. I find it interesting how many of these articles all list different milestones it passed in its first few days on the market.
that there are “tons of basics” missing, including hashtags and direct messaging between users. “Full disclosure, it’ll take time.”
Is Threads potentially lackluster in its current state (at the time it was released)? With many basic features missing, it might not be able to hold the attention of its rapidly increasing userbase.
Threads is in its early days, however, and much depends on user feedback
It's all uncertain!
The rollout of new features will also be key.
Emphasis is put on making sure it has the features needed in order to sustain itself
could be a significant headache for Musk and Twitter.
It's not impossible, but it just may be improbable?
watchers point to Meta’s track record of starting standalone apps that were later shut down — including an Instagram messaging app also called “Threads” that shut down less than two years after its 2019 launch
I remember a few other similar Instagram spinoffs that eventually were dropped not long after. At one point they tried to rival YouTube with IGTV, but it was quickly forgotten about and its features were inserted into the main Instagram app.
Success for Threads is far from guaranteed.
It's not for certain going to rival Twitter, but it also isn't for sure going to fail.
Meta informed Ireland’s Data Privacy Commission, Meta’s main privacy regulator for the EU, that it has no plans yet to launch Threads in the 27-nation bloc, commission spokesman Graham Doyle said.
Considering the EU's rules in relation to data collection, should we be concerned by the plans to not launch it there?
The similarities of Meta’s new text-based app suggests that the company is working to directly challenge Twitter
Suggestion doesn't mean outright confirmation.
seemingly appeared to address Threads’ launch in a Thursday tweet
CNN reported on this exact tweet, but they said it was without certainty that it was about Threads. Here there's some extra room for interpretation.
The Twitter owner responded to one tweet suggesting that Meta’s app was built largely through the use of the copy and paste function, with a laughing emoji.
It sounds like Elon doesn't take this potential competition very seriously.
Twitter’s trade secrets and other intellectual property by hiring former Twitter employees to create a “copycat” app.
Does hiring former employees of a place to then make something similar to their previous work count as intellectual property theft?
“one reason why Twitter never succeeded as much as I think it should have, and we want to do it differently.”
Threads is happy! Twitter is not...
“Threads” can run up to 500 characters — compared with Twitter’s 280-character threshold
500 characters is much more room to work with than 280. Does this make Threads the better app?
“the long term nature of threads is what’s going to ultimately predict its success or failure.”
Is Threads sustainable?
“That’s one of the reasons why Threads got over 10 million people to sign up in just a seven hour period” after launching.
Do we know if that's truly the case? Not to come off as overly skeptical, but there is always the slightest chance something else caused it. Instagram's connections seem the most likely though, despite this.
According to Threads’ supplemental privacy policy, you can deactivate your profile at any time, “but your Threads profile can only be deleted by deleting your Instagram account.”
Emphasis is put on the connection between Instagram and Threads. Should this be a concern to anyone? Does the Instagram connection make a differnce?
But Meta’s new app has also raised data privacy concerns, and is notably unavailable in the European Union.
That's certainly not a good sign. Should we be trusting or using this platform at all?
arrives at a time when many are looking for Twitter alternatives to escape Elon Musk’s raucous oversight
Mentioning the current pitfalls with Twitter makes Threads seem awfully compelling in comparison...
celebrities like Oprah, pop star Shakira and chef Gordon Ramsay — as well as corporate accounts from Taco Bell, Netflix, Spotify, the Washington Post and other media outlets.
Big names are coming to Threads. Using that information allows for it to be pushed as this huge new platform.
"DUDE EVERYONE IS USING IT! EVEN THESE FAMOUS PEOPLE!"
30 million people had signed up before noon on Thursday, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said on Threads
People are flocking to it FAST
Despite some early glitches
It's new, so it's bound to be a little finicky now that there's a wider net of people using it beyond initial beta tests.
Meta’s new Twitter rival
Rivals. Bitter enemies. They're constantly going at it 24/7
Despite its early success, Threads remains a relatively bare bones app. It’s still missing many of the features users like about Twitter, such as a desktop version, direct messaging, trending topics and the option to edit posts.
It's not a fully fledged application. .It doesn't have what it takes (yet?)
For Zuckerberg, though, the real draw may be in attempting to best his rival, Musk, with whom he has in recent weeks been making plans to engage in a cage fight. Perhaps winning in the battle of social networks is even better.
I think, just maybe, there might be some metaphor here about how Twitter vs Threads is a cage match in its own right.
after Meta laid off more than 20,000 workers starting last November, including user experience, well-being, policy and risk analytics employees.
Is it doomed from the start? Could this be what makes the difference?
In particular, Meta will have to work to prevent spam, harassment, conspiracy theories and false claims on Threads, issues that have caused many users to sour on Twitter.
A tall order they have for them.
challenge for new social media platforms often is not getting users to sign up, but rather keeping them engaged long-term.
More skepticism about if Twitter could be dethroned by Threads, but this time it's from Instagram's CEO himself.
Threads makes it remarkably easy for users to get started.
Ease of access as the reason for Threads being a Twitter Killer
“We’re often imitated — but the Twitter community can never be duplicated,” she said.
Combative response from Twitter. The idea that Twitter could never be killed is certainly an interesting one.
a lawyer representing Twitter sent a letter to Meta alleging intellectual property theft and threatening a lawsuit over Threads.
Is it theft to make an app that's derivative in nature?
“Twitter has had the opportunity do this but hasn’t nailed it. Hopefully we will.”
Zuckerberg also throwing shade at Twitter.
Meta has at least one significant leg up on Twitter
Threads is winning the race
Threads is just the latest platform
You mean to tell me it's not special? D:
can collect about users, including location, contacts, search history, browsing history, contact info and more, according to the Apple App Store.
Scary!
“your Threads profile can only be deleted by deleting your Instagram account.”
It's not everything it's made out to be...
Similar to Twitter
It's similar to Twitter, so that means it's definitely going to fold it in.
But Twitter has become particularly vulnerable in recent days, angering users over a temporary limit on how much content users can view each day.
More information on Twitter that supports potential idea of Threads being a Twitter Killer
faced backlash since Elon Musk took over the platform in October 2022
Background on Twitter that supports potential idea of Threads being the Twitter Killer.
Threads could pose a serious threat to Twitter
Could implies there's a chance it won't
Threads was the top free app on Apple’s App Store and a top trending topic on Twitter.
This app is HUGE. This the next BIG THING
and some questioning whether the app could end up being the “Twitter killer.”
"Twitter Killer" narrative has a level of skepticism surrounding it.
officially launched its Twitter competitor
Paints it as a direct competitor. Different from how Mark Zuckerberg of Meta talks about it.
‘Twitter Killer’
Twitter is mentioned outright as manor element of the article
“The vision for Threads is to create an option and friendly public space for conversation,” Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a Threads post following the launch.
Does not in any way mention Twitter. Shocking!
The platform looks a lot like Twitter, with a feed of largely text-based posts — although users can also post photos and videos — where people can have real-time conversations.
Twitter is integral to the conversation. It never leaves
already off to a strong start: it received 100 million sign-ups
It's powerful?
Twitter’s traffic has been on a downward trend in recent months, with CloudFlare CEO Matthew Prince posting to say traffic is “tanking.”
Threads vs Twitter is the narrative here. The idea that these two social media sites/apps with similar designs behind them are to be pit against each other. Twitter has seen heavy criticism ever since Elon Musk took over, and it feels like Threads it being suggested as the replacement people may be looking for.
That said, Threads is still in its infancy, and we’ll have to wait and see if it captures the same cultural cachet that Twitter once did.
A comparison to Twitter gives off the implication that it's meant to rival or maybe even surpass the site. That certainly could happen, considering the level of growth it has had, but the comparison to Twitter isn't really important in that regard.
Users aren’t just signing up: they’re posting, too.
Wow!
confirming the milestone that the growth was “mostly organic:”
With how high the numbers got in such a short period of time, this feels like it was a necessary statement that needed to be made. It also makes the app's rise seem impressive when considering how new it was at the time of writing (and still is now).
The number of users can be found in the Instagram app, which tracks the size of the Threads userbase.
Meta itself also putting major focus on the number of users. Could maybe be seen as prideful in a way.
OpenAI’s chatbot passed the mark after two months, but Threads, which only launched on Wednesday
Further hammering in the rate at which the app as been growing.
It handily beat ChatGPT to the milestone while Twitter traffic is ‘tanking,’ according to Cloudflare CEO.
Putting an emphasis on both the rate of the growth and comparing it to its competitors.
Over the last several weeks, multiple sources have reported that Apple will team up with a partner,
This is a rumor. It has not been confirmed by any Apple or any of its associates that there will be a partnership to bring AI technology to iOS version 18.
Bloomberg reiterates that iOS 18 will be “the most ambitious overhaul of the iPhone’s software in its history.”
Speculation. Based on the influx in AI technology over the last year, and how many other major tech companies are pushing for it, it would make sense for Apple to take a stab at it. The idea of AI implementation could be game changing, but it isn't known for sure the extent of what would be added, if it is at all.
Vision Pro will hit the mainland China market this year,
Usually, hitting means an attack or a strike. Here it signals the release of a product in a location it has yet to reach. Product release as an attack.
The company has innovated
Another instance of companies/brands being characterized as if they were an individual.
celebrates 70 years
Metaphor presenting companies/brands as people