• Spudger@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    It says “no fully exposed” arse pix. What percentage of exposed derrière is acceptable? Asking for a friend.

  • 1bitwonder@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    the headline is clickbait—the article has a really good point. threads is 50% brands emulating wendy’s twitter circa 2015 and 50% “insta famous” influencers being uninteresting. ive muted so many accounts but they don’t stop coming.

    there’s no edge to any of the content that makes it fun. it’s a puritanical facsimile of what twitter used to be.

  • editediting@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I dread the (IMO likely) possibility that users will just accept Zuck’s overlordship since everyone they follow on Twitter will be on Threads as he enshittifies the platform with industrial-scale data harvesting, endless ads, a stiflingly puritanical content policy, and algorithms designed to maximize short-term profits rather than spark conversations, leaving users wanting more than pablum with nowhere to go. It would be the end of an era of social media freedom if that were the case.

    • neilcar@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      …as he enshittifies the platform

      The interesting thing is that Zuck has managed to innovate and start out enshittified. Out of the gate, you can’t see/find/access a feed of just your friends so you’re immediately drinking from a firehose of posts from people who you wouldn’t want to spend ten minutes on line with.

    • DJDarren@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      everyone they follow on Twitter

      I fucked off Twitter months ago, so I don’t follow anyone over there. Check. Mate. Zuckerfucker!

          • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think it was easy for me because I had a couple of very public, negative interactions with people who were very prominent in my field of employment, and avoiding potentially career-limiting-interactions saved me a lot of personal stress.

  • varzaman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Idk, find it hard to believe sexually explicit content is what is gonna make or break it. The author seems to be talking about different degrees of promiscuity in the same article, so I am having a hard time following exactly.

    In one paragraph, author is talking about how its boring cause it won’t allow sexually explicit material. But goes on to talk about how people are getting written up for harmless stuff like saying “boobs”, which to me is a WAY different problem lol.

  • notamichael@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wonder if the harsh content moderation guidelines were a strategic decision by Meta to make a Twitter alternative that’s actually financially sustainable. Assuming that twitter struggled with advertisers because of their lax approach to moderation (especially porn).

    • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Was porn really the problem? I had the impression Musk’s tolerance of hate speech was what made advertisers run away. The woman getting banned for writing “boob” on Threads is such a puritan move.

      • notamichael@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Twitter has many problems that makes it’s hard for it to generate profit. Sure Musk’s ‘free-speech’ twitter has made it worse but I think twitter has struggled with profit generation since day one (I think it had a few good years recently before Musk took over) and the prevalence of porn didn’t help.

        Threads moderation may be puritan but it is advertiser friendly. And as long as the millions of active accounts stay engaged it looks like a much better alternative than twitter for advertisers.

  • sub_o@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I believe that advertisers are leaving Twitter not due to nudity, but:

    1. being associated with hate speech (companies don’t care, they just don’t want the association, they will fund hate groups behind everyone if it gets them lower taxes)
    2. Musk’s amazing engineering skills that breaks the site every Tuesday. Companies don’t invest in countries that constantly have regime changes (but they’d definitely move into long term authoritarian countries that they can bribe and monopolize)

    Threads’ aversion of nudity? Most probably so that their app is approved in conservative countries. That’s what Netflix and HBO did.

    the same author has been writing about how NSFW content could make or break social media platforms, so I’m assuming he’s just continuing from that.

    I dislike that he completely glossed over the fact that there’s a goddamn option on Bluesky to hide / show contents from political hate group! (Why the hell are they even allowed on Bluesky in the first place?!)

    • DJDarren@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      (Why the hell are they even allowed on Bluesky in the first place?!)

      Free Speech™

  • Squirrel [any]@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I get where this article is coming from but it does extremely poorly at explaining its topic and reads as basic “I hate content moderation because I can’t see nsfw content”

  • Mustafa Albazy@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    People are moving away from twitter because it’s full of spam, nudity and bullying. That doesn’t makes twitter any unique and/or worthy, that makes it toxic place to be in.

    Freedom of speech and (nudity, bullying) are not the same thing.

    • lemillionsocks@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I’m not pro meta taking over all of social media, but coming down hard and immediately on things that might constitute bullying and harassment , isnt necessarily a bad thing. The nudity thing is so so they already have a policy for “tasteful nudity” even if it sounds like it’s not well implemented, but I cant fault a social media for not wanting to be a space for porn and thirst posts.