Threads Is the Perfect Twitter Alternative, Just Not for You

Silicon Valley could well be built on the principle of scrapping principles. Now Elon Musk, perhaps the ultimate tech bro, is shredding another well-regarded convention with an original business strategy.

Generally, in business, it is sensible to provide your customers with what they want. With Twitter, the meme-makers' favourite billionaire is doing the opposite. The cyber-trucker is trying his best to cull his customer base. Instead of finding gaps in the market, Musk is helping to create them. Ever the copycat, Mark Zuckerberg wants to give these innovative tactics a try. Enter the-company-formerly-known-as-Facebook's rival to the birdsite: Threads.

The Zuck is, by all accounts, good at making social media platforms. This doesn't mean the platforms themselves are good - they aren't. But they are unarguably successful: Instagram and WhatsApp have comfortably over a billion users, Facebook has nearly three. If only half of these users adopt the new platform, it would instantly eclipse Twitter. As it happens, Threads allows you to import all your followers from Instagram. Of all the Twitter alternatives, Zuckerberg's looks like the most promising.

Here, however, the promise ends.

The man behind Facebook has somehow managed to make the Twitter experience worse. Following people, a key part of the social media mogul's earlier ventures, is meaningless on Threads. You are beholden to its algorithm and who it reckons you will interact with. (Want to see what your mates are posting about? Tough, here's an 'Epic Meme from the official Salesforce account.') Your timeline isn't chronological either.

And this is where it gets clever. Say you tire of blue-tick brands shitposting, and want to delete your account? Hard luck. Like an ill-advised tattoo, Threads accounts are effectively permanent. If you delete your Threads account, your Instagram account goes too. You're locked in this shiny pit of brand based flimflam, and your Instagram account is hostage.

Threads is what would happen if Twitter and Instagram shagged in a bowling alley. It's all their worst parts combined - but it may well succeed. Rocket-man Musk's changes to Twitter have not exactly made it 'brand friendly'. Threads, meanwhile, is shaping up to be a paradise for in-your-face brands - and the AdTech industry would love for you to join them. As Chris Black put it, Threads is just 'another marketing channel masquerading as a community.' When the site inevitably introduces ads, the scared Twitter advertisers will flock. A TechCrunch headline ran 'You can’t post ass, Threads is doomed'. It should have run: 'You can't post ass, Threads will boom'.

Despite cut-and-pasting a dying social media site, the Zuck won't be worried. If anyone knows how to transform bland technology into profit it's him. Aside from providing a platform for asinine hot-takes, Threads' main purpose is to hoover up and auction off data. Unlike Twitter, Meta's microblogging venture has strict moderation. When advertisers bore of Musk's manic antics you know where they'll go.

Threads' naffness won't stop its success. It's data-scraping fluffily dressed up as substandard corporate twaddle. It's a cringe-inducing privacy invasion. It's not meant for users, but that doesn't really matter: you're not a user, you're a product.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

Optimal Foraging Theory is what is killing us as a society.

Everything appears the same because companies literally can’t afford to look different. Being different means you don’t look like the other companies. Take Netflix for example. It behaves much better in performance and usability as well as aesthetically, but provides the exact same service as Hulu, Disney Plus, etc. While they are all essentially just streaming services, they all behave the same way. Humans are subject to this in every aspect of our lives, as we seek the highest value for the lowest risk.

It’s not a matter of being creative anymore. It’s no longer about being genuinely good at something, or having context; it’s all about making your product be of the highest value and of the lowest risk.

“Our economies are a bit like this jungle, and we’re the monkeys in it.”

We can easily attribute “Threads vs Twitter vs Mastodon” to this concept, because, in reality it’s not at all Threads vs anything – it’s risk vs reward. People will value Threads highly for a time, but then either go back when they realize it’s the exact same thing as Twitter with a new face or we’ll have 1% of netizens on Threads and Twitter, hoping that there will be some payoff to this choice.

Our strive to be different makes us more and more divided.

You can apply this risk-reward system to our entire, daily lives as humans on our earth. We continually and endlessly seek value in things that are increasingly and inevitably similar, but which come at different costs to us; we will always choose the easiest tree in the forest to get our mango fix from. As much as I hate calling us all monkeys (and how much I hate reading contextualized theory), it’s not that Threads is a “bad” or “good” company on the surface, at least from a regular human perspective, disregarding the privacy issues. It’s that we have too many of the same thing. We have car manufacturers that always produce the same fucking car with new names and new features, but they are visually and functionally the exact same vehicles. Nothing new lasts. Nothing innovative is created because we have no more creativity, and this is killing us.

Originally posted on Matrix.

This topic was automatically closed after 180 days. New replies are no longer allowed.