Who is surprised?

  • 312@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s plenty of things to hate Meta for, but this is inaccurate.

    You log into Threads with your Instagram account. There’s no “shadow account”, you’re logging into a second service with the same account and credentials.

    • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree that the wording is inaccurate, but some of the essence remains: the second “service” is forced on you. It’s somewhat as if anyone with a Fakebook account also automatically had a Whatsapp or Instagram account, or some permutation of this.

      • 312@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not forced on you. If you don’t download Threads and log in, you’re not on threads.

        This is akin to saying Google Calendar is “forced” on you if you have a Gmail account. They are separate services that use a common credential, you are under no obligation to use any or all of those services.

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nah its more like having Telegram prompt me “Jay is on Telegram, say Hi to Jay” when he hasn’t created an account or joined. Currently Telegram only shows those who actively joined. This is the point of the post.

          • 312@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Threads only shows users who have signed in to Threads. If you mention an Instagram user in a Threads post that has not signed in to Threads prior, the mention is removed because it’s not a valid handle.

            I urge you to read through the link in the original post to the Mastodon user who originally made this claim, where you’ll find plenty of people more eloquent than me explaining why this is inaccurate.

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

              I followed the link as you suggested. I found a slight correction on the way it works.

              A “shadow account” was some layperson’s attempt to describe what happened. That seemed clear to me immediately. It also seems that Threads and Instagram are much more intertwined than users expect.

              I understand why this would upset people! I was furious when I tapped one screen wrong and connected my Facebook and Instagram accounts. It can’t be undone. It changed a profile picture. I didn’t quite become angry enough to delete both, but I stopped using them.

        • 0x815@feddit.deOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not forced on you. If you don’t download Threads and log in, you’re not on threads.

          Although that’s technically true, it is clear what Meta is doing here (and even if most may know that the company sucks, I personally feel it is important report on things like that). Meta’s tactics should create a hype making people believe there are substantially more users than there actually are. The mass of people won’t recognize (or even care?) what’s going on I’m afraid.

          • 312@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            1 year ago

            What is Meta doing here? I’m not clear on what the point being made is.

            If you’re insinuating that they are doing this to artificially inflate user counts, why wouldn’t they be reporting about how there are 2+ billion threads users in the first week?

            They don’t need to manufacture hype - like Meta or not, in the first 96 hours they brought in almost 100 million users. Thats a third of Twitter’s entire active user base, in less than a week.

            • 0x815@feddit.deOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              It seems we agree to disagree. The point I make is pretty clear, and it doesn’t make sense if you repeating your arvuments over and over again.

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

                But the point you’re making isn’t clear which is why I asked if you could clarify - what is the point you’re making?

                  • 312@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    If it’s so obvious why can’t you state it clearly?

                    It seems like the insinuation is that Threads is artificially inflating user counts with “shadow accounts” that aren’t real - however it’s been clearly determined that they aren’t.

                    So, if it’s not that, then, again… what’s the “so obvious” point I’m missing?

          • Reclipse@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            there are substantially more users than there actually are.

            Do you have any source for that?

        • Big P@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Google is creating SHADOW Google calendar accounts for you if you use Gmail! Look! I sent my friend a calendar invite but they’ve never even logged into Google calendar!

        • stravanasu@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I get what you’re saying. From my point of view we’re just playing on the semantics of “service” and “app” here. I had indeed the same problem with Google and Hangouts.

          • 312@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            I too understand where you’re coming from, but I think it’s an important distinction, not semantics.

            If Meta was simply creating a duplicitous profile for every Instagram user, that would be pretty predatory and misleading.

            However, if that were the case, they would also be bragging about having 2+ billion Threads “users”.

            It also implies that users could interact with these “shadow accounts” even if that person never used Threads, which is not the case.

            As it currently works, if you try to mention a user who is on Instagram but isn’t on Threads, nothing happens, the mention is stripped because it’s not a valid handle.

      • NaN@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Instagram has over a billion users.

        Their user count is the number of Instagram users that have activated threads.

        If you follow someone who hasn’t, it will automatically follow them if they do activate. That doesn’t mean they created some shadow profile.

    • Sharmat@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, they probably just duplicated the username DB from instagram, so whenever someone starts using Threads, their username will already be “reserved” for them in an empty profile.

      • 312@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s probably even more simple than that - a single DB with a flag for threads_enabled = true/false.

        They made it super clear in advance this is how it would work, the app is called “Threads, an Instagram app”, but as always people froth at the mouth for any opportunity to say “Zuckerberg bad”.

        That’s not some big secret. Everyone knows meta sucks. We don’t need to make stuff up to prove that. They do that on their own.