This Vergecast has an interesting discussion about Meta’s planned push into decentralized social media. It's called Instagram Threads. Can and will it actually federate with Mastodon and the like? Will the Metaverse and Fediverse mix like oil and water? Some people don't want Meta's Insta in the Fedi. Despite my own past misgivings with Zuckerberg productions, I'm genuinely interested in what the Facebook owner has cooked up.
You can now "pre-order" the Threads app from Apple's iOS app store. I got my ticket as it's set to release soon. I plan to give it a fair chance since it is a text-based conversational social app meant to nearly replicate what Twitter was at its core. As a blogger, I'm interested in microblogging services and how they can be leveraged or enjoyed alongside traditional long-form self-publishing.
The website for Threads has a cool landing page and currently shows a countdown. The pending service is said to use the ActivityPub protocol, which allows interaction between different social platforms. It’s like how you can email from an outlook address to a gmail address. I’ve experienced this between Mastodon and Micro.blog. I can see posts from one site on the other and can reply from the site I see the post even though it was created elsewhere; it’s kind of baffling that it works.
This is something Threads should be able to do. You and I could imagine how this would work and what potential it might have.
But let’s be realistic if not cynical: I don’t think Threads will stay federated with anything. Instead, it will likely grow so large that it effectively becomes it’s own entity or silo just like Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram.
While accepting such a likely outcome, I’m still interested in Threads. Why? Because a part of me, however naive, thinks that Meta will have learned something from Twitter’s mistakes and from its own troubles over the years, thus applying those lessons to Threads. This means the social service could actually work, have decent moderation, and be a great conversation utility for billions of people. It will have reach, scale, and promise.
Speaking of reach and scale, 9to5mac makes this excellent point:
“Instagram currently has over 1 billion users, while Twitter has around 400 million. If half of Instagram’s users decide to use Threads, that’s already more than the number of users Twitter has.”
Filipe Espósito
That said, my hopes are tempered. I’m cautiously optimistic.
If nothing else, I’ll enjoy tinkering with Threads from a tech-geek perspective. Posts are said to be called, “Threads.” Nice. And re-sharing them is called, “Rethread.” Nice again. Plus, you can keep your Instagram username. Mine is _jasonmcfadden_ it’s like my Twitter handle but with added underscores at each end. Not pretty, but recognizable.
Finally, at least one thing is certain: Meta knows how to run a social network at scale. Given Twitter’s server performance issues reported over the past several months, it’s reassuring to know that Meta’s technical expertise and established server infrastructure are rock solid.
Is it vain or futile to want to connect with others online? We are relational creatures; we’re meant to connect. And however problematic or inferior digital tools are for remote connection, they provide some benefit at times. That's why so many people use them. The network effect is the common thread of social media. If enough people use Threads, it may pull you in.