Meta Platform’s (META.O) new social media platform, Meta Threads, is emerging as a potential contender to challenge Twitter’s dominance in the microblogging space. While Elon Musk’s upcoming Twitter rebranding has generated curiosity, some advertisers find Threads less contentious and more predictable, making it an attractive option to shift marketing budgets in the future.
Since its launch on July 5, Threads has seen remarkable growth, becoming the fastest-growing social media platform to reach 100 million users. Despite a slight drop in downloads and engagement in the immediate aftermath of its debut, analysts believe Meta Threads has significant potential for ad revenue if it can sustain its user base.
Various forecasts estimate that if Threads manages to retain users, it could generate impressive annual ad revenue, ranging from $2 billion to $8 billion. Brands are already taking notice of Threads’ potential, with some considering integrating Threads posts into their marketing campaigns alongside other platforms like TikTok and Instagram.
While Threads still has some way to go to match Twitter’s reach, it has garnered tens of millions of daily users, and the team is actively working on improving the user experience and retention.
Advertisers’ interest in Meta Threads is partly fueled by concerns about Twitter’s tone of discourse and policy changes since Musk’s acquisition. Some brands have already shifted their ad spending away from Twitter, and the hope is that Threads, backed by Meta’s resources and experience with Instagram and Facebook, will provide a more stable advertising platform.
Meta Threads’ current limitations, such as the absence of direct messaging, hashtags, and keyword searches, may affect its appeal to advertisers. However, many brands are experimenting with Threads, finding it refreshing and reminiscent of the “glory days of Twitter.”
Meta’s aggressive investment in AI capacity has been evident in its efforts to boost traffic to Facebook and Instagram and increase ad sales. The company’s upcoming quarterly report is expected to show robust revenue growth.
Despite the early signs of promise, Meta’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has emphasized that the company will only consider monetizing Threads once it reaches a substantial user base of 1 billion.
In conclusion, Threads is gaining traction as a potential challenger to Twitter, attracting brands eager to explore its advertising potential. While it still faces some limitations, the platform’s growth and Meta’s commitment to refining the user experience could position Meta Threads as a significant player in the social media landscape in the future.
Meta said Friday it is shutting down an AI image-generation feature it launched only days earlier, after the tool drew sharp criticism over privacy concerns, including a formal objection from a Hollywood union.
“Our intent was to provide a useful creative tool and to give people control over whether their public content could be referenced in this way,” Meta said in a statement. “We’ve heard the feedback that this feature missed the mark, so it’s no longer available.”
A Feature Built on Public Photos
Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, introduced the tool, called Muse Image, on Tuesday. It marked the company’s first image-generation model to come out of Meta Superintelligence Labs. The feature was built into the Meta AI chatbot and let users generate images using photos as input, then edit the results directly through sketches drawn on top of the generated image.
The trouble was where those input photos could come from. Muse Image let users generate images using content pulled from public Instagram accounts, meaning a person’s public photos could be fed into the tool without that person taking any action to allow it. The feature also came switched on for users by default, rather than requiring anyone to opt in before their content could be used this way.
That combination, automatic activation plus access to public account content, is what triggered the backlash.
Backlash Builds Fast
Hannah Einbinder, the Emmy-winning actor known for her role on “Hacks,” posted criticism of the feature on Instagram, telling followers it had been turned on automatically and urging them to switch it off.
SAG-AFTRA, the union representing actors and other media professionals, went further. On Thursday, the union publicly urged its members and other Instagram users to opt out of the feature entirely.
“Anything other than a clear and conspicuous opt-in for these types of uses of Instagram users’ images is unacceptable, and an utter miscalculation of public sentiment regarding the obvious dangers and harms inherent in such use,” SAG-AFTRA said in its statement.
The union’s objection centered on a concern that has followed AI image tools broadly: the risk that photos of real people can be used to create digital replicas or likenesses without their direct consent, even when the source material was already public. For an organization representing performers, whose faces and images carry professional and financial value, an opt-out model rather than an opt-in one raised immediate red flags.
Meta Reverses Course
Meta’s decision to pull the feature came just three days after its launch, a fast reversal for a company that had positioned Muse Image as a flagship product from its newly formed superintelligence research group. The company did not detail how many users had engaged with the tool before shutting it down, nor did it specify whether it plans to relaunch a modified version with different consent controls in the future.
SAG-AFTRA welcomed the reversal once it was announced.
“With the dangers of nonconsensual digital replicas well known to all, a feature that encouraged that behavior is unwise. We appreciate its discontinuance. It is the responsible thing to do,” a union spokesperson said.
A Pattern Tech Companies Keep Repeating
The episode fits a pattern that has played out repeatedly as tech companies race to ship generative AI features. A company builds a tool that draws on user content by default, faces immediate criticism once users realize their material is included without a clear opt-in step, and then pulls or modifies the feature within days.
What makes this case notable is the source of the pushback. SAG-AFTRA’s involvement signals that concerns about AI and digital likeness now extend well beyond Hollywood contract negotiations and into how ordinary Instagram users’ public photos get treated by AI systems. The union spent much of 2023 and 2024 fighting for contract protections against AI-generated performances; this dispute shows those same consent principles being applied to a mainstream consumer product with no direct connection to film or television production.
For Meta, the incident lands at a sensitive moment. The company has been investing heavily in its Superintelligence Labs division and pushing to establish itself as a serious competitor in AI image and video generation, an area where it has trailed competitors like OpenAI and Google. Muse Image was meant to show that investment paying off. Instead, its rollout became a case study in what happens when a company treats public content as fair game for AI training or generation without building in a clear, upfront choice for the people whose photos are involved.
Meta has not said whether Muse Image will return in a different form, or whether the company plans to build opt-in consent mechanisms into future features drawing on user or public content. The company’s statement framed the shutdown as a response to feedback rather than an admission that the underlying design was flawed, language that leaves open the possibility of a revised version down the line.
For now, the reversal leaves Meta without an image-generation feature it had promoted as a signature launch just days earlier, and it hands SAG-AFTRA a concrete example to point to in ongoing arguments about how tech companies should handle consent when AI tools touch real people’s images.
A long-standing feud between Elon Musk and Sam Altman, co-founders turned bitter rivals at the helm of OpenAI, has just erupted anew on Musk’s own social media platform, X, formerly known as Twitter. What started as a lighthearted jab over a delayed Tesla Roadster soon turned into another public clash between two of Silicon Valley’s most influential-and outspoken-tech leaders.
Altman’s “Tale in Three Acts” Strikes a Chord
The latest chapter in the saga began when OpenAI CEO Sam Altman posted what he called “a tale in three acts,” on X. It contained screenshots of his 2018 reservation for a Tesla Roadster, a follow-up email requesting a refund on his $50,000 deposit, and an automated bounce-back message.
“I really was excited for the car!” Altman wrote. “And I understand delays. But 7.5 years has felt like a long time to wait.”
Altman was likely responding to Tesla’s second-generation Roadster, first unveiled in November 2017 as the fastest production car in history. The highly anticipated car has faced years of delays in production; Musk recently promised a new version of it would arrive by the end of 2025.
Musk Fires Back: “You Stole a Nonprofit”
Musk didn’t waste any time going after Altman, responding to the post with the lacerating remark:
“You stole a nonprofit.”
The comment references Musk’s long-standing accusation that Altman “hijacked” OpenAI-which was originally founded in 2015 as a nonprofit research organization dedicated to safe and open AI development. Musk left the company in 2018, later criticizing its transition to a “capped-profit” model under the structure of OpenAI Global LLC, where the nonprofit board still retains control of the for-profit subsidiary.
In March 2024, Musk even sued OpenAI and Altman on grounds that the company had abandoned its founding mission by becoming too entwined with Microsoft and prioritizing profits over transparency. Although a court later dismissed the lawsuit, Musk has continued to publicly accuse Altman of betraying OpenAI’s original ideals.
Altman Pushes Back at Musk’s Claims
Never one to back down from a counterpunch, Altman fired back indirectly at the Tesla CEO’s accusations, implying Musk was hardly in a position to talk about fairness or competition.
He referred to Musk’s AI startup, xAI, which recently sued OpenAI and Apple, alleging that they colluded to hold down competition in the AI sector. Altman called Musk’s lawsuit “remarkable,” adding:
“Given what I heard alleged that Elon does to manipulate X to benefit himself and his own companies – and harm his competitors and people he doesn’t like.”
The comment points to increasing friction between the two entrepreneurs, who now spearhead competing efforts in artificial intelligence: Altman with OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Musk with xAI’s Grok chatbot, which is integrated into X Premium.
The Refund Controversy — and Musk’s Final Word
While Altman’s Tesla refund rekindled the feud, Musk did not waste any time in attempting to dial it back. Again responding on X, he wrote:
“And you forgot to say act 4, when that got resolved and you got a refund in less than 24 hours. But that’s your nature.”
Musk’s response suggested that Altman’s thread omitted important context-in this case, that Tesla had resolved the issue swiftly. Yet the exchange reflects how even a small customer complaint can become the latest front in a significantly broader personal and professional feud.
A Tech Feud Years in the Making
Musk and Altman have been at odds for many years. The two men were close collaborators when OpenAI was founded in 2015, united by a shared concern about the potential dangers of unchecked AI. However, philosophical and organizational disagreements soon emerged.
Musk reportedly wanted to roll OpenAI into Tesla’s AI team, a plan Altman and the board resisted. Musk left in 2018, citing conflicts of interest with Tesla’s self-driving AI effort. Since then, the relationship between the two has devolved into one of Silicon Valley’s most public rivalries.
Their differences reflect a deeper split in the tech world: Musk envisions AI as a tool best developed under private control with maximum safety constraints, while Altman is advocating for a more open and collaborative ecosystem — though his own company’s growing ties to Microsoft have raised eyebrows.
Rival Visions for the Future of AI
Today, the two men are at the helm of rival AI empires. xAI, Musk’s company, aims to create what he calls “truth-seeking AI” that avoids political or corporate bias; meanwhile, OpenAI, Altman’s company, continues to dominate the consumer space with ChatGPT, now integrated into Microsoft’s productivity software.
For all the public jabs, both men are racing toward the same goal: building the world’s most advanced artificial intelligence models. Their feud has become emblematic of the broader power struggle shaping the next era of technology, where ideology and business strategy intertwine with personal ego.
Conclusion: From Partners to Rivals What started as a friendly partnership to build safe, open artificial intelligence turned into one of the most bitter rivalries in modern tech. Musk and Altman’s latest exchange – over a car refund – is only the latest chapter in a saga emblematic of the cutthroat competition that lies at the heart of the AI revolution. Both men are forging the future of technology in their own ways, but their running clashes remind us: here in Silicon Valley, innovation and rivalry often run side by side.
