Threads now lets you manage Hidden Words separately from Instagram, set time limits
Threads, Meta's competitor to X, now has its own Hidden Words setting that operates separately from Instagram. The feature allows you to filter out posts that contain words, phrases, or emojis you don't want to see in feeds, search, profiles, and replies.
Previously, Hidden Words was tied to Instagram, so the filters that you entered would be applied to content on both platforms. Now, you can create a separate list of Hidden Words on Threads to further personalize the content that you see on the platform without impacting what you see on Instagram.
Threads also announced that you can now set time limits for filters in instances where you don't want to permanently block certain words, phrases, or emojis. You have the option to now set filters to expire within 30 days as a way to 'snooze' them until you want to see the related posts in the app again.
For example, this setting could be helpful in situations where you're not caught up on a TV show and don't want to see spoilers on your feed, but want to eventually see posts related to the TV show at a later point when you're caught up.
The move comes two weeks after the social network began testing a DM inbox that's separate from users' Instagram DM Inboxes. Today's announcement and the updates to direct messages suggest that Meta may be working to make Threads more of an independent service outside of Instagram.
As Threads continues to take on X, the social network has been rolling out numerous features every month. Most recently, the company launched the ability for users to see posts from other users on the fediverse within a dedicated feed, and search for fediverse users directly in Threads.
The platform is also testing spoiler text, and now allows creators to use their Threads profiles to share links and track clicks.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Brazil's Supreme Court decides to hold social media companies liable for user content
Brazil's Supreme Court agreed on Thursday on details of a decision to hold social media companies liable for what their users post, clearing the way for it to go into effect within weeks. The 8-3 vote in Brazil's top court orders tech giants like Google, Meta, and TikTok to actively monitor content that involves hate speech, racism, and incitation to violence and act to remove it. The case has unsettled the relationship between the South American nation and the U.S. government. Critics have expressed concern that the move could threaten free speech if platforms preemptively remove content that could be problematic. 3 Brazil's Supreme Court agreed on details of a decision to hold social media companies liable for what their users post, clearing the way for it to go into effect within weeks. AP After Thursday's ruling is published by the court, people will be able to sue social media companies for hosting illegal content if they refuse to remove it after a victim brings it to their attention. The court didn't set out firm rules on what content is illegal, leaving it to be decided on a case-by-case basis. The ruling strengthens a law that requires companies to remove content only after court orders, which were often ignored. It's the product of two cases accepted by the court last year in which social media companies were accused of failing to act against users promoting fraud, child pornography, and violence. A majority of the 11 justices voted to approve the change two weeks ago, but it took until today to reach consensus on how to implement it. 3 The 8-3 vote in Brazil's top court orders tech giants like Google, Meta, and TikTok to actively monitor content that involves hate speech, racism, and incitation to violence and act to remove it. REUTERS The justices also agreed that social media companies will not be liable if they can show they took steps to remove illegal content in a timely fashion. Google said in a statement that it is analyzing the court's decision. 'We remain open for dialogue,' the company said. 3 The justices also agreed that social media companies will not be liable if they can show they took steps to remove illegal content in a timely fashion. AFP via Getty Images Brazil's top court came to the decision after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned of possible visa restrictions against foreign officials involved in censoring American citizens. Thursday's ruling brings Brazil's approach to big tech closer to the European Union's approach, which has sought to rein in the power of social media companies and other digital platforms.
The Verge
an hour ago
- The Verge
Google's Doppl app took off my socks
I just tried on five different outfits in about 10 minutes — or at least my AI lookalike did. That's all thanks to Doppl, a new app that Google is testing, which I used to create AI-generated clips of myself wearing outfits that I found across the web. It mostly works, but it has clear issues putting pants on photos of me wearing shorts, and it even replaced my mismatched socks with AI-generated feet in one instance. Using the app is pretty simple. All you need is a screenshot of the outfit you want to try on — whether it's from Pinterest, Instagram, or another online source — along with a full-body photo of yourself in bright light, a natural pose, and no hat. Once you upload both, you can have Doppl generate a still image of you wearing the outfit. It takes a little while to generate, but once it does, you can hit the animate icon to add a random animation, which could show you tossing up the peace sign, smiling and waving to the camera, or striking another type of pose. I uploaded a simple photo of myself wearing a T-shirt, shorts, and socks. For my first try-on session, I selected one of Google's sample outfits. The app portrayed the white and blue striped shirt pretty accurately, but it gave me red shorts instead of skinny jeans and wrapped what should've been jeans around my calves, as if I were wearing leg warmers. Another outfit I screenshotted included a pair of distressed jeans. Once again, Doppl only included the button half of the pants, while making my shirt extra long and ending around where my shorts do in real life. Things got even weirder when I fed Doppl an outfit that showed someone from the knees up, wearing a striped button-down shirt and long, striped shorts. Instead of generating a similar outfit, it made the shorts even shorter and gave me a pair of somewhat convincing fake feet. Even though some of the other outfits I uploaded to Doppl didn't show the wearer's shoes, it still generated some kind of footwear for those looks. (Who knows, maybe Google's AI just thought the outfit would look good with bare feet?) During my testing, I found that Doppl wouldn't allow me to upload pictures of more revealing outfits I found on the web, like someone wearing a bikini. It also wouldn't let my colleague, Marina Galperina, upload an image of President Donald Trump. Those guardrails might make it more difficult for someone to create fake images of public figures or generate explicit images of a person. However, a strange pattern emerged when Marina and I uploaded mirror selfies of ourselves to the app to virtually try on outfits. Instead of staying relatively close to what we look like in real life, Doppl made both of our lookalikes thinner, to the point where we resembled bobblehead figures. The problem didn't appear when I used other full-body photos of myself that were taken by someone else. Google has had a virtual try-on feature for a couple years now, but it expanded that earlier this year by allowing you to upload a photo of yourself and use AI to put you in a shirt, dress, skirt, or a pair of pants that you come across in Google's search results. Doppl is an even bigger leap, as it lets you try on even more kinds of clothes from different sources around the web and can turn it into a video, too. If Google can fix some of the tool's quirks, I can see it being a handy way to imagine yourself in an outfit you find online. You can try out Doppl now by downloading the app on Android or iOS.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
2 Tech Stocks I'd Buy and Never Sell
Meta's $14.3 billion Scale AI deal signals a dramatic shift from social media to superintelligence development. Tesla's robotaxi launch and Optimus production represent the company's transformation from automaker to AI robotics powerhouse. Both companies are making massive investments that could redefine their entire business models over the next decade. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Everyone thinks they know what Meta Platforms (NASDAQ: META) and Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) are -- a social media company and an electric vehicle (EV) maker. But what if I told you that's like calling Amazon a bookstore? The real story is far more intriguing, and it's unfolding right now. Here's why these two tech giants deserve a permanent spot in your portfolio. Mark Zuckerberg is spending money like a man possessed. The Facebook founder just dropped $14.3 billion to acquire 49% of Scale AI, bringing its CEO Alexandr Wang aboard to lead a new superintelligence lab. He's offering $100 million signing bonuses to poach OpenAI engineers. When Sam Altman says your rival CEO is personally emailing his team with "crazy" offers, you know something extraordinary is happening. This isn't desperation -- it's calculation. Meta has quietly built one of the most impressive artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructures on the planet. The company's Llama models pioneered the open-source approach to large language models, fundamentally different from the closed systems at OpenAI and Anthropic. While critics fixate on Meta's recent AI stumbles, they're missing the forest for the trees. Consider the talent acquisition alone. Beyond the Scale AI deal, Meta has recruited former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman and AI entrepreneur Daniel Gross. The company approached Perplexity AI, Runway, and Safe Superintelligence for potential acquisitions. Zuckerberg himself is making job offers that one AI researcher described as "at least $10,000,000 a year." This isn't hiring -- it's building an AI Manhattan Project. The strategy makes perfect sense when you understand Meta's endgame. The company forecasts its generative AI products will generate between $460 billion and $1.4 trillion in total revenue by 2035. That's not a typo. Meta sees AI agents transforming everything from WhatsApp customer service to Instagram content creation. With 3.3 billion daily active users across its apps, Meta has the distribution advantage that pure play AI companies can only dream about. Wall Street remains skeptical, with Meta's 64% AI talent retention rate trailing competitors. But that misses the point. Meta isn't trying to win the current AI race -- it's changing the track entirely. By combining massive capital deployment, open-source development, and unmatched distribution, Zuckerberg is positioning Meta to own the AI infrastructure layer of the internet. Tesla finally launched its robotaxi service in Austin on June 22, 2025. The rollout was small -- around 10 Model Y vehicles and front-seat riders serving as "safety monitors." Critics called it smoke and mirrors. They're right about the modest start but wrong about what it represents. This isn't about competing with Alphabet's Waymo, which already operates 1,500 robotaxis and provides more than 250,000 paid trips per week across its markets. It's about Tesla's fundamental transformation from an automaker into an AI robotics company. The robotaxi launch is merely the opening act of a much bigger production. The real story is Optimus, Tesla's humanoid robot. Musk plans to produce 5,000 units this year -- what he calls a "legion" of robots. By 2026, that number jumps to 50,000. The robots will start in Tesla factories, handling dangerous and repetitive tasks, before expanding to external customers at a projected price of $20,000 to $30,000 each. Here's what makes Tesla different: vertical integration. The company designs its own AI chips, writes its software, and manufactures at scale. Every component developed for Tesla vehicles -- batteries, motors, AI inference computers -- applies directly to Optimus. Competitors like Boston Dynamics build impressive demos. Tesla builds production lines. The robotaxi service provides the perfect real-world testing ground for Tesla's AI. Every mile driven generates data that improves both autonomous driving and robotic navigation. It's a feedback loop that compounds exponentially. Musk believes Optimus could eventually be "more valuable than everything else combined" at Tesla. Given that humanoid robots could address the global labor shortage while transforming manufacturing, healthcare, and home assistance, that might be conservative. Critics point to Tesla's history of missed deadlines and Musk's "corporate puffery." Fair enough. But they said the same thing about Tesla overtaking legacy automakers in electric vehicles. The company's ability to manufacture at scale, combined with its AI prowess, creates a moat that's nearly impossible to cross. Both Meta and Tesla are making audacious bets on AI that could fail spectacularly. Meta might burn billions on talent that never delivers breakthroughs. Tesla's robots might remain glorified factory tools. But that's precisely why these stocks belong in a never-sell portfolio. These aren't trades -- they're generational investments in the future of technology. And with both companies led by founders willing to risk everything on their vision, selling would be the real mistake. Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $400,193!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $38,264!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $687,731!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, available when you join , and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of June 23, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. George Budwell has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms, and Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Tech Stocks I'd Buy and Never Sell was originally published by The Motley Fool
