@atomicpoet Ok, I'm not getting a clear answer on this. Could a groupthink institution like NASA or The Guardian set up a paid subscription instance, and block everything in and out? That would be a great way for people to make money, and you wouldn't have to worry about Google taking over everything. :)
@strypey @atomicpoet So, it is warring city states. I'll have to think on this.
@strypey @atomicpoet Ok, so here are bursts of short philosophy. I tend to view things on a long scale. Mastodon is a bunch of code, and not a Principle. Open source was a principle, and benefited the world. FB and bird made the world worse. We need a principle, such as "Freedom to Read". That would be fighting city states with Reformation coffee houses, which relied on smuggled papers, and lots of caffeine.
@hasmis
> Mastodon is a bunch of code
... and the community around its dev and use.
> Open source was a principle
More like a PR strategy for people pushing software freedom. But I'm splitting hairs. I agree it...
> benefited the world
> FB and bird made the world worse. We need a principle
Freedom to interoperate? Freedom to leave?
> That would be fighting city states with Reformation coffee houses
I'm not sure city-states weren't the better model. All for coffee houses :)
@hasmis
Paid subscription instances already exist, eg cloudisland.nz. Completely defederated instances already exists, eg counter.social, and a couple of sites associated with the alt-right that I refuse to name (all publicity is good publicity).
How is any of this a threat? Subscriptions are a more ethical business model for social media than DataFarming. Stand-alone instances are as threatening to the 'verse as Discourse forums or any other self-hosted silo.
@atomicpoet