Can Big Social just swoop in and take over the Fediverse on a whim?
Realistically, that can't happen.
1. Pivoting a big business is like captaining an aircraft carrier: it is slow and takes deliberation
2. Most businesses don't like to kill their cash cow, and the network effect that they own is their cash cow
3. Big Social itself is in disarray and doesn't have the wherewithal to make good strategic decisions
And there's other reasons too! 🧵
@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. :)
@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.
@strypey @atomicpoet So, it is warring city states. I'll have to think on this.
@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 :)
@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.