On threads:
Right now, it sucks and it's aggresively stupid.
The biggest question on the table here: How much do we believe in the power of the idea and practice of federation.
I'm optmistic and believe it's entirely possible that the best thing happens: Meta doesn't take over, but the opposite, "federation" infects threads and the like and we win this thing.
(again, I'm a fediverse maximalist, I want it to be the new twitter)
@jrm4 I don't think it's a zero sum game, though.
We can both win, with Fediverse and Threads serving different user bases and even benefiting from each other.
Absolutely -- that is what I intended by "win" though I didn't say it clearly. We have different likely "endgames?"
More like "meta the company" would probably like to take over, but "the fediverse" (even in my ideal maximalist state) can't or would never really be like that.
I want us to be the most popular thing because I think it's the safest way to do this, not because I want a high score or something.
@jrm4 but again, since they're independent platforms providing different user experiences that better serve different user bases, I don't think the popularity comparison is very meaningful.
If the Meta user experience is better at serving more users, even while the Fediverse user experience is better at serving others, then great! Meta SHOULD be more popular since that means more users better served.
And yet that popularity comparison doesn't in any way take away from Fediverse serving us.
Let each platform serve their users the best regardless of how those numbers compare.
That's how to get the most users the best experiences.
