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! 🧵

Big Social are no longer the innovators they were.

In actuality, for the past 10 years, most innovations in social media have been created by small, nimble players—which Big Social then attempts to either acquire or copy.

In essence, they've replaced R&D with M&A.

Thus, they probably have nothing new to add to the Fediverse.

The Fediverse is one thing that Big Social cannot acquire or copy.

No one owns the Fediverse, so that's not an option.

And to copy or integrate the Fediverse is to kill their own cash cows.

In essence, the Fediverse targets the chunk in their armour.

@atomicpoet What do you think about the possibility of a few big service providers coopting it via expansive services? The example is email/Gmail . What if Google skinned Mastodon with Gastodon? Not a walled garden, just a front end. You could still talk to the entire Fediverse, through Gastodon with slicker UI and features, and they host the data.

@mastodonmigration Google has a terrible track record with social, so I'm not worried about them.

And if someone else, like Apple, wanted to create an instance that actually federates, that's good. But they better behave themselves or they'll be on the Fediblock.

That said, I don't think they'll want to federate.