@nightpool@cybre.space @1br0wn @doctorow @cwebber I've seen interoperability as a compelling tool to inject competition into tech platforms for a while. FB beat the competition in the early 2010s and was rewarded with profits; but today it is profiting because users are locked in. Interoperability would give users more ability to switch and multi-home to try new services. If this had been in place, I'm sure people would have switched from FB during #StopHateForProfit. But it's hard to coordinate that move.
@mpanhans @nightpool @1br0wn @doctorow @cwebber
The entire reason for the social networks and platforms like YouTube was to reign in control and centralize the free/open web. Prior to this everyone had their own sites to do their own content and the technologies that would add more features were just around the corner. FB,YT,Twitter, WordPress etc have removed all independent ownership and replaced it with platforms as a service.
@nightpool@cybre.space @1br0wn @doctorow @cwebber But even if this happened, FB wouldn't play nice. If open social protocols had been established earlier, we could be in the equilibrium described in the article, with people on whatever social platforms they liked best. Instead we're stuck in this inferior equilibrium. But I think the transition cannot involve FB w/ its business model. We need to start from scratch. And I think the Fediverse is the most promising path to realizing that superior equilibrium.