Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales Is Working On A Twitter Rival.

[usonian]

10. To me, it's a matter of whether you want community or "infinite reach"

A human can relate meaningfully to no more than 150 people.

By associating with like-minded people, you can have some influence in order to make things better.

Plus, I really choose to keep garbage out of my brain. Just being aware of stuff, in a "Wikipedia" kind of way, is enough to help me do positive things.

Like DU:


Or like twitter:


Some things, especially ideas, deserve to be quality ones.
Like physicians! Go for cheap and mass-produced?

Not so good.


We're mostly middle-class (or what's left of it) or retired, on DU
But I do get a sense that our good ideas find their way into the bully pulpit or the hands of influential (translation:rich) people.

Just found this:
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/elon-musk-exposes-the-truth/
Elon Musk exposes the truth -- Nobody is happy with the private public square.
Open Rights Group
CC license, free to reprint in its entirety:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

The basic problem, as we have spelt out many times, is that:

Moderation of content at scale is extremely difficult; and
The attention business model pushes provocative content as it engages users

What users need is pretty clear. They need greater control over what content they receive, how it is prioritised and how it is presented. The way this is done, in a digital world, is to create more “open” systems that allow third parties to repurpose, filter and represent content in ways that users want. This can and should include better ways to moderate content.

A few years ago, a number of people who were very unhappy with what they perceive as the toxic environment on Twitter decided to create Mastodon, a platform which prides itself on ensuring a much more welcoming environment. It provides features like user “content warnings”.

However, the really clever thing about Mastodon is that it is not is single website, with a single moderator. Rather, it is many services that talk to each other. The result is that moderation on Mastodon services is much better. Small numbers of people police other people. So far it has managed to scale to around 5 million users. Given the low toleration given to abuse and negligent servers, this seems to work pretty well.

There is a lot to explain and think about with the concept of ‘federated social media’, but to make it simpler, think about email – which is not owned by a single company, but works across many and any; or even your mobile telephone, which can call any other telephone, regardless of the network.

Federated social media is not owned by a single company and cannot be bought or sold, even if individual services can. This places users in a much better relationship with their providers, because it is possible to move provider without losing your networks and contacts.

In principle, there is no reason why Mastodon could not federate with Twitter. It is Twitter’s choice to prevent this. Of course, it suits Twitter to keep its users within a walled garden. To do otherwise would create new competition and allow some users to move away.

Monopoly: BIG
Monopoly: You have no value, nor influence. Monopolies buy politicians first, their "lever of control"