I don’t agree. We’re not talking about a person or a charity. We’re talking about a VC-backed company. They can fuck off and die, and it’s not toxic – it’s just common sense.
But two corporate entities competing are better than one secure in it’s market share. Anyone with any sense would reject both for a fediverse option if it could be made to work well enough obviously but still.
Only marginally… maybe. Duopolies are still really shitty for consumers and that’s the best outcome to this. Significantly better would be if more people would realise what made internet amazing in the beginning and that logical consequences from that are that public spaces in the internet where the content comes from the people should be owned by the people.
I don’t agree. We’re not talking about a person or a charity. We’re talking about a VC-backed company. They can fuck off and die, and it’s not toxic – it’s just common sense.
But two corporate entities competing are better than one secure in it’s market share. Anyone with any sense would reject both for a fediverse option if it could be made to work well enough obviously but still.
Only marginally… maybe. Duopolies are still really shitty for consumers and that’s the best outcome to this. Significantly better would be if more people would realise what made internet amazing in the beginning and that logical consequences from that are that public spaces in the internet where the content comes from the people should be owned by the people.