> Or they’re only better ideologically, and in that case, only valuable to those who share the same ideology. Which is fine if the market for that ideology is big ... But other markets, like decentralized social media, make no money, because very few people care about their social media being centralized. They care a lot more about it being entertaining and insightful.
He's perfectly described Mastodon. A magnificent solution in search of a problem aimed at catering to ants. Hence the dominoes of instances shutting down one after another.
I don't know, Mastodon seems to do what it intends to do quite well. I don't find the fact that it's not taken over the world that big of a problem.
Mastodon is in my view ideological in the design and of course most attractive to people who share that particular ideology. And that's quite a lot.
I find it very refreshing compared to Twitter: it doesn't want to maximize engagement, it doesn't want me to follow more and more people. It's a boring tool that does a job quite well, which is exactly what I want from it.
He's perfectly described Mastodon. A magnificent solution in search of a problem aimed at catering to ants. Hence the dominoes of instances shutting down one after another.