[bubblewrap]

There are already options for decentralized social media. So clearly the majority of people is not in favor of using them, or they would simply do so (without a strike).

Therefore, this is about a minority trying to force the majority of people to adapt to their preferences.

I can not sympathize with such a cause, even though I personally would prefer decentralized solutions.

It reminds me of the town that voted to ban Amazon - when they could just have shopped locally to begin with. Weird, really.

[gilcardenas]

I think you're oversimplifying people.

Lots of people want to lose weight while also loving the taste of delicious food that makes them gain weight. Same with smoking, drinking, recycling, etc.

It really comes down to the cost on people to do something.

If your building didn't provide a recycling bin, you probably wouldn't take the trouble to take all your recycling to a recycling facility.

If none of your friends used social media, chances are you wouldn't either.

[bubblewrap]

Decentralized Social Media already exists, like the recycling bins at our apartment complex.

The problem is the network effect. But then who are the protestors protesting to? They should protest to their friends to switch over to decentralized SM. Maybe they are just not important enough to have their friends follow them to better services?

Instead of going on a strike, why not evangelize those solutions to your friends?

As for losing weight: it is true that sometimes people like to have their hands forced. It is called an Ulysses contract, from Ulysses tying himself to the mast so that he couldn't jump into the sea to follow the sirens.

Calling for the government in the case of Social Media seems way overblown, though. There are no health issues involved like with unhealthy food. And for unhealthy food, people make those choices by buying smaller packages or using different shops. Arguably not really a case for government intervention, either.