| Well, as long as it is run centrally, it can never be "global consciousness". Even if you trust Musk to run it in an open and transparent fashion, there is no guarantee that this will continue to happen after he's gone. The same forces that control the media (corporations, states) will continue to control Twitter policing. The idea that everything that is legal will be allowed on Twitter is great in Musk's head but it will be circumvented by shadow laws in the name of "national security" or "protecting the children" or something similar... and not necessarily in a transparent way because they can be marked "confidential"... and if Twitter fails to comply, the forces will get rid of it... or worse, those who run it. The only foolproof way to ensure free speech is to run it fully decentralized. It doesn't have to have unlimited history... one can archive important tweets if necessary. If that becomes successful though, the forces may target those who maintain the system... so they need to remain anonymous but give control to the community as soon as possible so that the system can continue to live even if they die by suicide with two bullets on the back of their heads. Also, if that successfully happens, the chipmakers will be targeted because the only way to fight the people will be to stop production of computers. So, that needs to be reasonably decentralized first. Fighting the globalist cartel and truly giving voice to the people is much more difficult than Musk and his followers in the issue seem to think. |
and yet, such a thing is already possible - in fact there's plenty of choices. None of them have taken off for various reasons.
I really don't believe a decentralized system works as the network effect fails to achieve domination under such a system (aka, competition from centralized network will out-compete it).