[busterarm]

No offense, but I think all of these federation protocols are a massive waste of time. Everything is building on top of the existing. At the end of the day, nation states still control the links.

Also lack of free speech isn't the problem with Twitter, nor do federated services solve it (control over your identity is meaningless if noone will let you distribute your content). The problem with Twitter/social media is that it amplifies all of the negative aspects of social power.

Moving that to a federated protocol won't make the environment less toxic. There won't suddenly be less misinformation (on one side) or less censorship (on the other). Social media is rotten at its core and just shouldn't have a place in polite society.

The fact that Twitter is so popular/necessary among journalists is a feature -- the profession moved from working class to being a tool/playground of billionaires decades ago and the combination of publications and social media is how they enforce their worldview on masses. The most social-media savvy journalists (e.g. Carlos Maza, Taylor Lorenz, etc) come from ultra-wealthy families.

Jack Dorsey either fundamentally misunderstands that or is complicit and doesn't care.

If people really want "internet freedom", then we're going to have to fully embrace balkanization and be prepared to run completely parallel networks with separate root DNS and compelling content to make people use it. It's a pipe dream.

[micropresident]

Agree with you. However, Stamp is federated only for encrypted direct messages. The twitter-ish feeds are shared everything, and anyone can spin up a node. Anyone can post anything. Good luck taking it down from all the nodes.

That's the reason for the RPoW tokens, otherwise the platform would collapse from spam/DDoS.

Also, where you accept your DMs can move relatively quickly with the way the system is designed.