The biggest hurdle is the vast VAST majority of people do NOT want to host or run anything, which means there is varying levels of centralization, which introduces the issues people have had.
No it doesn't. The architecture of the platform (like the crummy one that undergirds Mastodon) is what leads to that. Again: microblogs don't need to be any more complicated than a static site.
If you have the latest issue of Creed Thoughts in your word processor, then it's easier than ever to get a URL for it. Choose ".html" when you hit "Save As..." rather than ".docx", and then sign up for one of the unending supply free static file hosts.
This is already way past the "average" user; for millions even the configurability of MySpace was a bridge too far.
There is an argument that people who can't be bothered to figure it out probably have nothing interesting to say, and that may be true in the vast majority of cases, it's not universally true; I'm sure we can find quite interesting social media accounts posted by someone who doesn't have the inclination or time to figure out "free static file hosts".
My thinking is that it would be a bit like email: run your own server if you want, and the other 99% can use any of the zillion hosting services that exist or would crop up to do it for you with the ease of Gmail.
If you have the latest issue of Creed Thoughts in your word processor, then it's easier than ever to get a URL for it. Choose ".html" when you hit "Save As..." rather than ".docx", and then sign up for one of the unending supply free static file hosts.