@khurt yes I agreed photography was not good analogy for the same reasons you state.
I don’t think the web should be just for those that know html and css but a lot of people now just consume the web. Including many kids via other wall gardens not FB/Twitter and naively they give up many rights because the free access comes at the cost of giving over data, that’s the default and I don’t agree with that.
I had a brief discussed with @Manton and @aaronpk around the idea of supporting private feeds so you could quickly build a private network through MB and an indie web viewer. Not sure if this is something the MB platform wants but agree that FB et al. very easy to sign up, consume and use. But we need alternatives and the comments on the original link give a nice timeline of where we have ended up and I think we can end up in other places.
Webs can be independent, subsets or supersets of each other. They can be local, regional or worldwide. The documents available on a web may reside on any computer supported by that web.
CERN software release statement
I think we should move back to the model of Webs and perhaps some of them are (if not already) Facebook or even what a Google search deems fit for you. Some are homepages, some are micro.blog. The web is in an interesting place and as the biggest communication platform in the world that most people only consume through the eyes of advertising revenue it’s a little annoying for sure.