Got access to WT.social. Still a little frustrated that they get so much press for what is another silo, like a more-editable Reddit. And the good parts — we do need more smaller social networks — is offset by the founder saying he wants to grow to 50 million users.
@manton How big do you think a social network can get before it’s no longer small? 50 million is obviously huge but it’s also less than 1% of the world population.
I guessed at 50,000 for the “as big as small can be” number and that makes 140,000 networks for all ~7 billion of us.
I don’t necessarily know what I think about all this other than big numbers are confusing. 🤯🙃🧠
@jeffmueller Yeah, I hate to knock down another small company's idea, but it doesn't seem well thought out, and in fact runs counter to many things the IndieWeb community (and M.b) has learned. If WT.social does find a valuable solution in what they're building, I think it's going to be by accident.
@Bruce That's a great question. Another data point: the main Mastodon instance, which I expect many people already consider much too big, is 415k users.
@Bruce And it's unlikely people would belong to only one social network. Definitely room for, quite literally, millions of social networks. Enough that no single network would be overally influential.
@manton Maybe the people behind this can provide some disreputable sources to cite in the inevitable wikipedia entry about how it failed to reach even the smallest of its lofty goals.
@dgreene196 @Bruce Yes, we really need to escape this fetish (sponsored and promoted by the massive corporate social silos) that we must have everything all in one place and return to a (better) version of the way things were before, where we all participated in many small(er), focused communities, unconnected to each other save through our own participation.
