> This inherently limits reach and therefore reduces the burden of misinformation
I have no interest in any social network who's primary concern is limiting the spread of information. I don't care if you are scared of "misinformation". You want to restrict the spread of "good" information because you are scared of misinformation? That's the wrong solution to the problem. The correct solution is to spread your "good" information and education people on how to think critically. Censorship isn't the answer to stupidity.
But no one is interested in limiting himself to 10 people or so.
It is not only about Elon or Ye - even grandmas want to have a thrill of publishing post that will reach hundreds of people. Social network that limits outgoing communication has 0 chance of success. Social network that has great tools for limiting what I want to see has some possibility. Ideal social network would be one where I don't need to use any tools to see what I want ... which I think is the idea behind algorithmic feeds they came up with ... unfortunately these algorithmic feeds turned out to be not what "I want to see" but "what they want to show me" or "who paid the most to stuff his things into users faces".
I have no interest in any social network who's primary concern is limiting the spread of information. I don't care if you are scared of "misinformation". You want to restrict the spread of "good" information because you are scared of misinformation? That's the wrong solution to the problem. The correct solution is to spread your "good" information and education people on how to think critically. Censorship isn't the answer to stupidity.