I agree with the core of your point. I’d like to assert, though, that all people exert some level of self-censorship in public on the basis of the opinions of their neighbors and peers. Having to worry about powerful organizations like governments and megacorps also always being there (instead of just sometimes, or usually) adds a new degree of reason to self-censor, for sure.

I don’t want to have to keep up with the current styles of SmartGlasses from however many makers of these things there are at any given time. I am happy to outsource this awareness to someone I can find good reason to trust to provide me the info I need. Just like I don’t make my own vaccines, because I have no idea how to get the 5G that small.

Warning: there is probably a bunch of phones near you right now.

I’m with you. Made a comment recently, here or elsewhere, that a huge thing to happen with social spaces over time is that trustworthy sources of information have a chance to really prove themselves as such. So when you rip apart one platform and scatter its users, you destroy that earned credibility and leave a lot of people without at least some of their reliable news sources. That’s most harmful to people looking for actual truth, since people willing to swallow comfortable lies don’t really need the providers of information to be vetted.

The conclusion to all this is that keeping social platforms from building large, long-term communities is a very effective way to keep people who seek truth from finding it.

I suppose, but only about insofar as the U.S. is a branch of the British Empire.

I imagine you’re focused on for-profit companies