Yeah, I think we largely agree. I'm mostly aiming for #2, because I'm hoping that if we can get enough people using something that's hard to centralize, network

Yeah, I think we largely agree. I'm mostly aiming for #2, because I'm hoping that if we can get enough people using something that's hard to centralize, network effects will take care of #1. Consider email for example: I think the main reason it's stuck around with us for so long is that we're at the point where being reachable by email is just expected. With everyone using email, someone trying to replace it with a centralized option would need to get everyone on board, while someone who wants to interoperate with email in general doesn't have that issue. ISPs and phone companies are similar; nobody's going to start one that can't interoperate with the others nowadays. The public wouldn't stand for it, even if they couldn't explain why in terms of the underlying protocols. While I would certainly love it if we could get people to care about open protocols, I think getting enough adoption of an open protocol would really be sufficient, so long as it's not easy for one big player to lock it down. (Google Talk for example; it was XMPP, but Google was the only player that mattered then as far as the public was concerned. Matrix is in a better position than that now.)