Evergreen reminder that if this type of crypto actually fostered decentralization and community ownership, Twitter would not be investing in it. This is the sam

Evergreen reminder that if this type of crypto actually fostered decentralization and community ownership, Twitter would not be investing in it. This is the same company that has gone out of its way to shut down 3rd-party clients, that suppresses user agency by using phone numbers for account verification, that has progressively tightened and tightened its developer APIs over time. We generally know what Twitter's position is on Open access and community ownership over platforms already. There's no reason to believe that Twitter is actually interested in decentralization, there's no reason to believe that Twitter is interested in a social media landscape where Twitter has less power. And that should make you a little bit suspicious of the things they promote, it should make you a little bit suspicious of whether or not these technologies are actually going to decentralize these platforms in a meaningful way. But if the Twitter team wants to prove me wrong, they're welcome to invest into Mastodon or build official bridge APIs or allow users to pull Mastodon timelines into their main Twitter timeline. They could do some real federation and actual decentralization here, since they claim to care about it so much. They could open up their APIs and make them more easily accessible, or add back support for 3rd-party clients. This is like when Facebook talks about Open standards inside a metaverse; y'all blocked Instagram accounts from linking to other social networks, you really expect us to believe you'd back a product that encourages competition?