Over two decades into social media, I still see nothing I want from it as a user. Removing toxicity doesn't change that. > It requires a fundamental change fro

Over two decades into social media, I still see nothing I want from it as a user. Removing toxicity doesn't change that. > It requires a fundamental change from the reach model towards concentric social circles. The social network would allow users to arrange into small topical groups called social circles. These social circles would have a cap of 10 (arbitrary number) members. Each user could take part in many social circles. This inherently limits reach and therefore reduces the burden of misinformation, abuse, and moderation. I have group texts that work basically that way. Maybe group texts could be improved in some ways, but you haven't described anything that would be an improvement. In a sense, the killer features of WhatsApp or Signal are basically just that: making text messages work internationally and privately. > This model closely mirrors real social interactions and allows for both private and intimate communication. It also offers a profitable advertising opportunity. A social circle reflects its members’ interests and context. From the user's perspective: fuck advertising, and fuck advertisers. If I want a product I'll go looking for information about it, and even then I'm not interested in hearing from you, because you're not exactly an unbiased source of information. Advertisers are liars: even when they're not actively lying, they're misleading by leaving out relevant information about competing products. As long as your social media platform is in bed with advertisers, it's going to be fundamentally broken, because that money is going to force you to serve advertisers and not users. You can't serve both well--their interests are not compatible. Either you're serving advertisers and helping them lie to users, or you're serving users by keeping advertisers away from them.