Yeah it's kind of strange to think about, honestly. We're so close. All the tech is there and well-understood. Yet nobody seems to have made it, yet. But I gue

Yeah it's kind of strange to think about, honestly. We're so close. All the tech is there and well-understood. Yet nobody seems to have made it, yet. But I guess I should be more clear about the pitch because I know it's a little obtuse. Rather than thinking about a centralized blogging platform as the solution, I see that as only one part (the lesser part) of the solution. The other part is the aggregation sites. So, for the centralized blogging, you get seamless, free, hosted (no domain), and ANONYMOUS blogging (no registrations to track you). Easy sign up, collects many users, and broadcasts them to the aggregation sites. The aggregation site, on the other hand, doesn't do any moderation, doesn't do any comment handling, doesn't do any filtering. It just collects a list of urls that people want to subscribe to (so that those urls can be advertised to others), and negotiates with those blog urls to get the other endpoints that will allow for realtime commenting and interaction with the blog, itself. The centralized blog would be a lot like twitter, and it would handle its own content moderation, just like any large host would. But "power users" would have their own blogs which, when rendered as iframes, provides them with the entire publishing power of the internet. That kind of richer content serves as a reason for people who want to make a living on the internet to move away from the centralized blog(s; no reason others couldn't advertise their own apis to the aggregates; twitter included!) and on to their own servers. So yeah! I see some value there, at least. An 'on-ramp to self publishing', as it were. Without the ever-present threat that your host can de-platform you (without recourse).