> The anti-federation argument has always been that centralized entities have the resources to make a better product. I wouldn't phrase it like that. I'd say

> The anti-federation argument has always been that centralized entities have the resources to make a better product. I wouldn't phrase it like that. I'd say 'The anti-federation reality has always been that centralized entities have the authority to more quickly evolve their product.' Whereas federated models have always had a terrible time upgrading standards in a timely manner, even when upgrades are obviously needed. However, products typically exist in distinct phrases -- rapid growth/evolution is eventually followed by stability/maturity. Once the product switches to that latter mode, the evolutionary speed benefits of centralization dull. Obvious example: AOL Instant Messenger and ICQ's initial popularity... before multi-client Trillian et al. became preferable... because the limited intersection feature set it supported already covered everything everyone wanted to do via IMs. Reddit reached feature completion and maturity a while ago, which made it ripe for disruption via a decentralized clone. However, they're just realizing the emperor has no clothes and their only remaining moat is their existing users, and users are a fickle moat.