> I don't know why people would communicate in public spaces if they don't want to interact with the public. Isn't that the entire point? These 'social network

> I don't know why people would communicate in public spaces if they don't want to interact with the public. Isn't that the entire point? These 'social networks' the link speaks to may rely on the public to function, but that is just an implementation detail, not the point. The point is to submit your not-fully-formed thoughts into a piece of software and have it come back with details you have overlooked so that you can come to better understand the topic. However, the software it speaks to becomes buggy at scale, going off on random tangents that have nothing to do with anything, failing to stay true to speaking to details you have overlooked. It proposes that there is no way to scale that software to avoid such tangents because the implementation is ultimately, and fundamentally, flawed.