Not the OP, but their comment and your question got me thinking. Sometimes I get the sense that true decentralization could get people to 90% of how they actua

Not the OP, but their comment and your question got me thinking. Sometimes I get the sense that true decentralization could get people to 90% of how they actually use things like Twitter/X, and federation (including major hubs) gets you to the remaining 10%. What I often see is people following a certain number of people, often those they "know", either in real life or online, supplemented by a smaller number of bigger, more distant sources. Along these lines, what I could see working is something that's like Matrix, but where explicit groups/rooms aren't there, and defined implicitly by social networks. A bridge between something like bluesky and matrix. I think the "dark forest" part comes in with the idea that maybe a certain lack of knowledge is ok, or inevitable, just like the real world, and therefore is an acceptable cost to allow even more truly decentralized systems? I'm just thinking out loud, so maybe I am really off. But I often feel real world social dynamics are some kind of decentralized peer to peer and federated hybrid, and a platform with those characteristics could be successful if it got key elements right.