Chris TrottierDec 6, 2022

Twitter is NOT the public square.

It literally exists on a server farm owned by Elon.

If he wants, he can literally pull the plug on Twitter.

No one should base their online life on that thing. Or anything owned by Meta, for that matter.

I've said this previously in a reply, but it deserves its own thread 🧵

Show threadChris TrottierDec 6, 2022

The following is a form of public square or can be made into one:

* Fediverse
* Email
* HTML pages

Twitter is NOT the public square because it is *physically* owned by Elon Musk. You can't start a Twitter instance.

Hence why the Fediverse is not the same as Twitter.

For example, on Mastodon, you can easily migrate to whatever instance is of your choosing, or you can host your own instance if you're willing to put in the work.

Show threadChris TrottierDec 6, 2022

Someone might say, "But people can own a Fediverse server."

Sure, but a key difference is that the Fediverse is built for redundancy.

Twitter has no redundancy.

If it were to have anything resembling redundancy, it would be Mastodon -- which is decidedly NOT Twitter.

You can set up a Fediverse server if you wanted to do that, which would build more redundancy.

You can't set up your own version of Twitter, though.

Thus, Twitter is *not* the public square -- but the Fediverse is.

Show threadChris TrottierDec 6, 2022

Some folks also say, "Wherever the public congregates, that's the public square."

I don't think that applies to Twitter.

When I say that Twitter is *physically* owned by Elon Musk, that's not a small thing. It's actually a big deal.

And that should tell you a big difference between the Fediverse and Twitter right there.

No one can pull the plug on the Fediverse.

Show threadChris TrottierDec 6, 2022

You can go ahead and say the public square is wherever the public congregates. But that means nothing when -- not if -- Elon Musk decides to pull the plug, and everything disappears.

Everything you do on Twitter is all under the aegis of Elon Musk's whims.

Nobody owns the Fediverse.

Nobody stops you from downloading all manners of Fediverse software -- almost all which is free -- and running it yourself.

Show threadChris TrottierDec 6, 2022

You know what I just realized?

Some people view "public" as "centralized and government owned."

They like Twitter because it's centralized and seemingly endorsed by governments.

Which is a notion that I fundamentally disagree with -- simply because I likewise disagree that the state and industry should merge into each other.

Show threadJake MillerDec 6, 2022
@atomicpoet I think we have a lot of different meanings in these words. For T==tPS, Public is not ownership, but about where people are and ease of access. Not just centralized but “centrally located in social systems.” The “Square” marks a mental space. Journalists using Twitter increases the sense of “public-ness” in a self-reinforcing way. This #publicsquare metaphor is important though. It’s why EM wanted to buy it. And even “the” is important in this metaphor! 1/3
Show threadJake MillerDec 6, 2022
@atomicpoet “The” Public Square implies singularity. So we have a desire for a single, shared cognitive space for… (whatever we do, which is a whole lot more different meanings.)
I think this indicates a need for greater cohesion *for new users* in the #Fediverse. Easier #search, maybe new ways to do #timelines, simpler #app on-ramp, etc. It looks fragmented from the start, and adds to the learning curve, and thus deters adoption. 2/3
Show threadChris CarlinDec 6, 2022

@jakemiller @atomicpoet
But The Public Square evolves out of analogy to squares in each town. There's one public square... per town, but there are many towns.

We have a desire for places with critical mass, with network effects, places where people we want to talk to will congregate to make communication practical.

That doesn't mean there has to be one single place, and having just one has its own issues

Federated instances providing different places to choose from satisfies this need better

Show threadJake Miller
@crcarlin @atomicpoet I agree - I think this is a solid architecture which produces some nice advantages! But I believe it also *can* replace Birdsite and users and society will be better off for it. But there are certain things that it is “for” which Mastodon today doesn’t do, which is why some people are experiencing disappointment. (Some, loudly.) Many do desire a unified national/global square, which Birdsite does imperfectly but better than others.
Dec 6, 2022 at 10:07pmWeb
Show threadJake MillerDec 6, 2022
@crcarlin @atomicpoet And I think for journalists in particular, in an era of defunding news organizations, Twitter became a critical part of their operations. Self-reinforcing! Mastodon isn’t that, but it doesn’t need to be. Alternate approaches could theoretically deliver enough value for those uses - and then users come to prefer the unique value of the Fediverse.
Show threadChris CarlinDec 6, 2022

@jakemiller @atomicpoet To clarify, do you mean a sense of national/global square that is created by the algorithms doing the curation?

I wonder what the difference is between what you're referring to here and the global tab (whatever it's called) in Mastodon where it shows content from everywhere.

Is the difference purely a matter of algorithm?

Show threadJake MillerDec 6, 2022
@crcarlin @atomicpoet Fundamentally, I mean that Twitter users have a sense of the site as a “singular place,” despite having unique feeds! But there are specific features like Trending Topics that some people will use, and that reinforce the idea that everyone has a shared experience.
I might be wrong, but I think you’re talking about the Federated feed. This shows basically what people on the instance are subscribed to, afaik.
Show threadJake MillerDec 6, 2022
@crcarlin @atomicpoet I think it’s a super powerful feature (but is not in the official iOS app!) because your Masto neighbors are the algorithm. The idea is reinforced by features but it’s really a shared mental model. Easier to support such a product concept in a more centralized system, but deliberate design decisions in a decentralized system could serve this concept too.
Show threadChris CarlinDec 6, 2022

@jakemiller @atomicpoet You might be touching on yet another thing now.

Where DO Twitter users get that sense of the site as a singular place? I think that's an attitude that I've come across, but for the life of me, I don't understand it.

I asked you if that sense of national/global square came came from algorithm's curation, but this might be something different, more related to marketing, giving users a feeling regardless of how the site actually functions.

Maybe Masto. needs branding? :)

Show threadJake MillerDec 6, 2022
@crcarlin @atomicpoet Yeah, this is a whole other thing, while being intricately related. I’ll just throw out one possible contributor: Kimmel’s Mean Tweets segments. It shows that randos can heckle celebrities on Twitter. So, “all one place.” And I’m actually curious what impacts those segments had on discourse on the site in the following day/week. But you have these design “affordances” too like a single handle namespace. All build the concept.