Another stupid hot take about the Fediverse. This time courtesy of Megan McArdle from the Washington Post.

Apparently, Mastodon is doomed because it solves problems most users don't care about.

Just like Linux is a failure—because only hobbyists and IT professionals use it.

Except—unknown to Megan—Linux is a huge success which runs on everything (including your router).

Also Megan seems unaware that the *actual* problem with social media really is centralization.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/01/17/twitter-mastodon-replacement-social-media/

Twitter might be replaced, but not by Mastodon or other imitators

Twitter's successor will probably be something not much like Twitter at all.

The Washington Post

I'm so tired of these journalist hot takes about the Fediverse.

Elon Musk has declared war on journalists, banned them outright—including journalists from the Washington Post.

So what do these bottom feeders do?

Suck on the teat of Twitter all the more while bad-mouthing an actual solution that can save their dying industry.

What gets me is that the Washington Post made big hoopla about starting their own instance.

And a few weeks after the media's narrative changes, they publish a big article about why Mastodon sucks.

As I've already demonstrated today, that narrative isn't even based on facts—it's pure fiction created by the Guardian to justify staying on Big Social.

This is why no one should trust the Press to educate the masses about the Fediverse.

They will not give a fair assessment.

Instead, they will look at it as conflicting with their interests—and will spin up a narrative that coincides with their interests.

They don't want the Fediverse to succeed because it's not run by corporate interests.

And that's the subtext in Megan McArdle's article.

@atomicpoet Exactly!

It doesn't actually conflict with their interests, but they would have to put in some real work to be mainstream here.

That whole "not leaving the comfort zone" thing.