I genuinely disagree. At this point, the only real way to make sure something like this stays worthwhile is when it is not 'super easy and convenient'. In other words, it has to take effort ( and obviously right now it does take effort and that effort ranks close to 'impossible' --- that should be pared down a bit ).

I think we're still missing an "open social" closed social network. Something like old-Facebook where you can post to an intimate audience of friends and family, and your feed isn't stuffed full of ads and influencers. Just a little private windows into your friends' lives.

That feels like something that could displace other social media in a way that's difficult for for-profit businesses to replicate since it goes against every product manager's instinct to leave engagement on the table, and would stand in stark contrast to the current social media landscape.

You may like Peergos (creator here) https://peergos.org/posts/decentralized-social-media

That looks really promising. It checks a lot of the boxes I already had in mind for such a system, like being able to continue a thread without exposing the whole thing to untrusted parties

Thanks! You can play around with it on https://peergos-demo.net

I wish I understood why people will pay for streaming tv subscriptions but not for social subscriptions.

I suppose social subscriptions have to overcome network effects and a plethora of “free” alternatives - ranging from iMessage to facebook.

I think at least one take on this is that people see it as paying for the content of streaming subscriptions, not the streaming infrastructure itself.

So the idea of paying for the infrastructure needed to see the content produced by your social network doesn't feel like a good deal.