X Is a Power Problem, Not a Platform Problem – Connected Places

X is "a power problem, and why you cannot compete as platforms with power... The world’s richest man runs a subscription service to remove the clothing from photographs of children ... [and] it’s crickets... Society is going through the motions of vocal condemnation... then not enforcing anything... ... very clearly afraid of picking a fight with Elon Musk and a belligerent US regime...

X is both protected by US state power, as well as being a source of US state power... ‘guess our government communications now happens on a deepfake porn site’ is maddening... [but] shows that X is ... the internal coordination space for a political faction that now controls state power".

Using it as a public square, as the vast majority of users do, simply "legitimates X’s new role, facilitating the power of the neo-royalty... the small network of political, capital, and tech elites centered on Trump... X is their coordination infrastructure".

Whether you're on X or not, you can't escape that power, so Masto/Bluesky cannot compete - X is no longer in the same social media business. Leaving will "reduce its legitimacy. But ... will be taken as an offensive action by the US... likely triggering extensive retaliation", which no country wants to risk: "Everyone is waiting on everyone else to take the first move". He sees three possible outcomes:

• noone moves, and things get worse;
• a government sticks its head above the parapet and gets it shot off, dissuading the others
• a government sticks its head above the parapet "creating a permission structure for others"

The third "creates an opening for open social networks to not just be an alternative, but to be a source of political power as well".

I see a fourth: a bunch of countries take action at the same time. It would be tempting to say the EU 27 (although 25 is more likely), but instinctively it would be better if it was individual countries acting in concert.