This is a really interesting perspective, and it makes intuitive sense. Because of my pre-existing biases, the conclusion I draw from this is that we have two possible goals:
- Reducing inequality through re-architecting these platforms (though Sangeet doesn’t suggest how, and I can’t really imagine any solutions at the moment).
- Accepting inequality as not inherently bad, and instead creating more opportunity for more platforms to exist, so that more people overall have the chance to take advantage of mechanics #3 and #4.
I have long believed that achieving equality of outcome is a fool’s errand and our society’s obsession with this is preventing the outcome that I would rather see: which is collective (net) increase in wealth and access. The “rising tide lifts all boats” metaphor. See: https://twitter.com/johanknorberg/status/786556446628610048
Decentralized platforms are how I envision my goal number 2 being achieved. Take cryptocurrencies as an example. Early adopters of Bitcoin have made out handsomely, but there have been many more cryptocurrencies created and adopted by wide enough markets that they have created wealth and value as well. The more access that people have to decentralized platforms, the more value that is created within them.