This is a really interesting perspective, and it makes intuitive sense.
Paul Gambill

Inequality is not inherently bad, and I do call out that it is essential to a meritocratic society. However, opportunity that is not democratized and that scales rapidly for a few lead to inequality that is not based on merit alone.

I’m not proposing that we go all out after solving this, but that platform owners should architect platforms to prevent hyperscaling for a few (unless they are outliers based on merit). my point is that if you ever want to solve this problem, look at architecture before you look at policy.

Having many platforms is a possible solution but portability of network and reputation (e.g. bring your instagram following to snapchat etc.) make it a rich-becomes-richer loop that works across platforms, not just within them.

I agree with your final point about decentralized governance. That is where I”m going with a second piece on this issue and that is where some of the architecture gets taken care of in the market-led governance mechanism.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.