The “Stratchery” newsletter proposes a sophisticated scheme to split Twitter into two companies, with core Twitter retaining control of the social graph and underlying infrastructure, but relaxing their control of the end-user’s UI experience, advertising, and content moderation. Those endpoint presentation services would be provided by numerous companies competing in the free market. Ultimately there is a vision for Twitter to evolve into essentially an internet standard for notifications, supporting many uses that sometimes look nothing like today’s Twitter.
I’m not sure if it would be altruistically good for the world to loosen control in this way and open up Twitter via APIs (although it would certainly help avoid undue censorship on the free exchange of ideas). But it’s an interesting analysis of Twitter’s business situation.
The “Stratchery” newsletter proposes a sophisticated scheme to split Twitter into two companies, with core Twitter retaining control of the social graph and underlying infrastructure, but relaxing their control of the end-user’s UI experience, advertising, and content moderation. Those endpoint presentation services would be provided by numerous companies competing in the free market. Ultimately there is a vision for Twitter to evolve into essentially an internet standard for notifications, supporting many uses that sometimes look nothing like today’s Twitter.
I’m not sure if it would be altruistically good for the world to loosen control in this way and open up Twitter via APIs (although it would certainly help avoid undue censorship on the free exchange of ideas). But it’s an interesting analysis of Twitter’s business situation.
In our case we’re planning an open graph architecture, with users able to fork/spawn subnets.