I watched her talk and she is clearly not being honest. She uses a lot of buzzwords without any of the deeper philosophical underpinnings that would be necessary to truly create an open platform.
She plays like it will always be the way it is now which is frankly a lie being a for-profit entity with startup money from crypto bros.
Their terms of service will be changed when it suits them and already allow for their complete control of anything you share with them. Retaining your copyright means nothing if they can do whatever they want with what you share with them.
Finally we see the coupe de grace of binding arbitration in their terms. This is just another corporate attempt to be the next big social media thing. They will be hovering up all your personal details and selling it to marketers and AI bros before you can finishing signing on.
It’s a company, they need to make a profit. that’s fair enough when you sell an actual service or good, but in this care you just rent out a platform for people to talk from, financed by shareholders.
Renting out a speech platform for money from shareholders and being open and fair are not compatible with eachother. Even if she is genuine, she will have to respond to shareholders, she will need to make as much money as possible.
Shareholders are almost never a good thing, but for internet platforms, they’re the worst
