Tweet Thread 342

Here’s a blackpill for ya:

The Fake News revelation could not have happened without the (significant) tech centralization that preceded it.

Now here’s the sparkling galaxypill 🌌 to go with it:

Was the Fake News revelation a critical problem to both encounter and solve?

Or did we merely create it through our hasty and impatient efforts at centralization? 🤔

Will humanity EVER reach a level where we forego certain actions—immediately profitable, momentum-saving actions—because we know the consequences will consume more energy than the rewards could ever generate?

I am not bullish on this one, fam.

Please note:

The entire premise behind these statements is that the era of tech centralization was a bigtime money grab from every angle—founders, VCs, investors, the establishment, etc.

And it preserved existing momentum via the sunk cost fallacy.

Unfortunately, this now looks like a devil’s bargain because centralization is maximally efficient at one thing above all others:

Creating clear winners and losers.

Once this outlook becomes a little too crystalline—a little too obvious—the masses will revolt.

No exceptions.

I fail to see a scenario in which engaging in centralization for any length of time results in BETTER outcomes than just sticking with decentralization.

But I can certainly see how centralization can give the IMPRESSION of this reality…

Before the house of cards collapses.

Again, I have little to no confidence in humanity’s ability to overcome the basic tension between centralization and decentralization.

But based on history, it does appear that certain populations earn occasional 10–30 year periods to engage in meaningful decentralization.

God willing, we are in the earliest stages of one of these “decentralization epochs” right now.

But this time, it’s not just “Romans” or “Americans.”


We’ve literally never seen what’s coming next, fam.