Twitter as a City-State

if you come from a culture where the ‘argument is war’ metaphor pervades thought and language, then you’ll defend your position at all costs and attack your opponent with the hopes of total victory. But if you come from a culture where argument is seen as a dance, perhaps your behavior and expectations would radically change.

what would federalism look like on Twitter—could the network be split into regions that have some degree of local autonomy?

just as in physical territory, online territory starts out as default autocratic, then only can become democratic through revolt, revolution, and reform. 

I think the internet is more like land. In this metaphor:URLs ~= PlacesLinks ~= RoadsNetworks ~= City-states

I don’t think ‘public utility’ is the most useful metaphor to understand what Twitter and its peers actually are.Public utilities make sense when the product is a simple commodity, essential for everyday life, and delivered through a set of pipes that are incredibly expensive to install and maintain.

What would happen if online networks adopted these principles of governance? You can imagine all sorts of interesting configurations. For example, what would federalism look like on Twitter—could the network be split into regions that have some degree of local autonomy? What would happen if Twitter established a legislature? What if you could run f... See more

1. Ensure everyone is equally subject to and protected by the law (judicial) 2. Allow everyone to influence the law (legislative) 3. Elect leaders to enforce the laws and operate the public infrastructure (executive).

There are three core jobs-to-be-done of a democracy:

Most of the people who talk about user ownership of networks are focused on creating new city-states based on blockchain technology and egalitarian ideals, but comparatively little attention has been paid to reforming existing networks based on these same principles. I think this is a mistake.

So if URLs are like land, and dense networks are like city-states, then what form of governance is appropriate? Probably not the autocracies we live with today. Most people probably want rulers to be bound by law, enforced by an impartial judiciary, and shaped by democratic legislative principles.