Hacker News Reader

It's about portability isn't it. Removes lock in. You can shop for a host for your social data but retain the data [in part] under your control. You get some leverage. It's commoditisation of social network as a service.

"For this to get traction, it'll need at least one server with a strong user base."

Sooooo...Facebook basically.

Not if you can leave and keep your network of friends.

If 99% of your friends keep their data in Facebook, you're still dependent on Facebook.

why one server? the whole point is that you can communicate seamlessly with people on other servers.

Pretty much everyone who's been banned from Facebook or G+ wants this, although they may not realize it.