Hacker News Reader

You would have a point if Twitter was a non profit, but it's a publically traded company and, thus, has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders to make money.

...because it costs money to run it? And it costs money to hire good talent to maintain it?

Yes, but I would imagine that cost is not too much. Why not make it into something like a public resource. Often that approach will generate more wealth for the greater community.

Often the for-profit model and fiduciary responsibility can be constraining in wealth creation in general.

Because in order to be brought into existence, young Twitter needed money, and the people who gave them that money did so in return for the right to vote on the future of the company, and the holders of those rights today vote for profit.

If you'd like to see a different kind of company, you should offer to invest in startups under more altruistic terms.