RemiliaNET is a fundamentally different thing than Urbit. Urbit reinvents the personal computer with a sovereign ownership thesis around user control over computing infrastructure and a shared data model primarily for application communication. It's biggest challenge is the bespoke technical stack required to deliver this; it's essentially a new operating system, and that has a major engineering and funding lift to deliver without any specific user/social product. We're not building a new computer, but a new internet; it's a boring technology stack exploiting conventional web interfaces because the shared model is the relation and knowledge graph, not the application layer, allowing the actual client application's stack to be agnostic—there is no reason a full RemiliaNET client would not exist on Urbit or integrated into Urbit applications. This is possible in part because our ownership thesis is portability and openness, not control. It is consciously designed this way; not attempting to exit the current internet, but to build a wrapper, absorbing it in. The challenge then instead is entirely on developing the social and semantic graph to achieve runaway network effects. So the real question is, why does Remilia think it can launch a new social network to take on the titans, when the entire startup market has given up after a graveyard of a thousand tried and failed social? Setting aside the product's architecture being something that has never been tried before; and the current positioning of the web about to be inundated with a flood they have spent no serious time thinking about or preparing for; the real answer is—who else could do it, if not Remilia? Humanity has a narrow window to save the internet, and itself with it; and even if we don't step up to take the shot—who else will?