> Separate but equal was a dismal failure in the US.

It was not a failure, it was an lie that succeeded quite well at exactly what it was supposed to do, and was struck down for exactly that reason.

But there is a difference between de jure segregation of public services to assure that one community is underserved and crafting of commercial services to the serve a distinct set of preferences associated with a particular demographic.

I think you may be horrified to learn that American schools are still segregated

https://www.epi.org/publication/schools-are-still-segregated...

> These data show that only about one in eight white students (12.9%) attends a school where a majority of students are black, Hispanic, Asian, or American Indian. (We refer to this group collectively as students of color hereafter.) In contrast, nearly seven in 10 black children (69.2%) attend such schools (see Figure A).

That seems less like segregation and more of just statistics. If black students are a minority, then by definition they won't be a majority in a random subsample.

> As shown in Figure B, black students are also in economically segregated schools. Less than one in three white students (31.3%) attend a high-poverty school, compared with more than seven in 10 black students (72.4%).

That's probably the stronger argument in your link. That outcome isn't surprising given that most school funds come via property taxes - if most economically depressed areas are minority occupied due to lower costs, then those same schools would also be economically depressed.

Keep going! How did there come to be schools that were predominantly black? Why is school funding tied to property taxes? Why isn't there a level of mobility that would allow students to go to a more well funded school? Who made these policies and why?

> How did there come to be schools that were predominantly black?

The residents in their area are mostly black.

> Why is school funding tied to property taxes?

That's how most of your city is funded.

> Why isn't there a level of mobility that would allow students to go to a more well funded school?

There is? Like, you can move to a different school district but it's going to be more expensive. Nobody is preventing you.

> Who made these policies and why?

It's not clear what policies you are referring to. That we fund things via property taxes?

Was it really equal the last time around? As a thought experiment, which is better: amalgamated but unequal or voluntarily separate but truly equal?

There are apps that cater to comic book fans, are they promoting the comic nerd divide? What is wrong with a service that caters to a content niche? Separate but equal is only a bad thing when people cannot choose which of the two systems they select into. A black person can choose to get regular netflix instead of this niche service.

it’s bad because it create a bubble. It’s like the instagram for republican (parler). It turned into a social network for dangerous extremist very fast and is one of the reason the capital got attacked

I guess it's time to ban HN and force everyone onto reddit then, because HN is a bubble.

I disagree with your implicit assumption that all bubbles are inherently negative.

While HN is a bubble it will not result in burning the country to the ground. The problem is when polarization create war between 2 camp.

Is this still about BlackOakTV?

Regardless, who decides which category a site/app falls into? There are legal remedies that can fix literal "war between 2 camps", everything else is freedom of expression.

The reality is that most of the country remains extremely segregated.