Not that I believe this will be how the future turns out, but what if the main users of websites end up being agents? Then adopting the standard ends up being a requirement for survival instead of something negative.
Hopefully and ideally we don't end up there, because then the internet will surely suck for us humans, but I'm not so sure the whole "make platforms/websites open up for the machines" will necessarily fail yet again because of the same issues, can very well be different this time.
Now imagine doing that but instead jumping 50 years into the future. Surely most of the "highly valuable knowledge work" at that point will look just as alien to us today as today would look to someone from 50 years ago.
The dissassociation is the same confusing/confounding thing.
I love it when the people who just want to use technology to benefit humanity as a whole are dimly regarded as "starry-eyed idealists."
> because it will separate the site from its users, sites will obviously not do it.
Sites don't generate their own users. Users must discover sites. This allows a third party to dictate terms to them. Which we already know happens.
> especially if the water is obvious poison.
Alcohol exists. I think you might want to put away the "perfectly rational" assumptions about humanity.
It will hit exactly the same walls too, namely that the technical details are completely irrelevant - if adopting a standard is actually a negative for websites, because it will separate the site from its users, sites will obviously not do it.
You can lead the horse to water but you cannot make it drink, especially if the water is obvious poison.