Non classé

People in activism

In the coming era of #climatechaos the problem of #mainstreaming thinking and people will become a MUCH bigger issue that we need to mediate. This “common sense” is the #deathcult so we do need to do something with the #NGO crew and “activists” who worship this cult.

There is also the issue that needs mediating of the parasitic activists who push #fahernista paths in the grassroots movements. These guys are BAD friends, there are a lot of them. They are “native” being a part of the tribe in this its a question of balance to take a good path.

Non classé

The mess we keep making of #FOSS governance

It’s disheartening to see a community platform like Trustroots facing challenges with governance, leading to issues and tensions among its contributors and here This situation mess underscores the importance of establishing healthy governance practices within community-driven projects to ensure their long-term sustainability and effectiveness.

The case of Trustroots alongside the earlier issue of CouchSurfing serves as a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of traditional vertical #FOSS foundation/ #NGO models for open-source projects. These models may initially foster collaboration and innovation but become susceptible to internal conflicts and power struggles over time.

The #OGB (Open Governance Body) suggests an alternative approach rooted in a more grassroot and inclusive ethos. By embracing “producer” sortation, decentralized decision-making and community-led initiatives, projects like #OGB aim to avoid the pitfalls associated with hierarchical governance structures

Overall, examining case studies like Trustroots and CouchSurfing offer insights into the complexities of managing community platforms and the importance of fostering transparent, inclusive, and participatory governance processes to sustain healthy and thriving communities.

We can’t keep making this same mess.

Non classé

A conversation that circles

Conversation revolves around the intersection of technology and social issues, with one side emphasizing the importance of practical solutions to real-world problems, while the other highlights the underlying social dynamics that shape technological landscapes.

The first prioritize pragmatic problem-solving, expressing a preference for concrete solutions to specific issues rather than abstract or philosophical discussions. They are dismissive of broader societal critiques, such as the notion that contemporary code is influenced by capitalist structures.

The second argues that technological problems are inherently intertwined with social factors. That understanding the human and social dimensions of technology is essential for effective problem-solving in this domain.

Overall, this conversation touches upon the complex relationship between technology and society, highlighting differing perspectives on how best to approach and address challenges in this space.

Non classé

Reminder about the hashtag family

A breakdown of the #OMN hashtags and how they are typically used:

  1. #dotcons: This hashtag refers to corporate centralized platforms, such as social media networks, that prioritize profit and control over user data and content. It’s often used in discussions about the negative effects of centralization on the internet and the importance of decentralization.
  2. #fashernisat: This hashtag combines “fashion” and “lifestyle” and is used to criticize trends or behaviours that promote #mainstreaming unthinking consumerist behaver, or ideas in popular culture.
  3. #stupidindividualism: This hashtag critiques the ideology of individualism that prioritizes individual gain and ignores collective well-being. It’s often used to highlight the negative effects of prioritizing individual interests over those of society as a whole.
  4. #neoliberalism: Neoliberalism is an economic and political ideology that emphasizes free-market capitalism, deregulation, privatization, and limited government intervention. This hashtag is used in discussions about the effects of neoliberal policies on society, such as income inequality and the erosion of public services.
  5. #deathcult: This hashtag is often used metaphorically to describe neoliberal ideologies that prioritize profit and power over human well-being, environmental sustainability, and social justice. It’s frequently associated with critiques of #climatechaos capitalism, consumerism, and imperialism.
  6. #NGO: This stands for “Non-Governmental Organization” and refers to non-profit organizations that operate independently of government control. This hashtag is used in discussions #mainstreaming roles of NGOs in not addressing social, environmental, and humanitarian issues.

And on the positive side:

  1. #openweb: This hashtag celebrates the principles of openness, decentralization, and inclusivity on the internet. It’s often used in discussions about the importance of preserving and promoting an “native” open and accessible web for everyone.
  2. : This hashtag is used to promote transparency, collaboration, and community-driven development in software and technology projects.

Each of these hashtags serves as a shorthand for broader discussions and concepts, allowing people to participate in and contribute to conversations around these topics on the #openweb and inside the #dotcons.

Non classé

Should we ban TikTok

The #dotcons are about ideological control (advertising) of information for profit, #TikTok is likely the most advanced at this.

The question whether to ban TikTok is significant within the context of a move back to the #openweb and concerns about the #dotcons, which prioritize ideological control and profit through advertising. Some considerations:

  1. Impact on Ideological Control: TikTok, like other #dotcons social media platforms, shapes public discourse and influences #neoliberal and #stupidindividualism ideological agenda. Banning #TikTok could disrupt the control exerted by centralized platforms over the flow of information and content moderation policies. However, it’s essential to consider whether banning TikTok is the most effective way to address concerns about ideological control, as users will likely simply migrate to other #dotcons with similar issues.
  2. Privacy and Data Control: TikTok has faced scrutiny over its data practices and potential ties to the Chinese government, raising concerns about privacy and data security. this is a normal issue with state bound #dotcons Banning TikTok might address these concerns by limiting the collection and dissemination of user data to the replacemnt state, likely the USA. However, it’s important to explore alternative measures, such as regulatory oversight and requirements, to protect user data without resorting to a ban.
  3. Innovation and Competition: Banning TikTok could stifle innovation and competition in the #dotcons, limiting the diversity of #techshit platforms available to users. This has implications for content creators, influencers, and businesses that rely on TikTok for outreach and engagement. Instead of a ban, fostering competition and growing alternative, decentralized platforms (like the #Fediverse) would promote innovation and diversity in the social media ecosystem in a better way.
  4. Freedom of Expression: Banning TikTok raises concerns about freedom of expression, as it restricts digital surfs ability to share content and engage with others slaves on the platform. While TikTok has faced criticism for its content moderation practices, outright banning the platform may not be the most appropriate solution. Instead, data portability and interoperability combined efforts would address harmful content and promote healthy online discourse, thus focus on regulatory measures and community-driven initiatives.
  5. Broader Societal Implications: Banning TikTok could have broader societal implications, particularly for younger generations who are active users of the platform. It’s important to consider the social and cultural significance of TikTok as a platform for #fashernnista creativity, self-expression, and community-building. Efforts to mitigate potential harms associated with TikTok should prioritize education, digital literacy, and awareness-raising initiatives of real alternatives.

In conclusion, the question of whether to ban TikTok involves weighing concerns about ideological control, interoperability, privacy, innovation, freedom of expression, and wider societal implications. While banning TikTok may address some of these concerns, alternative approaches, such as , regulatory oversight, #openweb competition promotion, and community-driven initiatives, should also be pushed to ensure a balanced and effective response.

We need to move past these illogical gatekeepers on thing of issues like this.

Non classé

Who gets to decide what this place is? How are we being represented

“An important distinction is slowly being uncovered about the definition of the term “fediverse.” Who is it that gets to decide what this place is? How are we being represented?”

The lack of discussion about the definition of the term #fediverse raises questions about representation and identity within this #openweb “native” network.

  1. Ownership by Communities: The fediverse offers a way to build the internet by communities, in contrast to centralized #dotcons social networks that prioritize monetization over community well-being. By decentralizing governance (#OGB), the fediverse empowers people to take control of their online spaces and relationships.
  2. Audience and Adoption: The fediverse is valuable for those who are hostile and disillusioned with monetized social networks and seek ways to connect with real change/challenge comunertys. While some are eager to explore alternatives, others face limitations or challenges in transitioning to the fediverse. Nonetheless, the slow growth of communities within the fediverse is essential for building a strong “native” foundation for decentralized networking.
  3. Governance and Community: A key distinction of the fediverse lies in its shared governance model, where people have a say in how their communities are governed. This contrasts with centralized social networks, where governance decisions are made by a central authority does not align with community interests. People are drawn to the fediverse for its emphasis on inclusivity and people agency, allowing individuals and social groups to express themselves without fear of censorship or coercion.
  4. Coexistence with Centralized Networks: The fediverse does not require people to opt out of centralized social networks entirely. Instead, people can maintain connections on both platforms while stepping to decentralized networking. This allows people to become familiar with the fediverse’s culture and its advantages.
  5. Website Design and Accessibility: With the foundational principles of the fediverse defined, the focus shifts to website design that reflects these values. Accessibility, both in terms of physical access and cultural understanding, is prioritized to ensure that the platform is inclusive and user-friendly in contrast to much of the history of #FOSS coding.

In summary, the fediverse represents a shift towards community-driven, decentralized networking, offering an alternative to #dotcons. By prioritizing peoples and communertys agency, inclusivity, and accessibility, the fediverse creates spaces where people can connect and express themselves freely.

Non classé

Images of protest posters

Thalia and Ian Campbell have been #makinghistory throughout their life’s, by collecting an amazing collection of posters that we have divided into categories below:

Peace Posters

Labour and Trade Union Posters

Feminist Posters

Counter Culture

Non classé

Branding – 4opens collective identity and values of the network.

Branding in the #Fediverse raises considerations about how to effectively communicate the identity and values of the decentralized network while preserving its diverse and inclusive nature.

* Purpose of Branding: Branding serves different purposes for different organizations within the Fediverse. It is a way to assert control and ownership over the platform/network, but it can also be used to communicate identity and values to people and potential adopters.

* Instance Branding vs. Project Branding: Shifting the focus from project branding to instance branding give’s more control to the communities using and running the instances. This decentralized approach allows for customization and fosters inclusivity within the Fediverse.

* Impact of Strong Branding: Strong branding by developers and platforms overshadows the diversity of instances and communities within the Fediverse. It limits collaboration and customization, threatening decentralization.

* Scale of Branding: Branding is used at different scales within the Fediverse, from single instances to suppliers of federated services. While branding can facilitate onboarding and accessibility, it may also pose a threat to decentralization if single entities gain domanating influence over the network.

* Balancing Accessibility and Freedom: Visual identities play a crucial role in guiding new people to the Fediverse and communicating its values. However, a strong branding presence may inadvertently restrict the freedom of expression of instances and communities. It’s important to balance accessibility and freedom when designing branding solutions.

* Community Acceptance: New branding solutions should be organically accepted by the majority of communities within the Fediverse. The current logo’s are tolerated because they communicate an idea without imposing a single identity or viewpoint. Any new branding should aim to achieve the same balance to gain “native” community acceptance.

In conclusion, the fediverse, is “native” to balancing accessibility with the preservation of diversity and freedom of expression. Any branding solutions should be community-driven and strive to represent the collective identity and values of the network.

Non classé

Development of technology towards a more community-centric and empowering direction

Shaping technology to empower people and cater to their needs is crucial for creating a more inclusive and democratic digital environment. Moving towards building technology that prioritizes people and customization:

  1. User-Centric Design: Technology should be designed with the people in mind, focusing on usability, accessibility, and flexibility. This means involving people in the design process and incorporating their feedback to ensure that the technology meets their needs and preferences.
  2. Open Source and Open Standards: Embracing principles promotes transparency, interoperability, and peoples control. By making source code freely available and adhering to open standards, developers empower people to modify and customize the technology according to their requirements.
  3. Decentralization: Moving away from centralized platforms and embracing decentralized architectures fosters community and resilience in the digital ecosystem. Decentralized technologies empower people to have greater control over their data and interactions, reducing reliance on large corporations and promoting a more democratic online environment.
  4. Education and Empowerment: Educating people about technology and creating tools and resources to shape and customize to their needs is essential. By fostering digital literacy and empowering people to take control of their digital experiences, we can create a more informed and engaged user base.
  5. Community Engagement: Engaging with communities and fostering collaboration and co-creation leads to the development of technology that better reflects the diverse needs and perspectives of people. By building inclusive and participatory processes, developers can ensure that technology serves the interests of the community as a whole.

In the context of the #Fediverse and #openweb reboot, prioritizing these principles can help steer the development of technology towards a more community-centric and empowering direction. By stepping away from the #dotcons tech that pre-shapes people’s behaviour and embracing a more participatory and inclusive approach, we can build a digital ecosystem that truly serves the needs of people.

Non classé

Composting in tech

The #OMN (Open Media Network), composting in tech, is a process of recycling or repurposing digital resources and technologies in a sustainable and environmentally conscious manner. Just as composting in agriculture involves breaking down organic matter into nutrient-rich soil, composting in tech involves reusing and repurposing digital assets and technologies to create new value and reduce waste.

* Reuse of Code: Instead of reinventing the wheel, developers should reuse existing code or software components to build new applications or platforms. This approach reduces duplication of effort and promotes efficiency in software development.

* Repurposing Digital Content: With media and content creation, composting in tech involves repurposing existing digital content (such as articles, videos, or podcasts) to create new content or derivative works. This practice helps extend the lifespan of digital assets and reduce the need for constant creation of new content.

* Open Source and Collaboration: Embracing principles and collaborative development models is a form of composting in tech. By sharing code, knowledge, and resources openly, developers can collectively improve and build upon existing technologies, growing innovation and sustainability in the tech ecosystem.

* Circular Economy in Tech: Composting in tech aligns with the principles of a circular economy, where resources are used, reused, and recycled to minimize waste and maximize use. By applying this concept to digital technologies, #OMN promotes a more sustainable approach to tech development and consumption.

Overall, “composting in tech” reflects a mindset of sustainability, resourcefulness, and responsible stewardship of digital resources within the #openweb

The mess we need to compost:

* Arrogance and Ignorance: In alternative and grassroots movements, there is a recurring problem where members display arrogance and ignorance. This hinders progress and collaboration within these movements. At a time when there’s a growing need for successful examples to inspire larger, more #mainstreaming alternative and progressive movements, addressing these issues becomes particularly important.

* Capitalism as the Root Problem: The solution, involves stepping away from capitalist structures. This will require a combination of strategies, including non-violent resistance and, in some cases, revolutionary action.

* Challenge of Stupid Individualism: #Stupidindividualism refers to the pervasive influence of individualistic thinking promoted by #neoliberal ideology. This mindset undermines collective action and makes it difficult to build alternative tech and social projects that prioritize community over individual gain.

* Vertical vs. Horizontal Structures: Hierarchical thinking (“vertical”) often disrupts egalitarian structures (“horizontal”) within movements. This disruption contributes to a cycle of destruction and rebuilding, making it challenging to maintain momentum and achieve lasting change.

* Affective Direct Action My personal and familial experience with affective direct action for progressive change. This type of activism emphasizes emotional engagement and personal connection to issues. This experience underscores the cyclical nature of social and political challenges and highlights the importance of addressing underlying issues for meaningful and lasting change.

Addressing the challenges faced by alternative and grassroots movements requires collective action, strategic thinking, and a rejection of individualistic and hierarchical ideologies. It involves creating spaces where collaboration and community-driven solutions can thrive, ultimately working towards a more equitable society.