Naming the problem, a first step on this path, what is the #deathcult

Naming the problem is a first step, let’s take a step, what is the #deathcult? The “death cult” refers to the systemic prioritization of profit, consumption, and power over life, sustainability, and equity. Relentless resource extraction, despite environmental collapse. Neoliberal policies that sacrifice public good for corporate gains. And most importantly, the dogmatic passive social complicity in maintaining these destructive paths.

Active vs. default worship, active worshippers are leaders, corporations, and influencers who knowingly drive destructive practices. Default worshippers, are the majority who, often unknowingly, sustain the system through everyday actions shaped by a lack of alternatives and awareness.

To challenge default worship, there is the normal path of awareness and education, campaigns that demystify the ways neoliberalism and climate inaction shape everyday life. On the fluffy side, practical Steps for people and communities, join or start local climate and justice groups. Advocate for sustainable policies in your community (e.g., green energy, public transit). This is about shifting narratives, a core part of this is contributing to independent media and grassroots storytelling. A second thread is practical building resilience by developing skills and networks for mutual aid, local food systems, and sustainable living.

Then the is creating alternatives, by invest in and promote grassroots initiatives like community energy projects, mutual aid networks, and cooperative economies. Supporting platforms and movements that embody values of sustainability, equity, and transparency (e.g., the fediverse, #4Opens initiatives).

This then needs to be balanced by more radical action, mobilizing for more immediate change, direct action, organizing protests, strikes, and civil disobedience to demand systemic shifts. Then celebrating and amplify these stories of resistance and regeneration.

#dotcons fail human connection

We do need a critique of the trajectory of social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram, to highlight how their growing reliance on AI-generated profiles and diminishing organic engagement undermines the little trust, satisfaction, and the purpose of social connection that people have left in them.

This started with the death of organic engagement, Facebook and Instagram’s shift around 2013 to force content creators and businesses to pay for visibility, marked the end of organic engagement for the majority of people. This created a reliance on paid boosts, alienating real people and the army of small creators who pushed the platforms into prominence. Without organic engagement, people feel unseen, leading to declining satisfaction. The current shift to AI-generated profiles and bots are an attempt to simulate “engagement”, the illusion of interaction.

It should be simple to see that #dotcons fail to fulfill the human need for connection and actually alienate people and communities, even if this shift manages to build short-term engagement with profiles and “interactions” to create “likable” fictional characters for product placement. Replace human influencers with bots is cost efficiency. Feeding artificially inflate metrics to attract advertisers. But as people become more aware of bots replacing humans, the sense of authenticity diminishes, particularly among those who value any real social connections.

As I have been arguing for 20 years there is a real need for alternatives, #DIY and grassroots movements, platforms like the #Fediverse and open-source projects demonstrate that decentralized networks prioritize human connection and transparency over profit. These alternative resist capture by corporate interests and maintain authenticity, creating #openweb ecosystems where trust and interaction thrive.

Embracing “messiness” is a feature in effective tech solutions

Embracing “messiness” as a feature, not a bug, in creating humane and effective tech solutions.
Why messiness matters, real-world social paths are inherently messy. Attempting to design tech solutions that are rigid, “perfect” systems leads to failure because they cannot adapt to human complexity and unpredictability. Projects that actually work in messy environments prioritize flexibility, openness, and adaptability over strict control and rigid frameworks.

Wikipedia is a messy, decentralized project that thrives because it prioritizes community and collaboration over technical perfection. The #Fediverse, with its federated nature, allows for diverse approaches and experimentation, embracing a level of messiness to resist centralization and foster creativity.

Code is a tool, not the goal, the value of software lies in its social impact—how people use it—not in the technical complexity or “cleverness” of the code itself. Over emphasizing code at the expense of social “use” creates #techchurn and decay. Projects without meaningful use end up abandoned, despite the sometimes impressive technical work. The practical path we argue for, is to prioritize designing for social utility, not only technical performance.

The #geekproblem we need to mediate is the churn of #techshit, of developers focusing too heavily on technical aspects, ignoring the social context and long-term utility of their work. This results in churn—continuous cycles of development with little lasting value—adding to the pile of decaying, unused code.

What are #KISS paths to avoid this, a simple first step is involving non-technical voices early in the process to ensure social relevance and usability. Use iterative development methods that prioritize real-world feedback over technical perfection. Embracing the #4opens: Open Data, Open Source, Open “industrial” standards, Open Process. Build for use, not show, with simplicity and usability over technical complexity. Engage people in testing and iterating early and often. Embrace the mess, imperfections and unpredictability are part of the process.

Strategies to build messy, human-centric projects: Start with the “Why”, clearly define the social purpose of the project before writing any code. What problem are you solving? Who benefits, and how?

#KISS

The #Fediverse is native to anti-common-sense governance

My view of this is passionate and grounded in years of experience, weaving together themes of grassroots activism, technology, governance, and the mounting challenges of #climatechaos leading to social collapse.

On this Alt path, the two often pushed liberal #foundation models, with their failures, can lead grassroots, community-driven projects to become corporate tools, diverting resources toward maintaining the status quo rather than fostering innovation and social change. Examples of open source capture, projects like OpenAI initially emphasized openness but became increasingly closed and profit-driven once corporate interests got involved. The highlights the ease of capture by “#fashionista agendas.”

These failures underscore the need for governance models that resist centralization and co-option. The DIY, bottom-up approach is a powerful counter to these trends. #OGB and #DIY as tools for resistance and grassroots empowerment. Why #OGB Matters, the path aligns with the fediverse’s ethos by emphasizing non-elitism, democracy, and simplicity. By prioritizing KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) principles, it remains accessible and adaptable, ensuring that governance grows organically rather than being imposed.

The #Fediverse is native to anti-common-sense governance, centralized platforms like Facebook and Twitter impose governance that aligns with corporate agendas, prioritizing profit over social good. Decentralized networks like the Fediverse allow for experimentation with governance paths that are participatory and community-driven.

This is an opening and opportunities for anti-“common sense” tools, reputation networks, build trust through reputation rather than encryption aligns with human-centric approaches. This moves away from paranoia-driven models (“trust nobody”) to systems that foster community bonds. The Fediverse can be a template, with the decentralized, anarchistic roots of the fediverse providing a sandbox for developing governance models to influence broader #openweb paths.

Combating the #deathcult mentality, social collapse and climatechaos, the persistence of policies and behaviours that prioritize short-term gains over long-term survival, is a defining feature of the “deathcult” we keep talking about. Examples, governments doubling down on fossil fuels despite clear evidence of climate catastrophe. Corporate greenwashing that markets unsustainable practices as solutions.

In the #OMN and #4opens philosophy, simplicity matters, complexity often alienates the very communities that systems aim to empower. The OMN’s emphasis on simplicity ensures accessibility, fostering broader participation. The #4opens, Open Data, Open Code, Open Access, and Open Process form a foundation for transparency and trust, essential for building resilience against co-option.

Practical applications are reputation paths, tools that prioritize human connections over algorithms, to strengthen communities. Human-readable systems avoiding jargon-heavy and technical solutions ensures the governance model remains inclusive. Let’s keep this #KISS