This was the thinking of the #OMN project ten years ago

This was the thinking of the #OMN project ten years ago: The proposed project is to reboot basic web tools and turn existing silos and portals into a network where data flows between different sites. The technology used will be #RSS and its lesser-known counterparts, allowing sites to link to each other and content to appear on multiple sites. The project aims to provide an alternative to the #dotcons and to serve alternative grassroots media by creating open tools and processes. The project will start with the addition of a sidebar to existing sites and the building of new aggregating sites with overviews on subjects. The long-term goal is to expand into other networks.

A trailer film script for the man who bought a lifeboat

FADE IN:

EXT. LONDON – DAY

We see the bustling city of London. People are rushing to work, cars are honking and the sound of construction is deafening.

CUT TO:

EXT. A BOATYARD IN SCOTLAND – DAY

A man, HAMISH, in his late-thirties, stands in front of a bright orange, round boat with 60 seats.

HAMISH
(to the boatyard owner)
I’ll take it.

BOATYARD OWNER
(shocked)
Are you sure? This is a lifeboat.

HAMISH
(smiling)
I’m sure. I want to downscale and have a more sustainable life.

CUT TO:

INT. THE LIFEBOAT – DAY

Hamish is inside the lifeboat, taking out the central seats to open up space.

HAMISH (V.O.)
It comes with nothing, no kitchen, no bathroom. But I have a plan.

CUT TO:

INT. THE LIFEBOAT – LATER

Hamish is setting up a stove and drainage system. He looks up and smiles.

HAMISH (V.O.)
For this summer, I plan to camp out in it. Take the central section out, open up the space, and just sling a hammock.

CUT TO:

INT. THE LIFEBOAT – DAY

hamish is looking at a map.

HAMISH (V.O.)
I’ve got this whole plan. After next year, I’ll take the boat across the channel and then go through the waterways of Europe.

CUT TO:

EXT. ENGLISH CHANNEL – DAY

We see Hamish sailing the lifeboat across the English Channel. It’s a bit uncomfortable, but he’s safe in the lifeboat.

CUT TO:

EXT. A CANAL IN EUROPE – DAY

We see Hamish navigating the lifeboat through a canal in Europe.

HAMISH (V.O.)
And actually go all the way down to the Mediterranean.

CUT TO:

EXT. THE MEDITERRANEAN – DAY

The lifeboat is sailing on the beautiful Mediterranean Sea.

HAMISH (V.O.)
And then, you know, through the rivers and canals of Europe and into Russia and down to the Black Sea.

CUT TO:

EXT. THE BLACK SEA – DAY

The lifeboat is sailing on the Black Sea. Hamish looks happy and fulfilled.

HAMISH (V.O.)
It’s technically possible to do that.

FADE OUT.

Memorial for Don of 50 Aston street Oxford

Don, provided a space for people to gather and connect, he was a free-spirited person who made his own choices and lived life on his own terms. He passed away, and many people who knew him gathered to remember him and the impact he had on their lives. The memories and connections that Don created have continued to endure even after his passing.

Some images from the house https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/50-aston-street.html?sortBy=relevant

Talking about grassroots media as a step away from the current #techshit

Hamish Campbell, a veteran in radical media for the past 30 years, discusses the failure of current technology and mainstream culture. He highlights how the #dotcon boom commodified our data, resulting in closed technology silos like #Facebook and #Instagram that capture our attention and data for their own profit. Campbell argues that alternative technology built around an #encryptionist agenda has gone nowhere and that the world is dominated by these tech giants. He argues for the importance of the #openweb, which was born open but is dying closed over the last 20 years, and advocates for rebooting grassroots media as a solution. Campbell uses the Oxford #IMC as an example of how a simple federated network can work by sharing content, using trusted link flows, and allowing content to be moderated or rolled back. He believes that the beauty of the #openweb is based on free flowing links, unlike the #closedweb of our current dominating technology. Campbell concludes that the #OMN project is more important for what it does not do than for what it does, and highlights the need to take small steps towards a solution by rebooting grassroots media as a example project.

What you can do

In the last few years there have been events and gatherings in the US, Portugal, and Madrid, discussing the possibility of #rebooting #Indymedia. The current history of Indymedia has been primarily written by academics and is very Americanized, so there is a need to retell the stories and provide a wider perspective. To successfully reboot Indymedia, I think it needs to return to its open and serendipitous roots, rather than the bureaucratic and closed structure it became. Fortunately, most of the technical tools needed for a decentralized and federated system, such as ActivityPub and Scuttlebutt, already exist. To maintain its radical grassroots philosophy, the #4opens principles should be used to ensure openness and accessibility. To get involved, one can search for #indymediaback or “reboot Indymedia” and find useful links #OMN

The problem with institutions funding the social side of #openweb tech

Almost all our #geekproblem software fails because they are building “control”, where all good societies are built on “trust”. We keep making piles of #techshit because we can’t communicate about this simple understanding #techchurn one way to address this is to fund the social side of tech.

The problem which we need to solve is the institutions funding of the social side of #openweb tech, if we do this now most of this funding will feed parasite #NGO’s rather than anything useful. This is also a problem of the existing funding for coding, it pushes the #geekproblem when it funds anything outside the basics.

We have a mess because our world is messy, current funding plays little role in composting this mess.

That’s the job of people with shovels – who funds them.

Most of our software fails because it is built with a focus on “control”, rather than “trust”, which is the foundation of a good society. This leads to an endless cycle of creating useless technology that we can’t communicate about. To address this problem, we need to invest in the social side of technology.

The challenge lies in funding the social aspect of #openweb technology. Currently, most funding goes to non-governmental organizations (#NGOs) that are not always effective. Additionally, the existing funding for coding primarily focuses on the basics, which perpetuates the problem of the #geekproblem.

Our world is messy, and the current funding plays little role in cleaning up this mess. People with shovels – those who do the work – need funding to make a difference.

A large-scale protest against the construction of an open-cast coal mine in Fos-y-fran, South Wales

A large-scale protest against the construction of an open-cast coal mine in Fos-y-fran, South Wales. Climate activists from across Wales and local residents, took direct action by occupying the construction site and chaining themselves to the excavation machinery. The protest is a symbol of the battle against climate change and a challenge to the government’s stance on the issue, with the protesters accusing the government of hypocrisy for participating in international talks on reducing carbon emissions while supporting the development of new coal mines at home. The protesters believe that the use of coal, the dirtiest fuel, will have a devastating impact on the global climate and will undermine efforts to address the issue.

Thnking about “communerty”

Reflecting on the history of community spaces and how they have evolved over time. In the 19th and 20th centuries, two main types of community spaces existed: village halls and church halls. Village halls were neutral spaces for community events run by a local group, while church halls had a moralistic and ideological focus and were more restricted by the attitudes of the church.

The rise of community centres, in the mid-20th century, were driven by ideas of social justice and community empowerment. However, these centres later became commercialized and bureaucratized, losing their focus on community empowerment. In the 21st century, we need to “reboot” the older ideas of community spaces, such as the village hall, to better reflect the different needs and values of contemporary society.

If people care, if people do not care.

The Hive Dalston was a grassroots community centre that was started as a collaboration between radical squatters and more mainstream arts groups. The aim was to take advantage of the Tory “big society” legislation, which offered incentives for the social use of empty properties. However, the project soon failed to maintain its radicalism and became more like a conventional community centre, with a focus on the arts and NGOs.

This highlights the challenges of balancing the need to stay sustainable while remaining relevant and true to the original goals and ideals of the project. The failure of The Hive Dalston raises questions about the viability of similar projects and whether they can walk the tightrope of sustainability and relevance. The success of such projects depends on the level of community support and interest. If people do not care enough about the issues and goals, then they are unlikely to succeed.

Thinking about why #openweb projects fail.

Many #openweb projects have failed over the years, and there are reasons, first is the challenge of sustaining a project that is built on open-source principles and relies on community involvement and collaboration. In capitalism, without a clear and consistent funding model, it can be difficult to keep projects going over the long term.

Another factor is the competition from proprietary technology that is always better funded and more easily accessible to the public. This can create a challenging environment for open-source projects that struggle to keep up with the pushing of “innovation” in the tech industry.

There are also ideological differences between different groups within the open-source community that leads to conflicts and disagreements over the direction of projects. This can result in splintering and fragmentation of the community, making it difficult to achieve a shared goal.

Non “standard” #UX is a big issue as well, nice to make something you like, but better to do something the user community likes.

From @bob@epicyon.libreserver.org Irreconcilable musical differences, someone in charge of donations taking it to Vegas, becoming a parent or getting a new job, burnout, unrealistic expectations based on hegemonic BigTech systems, illness, an excess of technical debt and trolling can all result in failures of open source projects.

Most projects are one or two people with occasional driveby patches. Projects with more volunteers than that are rare exceptions. Most maintainers are not people on six-figure salaries going on slides at Google. Usually they are barely making rent.

Another factor is that often accessibility is not as good as it could be. The big companies can dedicate a department to just ensuring accessibility meets a minimum standard, but open source projects often don’t have the knowledge and are regularly criticized for accessibility problems.

From the #openweb

(https://elplatt.com/) happy to remove this link if asked

The main challenges I’ve experienced in projects I’ve been a part of:
* Tendency for potential contributors to start new projects from scratch
* Lack of communication within the user community and between users and maintainers
* Contributions driven by prestige or excitement, prioritizing new features over maintenance
* Lack of funding

It’s a good list, maybe we need a post writing up covering them all.

(This is why I work #KISS whaw that is bad behaver, lie about someone then blocked their instance. #GreatjusticeNet has blocked campaign.openworlds.info for plagiarizing fediverse content. In this post, it says “From the #openweb” in BOLD, so clearly it’s not plagiarism. But happy to remove stuff if people don’t won’t it archived)

Over the years, many #openweb projects have failed due to various reasons. The first challenge is to sustain a project that is built on open-source principles and relies on community involvement and collaboration. In a capitalist society, without a clear and consistent funding model, it becomes difficult to keep the project going over the long term.

Another factor is the competition from proprietary technology that is better funded and more easily accessible to the public. This creates a challenging environment for open-source projects that struggle to keep up with the “innovation” pushed by the tech industry.

Ideological differences within the open-source community leads to conflicts and disagreements over project direction, resulting in splintering and fragmentation of the community, making it challenging to achieve shared goals.

Non-standard #UX is also a significant issue, as it’s better to create something the user community likes than something just the developer likes.

Some ideas on this from the #openweb, irreconcilable musical differences, individuals in charge of donations taking it to Vegas, becoming a parent, getting a new job, burnout, unrealistic expectations based on hegemonic BigTech systems, illness, an excess of technical debt, and trolling can all result in open-source project failures.

Most projects have only one or two people, with occasional drive-by patches. Projects with more volunteers are rare exceptions, and maintainers are typically not people on six-figure salaries going on slides at Google. Usually, they barely make rent.

To sum up, the main challenges experienced in the projects that the author has been a part of include the tendency for potential contributors to start new projects from scratch, lack of communication within the user community and between users and maintainers, contributions driven by prestige or excitement, prioritizing new features over maintenance, and lack of funding.

Additionally, accessibility is often not as good as it could be, as big companies can dedicate a department to ensure accessibility meets a minimum standard, but open-source projects often lack the knowledge and are regularly criticized for accessibility problems.

In conclusion, a post covering all these challenges would be useful.

Looking at #DIY projects

Looking at failures offers lessons: the importance of balancing sustainability with integrity, the necessity of regenerating core culture in growing communities, and the need for healthy conflict resolution to prevent ideological capture. In each case, the projects burned bright for a time, flashes of what’s possible when people come together to build outside the #mainstreaming. But without tending to the human side of organizing, even the most vibrant initiatives unravel.

The #VillageButty project was a vital social hub for London’s boater community, a floating space where people gathered, share stories, and maintain the traditions of life on the waterways. It served as a beacon of #boaterculture, offering a place for community events, music, and collective organizing. However, the project’s survival depended on a delicate balance: generating enough income to sustain itself while remaining true to its grassroots ethos. Commercializing too much risked alienating the people it was meant to serve, while staying purely community-driven made it financially precarious. We struggled to navigate this tension. Attempts to expand and bring in outside funding diluted the project’s identity, and without enough internal cohesion, the balance tipped. The Butty lost its anchor, and despite the clear need for such a space, we failed to keep as a centre of the #Londonboater community.

The #LondonHackspace was a cornerstone of the DIY and maker scene, a living example of what can be achieved through collective skill-sharing and open collaboration. Initially stewarded by an invisible affinity group, people who quietly maintained the space and nurtured its culture, it flourished as a haven for experimentation and tech creativity. But success came with growing pains. As membership surged, the core collective was overwhelmed, leading to burnout and disengagement. The influx of new members diluted the shared values that had held the space together. Without that core cultural glue, informal trust-based governance gave way to rigid bureaucracy. Conflict, once mediated through affinity bonds, spilled out in toxic online discussions, poisoning real-world interactions. The space itself became drained of energy, losing its spark. It became a lesson in how scale can crush solidarity if care isn’t taken to regenerate the social fabric that makes spaces like this thrive. It failed.

The #HiveDalston started as a promising experiment in community space, a potential sanctuary for grassroots organizing, creative expression, and radical thought. The idea was to create an open, collaborative environment, but without a shared vision or clear conflict-resolution practices, ideological fractures emerged. Political differences, personal agendas, and unspoken tensions built up over time, eventually boiling over. Instead of addressing the underlying issues, one faction seized control, remolding the project in their image. What was meant to be a space for collective liberation became just another battleground, mirroring the very dynamics it had hoped to disrupt. The Hive became a cautionary tale of how personal politics and a lack of structural care can fracture communities. We failed.

I need to add #socialhub and the #Fediverse, maybe #ActivityPub, #resistanceexhibition to this list.

This is basic to thinking – ideolagy

Different economic systems are based on different ideas of what it means to be human and what motivates us. The Old Testament in Christianity reflects a negative view of humanity, while the New Testament focuses on love and the idea of a common humanity. Capitalism, is based on the idea that greed and self-interest drive individuals and the market, while socialism is based on the idea that solidarity and cooperation are what motivate people.

This division between different ideologies and worldviews is a long-standing one. Understanding the underlying assumptions about human nature can provide a useful framework for examining and critiquing different economic systems and ideologies, and help us make informed decisions about the kind of society we want to build.

“the currency of the 21st century is information”

“the currency of the 21st century is information” highlights the growing importance of data and knowledge in our rapidly-evolving digital world. For the last 5 years, the rise of encryption and cryptocurrencies is on aspect of this trend, reflecting a growing concern for privacy and the secure exchange of information.

The unspoken liberal individualism and private property ideas that comes with encryption and cryptocurrencies is a market-based approach that prioritizes exploitation, greed, and selfishness. In contrast, #4opens can be seen as promoting connection, cooperation, and altruism.

The concept of a #4opens approach, which prioritizes connection, cooperation, and trust, represents an alternative to the market-based approach and highlights the importance of social norms and values in shaping the technology we use.

There is a divide between the “soft power” of social norms and the “hard power” of code in the #geekproblem, and the challenge is to find ways to talk about these issues and bring them into the #mainstreaming discourse.