Tag: dotcons

Reminder about the hashtag family

A breakdown of the #OMN hashtags and how they are typically used as a social change and challenge project that we need:

  1. #dotcons: This hashtag refers to corporate centralized platforms, such as social media networks, that prioritize profit and control over users, data and content. It’s often used in discussions about the negative effects of centralization on the internet and the importance of decentralization.
  2. #fashernista: This hashtag combines “fashion” and “lifestyle” and is used to criticize trends or behaviours that promote #mainstreaming unthinking consumerist paths, behaver and ideas in popular and counter culture.
  3. #stupidindividualism: This hashtag critiques the current use of the ideology of individualism, which 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 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, its the mess we live in today.
  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 and people who think like NGO’s in not being brave enough to address 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 a “native” open and accessible web for everyone. This is #web01
  2. : This hashtag is used to promote transparency, collaboration, and community-driven development in software and technology projects. It should be used to JUDGE 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 it’s about linking.

#KISS

Should we ban TikTok

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

Whether to ban TikTok is part of the #mainstreaming mess and significant within the wider context of the move back to the #openweb

Some considerations:

  1. Impact on Ideological Control: TikTok, like other #dotcons social media platforms, shapes public discourse and pushes #neoliberal and #stupidindividualism ideological agenda and control. 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 mostly simply migrate to other #dotcons with the same issues.
  2. Privacy and Data Control: TikTok faces scrutiny over its data practices and ties to the Chinese government, raising concerns about privacy and data security. This is a normal issue with any state bound #dotcons. Banning TikTok might address these concerns by limiting the collection and dissemination of user data to the replacement state, 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 monetizable engagement. Instead of a ban, maybe 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 faces criticism for its content moderation practices, outright banning the platform may not be an appropriate solution. Instead, data portability and interoperability as combined efforts would address harmful content and promote healthy online discourse, thus focus on regulatory measures and community-driven initiatives rather than a ban.
  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 #fashernista 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 rather than simply national propaganda agender.

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

We need to move past these illogical gatekeepers.

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?”

https://mastodon.social/deck/@fdrc_ff@www.foxyhole.io/112435833670527639

The lack of discussion about the nature of the space the #fediverse occupies 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, 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 shaped. This contrasts with centralized social networks, where governance decisions are made by a central authority that does not align with community interests. People are drawn to the fediverse for its emphasis on inclusivity and people’s 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 networks 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 sharp contrast to too much of the bad #UX history of #FOSS coding.

The fediverse represents a shift towards community-driven, decentralized networking, offering an alternative to #dotcons. By prioritizing people’s and community agency, inclusivity, and accessibility, the fediverse creates spaces where people can connect and express themselves. Let’s reboot the #openweb as a start, we could try calling this #web1.5

On the subject of activism, “don’t be a prat” is a good start.

Development of technology in a community-centric direction

Shaping technology to empower people and building to their needs is core to create an inclusive and democratic digital environment. We need technology that prioritizes people and customization first:

  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 create technology meets real needs, process and preferences.
  2. Open Source and Open Standards: Embracing principles promotes transparency, interoperability, and people’s control. By making source code freely available and adhering to open standards, developers empower people to modify and customize the technology they are building according to wider social 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 control over their digital lives and communities, stepping away from 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, people can understand and thus take control of their digital experiences, to create a more informed and engaged user base.
  5. Community Engagement: Engaging with communities and building collaboration and thus co-creation leads to the development of technology that 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.

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

#KISS is a good start on this path.

What names to use?

The term #openweb refers to an internet ecosystem characterized by decentralized, interoperable, and community-driven platforms and protocols. It emphasizes principles of openness, inclusivity, and user control over data and online experiences. The “openweb” contrasts with the #dotcons centralized and proprietary nature, the mainstream internet platforms, thus offering an alternative vision for the future of the internet, and the society this shapes.

Meanwhile, #Fediverse refers to a specific decentralized social networking ecosystem built on interoperable protocols (#ActivityPub), allowing people on different platforms to interact and share content seamlessly. It encompasses a variety of codebases such as #Mastodon, #PeerTube, and #Pixelfed, offering alternatives to centralized social media giants like #Twitter, #YouTube, and #Instagram.

#web1.5 is a more technical term used in geeky conversations, this can be useful as a buffer to the #ecryptionist mess that talks about #web3

Talking about the fediverse can be hard, for broader, #mainstreaming audiences, simply using #mastodon can be sufficient, as Mastodon is one of the most well-known platforms within the Fediverse. This term may resonate more with individuals who are less familiar with the technical nuances of decentralized web architectures but are interested in exploring alternative social media platforms.

The choice of terminology depends on the context and audience. Whether you’re engaging in technical discussions with the “tribe” or introducing newcomers to decentralized internet paths, using the appropriate term can help facilitate understanding and communication.

Tribalism can make this harder than it needs to be, “don’t be a prat” comes to mind.

In the #openweb reboot, metaphors are a strong path

We do need to look t things differently, for example the #darkweb is in our poisoned self that has fermented for the last 40 years. It’s the algorithms of manipulation, and the #geekproblem unthinking pushiness of this fermentation. The #dotcons are the shiny surfaces of this mess. And the #openweb the seedlings to grow community to step on the path away from this.

We have turned our backs on this metaphor the last few years, can we now turn back before we are consumed by the #dotcons the shiny surfaces of #mainstreaming mess

———————————————

let’s try, in the metaphorical landscape of the #openweb reboot, the concept of the #darkweb represents the darker aspects of our digital existence that emerged over the past four decades. It encompasses the algorithms of manipulation that fuel online platforms, the unthinking pushiness of the #geekproblem culture, and the shiny surfaces of centralized platforms (#dotcons) that dominate our online experiences.

The #darkweb symbolizes the poisoned self that has fermented within our digital spaces, perpetuating societal division, misinformation, and exploitation. It reflects the consequences of prioritizing profit and power over community and collective well-being.

In contrast, the #openweb represents a path towards renewal and regeneration. It embodies the seedlings of community and collaboration, offering an alternative vision for how we engage with technology and each other online. The #openweb encourages decentralization, transparency, and participatory governance, fostering a digital ecosystem that prioritizes the needs and interests of people.

In our #fedivers based #web1.5 reboot, there is #mainstreaming mess pushing, a collective turning away from the #openweb metaphor, as centralized platforms continue to exert their influence and dominance.

We are attracted to be consumed by the allure of shiny surfaces and instant gratification offered by #dotcons, we risk losing sight of the values and principles that underpin this #openweb path.

The challenge now is to rekindle our commitment to the #openweb and reclaim its promise of community, empowerment, and connection. It requires a collective effort to resist the pull of centralized platforms and reassert the importance of human community.

The #openweb reboot metaphor is a reminder of the ongoing struggle to shape the future of the internet in a way that aligns with our humanist values and aspirations. It calls upon us to confront the darkness of the #darkweb within ourselves and embrace the potential for renewal and transformation offered by the #openweb.

You can help support this here https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Cyril Foster Lecture 2024: On the Declining Success of Civil Resistance

Professor Erica Chenoweth will explore the puzzling decline in the success of civil resistance movements in the past decade, even as unarmed movements have become more popular worldwide. The findings have implications for the future of nonviolent alternatives to armed struggle, as well as to the ability of pro-democratic movements to defeat authoritarian challenges.

Erica Chenoweth is the Academic Dean for Faculty Engagement and the Frank Stanton Professor of the First Amendment at Harvard Kennedy School, Faculty Dean at Pforzheimer House at Harvard College, and a Susan S. and Kenneth L. Wallach Professor at the Harvard Radcliffe Institute. They study political violence and its alternatives. At Harvard, Chenoweth directs the Nonviolent Action Lab, an innovation hub that provides empirical evidence in support of movement-led political transformation.

  • Creative messy thinking
  • Structured rigid thinking

Over the last 20 years we have moved from the first creative messy at Greenham Common Peace Camp and 1990’s road protests thought to the turn of the century anti globalisation movement.

Then this started to shift with the very affective protest movement Climate Camp, with pushing in process geeks ossifying the process and direction. To a hard shift of the occupy movement, process and organising on #dotcons social media.

As this lecture illustrates, the last ten years activism of all forms has been failing, likely due to in part to this shift.

Academic thinking is a part of this, giving rigid thinking strength to push on to messy activism.

Why is academic thinking so bad and irrelevant? “Getting it done people” have no time or interest to talk to academics, they are to focus on the hard mission of “getting things done”. Who the academics and journalist end up getting their data from is way to often wannabe #fashernistas do, in this academic knolage, and the journalism that feeds it, is “manurist” and not helping, and harming a lot of time.

Ideas on how to talk about this, please.

#oxford

It’s interesting to look at all the new #openweb native social media applications

This is my expirence:

To be updated:

We must reckon with the consequences of our past decisions

The intertwining of #postmodernist social thinking and #neoliberal economic ideology over the past four decades has laid the groundwork for the turbulent state of contemporary politics and the social chaos evident in our digital ecosystems (#dotcons)

This marriage of ideologies led to a fracturing of societal values and a narrowing of ideological divides, resulting in the polarization and dysfunction we witness in both right and left-wing politics. In the realm of technology, this has manifested in the proliferation of centralized platforms and the erosion of community.

For forty years, we’ve marched down this dark path, “unwittingly” shaping our current “human nature” through our collective choices and actions. Now, as we confront the existential threats posed by #climatechaos and ecological degradation, we must reckon with the consequences of our past decisions.

The next four decades will undoubtedly be marked by hardship, suffering, and loss as we grapple with the consequences of our actions. We must acknowledge our role in shaping this grim reality and take responsibility for charting a new course forward.

It’s time to reject the poisoned philosophies and economic doctrines that have brought us to this precipice. We must reclaim agency over our collective future and commit to a path of social healing, reconciliation, and renewal.

Acknowledging our complicity in creating this mess is the first step towards redemption. It’s time to embrace the power of #openweb collective action and solidarity, working together to build a more just, equitable, and sustainable world for generations to come.

It’s important not to just see this social thinking as simply an individualistic moral judgment, this would be using the current mess to judge the current mess. This is a hopeless path to walk down, and would only lead to the pushing of more mess. Please try not to take this path, thanks.

And am not saying that these ways of thinking are not working as intended, they obviously are. Postmodernism has been used to disintegrate social norms that bind society together, it has done this. Neoliberalism has been used to divide the rich and the poor, it has done this. The moral judgment is not in the effectiveness of these paths but in our choice of path.

Together, social disintegration has lubricated the pushing of the divide between the rich and the poor to the extremes that are growing today. It’s important not to simple see this as a moral judgment, as it’s a natural outcome of the path we have chosen to walk over the last 40 years, the moral judgment is the on the path we have chosen.

The Mess of Web3: Why #openweb natives question the Blockchain Narrative

In the ongoing discourse surrounding #openweb and its relation to failing technologies like #web3 and #blockchain, a critical question emerges: why do we readily accept solutions without first defining the problem at hand?

“… it’s not secure, it’s not safe, it’s not reliable, it’s not trustworthy, it’s not even decentralized, it’s not anonymous, it’s helping destroy the planet. I haven’t found one positive use for blockchain. It has nothing that couldn’t be done better without it.”

—Bruce Schneier, *Bruce Schneier on the Crypto/Blockchain Disaster

The allure of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) and blockchain technology for the last ten years has overshadowed the necessity of understanding the fundamental issues within our communities. Instead of exploring how we want to govern, decide, and interact within our communities, we find ourselves seduced by the promises of #DAO pitches.

The core of the matter lies in the conflation of culture with technology. Every time a DAO or blockchain solution is proposed, the culture and organization of communities become intertwined with the #geekproblem tools being offered. This bundling tactic obscures the essence of the technology and stifles meaningful discourse. By presenting technology as a fait accompli, we are robbed of the opportunity to critically assess its implications.

In the realm of the #openweb, technology is envisioned as a manifestation of communal decisions and conscious choices. It is the crystallization of community values, traditions, and needs. Where blockchain and DAOs represent an antithesis to this vision. They dictate choices rather than empower communities to determine their own paths.

One of the most concerning aspects of blockchain technology is its enforced financialization within communities. The implementation of ledger systems and tokens mirrors the #dotcons capitalist market traditions, where wealth equates to power. In stark contrast to the principles of “native” gift economies and communalism, blockchain perpetuates a system where those with the most resources wield influence.

In this, even in #mainstreaming dialogue, these ten years of blinded move to blockchain threatens to undermine centuries of liberal evolution by replacing established legal systems with #web3 engineers acting as arbiters of justice. This shift from #mainstreaming transparent and “equitable” legal frameworks to opaque and centralized technological solutions is deeply troubling.

As proponents of ideals, we should question the last ten years narrative of blockchain’s and DAOs. We must resist the allure of #geekproblem technological solutions that obscure the essence of community governance and autonomy. Instead, let’s engage in meaningful dialogue, grounded in clear understanding of the problems we address and the values we hold to forge a “native” #openweb path.

We now face another wasted ten years of #AI hype with the same issues and agender. We have to stop feeding this mess.

#OGB #OMN #makeinghistory

A fresh look at #openweb history

The term liberals understand is a narrow point of view

let’s look at this through one example. The term #enshittification coined by https://mastodon.social/@pluralistic@mamot.fr is a pop term for a very real social/tech problem. I have been using the term #dotcons for the last 20 years to express this same idea and feel this is a better hashtag, but that’s just my view, you can see the thinking for this latter.

The whole 30-year tech ecosystem is designed to Confidence Trick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scam) for profit #dotcom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_company) the outcome was they inclosed the #openweb and we (our liberals) went along with this, with “#enshittification” we are still going along with this mess.

A critique of the term “#enshittification“

* Obscuring Responsibility: Using terms like “enshittification” obscures the true root causes of the issue. Instead of attributing problems solely to a general decline in quality, the focus should be on identifying specific actors and factors responsible for this decline.

* Profit Motive and Diverging Interests: Behind the concept of “enshittification” lies the profit motive inherent in capitalist systems. There’s a divergence of interests between product users (consumers) and product owners (corporations), where decisions are driven by maximizing profits rather than improving user experiences.

* Lack of Accountability: By simplifying issues like “enshittification,” there’s a risk of absolving those responsible for making harmful decisions. The critique should emphasize the need to hold accountable the individuals and entities that prioritize profit over societal well-being.

* Liberal Perspective and Tech Ecosystem: The discussion needs to extend to the role of liberalism and the resulting tech ecosystem in perpetuating these problems. We need to criticize how the #openweb was enclosed and co-opted by the #dotcom industry, with complicity from #fashionista liberal circles.

* Call to Action: The #dotcons, critique is a call to action against those who exploit technology for profit without regard for societal consequences. It condemns the manipulation and exploitation within the tech industry and urges a more critical approach to understanding and addressing these issues.

In summary, we need to challenge the use of “common sense” terms like “#enshittification” to describe complex societal problems, advocating instead for a deeper examination of the profit-driven motives and systemic inequalities that underlie deteriorating online quality and community experiences. #dotcons highlights the importance of accountability and critical view in addressing the harmful impacts of technology in the hands of capitalism on society.

Our liberals need to think about this, if they can think, best not to be a prat about this please.

More on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification

#Fediverse how can we do better

#Fediverse how can we do better at this https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/the-process-platform-isnt-working/3923/6

The current move to #blocking of the #dotcons moving to the #openweb is not a real solution, it’s like we are putting our heads in the sand. We need to understand that our “native” projects are #4opens thus anyone, including the #dotcons can be a part of the #openweb in this it’s a good thing they are moving back to this space.

Feel free to block them, but pushing this path as a solution is both naive and self-defeating. We need to do better and build a healthy culture and a diverstay of tools, it’s always a fight, hiding in a cave wins no wars, and we are in a war.

Issue within the #Fediverse community regarding the handling of problematic behaviour or interactions on the platform. A breakdown of the key points:

  1. Problem with Blocking: That simply blocking users or instances (such as the #dotcons) is not an effective long-term solution to fostering a healthy and diverse community within the Fediverse. Blocking is “putting your head in the sand,” ignoring or isolating problematic elements doesn’t resolve underlying issues.
  2. Advocating for Openness: Emphasizes that the Fediverse should remain true to its principles of openness (#4opens), which allow anyone, including controversial entities like the #dotcons, to participate. This openness is a positive aspect of the #openweb.
  3. Building a Healthy Culture: Rather than relying on blocking, we need to advocate for actively building a healthy culture within the #Fediverse. This involves nurturing diversity of tools and fostering a community where constructive engagement and dialogue can thrive.
  4. Need for Engagement and Solutions: The importance of proactive engagement and problem-solving. We need to warn against passivity (“hiding in a cave”) and encourages efforts to address challenges head-on to create a stronger and more resilient ecosystem.

Overall, a call for constructive action within the #Fediverse community, moving beyond simple blocking measures and focusing on building a robust and inclusive path that aligns with core values of openness and diversity. With an emphasis on proactive engagement, collective responsibility, and continuous improvement to create a healthier online and offline environment.

humm needs more…