It’s less messy to see the “protocol wars” of #bluesky #Nostr #activitypub from a social understanding

Listening to the #mainstreaming of the 3 protocol mess, we have a building signal-to-noise issue. We need to push signal, so good to think before you share something that is likely more noise on this subject.

20338

As a way out of this, I have been pushing bridges for a while as they are the lowest common denominator and can be built and implemented “permissionless” to allow people to cross #4opens protocols. “Permissionless” is important as the is no way you would get consensus to do this, without adding much more mess. Technically, people coding the protocols are too busy with tribalism to focus on cross protocol interop… or they would not be building a new protocol

The advantage of a bridge is you do not have to get the codebase to change their project – it’s just a relay that connects one protocol to another, “permissionless”. Nobody has to federate, they can unfederated from a relay if they don’t like it.

It’s a BAD but good tech solution, and likely the best we can do to mediate the current squealing mess our #fahernistas make.

All the projects are actually kinda good, they are mostly #4opens and #openweb native this is a BIG move away from the #dotcons so good – TICK

I find it less messy to talk about the “protocol wars” of #bluesky #Nostr #activitypub from a social understanding.

They all share #4opens #openweb tech, so this is a win.

Where they differ is in the “culture” they come from and push.

#bluesky comes from surveillance capitalism, it’s from the #dotcons and has meany of the same assumptions, just “better”.

#Nostr comes from the #encryptionists and #bitcoin bro crew and suffers from being from this mess.

#activitypub is #openweb native and comes from the #4opens traditions the whole software world is actually built on.

#KISS

For us guys building on #ActivityPub, it’s important to keep focus that the #Fediverse was built on “trust” and will likely fail fast if we move to building it on “fear”.

Please, please, “don’t be a prat” about these thanks.

People destroy things they love, not from hate, more from possession

The mess we make, people often destroy things they love, not from hate, more from possession. Let’s look at a few projects on this path to critique the fall short of potential due to a lack of connectivity and maturity

The distributed cooperative organisation project on https://anagora.org while it aims to provide organizational tools for cooperative, commons-oriented, and feminist economic forms, it lacks the necessary links and connections to be in any way truly effective.

  • http://disco.coop/manifesto/ This is the #fahernista view of the 20-year-old #OMN project, it is full of teenage focus and might be interesting if it LINKED, but it does not, flight and scatter to the wind, more to compost.

The #DisCO (Distributed Cooperative Organisations) manifesto at disco.coop is the same project run by #fahernistas

The COMPOST digital magazine (two.compost.digital) is also in similar terms, #NGO and #fahernista path, with no affective linking.

These projects are all #blocking by occupying space. In the #fahernista path, it’s good to see how possessiveness leads to unintended destruction of things we cherish. This reflects a common path of human nature, where love and possession become intertwined, with negative consequences.

“Flight and scatter to the wind, more to compost” these projects, despite their intentions, ultimately dissipate or break down without achieving any goals. The use of “compost” as a metaphor that suggests that in their failure, these projects might contribute to future growth or development in unexpected ways. The hashtag “#blocking” is a call to prevent or resist these ineffective approaches.

Our “common sense” paths are often bad:

This path of possession can early lead to bad paths in alt organising. Abuse of power, when leadership positions within a cooperative become possessive of their authority, this can lead to corrupt practices and mismanagement, misappropriation of resources, even fraud. The desire to maintain control and cover up misdeeds leads to the destruction of records and falsification of information. Erosion of cooperative principles grow when peoples interests overshadow collective goals, this can destroy the ethos of cooperation. Then trying to fix this becomes much harder with resistance to transparency, and over control of information. This all leads naturally to conflict and retaliation, destructive actions against those who challenge them.

How possessiveness in different forms undermines the collaborative nature of cooperatives, leading to the destruction of trust, resources, and the organisation’s integrity.

An activist history of the web

The “better” #closedweb (ISP intranets) was “surprisingly” destroyed by the “inferer” #openweb, which then exploded in use to spread everywhere. The #mainstreaming thinking then tried and failed to recapture this project for ten years as it takes up global space, and was a real challenge change, that the “common sense” said should not exist. This working alternative was finally sold out by our own #fahernistas, who bribed with money and statues members of the “unthinking” #geekproblem to build the #dotcons that rapidly took over the #openweb space.

Our wider activist #fashernistas created “liberal stories” about how embracing the #dotcons was a good path. The wider #fahernistas flocked to these #closedweb spaces to grasp at the real early power they provided, after society had finished this shift, the bate and switch took this power away, and we were left with “servalence capitalism” and no social power, as was obvuse at the time it was a con.

Our #fashernistats then pissed tech change/challenge agenst the wall for ten years. While the #openweb user facing technology withered, ignored and irrelevant to #mainstreaming. A few years ago we had an “accidental” #openweb reboot with #activitypub and soon after pushing of the next generation of #closedweb projects with #web03 leaving us in the current messy times.

Yes now the #dotcons are roting, but the #openweb is only a small change challenge due to our #fahernistas and #geekproblem actively #BLOCKING the change challenge inherent to the project.

Where are we now and what can we learn from this? Liberalism in tech are often active prats, co-opting, bait and switch and taking the easy #NGO funded path when the choice comes. They are #friendlyenemies, even when they deny this with all their “common sense”. Ideas to mediate this, please?

Do you except that “new” is often #deathcult (neo-liberalism) and #postmodernism because this is “common sense” what is your plan/idea to get around these problems?

I have had 20 years of “new” and am very underwhelmed, actually it’s almost all #blocking or adding to the #techshit to be composed. This is obviously a problem that needs to be mediated, what is your plan/process to have a better outcome?

Remember that the only thing that has worked in the last 10 years has been copying #dotcons with #activertypub every themselves has failed, what can we learn from this?

This is an important question that the #OMN project mediates.

Change and challange to compost the piles of techshit

Anyone interested in doing a sexy site for the #4opens think people need “official” look and feel to make use of this powerful tool to fight the #techshit #techcurn and help to reboot the #openweb

Basically we need this on a nicely designed page with a bit of polish on the text unite.openworlds.info/Open-Med

Then link back to the wiki for full humane use space.

4opensOpen Media Network

This is needed as a “common sense” existing path out of pointless #techchurn to give our lost #fahernistas something real to work for/to/on.

The #4opens is simply the foundation of open-source development “socialized” for change/challenge.

We need this to escape the #techshit

Q. I think we need a 5th open: #openAccess. If you have the #4opens, but the project is jailed in the #walledGarden of #gitlab.com (which blocks some people from participation), the 4 opens are hindered by reduced/suppressed participation. E.g. some people cannot (or will not) file bug reports. So, can we get #5opens?

A. The #4opens is only designed to deal with 95% of the #techshit the rest is open to our creativity. Am interested in a #4opens review of GitHub

What we are likely to find is that GitHub is still inside the world of open source development, this is both good and bad, good in the sense of Microsoft moving away from its closed source roots, bad in the sense that they are doing it in the attempt to co-opt and extinguish.

The #4opens are not a way of keeping them out, but they are a way of mediating and stopping the extinguish bit when used as a tool to aggressively block that move.

It would help to think about society rather than individuals – for diversity as a healthy path. As long as they have opendata and open “Industrial” standards, you can move your work in and out… Openprocess makes easier as the documentation can be created to help people do this.

The open licence keeps you in control of your work, while promoting social use

Am interested in how #openacess adds over the other #4opens as I think you end up with “open access” from the outcome of the first 4 can we think about this?

Was thinking about this when reading other tweets and the #4opens gives you open access already, so we don’t need a 5th open #KISS

Good to have a chance to think these things though, thanks for the question.