Tag: feudalism

Clear and urgent challenge, to step away from entrenched thinking

There are deep cultural and structural problem within the #openweb and tech spaces, which are often shaped by entrenched hierarchical thinking (#feudalism) and the inability to embrace horizontal governance models. This #geekproblem represents a persistent resistance to the solutions necessary for fostering the meaningful change we need, instead they’re defaulting to patterns that reinforce the status quo (#deathcult worshipping).

Horizontal solutions have proven foundations, community-driven models like #OGB (Open Governance Body) reflects a grounded understanding of what works. Over five years of work in the decentralized Fediverse shows that horizontal technology can scale without succumbing to the pitfalls of centralized, hierarchical control.

#Nothingnew, combining what works. The creative task now is to integrate these proven social and technical approaches into cohesive systems: #OMN (Open Media Network): A decentralized framework for building media networks based on trust, transparency, and shared governance. #OGB: A governance model for the open web, ensuring horizontal decision-making structures that resist co-option by hierarchical or neoliberal influences. #Indymediaback: Reviving radical, grassroots media projects that embody these principles, amplifying voices outside the mainstream.

Breaking the #blocking cycle, when discussions about radical or progressive changes are met with #blocking, the result is often a stagnant cycle of unresolved issues that erode goodwill. This stagnation is a direct threat to the social commons. To break this cycle we can use and think inside the Fluff/Spiky debate to encourage broad, inclusive thinking while not shying away from hard truths and unpopular calls for accountability. Reject #fashernista worship to push back against superficial trends that align with neoliberal or #mainstreaming values, which are ultimately harmful to the #openweb paths.

The language trap, #liberalism, and by extension #neoliberalism, dominates conversations without a critical examination of its misalignment with the goals of the openweb. Calling this out is uncomfortable but necessary, to recognize and challenge how these frameworks perpetuate the #deathcult.

You’ve outlined a clear and urgent challenge, to step away from entrenched thinking and embrace the tools and principles that can rebuild the openweb. The question remains, will others step up to help make this happen? Are they ready to rise to this challenge?

Grassroots in Tech Communities: Challenges and Paths

The discussions surrounding grassroots movements within tech communities intersects with broader social themes, such as #neoliberalism and #postmodernism. These ideologies shape what is considered “common sense” and can create real barriers to introducing alternative viewpoints and practices. Within this context, progressive grassroots initiatives aim to counteract these dominant paradigms, but they frequently face challenges both from within and outside their communities.

The concept of #mainstreaming refers to the process where dominant ideologies and practices become the accepted norm, marginalizing alternative perspectives. This current mainstreaming is driven by the forces of neoliberalism, emphasizes market-driven solutions and (stupid) individualism, and (zombie) postmodernism, that foster a sense of scepticism and relativism. Together, these forces create a “common sense” that is actively hostile to grassroots progressive initiatives.

Let’s look at a few of the “surface issue” faced by Grassroots Movements:

  • Perception of Spam: As highlighted in #socialhub experiences, grassroots advocates face accusations of spamming when they consistently share links and resources to support #KISS arguments. This perception can stem from a misunderstanding of the intent behind sharing information, which is to provide context and facilitate basic understanding.
  • Resistance to Alternative Views: When #mainstreaming ideas are challenged, the response is often, hostile, defensive or dismissive. This resistance is rooted in cognitive dissonance and the threat to personal and collective identities that alternative viewpoints pose.
  • Governance Issues: Effective governance within tech communities is crucial for fostering inclusivity and legitimacy. However, governance processes become contentious, particularly when there are differing visions for the community’s direction and priorities. This is a problem with much of the #feudalism in #FOSS thinking.

Some projects that are designed to mediate these issues

  • The Open-Media-Network (#OMN) and its associated projects, such as the Open Web Governance Body (#OGB) and the framework, represent grassroots efforts to address these challenges. These initiatives aim to create a more democratic and inclusive “trust” based internet by emphasizing transparency, open governance, and community-driven development.
  • Open Web Governance Body (#OGB): Project focuses on creating governance structures for horizontal projects using simple online tools. By promoting open and inclusive governance, the OGB mitigates the issues caused by #mainstreaming and ensure that grassroots voices are heard and valued.
  • The Framework: Advocates for open data, open source, open standards, and open processes. By adhering to these principles, grassroots movements can create robust defences against co-optation and maintain their autonomy and integrity.

What can you do to help:

  • Build Community and Solidarity: Strengthening ties within the community and fostering a sense of shared purpose to help counteract the fragmentation often caused by dominant ideologies.
  • Educate and Inform: Providing accessible and compelling information about the benefits of alternative viewpoints and practices to shift perceptions and reduce resistance.
  • Engage in Dialogue: Creating spaces for open and respectful dialogue can help bridge divides and foster mutual understanding.
  • Leverage Technology: Utilizing #openweb tools and platforms like the #OMN and wider #Fediverse empower grassroots movements to organize effectively and promote their message to escape the #dotcons echo chambers.

The struggle to establish and maintain grassroots movements within tech communities is ongoing and very messy. By understanding the dynamics of #mainstreaming and employing strategies to counteract its effects, these movements can create more inclusive and democratic spaces. The initiatives by the Open-Media-Network offer real grassroots frameworks and tools for achieving these goals, demonstrating that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can indeed change the world.

Become a part of this movement https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Feudalism, #FOSS native governance?

Interesting to see this metaphor take off

#Feudalism, in Free and Open Source Software (#FOSS) governance, is not inherently native but is often found due to structural and cultural factors inside the development communities.

Feudalism in FOSS

  1. Hierarchy and Control: In FOSS projects, a small group of core maintainers or a single benevolent dictator (often the project’s founder) holds power over decision-making processes. This creates a hierarchical structure where decision-making authority is concentrated.
  2. Dependency on Maintainers: Contributors depend on the core maintainers to merge their contributions and resolve issues. This dependency creates a power dynamic where the maintainers like courtiers have control over the project’s direction and priorities.
  3. Gatekeeping: Core maintainers act as gatekeepers, deciding which contributions are accepted and which are not. This leads to favouritism and exclusion, reminiscent of feudal lords controlling access to resources and opportunities.

Why?

  1. Volunteer Nature of Contributions: Since contributors are volunteers, there is no structure to ensure equal participation or accountability. Core maintainers emerge “naturally” based on their sustained contributions and expertise.
  2. Meritocracy Ideals: FOSS communities value meritocracy, people gain influence based on their contributions. However, this leads to entrenched power structures, as those who have contributed the most or the longest hold sway, sometimes stifling new contributors’ voices.
  3. Resource Scarcity: Many #FOSS projects operate with limited resources, leading to a concentration of control among those who dedicate the most time and effort. This result in a few individuals having outsized influence.

Manifestations

  1. Benevolent Dictator for Life (BDFL): Projects like Python had Guido van Rossum as a #BDFL, where his decisions are final. While this can lead to clear and consistent leadership, it also centralizes power.
  2. Core Team Dominance: In projects like Linux, the core team led by Linus Torvalds has control over the kernel’s development. This centralized control lead to conflicts within the community, as seen in the controversies around code of conduct enforcement and inclusivity.

Balancing Feudalism.

  1. Distributed Governance Models: Some FOSS projects adopt #NGO type democratic or federated governance models, such as Apache Software Foundation’s model, which emphasizes burocratic community-driven decision-making and a meritocratic process for becoming a committer or PMC member.
  2. Transparency and Accountability: Increasing transparency in decision-making helps to hold maintainers accountable through open process and community oversight plays a role in helping mitigate feudal tendencies.
  3. Community Practices: Promoting diversity and inclusivity helps balance power dynamics. Encouraging mentorship and lowering barriers to entry for contributors also helps distribute influence.

Conclusion

While feudalism is not inherent to #FOSS governance, structural and cultural factors lead to feudal-like power dynamics. Addressing these issues requires conscious effort to promote full transparency, accountability, and inclusivity within the community. Adopting balanced governance models and practices, like the #OGB, allow projects to mitigate the risks of feudalism and ensure a healthier development environment.

A wider picture of this mess

Talking about #hashtags

We need to think of a serendipity view of how #hashtags work and how our coder kings implement them (#feudalism). Not saying this is a good aproch… i don’t know… but spelling hashtags “wrong” makes their use in categorization and sorting work differently. Might be worth thinking if this could add value or is purely negative? This depends on different views on federation and ideas of a universal truth or messy “truths”. Composting thought on this.

In the #OMN coding project, currently offline (unite.openworlds.info) we add word grouping flows, so you can say one hashtag is the same as another, ie. you can group different “meanings” to build category flows. This makes misspelled hashtags functional, and our current coding broken from the #OMN point of view.

It’s not implemented, is a speck projects so can’t test this. Over the last year I have put 5 #FOSS funding applications in to try and get this built, 3 turned down so far 2 more to be turned down (cross fingers and toes not) soon. Our #AP #openweb reboot is being destroyed by our #fahernistas and #geekproblem nothing new here, but we do need to do better.

That’s what we set out to fix 20 years ago, with the #OMN still digging, but my shovel has no handeal nor a head… says the man on his knees hands covered in shit… composting worthwhile however you do it, I could not make this shit up… but we keep making more #techshit

Why is Mastodon so dominant in the fediverse?

Q. Why is Mastodon so dominant in the fediverse?

A. It had better #UX and @Gargron running it was an effective communicator at #KISS and built it out as a project alongside a healthy (white) lie about security and privacy.
The rest of the projects lacked these things – #Pleroma the obverse compaine was ripped apart by the #geekproblem then embraced by the right-wing. #Peertube was stuck in a good but closed development for years. #Pixelfed is a little brother project to #mastodon. Then there are a whole flood of #NGO funded projects that have no community.

Might be useful to see it as we’re having a “KING” problem, then the rest are #feudalism all the way down. This should be easy to fix as its and all #openweb, but it’s not. Just about everyone is hard #BLOCKING the obvuse need for “democracy” as a path out of the mess #OGB

How is the #NOSTR world doing on this?

Talking about trust and power in networks

A. on the subject of “security” we have a #open policy of not trusting ANY client server security at all, so this should only be done as far as possible and having limited trust in #p2p security, even though we use this, because of the insecurity of the underlighting syteams it runs on, mostly old outdated phones, built as blobs by #dotcons this simple approach gets round much of the current thinking of technical “security” ie. the is almost non at a normal use level and little real security at the paranoid level as you will be talking to the normal level so there security will fail even if yours is solid. good to keep this in mind 🙂

The #OMN is all about people messing around with each others data 😉 but yes we need good basic security, (sudo anomumus) accounts, public audit trails (openprocess) everywhere. we will need digital hashes/cigs for media items etc. but the data it self just sloshes around and gets hacked at and added to. its a commons, the rules are social based on trust flows, they are not mostly hard coded or encrypted. but we add a smidgen of hardcoding and decryption ONLY were its needed. So 90% trust flows, 5% social norms, 4% hardcoded, 1% encryption is my thinking.

A. Data has the value the instance itself is transitory, and yes the instance is needed and stores the data but if it vanishes it has little impact on the value (the data), we build this into the network.

Q. am talking about the machines

A. We won’t the instance to stay up and be secure, BUT we build the network, so it keeps working when they are hacked and poisend by bad actors.

Q. Yes, but that doesn’t mean we make things easy for bad actors

A. Yes, the code and instances have to be secure, but the network flows, and the data soup have to keep working when the individual instances are hacked and poised, no security is fool prof and the #OMN is focused on building trust so is inherently more open to fools, we build with this in mind. We are building a #KISS semantic internet of data/flows. For example the idea of rollback as a core security model rather than more traditional hard (control) security is a good fit, due to the approach, the missing few days of data will (mostly) rollback into the instance so the cost of being hacked/trust failed is less of a block to being open and (social) trusting to bring in actors/sysadmins/moderates etc. On the tin, we are clear that our network is a trust based “lossy” network.

Where you can still run the #OMN as a hard control based secure network if you wont BUT it will not scale to the social change/challenge if this second option is the only one, this is the current #geekproblem we need to work our way out of. The first path of trust based “lossy” is where the real horizontal “power” comes from.

Q. We sometimes need to think/talk about “security”.

A. I can only repeat I don’t have a solution to this, but I have a path to one, make the user facing “trust” based then from this, “trust” them to fix the next “problem” the #geekproblem of the hardcoded #feudalism of all our networks and code. Or in other words head in sand and pray someone else will fix it, am bussey 😉

On the #OMN projects maybe we need to list what needs to be secure: the account, the activity feed, the data credit might be more but can’t think of much else off the top of my head. And yes to secure the account the instance has to be secure, to secure the activity feed the flows need to be secure, to secure the credit the likely needs to be some hashing done on the media objects.
We likely end up back close to the place we started, but we come to this from a very different place, if that makes sense. This path we take matters.

Nurturing community’s – tech is not going to do this

On the #fediverse, we need to work/think about the need to cross-link the subject instance.

As, the idea of as instance as a community is lightly built into the code of mastodon. So individuals and groups need to push this into existence, then add issues to the #ygithub mastodon tracker to try and get this into the code (hard job due to #feudalism as governance in #FOSS).

As a first step, we need to build flows between subject instances by individually fallowing people cross subject instance, to leak the content into timelines. Then encourage people to look at the global and local timelines, not just their personal timeline, which is likely pretty empty.

Nurturing community’s – the tech is not going to do this for us, is my thinking. This is a problem as community’s have the power for social change/challenge we need to get out of this mess.

I am asking people to try working round the poor “community” side of the hard coded ideas of community in mastodon.

A conversation on trust and tech with #OMN projects

Remember the #fedivers is built like this, no geek in their right minds would do this, yet we use it every day

All our existing code is based on #feudalism master (admin) surf (user) this is why it is defenceless vs capitalism (#dotcons)

There have been attempts to build democratic code, early #wikis, think #indymedia

#geekproblem “common sense” shifted them back into feudalism.

We have a hard #BLOCK on democratic code, if you want to change/challenge then this blocking needs to be removed.

The #OMN is a project for this, it’s an uphill battle to bring democracy into our coding.

This is the media project (text needs a update” unite.openworlds.info/Open-MedOFFLINE

Governance for horizontals to talk to “vertical power” unite.openworlds.info/Open-MedOFFLINE

And a video for you visionon.tv/w/jqTdss1qrdk4yEZi OFFLINE

We get into the details, of the #OMN you would get Boleyn tag changes on import, so you can auto translate guardian issued tags and add your own tags with both rules and manually.

These tags would flow out of your instances and could flow back to the guardian if you trusted each other.

The idea is to turn news stories/videos into “commons” objects with rich flowing metadata… done in a #KISS way based on trust/moderated link/flows

RSS bring in the legacy objects #activitypub is the main transport protocol.

It’s the news part of the #fediverse, our first implementation of this would be #indmediaback

The idea is to decenter the server, the data is in a soup that flows… #activertypub is two-way this is need to build the horizontal network, so the soup does not ONLY flow one way.

Nobody is in charge, no slaves, no masters. Only trusted or moderated flows. It needs to be two-way, though you are right people being human meany will be one way. BUT we are not building it that way 🙂

RSS brings the legacy in, and it’s a simple display format for embeds and passive news feeds etc.

I think people find the “nobody is in charge” bit a very hard thing to understand, even though we have built meany networks/social groups on this idea, and still do.

In the realm of tech, I call this #blocking the #geekproblem and to get anywhere we need to take the “problem” outa “geek” or we are left with the mess (in a bad way)

#KISS