Non classé

Some aspects of the geekproblem

The #geekproblem refers to the challenges and limitations that arise from the dominance of a particular “problem” geek culture within the technology industry and #FOSS. This culture is characterized by a strong emphasis on technical expertise, at the expense of social, ethical, and democratic considerations. The geek culture prioritize technical solutions and innovations over social implications, which leads to problems in the development and deployment of #openweb technology.

Here are some aspects of this geekproblem:

  1. Technical Bias: Geek “problem” culture tends to favour technical solutions to problems without considering the broader social context or implications. This results in the development of technologies that are inhuman, inaccessible, exclusionary, and often harmful.
  2. Meritocracy: Geek”problem” culture often operates on the principle of meritocracy, where individuals are valued based on their technical skills and knowledge. This leads to the ignoring of voices and perspectives from non-technical backgrounds, contributing to a lack of diversity and inclusivity and functionality in #FOSS projects.
  3. Lack of Empathy: The geek “problem” culture’s focus on technical excellence leads to a lack of empathy for users who are not as technically proficient. This results in user interfaces and experiences that are difficult to understand or navigate for non-technical people, further exacerbating digital divides and inequalities and use of #FOSS code.
  4. Resistance to Change: Geek “problem” culture can be resistant to change, particularly when it comes to questioning established technical norms or practices. This resistance can hinder progress in addressing social, ethical, and environmental challenges that require broader systemic changes beyond technical solutions.
  5. Power Dynamics: The dominance of geek “problem” culture creates power imbalances within the tech industry, where certain individuals or groups hold disproportionate influence over decision-making processes. This results in the prioritization of technical interests over broader social or ethical concerns.

Overall, the #geekproblem highlights the need for a more holistic and inclusive approach to technology development that considers social, ethical, and democratic dimensions alongside technical considerations. Addressing the geekproblem requires challenging social structures and promoting diversity, empathy, and democratic decision-making within the development and #FOSS communertys.


The problem with #openweb funding and the tools people use

#NGO Internet funding organizations often use #closedweb tools despite their stated commitment to openness and the Digital Commons. Some of these reasons:

* Familiarity and Convenience: Many funding organizations and their staff are accustomed to using closed tools due to their prevalence in the industry. This is a non “native” aproch

* Security Concerns: Closed tools are perceived as more secure, especially when dealing with sensitive information or financial transactions. Funding organizations prioritize security over openness.

* Vendor Lock-In: Closed tools come bundled with proprietary services or platforms, leading to vendor lock-in. Once an organization becomes reliant on a particular closed tool, switching to open alternatives can be challenging and costly.

* Perceived Reliability: Closed tools are often associated with established companies or brands known for their reliability and stability. Funding organizations feel more confident entrusting their operations to these tools, especially if they lack experience with open alternatives.

* Lack of Awareness: Despite their commitment to openness, some funding organizations may not be aware of the availability or benefits of open tools. They may simply default to using closed tools out of habit or lack of knowledge about alternative options.

However, advocating for the use of open tools, such as #FOSS video streaming solutions and open collaboration platforms, aligns with the principles of openness and transparency promoted by funding organizations like #NGI. By encouraging the adoption of open tools at events and in everyday operations, organizations can demonstrate their commitment to fostering a more inclusive, accessible, and equitable #openweb.

We need to advocate for a more open-web native approach within the EU and beyond, ensuring that the internet remains a digital common that empowers people and promotes trust, collaboration, and innovation.

Please share this thanks


The Open Governance Body: Revolutionizing Governance with Grassroots Tech

In our ever-evolving digital world, governance is often left behind, struggling to catch up with the pace of technology and social change. Among the myriad of attempts to tackle this problem, there’s one that stands out for its innovative and participatory approach: the Open Governance Body (#OGB). This grassroots, federated project is more than just another tech experiment; it’s a blueprint for the future of human-scale governance.

The Flawed Systems of Old

Let’s face it—governance, as we know it, is far from perfect. Our current systems are either too unwieldy for large-scale implementation or too limited for local contexts. Traditional Free/Open Source (#FOSS) governance models might be native to the tech world, but they’re entrenched in a medieval hierarchy, reminiscent of kings, nobles, and peasants. Who needs feudalism in the digital age?

#Mainstreaming politics, with its frequent ineffectuality in the face of #climatechaos, also demonstrates that we desperately need something that works—something innovatively rooted yet freely scalable.

Grassroots Activism Meets the Fediverse

Enter the #OGB, a robust fusion of proven federated technology and grassroots governance. It’s the brainchild of a diverse group of independent thinkers who understand that, progressive social change has always sprung from the bottom up. They’ve taken the federated solution framework of #ActivityPub (think decentralized social networks) and meshed it with organic activist governance.

This blend gave birth to a surprisingly simple yet powerful platform based on sortation, where roles and responsibilities are distributed fairly, fostering efficient decision-making.

A Tale of European Success

The potential of #OGB is more than just theoretical talk—it’s been field-tested with promising results. Our band of “libertarian cats” successfully outreached to the European Union, showcasing the versatility of ActivityPub and the #fediverse. Presentations and collaborations with EU bureaucrats catalysed the setup of project outline, a prescient move that looked like wisdom personified post-Twitter’s dramatic downturn.

Market Dynamics—A Hypothetical Utopia

Think of a bustling local street market—a microcosm of society with stallholders, shoppers, and various stakeholders like organizers, trash collectors, and local law enforcement. The #OGB can empower such a community to self-govern in harmony, thereby bypassing cumbersome bureaucracy.

It’s a permissionless rollout—meaning, creating a governance community is as easy as setting up an instance, generating a QR code, and inviting market participants to jump on board with a simple app installation. From there, a sortation algorithm orchestrates the decision-making process, naturally enticing more stakeholders to participate.

From Small Markets to Society at Large

This isn’t just about one market. The beauty of #OGB is its inherent scalability and adaptability. Just as the #fediverse has grown organically over the years, OGB can proliferate from one market to others, weaving a tapestry of self-governance that could very well encompass various societal facets.

“We know the grassroots process of organizing works. We’ve seen the federated model scale times over. Combine them, and we have a DIY governance culture that could revolutionize society.”

A History of Activism, A Future of Change

The Open Governance Body is not just a project; it is the culmination of centuries of activism and social organizing techniques, proven time and again. Combined with the remarkable technological advancements of the fediverse, OGB embodies a modern solution rooted in historical success. It’s a rallying cry for those seeking to instill real, lasting change in the world through cooperative, human-centric means.

The future of governance looks brighter with initiatives like OGB. Unlike the faltering structures of old, this endeavor promises to usher in an era where technology enables democracy and human connection, not control and division. It’s time to embrace the open governance body, roll up our sleeves, and be a part of the grassroots revolution.

Remember, progress doesn’t ask for permission—it is an open invitation to innovate, participate and effectuate change. Join the OGB movement, and let’s co-create a governance model that befits our times and aspirations.


1. Have you heard about #OGB? It’s breaking boundaries in web governance through grassroots activism & federated tech! Get ready to govern your own communities with human-scale solutions that actually work.
2. Exciting news: The federation of #ActivityPub proves we can scale horizontally and spark real change! Combined with grassroots governance, we’re onto a new chapter of progressive social shifts. Let’s build this together!
3. Picture this: A street market governed organically by its community via #OGB. Stallholders, customers, and local services all have a say. Ready to revolutionize the way we collaborate and manage shared spaces?
4. Do you want an active role in shaping your community? With #OGB permissionless roll-outs, anyone can start making impactful decisions. Let’s grow this movement, producers by producer group, instance by instance!
5. Imagine a system where your voice directly influences your surroundings. #OGB is blending hundreds of years of activist governance with the scalable power of the #fediverse. Let’s make self-governance the norm!
6. We’re planting seeds for a #DIY grassroots culture to flourish across society with #OGB. No permission needed, just the desire for change and collaboration. Who’s ready to be part of this empowering journey?

Now, where is my shovel?

A lot of current #mainstreaming arguments that are treated as left and right are actually not. They are arguments between modernism and postmodernism. This is a mess that the postmodernists have pushed over the last 40 years.

We need tools for composting this mess, shovels come to mind. But it’s hard to grasp a shovel on your knees with no handle and no head… so we are currently dealing with the shit with our hands, yes it’s messy.

We have people who are dogmatic, careerist and secretly worshipping the #deathcult as the #mainstreaming voices of much of the #Fediverse, this is ALWAYS a problem in activism and #FOSS is activism if it’s anything at all.

This is an issue that needs active mediation, and yes this will create mess and bad feelings, this is how you can tell you are doing the right thing and being useful… phwww… work.

Now, where is my shovel?



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 ( 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


The signal to noise issue of our #geekproblem

#Mastodon and the wider #fedivers are native #openweb project based on the people who try to “harden” and “secure” these are completely missing where the value is at.

They are spreading #FUD and endangering real activists acting this way.

Media is “open” using #ActivertyPub.

Anything that is not media should use encrypted p2p chat, there are many mature #FOSS projects for this.

At the moment as the #Fediverse is a #OMN based on the you have very low barrier to running or even developing an instance, this is where the value is.

Adding security generally makes a HUGE barrier to Dev and #DIY running an instance.

The #geekproblem has no idea of the damage they do when pushing their “common sense”. This creates a signal-to-noise issue that has been blocking alt for 20 years.



Signal to noise on the #FBI seazing a database of a fedivers instance

The #Fediverse is all #4opens so should not be used for anything that should be P2P encrypted. It’s important to keep this clear to users by not focused on the fig leaf of “hardening” security as the is non. It’s a very successful #OMN open media network, and it’s value lies in this.

Peoples pushing this are often not seeing the point that it’s designed #4opens this is why it works.

Both paths have value, but they are different.

And the push a different project (#4closes) which is fine. But not a #OMN maybe they would be better off working on bridges as companion projects.

Good to think about this mess they talk about as it is not solved by more tech we already have most of what we need.

* Open media is #4opens based on trust, the current ActivityPub is a relatively #KISS good example of this.

* Privacy is encrypted p2p chat, which the are meany good #UX mature #FOSS projects you can find

The change we need is social, getting people to use the different approaches for different needs, this is surprisingly difficult.

Bridges while dangerous are needed here, it’s good to talk about this in the sense of “security”.

This text reads like a vanguardists path, based on #mainstreaming reading and narrow #geekproblem thinking. It’s missing the paths that hold value in #4opens horizontal activist paths we are building. But yes, we are getting lost in the growing #fedivers and the wider spread of #openweb  reboot diversity projects.

What it does highlight is the need for social and political thinking is needed, the is value there.

It’s hard to stress how “nave” meany devs on the #fedivers

#openweb #4opens is about building human trust, hard security is a very slightly overlapping but easy to see different path for building non “trust” based connections.

Some surprisingly hard to build bridges might help with this ongoing mess.

Can you see any of this feedback?


Meta and the mess

#FOSS governance is based on #feudalism  the thing you learn from history is to never trust a king.

#meta and the messy path we are going down, Libertarian cats are completely pointless at this stage of mess, anyone got a plan?

#OGB #OMN #indymediaback


What is visionontv

#Visionontv is a grassroots media project that aims to provide an alternative to mainstream media by creating and distributing independent video content. The project has been running for over ten years and is based on the principles of openness, collaboration, and decentralization. It uses #FOSS open-source software and decentralized platforms to create and distribute activist video content. One of the key features of the project is its participation in the Open Media Network (#OMN), a decentralized network of media sites that share content and promote independent media that is not controlled by any single entity. The project emphasizes the importance of grassroots community-driven media, where people and groups can create and share their own content.


Keep building a better world, one link, one line of code at a time.

Once upon a time, in a world dominated by the #dotcons, closed-source technology and centralized decision-making, a small group of passionate activists and developers came together to reboot an old way of building technology. They believed that technology should serve the needs of people, not just the interests of big corporations and governments. They called themselves the community.

The community believed that openness and trust were the keys to creating technology that served the needs of people. They codified the existing #FOSS, open-source working practices as a process called the , which consisted of four #KISS principles: open data, open source, open “industrial” standards, and open process. They believed that by embracing these principles, they could create technology that was more transparent, collaborative, and decentralized.

The first principle of the was open data. The community believed that data should be freely available to everyone, so that anyone could use it to build new tools and uses. They created a platform #OMN where people could share data openly and collaborate on projects together.

The second principle of the was the #mainstreaming idea of open source. The community believed that software should be free and open for anyone to use, modify, and distribute. They created a library of open-source software that anyone could use to build new tools and services.

The third principle of the was open “industrial” standards. This principle was a little more complex, but it basically meant that technology should be built using open, standardized protocols that anyone could use. This would ensure that technology was interoperable and that people could easily switch between different tools and services.

The fourth and final principle of the was open process. This principle was perhaps the most important of all. The community believed that technology should be developed using transparent, collaborative processes that anyone could participate in. They organized on a platform where people could share ideas, collaborate on projects, and make decisions together.

Over time, the community grew and expanded. They built new tools and services that were based on the principles of openness and trust. They created a vibrant ecosystem of developers, designers, and users who worked together to create technology that served the needs of people, not just the interests of big corporations and governments.

And so the community continued to grow and evolve, creating a more healthy vision for technology. They knew that their work was just the start, they were determined to keep pushing forward, to keep building a better world, one link, one line of code at a time.