Non classé

Revisiting the ActivityPub foundation idea

There are a few views on this, the “common sense” #NGO path, an example Presenting Fedi Foundation: Empowerment for SocialHub community 1

And the more “nativist” openweb path What would a fediverse “governance” body look like?

And then we have the #geekproblem path, which has been pushing the fep process the last 2 years, but I think they are avoiding the politics of actually touching this issue. Fair enough.

If the “native” openweb crew don’t move past their frackterd “left” mess issues then I think in the end the #NGO path will be imposed, It’s simply what happens, the is a long history to this.

The argument between structure and lack of structure is often a strawman. For example, the ogb project, that came out of the #EU outreach has a lot of structure Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody: ON STANDBY due to waiting for funding – (OGB) This is a space for working through Governance of horizontal projects – using #KISS online tools. – openwebgovernancebody – Open Media Network BUT it is “nativist” rather than the hard structure that #NGO “foundation” people think of structure, it’s interesting when people can’t see this, it’s a kind of blindness, hard subject to talk.

Obviously anything that works has lots of structure, the more important question is about the visibility and “native” democracy of this structure. This is a hard argument/talk to have, and we do keep failing on this, what to do? Ideas please.


It’s interesting that formal coops almost never work in reality, if they do work they tend to become shadows of the #deathcult

In contrast, activist agonising works, often badly. But over all, activist organising is more successful at being an Alt than formal coops, there is a long unspoken history to back this up.

BUT our #mainstreaming always talks about formal coops, if they talk about alts at all, because they can ONLY see this shadow of the #deathcult

Activist organising is always fighting the #deathcult, so it rarely functions as this shadow. The #NGO world is always this shadow.

OK I admit with the right/left mess, this is more of a mess to be composted.


Current examples in the UK would be the coop supermarket, which got Tesco people in to make it profitable and has soviet design sense and staffing. And the coop bank, which is so bureaucratic as to be pretty much unusable. we have banked with them a number of times. On the positive side you had the co-op hollfood shops in the 1970’s which metamorphosed into the much less good health shops in the 1990’s. Just to touch on a few. Housing coops have an interesting history, quite a few stories to tell on these.

Don’t take me wrong, i like coops, but I don’t like #fahernistas pushing them over things where we other forms of organising will likely work better. Diversity is good, just don’t dogmatically push crap that then needs to be composted, we have enough shit to shovel without this thanks.

Non classé

The Rise and Fall of Grassroots Activism in the UK: A 40-Year Retrospective on the Openweb

Grassroots activism has undergone significant ups and downs over the past four decades, particularly within the realm of digital communication and organizing. This essay seeks to provide an overview of the challenges and successes experienced by grassroots activists during this time period, focusing on the evolution of the open internet and its eventual decline. It explores the ideological underpinnings of internet projects, the impact of funding and #mainstreaming efforts, and the shifting dynamics between open and closed systems. By examining these trends, we can better understand the complex interplay between technology, ideology, and activism in the digital age.

The Rise of the Open Internet: In the early days of the internet, there was a surge of enthusiasm for and decentralized communication platforms. Projects like early #indymedia, blogging platforms, wikis, and peer-to-peer networks flourished, driven by an ethos of democratization and empowerment. These offered people and grassroots movements unprecedented opportunities to connect, collaborate, and mobilize on a global scale. The ideology of the #openweb, rooted in principles of decentralization, transparency, and freedom, captured the imaginations of many activists seeking to challenge established power structures.

However, alongside the growth of #openweb projects, there were also significant challenges and tensions. The influx of funding from state, foundation, and #NGO sources brought both opportunities and risks. While funding provided vital resources for development and expansion, it also introduced pressures to conform to #mainstreaming norms and intrenched #geekproblem agendas. Additionally, as open internet projects gained popularity, they became susceptible to co-option and manipulation by corporate interests seeking to capitalize on the growing community interest.

The Fall of the Openweb: Despite early successes, the open internet eventually faced a decline, marked by the erosion of its ideological foundations and the resurgence of closed, centralized platforms, the #dotcons. One key factor in this decline was the failure of many openweb projects to align with the dominant ideology of the web itself. The pushing of non-native common sense. While some projects embraced the principles of trust-based anarchism and decentralized governance, others veered towards more hierarchical and exclusionary models.

The rise of a new generation of technologists and entrepreneurs, shaped by #neoliberal ideologies of individualism and competition, led to a merging of open and closed systems. This shift towards closed platforms, controlled by a handful of corporate giants, undermined the diversity and resilience of the openweb. The very chaos that once protected the openweb from vertical integration and monopolization was replaced by a homogenized landscape dominated by a few dominant #dotcons.

Challenges and Opportunities: In the face of these challenges, grassroots activists must grapple with the complexities of navigating a digital landscape that is increasingly hostile to their values and principles. The siloed nature of many media projects presents a barrier to collective action and solidarity, limiting their impact and longevity. However, there are also opportunities for resistance and resilience, through the cultivation of networks based on mutual aid and cooperation like the #OMN

Conclusion: The trajectory of grassroots activism in the UK over the past four decades reflects the broader shifts and tensions within the digital realm. The rise and fall of the openweb mirror the struggles of activists to carve out spaces for dissent and resistance in an increasingly corporatized and surveilled environment. By critically using the , examining the ideological underpinnings of internet projects and exploring alternative models of organizing, activists can work towards reclaiming the promise of a truly open and decentralized digital future.

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.

Non classé

Branding, addressing this issue

The issue of branding in the #openweb and #fediverse is multifaceted and touches on both technical and social aspects. A list of why addressing this issue is crucial:

  1. Barrier to Community Adoption: Strong branding in #openweb codebases is a barrier for communities to adopt and customize the technology for their collective use. It limits the ability for different communities and groups to collaborate and share resources.
  2. Centralization of Power: Project branding centralizes power in the hands of developers and funders, rather than the communities that are using and running the instances. This leads to decision-making processes that do not represent the diverse needs and perspectives of users.
  3. Stifling Innovation: A focus on project branding stifles innovation and creativity within the #fediverse. Communities feel constrained by the predefined branding and unable to express their identities and values through their #openweb spaces.
  4. Inequality in Representation: Branding perpetuates inequalities in representation within the #openweb ecosystem. Communities that lack the resources or technical expertise to customize branding feel marginalized or excluded from #geekproblem and #mainstreaming discussions and initiatives.
  5. Resistance to Change: Strong project branding creates resistance to change within the community. People become accustomed to the existing branding and are thus reluctant to embrace new ideas or alternative approaches that challenge this often ossified status quo.

To address these challenges, it’s important to shift the focus from strong project branding to instance branding to empower communities to make their own #openweb spaces for collaboration and collective action. This involves:

  • Rethinking the traditional #NGO concept of branding and finding ways to communicate the values and mission of projects without relying on dominating #mainstreaming, project branding.
  • Creating better user experiences for community members to shape the look and feel of their spaces and actively participate in decision-making processes.
  • Encouraging open and honest dialogue about the role of branding in the #fediverse and its impact on community participation and representation.
  • Promoting a culture of responsible branding/templating that prioritizes inclusivity, diversity, and empowerment of people and projects.

By adopting these principles and practices, we should create a decentralized ecosystem within the #openweb and #fediverse, where communities have greater power over their tools to build community.

Non classé

We can work towards a future

The discussion surrounding the classification of different versions of the web, such as #Web01, #Web02, #Web03, #Web04, or #Web05, is not merely an academic exercise but an aspect of understanding the evolving nature of the digital landscape. However, the proliferation of these hashtags can lead to confusion and contribute to the spread of fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) among users.

In response to this confusion, the hashtags #openweb and #closedweb offer a clear and concise way to delineate between platforms that embrace openness, transparency, and community control (#openweb) and those that prioritize proprietary technology, centralized control, and lack transparency (#closedweb). By using these hashtags, we can foster a better understanding of the ideological and technical underpinnings of different web platforms.

Projects like #indymediaback and #OMN exemplify grassroots efforts to promote decentralized, community-controlled media and communication platforms. These initiatives are vital in challenging the dominance of large corporations in shaping the digital landscape and in advocating for a more inclusive, diverse, and community-controlled approach to technology development.

At the heart of this discussion lies the #geekproblem, which refers to the tendency among technologically inclined people to prioritize technical solutions without considering their broader societal implications or the needs of ordinary people. By recognizing the #geekproblem, we can begin to address the inherent biases and limitations of tech-centric approaches to problem-solving and advocate for solutions that are more inclusive and community-driven.

The solution to this problem lies in developing social tech that transcends the #geekproblem and focuses on the needs and perspectives of the community. This entails involving a diverse group of people in the development and decision-making process and promoting open-source code, open standards, open governance, and open data in technology development. By embracing these principles, we can create a more equitable, transparent, and collaborative digital ecosystem.

However, achieving this vision requires overcoming challenges, including the resistance of the status quo and the fear of change. By actively using the #4opens—open participation, decentralization, transparency, and interoperability—we can challenge the prevailing narrative, call out pointless technologies, and compost the #techshit that contributes to the perpetuation of harmful social dynamics.

Moreover, it is essential to recognize that the struggle for a more equitable and sustainable future is inherently political. The dominance of large corporations and the perpetuation of #neoliberal ideologies pose significant barriers to progress. Therefore, it is imperative to mobilize collective action and advocate for policies and initiatives that prioritize the needs and well-being of communities over profit-driven interests.

In conclusion, the use of hashtags such as #openweb, #closedweb, and serves as a powerful tool for organizing and mobilizing grassroots efforts to challenge the status quo. By embracing these hashtags and the values they represent, we can work towards a future where technology serves the interests of the many rather than the few.

Non classé

A balanced and pragmatic approach to native #openweb security

Challenging the Universal Mandate of SSL: A Critique from the #OpenWeb

In the digital landscape, the ubiquitous presence of #SSL encryption, while undoubtedly enhancing security, raises questions about its compatibility with the ethos of the #OpenWeb. The prevailing narrative around SSL often overlooks its ideological underpinnings and the broader implications of its universal adoption. This article aims to challenge the hegemony of SSL by highlighting its limitations and proposing a more nuanced approach to internet security rooted in the principles of accessibility, decentralization, and community empowerment.

At the heart of the issue lies the distinction between the #OpenWeb and the #ClosedWeb, represented respectively by the ethos of accessibility and decentralization, and the closed-off, centralized nature web. While SSL undoubtedly offers security benefits, its imposition on all online interactions reflects not only technical considerations but also ideological stances. The insistence on universal SSL usage is symptomatic of what we term the #GeekProblem—an inclination among technologically inclined people to prioritize technical solutions without consideration of their broader societal implications or the needs of ordinary people.

The universal mandate of SSL, championed by tech giants like Google, not only introduces complexities and barriers for ordinary users but also contributes to the centralization of internet infrastructure. Let’s Encrypt, an American NGO and a dominant SSL certification authority, epitomizes this centralization, posing a significant risk of a single point of failure. If compromised, Let’s Encrypt could undermine the security of countless websites and services, highlighting the dangers of relying on centralized authorities for internet security.

Moreover, the imposition of SSL as a default requirement creates hurdles for community-run platforms and DIY enthusiasts seeking to establish their presence on the #OpenWeb. The technical intricacies involved in obtaining, installing, and maintaining SSL certificates can be daunting for non-experts, leading to barriers to entry and discouraging participation in the vibrant ecosystem of the #OpenWeb.

Critically examining the motivations behind the push for universal SSL adoption reveals a fear-based agenda rooted in a conservative ideology of control. By framing SSL as a tool to be judiciously used rather than universally mandated, challenges the prevailing narrative surrounding internet security and advocate for a more balanced and pragmatic approach. Embracing the principles—open participation, decentralization, transparency, and interoperability—offers a pathway to internet security that prioritizes accessibility, decentralization, and community autonomy.

In conclusion, the universal mandate of SSL represents not only a technical solution to security but also an ideological stance that warrants critical examination. By advocating for a more balanced and user-friendly approach rooted in the principles of the #OpenWeb, we can foster a digital landscape that empowers communities, fosters innovation, and safeguards social freedoms. It’s time to rethink the role of SSL in the #OpenWeb and embrace a more inclusive and decentralized vision of internet “trust” based security.


The #geekproblem is a part of our collective #deathcult

There is a value miss match that is a core part of the #geekproblem and its relationship to “normal” society .

One side prioritises the tech, the other the social, they then ignore each other. Both suffer and become pointless, or likely die out as a species in the era of #climatechaos.

Build a bridge or be pointless, or more likely dead in the long term.

#OMN #indymediaback #makeinghistory #OGB are bridges.

The recognition and resolution of the value mismatch between technology and society are crucial for addressing pressing global challenges such as #climatechaos. The #geekproblem encapsulates this divide, where one side prioritizes technological development while the other prioritizes social considerations. However, both perspectives are essential for meaningful progress. By building bridges between technology and society, initiatives like #OMN, #indymediaback, and #OGB serve as vital connectors that facilitate collaboration and mutual understanding. These projects recognize that addressing complex issues requires interdisciplinary approaches that integrate technological innovation. By bridging the gap between technology and society, these initiatives pave the way for holistic solutions that can effectively tackle the challenges of our time, ultimately contributing to a more sustainable and equitable future. Failure to build such bridges risks rendering both perspectives ineffective or irrelevant, potentially leading to dire consequences for humanity in the long term. Therefore, the importance of initiatives like #OMN, #indymediaback, and #OGB cannot be overstated, as they play a crucial role in bridging the gap between technology and society and advancing collective efforts towards a better future.


The new and old #openweb protocols


The #nostr crew are the children of #web3 mess, they are a bit reformed, let’s see.
Then the #BlueSky are the reformed children of the #dotcons
The #fediverse is the child of the #openweb

Q. Where would you put #dat or #ssb and in general the #p2p post-web tools?


#dat is a child of the #geekproblem if it is reformed or not, you can maybe tell me?
#SSB was a wild child, now sickly/lonely with the #fahernable kids gathering round #nostr
#p2p was the poster child of the era of the #openweb it was caught in the quicksand of legal issues, the shadow that was left was eclipsed by “free to use” #dotcons Now finds it hard to come back due to mobile devices not having an IP address, thus most people not actually able to use p2p reliably.


‘The Arkenstone and the Ring: wilful objects in Tolkien’s The Hobbit’

A series of seminars to commemorate the death of J. R. R. Tolkien, to be held in 2023/2024 in the University of Oxford. The talks present an introduction and further background to Tolkien’s life, work, and legacy. They have an academic approach, but they are also aimed at those who have read Tolkien’s work but are interested in gaining a bit more insight into his life, career, and writings.

Mark Atherton (University of Oxford)
The Arkenstone and the Ring: wilful objects in Tolkien’s The Hobbit’


Wilful objects in the Tolkien’s work, thinking about embedded AI in ten years, and mobile phone now. This world could become like Tolkien world after the #climatechaos claps in 50 years.

Dwarfs are the geeks, control #geekproblem

Elves are the #fashernistas, appearance, humanists

The humans are the Oxford union, power politics

The hobbits? – the wholly greens

Orcs? –


Best not to go down this path

I have been in Oxford for the last month, attending university talks and seminars on subjects of interest. And I am seeing the normal issues of this is an “art” way of expressing the issue but it’s a good description of much inward looking thinking. Their answers when questioned on this are in that, It’s not as bad as you think, “am more positive” etc.

This is an issue with the current #geekproblem and much #mainstreaming thinking in the era of #climatechaos

The mess we are likely to make over the next ten years. Best not to go down this path.