Linking on the #OpenWeb: Why It Matters

The concept of linking is fundamental to the structure and philosophy of the web. Links are not simply a technical feature; they are the social connective tissue of the internet of people, enabling decentralized and interconnected paths where information is shared and accessed. However on the internet, as centralized platforms, the #dotcons, gained dominance, the social art and purpose of linking has unthinkingly been forgotten by current #fashionistas and is often actively blocked by the #geekproblem crew.

Let’s look back so we can look forward, linking is core to the path of creating a decentralized web of knowledge and wisdom. When you link to another site or resource, you’re effectively creating a pathway that connects knowledge and experience across different domains and cultures. This is how the web was originally envisioned, as a space where documents interlinked, allowing people to navigate from one piece of information to another seamlessly. This decentralized path contrasts sharply with the #closed ecosystems of current social media platforms, in which linking is discouraged, and knowledge and wisdom are siloed, controlled, for profit and power by closed algorithms.

Linking encourages collaboration and the sharing of knowledge. When you link to another’s work, you’re both acknowledging their contribution, and amplify their voice. This grows a cultural “commons”, a space where ideas and information are freely exchanged, built upon, and improved. The link is a gesture of trust and respect, integral to the “native” cooperative path of the openweb.

From a technical point of view, this path creates serendipitous discoverability, links are crucial for making information discoverable. The dotcons search engines like Google rely heavily on links to index content and determine its relevance. When your content is linked to by others, it signals that your content is valuable, this is used to raise its rank in search results. This is the essence of organic growth on the web, content becomes more visible as more people find it useful and link to it #KISS

Linking directly to sources and references maintains the basic integrity of the openweb. It allows people to verify facts, trace the origins of ideas, and explore related content. This is particularly important in an era where algorithmic pushing of misinformation spreads rapidly. On the KISS openweb, links provide the context and credibility needed to evaluate the trustworthiness of information.

The basics of how linking works on the native openweb:

Hypertext and hyperlinks, the web is built on the concept of hypertext—text that contains links (hyperlinks) to other text or resources. These hyperlinks are embedded within a webpage and, when clicked, take the user to a different location, whether it’s another page on the same site or an entirely different website. This simple mechanism allows the horizontal building of complex networks of information.
HTML and URLs, At a technical level, links are created using HTML (HyperText Markup Language), the standard language for creating web pages. A basic link is formed with the <a> tag, where href specifies the URL (Uniform Resource Locator) of the destination. For example: html <a href=”https://www.example.com”>Visit Example</a> This would create a clickable link that says “Visit Example” and takes you to the specified URL.
Inbound links, or backlinks, links from other websites pointing to your content. Outbound links are the links you create that point to external content. Both types of links are important.

We need to revive linking in the #openweb reboot. As for the last 20 years in the era of the dotcons, content was trapped inside walled gardens and the native path of linking was diminished. These “social media platforms” discourage, and then punished external linking, if you put a URL in a post the algorithm will hardly show that post at all, this keepa people and communities trapped to maximize addiction for profit and control. This has led to a fragmented web where content is invisible, less connected, and much less reliable. We lived for 20 years in shrinking echo chambers, feeding our rage and building ignorance.

Linking is much more than a technical function; it’s basic to the #4opens. By rejuvenating and embracing linking, we resist the centralizing forces of the #dotcons and walk the path towards a humanistic web that is open, accessible, and democratic. It’s time to remember what linking is for and to use this native path to build a better internet.

Let’s not continue to be prats on this, please. You can support this work https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Bogged down in negative criticism, let’s focus on building something better

The mess we made with our addiction to #dotcons social media over the last 20 years means we need to look at the broader implications of how we interact with these platforms if we are to step away from this mess. Yes, criticism is a first step, a second step is seeding #openweb alternatives, then to stride away from this mess, we need to foster a culture of positive, constructive engagement to build grassroots communities of action. This means not only criticizing the current mess, but actively working towards creating and promoting alternatives. By using our “spades” to dig into the issues and “composting” the negativity, we can cultivate a healthier humanistic social tech ecosystem where communities can thrive independently of corporate and state control.

The shovel and compost metaphor is a useful “organic” path on this, the “shovel” represents the tools we need to dig into and dismantle the current #dotcons structures. Where “composting” symbolize the process of breaking down these negative aspects (#stupidindividualism) and using them to cultivate something healthier and more sustainable. These simple metaphors encourage people to actively become a part of positive change by putting their energy into building and promoting openweb alternatives, rather than continuing to engage in the negative cycles perpetuated by #mainstreaming platforms and paths.

Positive engagement on the #openweb, instead of only criticizing inside the dotcons, is an effective path to promote and use alternatives. For this to work we not only need #FOSS copies like we have now in the #fediverse but real working alternatives as outlined by the #OMN (this so obviously needs devs and funding). We need tangible and the ground steps and resources, so people feel empowered to make the switch from closed, corporate-controlled platforms to open, grassroots ones.

On the spiky path, we URGENTLY need to change the instinct in the #geekproblem to close most communication tools with encryption, with the strong focus on privacy. For media, on balance, this is a very unhelpful path to take, but yes, there is a small role for closed, the path is in better balance. The “native” openweb idea is that some communication needs to be private and encrypted (20% closed), the majority of it should be open and accessible (80% open) to foster the communal #4opens path. By closing down communication to one to one or small groups using encryption, we are feeding the problem of #stupidIndividualism. This problem behaviour focuses on individualistic, self-serving actions that reinforce the problems’ by reflection of the current mess, we only see this path. When we take this closed path, we have no room for encouraging social constructive dialogue. Simply put, striking the right balance between open and closed communication is essential for the “native” path to building a resilient openweb.

On the fluffy #fashionista side, we need to balance the paths from performative activism, of using sarcasm that mostly fuels the system people aim to critique. Sarcasm and comedy on the dotcons has been a staple of fluffy online activism for the last 20 years. The Issue with this is that sarcasm and comedy are focused to criticize and ridicule inside the very dotcons platforms that control our personal communication and communities. While this might feel like a way to resist or subvert these platforms, it disastrously drives engagement and feeds the data algorithms that sustain them, and are focued on controlling us and our movements. Engaging in this kind of humour provides temporary relief and a transient sense of camaraderie, but it actually is only reinforcing the power of these platforms by driving more traffic and interaction. The better strategy is to disengage and move toward alternative #openweb platforms. Instead of feeding into this #dotcons cycle, the goal should be to step away from these platforms and take collective action to build and support openweb alternatives #KISS

Final thought, instead of only getting bogged down in negative criticism, the focus needs to be on building something better. A simple step is to support a path with real history https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

The victimhood narrative needs composting

The #openweb – Escaping the Grip of the Algorithm

Myth of the tech genius

When we all moved from the #openweb to the #dotcons 20 years ago, the lies being pushed shaped attention. This imprisonment us in a personal and social mess that we now need to compost. One easy to understand #mainstreaming part of this is the idolization of tech billionaires and the revolting cultural myth that they are inherently geniuses due to their wealth and success. This narrative has allowed figures like Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sam Bankman-Fried to amass power and influence, without scrutiny of the paths they have pushed us down, shielded by their wealth and the public’s willingness to buy into the myth of their genius, this mess pushing has wreaked havoc on businesses, economies, and society.

The myth of the tech genius is an obvious lie, shaped, by the “common sense” belief that wealth equals intellect, especially in the tech industry. Figures like Musk, Zuckerberg, and Bankman-Fried are still celebrated as visionaries by meany people, despite the mess they make. Musk’s disastrous #Twitter acquisition, Zuckerberg’s failed #Metaverse venture, or Bankman-Fried’s crypto fraud—highlight that their “success” stems from our blinded view that plays a role in hiding, privilege, incompetence and ruthless business practices.

This big picture is mirrored in millions of small pictures, in the #geekproblem mess we live through, this has a real economic impact, the idolization of these figures, and the emulation of this has real-world consequences. Their decisions led to huge financial losses, job cuts, and broader societal and ecological disasters, such as the erosion of social bindings failing, the destabilization of democratic processes, and the proliferation of unregulated financial schemes like crypto. The small picture replication, this is a #blocking of any real building of alternatives.

A #fashernista look at this mess, do you think it’s helpful spreading this #dotcons fodder?

The role of media and #mainstreaming society is crucial in perpetuating the myth of the tech genius. By constantly elevating these figures, they give them a platform to push their nasty and flawed visions over us on a global scale. And this feeds through into the millions of small picture messes that shape us.

A powerful reminder of the need to question the narratives we’re sold, especially when it comes to those in positions of power and though who emulate them, A first step is to stop equating wealth with intelligence and moral superiority, this worshipping at the #deathcult is not clever, and not helping you or anyone you care about.

The current “debate” about AI is a distraction #KISS

The debate over AI’s energy consumption is one piece of a larger mess about technological in the face of current existential risks. Yes, #AI’s energy demands are a huge #dotcons waste, but focusing only on this is distracting us from a more #4opens discussions about the underlying ideology and assumptions driving the #geekproblenm technological paths—an example, the ideas of #longtermism, lets look at ths:

#Longtermism is a philosophe prioritizes the far future, arguing that we should make decisions today that benefit humanity hundreds or thousands of years from now. Proponents of longtermism advocate for technological advancements like AI and space colonization, pushing that these will ultimately secure humanity’s future, that is after many of us have been killed and displaced by #climatchoas and the resulting social brake down of mass migration. The outcome of the last 40 years of worshipping the #deathcult is this sleight of hand by changing the subject, yes, its a mess.

This mindset is a ridiculous and obviously stupid path we should not take, some of the issues:

Overconfidence in predicting the future: Longtermists assume that we can reliably predict the long-term outcomes of our actions. History has shown that even short-term predictions are fraught with uncertainty. The idea that we can accurately forecast the impact of technologies like AI or space colonization centuries from now is, at best, speculative and, at worst, dangerously hubristic.
The danger of #geekproblem mentality, the idea that we should “tech harder” to solve our problems, that is, to invest more heavily in advanced technologies with the hope that they will eventually pull us out of our current crises, mirrors longtermist thinking. It assumes that the resource consumption, environmental degradation, and social upheaval caused by these technologies will be justified by the benefits they might bring in the future.

This path is the current mess and flawed for meany reasons:

Resource Consumption: The development of AI, space technologies, and other technological “solutions” requires vast amounts of energy and resources. If these technologies do not deliver the expected returns, the initial resource consumption itself exacerbate the crises we are trying to solve, such as the onrushing catastrophe of climate change.
Opportunity Costs: By focusing on speculative technologies, we neglect immediate and practical solutions, like transitioning away from fossil fuels, which mitigates some of the worst effects of climate change. These simpler, more grounded paths may not be as glamorous as AI or space travel, but they cannot backfire catastrophically.
Moral and Ethical Implications: Whether it is right to invest heavily in speculative technologies when there are pressing issues today that need addressing—issues that affect billions of lives. The idea that a few future lives might be more valuable than current ones is a dangerous and ethically questionable stance.

The is always a strong case for caution and pragmatism in technology. Instead of betting our future on high-stakes #geekproblem technological gambles, a pragmatic approach to focus on solutions that offer benefits today while reducing the risks of tomorrow is almost always a good path. For example, changing our social relations and economic systems away from the current #deathcult, by using social tools to investing in renewable energy, rethinking urban planning, and restore ecosystems would all be actions that can have immediate positive effects while also contributing to a humanistic future. This #KISS path carry far fewer risks if they turn out to be less impactful than hoped. The worst-case scenario with renewable energy is that it doesn’t solve every problem—but it won’t make them worse. In contrast, if AI or space colonization doesn’t deliver on its pie in the sky promises, the consequences are simply disastrous.

A #mainstreaming view of this mess

A call for grounded action, the challenge of our time is not to “tech harder” in the hope that advanced technologies will save us, but to consider the balance between “native” #4opens humanistic innovation and #dotcons caution. The example here #Longtermism, with its emphasis on far-off futures, leads us to a dangerous path by neglecting the immediate, tangible actions we can take now, not in a thousand years. We need to focus on paths that address our most pressing problems without risking everything on pie in the sky self-serving mess making. This means actions like reducing fossil fuel dependence, preserving biodiversity, and creating more change and challenge social systems like the #OMN and #OGB—steps that will help us build a resilient and humanist world for both the present and the future #KISS

The media noise about the current #AI is mostly noise https://www.bath.ac.uk/announcements/ai-poses-no-existential-threat-to-humanity-new-study-finds/ and money mess, it’s the normal #deathcult with a bit of kinda working tech.

The insanity of #mainstreaming

When I call #mainstreaming people insane, I genuinely mean it. Common sense has become an illness born from 40 years of worshipping the #deathcult, leaving little actual “sense” in society. This is a critical issue we urgently need to address to combat #climatechaos and the pervasive #geekproblem.

Living in the #deathcult, limits our power to effect change. Our media is created and distributed within #dotcons, which are products of our own #stupidindividualism. This cycle of self-destructive behaviour is repeated endlessly, perpetuating the status quo and hindering any hope of a different progress path.

The Problem with #StupidIndividualism, The hashtag can be read in two ways:

Constructive Truth: Your individualism makes you stupid.
Destructive Truth: Feeling personally insulted by being called stupid.

Both interpretations are valid, but the first one is the constructive truth I’m conveying. The second, feeling insulted, is a reaction rooted in #stupidindividualism itself. This reaction proves the point that our blinded individualism keeps us from the collective action and shared responsibility needed to take different paths.

Breaking the Cycle, it’s crucial to understand that your individualism makes you stupid. This isn’t an insult but a wake-up call. We must recognize that prioritizing individual desires over collective good leads to detrimental outcomes. By embracing this constructive truth, we can begin to dismantle the #deathcult mindset and move towards a sustainable, community-driven approach to solving our pressing issues.

In conclusion, the insanity perpetuated by #dotcons and our current “common sense” is a barrier to meaningful change. We need to shift our perspective to address the environmental and societal crises we face. Only by acknowledging and overcoming our blinded individualistic tendencies can we hope to create a more balanced and sustainable path and any future.

Trust and parodied fuckwittery is a hard bridged to build and keep in place. The #mainstreaming is poison on this path, it why we need to change and challenge the current mess.

The Urgent Need for a Paradigm Shift

For the last 40 years, we’ve been entrenched in a system that pushes economic efficiency, shown by the rich getting richer while the poor get poorer. This mess has been touted as the ideal, leading to an “efficient” economic structure that, in reality, has been a disaster of environmental destruction and social disintegration. It’s well past time we recognize the worship of the #deathcult for what it is: a dire mistake that urgently needs correction to move away from the false idol of economic “efficiency”.

We need to rebalance for survival, to prioritize social and environmental sustainability rather than only blinded consumption to push mere economic “gain”. The last four decades of economic efficiency have destroyed the balance necessary for a stable and healthy society. If we continue down this path, we will face complete social disintegration and ecological disaster in the next 20 years.

Our current social structures are riddled with status games and toxic individualism, direct outcomes of the clective worship of the #deathcult. We need to move away from these destructive patterns if we want to live in a civil society in the coming years. This means rejecting “common sense” paths tainted with this worship and embracing collective, community-driven approaches. “Let us not flatter ourselves on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory, nature takes its revenge on us.” – Friedrich Engels

We are in a mess, as highlighted by fluffy movements like #XR (Extinction Rebellion). On the positive path we need is planting grassroots media and alternative narratives, without this it is a real challenging to escape this mess. The #OMN offers a path forward, but it requires us to rethink our values and priorities fundamentally. We need to focus on this shift of power away from the #geekproblem and the #dotcons to the grassroots producers of media, culture and meaning. To foster a commons-based #openweb, economic, and social ecosystem.

This positive shift in power dynamics is a step in nurturing a #KISS more sustainable and equitable path. The wisdom from Engels reminds us that our actions have consequences. The environmental and social crises we face are nature’s “revenge” for our hubris and neglect. It’s time to change course and prioritize balance, sustainability, and collective well-being over short-term economic “gains” for the few. The time for change is now.

https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

In general, as a part of the hashtag story, I call this #stupidindividualism

More Than Just a Difference of Opinion

In today’s #mainstreaming political mess, the issue of #climatechange is sometimes seen as a matter of differing opinions. However, we need to be honest to recognize that climate denial, particularly among #mainstreaming people, is not a simple case of holding an alternative viewpoint; it’s a deliberate spread of misinformation.

The Reality of Climate Change we can see every day, it is a fact, supported by a consensus within the scientific community: rising global temperatures, melting ice caps, increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, and shifting ecosystems all show the severe impact of human activities on our planet. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (#IPCC) have repeatedly confirmed these findings.

The motives behind climate denial, despite the scientific consensus, is to push falsehoods. Why? Financial Interests: Climate deniers are financially tied to industries that would be negatively impacted by stringent environmental regulations, such as the fossil fuel industry. These industries stand to lose billions if policies are enacted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Political Gain: Politicians deny climate change to align with their party’s stance, which is influenced by powerful lobbies. By doing so, they secure campaign contributions and political support. Ideological Reasons: Denying climate change is part of an ideological battle pushed by our blinded worship of the #deathcult that this “common sense” is blocking the needed intervention and regulation. Yes, the reality of climate change would require some of us to endorse policies we fundamentally oppose, it would bring into question the last 40 years of our worship, we might have to wait for some people to die out, for their blocking to end.

The consequences of denial, labelling climate denial as just another opinion trivializes the consequences it has on public policy and global well-being. The spread of misinformation leads to: Delayed Action where policy measures to combat climate change are postponed, worsening the impact and increasing the cost of mitigation efforts. Public Confusion, where people are misled about the severity of the issue, which undermines efforts to build the consensus for collective action. Global Harm of climate change are not confined by borders. Decisions made by deniers in the rich countries, have ramifications for ecosystems and communities worldwide.

Calling out the liars, is a first step, to make visible, what is a deliberate and harmful lie. The stakes are too high to treat it as a difference of opinion. Effective climate mediation requires a foundation built on truth and scientific integrity. We need to strongly push back and make accountable people and organizations who spread these lies, particularly those in positions of power. This involves, demanding #4opens transparency of politicians and public figures, a simple step is disclosing financial ties to industries that influence their stance on climate issues.

Climate change is the defining issue of our era, and addressing it requires a commitment to truth and action, both grassroots and mainstreaming. Climate deniers are not holding a different opinion; they are actively obstructing progress, by lying. We need to walk a truthful path, act on this, by starting to implement the actions and policies needed to protect, our society, environment and our planet.

Neoliberalism Can’t Solve the Climate Crisis: We Need Activism

Ps. This post applies to meany subjects, for example the #geekproblem and our use of the #dotcons

Control in Tech Culture

The 20th century was marked by significant technological and scientific advancements, alongside violent conflicts. As we move through the 21st century, the nature of these conflicts is shifting. The struggle is increasingly between humanity and nature, with dire consequences if we continue down our current path. Environmental degradation and climate change are no longer side effects, but central challenges that must be addressed. We need to find paths to move off the current paths, there are assumptions that are #blocking this needed move, one is in technology and its assumptions.

This #geekproblem has been inherited from past era’s in our computer architectures and the broader tech culture that has an ingrained concept of control. This control, hardcoded into systems and frameworks, poses an unspoken problem within many geek paths. Addressing this issue is crucial for understanding the broader implications and possibilities of grassroots #openweb tech activism as a path out of the current social and technical mess.

The Control paradigm in tech, from the foundations of computing, control has been a central theme. Systems are designed to operate under strict protocols, ensuring reliability, security, and efficiency. This paradigm, while effective in technological contexts, is inadvertently extend into social dynamics within tech communities. Control in tech is not just about managing systems; it also shapes interactions, hierarchies, and decision-making processes.

Unconscious participation in control structures, in tech communities, is unconsciously embedded in social groups that perpetuate this control paradigm. It’s essential to recognize that this isn’t a personal failing but a reflection of broader cultural trends. The challenge lies in identifying and addressing these unconscious patterns to foster more open, collaborative, and equitable environments.

The Keep It Simple, Stupid (#KISS) principle is a valuable tool for analysing generalist issues within our shared cultures. By simplifying complex problems, we can better understand the dynamics at play and develop more effective solutions. Applying the KISS principle to tech activism helps to demystify the control paradigm and its impact on our communities.

This blog is dedicated to exploring alternative paths that we can take to address these issues. By grassroots #openweb tech activism to mitigate the destructive patterns of control and build more sustainable and equitable paths. To promote decentralized technologies to empower people and communities, reducing reliance on centralized control structures.

#4opens emphasizes the importance of open-source software, to encourages collaboration, transparency, and shared ownership and community building. We need to fostering strong, inclusive communities that prioritize collective well-being over hierarchical control. We need to shift to environmental stewardship and ecological consciousness in our tech development and usage, recognizing the interconnectedness of human and environmental health in the tools we use.

This path requires a fundamental shift in how we approach technology and control. By embracing the #openweb and grassroots activism, we can create resilient, inclusive, and sustainable technological systems. This is not just a technical challenge but a cultural and ethical one.

#OMN #indymediaback #OGB #makeinghistory #visionontv #4opens

Communities and People are the #Openweb

The #Fediverse, short for Federated Universe, is a part of the #openweb made of human connections through #4opens computer networks. Its value is not a collection of software packages, much more about the flows of human community that build relationships across diverse groups and regions. Imagine the Fediverse as a web of communities, each represented as a node. These nodes are not defined by the software they use, but by the people and groups that form them:

Affinity Groups in Activism: communities of action and social movements
Local Governments: Municipalities using the Fediverse to communicate with residents, share public announcements, and gather feedback.
Universities: Academic institutions fostering collaboration among students, faculty, and researchers, enabling the sharing of resources and knowledge.
Families: Family members staying connected, sharing updates, photos, and maintaining family bonds regardless of geographical distances.
Friend Groups: Friends interacting and sharing moments in a private, ad-free space, organizing events, and maintaining their social ties.
Companies: Businesses collaborating internally and with their customers, providing customer support, and sharing company news.
Interests: People and communities expressing themselves, sharing their thoughts, hobbies, and connecting with like-minded individuals around the world.

These communities interact seamlessly across the #openweb, regardless of the specific codebase they grow in. Yes it’s important to understand the good #UX of the software that makes these connections possible plays a part, and that each of these nodes use a common protocol, #ActivityPub, to communicate, forming the backbone of “native” #openweb flows. This #4opens interoperability allows people on one codebase to interact with users on another, creating a unified, yet decentralized, social network.

“The Fediverse isn’t about connecting software packages. It’s about connecting communities and people. If you make a Fediverse explainer, try to show some real communities as the nodes in the network, rather than using software packages and their logos. Companies, local governments, universities, families, friend groups, individuals. You can explain what software makes those networks possible in your next slide.” https://mastodon.social/deck/@evan@cosocial.ca/112847724644046695

Though, what meany in our #fashernista and #geekproblem paths miss is this thrives because of the human element. It’s about the people who use these platforms to connect, share, and build spaces that reflect their values and needs. It’s the people and the communities of use that make this real, let’s talk about them #KISS

Reconnect with Our Social Roots

The path through technology, society, and environmental crises is a challenge that most people find difficult to find, let alone walk. This is why I have been building “sign posts” in a #hashtag story for the last 20 years, hashtags such as #geekproblem, #KISS, #4opens, and #deathcult etc. These are metaphors that highlight our technological thinking and represent issues and philosophies that make visible the paths of technological advancements and social cohesion. By using these “signs” and path, people can better understand the need to move from individualistic and technocentric working to collective and sustainable social practices.

The #geekproblem has the tendency of technologists and enthusiasts to focus excessively on technical solutions, neglecting the social and human aspects of these paths. Technologists struggle to comprehend the simplicity of #KISS path to overcome the tunnel vision where technical fixes are panaceas, side lining the importance of social dynamics and community engagement. The #4opens framework—open data, open source, open standards, and open process—offers a counterbalance by providing a structure that promotes transparency and collaboration. However, this does not inherently solve issues; it simply creates a space for people to engage and address problems collectively.

A significant barrier to overcoming the #geekproblem and embracing more holistic approaches is the pervasive culture of #deathcult worship. This is a metaphorical for the last 40 years of #neoliberalism, a term that describes the idolization of technological progress and capitalist efficiency at the expense of environmental sustainability and social well-being. Many people and groups, consciously or unconsciously, worship this path, prioritizing short-term gains and #fashionista “marvels” over sustainability and human connections.

The worship of this #deathcult is destructive because it undermines broader societal issues, it pushes the culture of #stupidindividualism with blinded competition, making it challenging to discuss and address anything outside the #mainstreaming agenda. This focus diverts attention from the collective action needed for #KISS tackling complex problems like #climatechaos and resulting social break down.

In this metaphor, composting represents the process of breaking down and re-evaluating our technological and social practices. It requires a willingness to let go of dysfunctional and harmful paradigms and to create fertile ground for new seeds or sustainable and humane approaches. This fertile soil, enriched by lessons learned and experiences gained, can nurture the sprigs of humanity through the on rushing era of #climatechaos.

To move beyond this destructive worship and technocentric mindset, we need to recognize and reject the blinded pushing of technology and efficiency as easy goals. This involves a critical examination of our values and the systems we support, using the #4opens to composting the piles of #techshit accumulated over the past decade’s symbolizes a necessary shift from merely accumulating technological advancements to reflecting on their impact and repurposing them for good.

Pickup your #OMN shovel and get to work:

Balance Individualism: Embrace collective action and community engagement. Recognize that social problems cannot be solved by technical solutions alone.
Promote the #4opens: Encourage transparency, collaboration, and openness in all endeavours. Use these principles to create spaces where people can engage and address issues together.
Critique the #Deathcult: Actively challenge the idolization of blinded technological progress and capitalist efficiency. Advocate for sustainable and socially responsible practices.
Compost and Rebuild: Reflect on past practices, learn from mistakes, and repurpose technology to support long-term sustainability and human well-being.
Nurture Humanity: Focus on building strong, resilient communities that can withstand and adapt to the challenges of the #climatechaos era.

The journey to overcoming the #geekproblem and moving away from #deathcult worship is needed, it’s past the time to pick up your shovels and make compost on this.

https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

State Funding of #FOSS and Open Source: Is it a Good Idea or a Bad Idea?

The questioning over state funding of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and open-source initiatives revolves around invisible ideological debates about benefits and drawbacks. Let’s look at this from a few specific examples: #NLnet, #NGI, and the European Union (#EU), to understanding the implications and effectiveness of this funding path.

The #NLnet Foundation is a notable example of an organization that provides funding to open-source projects. Supported by private and public funds, including significant contributions from the #EU, NLnet focuses on promoting a free, open, and secure internet.

The #NGI initiative, funded by the #EU, aims to shape the development of the internet of tomorrow. By supporting a range of open-source projects, NGI tries to foster innovation, privacy, and security. It emphasizes human-concentric technology, ensuring that the future internet respects humanistic values and needs.
The #EU has been a significant proponent of FOSS, providing funding through programs such as Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. The EU’s supports digital sovereignty, reduce dependency on non-European technologies through promoting open standards.

The is some democratization as these state-funded FOSS projects ensure software is accessible to wider groups, thus reducing the digital divide. For instance, NGI-funded projects are supposed to focus on inclusivity and user empowerment. At best, this transparency brings public overview to these processes.

There are some economic benefits and cost savings in using and supporting FOSS instead of expensive proprietary software. Funding initiatives like NGI stimulate innovation by allowing developers to build upon existing open-source projects, fostering a collaborative environment. Though, there are unspoken issues of sustainability in a pure capitalist path, thus the question of balance in state funding.

Open-source software allows for independent security audits, reducing the risk of vulnerabilities. The EU’s investment in secure communication tools underlines this advantage. Reducing reliance on a few large proprietaries #dotcons software vendors enhances national security and control. The EU’s support for open-source projects aims to bolster humanistic digital sovereignty.

For example, #NLnet’s diverse (though #geekproblem) funding portfolio highlights this limited community-driven development. The collaboration between public institutions, the private sector, and community contributors helps #NGI projects bring together diverse stakeholders to work on common goals. #FOSS projects thrive on community contributions, leading to continuous improvement and support and thus in theory community needs, though due to the dogmatic #geekproblem this is currently failing.

Funding Continuity: Projects become dependent on government funding, which currently is not stable or continuous. For example, sudden policy shifts in the EU affect long-term project sustainability. Without a sustainable funding, FOSS projects struggle with long-term maintenance and support.

Most #FOSS projects are too idiosyncratic to meet quality #UX standards. Thus, the current #geekproblem dominated process means that state funding inadvertently support meany unusable and thus pointless, subpar projects. Effective diversity and oversight of these mechanisms are crucial to mitigate this failing path.

Government involvement leads to bureaucracy, slowing down and ossifying development cycles, currently we do not work though this path well, The balance between oversight, diversity and agility is critical. With the #EU path this is a huge problem leading to almost all the current funding bring poured down the drain.

For #mainstreaming capitalism the issue of “Market Distortion”, the idea of competition raises the issue of state funding distorting “market” dogmas to disadvantage private companies and startups that don’t receive government support. For instance, EU funding can overshadow smaller #dotcons, capitalist thinking sees this as a risk that government-backed projects might stifle innovation by shaping the market landscape.

Political and ideological biases influence which projects receive funding, this is currently pushing a #blocking of the needed “native” #openweb path. How to move past this to ensuring diversity and “impartiality” in funding decisions need real work. How can we shift this “common sense” focus that government priorities do not align with the wider needs of the #openweb community and end-users. Aligning funding priorities with community needs is needed to address this concern, how can we make this happen with funding like #NLnet and #NGI?

To sum up, #NLnet are doing some good work, but this is focused on feeding the #geekproblem and building #fashionista careers, evern then on balance they do a better job than most. Then the wider #NGI funding is going into the #dotcons and #NGO mess, thus being poured directly down the drain. Over all, it’s fantastic that the #EU is funding the #openweb even if it is doing it very badly by funding very little that is native or useful.

Conclusion, state funding for FOSS and open-source initiatives, in our examples #NLnet, #NGI, and the #EU, has potential for creating real change and challenge, but this path presents both opportunities and challenges. When implemented thoughtfully, it can foster “native” paths, innovation, reduce costs, and enhance community and security to challenge the current worshipping of the #deathcults by our widespread use of the #dotcons. The question is the will and understanding to balancing this path to ensures that state funding positively contributes to the #4opens FOSS ecosystem, driving forward a free, open digital future or just leads to the capitalistic criticism of waste and distortion? At best and at worst, we see some real change and a lot of poring funding down the drain to feed some #geekproblem and build the careers of a few #fashernistas

The is much to compost in the current mess, can we get funding for shovels please #OMN

Addressing the #geekproblem

A river that needs crossing political and tech – On the political side, there is arrogance and ignorance, on the geek side there is naivety and over complexity. All code is ideology solidified into action – most contemporary code is capitalism, this is hardly a surprise if you think about this for a moment. Yes you can try and act on any ideology on top of this code, but the outcome and assumptions are preprogramed… cant find any good links on this…

As a useful path, we need to look at technology from the social prospective to have any hope of the needed change and challenge. With this view, on one hand, it’s interesting to look at how data and metadata serve as the social glue binding society together. And on the other, how our contemporary #deathcult worship—championing separation and anonymization through privacy and security efforts coded by the #geekproblem—undermines this needed social cohesion.

If you are a part of this #geekproblem then it is worth taking a step back to consider how our current coding practices shaped by society and liberalism affect both society and ecology in this blind worship. This “common sense” dogmatic path leads us toward corporate “socialism”, which is the path to fascism, where the laws and norms are tailored to benefit a select few at the top of the shit pile we live in. Consequently, this data and metadata privatization, pushes us down the path to a disturbing shift towards “National Socialism” that then becomes the #mainstreaming.

The #KISS path to address this #geekproblem is to #stepaway from this cycle and code outside the confines of #mainstreaming liberalism without going down the fascism path.

To achieve meaningful change, we must examine technology from a social perspective. On one hand, data and metadata act as the social glue binding society. On the other, our obsession with privacy and security—driven by the #geekproblem—undermines this cohesion.

If you’re part of the #geekproblem, consider how our coding practices, influenced by liberalism, affect society and ecology. This “common sense” liberalism leads to corporate “socialism,” benefiting a select few and paving the way to fascism, with laws favouring the rich. Privatizing data and metadata pushes us towards a disturbing shift to “National Socialism” #mainstreaming.

The #KISS approach to this issue is to step away from this cycle, coding outside mainstream liberalism without veering towards fascism.

This is on this subject