Tag: OGB

Navigating challenges: online governance, trolling, and privacy

It’s interesting and useful to look at the critical issue of online governance, community dynamics, and the problem of #mainstreaming trolling on both the #dotcons and open social platforms like #Mastodon, #Fediverse and the broader #openweb

Let’s start with mastodon, the complexity of (default) privacy settings leads to public conversations inadvertently shifting into private spaces, this is a UX problem, but it also points to a larger issue with how we handle communication, trust, and governance on decentralized platforms. And raises a question, are we on the right path? Confusing privacy settings are disempowering, the defaults in platforms like Mastodon pushing users toward privatized conversations, which are not combatable with media paths, of transparency and public dialogue. Yes, this is a subtle but important #UX issue, exacerbated by the complexities of decentralized platforms and different peoples preferences for engagement.

UPDATE: it’s about inheriting the settings of the thread, all my posts are as this is the core project, it’s unusual to send a DM or other setting though do this a little when needed. When having a public conversation and suddenly find this happening in a non-public space, at no point did I agree to this move, but it happens, due to others settings, it should default to one side public, my settings, and one side (semi) private the other person’s settings, as on my side it is VERY much a public conversation, it’s a form of corruption for this privatisation to happen… a mess I have to fix by republishing my side as a separate post – sub optional and bad #UX

This is in part the push for mainstreaming, both inside and outside, alternative platforms, creates pressure toward conformity and centralization. This undermines the grassroots nature of media networks like the Fediverse. In the end, we move towards the same governance and behavioral issues seen in #dotcons, corporate social media platforms. Left-wing and progressives need to resist these pressures to/by fostering a culture of diversity, and mutual aid.

Moving beyond this mess, a culture of empathy and understanding is needed for mediating trolling behavior. Listen before judging, then make judgements based on sound open process, so people have the space to change their paths if they can. A mindset of curiosity and openness, rather than rigid ideological adherence is needed for this to work, metaphors are fertile seeds to bring conversation into this path. This creates spaces where different perspectives can be heard and discussed constructively.

A first step is to be “intolerant of intolerance” with as a guide. The problem is that this is a right-wing path https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance so we add the , ethics, to turn this to the left/progressive #KISS path.

The #openweb has always been, under the surface, built on strong communities rooted in mutual aid to provide a buffer against the toxic effects of trolling and infighting. When people feel connected to a shared mission, they are less likely to engage in destructive behavior. The strength of grassroots movements lies in their ability to offer this solidarity and care as an affective path of change and challenge. You acturly can’t have one without the other, in this conflict in moderation can be healthy or not.

We need structural social solutions to governance, the work on the #OMN and #OGB is a promising step toward creating decentralized, open governance paths that can mediate trolling and other negative behaviors. “the rule of an enlightened “philosopher-king” (cf. Noocracy) is preferable to the tyranny of majority” is the bases and fear unthinkingly in #FOSS governance paths. Much of the trolling comes from this unthinking. By embedding trust, transparency, and community in the path of these networks, we create environments that foster collaboration and experimentation, rather than pointless ongoing conflicts.

Navigating these challenges: online governance, trolling, and common sense privacy is no small step. However, with the paths like the , a focus on mutual aid, and a commitment to progressive, decentralized governance, it’s possible to create a healthier, more resilient online and offline progressive ecosystem. The work done through the #OMN and #OGB projects reflects this path where spaces (online or offline) are inclusive, productive, and capable of handling the messes that inevitably arise in all “open” communities.

Navigating the Trolls

The “public first” paths of the #OMN faces steep hurdles without the necessary support, focus, and funding. Achieving diversity in these spaces requires more than just a philosophical commitment—it needs active engagement from a variety of voices, technical expertise, and resources to push the project into wider use.

The current dominant “safe first” path in projects like Mastodon does create a certain type of functionality, but it also stifles innovation and radical potential by prioritizing safety in ways that ultimately encourage more privatized interactions. For grassroots, #openweb movements to thrive, they need both tech development and community support that embraces complexity rather than pushing toward conservative #mainstreaming defaults.

Ideas please to pull in the necessary dev focus and resources to make the public-first #OMN a reality? Can we build ways to attract contributors outside traditional #blockeing funding paths?

The Open Media Network (#OMN) is a set of tools to empower communities

Thoughts on the mess we made on #socialhub and the wider #openweb reboot

The frustration of navigating the mess of activism, tech, and grassroots movements, especially when they get co-opted and sidetracked by personal interests, #NGO agendas, or broader #mainstreaming mess. We need ways to process, compost, and turn this mess into productive paths, which better balance burnout and disillusionment with actual progressive outcomes.

A part of this is the parasite #NGO and #fashionista paths, how NGOs and big parts of tech can parasitically latch onto grassroots movements, commodifying and diverting them from their own paths. These non-native ways end up taking the paths they claim to oppose, and are a part of the broader #deathcult problem. Mediating this deathcult and pratish behaviour is needed, that challenges the individualistic, egotistical people who are always a part of grassroots movements. If left unchecked, these people will derail collective efforts and reduce movements to infighting rather than the path of change and challenge we need to be on.

Composting the mess, is perhaps the most hopeful metaphor to turn #mainstreaming shit into something more fertile. This metaphor is about processing what went wrong, reflecting, and turning that energy into a better path, sustainable, and rooted in the core values of the #openweb and grassroots efforts. The mess is undeniable, but with native openweb tools and paths, composting, mediation, linking, and decentralization there’s still hope to turn this #reboot into something productive. We really need to make this work.

The normal problem, the trajectory of #SocialHub, and the broader #openweb community, simply went off course due to factors that we need to talk about:

  • Shrinking of the crew, led to the forced narrowing of focus, limiting the community’s ability to engage widely and creatively. As fewer people became involved, the flexibility and potential of the project shrank.
  • Chasing funding, is a recurring poison in many grassroots projects. The moment funding enters the picture, the focus can shift from mission driven goals to survival driven ones, leading to compromises and sell outs.
  • The #geekproblem, is a recurring issue where the culture of arrogance and ignorance within tech communities blocks collaborative, inclusive problem-solving. Tech culture ignores the social dimensions of community building, exacerbating problems instead of solving them.
  • Failed governance, feudal-like governance structures hindered the ability to mediate these issues, turning leadership into top-down control rather than fostering horizontal collaboration. Attempts like the #OGB (Open Governance Body) were/are being blocked by the systems they set out to fix, leading to a self-reinforcing mess.

What can we do, next steps:

  • Composting the mess, rather than seeing the failure as terminal, it’s about turning the decay into fertile ground for new growth. This composting metaphor is apt—it’s about taking what didn’t work, reflecting on it, and using it as the soil for new, better-structured efforts.
  • Recognizing people over code: The issue lies with people, not technology, the main barriers are social—ego, power dynamics, and lack of collaboration. Governance structures, community engagement, and shared values need to take centre.
  • Defining and defending the #openweb, people will inevitably sell out for funding and status. To mediate this, a clear, shared understanding, of what the openweb stands for, an articulation of principles like the #4opens is crucial. The community needs a strong value framework to guide decisions and prevent the erosion of ideals and paths.
  • Building a hub for meaningful engagement, #SocialHub was once this place, but it’s now too narrow and constrained by the #NGO. #fashernista and #geekproblem interests. If the community is to thrive, it needs a revitalizing, a broader range of voices participating, where governance is open, and where people are empowered to contribute without the weight of gatekeepers and blinded apathy and intolerance blocking we to often have now.
  • Infrastructure and funding, the practical path of supporting the infrastructure also needs addressing. The lack of funding is damage that shifts, the code itself, into became unresponsive to the community’s needs. Finding sustainable, non-exploitative funding models is needed. Could a cooperative or mutual aid model be a path forward, that aligns with the values of the #openweb while providing the necessary resources?

Immediate Actions:

  • Broaden governance: If we return to SocialHub or a similar network, start by widening the admin and mod team to ensure it represents more than just the narrow confines of #NGO, #fashernista and #geekproblem interests. This inclusivity prevents drift.
  • Articulate values clearly, by creating a visible and accessible page for the , making it a cornerstone for paths and discussions, decisions, and collaborations. People need to understand and agree on the principles driving the openweb, #KISS
  • Revive discussions, reignite meaningful discussions about the purpose and direction of the openweb. This needs to happen on networks where all voices are welcomed, and consensus building isn’t seen as a hindrance but a pathway forward.
  • Explore funding models, as the current mess is feeding this #blocking. Look into alternative funding mechanisms—cooperatives, community-supported models, or decentralized funding structures that align with openweb values. Chasing VC or NGO funding leads to the same patterns of co-optation and control.

By addressing these issues—people, governance, values, and sustainability—the community can begin to rebuild, with a “native” approach, it’s possible to compost the mess into fertile soil for future growth.

UPDATE the thread on this turned into a mess then a part of it vanished, likely someone blocked, so posting the last update here:

” I just don’t see SocialHub as likely to evolve into the kind of place for the broader discussions focusing on social issues.”

The problem we are talking about. This is exactly what #socialhub was “broader discussions focusing on social issues” for the first 3 years or so, we had the path we now need in place as native grassroots.

A tiny number of people used the #geekproblem to narrow this open space down to focus EXCLUSIVELY on the #FAP. Why and how this happens is where the value is, so we don’t keep adding to this mess, in the future.

PS, this mastodon mess of jumping from public to semi private all the time is a mess.

The patriarchs of the early #openweb

We face a digital cliff the open internet may be over
I wrote this post nearly ten years ago.

Back then, we were teetering on the edge of a digital cliff, with the open internet hanging in the balance. There were two insightful perspectives capturing the crossroads we are at: Phil Windley argued that the open internet was a historical fluke, while Dave Winer suggests that what we were seeing was merely the ebb before the next wave of the #openweb arrived.

With this enclosure of the digital commons, #PhilWindley perspective, is a sobering one. Though he has updated his post, he used to see the internet early open nature as an anomaly—an accident of history. In this view, the open internet as we knew it is essentially finished. That once-thriving commons have been systematically enclosed by corporate silos—the #dotcons like Facebook, Google, and Amazon—that now dominate the digital landscape. What remains outside these silos is, according to this perspective, withering and dying. The vision of a decentralized, user-controlled internet has been overwhelmed by the centralized, profit-driven motives of these tech giants.

His argument is that decentralization is hard, perhaps too hard for most people to handle. This reality, combined with the fact that these silos provide convenience, user-friendliness, and perceived safety, has led people to choose them over the messy and challenging world of a truly #openweb. People have traded freedom for convenience, security for walled gardens, and the vibrant chaos of the commons for the curated safety of #dotcons. The digital commons have been enclosed, and it was a bleak view.

On the other side, Dave Winer offered a more hopeful perspective. He believes that the history of the internet and the web comes in waves—periods of openness followed by enclosure, which then recede to allow for another wave of openness. In his view, Phil Windley’s observation might not be wrong, but it’s not the end of the story. Rather, it’s the ebb of the tide before a new wave of the #openweb surges forward. The potential for decentralized, and open paths is always there, and it’s a mistake to assume that the current moment is the end of the line.

#DaveWiner argument rests on the idea that the desire for openness and freedom is cyclical. When centralized systems become oppressive, restrictive, or exploitative, there will be a counter-movement that pushes back. The nature of technology, innovation, and humanistic creativity ensures that “native” paths, and protocols will emerge to challenge the status quo.

There is a logic to the digitization of everything. The internet and #openweb built on top of it, is a living example of what happens when this logic is let loose: a tsunami that crashes over every part of our cultures, breaking old structures and opening up possibilities. The storm is not over. Just as the early web opened up commons that were later enclosed, the current wave of enclosure is broken by a new wave of decentralization paths.

What Has Changed in the Last Decade? Looking back at what I wrote nearly ten years ago, the fundamental dynamics haven’t changed. The dotcons have only grown more powerful and more entrenched, but at the same time, the counter-forces have also begun to stir vigorously. Movements like the #Fediverse, based on #ActivityPub, #Nostor and to a lesser extent #Bluesky have grown into real usable decentralized social paths, together with this, we are dipping our toes back into peer-to-peer technologies, this wave is evidence that the storm of digitization is still alive.

Yes, the #dotcons did enclose the first wave of commons, when we stupidly took their digital algorithmic drugs. But the defences of the dotcons are very weak, the only thing holding most people is their addictions, nobody thinks they are healthy any more. The logic of digitization continues, and as long as there are waves, there is hope for the current openweb reboot.

#OMN #makeinghistory #OGB #indymediaback

What is “mess” in the hashtag story?

In this 20 year hashtag story, it’s important to understand chaos as a creative force for change. But it’s also important to see that the path of the #openweb and the ongoing struggle for a more decentralized, human-centered internet, makes this idea of “mess” into meany “bad faith” arguments. For #mainstreaming, people to often hear, images of disorder, confusion, and breakdown, things we are taught to avoid in our neatly structured lives. Yet, from the “native” perspective, mess is not only a negative state to be avoided; it is an essential part of the process of growth, creativity, and radical change to challenge the current mess making, it’s a messy process we need to live through, this is positive as to avoid this mess would be negative.

The mess is not just a state of disarray but also fertile ground for thinking, growth, and alt pathways to emerge. In a world dominated by the #dotcons and their “clean”, control-driven algorithms, we need to reclaim the value of messiness as a useful path to walk. When we talk about “mess,” we’re referring to the tangled, often uncomfortable realities of grassroots organizing, alternative tech development, and the daily work of trying to “natively” build something in the ruins of the old. It’s the disorganized, contentious, and chaotic space where ideas clash, projects falter, and consensus is hard to come by. This mess is unavoidable and, importantly, it is productive.

Mess is where real conversations happen, where people get angry, feel frustrated, make mistakes, and crucially, learn from those mistakes. It’s where things break, and we figure out how to fix them, or better yet, build something that doesn’t have the same flaws. In this, mess is not a symptom of failure but a part of the creative process.

The problem with “clean” solutions pushed by centralized #dotcons like Facebook, Twitter, and Google, is the relentless push for paths, seamless, frictionless experiences that prioritize convenience and profit over human engagement. This creates spaces that discourage messiness, complexity, and deviation from the norm. This experience translates into algorithms that filter out dissent, controversy, and alternative perspectives. It smooths out the rough edges of human interaction, leading to echo chambers and a narrowing of the public spaces we live in.

Our #geekproblem is a part of this dotcons mess, that, spreads into our needed openweb reboot, the sanitized, controlling path is not conducive to real social change. Our natural desire for control (thus safety) is a social problem of “tidying up,” where anything that doesn’t fit into a blinded #mainstreaming categories is thrown out.

The native openweb path is based on ideas and movements that stand in stark contrast to the polished, walled, gated gardens of the dotcons. It’s about creating spaces where mess is not only tolerated but celebrated. Why? Because mess is where serendipity happens. It’s where people come together in unpredictable ways, where different perspectives collide and, through that collision, new and unexpected spaces are opened up for people and communities to take different paths.

When we think about projects on the openweb, whether it’s decentralized social networks like #Mastodon or collaborative platforms like #Wiki’s, they are often messy spaces. They are places where people bring their full, complex selves—warts and all—into the conversation. And that’s what makes them so powerful. Unlike the mainstream platforms, which control and filter, the openweb is alive with the possibility of serendipity. It’s a place where things are being broken down and rebuilt, where people are open to change, so they can challenge the #mainstreaming.

The challenge for those of us working in building the openweb is to learn to love mess, to see it not as a problem to be solved but as a healthy part of the journey. This means accepting that there will be conflict, misunderstandings, and periods of chaos. It means recognizing that there will be little perfect if any polished solution, and that’s okay. Mess is fertile ground, as composting transforms waste into soil, mess is compost for new ideas. We take the scraps, the discarded parts, and the failures and turn them into new connections, new networks, that have the potential to grow into a more equitable digital paths both online and offline.

Mess is resistance, a way of saying that we refuse to be tidied up, categorized, and sanitized. We are messy, complicated, and unpredictable, and this is where our strength lies. Mess is human, at the centre of this path is a simple truth, humans are messy. Our lives are messy. Our relationships are messy. And any system or platform that pretends otherwise is denying this human experience. The openweb should be a place that reflects the full spectrum of human life, not just the neatly packaged version that the dotcons want to sell us.

To turn the chaos, conflict, and complexity into a fertile ground for growth, involves developing better tools for mediation, conflict resolution, and collaborative decision-making within our communities, the #OGB is such a project. It means creating paths and “commons” where different voices can be heard #indymediaback is a media project for this, where disagreements can be worked through constructively, and where there is room for both dissent and consensus #OMN if the overarching project.

The idea of composting the mess is not about eliminating it but transforming it. Just like in nature, where decomposing matter is essential for new growth, our digital and social ecosystems need a process for turning the old, the broken, and the chaotic into the new and vibrant #makeinghistory is a project for this.

The journey to a better openweb is not going to be straight. It will be full of twists and turns, false starts, and breakdowns. But in that mess lies the potential for real, meaningful change. The polished, controlled environments of the #dotcons cannot offer this; they are too invested in maintaining the status quo.

With the committent to the #openweb, the challenge is to embrace the mess, to see it not as a hindrance but as an opportunity. It is in this mess that we will find energy, creativity, and resilience to build a more human-centered internet. Let’s roll up our sleeves, get our hands dirty, and start composting. The future is messy, and that’s exactly why it’s worth fighting for.

Ideas to build communities on this #KISS path please

To shift society away from heads down worshipping the #deathcult to lifting our heads towards simple sustainable, open, and cooperative change and challenge we need. To push this change information alone is insufficient; instead, we need to focus on fundamentally transforming lifestyles, habits, and world-views, the change, requires more than just intellectual understanding—it requires emotional engagement, experience, and sometimes, unfortunately, the pain that comes from learning the hard way.

The challenge, short-term vs. long-term thinking, is a barrier of our collective prioritizing short-term comfort and stability over long-term solutions. This mentality impedes the adoption of generational, sustainable approaches that address the deeper systemic issues we face. With the shrinkage of comfy spaces, the “comfy majority” could, paradoxically, be motivated for serious change. As the pressures mounts, the #mainstreaming can become more receptive to alternative paths.

There is an obverse need for this paradigm shift, beyond patching, fundamental rethinking of how we organize society, economy, and technology. To a focus more on inclusive and open principles like 4opens and #OMN. The (open data, open source, open standards, and open processes) and the OMN (Open Media Network) represent a path for inclusive, decentralized, and transparent native networks. An easy path to take, as these concepts are already at the core of the open-source movement, which powers much of the digital world.

To take this path, we need to emphasize avoiding exclusionary and rivalrous practices, advocating for a more healthy balance of cooperation over competition. This requires finding common ground and shared interests across the current social mess, to take us on the path for building resilient, cooperative networks. There is a strong role for narrative, exemplified by the hashtags’ story. A shared narrative, organized around common radical hashtags, can be used to build unify diverse groups and drive change. This story needs to be grounded to avoid becoming just another layer of noise in the current “mess.” the path needs to make #mainstreaming uncomfortable, by making these narratives “dirty” and uncomfortable, the aim is to highlight the flaws in current systems and make alternatives more visible and attractive.

This path need to balance the political and practical. An example of this is that while recognizing the importance of the #PGA (People’s Global Action) hallmarks—anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchal, anti-authoritarian principles—these need to be introduced slowly into projects, given their strong anarchist roots and thus political nature. This balance between pushing practical solutions and maintaining a political critique is crucial. With this in mind, we need to keep definitions loose to hold pathways flexible, thus acknowledging that society is inherently messy and that a rigid approach is unlikely to succeed. This flexibility allows for a mix of passion, diversity, and common sense to guide the evolution of new paradigms.

Practical steps and considerations are core to cultivating emotional engagement. Since information alone isn’t enough, we need to focus on creating experiences, stories, and communities that engage people emotionally. This could involve storytelling, art, technology and activism with meany forms of expression that make the new paradigm not just intellectually appealing but also emotionally resonant.

There are meany paths to do this, examples would be working on concrete projects that embody the principles, like #OGB #OMN #makeinghistory and #indymediaback. By demonstrating that these alternatives are not only viable but also superior paths in aspects, we can build early adopters and gradually build momentum. This will foster trust and cooperation, this trust is a critical ingredient for the kind of decentralized, cooperative systems we need to make happen. This path needs to focus on building networks where trust is cultivated through transparency, accountability, and shared values. Yes, there will be mess, this is normal, but let’s keep our focus on the #KISS path.

Ideas please for how to build communities around this path. The approach is addressing the deep-rooted issues of our current economic and social mess in a thoughtful and multi-faceted way. By pushing for open, cooperative, and emotionally resonant alternatives, we can try to lay the groundwork for a shift to more sustainable and equitable societies. The challenge is immense, practical actions with a compelling narrative, and remaining adaptable and inclusive paths, there is potential to change and challenge for meaningful change.

The #openweb – Escaping the Grip of the Algorithm

A fluffy view of the path, with a touch of spiky

The concept of the “good society” is the most socially profound questions we can ask, especially at this moment of history. When we face the overlapping crises of climate change, political instability, and extreme economic inequality, the question of what constitutes a “good society” becomes urgent and pressing.

There should be an obvious view that there is a need for a real change of path, to address the severe social, political, and environmental mess we have made of our time, we need more than just incremental change—we need a fundamental shift in how we think about and act in society. This involves rethinking our economic, political, and social systems in ways that enhance the freedoms and well-being of the majority, rather than concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few.

This path leads us to break from the current #stupidindividualism of #deathcult worship to walk a very different “good society”. Not the current #mainstreaming one of the minimalist state advocated by #libertarians, nor the highly constricted state envisioned by #neoliberalism. Instead, we have options, the #fluffy path of rejuvenated European social democracy or a new American progressive capitalism—a twenty-first-century version of the Scandinavian welfare state. Or the more #spiky path of #openweb native anarchism or metadata driven socialism.

What we cannot do is live in the #neoliberalism that has dominated the political and economic landscape for the past 40 years, with the concentration of wealth and power among the nasty few eroding the lives of the nicer meany, with resulting undermining of democratic institutions and social bindings. Our current path, claims to promote “free markets,” has been lying to us, imposed new rules for the benefit of the wealthy and powerful, and socializing losses to the meany. The 2008 financial crisis, where governments bailed out banks with taxpayer money, while the bankers themselves reaped enormous profits, is a prime example of this. This led to economic inequality, political corruption, and a loss of faith in social democratic paths. It is a road to fascism at worst and ecological and social break down at best, please let’s step away from this mess.

On the fluffy path, there is a role for government, a role to play in creating a “good society.” This involves using the economic system to provide people with the resources needed to open the range of options available to them in life. This, in turn, enhances their freedom to act and live up to their potential, its basic humanism. This path, would address the deprivations faced by those with low incomes, ensuring access to basic needs like healthcare, education, and housing. The assumption that economic rights and political rights are inseparable is core to this path. That freedom can be achieved when people have the economic security to exercise their political rights.

The conception of “freedom” promoted by neoliberal thinkers like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman led us down a dangerous path. While they argued for “free markets” and minimal government intervention, in practice, this restricts freedom for the many while expanding it for the few. The deregulation of markets and the reduction of taxes on the wealthy leads to a concentration of power that threatens the foundations of the #fluffy social democracy path. If we stay on this path, it will lead us to a twenty-first-century version of authoritarianism, where advances in science and technology are used to surveil and control us. In this Orwellian scenario, truth is sacrificed to power, and the freedoms of the majority are eroded.

What would a path to a “good society” look like, prioritizing the well-being and freedom of the many over the wealth and power of the few? From a #spiky view, this would need fundamentalist change that frees us to take very different paths. There are seeds for this in the #OMN #OGB #makeinghistory and #indymediaback etc. For people who doubt, the two paths, projects, will work fine at the same time, many people push the #fluffy path, with its commitment to social democracy, progressive capitalism. The spiky path will work as a balance to this, and maybe replace it if people can get their act together, it’s up to people and communities to decide which path to take in the end.

We are in a global, intellectual, and political war, the paths we take now will determine whether we move towards a just and equitable society, or whether we continue down the path of inequality and authoritarianism, which will lead to #climatechaos, death and displacement. It’s good to remember that the good society provides for the needs of all its people, enhances their freedoms, and ensures that democracy and justice are more than just “chatting class” noise. Let’s please take a different path https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

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 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” 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.

Post-Modernism Influence on Social Movements

Leaving the fig leave of dead philosophies covering #liberalism and #neoliberalism, gives cover to continue ideological works, this mess masks and hides insidious agendas. By removing these fig leaves, we can see, understand and dismantle the mechanisms of power they obscure.

I have talked about this, a lot, let’s try one more time. The lingering #zombie of post-modernism and its influence on social movements and #mainstreaming anti-ideological “common sense”, despite being very much dead in most intellectual circles, continues to exert ongoing influence on thought. This lingering specter is not only academic debate but a tangible and invisible force that shapes ideologies, policies, and actions. Understanding the ramifications of post-modernism is a path to addressing the current societal mess and dismantling the layers of deception that obscure the nature of #liberalism and #neoliberalism.

The legacy of post-modernism, emerged in the mid-20th century as a reaction against the certainties and grand narratives of the progressive modernism with the denial of objective truths, embracing relativism, and deconstructing power and knowledge. While this philosophical approach did provide insights and can be used to challenge oppressive systems, with its embrace and twining with the #neoliberalism of the last 40 years it pushed a lot of the current mess, of pervasive skepticism and cynicism that undermined the path of collective action and coherence in social movements.

  • The Perils of Post-Modernist Relativism. Erosion of Truth: Post-modernism’s insistence on the relativity of truth has eroded the foundation of factual discourse. In a world where all narratives are equally valid, distinguishing between reality and fiction becomes opaque, creating fertile ground for misinformation and manipulation, as any attempt to assert objective truth is met with suspicion and relativistic counterarguments. This is the mess of our use of the #dotcons
  • Fragmentation of Social Movements: By emphasizing the multiplicity of perspectives and identities, post-modernism pushes the current fragmentation of social movements. While recognizing diverse voices is important, the lack of unifying visions leads to disjointed efforts that fail to achieve any substantial change. This fragmentation makes it possible for entrenched powers to maintain the status quo, as there is no cohesive opposition to challenge and change them. The mess we work in.
  • Depoliticization and Inaction: The post-modern emphasis on discourse and representation over material conditions and collective action leads to depoliticization. When activism becomes #fashionista shouting primarily about language and symbols rather than tangible change, it loses any efficacy. This shift from praxis to performative results in social movements that are about virtue signalling and status games rather than achieving concrete goals. The mess we are in today.
  • Liberalism has been a Fig Leaf for Imperialism: Liberalism, with its emphasis on individual freedoms and democratic values, serves as a fig leaf for imperialism. This is evident in foreign policies that justify interventionist actions in the name of spreading democracy and human rights. However, these interventions serve geopolitical and economic interests rather than the purported liberal ideals, leading to the exploitation and destabilization of other nations. The mess our apathy pushes over others.
  • Neo-Liberalism’s Economic Fig Leaf: Neo-liberalism uses economic theory as a fig leaf to conceal a conservative agenda that prioritizes corporate power and wealth accumulation over social welfare. Policies promoted under the cover of economic efficiency result in austerity measures, deregulation, and privatization, which harms the working class and marginalized communities while enriching the few. The mess we push over ourselves.

To move beyond the mess created by the undead philosophies which hides behind the fig leaves of liberalism and neoliberalism, we need a renewed commitment to social truth, solidarity, and collective action.

  • Reasserting Objective Truths: While acknowledging the complexity of reality, we must reclaim the importance of objective truths and evidence-based discourse. This involves resisting relativism and combating misinformation through critical thinking and basic media literacy. We need tools, shovels for this composting #OMN
  • Building Lose Unified Movements: Social movements need some unity without erasing diversity. This requires finding common ground and shared goals that can unite different groups in the pursuit of systemic change. Solidarity should be the cornerstone, enabling coordinated efforts that can actually challenge entrenched powers. We need federated p2p tools for this #OGB
  • Focusing on Material Conditions: Activism prioritizes material conditions and tangible outcomes over performative gestures. This means addressing economic inequality, environmental degradation, and social injustices through concrete policies and actions rather than symbolic acts. We need media for activism #indymediaback to build meaningful action.
  • Exposing and Dismantling Fig Leaves: By examining the fig leaves of liberalism and neo-liberalism, we can expose the motivations behind these ideologies and advocate for #grassroots alternatives that prioritize human well-being and ecological sustainability over #mainstreaming corporate profits and imperial ambitions. #makeinghistory is a #KISS tool for this.

The philosophy of post-modernism, despite its intellectual demise, continues to shape our “common sense” contemporary thought and social movements. To navigate this mess, we must compost the relativism and fragmentation it has pushed. By reasserting “objective” truths, building unifying movements, focusing on material conditions, and exposing ideological fig leaves, we can walk the path for a just, equitable, and sustainable future. It’s this simple, please try not to push prat down this path, thanks.

What can you do https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

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.

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

The Path Beyond #Neoliberalism

On the path of the current climate and systemic crises, it becomes realistic to see that #neoliberalism, with its free-market orthodoxy and the pushing of minimal state intervention, is fundamentally an inadequate path that is ill-equipped to address #climatechaos and social challenges we face. This failure means a radical shift in perspective and approach is going to happen, with this we might need to shift our “common sense” to being “Revolutionary Realism.”

The current #mainstreaming of false promises of #Neoliberalism over the last 40 years has pushed the fundamentalist free market path as the engine of prosperity, wealth and efficiency. However, since the 2008 financial crisis, these promises have increasingly rung hollow. The empirical evidence—rising inequality, decreasing life expectancy, and environmental degradation—exposes the limitations and failures of this economic model.

From our turn of the century Alt globalization movement, we have Mark Fisher’s concept of “capitalist realism”, which describes the pervasive belief that capitalism is the only viable economic system. This invisible dogma has fostered a sense of fatalism, particularly on the left, where a resignation to critique and protest has replaced active efforts to envision and construct alternatives. This defeatism perpetuates the status quo, as it undermines belief in the possibility of systemic change.

The need for revolutionary path in the imminent collapse of capitalism, contrary to the notion that capitalism is indestructible, we are witnessing its destabilization under the weight of its inherent contradictions and the accelerating climate mess. This realization prompts a shift from capitalist realism to revolutionary realism, acknowledging the inevitability of capitalism’s decline and the necessity of preparing for what comes next.

The climate crisis is a catalyst, a primary driver of this impending transformation. From droughts affecting global trade to natural disasters disrupting economies, the environmental impacts of #climatechaos are compounding the systemic vulnerabilities. These disruptions necessitate a move towards a different way of organizing economic systems, this could be a controlled and planned economic system or more a balance of grassroots federated democracy.

State control of the economy is one path. Historically, state intervention has proven effective in times of crisis, as seen during World War II and the COVID-19 pandemic. State control of the economy does not inherently mean totalitarianism; it can involve a balanced approach, with both top-down planning and bottom-up participation.

Effective planning is a path we might need to take, being crucial for managing resources and ensuring equitable distribution. This could involve simplifying economic processes, such as reducing the variety of consumer goods and localizing production to reduce dependency on international trade. Digital technology can enhance this planning by providing real-time #opendata and facilitating more responsive governance.

Democratic Participation is a path to avoid the pitfalls of authoritarianism, any new system must incorporate democratic mechanisms, such as #OGB path of building the power of citizens’ assemblies, to legitimize state actions and ensure accountability. This grassroots participatory approach mitigates the risk of corruption and foster a sense of collective responsibility.

Practical steps for transition, free basics and rationing. A key element of a new system would be the socialization of essential services—healthcare, housing, and food production—to ensure that everyone’s basic needs are met. Rationing of luxuries and non-essential goods can help to push some sustainability and equity on this mediation path.

Encouraging worker participation in decision-making using projects like the #OGB and perhaps supporting small businesses, as a path out of the current #mainstreaming, can humanize the economy and maintain a degree of market diversity to push the needed transition. This hybrid approach blends state control with “entrepreneurial” social freedom, making the path through the coming mess by balancing efficiency with innovation to shift our dogmatic common sense.

But fundamentally we need a cultural shift towards valuing sustainability, community, and collective well-being over the #stupidindividualism of individual consumerism. This can be promoted through, empowering #DIY education, radical media (#indymediaback), and grassroots movements. There is a long history of this (#makinghistory) which we need to remind our selves about.

The transition from current #mainstreaming to a more sustainable and equitable system requires revolutionary realism—a pragmatic recognition of the imminent collapse of the current system and a proactive approach to growing its successor. This might involve embracing state control, and or fostering grassroots democratic participation, to push the cultural shift towards sustainability and collective well-being. Can we navigate the complexities of this transition to take the path to building a more resilient and just society is the most important question for today?

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

The climate crisis demands urgent and radical action, yet #neoliberalism, with its dogmatic focus on markets and deregulation, falls well short of this. History tells us that activism is the path to take for the systemic changes necessary to save us from environmental and social degradation we face.

The Inertia of the #deathcult refers to this entrenched ideology which prioritizes economic growth and individual freedom over environmental and social issues. This ideology pushes the #stupidindividualism that corporations are using to exploit and destroy the environment. We need to shift this balance. Currently, the balance is tipped far to the right, with no end to environmental and social harm. To save our planet and our communities, we need to push the balance to the left. This means prioritizing sustainability, community well-being, and ecological health to balance the last 40 years on the path of pushing of profit and deregulation.

There is a long history of tools for activism, to achieve this shift, we need to reboot these effective tools and frameworks. Here are some key projects and movements that can help:

#KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) Simplicity in Solutions: Focus on straightforward, easily implementable solutions that have a broad grassroots impact. This principle ensures that our actions are accessible and understandable in use.

#PGA hallmarks are a basic-established ethical path for affective grassroots movements, #nothingnew is the key hashtag for why take this path.

#OMN (Open Media Network) Decentralized Information Sharing: By creating and supporting open media networks, we can push the free flow of information and awareness about social and environmental issues. This fosters balance and a more informed and engaged public.

is a key tool in judging and guiding the tools we use: Open Data, Open Source, Open Standards, Open Processes.

#OGB (Open Governance Body) Participatory Governance: Establish open governance bodies that include a diverse range of stakeholders, ensuring movement away from the current worshipping of the #deathcult (neoliberalism) by building grassroots working federated decisions about the social and environment paths are made democratically and transparently.

#makeinghistory is a way of remembering this simple path and find the tools that have worked that we need to make work agen.

Conclusion, #Neoliberalism’s reliance on market solutions is insufficient to tackle the climate crisis. We need a paradigm shift that emphasizes collective responsibility and action. By using tools like #KISS, #OMN, , and #OGB, we can empower grassroots communities of action that we need to change and challenge, ensure transparency, and promote sustainable paths. Activism, guided by these principles, is essential for pushing the balance towards ecological stability we urgently need.

Bad conversations in #FOSS and tech

A lot of our public discourse has reached the stage where it might be worth thinking about it as a mental health issue, and that after the “common sense” worshipping of the #deathcult for 40 years, this becomes escalating hard to mediate. This post is about a summing up of this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/foss/comments/1e5vhif/crisis_of_governance_in_foss_medieval_politics/ on Reddit where I posted the text of one of a blog posts on #FOSS and the need to move away from medieval governance.

The is very little if any constructive dialogue, instead we have #blocking, simply ignoring, participants selectively address certain points while neglecting others. This creates an incomplete dialogue and fails to engage with the actual scope of the argument. Example: If someone ignores the historical context and current challenges within FOSS governance structures, they miss why the proposed changes are necessary. Belittling involves dismissing or undermining arguments or concerns, which shuts down dialogue and discourage participation. Example: Dismissing the discussion of governance in FOSS as “unreadable” or “spammy” without engaging with the substance or argument. Nitpicking, focusing on minor details and errors rather than engaging with the main points, derails the conversation and prevent meaningful discussion. Example: focusing on correcting typos or minor factual errors without addressing the argument for the need for governance changes in FOSS projects. StrawMan, misrepresenting the argument to make it easier to attack, distorts the discussion and leads to unproductive debate. Example: Suggesting that advocating for more structured governance in FOSS is equivalent to demanding strict corporate-like control, which misrepresents the argument for more democratic and community-driven governance.

Reasons for these messy behaviours: Ideological Differences: People have strong beliefs about what is “common sense” and react defensively to suggestions that change/challenge this. This misunderstanding grows the lack of understanding of the historical context and the specifics of the proposed changes that feedbacks misinformed critiques that that keeps building resistance to change. Yes, change is uncomfortable, and people resist it by dismissing or undermining new paths, ideas please? Communication Style: The style of communication can be off-putting and confusing for in and out groups, leading to reactions that focus on form rather than addressing any substance.

Why this matters: There is a crisis of governance in #FOSS, Aristocratic Hierarchies and Monarchical Leadership pushes the concentration of power among a few maintainers and leaders, this lowers community building and buy in. Medieval Governance structures are medieval political systems, It’s obviously unfit for the modern world, let’s look at why we have this mess: #Neoliberal individualism and its failures, #stupidindividualism breeds the focus on individualism, which undermines collaboration and community-driven efforts in FOSS. This fixation with market-driven development rather than community needs result on one hand in less innovative and user-friendly software, and on the other in #dotcons control and exploitation. Feeding the #techchurn and #geekproblem insular and exclusionary culture.

Addressing issues of ignoring, belittling, nitpicking, and straw man arguments push back productive dialogue. Solutions to this current path, democratizing decision-making, the path of transparent and inclusive governance models like the #OGB to build community-concentric approaches, like #indymediaback and #makeinghistory. To make this work, let’s try shifting to focus on to community needs over individuals ambition and market demands. Cultivate an inclusive culture that values diverse perspectives and considers different social, cultural, and economic paths.