Thinking of stepping away from the #dotcons to the #openweb a conversation with an activist signing up on a big general instance – they kinda all do this.
A. You might be better off on an activism focused instance, https://activism.openworlds.info, but you will be fine on the one anyone, as they all talk to each other. The instance you join is your “home community” so good to join one that matches your interests and mission.
Q. Thank you so much – I am entirely lost here as just arrived and the whole ‘find your server’ bit flumoxxed me! Excuse what’s likely a silly question – but ‘where is my main profile?’ ie: where whatever bit of Mastodon I’m on… I would
be the same me?
A. you have joined a big general instance’s https://mastodon.online/ it’s a fine place to be. You can have more than one account on different instances, I have 3 mastodon accounts on 3 different instances, run 2 of these as a part of the #OMN
Ps. hashtags are your friend, use them in posts and click on them to find interesting people
Q. so if I boost a post on one account – I would need to also boost on other ‘me’ accounts in other arenas/spaces? Thanks so much for your help x
A. you can do that, but you don’t need to. All the instances are kinda one big space. The import bit is that each instance has a community and focus, so it helps yourself and the #openweb if you put our self into a subject instance.
For example, if someone complains about your posts it’s the mods and admins of the instance you join get to decide if it stays up or your account gets closed… so best to have a relationship with the instance admin and mods… This is much easer on a smaller, friendly focused instance than a bigger, more inpersional general one.
It’s much more #DIY and human relationship than #twitter.
The “better” #closedweb (ISP intranets) was “surprisingly” destroyed by the “inferer” #openweb, which then exploded in use to spread everywhere. The #mainstreaming thinking then tried and failed to recapture this #4opens project for ten years as it takes up global space, and was a real challenge change, that the “common sense” said should not exist. This working alternative was finally sold out by our own #fahernistas, who bribed with money and statues members of the “unthinking” #geekproblem to build the #dotcons that rapidly took over the #openweb space.
Our wider activist #fashernistas created “liberal stories” about how embracing the #dotcons was a good path. The wider #fahernistas flocked to these #closedweb spaces to grasp at the real early power they provided, after society had finished this shift, the bate and switch took this power away, and we were left with “servalence capitalism” and no social power, as was obvuse at the time it was a con.
Our #fashernistats then pissed tech change/challenge agenst the wall for ten years. While the #openweb user facing technology withered, ignored and irrelevant to #mainstreaming. A few years ago we had an “accidental” #openweb reboot with #activitypub and soon after pushing of the next generation of #closedweb projects with #web03 leaving us in the current messy times.
Where are we now and what can we learn from this? Liberalism in tech are often active prats, co-opting, bait and switch and taking the easy #NGO funded path when the choice comes. They are #friendlyenemies, even when they deny this with all their “common sense”. Ideas to mediate this, please?
Do you except that “new” is often #deathcult (neo-liberalism) and #postmodernism because this is “common sense” what is your plan/idea to get around these problems?
I have had 20 years of “new” and am very underwhelmed, actually it’s almost all #blocking or adding to the #techshit to be composed. This is obviously a problem that needs to be mediated, what is your plan/process to have a better outcome?
Remember that the only thing that has worked in the last 10 years has been copying #dotcons with #activertypub every themselves has failed, what can we learn from this?
This is an important question that the #OMN project mediates.
A. I joined here only recently to experiment with the Fediverse, and that’s my first impression too. The two hottest kinds of topic I found were meta discussions such as “Twitter users will come here now”, and “the system is fucking with us using vaccines”.
Q. we build at Alt but will people come, some will. Moving away from the #dotcons it’s a tiny step we need to do more, MUCH more #OMN
A. people use the mainstream media because there they can find the information they want, their friends, and have a pleasant experience with highly usable tools. Only a very small group of people would use a privacy-oriented social media with complexities such as a federated network just because “fuck the system”. Even a nerd with the obsession for cybersecurity and privacy like me has an hard time finding interesting stuff here. And, believe me, I’m trying.
Q. this is an excellent question to ansear.
There are two points:
Firstly, we had exalent outreach alt media around for 20 years, #indymediaback is an example project that we need coders to help reboot.
Secondly, to think that we/you have any chance of grassroots progressive social change challenge without working alt media is a fatal fantasy. We can clearly see this in the mess of the last ten years.
We have the codeing tools #activitypub, and we have the historical social models that we know used to work, but had scaling issues.
The #OMN plan is simple, bring the new working technical scaling to the old working social models/process #4opens
As you say the fedivers made up of copies of #dotcons is too small a step.. We have to take the next step if we have any seruse ideas about change/challenge of the current #mainstreaming#deathcult
We have to change, challenge our social ideas and social process in what is left of the #openweb
This is less fundermentalist than it sounds as open-source (free softer) development already works mostly #4opens so the change being pushed by the #OMN is #nothingnew
This should be easy, but #BLOCKING has obviously to be overcome, dig, plant, grow. Compost the #techshit, repeat. One good first step is to be honest about our own funding.
A. being “alternative” is not a strong selling point because you define yourself relatively to something else instead of having your own identity. This dooms you to be always in the shadow of “the mainstream” as a sort of second choice.
Q. Being alternative USED to have a strong identity as did #openweb and yes you are right they DO NOT have this any more, this is a problem we should change challenge not except as “common sense”.
Think before replying as this conversation is more about agreeing then division, focus is good.
We need to start from a simple but often-missed point – different starting assumptions lead to different processes – and those lead to very different outcomes. This is the lesson that gets lost when radical #openweb projects are treated like just another app, or reduced to a polished #NGO common sense path.
The #OMN doesn’t come from that place. It grows out of a different worldview, rooted in the lived traditions of the commons, the early internet, and grassroots organising. This isn’t abstract theory; it’s a body of practice that has already worked in many different forms.
We’ve seen it before in the early #indymedia network giving global voice to decentralised movements in the #wikis and early blogospheres building shared knowledge in public and more recently, the #Fediverse (for example Mastodon) showing that federated systems can scale without (yet) falling under corporate control.
These are not utopian ideas, they are working proofs that transparent, decentralised, trust-based systems can function and sustain real communities. Yes, they have limits. But those limits are not simply weaknesses, they are part of what keeps them healthy. They enforce diversity, autonomy, and accountability at a human scale, rather than collapsing everything into a single, extractive system like the #dotcons.
Where things go wrong, the current problem is a loss of context. Many people entering tech and activism today don’t have access to this lineage, or only see half of it. Developers who understand federation but not community process often build technically elegant systems that don’t sustain real social use. You end up with silos that work, but don’t live. Activists who understand horizontal organising but not open standards end up relying on closed tools – Facebook groups, Google Docs, Slack – rebuilding their movements inside systems that ultimately undermine them.
In both cases, something essential is missing. Without a grounding in the subcultures that shaped civil rights movements, free software, and the commons, people default to what feels like “common sense” – but is really just #mainstreaming logic.
That tends to look like discomfort with open governance (“too messy”), preference for control and clarity over participation and suspicion of openness when it challenges institutional norms. The result is familiar: well-intentioned projects that centralise, burn out, and quietly disappear when funding cycles end.
The #OMN is an attempt to break that cycle, it’s not a single platform or product, it’s better understood as shared infrastructure – both social and technical – that helps reconnect what has been fragmented. Think of it as soil, not a finished structure. The aim is to reconnect grassroots practice with open technical standards, compost the backlog of half-built projects and abandoned ideas and create conditions where new work can actually take root and grow.
On the technical side, the building blocks already exist – protocols like ActivityPub and RSS. On the social side, we have long-standing practices of trust, transparency, and collective governance. What’s missing isn’t only the tools, it’s cultural memory, continuity of practice and the confidence to build differently.
If we’re serious about the #openweb, the shift is less about innovation and more about orientation from products → to processes, from platforms → to ecosystems, from control → to trust and from presentation → to practice.
This isn’t about rejecting institutions or funding outright. It’s about recognising that if everything is filtered through those to often blinded lenses, we lose the qualities that make the #openweb viable in the first place.
The challenge – and the opportunity – is to reconnect the layers of narrative with practice, funding with real needs and technology with lived community. Because without that, we don’t get growth, we just get better storytelling about stagnation.
Hey, changemakers! Are you tired of shouting into the void on social media? Frustrated with the endless noise and the lack of impact? It’s time to harness the power of #hashtags to fuel a movement that can actually make a difference. And guess what? The #openweb is our playground for this revolution!
Check out The Hashtag Story https://hamishcampbell.com/?s=the+hashtag+story it’s more than just a guide; it’s a blueprint for building something big, something real. If you’re passionate about activism and ready to step up, this is your chance. This isn’t going to be an easy or comfortable path, but hey, who ever said change was easy?
The #OMN (Open Media Network) path is more than a simple call to action. Core to this is that the hashtags story can be more than just noise; it can be seeds for a movement, a way to connect, organize, and grow. But this only works if we make the commitment to turn those hashtags into something more than just digital graffiti. We need to take that extra step, turn talk into action, and make the #openweb a place for real, meaningful activism.
The #hashtags cover technology and society from a progressive view and are very simple, on a surface level, but full of complex conversations when you lift the lid and talk in the context they are planted in.
#BLOCKING = refusing to look/averting eyes/eyes closed
The stroy is complex and interlocking, telling us a wide story and world-view, to show a path out of our current mess.
#deathcult is relevant because of #XR forcing us to look the truth of ecological and social decay in the eye, good to ground this in real historical experiences, think of the Irish Potato and Bengal famine.
#Fashionista is about consumer capitalism, looked at as social illness.
#openweb is about building code for anachronism rather than capitalism
#dotcons are feeding social illness, we cannot keep building this sickness, the step away metaphor is a positive path away from this.
#closedweb is a form of technological slavery, we often choose.
#4opens is a tool that can be used to guide us on to the better humane path and, it gives us the power to JUDGE and thus decide, it is POWER.
#geekproblem is a group of people lost in darkness, blinded to humane light, they inbreed monsters in code #techcurn#techshit
The #geekproblem hashtag is not simply negative, it’s taking obvious “problem” out of “geek”.
The problem is obvious look at #failbook and Google both “geek” projects of domination/control, and yes you are right it’s geek culture shaped by capital in both cases.
What does #openweb geek culture look like? Looking back at early #couchsurfing and #indymedia you have healthy non “problem” examples. Look at both projects late in their decline, we have strong examples of the “problem”.
#techcurn the world is full of me to projects, everyone has the same ideas, few if anyone links.
#nothingnew is a question, do we need this codeing project.
#techshit is when people do not ask this question and build it anyway agen and agen
#encryptionists are in the end way too often about artificial scarcity (web03), this is not actually needed. To be clear this is a minority need for this technology, but as a limited use case not as a dominant way of thinking, codeing. #encryptionists is about the feeling of total control that encryption gives the #geekproblem this is key because all good progressive society are based on trust, which is about giving up this desire. The problem in geek is the problem of socialization… a known geek issue 🙂 in itself is fine, am not judging. BUT this is embedded in code that shapes society, it becomes a “problem”. Good to think a bit more on this one. With power comes responsibility.
This list only touches on the meanings and subjects. Next question, what is the story and world-view that these #hashtags embody?
Q. these things are kinda hopelessly expensive. You have to worship the #deathcult to attend… Hard to know what to do with these two track approaches… Kinda can’t be #openweb are the any that are happening outside the temples of death #XR
Ps this is a metaphor 🙂
A. I think that’s a complicated way of saying you can’t afford to go?
Q. is a social comment about events like this, there are a lot of them. How can non #mainstreaming people get involved in #openweb events like this, a good subject for you to bring up, if you would, thanks. Ps. Not #stupidindividualism I should not have to say that.
A. My opinion is that you can’t have your cake and eat it? You can’t live outside the mainstream, throw rocks at it, and then complain when it doesn’t accommodate you?
Q. yep, I have spent my whole life outside the #mainstreaming, much of it building up and working on #openweb projects and content. Do you not find what you just said cruel and dismissive? Good to think on this and hopefully bring it up at the event. Not picking on you here, or attacking you, social commentary is not a bad thing on the #openweb
A. Social commentary is not what you’re doing here. You’re just replying to me to reinforce your worldview. So no, I don’t think I’m being cruel and dismissive. Perhaps you should think about your theory of change about how you’re going to build a constituency of people to change the world? It’s certaintly not by being a reply-guy 🙄
Q. dismissive and curl second time. Now this is just being a prat “It’s certainly not by being a reply-guy” OK, please have a think about how to bring the #openweb away from the current #mainstreaming that events like this embody (due to cost) as we are heading for social/environmental disaster fast, the is no good outcome from the #deathcult we all worship, we do need a working #openweb for a better outcome.
A. So you reply to me with the #deathcult hashtag after I share excitement about going to an event? And I’m being unreasonable? I’ve never had a positive interaction with you, Hamish. You might wear that as a badge of honour, but I’ve finally realised it’s time to mute you. Good luck.
Q. OK, please have a think about how to bring the #openweb away from the current #mainstreaming that events like this embody (due to cost) as we are heading for social/environmental disaster fast, the is no good outcome from the #deathcult we all worship, we do need a working #openweb for a better outcome.
Anyone interested in doing a sexy site for the #4opens think people need “official” look and feel to make use of this powerful tool to fight the #techshit#techcurn and help to reboot the #openweb
Q. I think we need a 5th open: #openAccess. If you have the #4opens, but the project is jailed in the #walledGarden of #gitlab.com (which blocks some people from participation), the 4 opens are hindered by reduced/suppressed participation. E.g. some people cannot (or will not) file bug reports. So, can we get #5opens?
A. The #4opens is only designed to deal with 95% of the #techshit the rest is open to our creativity. Am interested in a #4opens review of GitHub
What we are likely to find is that GitHub is still inside the world of open source development, this is both good and bad, good in the sense of Microsoft moving away from its closed source roots, bad in the sense that they are doing it in the attempt to co-opt and extinguish.
The #4opens are not a way of keeping them out, but they are a way of mediating and stopping the extinguish bit when used as a tool to aggressively block that move.
A. aha just noticed this was gitlab not GitHub, don’t know much about that, so a #4opens review would be good.
It would help to think about society rather than individuals – for diversity as a healthy path. As long as they have opendata and open “Industrial” standards, you can move your work in and out… Openprocess makes easier as the documentation can be created to help people do this.
The open licence keeps you in control of your work, while promoting social use
Am interested in how #openacess adds over the other #4opens as I think you end up with “open access” from the outcome of the first 4 can we think about this?
Was thinking about this when reading other tweets and the #4opens gives you open access already, so we don’t need a 5th open #KISS
Good to have a chance to think these things though, thanks for the question.
#fediverse is an accidental#openweb reboot – largely driven by the #fashionistas. Which means – it’s like herding cats – hard to move, hard to align, not a bad thing, not a good thing – just the reality.
If we want to move beyond the mess, one path is #OGB – grassroots, #DIY, producer-led governance.
If not, then we live (and die) with the chaos. And do what we can to stop people bowing down to the #deathcult. Because even holding that line matters, if we want to keep the #openweb alive.
Q. A lot of evil stuff happens via the cyberweb, no doubt. But I would encourage anyone who still knows how it works not to give up on it. Instead, try to work around the BS and design systems which are resilient to adversaries. As conditions of life get harder and the oligarchy turns the screws we need channels of dissident communication, even if they are no longer mainstream ones. Even retro stuff may go under the radar.
A. This is a social tech problem, a #geekproblem and the solution is social tech that steps away from the #geekproblem we cant just keep doing the same #techshit it’s time for composting #indymediaback#OMN are example of this that are currently blocked.
Q. As far as I could understand from what you said, what would then be exactly the social related problem to solve ? Are you referring to the way spying agencies like the CIA that is dominating the hacktivist scene, are creating “trends” on how to be safe online, which have most of the time no true impact regarding the possibilities of such agencies to continue spying and having social control? So you mean it’s a matter of being good at creating counter propaganda to cancel
A. You are describing the problems, then adding a layer of self-destruction to the problem, that’s not helpful. The #openweb has been “destroyed” by some forces you name. But we have also played a role in destroying it ourselves in refection to the real problems you highlight. We have little power over the first and more power over the second. It’s hopeful to think about this #geekproblem
Q. The #openweb wasn’t destroyed exactly. If you look at the numbers of websites over time, the open web is still there, but what happened is that almost all of the attention got captured by a small number of enormous corporate sites. The corporate sites made themselves critical conduits for search and discovery of news and views, such that the notion of “web surfing” has become almost obsolete. Google search increasingly won’t show much of the open web, because it’s not within the targeted ads business model.
A. yes my point, the #openweb is under a thin veneer of corporate crap. The #fedivers is a tiny break out of this that seceded because it was “accidentally” anti #geekproblem we need to be hardcore anti #geekproblem is the is to be HOPE 🙂
Q. The success of the fediverse did have a very large element of luck to it. Before 2017 it was doing very badly, and I remember unsuccessfully trying to persuade people to try GNU Social instead of going on Facebook. Even people who hated Facebook were reluctant to try the fediverse. Also my interpretation is that ActivityPub was originally a corporate idea but that the corporates lost interest, leaving its development to a few remaining grassroots activists. If the corporates had stayed that ActivityPub would probably be something quite different.
A. Yep, gave me hope, though it’s failing now – we have to stop fucking up this grassroots tech. A start is #4opens talking about the #geekproblem and using these to start composting #techshit
Q. The fediverse isn’t failing as such, but is becoming an established technology and so is no longer shiny or something which a clueless tech journalist would want to breathlessly scribble about as a new phenomena. Like XMPP and other previous protocols it is getting into the “plateau of productivity” where it mostly “just works”. There are complaints about lack of spec development, and some of those are justified. But ActivityPub doesn’t need to do all the things, it only needs to do one job well – that of being a social network protocol.
A. yes, it’s not failing in its own terms. But it is not heading to success in the bigger picture of being a alt to the #dotcons I should know being involved for the last few years outreaching it to the #mainstreaming that understands it has a #closedweb problem. The #EU outreach is interesting in this and likely also going to fail in the wider mission. It’s hard to push #openweb in a era controlled by #stupidindividualism and capitalism/alt diesper.
Q. It depends on what the EU’s wider mission is, but I expect that it’s not really a grassroots type of mission anyway. Whatever the machinations or motives of the EU, we do need to maintain a viable space for people who actively don’t want to be stuck in the corporate hellscape. And we shouldn’t assume that the EU will continuously bankroll some projects.
A. At the #EU it’s a power politics fight between the need for #open in a organization that is all about #closed people know they need to change but are only brave to pretend to do this. Am interested if a little crack of #open might be enough to undermine the monolith. Problem is everyone is up for selling out #open to grab a bit of #closed so only weak #open PUSH is all we have, needs to be sharper and harder push. Think stake and vampire level of PUSH with a few blows of a mallet to drive the point home. #open has power over closed, just like light over darkness.
Q. Who creates a non-crypto-based Web-version calculator that has the complex algebra to determine if we deal with #Web1, #Web2, #Web3, #Web4 or #Web5?
Q. #nlnet – The problem we face with funding http://hamishcampbell.com/2022/06/06/the-problem-we-face-with-funding/
A. KiCAD, some warrant canary and Armbian aren’t “open internet” projects by any stretch of imagination, but the ones relating to routers and mesh networks are. They’re “open internet” at the infrastructure level – like Guifinet or Freifunk.
Q. yep and are useful for a tiny number of people so worth supporting. BUT the call-out for the funding is for a much wider social affect in the #openweb, so the is an obvious #geekproblem can you see this?
A. Whatever funding they put into the applications layer will be cautious because they probably don’t want to be dealing with Twitter-like problems. Infrastructure is more narrowly technical, and so it’s hard for that to blow up into a scandal, which could happen if they were more directly funding social networks.
Q. yep… but the #openweb needs better USER-FACING code not more backend, the backend is not helping to address the social problems we face where it is being digested by the #dotcons and then adding more mess to compost. How to communicate this problem to the geeks?
A. Really it’s the backend – the plumbing – which needs more funding, because when you peel off the layer of ultra-trendy ActivityPub apps underneath you will find tools and systems which have been neglected for years if not decades. The application layer is currently a house built on sand. Or quicksand if you include Javascript.
Q. We do see the #geekproblem here you are right, and at the same time the view is irrelevant when you step back to look at the problem.
An example, #activertypub would have been still born without the outreach social UX of #mastodon. We have the #fediverse due to the social side of the mastodon project.
Adding more backend is feeding the #dotcons not the #openweb because we need BOTH, and we need to fund both. Yes, we can play “safe” and build tools to feed the future #dotcons, or we can do both and live life with the possibility of social change challenge…
UPDATE
Talking about the problem:
Q. Am thinking the #fedivers is in a bad way, so being angry and annoyed is understandable. The #openweb momentum we had is stumbling, the people sellingout growing as funding shifts… the problems grow, am interested in ideas to mediate these? The fedivers is a CULTURE first and a standard second… ideas?
A. I agree with your observation on the state of the fediverse. And on the cultural aspect too. I envision a Peopleverse (social) that is enabled / supported by the Fediverse (technical). And much more diverse social activity taking place here, that goes well beyond microblogging. And the funding should shift accordingly. You can fund as many innovation projects as you wish, but if the adoption of the technology grinds to a halt, then there’s a high risk this money is wasted.
