Also that whatever process people use, it needs to work in the mess.
In tech outreach work using the hashtag #geekproblem to highlight the “need for control” that is a clear block and not a solution to the very human mess we are in. We need to build structers/code where we “lose” control of our current #mainstreaming agenders and take “control” by building bridges and holding these human bridges in place, so we can choose different paths.
🤩 Aren't you just delighted by all those proprietary software apps for the #Fediverse?
😮 Don't be. Each time you choose proprietary you help turn the fedi slowly in the direction of the usual corporate hellscape that the rest of the Web already is.
😨 And then we end up in an online space where for years we can complain to each other how we squandered an opportunity and how #capitalism won once more.
🎯 Use #FOSS apps instead, created by the public for the public.
The first part is about democracy, the second part is hard politics, and is more nasty.
The #fedivers was booted up on grassroot #openweb passion and crowed funding, it was sustained in the early growth by crowed funding and expanded (in an often not helpful way) by #geekproblem passion. Over the last 2 years we have seen this shift sharply to “institutional” funding, some of this has been behind the seanes “think-tanks/academia” but over the last years the #EU though #NGI and more specifically #NGIzero have taken a central role in funding just about all fedivers #mainstreaming projects and much background technology.
In this, we have moved from meany 1000’s of people shaping the direction in a radically #4opens transparent way to handfuls of people controlling the levers of influence in a more opaque process. This is a clear and very obvues failing of #openweb governance, kinda normal and very obvuesly fail.
Now the wider #NGI project pour funding directly down the drain, which is a normal outcome so not an issue for us as the money is wasted anyway. #NGIzero are doing good, they are funding grassroots #openweb technology, so they are people we should work with.
How do we start to mediate this issue “In this we have moved from meany 1000’s of people shaping the direction in a transparent way to handfuls of people controlling the levers of influence in a more opaque process” And more importantly rebalance the #mainstreaming agenda that flows with this funding https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/4opens/wiki/Funding-of-openweb-projects this second part is a BIG problem, this first part is about democracy, the second part is hard politics, and is more nasty.
Introducing OMN: A Trust-Based Project for Federated Networks
In the ever-expanding digital landscape, where information overload and spam are commonplace, there's a crucial need for a trust-based project that emphasizes human moderation and community cooperation. Welcome to OMN – a unique initiative that aims to leverage the power of human moderation to foster federated networks and genuine online communities.
The concept is simple: every piece of content, known as a "flow," goes through a trust-building process. When users create content, it's either trusted – indicating a consistent track record of quality contributions – or moderated when the content varies in quality. This dynamic approach ensures that the system scales effectively by encouraging users to build trust links with one another.
Without this human touch, a network's workload quickly becomes unmanageable, or it's overwhelmed by irrelevant or spammy content, rendering the sites useless. This core feature of OMN is designed to encourage the growth of human-scale federated trust communities.
To maintain a useful site, two key outcomes are possible: the creation of large, diverse communities with a broad spectrum of admins and moderators, or the establishment of smaller, tightly-knit trust groups focused on quality connections. Both outcomes are valuable and central to the essence of #OMN.
While automation might seem tempting, it risks creating countless middling-quality sites, leading to a signal-to-noise problem. In the end, this could undermine the entire network. OMN's philosophy is rooted in the idea that "less is more" – a deliberate move away from the #geekproblem of endlessly improving tools.
OMN addresses the challenge of managing spam and low-quality content by allowing them to flow into the network and then guiding them away from the quality areas of the network.
One unique feature of OMN is its organic growth model. New sites may need to be set up to allow new content to flow in, spreading the network wider and narrowing the focus. This leads to an ecosystem where base sites feed into middle sites, which in turn feed into top sites, creating a robust network interconnected by quality tags, subject feeds, and editorial articles.
Surprisingly, OMN inverts the traditional value pyramid: the top sites are easier to set up and manage but hard to add value to. The core of the project lies in the middle sites, where content is sifted and aggregated. The real value, however, remains at the base where content is created.
OMN operates on the principle that there is nothing entirely original in its approach – it draws inspiration from how plumbing, electrical grids, and even the neurons in our brains function. This embraces the concept of #nothingnew as a fundamental pillar of the project.
In the next step of the #OMN project, the focus is on stepping away from the dominant ideologies of the 20th century and building social technology based on a different vision of human nature. Unlike other projects, #OMN is all about simplicity and decentralization, emphasizing people and community control and social connections. It's an invitation to break free from the confines of the past and shape the future of online communities.
#mainstreaming and #geekproblem are not positive terms in my personal estimation.
But I guess it depends on personal stance ;)
The #geekproblem to me (also a programmer) is where tech-obsessives build almost for the sake of building, do not consider the repercussions of their work and end up making shit worse.
E.g. the 'like' button
#mainstreaming is more obvious. While it is sometimes nice to feel part of something big, it's where diversity goes to die.
Rule making is always the death path of any working Alt/grassroots structure https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/ this comes soon after the dictatorship of the invisible hierarchy, its mess making.
This is a scripted fail that is recurring for 20 years of the #geekproblem in tech and #FOSS "governance" we do need to do better #OGB
#fashionistas are always in part a reflection of the #mainstreaming agenda, as are the #geekproblem I think we need to change the mainstream to bring change to these groups.
It's interesting to see the balance of fail and success in this #openweb project/community in the small picture we seced in the big picture we fail, a recurring #geekproblem. How to care about this is something we don't think about much. Maybe this should be a part of our SocialHub Community Values, how can we embedded something like this, is it even possible.
The #indymediaback project is a reboot of the original #Indymedia project, which was a decentralized, grassroots media network that emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The project aims to learn from the mistakes and challenges faced by the original Indymedia, particularly the split between the #fashernitas and #geekproblem factions.
20 years of #dotcons selling us libertarian individualism to push aside collective support of the "revolutionary" #openweb which is when we last had left tech power.
For this 20 years we have had #geekproblem pushing #closedweb as left tech, this is OBVIOUSLY a disaster we can't keep doing. Yes, let's not get into a prat fight, this is needed as a supplementary.
When I call #mainstreaming people insane, i actually mean this. Common sense is now the illness of 40 years of worshipping the #deathcult, so they is little "sense" left.
Common sense is knowledge that is readily available to everyone. However, it is not information that is used by most anymore it seems. That makes common sense uncommon.
Capitalists must always seek to maximize differential profits—they have to collect more profits than their competitors.
Because you can reinvest those profits in buying up more revenue generating assets, you can expand your business and grab more market share. Or, like when Microsoft bought Nokia to grab the patents Nokia held, you can invest in blocking your competitors from expanding.
If your share of the market falls so far that you can’t make payroll or pay your creditors, you go out of business. Your capital is seized and sold off, and you become just another worker, subject to the whims and commands of capital owners.
So capital owners in competitive markets must always try to grow at a rate faster than their competitors. If they stop, if they take a break, if the global ecosystem collapses, then so does capitalism.
Yep, we have had 20 years of #dotcons selling us libertarian individualism to push aside collective support of the "revolutionary" #openweb which is when we last had left tech power.
For this 20 years we have had #geekproblem pushing #closedweb as left tech, this is OBVIOUSLY a disaster we can't keep doing. Yes, let's not get into a prat fight, this is needed as a supplementary.
@jkerrison@jeffjarvis yep, our #geekproblem has proven to be a "problem" for the last 20 years in tech. Now how do we take the problem out of "geekproblem" as the is much to like about geeks themselves.
"You cannot complain about Facebook collecting your life’s history, while at the same time complaining that diaspora* cannot find your former classmates. You cannot complain about WhatsApp collecting your address book, while at the same time stating you do not use eMail because exchanging addresses is too cumbersome. You either get a system that knows who you are or a system that does not."
In 2020, I published This is Fine: Optimism & emergency in the p2p network(https://newdesigncongress.org/en/pub/this-is-fine). It laid out a clear argument that the #fediverse is irreparably vulnerable because of its p2p nature and political naivete:
"Anyone with administrator access to an Instance can read anything that travels through that Instance’s infrastructure – including direct messages. The level of risk correlates with the number of cross-Instance interactions between users. If users from different Instances communicate, an attacker need only compel one Instance to reveal the direct messages between all of the interacting accounts. [...] In a peer-to-peer network without encryption, there’s no structure, no agreed-upon governance, and absolutely no protection. Compromising or compelling an Instance or its staff means that all of network traffic is laid bare to its assailant. [...] The decentralised community seeks to antagonise a powerful status quo whilst making tradeoffs that do not acknowledge how societies directly threaten their communities."
Today, Kolektiva - a anti-colonial anarchist instance - announced an FBI raid of one of their admins, which included the seizure of an entire copy of the Kolektiva instance.
This is literally the kind of situation I warned about nearly three years ago.
This text reads like a vanguardist path, based on #mainstreaming reading and narrow #geekproblem thinking. It's missing the paths that hold value in #4opens horizontal activist paths we are taking but, yes, getting lost on in our the growing #fedivers and wide spread of #openweb current diversity projects.
What it does highlight is the need for social and political thinking is needed, the is value there.
Yes at the moment as it's a #OMN based on the #4opens you have very low barrier to running or even developing an instance this is where the value is.
Adding security generally makes a HUGE barriers to Dev and #DIY running an instance.
The #geekproblem has no idea of the damage they do when pushing there "common sense". This creates a signal to noise issue that has been blocking alt for 20 years.