Table of Contents
This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters that may be confused with others in your current locale. If your use case is intentional and legitimate, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to highlight these characters.
An edited and anonymous transcript of some chats about #rebooting the #openweb and #mastodon
X. Mastodon is interesting and seems to work well. I worry it's lack of ML engagement will keep people addicted to the other stuff. The Facebook organizing stuff is a lot about that ml showing people things and making it feel like there is connection and momentum
H. ML?
*** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning ***
X. The machine learning which decides what you see. It's a lot of what makes these services engaging and addictive
H. I find mastodon quite addictive rember its twitter rather than facebook. though twitter now douse this ML shit too…
X. Yeah Twitter has content relevance teams So the thing that freaked Twitter out was the idea of a cross posting cross reading app So if you had Mastodon client which let you post / read Twitter you could pull people over keeping their graph
H. The is a site that dues that but think the twitter terms of service make it dysfunctional - i never got it to work. Our first instance https://campaign.openworlds.info then we have one for activist coming up soon
X. A single bug app will be blocked but many small ones won't
H. Spiky/fluff both get their work view (which links to each other) world this is supposed to be the mastodon twitter bridge https://bridge.joinmastodon.org/
X. Yeah
H. The XXX funding is to kick it off then have a 10k reserve in the bank so with some donations it should keep running long term. Plan is to roll out clusters of easy to use open tools as part of the #OMN umbrella. What do you think, ideas?
Y. A few possibilities: 1 could you run hosted Mastodon instances for groups, who could pay a fee (eg XXX could pay for an instance) 2 The metric needs to be active users: sign ups that don't post or use it aren't really helpful 3 I would be really clear about the means that would actually motivate and create a community, or else, a way to experiment to find those reasons I'm pretty sure that the only way to overcome the 'network effect' is some kind of unique property belonging to the new network dislike of FB et al isn't enough on its own H. Good points to be thought about
H. Just looking for feedback on sighnup/text and any issues. Goes live in the new year.
Z. I have no idea why I would want to use it
H. Good but troubling answer ... what would you like to use 🙂
Y. What problem are you trying to solve?
H. Giving a stepping stone outside the #dotcons. lots of people are talking about stepping away - good to have spaces so they can take that step.
Y. Let me rephrase the question, what problem are you trying to solve that you think I have and that that is the solution to. “Twitter without the network” is a perfectly fine thing to run, I just don’t see why I’d spend the time to use it, let alone try and work out what it is you’re doing and why
H. The project is not a solution to a big problem, its just a step. Q. do you get any value from the #dotcon world? if you do this is a space to get value on the openweb... take a step. if you don't then this is not for you? Thinking through answers 🙂
Y. I’m where others are, and you need a narrative which is why I should add yet another fucking messaging app to my phone. Which is an entirely different approach from just putting a server up somewhere
H. True, that outreach is coming in the new year to NGO's campaign groups and activists. just getting the server tested 🙂
Y. That still doesn’t answer my question 😊
H. Thinking I can answer that question in lots of big issues but find it hard to do at individual/personal level, so, good question.
if you have 20 min can you go through account set-up, friend some one and send a toot. Get the feeling our install might have issues - fixed some of them last week need to check if any remaining.
H. Just looking for feedback on sighnup/text and any issues. Goes open in the new year.
Z. well it seems like works why did you do it? what's its purpose? that seems missing
H. Am pushing a step away from the dotcon in the new year this is a part of this.
Z. but there's other instances, why start a new one?
H. This is to do "subjects" outreach to activism and campaigns/NGO'S For mastodon to survive it needs to be relevant in more subcultures to be big anufe to step out into the mainstream.
Z. Sure but why did you start a new mastodon instance, not just point people to existing ones? i'm trying to understand
H. Mastodon is about micro community being part of a bigger whole so should be built out subject based am pushing this by DOING. If it is to grow a part of this value is each community having it's own traditions/rules and myths. The technical difference is irrelevant for the majority of people. Almost all of the current instances are geek experiments thus likely to fade or generally community’s which have value when they "focus" or will likely fade. Its one of the reasons why http://mastodon.social is locked to new logins to push wider diversity. This change is happening anyway just planing to push it harder.
Z. hum ok i don't buy this kind of data/instance fabric I have an interest in your community but that doesn't mean i'll create an account there. i'm interested in many things but i won't spread my data around all of them the whole federated model is a bit silly.
H. Why? It mirrors the structure of the openweb that pushed aside/distrod billions of dollars of secure user authenticated networks that existed before the openweb. Ok after 10 years of lost faffing and 10 years of hard work they have rebuilt the pre closed (open) web as dotcons yes. But “open/federated” had/has huge disruptive power? I like peer to peer but federation is a good step. Steps matter.
Z. That's a strong point but the my question can be rephrased as: OK, let's have a federated web. Which instance should one creates an account on? Should I have several accounts? What constitutes a sensible reason to have an instance? Otherwise it's same as Jabber. I don't have an account there because I have no idea which instance, in the flood of them, to make an account on. They have no reason to justify why they exist I'd just like one instance that's cooperatively ran ... So this is an anarchism vs communism debate. I don't want a plethora of random communities. I want one that's ran well.
H. So you wont your community. I rest my case 😉
Z. No I do not want a "community" That’s what bothers me, the very form of "belonging" to pods, and having to choose them and they all have non-sense names and no justification what they are and why they exist I just want a default pod and that's it. I definitely don't want a musician pod because i play music or a whiskey pod because i like drinking
H. A instance is just a local view on the big data soup so you can ignore it if you like? And have your wish?
Z. If it's a problem others will have I don't think I it can be ignored Let's just leave it at this - I think it's a bad thing to have a bunch of instances that never attempt to justify why they're there, why them not just any other In some people it will breed anxiety as you need to "pick" the right one and then you pick none at all. That's what will happen. I think that's why platforms right now are successful. You don't need to pick ,you just go with it So to TLDR: my feedback to you is -
- justify why it's a good idea to have this instance
- provide people a way to decide where to have their data So you kill "analysis paralysis" and "decision anxiety" I think you shouldn't have one though... There's htp://social.coop so why not just use that one?
H. because its for coops, a fine thing but not everyone wants to be forced into a coop to join a social networks, its a step to far for outreach :)
H. what do you think?An edited and anonymous transcript of some chats about #rebooting the #openweb and #mastodon
X. Mastodon is interesting and seems to work well. I worry it's lack of ML engagement will keep people addicted to the other stuff. The Facebook organizing stuff is a lot about that ml showing people things and making it feel like there is connection and momentum
H. ML? We are setting up a few servers
X. The machine learning which decides what you see. It's a lot of what makes these services engaging and addictive
H. I find mastodon quite addictive rember its twitter rather than facebook. though twitter now douse this ML shit too…
X. Yeah Twitter has content relevance teams So the thing that freaked Twitter out was the idea of a cross posting cross reading app So if you had Mastodon client which let you post / read Twitter you could pull people over keeping their graph
H. The is a site that dues that but think the twitter terms of service make it dysfunctional - i never got it to work. Our first instance https://campaign.openworlds.info then we have one for activist coming up soon
X. A single bug app will be blocked but many small ones won't
H. Spiky/fluff both get their work view (which links to each other) world this is supposed to be the mastodon twitter bridge https://bridge.joinmastodon.org/
X. Yeah
H. The XXX funding is to kick it off then have a 10k reserve in the bank so with some donations it should keep running long term. Plan is to roll out clusters of easy to use open tools as part of the #OMN umbrella. What do you think, ideas?
Y. A few possibilities: 1 could you run hosted Mastodon instances for groups, who could pay a fee (eg XXX could pay for an instance) 2 The metric needs to be active users: sign ups that don't post or use it aren't really helpful 3 I would be really clear about the means that would actually motivate and create a community, or else, a way to experiment to find those reasons I'm pretty sure that the only way to overcome the 'network effect' is some kind of unique property belonging to the new network dislike of FB et al isn't enough on its own H. Good points to be thought about
H. Just looking for feedback on sighnup/text and any issues. Goes live in the new year.
Z. I have no idea why I would want to use it
H. Good but troubling answer ... what would you like to use 🙂
Y. What problem are you trying to solve?
H. Giving a stepping stone outside the #dotcons. lots of people are talking about stepping away - good to have spaces so they can take that step.
Y. Let me rephrase the question, what problem are you trying to solve that you think I have and that that is the solution to. “Twitter without the network” is a perfectly fine thing to run, I just don’t see why I’d spend the time to use it, let alone try and work out what it is you’re doing and why
H. The project is not a solution to a big problem, its just a step. Q. do you get any value from the #dotcon world? if you do this is a space to get value on the openweb... take a step. if you don't then this is not for you? Thinking through answers 🙂
Y. I’m where others are, and you need a narrative which is why I should add yet another fucking messaging app to my phone. Which is an entirely different approach from just putting a server up somewhere
H. True, that outreach is coming in the new year to NGO's campaign groups and activists. just getting the server tested 🙂
Y. That still doesn’t answer my question 😊
H. Thinking I can answer that question in lots of big issues but find it hard to do at individual/personal level, so, good question.
if you have 20 min can you go through account set-up, friend some one and send a toot. Get the feeling our install might have issues - fixed some of them last week need to check if any remaining.
H. Just looking for feedback on sighnup/text and any issues. Goes open in the new year.
Z. well it seems like works why did you do it? what's its purpose? that seems missing
H. Am pushing a step away from the dotcon in the new year this is a part of this.
Z. but there's other instances, why start a new one?
H. This is to do "subjects" outreach to activism and campaigns/NGO'S For mastodon to survive it needs to be relevant in more subcultures to be big anufe to step out into the mainstream.
Z. Sure but why did you start a new mastodon instance, not just point people to existing ones? i'm trying to understand
H. Mastodon is about micro community being part of a bigger whole so should be built out subject based am pushing this by DOING. If it is to grow a part of this value is each community having it's own traditions/rules and myths. The technical difference is irrelevant for the majority of people. Almost all of the current instances are geek experiments thus likely to fade or generally community’s which have value when they "focus" or will likely fade. Its one of the reasons why http://mastodon.social is locked to new logins to push wider diversity. This change is happening anyway just planing to push it harder.
Z. hum ok i don't buy this kind of data/instance fabric I have an interest in your community but that doesn't mean i'll create an account there. i'm interested in many things but i won't spread my data around all of them the whole federated model is a bit silly.
H. Why? It mirrors the structure of the openweb that pushed aside/distrod billions of dollars of secure user authenticated networks that existed before the openweb. Ok after 10 years of lost faffing and 10 years of hard work they have rebuilt the pre closed (open) web as dotcons yes. But “open/federated” had/has huge disruptive power? I like peer to peer but federation is a good step. Steps matter.
Z. That's a strong point but the my question can be rephrased as: OK, let's have a federated web. Which instance should one creates an account on? Should I have several accounts? What constitutes a sensible reason to have an instance? Otherwise it's same as Jabber. I don't have an account there because I have no idea which instance, in the flood of them, to make an account on. They have no reason to justify why they exist I'd just like one instance that's cooperatively ran ... So this is an anarchism vs communism debate. I don't want a plethora of random communities. I want one that's ran well.
H. So you wont your community. I rest my case 😉
Z. No I do not want a "community" That’s what bothers me, the very form of "belonging" to pods, and having to choose them and they all have non-sense names and no justification what they are and why they exist I just want a default pod and that's it. I definitely don't want a musician pod because i play music or a whiskey pod because i like drinking
H. A instance is just a local view on the big data soup so you can ignore it if you like? And have your wish?
Z. If it's a problem others will have I don't think I it can be ignored Let's just leave it at this - I think it's a bad thing to have a bunch of instances that never attempt to justify why they're there, why them not just any other In some people it will breed anxiety as you need to "pick" the right one and then you pick none at all. That's what will happen. I think that's why platforms right now are successful. You don't need to pick ,you just go with it So to TLDR: my feedback to you is -
- justify why it's a good idea to have this instance
- provide people a way to decide where to have their data So you kill "analysis paralysis" and "decision anxiety" I think you shouldn't have one though... There's htp://social.coop so why not just use that one?
H. because its for coops, a fine thing but not everyone wants to be forced into a coop to join a social networks, its a step to far for outreach :)
H. what do you think?
A discussern on mastodon
Q. I am still looking for someone to explain me how technical openness translates on political freedom and equity. Or is it an "apolitical" project?
A. The are lots of different views on this subject, we could try this one: We are tool using creachers and it is our tools that shape our society that then shapes us that then shapes our tools that shape our society that shape us and round we go. Digital tech is not natural it all comes with a world view (ideology). The are many articles on this subject online. From closed to open is a step.
Q. Well, that is rather obvious, but it still gives me no answer I am looking for. What is the world view (ideology) you want to advance? Technology is only a vehicle for social and political agenda. Legal and political wrap-up can turn the most open technology into a tool of oppression. What is your take on this problem?
A(2). Technical openness has the advantages that:
- Potentially anyone can modify/improve the system to fit their needs
- There is discouragement against adding antifeatures which are against the interests of users. This operates mostly at the psychological level - it's not that there are millions of code reviews of each project
Q. I am not new to open* concept and movement, going way beyond software. My question, still unanswered, i about political agenda connected with this particular project. Or lack thereof. Also, please note that "open" !== FLO There is a lot of open products, being propriety at the same time, due to licensing regulations (patents, intellectual "property" and such). What is your position in this regard?
A. If you click through to the wiki's on these projects you will find much on this subject https://github.com/Openmedianetwork
Q. I would rather prefer a comprehensive and concise political manifesto. If a project community does not care enough to write and publish it, it is ok. I will get through those links whenever I have time for it.
A. interestingly that is exactly what am trying not to do. Though a clear wright up of working practices is needed. These working practices are of course "political" but locking the #openweb to one point of view would not be open anymore, its why the #4opens are not directly political, its what we make of it.
Do you think this is a valid approach?
A. A side note to talk political ideology for a moment. The Internet and WWW were built to work in anachronistic world (based on trust and KISS) Its why it did not have identity or security hard coded in to it. The #OMN reboot is held in place by the #4opens Not a easy place for capitalism (though will work), its not hostile to liberalism (though will likely push past this). friendly to socialism (based on trust). Unfriendly to controlling bureaucracy (top down communism/fascism) etc.