@strypey intresting its a similar base idea but 100x more complex and upside down. In that its a technological project creating a social project. Were the is a social project creating a technological project.

If this project happans it should talk to a network to build a wider more ecological not a bad outcome :)

@witchescauldron what do you mean 'if it happens'? They have published code under free licenses. It's happening!

@strypey am not judging this project.

Some underlying thought: 95% of open source projects are obviously pointless. 4% of open source projects fail due to complexerty and bad UI. That leaves 1% that are potentially usefull.

The is about looking for the 1% and rolling out public versions

At the moment this area is largely codebases.

searx is a way of adding general web search access to this wider network.

@xj9 @strypey the project i like to point to as an example. The indymedia project an early alt-media network that spread the use of open source software and organizing around the world at the turn of the century. In the UK the was a vs fight that became nasty over what we would now understand as "activertypub" the fedivers vs more centralized silo approach. In the UK this stress point was fought as a proxy war over

@xj9 @strypey the aggregation side were sold a dud by the being swayed by the It was obvious that the project had to change and move away from central servers to a more aggregation model. BUT the movement was torpedoed by an obviously pointless opensource project instead of implementing a existing standerds based RSS they created there BETTER, BRIGHTER flavor which was of coures incomparable with everyone else.

@xj9 @strypey this is an example of a "better" but obviously pointless open source project and also destructive behaver. The project in the UK was ripped apart internally from this same devide in the end. A bad "open source" outcome. You can find similar behaver today in the fedvers if you look.

@witchescauldron
> #geekproblem vs #openweb

I still have no idea what you mean by either of these hashtags. It sounds like UK #Indymedia had a difference of opinion between geeks that favour decentalization and aggregation, and geeks that favour centralization and moderation. Why is only one of these the "geek problem"?

@xj9

Follow

@strypey @xj9 its a intresting thing to look at. Actually you can see 3 active sides in the uk mess and important to see the outcome that they ALL LOST in the end.

1) (being pushed by the )

2) (being influenced by the )

3) being sidelined by the rest

@strypey @xj9

1) The first resisted and blocked aggregation and from privacy and "securaty" issues.

2) The second is a obviously failed compromise by keeping control of "there" own better, non comparable RSS format.

3) The last, the one the whole project was based on were ignored and sidelined.

The project became irrelevant and died.

@clacke @xj9 @strypey the is a page of Jargon here unite.openworlds.info/Open-Med or just fallow the hashtags back to pickup a flow if rearly intrested the is a backstory here hamishcampbell.com agen use the hashtags

@witchescauldron I can't understand the geekproblem entry on that page, but it links to shkspr.mobi/blog/2020/01/the-c… which talks about how gatekeeping geeks lost the mainstream users to alternatives on the closed web that offered better usability.

Is that the definition of the #geekproblem?

@xj9 @strypey

@clacke @xj9 @strypey

"Redecentralisation won't happen because of us nerds. It must happen despite us. Despite our ingenuity and despite our self-infatuation. It must be inclusive, and put user-needs at its very heart."

He says it well in the link

@clacke @xj9 @strypey

"A large part of this is our fault. And, by us, I mean gatekeeping nerds. We developed tools which were unforgiving. We had no interest in the "soft" skills of empathy. We were too socially-awkward to speak to real users. We were insular and we liked it! Worse than that - we revelled in it."

@witchescauldron @clacke @strypey

> The problem is, making a decent user interface is hard. It takes a lot of work by teams of real people. It isn't just a failing of the individual programmers behind the ancient tools, because expecting one person to have all the different skills is unfair. The private companies were able to take over all these areas because they invested the effort and money into making a tool that was easy to use.

https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2020/01/the-commons-weve-enclosed/#comment-138598

@xj9
> i asked to be untagged so please be polite and untag

I agree that respecting your request is common courtesy, but just out of curiosity, does your client not have a 'mute conversation' function?

@strypey

i use a few different clients, must have been using one without mute conversation.

@xj9
> my view of the future of computer: xj9.io/posts/2019/programming-

A lot to agree with here. One thing that's missing though. The layer of software users interact with directly, is often *not* built by a software engineer, but by a graphic designer. Most #Javascript, for example. Moving this into user control, wherever possible, and putting the rest in the hands of competent engineers (paid or unpaid), would be a net improvement for all 3 groups.

I think 'gatekeeping nerds' is a naive account of the problem, as it applies to network tech in general, and @Indymedia as an example. It ignores the much more powerful social forces at play and severely overestimates the amount of power geeks had to influence the outcome.
@witchescauldron @clacke

The primary reasons #Indymedia died, as a broad-based media network, were IMHO:
a) it depended utterly on coding and sysadmin skills that, even then, were attracting huge salaries
b) the constitutional agreements of the network effectively forbid paying those people
c) it fell into the same orgy of attack politics we've seen on the fediverse, making it socially impossible for all but the most flawlessly PC radical left geeks to stay involved
@Indymedia @witchescauldron @clacke

Given those 3 facts, and the massive amount of #VentureCapital flowing into startups, which (in theory) allowed geeks to develop software useful to independent media efforts while getting *well* paid, it was inevitable that @Indymedia would bleed tech support volunteers, and fail to recruit many new ones (if any). This gradually but inevitably shifts decision-making power over whatsoftware gets developed, and how it gets deployed, from activist networks to capitalists.
@witchescauldron @clacke

What @Indymedia could have done, once these problems started to manifest, was negotiate some modifications to it's constitutional agreements. Changes allowing worker-owned cooperatives to be full members of the network, as well as #IMC collectives. This would have created a way to fund both tech infrastructure and dev, under activist coordination, while allowing geek activists to work in their own social spaces, and get paid. This is the model I think is worth pursuing.
@witchescauldron @clacke

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke this aproch was tried by champagne IMC in the USA it did a lot of damage and no good. The is a space for non commercial software development. Its fine to have different points of view and the is value in a more aproch but is clearly not the project for this aproch. Please respect diversaty of stratergys.

@witchescauldron
> this aproch was tried by champagne IMC

That's not possible. You can't enact a network-scale tactic in a single local collective. You may be remembering the UC IMC tactic of registering for NGO status and accepting grants from US Foundations. Which is a totally different thing from the model described in the posts you're replying to.

@Indymedia
@clacke

@witchescauldron all I'm saying is that the #PlatformCooperative movement is growing sustainably and will continue to do so. A refusal to engage with it is self-marginalizing.
@Indymedia @clacke

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke what do you wont to build as a platform coop? Am up for helping with media projects :)

After the is up and running and moves into a maintenance mode a coop might be the right model for holding the servers, standerds, domains and documents? Lets see if it grows :)

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke its fine to have different aproches and fine to have different world views. Its healthy.

What is not fine is to use your world view as a on other world views in the guises of "helping"

At the base of actavism is diversaty of stratagys, please respect this.

The is a role for commercial.

The is a role for not for profit.

The is a role for voluntary.

The is not a role for proxy fights leading to trolling.

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke pushing a volentery project into being a not for profit (coop) is not a diversaty of stratergys nor was it one when people tried the same 10 years ago. Indymedia is at its foundation a voluntary project. Its fine to build not for profit (coop) media projects, have seen hundreds of then grow wither and die over the last 10 years. A few are still growing in small ways. Please don't become a troll on this subject :)

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke rather than pushing something that is compleatly incompatible at the project. And risk being seen as a troll. Build a coop media project that talks and join the wider, non dogmatic, open media network

Its simple and open to do and fits the coop model perfectly. We need good coop media as well as spiky grassroots media as they complement each other.

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke this is a symptom of the the indymedia was setup to rebel and create non commercial spaces - the was a lot of this in the turn of the century. The needs to be a lot of that today in the era of

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke this is pritty much how i see the project working. But clearly not how the network can work.

As long as projects are the is no reason not to have a happy diversity of stratagys in a wider network. The problem is when each of these go in different incombatable ways and create parrel networks, a all to common problem. The approach is designed to mediate this problem.

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke

This is a part of the story, what i tell is a part of the story.

B) this is a good thing.

C) the mystical i keep talking about with the hundreads of examples over the last 10 years. The tech and process both ossifyed, it could not move or bend thus could not try and solve these issues. this killed it... and meany people were holding bloody daggers in hands that they did not see.

@strypey @Indymedia @clacke am only looking at forces that we (was deep in the trenches throught the bloody suiside/death of indymedia) had power over. So am ignoring what we don't have power over, the as power matters. Wish fulfillment over things outside the scope of takes up way to much of our media time. Focues.

What did we have power over, what do we have power over now.

Focues.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Activism

To support this server and the OMN project https://opencollective.com/open-media-network