The geeks have been lieing to themselves and to us that there code can be "secure" on these devices. This has been going on for 20 years, the fantasy has been built on top of this lie, as well as our banking and governance.

Take a moment to think about this mess.

The is a way out networks move us to a different place, and likely set of problems ;)

Am doing a talk at this event about the reboot project.

Need help on how to get the and crew to understand "social technology" thinking and resulting projects built on the

This is a hard sell, even though crew are probably the best ordnance around for this kinda project.

The was ripped apart by meany forces.

pushing securaty theater broke UI and trust based relationships

narrowed this into a irrelevant subculture.

inbraced the bad in both sides for self intrest, greed and fame.

privatised data and metadata to the service of profit and social controle. All the above groups played there role in this.

The is a hollow shell for most people


“This is the Internet”


This Odata is the project.

Not for the first time and likely not the last time. Misunderstanding of what am saying/talking about. To be clear the is complex in that its at root a unhealthy/inhuman desire for total control.

The federated model is both pandering to the problem, here have control and diluting the problem by spreading it thinly and then turning it into vapor ie. Its a kind stepaway if you understand the problem is there to stepaway from :)

I will be happy when the apps cross standards with the apps to bridge the human nature "feeling" that feeds this "gap". The are a lot of unspoken issues and the is a strong "unspoken" push not to address them. Just about all I do nowadays is addressing the unspoken issues ;)

Been doing/at the hart this full time for more than 30 years, seen hundreds of alt tech projects wither at the vine, a very few flower. Thinking about this, have come up with a pretty much universally accepted way of judging what might flower and what will wither, i call this the other people call it open source development etc.

OMN - Projects are based on a core/periphery mission. The path to being involved is to work in the periphery for a time before being excepted into the core of the project. All the projects are based on the so the organizing process is public and everyone can have a say, though core decision making can be reserved for the core group if/as needed. How to move from the periphery to the core is a slippery thing.

Mission is “social change”, the peripheral mission is “social work”

We reboot this, social project, using modern federated technology and successful modern working practices

One is the editorial one the code and sysadmin.

Show thread

Power always exists the important question is who has access to this power.

With the its privatised to capital and state actors. With the it is shared to much wider social groupings. Using their tools, like, share, time on article, friend etc the data (value) is captured for their profit. Using our tools the the data is kept (to a degree) in the and in the commons.

Its about who has the power, give it to "them" or share it with "us" its your choice.

Show thread

All this has been explaned 100's of time on the blog and git and posted to failbook mastodon and twitter likly thousends of times. you can just fallow the hashtages if you wont to its what they are there for. NO ONES SLAVE, NO ONES MASTER

Show thread

The is a existing tested rolled out and scaled stupidly KISS set of tools and standerds that allows people to build semanticweb projects - you can use it to build an exact copy of the IMC sites and am going do that, but behind the site in the admin are levers and if people push or pull them new ways of working will apper as if by magic. its up to them if they like spellcasting.

A. The problem with this is that in the way you seem to understand it and definitely in the way you SAY it is simply irrelevant to what we are trying to build with the It's very basic stuff, think we all agree with what you are saying, but the is little common understanding of its relevance as you say it for and reboot. Q. Why are these agenders talking about the relevant to a human moderated grassroots on the ground media network?

Show thread

Q. um, your critique of people who might have serious critiques of the tech environments ( i.e. the "cybernetic regime" + "technofascism" as related to the material requirements for ALL high tech industries ) as a whole ( is hardly in all cases, a zero/negative understanding )... i appreciate the work you are doing, but would advise you keep your EARS open to those who understand things that maybe you don't... and best wishes for the work!

Thoughts from

It always surprises me anew when people show they have zero/negative understanding of the power and empowerment of DIY grassroots organizing. When am actively, not to say a bit annoyingly, doing open process to be meet with "you just wont to be king" is a easy to understand indictment of the people shouting. Its basic stuff to hear them saying i wont to be king NOT YOU. Which of course ignores the DIY grassroots part in that the is NO KING in the world ;)

Our are useless so if we are to make any social change it has to be done by small focued affinity groups before expanding into helping srink the useless mainstream activism space and expand heathy commons. what we do with these commons is up to us.

The has strong blocking energy on radical tech.

Ideas/strategies to mediate/overcome this unspoken block?

The failure of the fluffy/spiky debate in media is highlighted in this.

The wonabe mainstream are not friends of the grassroots. They say this clearly here, good to have this in the

The is a social technology held togather by the that pushes into being a digital commons. What we then do with this liberated space is up to us.

Show more