We don't need more tech, let's keep it to the level we have now as basic messages and if people don't even reply or care THAT IS YOUR ANSWER even from the best of us rubbish / non-existent repliers on open source "social" which doesn't change reality of s
Sensitive content
Have you not learned what people do in humanity? (so unless you solve how to keep another hammer tool from being used against people, don't give it to anyone! They will only exploit it and we are all getting toward 100% to know STATE DOES NOT CARE and they manage all companies, pipes etc)
💯 % failure rate... past gifts all being exploited / leveraged - Linux™️ / The best advert farms.
We don't need more tech, let's keep it to the level we have now as basic messages and if people don't even reply or care THAT IS YOUR ANSWER even from the best of us rubbish / non-existent repliers on open source "social" which doesn't change reality of separation.
The above is one of the true tests.
Said with love - I've tested and seen a lot here and still nobody really with making #friends or for "benefit of beings" like you said. It's mostly tech-heads here working with machines - NOT people. Developing machines, not developing better people.
Do prove me wrong or would you like to be the change yourself?
Why are so many people embracing that so dearly, and well.. lazily?
Because most people operate on "what's in it for me?" or "what's in it for my tribe?" And people tend to pick the path of least resistance.
Also, people need to make a living. And people who don't want to work for corporations are typically not welcomed here. If they even mention their side gig, small business, or freelancing career, people shout at them. Which is ironic, since that just forces them to use big social media and ad companies to support themselves.
For the fediverse to truly thrive, we have to do three things:
1. Embrace the small guy, and realize that there is a difference between commerce and corporatism. That single mom selling scarves or that freelancer making websites so they can pay their rent are not the threat.
2. We need to innovate, and not just copy what the big guys a
Why are so many people embracing that so dearly, and well.. lazily?
Because most people operate on "what's in it for me?" or "what's in it for my tribe?" And people tend to pick the path of least resistance.
Also, people need to make a living. And people who don't want to work for corporations are typically not welcomed here. If they even mention their side gig, small business, or freelancing career, people shout at them. Which is ironic, since that just forces them to use big social media and ad companies to support themselves.
For the fediverse to truly thrive, we have to do three things:
1. Embrace the small guy, and realize that there is a difference between commerce and corporatism. That single mom selling scarves or that freelancer making websites so they can pay their rent are not the threat.
2. We need to innovate, and not just copy what the big guys are doing. Because if the small platforms are just a clone of the bigger platform, it is really hard for the smaller platform to compete. We need to focus on making better platforms so that people want to switch just because it is a better platform, not because of philosophical differences.
3. We have to stop being so insular and accept that there are people who don't hold our views and principles. Having unwritten requirements like "you must lean this far left to ride the fediverse" will just keep the fediverse small. We have blocking tools, and if you use Hubzilla, you have post permissions and additional tools to control what you see. You don't have to follow or listen to them. But requiring a politically correct viewpoint and the goal of growing the fediverse are conflicting goals.
Between the attitude that some people are not welcome here, and the fact that most people prioritize themselves and their tribe, it is not surprising that the fediverse, as it currently is, only attracts a small portion of social media users.
@scott totally agreed. My post was a bit of a shout to people who should know better and also preach(ed) better.
A future peopleverse should facilitate small to medium size, and likely large businesses appropriately. That is the fist issue: appropriate, and not a corporate ad-infested hellhole. But that is not the biggest issue by far.
The real challenge is that any big corporate player can (and did imho) take over control on a whim and a dime of investment. Fedi has no #CommonsStewardship.
@unixwitch not directly. But by being elated on each and every corporate entry, cheering these on, they are indirectly helping the takeover. There is no defense of the commons that can withstand it either.
Not saying that there are no politics. But politics emerge from complex mental constructs that we share a common understanding of.
Today we all too eagerly slam a label of "political" onto something, just so the heated discussion, misunderstandings and endless infighting can continue. It is just not useful other than in handwaving chatter, or when craving for the (intellectual or otherwise) usual contra-productive and quasi-political dogfight.
@bob what I am saying is that by accepting this easy labeling system, you accept to work from a reasoning system that is defined under hypercapitalism. This risks keeping your thinking patterns captured through conway's law in thinking within the existing mental construct of what is accepted to be political. Now people don't often give a political 🤗
Today everything is slammed political. Then either the term is useless, or with same reasoning just as well nothing is political at the same time.
Saying a lazy "all tech is political" and subsequently calling moral judgment onto someone who is "not as much in the light as you" i.e. rejecting all shades of grey that people go through when they slowly come to awareness and understanding is key driver of the culture war purity spirals that drives people to extremes on both sides of the isle. Including to be a boon to fascists who see the most easy way to once more have the left do the heavy lifting: To divide ourselves to be conquered.
Around 1975 Abdul Qadeer Khan, a Pakistani spy, managed to steal nuclear secrets from the highly secure uranium enrichment plant Urenco in the Netherlands. This led to nuclear proliferation and Pakistan having the nuclear bomb.
The layers of security at Urenco could not avoid this from happening.
Now..
Are we in #FOSS enriching uranium fully out in the open in how we develop the decentralized #SocialWeb? Or are we reasonably #secure?
Is it possible that while we are fiercely opposed to #AI and how this highly disruptive technology is just introduced everywhere in #society without a second thought (ignoring all the voices that advocate responsible use) ..
Is it possible that maybe with decentralized #SocialWeb technology with semantically meaningful #machine-readable services, we are creating the tech that'll bring AI up to our skin, into our very pores?
In #Flancia we'll meet
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •#FreeSchool ⬅️ (see hashtag)
in reply to In #Flancia we'll meet • • •Sensitive content
Have you not learned what people do in humanity? (so unless you solve how to keep another hammer tool from being used against people, don't give it to anyone! They will only exploit it and we are all getting toward 100% to know STATE DOES NOT CARE and they manage all companies, pipes etc)
💯 % failure rate... past gifts all being exploited / leveraged -
Linux™️ / The best advert farms.
We don't need more tech, let's keep it to the level we have now as basic messages and if people don't even reply or care THAT IS YOUR ANSWER even from the best of us rubbish / non-existent repliers on open source "social" which doesn't change reality of separation.
The above is one of the true tests.
Said with love - I've tested and seen a lot here and still nobody really with making #friends or for "benefit of beings" like you said. It's mostly tech-heads here working with machines - NOT people. Developing machines, not developing better people.
Do prove me wrong or would you like to be the change yourself?
just small circles 🕊
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •I don't want a corporate takeover of #fediverse, because:
- conway's law
- more of the same
- status quo
- deathmarch
- clownicharchy
- dystopia
- mars
- skynet --> and you are not Neo.
Why are so many people embracing that so dearly, and well.. lazily? Out with the reeking vitriolic musk, in with some fresh air.
Are you 🌱 #Fedi4Change?
Scott M. Stolz
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •@small circle 🕊 in calmness
Because most people operate on "what's in it for me?" or "what's in it for my tribe?" And people tend to pick the path of least resistance.
Also, people need to make a living. And people who don't want to work for corporations are typically not welcomed here. If they even mention their side gig, small business, or freelancing career, people shout at them. Which is ironic, since that just forces them to use big social media and ad companies to support themselves.
For the fediverse to truly thrive, we have to do three things:
1. Embrace the small guy, and realize that there is a difference between commerce and corporatism. That single mom selling scarves or that freelancer making websites so they can pay their rent are not the threat.
2. We need to innovate, and not just copy what the big guys a
... show more@small circle 🕊 in calmness
Because most people operate on "what's in it for me?" or "what's in it for my tribe?" And people tend to pick the path of least resistance.
Also, people need to make a living. And people who don't want to work for corporations are typically not welcomed here. If they even mention their side gig, small business, or freelancing career, people shout at them. Which is ironic, since that just forces them to use big social media and ad companies to support themselves.
For the fediverse to truly thrive, we have to do three things:
1. Embrace the small guy, and realize that there is a difference between commerce and corporatism. That single mom selling scarves or that freelancer making websites so they can pay their rent are not the threat.
2. We need to innovate, and not just copy what the big guys are doing. Because if the small platforms are just a clone of the bigger platform, it is really hard for the smaller platform to compete. We need to focus on making better platforms so that people want to switch just because it is a better platform, not because of philosophical differences.
3. We have to stop being so insular and accept that there are people who don't hold our views and principles. Having unwritten requirements like "you must lean this far left to ride the fediverse" will just keep the fediverse small. We have blocking tools, and if you use Hubzilla, you have post permissions and additional tools to control what you see. You don't have to follow or listen to them. But requiring a politically correct viewpoint and the goal of growing the fediverse are conflicting goals.
Between the attitude that some people are not welcome here, and the fact that most people prioritize themselves and their tribe, it is not surprising that the fediverse, as it currently is, only attracts a small portion of social media users.
just small circles 🕊
in reply to Scott M. Stolz • • •@scott totally agreed. My post was a bit of a shout to people who should know better and also preach(ed) better.
A future peopleverse should facilitate small to medium size, and likely large businesses appropriately. That is the fist issue: appropriate, and not a corporate ad-infested hellhole. But that is not the biggest issue by far.
The real challenge is that any big corporate player can (and did imho) take over control on a whim and a dime of investment. Fedi has no #CommonsStewardship.
Hella
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •I have yet to meet any Fedizens in my part of the Fediverse who would welcome a corporate takeover.
Are there any? And where are they hiding?
just small circles 🕊
in reply to Hella • • •just small circles 🕊
Unknown parent • • •@bob
Not saying that there are no politics. But politics emerge from complex mental constructs that we share a common understanding of.
Today we all too eagerly slam a label of "political" onto something, just so the heated discussion, misunderstandings and endless infighting can continue. It is just not useful other than in handwaving chatter, or when craving for the (intellectual or otherwise) usual contra-productive and quasi-political dogfight.
Tech is definitely not neutral, but nuanced.
just small circles 🕊
Unknown parent • • •@bob what I am saying is that by accepting this easy labeling system, you accept to work from a reasoning system that is defined under hypercapitalism. This risks keeping your thinking patterns captured through conway's law in thinking within the existing mental construct of what is accepted to be political.
Now people don't often give a political 🤗
Today everything is slammed political. Then either the term is useless, or with same reasoning just as well nothing is political at the same time.
just small circles 🕊
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •@bob
Saying a lazy "all tech is political" and subsequently calling moral judgment onto someone who is "not as much in the light as you" i.e. rejecting all shades of grey that people go through when they slowly come to awareness and understanding is key driver of the culture war purity spirals that drives people to extremes on both sides of the isle. Including to be a boon to fascists who see the most easy way to once more have the left do the heavy lifting: To divide ourselves to be conquered.
just small circles 🕊
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •#ThoughtProvoker
Around 1975 Abdul Qadeer Khan, a Pakistani spy, managed to steal nuclear secrets from the highly secure uranium enrichment plant Urenco in the Netherlands. This led to nuclear proliferation and Pakistan having the nuclear bomb.
The layers of security at Urenco could not avoid this from happening.
Now..
Are we in #FOSS enriching uranium fully out in the open in how we develop the decentralized #SocialWeb? Or are we reasonably #secure?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qa…
Pakistani nuclear engineer (1936–2021)
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)just small circles 🕊
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •#ThoughtProvoker
Is it possible that while we are fiercely opposed to #AI and how this highly disruptive technology is just introduced everywhere in #society without a second thought (ignoring all the voices that advocate responsible use) ..
Is it possible that maybe with decentralized #SocialWeb technology with semantically meaningful #machine-readable services, we are creating the tech that'll bring AI up to our skin, into our very pores?
Is social web merely #technology?
hairylarry
in reply to just small circles 🕊 • • •