Intro and forums versus chats

Trying to read some of your posts. There is a lot I don’t understand. Some words resonate. Putting this here for future use:

1 Like

Well, browsing your blog, it is difficult for me to get back to what I read. I can’t conceptualize it as a space with that being there and that being there. But I succeeded here

… from these small openings, people can try to step outside this mess and challenge the status quo… we are looking for the tiny minority who can still think outside this mess and are willing to challenge the… narrative… a call to action for those who want to create a more equitable and just society.

This resonates :slightly_smiling_face:

  1. Stepping outside, thinking outside.
  2. Call to action.
  3. Equitable and just society.

On 1: My tool(?) for stepping / thinking outside is a conversation of certain quality. (There are many conversation which keep me inside.)

Some of the qualities: one fixed partner or small group, persistent, frequent enough, regular(?), equal(?) / equitable(?), just…

Such a conversation, for me, creates a space, where the participant can play. They can play princesses and dragons. Or trains. Or the creators of the universe.

2 posts were split to a new topic: Social Web and App Free Computing

This is observably true.

I agree with David Graeber that most social life is still organised this way. Bureaucratic machines like states and corporations try to convince us they organise it all ( this is also discussed by Timothy Snyder in the context of the stories that create ‘nations’. But when people want to have a meal together, or go camping, or help a friend move house, we don’t rely on a bureaucratic machine to organise it for us.

Further evidence, we are doing it right now! Up until a year ago, with the exception of W3C standardising ActivityPub, the entire fediverse was organised by spontaneous voluntary association. Even now that there are some bureaucratic machines involved, their role is peripheral.

1 Like

Using HTTPS is no more centralised than using DNS. If you don’t use HTTPS, you’re exposing your site to a risk of MitM attacks, and your webserver being used in giant botnets like the Great Canon;

1 Like

Agen we have a danger of a #ragecircle as one person is talking about the social impact and the other is talking about the technical impact. The point I was making is that most sites on the openweb rely on a singal point of failer " A nonprofit Certificate Authority providing TLS certificates to 300 million websites." this was a stupid (good) technical solution for a federated openweb to take, you can find out more about issues like this #geekproblem on Mastodon

1 Like

Preliminary note 1: Strictly speaking, these possibilities are not mutually exclusive. A thing can be both greatly reduced and most of.

Preliminary note 2: Two different words. I was thinking about big cooperation as something good, eg language. You are thinking about big corporation as something bad, eg Microsoft; I guess.

Fair point. Do you have a solution to propose?

1 Like

Well, “social life” is complex, its description is complex and its mesurement is complex too. I propose to concentrate on what we do, on what we want to do and on what we shall / should / will do :slightly_smiling_face:

My attention is directed to a kind of small cooperation in pairs or small groups. Some of the qualities of the cooperation I look for are:

  • long-term
  • frequent
  • regular
  • equal
  • autopoietic, autonomous, self-thematising, self-regulating, self-determining, conscious…
  • it is its own purpose…

Here, I am a guest in an enviroment of people, who are capable of, and engaged in highly sofisticated small autopoietic cooperations. (I have a suspision, it is difficult for you(?) to imagine / to work with how ordinary folks operate.)

I was thinking about that a while back. But apparently there are other CAs supporting ACME protocol. And horribly imperfect though the CA system is at least it prevents the kinds of injection attacks which were common over a decade ago.

1 Like

Well, I would be interested in some data about how often people have a meal together, or go camping together or help a friend move house… It may be country or region specific. I like the site and here is what I have fished out on the first cast: And at first skip it looks to me thant no, not everything is bright and rosy and the trends are of less meal together, less camping together and less helping moving a house.
But, again(?), however the data are interesting, for me, the more important is, what you, @strypey, and me, and others are doing. I am trying to intitiate small conversations / cooperation, which, if possible, thematise what we, the small people, can do to make the Universe a better place. And, although I have a very limited success, I perceive it as a very difficult task and I do not see around me happy bubbling plethora of small conversation / cooperation about how we deal with the climatic catastrofy, with the Russian genocidal war against Ukraine, Trump, Orbán and other ‘small nuisances’.

(Sorry for the irony :grimacing: I am angry :rage: I see my ridiculousness too :slightly_smiling_face: )

1 Like

Some more data: Got link here:

The paper is a deep and narrow investigation of how toxic comments decrease engagement. It is difficult to measure that in broader context, but my feeling is that, say in decades, willingness to engage is decreasing; or, at least, shifting from ‘public’ and cummulative spaces (for example fora?) to ‘private’ and transient spaces (for example Mastodon?).

An unrelated note: Wouldn’t it be possible that my computer is mine and there are “things” that come in rather than my computer pulls me over to different places / enviroments / spaces / platforms…?