Pinned toot

Puzzled . . @mako makes a clear pitch on "Free software production needs free tools"
And is very clear on and (though says most code comes from solo not collaboration!). Yet not a hint of coop ownership of to keep tools honest & open (GitHub!). Surely tools today become platforms? And platforms require collaboration even if code doesn't? So why doesn't follow automatically, as we talk tools? How does libre not equal coop in FLOSS world?

An average car emits 650g of COβ‚‚ per km driven. An average person travels 25km to get to work each day. Commuting by car emits an average of 32.5kg of COβ‚‚ daily. (Based on data from the US.)

An adult tree absorbs up to 21.8kg of COβ‚‚ per year. It would take one tree 1.5 years to absorb what one person can emit in a single day.

In the US alone, over 6 million more cars are registered annually. Each year we destroy 18.7 million acres of forest worldwide, killing roughly 1.1 billion trees.


What has happened to code in recent updates? Used to be possible to extract a URL from a toot's <Embed> link, which would display a sequence of Mastodon ( toots. No more! Please can we have this back again? It was so helpful to be able to extract a flow of exchange in this way, maybe to make a txt copy of it for keeping elsewhere (since Favourites management in Mastodon is so poor).

Day 1 of Sowing the Seeds started off with a big picture overview by Michel Bauwens of the #P2PFoundation, and sociologist scholar and labour activist Professor Pun Ngai from the University of Hong Kong. She set out to place the #PlatformCooperative movement in the context of the Chinese socialist revolution, and I'm looking forward to rewatch this video and try to understand more deeply what she was arguing:

@bhaugen I think this is the early-stage draft of the P2PF report you referred to "Full spectrum accountability etc"
Can you confirm we're on to the same doc?

Re-tooting . . @bhaugen to @strypey @mike_hales
We're working to get there.

This was written as an appendix for an upcoming P2P Foundation report
entitled "Full-spectrum accountability and commons-based production for planetary survival":

They want to couple it with some work on biophysical limits from James Quilligan.

Also want to add connections to Emergy accounting:

Re-tooting . . to @strypey @bhaugen
ValueFlows looks v important Not just as use-value supply-chain operations-management infrastructure for a local/trans-local economy. But extremely important once algorithms and metrics for environmental/thermodynamic impact/exchange *with nature* get wired in. Then we'd be equipped to engage in P2P governing of all kinds of *commons* - material/digital, natural/urban, customary/contemporary - as well as operate networks of coop trade. This is a Big One?

Re-tooting . .
@strypey to @bhaugen
I can see that the scope of ValueFlows is a lot broader and more ambitious than anything I've worked on

@bhaugen wrote elsewhere
. . economic vocabulary [ValueFlows, for example]. To get it to work for many situations, we need to generalize to the point where it becomes abstract, and then we need to make the abstractions concrete again to apply to particular situations.

Inescapable problem. Anybody have thoughts on guielines for minimum-necessary generalisation? Include many illustrative (narrative?) instances, maybe?

Though isn't design intrinsically big-to-small-to-big-again etc?

@bhaugen it's not really important at the level of standards and protocols. #ActivityPub doesn't care if an instance has a single user or millions, for example. But it does matter when it comes to how we think about #UX, admin interfaces, moderation structures and rules and how they're set, portability of accounts, deployment and provisioning, financial arrangements, legal structures; ie where the mechanics of digita tech meet the dance of human *organization*.

Is there a good, no-university-login, non-google alternative to

I use it on the regular, but would love to move away from google if possible.

@strypey At
you wrote
> a free network would actually be a federation of commons, each operating at one or more network layers
Sounds about right . . I would say "a commons of commons".
The big economic/cultural (difficult) trick being, to learn to do very many CoCs? Is there any difference between a really *well* federated federation, and a really *well* commoned commons? I don't mind the anarcho terms . . we *are* talking about the same things here, aren't we?

@LeoSammallahti totally agree. Where it gets complicated though is that in the development of cyberspace we've applied "how to collaborate with [x]" to *everyone*, including corporations. This has worked for us in some ways, and allowed our efforts to be recuperated in other ways. I still think it's possible to work constructively with the humans enmeshed in corporate structures while trying to win against those structures, but it's tricky. Constant evaluation and correction is required.

Wired editor Chris Anderson wrote a book asking how one can compete with "free"? Let's reframe the question. How do we compete with free *and* amoral? How about by doing cheap and ethical? How about by replacing trustless, dehumanizing "platforms" with a return to human-scale organizations based on bulding trust?

sex, gender, hard labour, alliance Show more

I just favourited another toot . . great stuff :D When will furnish me with tools to manage and search , like in any other much-used communication app (my browser has hundreds of favourites, all indexed and searchable) or well-tooled operating system (Alfred in MacOS is a life-saver)? Mastodon's endless roll in a pinned pane is well-nigh useless as longer-term memory. Please, some hacker out there, fork the code, help us love mastodon more? Tool up.

I have lot of sympathy for Matt Slater's arguments for Protocol Cooperativism. This is essentially the songbook I was singing from, since the late 90s, and throughout my time working on the Aotearoa localizations of #Indymedia and #CreativeCommons. But in hindsight, those songs were naive. As Matt points out within his own essay, capitalists have already figured out ways to dominate open networks based on open protocols (eg Microsoft's "embrace, extend, extinguish"). Ownership matters.

I don't care about follows/clout/etc on the verse. What matters is the interactions, the forging of friendships and how a group of people can make your hour/day/week feel special.

As a whole social media has become a monster, it's lost the social and become more about shouting into the void.

Here on the verse the void not only shouts back, it boosts you, comforts you, chats and laughs with you, helps you and much, much more.

Toxicity has the potential to poison every platform eventually, but so long as we push it out, de-federate its origin and quarantine it through isolation to the fringes, the verse will always feel like home.

This has been my TED talk, thank you for listening, keep being awesome. πŸš€

@bhaugen I think this is particularly important because unlike a lot of us, who mainly work on comms and documentation tools intended to complement and extend group organizing by humans, the stuff you folks are working on mainly seems to be about leveraging networks to do something much more ambitious.

Maybe part of the solution could be to have organizations like FSF, SFC, OSI etc provide genuine users with an identity credential they can use to authenticate on any free code development repo site? This would be a benefit of membership of those orgs, and make sustaining a membership more attractive. We keep looking for trustless solutions to distributed infrastructure. Maybe we need to start valuing trust again?

Show more is a a coop-run corner of the fediverse, a cooperative and transparent approach to operating a social platform. We are currently closed to new memberships while we improve our internal processes and policies, and plan to re-open to new folks when that work is complete. [9/2/2018]