Puzzled . . @mako makes a clear pitch on "Free software production needs free tools" youtube.com/watch?v=U_nK6nP_RC
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?

Of course, when talking and I'm thinking of social.coop too. If social.coop exists to cooperatively own and operate tool platforms (did I get that right?) . . what other tools than Mastodon will come under the umbrella? And which kinds of users will they be tools for? Tech nerds? Coders? Ordinary everday folks? P2P/solidarity economy activists? Etcetera. Diverse use cases, can't serve 'em all well?

@mike_hales we went through this a couple times already, and the strongest feeling among those involve was that, if and when we'll expand, it will be towards implementing other federated tools (peertube, matrix chat etc...). Also, I prepared a specific questionnaire to be used for when we'll get the ball rolling on this matter to better understand what are the most relevant tools for our user base.


@Antanicus Federated tools, of course. IMHO offered list seems a bit bread&butter - C21 variants on C20 print media telephone &c?

What of emerging technologies to change relations of ownership with what we make and say - web, ? Existing technologies on wild commons of data . . should be in the storefront serving *us* not back office serving extractive corporations?

A fediverse issue not social.coop issue? But social.coop might lobby devs, boost protocols.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A Fediverse instance for people interested in cooperative and collective projects.