@mako @oli @bhaugen @richdecibels @Graham_Mitchell @dajbelshaw @mayel
Surely feds in the ‘verse need a mirror of their own *collective* acting/federating/publishing/sharing. Like birdsite shows ‘trending’ but more catholic. Like FarceBook sells profiles and target zones to marketers & alt-right ideologues. Don’t we need APIs that show ‘us’ to ourselves in the large? reveal emergent patterns in our tacit collective motion? help us see the movement in the movements?
Is the anarcho vision individualistic, like Margaret Thatcher, ‘there is no society’? Do FOSS folk fantasise that the only significant actions are the intentional ones, the connections we *mean* to make, with discrete materials we individually own and kontrol?
@mako @oli @bhaugen @richdecibels @Graham_Mitchell @dajbelshaw @mayel
Is the rationalist ideology of free choice so embedded that we can’t acknowledge emergent properties of large aggregates of ppl?
Pls tell me these P2P self-reflecting data-analytic protocols and tools are actually out there, and I’m just listening to the wrong conversations!
1. Individualism/rationalism/"free choice" is indeed embedded. We have a hard time convincing eg some of the holochain people that groups even exist.
2. You might be listening to the wrong conversations, but more likely missing the signals of something more like what you are thinking.
...part 2 of 2
Read between some of the lines.
Or http://locecon.org/ (ValueFlows for aggregates of ppl).
Or https://singularitynet.io/ (popped up in SSB)
@bhaugen @mike_hales @mako @oli @richdecibels @Graham_Mitchell @mayel Right, and I think that the issue might be that Twitter gets to decide what its users should pay attention to. The Fediverse, not so much, because people have divergent interests and there is no centralised place which tells people what they *should* be paying attention to.
The canonical use case of trending topics is news items, which is something I'm trying to avoid at the moment.
So while I'm sympathetic to the idea of solidarity around things that deserve our attention, I certainly wouldn't want that to be at the expense of creating a 'trending' mechanism that could be gamed.
Twitter have created a rage machine which feeds of political news and is financed by advertising. It's like big corporations feeding off the emotions of the masses.
Would would the *opposite* of that look like?
This is not directly the opposite of trending mechanisms, just different. But we use voluntarily provided aggregate economic information to analyze opportunities for more network coordination and unsatisfied needs. Or for another example see https://app.solidbase.info/
So it's about coordinating collective activities, not individual self-promotion.
One feature of an 'opposite' mechanism might be just to show *all* traffic and trends, not just 'winning' ones? Requires quite a complex and customisable UI of course, for ppl with more than 2sec attention span?
In historical-cultural analysis, attention is paid to residual and emergent formations, as well as dominant ones. Some form of meme-recognition required to spot these outliers? A qualitative not quantitative filter.
@bhaugen @mako @oli @richdecibels @Graham_Mitchell @mayel
>not close to anything we have done
Serious computational challenge? Certainly a lot of learning hours and machine time. Analogous to accumulating algorithm-capital as commercial social media platforms have. Which rich folks like Cambridge Analytica and the Trump/Brexit campaigns hire by the hour.
Yep 👎 follower counts. But I would love to see a behaviour-analytic pattern-recognition approach that tuned to humane, compassionate, generous etc communications and actions.
The Big Five and Myers Briggs are not the only frames for tracking memes! And propensity to follow or to buy are not the only filtering criteria! But I haven't seen a dhamma frame, for example, implemented in a meme-tracking algorithm. Would love to.
👌 ValueFlows. D'you intend system-level overviews, or just transparency across specific value nets, per-product?
For eco mappings - like your nice locecon example - I'm open to some automated pattern recognition too. Human recognition alone in the face of present complexity is on a failing slope? Problem is, ground-truthing & rating an algorithm's results?
> ValueFlows. D'you intend system-level overviews, or just transparency across specific value nets, per-product?
http://locecon.org/ analyzes aggregate flows of any kind of resource between agents or composites in a community.
Scenarios https://valueflo.ws/introduction/estimates.html is a ValueFlows structure for that.
The data could be accumulated and entered by hand or assembled from activities in a network, given permissions.
Thanks for prompting closer look at locecon. I get it now
>analyzes aggregate flows of any kind of resource between agents
= hybrid between what I'd seen as two cases: traffic analysis across ntwk locations and meme/content analysis of traffic. Both views needed by community members? I'd been thinking *text* traffic not material trade.
Can locecon derive its own categories/tags for mapping or are these human inputs?
> SingularityNET is a surprise. I need to digest that one!
AI folks, militantly open-source
Seemingly wishing to counter the AI oligarchs (eg Microsoft’s take-over of GitHub) in the name of democracy and free enterprise
And an argument pitched in terms of capital and labour (tho not Marxist. Market-anarchist? neo-classical?)
An interesting, monetising geeks' view of AI in C21 economy.
@mike_hales @mako @bhaugen @richdecibels @Graham_Mitchell @dajbelshaw there are certainly many people (including myself) who are trying to study these things. One reason there aren't as many tools is because doing that kind of analysis in a way that respects privacy and consent is very hard, and we're still figuring out how that might work.
@mike_hales @bob It's a tricky problem. How to provide information useful for organization without making individuals transparent.
I think the human network effect should always be greater than any automatic analysis. That is, to get things done should always primarily require real social relations to exist. What happens elsewhere is the opposite and people perform to fit the expectations of the metrics/trends.
I do agree, 'human network effect' and real social relations is what it's all about. But, since digitla-mediated life is lived so much now in bubbles, I feel it's important - for liberation movements - to have a realistic perception of what these bubbles are. Most doing crap stuff maybe! Many doing lovely stuff. I feel it's important to have a digitally mediated capacity to be realistic about the bubble-ness of present day living?
And then, develop real social relations.
@mike_hales @bob People have always lived within small lifeworlds. What was anomalous was the broadcast communications of the 20th century in which large populations would be regimented into usually nation state based monocultures.
With online social networks, especially of the federated kind, I think we're in the process of returning to the historically typical condition of human relations in which if there are celebrities they're someone you personally know or who lives locally.
I don't believe the clock can be rewound Bob - genie's out of the bottle? Rather there's now an evolutionary challenge of living well&wisely in a world we know to be enormously complex, composed of many cultural bubbles of knowable and maybe intimate community - but with intentional, respectful, well-informed and where possible direct P2P relations. At scale
I think this is called 'pluriverse'. It's a tough one. The available alternative is barbarism & media chaos? Villages not available!
@mike_hales @bob There wasn't anything historically inevitable about the broadcast era. It was a function of the technology which existed at the time. As bidirectionality again becomes conventional this is why you see panics about "bubbles" or "apathy". To the powerful it looks like something is being lost (i.e. their exclusive control over information) but really it's something being regained.
@mike_hales @bob I don't think behavior analytics would be "cool" and that instead we should always be seeking to practice data minimization either by not collecting data or by expiring it when it's no longer strictly required.
Even if analytics data is initially gathered for ostensibly good reasons it will often then fall into the hands of the state and the people who want to disrupt or destroy movements. Years ago I used to follow the academic research on social network disruption. There's not much doubt that powerful people don't want online movements to develop and are doing just fine with the existing distribution of wealth.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!