Notices by Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz), page 163

#ForceNetwork appears to be yet another project to create a privacy-orientated internet, like #FreeNet, #I2P, #MaidSafe, #Urbit etc etc Anyone know anything more detailed about it? Worth looking into?
https://forcenetwork.io/

Even putting aside the fact that the only way to get off-planet at present is to burn monumental amounts of fossil fuels, so the whole thing is a non-starter, why would having multiple colonies of humans die in their own filth be a better use of energy than learning to live sustainably on the planet we've got?
@freakazoid @plausocks @xj9 @mlg

@freakazoid @plausocks @xj9 @mlg imagine you've got 5 punks living in a filthy squat. Would encouraging them to each go off and start a new squat solve the problem? Seems to me you'd just end up with 5 filthy houses instead of one.

Space colonization could be categorised as a variant of the Lifeboat response in Holmgren's model, or as a form of Brown Tech. Maybe it needs it's own category? I'd be curious to know what Holmgren thinks about it.
@xj9 @mlg @freakazoid @plausocks

This is a fascinating discussion, which reminds me of #David Holmgren and his work analysing people's responses to the challenges of environmental crises and energy decent:
http://futurescenarios.org/
@xj9 @mlg @freakazoid @plausocks

@LWFlouisa Three Arrows did a good video (on YT) about what German fascism actually was, and why it's bullshit when the alt-right taking heads try to claim that democratic socialism (a la Warren or Sanders) is like fascism.

@LWFlouisa I think it's dangerous to misuse the term "fascism", which has a specific set of meaning based on a history of usage, to describe any law or use of institutional power that we don't like. Treating catcalling as legally punishable harassment may be good or bad, but it has nothing do with "fascism". Three Arrows did a good video (on YT) about what German fascism actually was, and why it's bullshit

@alcinnz sure, I did say *all but* ignored. My point is the article implies that other than RMS and a handful of loyalists, everyone else was busy serving O'Reilly's pro-corporate agenda. Not only does that totally misrepresent the libre software world in general, I think it's also unfair to most of the OSI founders, who were interested in getting businesses to serve free code software, not vice-versa.

@LWFlouisa any site that's still using #Flash is obsolete. You know #Adobe Flash plugins can use your camera and various other things to spy on you, right, and that spyware is turned on by default?

@demonshreder @cbowdon also ...
> Nobody cares about licenses until it is put to test (court)

That may be true in some cases, but it's not true for any business looking to use software, either as an end user, or even more so an a component in a system they are developing. Such people have to minimize their legal risk, so if they can't afford to pay a lawyer to check on the licensing, they stick to licenses they are sure they understand. That's why GPL, "MIT", "BSD" and Apache are so common.

@anarchist_rabbit I take your point, but we need to be conscious that outside of intra-movement debates about collective action, sending out instructions on what kinds of action to take it not take is vanguardism. It's not for us to decide for other activists what tactics do and don't make sense in their situation.

@demonshreder @cbowdon
Copyright assignment agreements (so license can be changed) is risky, as projects can then be relicensed as non-free software, although the agreement can forbid that. I believe #Loomio has a Contributor License Agreement that licenses all submitted code under AGPL, but allows the Loomio Cooperative to relicense the whole codebase under any license approved by FSF or OSI.

@demonshreder @cbowdon one solution is for contributors to dual-license their contributions, under EPL so it can be used in the original project, and GPL in case anyone wants to use their code with GPL software. But that's really only a solution if the code is a library or plugin that is useful in isolation from the original it was written for.

@musicman one thing that would definitely help is a trustworthy global organization putting together some research on the various projects already out there attempting to help commons projects collect money; all the crowdfunding and micro-patronage sites, and 'buy me a coffee' systems, and so. From both an audience and creator POV, there are so many platforms it's very hard to know which ones are trustworthy, let alone effective. I blogged about this recently:
https://www.coactivate.org/projects/disintermedia/blog/2018/04/19/funding-the-web-commons-or-how-do-you-fund-crowdfunding/

@bob @LPS ae, I'm living in China at present.

@adfeno But whatever we blame, we all realize that both corporations and governments can be threats to our somewhat shared vision of a free, tolerant, creative, open, global democracy, organized at least in part using the net. So via groups like the EFF, FSF, and Fight for the Future, we join together to fight for net neutrality, and sensible copyright laws, and against fast lanes, and DRM, and link taxes. Because we can all put our our political biases aside, and see that this need to be done.

@adfeno the way we explain this conflict to ourselves depends on what political assumptions we bring into our online work. If we're left-liberals or progressives we tend to blame corporations. If we're pro-capitalist propertarians (often miss-labelled as "libertarians"), we blame government and regulation. If we're anarchists (actual libertarians), we blame both. Some blame the NWO, or the banks, or something else, as the root cause of the symptoms we can see.

@adfeno The founders and staff of the EFF, like a lot of the people involved in the development of the net, internalised that image of a free, tolerant, creative, open society, as projected by both US and USSR/PRC propaganda during the Child War. We set out to make the net resemble that image, and then found ourselves at odds with a rapidly globalising state-corporate system that was threatened by people being too free, tolerant, creative, or open.

@adfeno@ecodigital.sociaThe founders and staff of the EFF, like a lot of the people involved in the development of the net, internalised that image of a free, tolerant, creative, open society, as projected by both US and USSR/PRC propaganda. We set out to make the net resemble that image, and then found ourselves at odds with a rapidly globalising state-corporate system that can't tolerate people being free, tolerant, creative, or open.

@adfeno #DougRushkoff's monologue on a recent edition of #TeamHuman is kind of relevant here. He's talking about the image of the US projected to Europe during the Cold War.
> "The problem was that the image of America the agencies [State Department, CIA, US Information Agency etc] were projecting to the world, wasn't the image many Americans had of themselves".
https://teamhuman.fm/episodes/ep-108-jessica-blank/