@alcinnz@lightweight I don't think that systems like Freedombone or FreedomBox can "save democracy", but taking back some ownership and control of your own digital communications, including the network infrastructure, is an aspect of democratization. I think the Facebook problem will become bigger if they go fully encrypted as Zuck recently claimed. They'll be able to say that because they don't have the plaintext they don't have any responsibility for what goes through their servers, and that could allow existing problems to get worse.
Apparently back in jail, with additional accumulating fines. In the US of A the judicial system doesn't even attempt to be anything other than completely corrupt. It's like a cross between Stalin and the mafia.
@brennen@cwebber@brainblasted@catonano In the US in the past the free speech battle was mainly from the left in terms of anti-communism and also suppression of protest against the draft during the Vietnam war. Communists, union organizers or even anyone suspected of holding vague left wing sympathies was removed from official positions and from the entertainment industry and anything which looked like left wing talk was removed from newspapers and magazines.
So the ability to speak and organize in public is pretty important, but this is not really what the far right are up to. They know that "free speech" is a weakness, especially in the academic environment where people are very tolerant of unconventional ideas. They know that by using this they can create shock and fear and most importantly shut down any oppositional counterspeech. Once people are in a psychological state of fear they will no longer criticize the regime and be too scared to organize in public, and that's the environment in which right wing authoritarianism thrives. The blueprint is that they always use a combination of scapegoating hate speech combined with shocking acts of violence publicized as widely as possible.
@cwebber@nev@brainblasted@catonano The claims on "free speech" by the far right were never honest and for them it's not even a new tactic. They're just reheating the rhetoric of the 1930s and deploying it in a modern context.
@maiyannah@camoceltic Going down the rabbit hole of "pref flips" leads to a place of creepyness. A lot of what Mozilla does is in the "hidden in plain sight" category.
"What percentage of users do you want in each branch?"
This looks like deliberate manipulation of user behavior with discussions of the legality of what they're doing and "risk matrix" but with whoever is on the team "signing off". The language is often not easy to interpret though, due to jargon.
Whenever I read these Mozilla threads I always come away from it feeling like I've emerged from some disturbing nightmare. It's the cynical way in which they talk about users.
It looks like 4 years ago Firefox added a system to centralize the addons and only allow ones pre-authorized by Mozilla. Mozilla then became a central authority determining the legitimacy of an addon.
That pretty much knocks out Freedom Zero with regard to Firefox: the freedom to run the program for any purpose.
@maiyannah@purplehippo Having Mozilla remotely disable working software with no easy way for the user to override that definitely isn't in keeping with the four freedoms.
@charlag If they don't like IRC, which admittedly has limitations, then XMPP would make more sense. But Mozilla's decision process often is perplexing.
Bob Mottram π§ β β (bob@soc.freedombone.net)'s status on Friday, 26-Apr-2019 09:01:39 EDT
Bob Mottram π§ β β Intentional communities are probably ok if you can make that work. Temporary Autonomous Zones or zones to defend. But so long as it's around capitalism won't leave you in peace to do your gardening. At the behest of megacorps or offshore shell companies guys with guns will show up and declare your commune to be their private property under "corporate law".
@maiyannah It's the same sort of regulatory capture as happens with the Linux project. Developers often like to think that they're immune from being influenced, but if you splash enough cash then most people can be bought into collaborating with any dubious political project, letter agency front organization or corporate monopoly agenda. It takes a rare kind of stubbornness to resist the temptation.