221–230 of 259 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
RMS is on record saying "I am not an anarchist. In fact, I have a pro-state gland"
I assume that's because someone tried to attribute to him certain anarchistic positions that he didn't share. This doesn't make his own ideas less anarchistic however.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
RMS is a classic Green Party guy, explicitly . That is not the same as being anti-capitalist. And only idiots think that free markets don't have externalities, so RMS noting that there are environmental or social issues free markets fail to address is itself completely unremarkable. Anyone who denies those facts should be completely disregarded. Even the most staunch free market advocates who have any understanding o…
Usually the staunch free market advocates don't want to do anything about those externalities, though. They accept that they exist, but that doesn't stop them from fighting whenever regulation or taxes come up as a way to fix those externalities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You get an email that you respond to to finish the registration process.
No, I mean... what is the difference between a user called mattl being on two GNU social servers, and a user called mattl being on two common, gratis email servers? I could go and make a webmail account called mark_l_watson@whatever.com and people shouldn't assume it was you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume that's because someone tried to attribute to him certain anarchistic positions that he didn't share. This doesn't make his own ideas less anarchistic however.
Indeed, but promoting some anarchist (or just anarchy-compatible) ideas does not make one an anarchist.
Reading the comments here it seems that people are missing the point by just joining one of those instances. It is not about just using some alternative to Twitter, the real advantage begins when you host it yourself so that you can own your own content and post whatever you want (not what some company wants you to) and (perhaps) syndicate to other services like Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, etc. I just gave a small tal…
"Reading the comments here it seems that people are missing the point by just joining one of those instances." No, they're not. They just want to get started and go. They don't want to deal with hosting or configuring servers. Many of them might not even have the equipment to do it. That's the experience they've gotten from Twitter, and most people like that.
The https://quitter.se anti-capitalist message didn't resonate with me, so I joined the https://gnusocial.no federation. Much friendlier :)
I am not familiar with either, but I am curious why does "anti-capitalist message" matter so much? I thought the purpose is to build a messaging network that everybody can use. And even GNU founder can be considered anti-capitalist. I am asking because to me, to decide to join some (not political) community based on your own political opinion, is a good way to live in your own bubble. The real strength of the Interne…
The only political opinion you should share about Free Software, is whether the software honors the four freedoms[0]. The rest (open source software, FOSS, etc), are corporate add-on sales attempts.
0.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Free_Software_Definition
Before the site has given me any reason to join, it makes me choose between 7 virtually indistinguishable options of providers with subtle technical advantages and disadvantages. Ah, GNU projects. Never change.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So "Quitter" is obliquely referencing someone that has "quit twitter"? I guess there's a certain logic behind it, then -- but as a name that (1) creates a positive emotional feeling and (2) is intuitively obvious, it falls very short.
Quitter is someone else's interface to GNU social. You'd have to ask them about it. I'm not sure if the founders of email would care for names like Thunderbird and Icedove, but you'd have to ask them.
what lessons can we learn from slack vs irc? from whatsapp vs email? from usenet vs reddit? etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is not one single global point of failure, which has other implications regarding things like censorship. In other words it doesn't just ignore abuse and harrassment one of the biggest problems - maybe the biggest problem - twitter has a communications platform, it practically encourages it.
I expect there are ways to make something both resistant to harassment and resistant to censorship. Like, suppose a network was designed with those as its primary 2 goals. I don't think that would be totally unachievable. DewDrop (I might have gotten the name mixed up with another thing by neyer) and related things seem not inconsistent with decentralized things, and they seem like they could be used for combating ha…