Billionaire-proof open social media is now mission-critical infrastructure for the future of democracy.
@ntnsndr
And yet most people who *finally* flee the nazi bar flock to… BlueSky and Threads. They've obviously learned nothing, and this is very disheartening.
@fheinderyckx @ntnsndr well you see we're all radicals over here who are making a big fuss over nothing as this is surely going to blow over jesus christ is that a mushroom cloud in the distance
@lritter @fheinderyckx @ntnsndr yes, pretty much. I heard from someone leaving X that they prefer Bluesky because it has more features they like. Fair enough but also: so you're not really leaving X for the reason you thought all along...

@fheinderyckx

Not really. We just have to keep this place alive and buzzing so they have a safety net to fall back on. And the Fediverse has it's own life energy that makes it a fun and interesting place to be. We don't need huge hoards to enjoy it.

@ntnsndr

@fheinderyckx @ntnsndr

If we've learned anything from Antietam, it's that we just can't keep marching people over a hill from just one side.

If there is a hill, it needs to be approached around from the right, around from the left, and THEN over the top. Taking the top then means that you have the high ground and can chase those Bastards straight back to Hell.

@fheinderyckx

I think that's a misunderstanding. They don't leave X because Elon is a nazi, but because there are too many nazis, trolls and dipshits in their timeline and interactions and that's a problem BlueSky actually solves quite well at the moment (and to be fair, better than the fediverse). Threads not so much, but they seem to abandon that too in the meantime.

@ntnsndr

@Starkimarm @ntnsndr
You're right, but the proliferation of nazis, trolls and dipshits results from the whims of the new owner. So the owner is the root of the problem. So ownership, i.e. being owned by someone or some profit-driven entity, *is* the peril.

@fheinderyckx

That is partly right, but obviously many could live very well with Twitter being for-profit pre-Elon and many can live with BlueSky the way it is right now. Because it also has some aspects people like. that the fediverse is lacking.

@ntnsndr

@ntnsndr Why?
Please explain as if to someone not in your political/ideological/social bubble.
@light @ntnsndr The major social media platforms (at least Meta, X, and TikTok) are now in the thrall of a single political leader. The ability to have dissident speech now depends on having networks that are not similarly capture-able.
@ntnsndr To my mind, that means P2P networks and darknets.
Only then can we have truly free speech.
But they needn't be ungoverned.
They can be designed with new forms of governance, unconstrained by the implicit feudalism of the old.
@ntnsndr For example, Aether (a Reddit-like) had democratic and individualistic moderation (collectively vote on default moderation for newcomers but your vote is your moderator regardless): https://getaether.net/
And Cabal Chat has what they call "subjective moderation" (choose your own moderators): https://cabal.chat/
Aether

@light Yes, I think Aether was a really interesting experiment!

Hylo has also been introducing some interesting collaborative moderation tools.

And a student of mine has been building user-governed moderation for Bsky: https://pmsky.social/

pmsky

enabling peer moderation on bsky

@ntnsndr

Has Elon been banned from getting a Fediverse account?

@VulcanTourist @ntnsndr would it be appropriate to say: "I Hope so"?
@VulcanTourist The point is he can't be

@ntnsndr

Well that's unfortunate, then, since it's not billionaire-proof. He's free to infect the Fediverse like the unwoke virus that he is. It's the Paradox of Tolerance again.

@VulcanTourist @ntnsndr he can be here, can talk shit and he can even grow an audience, but he cannot, by definition, take over the network and run the show.
On the contrary, he can be isolated, banned from parts of the network, diminshing any benefit of being here in the first place
@VulcanTourist @ntnsndr Trump's Truth Social network runs on a version of Mastodon under the hood. No one federates with it. Something similar will hopefully happen when the rich techbros turn up, but do doubt there will be arguments about it

@paulsilver @ntnsndr

Fascists and other threats to society need to be exiled - excommunicated - from it, per the Paradox of Tolerance. Break the contract and it no longer binds you nor tolerates you.

@VulcanTourist @ntnsndr no it isn't the paradox of tolerance, instances and users don't have to tolerate a Musk account.
@VulcanTourist @ntnsndr Well, the infection would be quickly quarantined and walled off. It would be like an old cyst that doesn't go away but cannot infect the rest of the body. More precisely he would be a cyst in the body of only one person out of a community, like when the body walls off tuberculosis and it becomes inactive, causing no symptoms and no longer transmissable.

@VulcanTourist @ntnsndr That is actually impossible as a full ban would require every other server to refuse to federate with any server he set up as well as banning him directly.

He would not last two minutes here on Kolektiva, but this is ONE instance not the whole network. I would not last two minutes on Gab, but note that that's a standalone instance nobody federates with.

@ntnsndr open and decentralized. In case they invent another form of capture beyond billionaires.
@ntnsndr A nation was roused to independence arguably within the consideration of a pamphlet of text; spelling and grammar errors corroborate.
@ntnsndr
The fediverse has nothing to be smug about so long as (parts of) it continue to collude with the Zuckerberg entity. That is the entryist project for an anti-democracy billionaire to control this network. Meta has been afforded deep access into the development process of ActivityPub, and the fedi as a whole has failed to contain and reject the threat. Until and unless that happens, the fediverse (as a distinct AP-based construct at least) will not be the vehicle to fulfill this mission
@ophiocephalic @ntnsndr The Fediverse is whatever you want it to be, open or closed. My instance has blocked all access to threads and even Bluesky. I like it that way.

@adrianmorales
Cheers to your blocking policy; and yes, there is a part of the fediverse standing against the threat!

@ntnsndr

Yeah, the Free Fediverse, anti-Meta FediPact, and instances with blocking policies like the ones @adrianmorales all have an explicit goal of being billionaire resistent.

And totally agree: with Meta having so much influence over the AP standard it's proof by example that any AP-centric construct is not billionaire-resistant.

.@ophiocephalic @ntnsndr

@thenexusofprivacy @adrianmorales @ophiocephalic @ntnsndr

What influence does Meta has over AP? Where can we check that?

@nemesis
Excuse the self-promotion, but you can have a look at some posts on that subject which are linked at the top of my feed under the heading "Meta and its collaborators"

@thenexusofprivacy @adrianmorales @ntnsndr

You can track the SocialCG's public discussions at https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG - it has links to the email list and meeting notes. Here's an example of somebody from a Meta-funded non-profit (who's got a major role in the discussions going forward) attempting to shut down criticisms of Meta on the email list. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swicg/2025Jan/0026.html

The SocialCG is currently in the process of coming up with a charter for a Working Group to create the next version of the ActivityPub spec. Things to look for: does Meta have a representative on the working group? (Since they're a dues-paying W3C member, they're entitled to one, so presumably the answer will be yes.). How many people from Meta-funded non-profits (or organizations that take funding from Meta or Meta-funded non-profits) will be in the group? What roles will they play, publicly and behind the scenes? How many people critical of Meta will be involved -- and what roles will they play?

@nemesis @adrianmorales @ophiocephalic @ntnsndr

SocialCG - W3C Wiki

@ntnsndr New media billionaires got there thanks substantially to the algorithm. Open social media will hopefully remain algorithm-free. Where it applies, everyone is after you, not just the fascists.

@ntnsndr I've seen the UX-related Mastodon issues that seem to stay open forever. It's not happening here.

I thought I read that cwebber was planning a different alternative (successor) to ActivityPub.

@ntnsndr The Right actually learned this lesson after 2020. They got kicked off Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit. They went to Rumble for video, and Patriots.win for Reddit-like discussion.

Who was it that said the power of the press belongs to the person who owns it?

@ntnsndr yes, that is why I'm here, to save democracy. not for pics of species ambiguous erotica.
@ntnsndr Keep in mind who owns the wires.

@ntnsndr

Truly distributed open public social media is critical infrastructure. Unfortunately #Bluesky fails this test and will be scooped up when the boom comes down. Anyone who thinks they have found a safe haven there will be rudely disabused of this misconception.

@ntnsndr I’m struggling to think of democracies that have become more healthy over the period in which social media became widespread. Isn’t there a serious argument to be made that we would be better off without social media?

@UlrikeHahn @ntnsndr It depends what you mean by social media.

The agora enabled Athenian democracy.

Coffeehouses and salons fueled the rise of Enlightenment republicanism.

Early social networks aided the Arab Spring.

But once powerful figure out how to centralize those platforms, they become counter-democratic.

@ntnsndr I guess I’m not yet convinced that it is only “centralization” that is the problem…or to put it differently, clearly central features of what we’ve had (attention economy driven algorithmic amplification) have been bad, but I’m not sure that even those aspects are neutralised that there doesn’t remain more risk than benefit - at least given where we have arrived now…
@ntnsndr What kind of open social media? If power remains concentrated and determines the views of much of the public consciousness, that can happen without billionaires, because the centers of power have their networks of influence in place. But if we have a media that has constant feedback mechanisms that allow us to create and maintain a variety of democratic spaces for community building, thoughtful and respectful discussion, and decision-making, for example, then we might have a chance.
@ntnsndr it would be useful to make a list of required criteria that makes it so, and what avenues to takeover exist if any one of them is not met.
@ntnsndr I found out yesterday that Meta has used my PBSR articles and other material unknowingly to me to train their AI. They used a pirate site to do this. Bandits! 🤯
@ntnsndr Tell that to all the people on BS because "this VC backed social network will be better this time, really".
@ntnsndr this exists in real life. Not trying to demean, but we know what we need to do.

@ntnsndr Don't worry! We're about 2.5% of the way to billionaire-proofing social media! 🤡

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-us-free-social-media-from-billionaires

(INSERT SUPER OVER THE TOP EYE ROLL HERE)

Donate to #FreeOurFeeds - help secure the future of social media, organized by Free Our Feeds

Free Our Feeds | A campaign to keep social media open, people-po… Free Our Feeds needs your support for #FreeOurFeeds - help secure the future of social media

gofundme.com