[liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-17 Thread Steven Clift 
I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
"Building Global Community" letter:

  https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity

This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
with my contacts at Facebook.

You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and more:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/

Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal

Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook Groups:
http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc

Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me -
cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.

Thanks,
Steven Clift
E-Democracy.org

P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):

1. Supportive Communities:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502355863485702/

2. Safe Community:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502356546818967/

3. Informed Community:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502358683485420/

4. Civically-Engaged Community:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502359110152044/

5. Inclusive Community:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502359536818668/

Other Conversations:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366996817922/

Media Reports:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502367900151165/




Steven Clift  -  Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
   cl...@e-democracy.org  -  +1 612 234 7072
   @democracy  -  http://linkedin.com/in/netclift
   http://1radionews.com - My radio app
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-17 Thread Thomas Delrue 
On February 17, 2017 1:32:46 PM EST, Steven Clift  wrote:
>I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
>"Building Global Community" letter:
>
>  https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity
>
>This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
>disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
>with my contacts at Facebook.
>
>You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
>questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and more:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/
>
>Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal
>
>Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
>this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
>E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook Groups:
>http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc
>
>Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
>leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
>supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
>create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
>inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
>engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
>to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me -
>cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
>line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
>that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.
>
>Thanks,
>Steven Clift
>E-Democracy.org
>
>P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):
>
>1. Supportive Communities:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502355863485702/
>
>2. Safe Community:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502356546818967/
>
>3. Informed Community:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502358683485420/
>
>4. Civically-Engaged Community:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502359110152044/
>
>5. Inclusive Community:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502359536818668/
>
>Other Conversations:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366996817922/
>
>Media Reports:
>https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502367900151165/
>
"Facebook guy tells world it needs to use more Facebook or face bad times",  is 
that roughly the right summary of his 'insights' or am I way off? 

--
Thomas
(Sent from my mobile device,  please forgive brevity or typos.)
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-18 Thread F LM 
Relevant: 

Zuckerberg removed a line about monitoring private messages from his Facebook 
manifesto

http://mashable.com/2017/02/16/mark-zuckerberg-manifesto-ai/#OSZDnazMKkqD

FL

> On 17-02-2017, at 17:24, Thomas Delrue  wrote:
> 
>> On February 17, 2017 1:32:46 PM EST, Steven Clift  
>> wrote:
>> I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
>> "Building Global Community" letter:
>> 
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity
>> 
>> This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
>> disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
>> with my contacts at Facebook.
>> 
>> You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
>> questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and more:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/
>> 
>> Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal
>> 
>> Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
>> this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
>> E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook Groups:
>> http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc
>> 
>> Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
>> leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
>> supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
>> create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
>> inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
>> engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
>> to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me -
>> cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
>> line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
>> that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Steven Clift
>> E-Democracy.org
>> 
>> P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):
>> 
>> 1. Supportive Communities:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502355863485702/
>> 
>> 2. Safe Community:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502356546818967/
>> 
>> 3. Informed Community:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502358683485420/
>> 
>> 4. Civically-Engaged Community:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502359110152044/
>> 
>> 5. Inclusive Community:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502359536818668/
>> 
>> Other Conversations:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366996817922/
>> 
>> Media Reports:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502367900151165/
> "Facebook guy tells world it needs to use more Facebook or face bad times",  
> is that roughly the right summary of his 'insights' or am I way off? 
> 
> --
> Thomas
> (Sent from my mobile device,  please forgive brevity or typos.)
> -- 
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
> list guidelines will get you moderated: 
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
> change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
> compa...@stanford.edu.
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-18 Thread Cristina [efecto99] 
On 17/02/17 17:24, Thomas Delrue wrote:
> On February 17, 2017 1:32:46 PM EST, Steven Clift  
> wrote:
>> I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
>> "Building Global Community" letter:
>>
>>  https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity
>>
>> This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
>> disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
>> with my contacts at Facebook.
>>
>> You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
>> questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and more:
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/
>>
>> Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal
>>
>> Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
>> this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
>> E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook Groups:
>> http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc
>>
>> Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
>> leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
>> supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
>> create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
>> inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
>> engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
>> to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me -
>> cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
>> line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
>> that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Steven Clift
>> E-Democracy.org
>>
>> P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):
>>
> "Facebook guy tells world it needs to use more Facebook or face bad times",  
> is that roughly the right summary of his 'insights' or am I way off? 
>
> --
> Thomas
> (Sent from my mobile device,  please forgive brevity or typos.)
It seems as a joke if wouldn't be posted HERE, on *Liberation tech*
mailing list: since when Facebook serves to the liberation of people!? I
must be reading a lot of fake news about Facebook the last5 years?
(and i think I'm getting short).

So funny...

My 1st impulse to answer this email was to simply put:

One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor   Surveillance where the Shadows lie.

99


-- 
Esta comunicación puede ser legal y/o ilegalmente recogida, almacenada y
utilizada por distintos actores. Si duda sobre el contenido a compartir,
evite enviarlo sin cifrar.
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-18 Thread Yosem Companys 
I know. I agree.

I have never been thrilled with Steven's selection of Facebook for
pro-democracy groups.

To protect your privacy and security, stay off Facebook.

But, to build movements, create an account on Facebook (or Twitter or any
other dominant centralized social network) and try to get as many people to
join.

One vision we had on Diaspora was to create a HootSuite like app that would
integrate all of your social networking sites on one dashboard and enable
you to decide how public you wanted to be. You wanted to connect with a
friend? You could do it directly from your own server to your friend's own
server without an intermediary. You wanted to advertise something more
broadly on Facebook or Twitter? You could do that too. Unfortunately,
Diaspora never moved away from its pod focus to build a better HootSuite.

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Cristina [efecto99] 
wrote:

> On 17/02/17 17:24, Thomas Delrue wrote:
>
> On February 17, 2017 1:32:46 PM EST, Steven Clift  
>  wrote:
>
> I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
> "Building Global Community" letter:
>
>  https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity
>
> This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
> disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
> with my contacts at Facebook.
>
> You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
> questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and 
> more:https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/
>
> Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal
>
> Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
> this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
> E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook 
> Groups:http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc
>
> Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
> leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
> supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
> create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
> inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
> engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
> to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me 
> -cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
> line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
> that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.
>
> Thanks,
> Steven Clift
> E-Democracy.org
>
> P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):
>
>
> "Facebook guy tells world it needs to use more Facebook or face bad times",  
> is that roughly the right summary of his 'insights' or am I way off?
>
> --
> Thomas
> (Sent from my mobile device,  please forgive brevity or typos.)
>
> It seems as a joke if wouldn't be posted HERE, on *Liberation tech*
> mailing list: since when Facebook serves to the liberation of people!? I
> must be reading a lot of fake news about Facebook the last5 years? (and
> i think I'm getting short).
>
> So funny...
>
> My 1st impulse to answer this email was to simply put:
>
> One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
> One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
> In the Land of Mordor   Surveillance where the Shadows lie.
>
> 99
>
>
> --
> Esta comunicación puede ser legal y/o ilegalmente recogida, almacenada y
> utilizada por distintos actores. Si duda sobre el contenido a compartir,
> evite enviarlo sin cifrar.
>
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/
> mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change
> password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
>
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Steven Clift 
Quickly now ... I've been building an open source-based, public
creative commons structured, non-profit, members-supported
citizens-based network for twenty-years.

Here is the sad truth:

1. The general public doesn't care ... enough anyway, they want online
spaces that work for them - the more familiar the better
2. People who support this model in theory don't donate, foundations
mostly just give freedom lip service online or fund elites
3. The technologists who could build out the open source tool we use don't help
4. The resistance by most people to signing up for anything new makes
it almost impossible to serve new communities
5. The economic and social diversity of people we can reach via
Facebook is far more inclusive than on our own platform
6. We do generate donations from our neighborhood participants, and
much less so from our forums that are about political city and
state-wide politics, but all the venture money in NextDoor and their
gated community model is finally eroding our public model where we've
been strongest (I'll take an "open" Facebook Group any day over the
NextDoor connect all the wealthier homeowners model any day!)

So, if you value the power people get in democracy from connecting
with each other for two-way conversations, you need to reach them
where they are.

When it comes to Facebook, I've concluded that shaping it for good,
for more local online group formation in public life (my big passion),
will generate more democratic value than ignoring it.

Thanks,
Steve
Steven Clift  -  Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
   cl...@e-democracy.org  -  +1 612 234 7072
   @democracy  -  http://linkedin.com/in/netclift
   http://1radionews.com - My radio app



On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Yosem Companys  wrote:
> I know. I agree.
>
> I have never been thrilled with Steven's selection of Facebook for
> pro-democracy groups.
>
> To protect your privacy and security, stay off Facebook.
>
> But, to build movements, create an account on Facebook (or Twitter or any
> other dominant centralized social network) and try to get as many people to
> join.
>
> One vision we had on Diaspora was to create a HootSuite like app that would
> integrate all of your social networking sites on one dashboard and enable
> you to decide how public you wanted to be. You wanted to connect with a
> friend? You could do it directly from your own server to your friend's own
> server without an intermediary. You wanted to advertise something more
> broadly on Facebook or Twitter? You could do that too. Unfortunately,
> Diaspora never moved away from its pod focus to build a better HootSuite.
>
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Cristina [efecto99] 
> wrote:
>>
>> On 17/02/17 17:24, Thomas Delrue wrote:
>>
>> On February 17, 2017 1:32:46 PM EST, Steven Clift 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
>> "Building Global Community" letter:
>>
>>  https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity
>>
>> This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
>> disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
>> with my contacts at Facebook.
>>
>> You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
>> questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and more:
>>
>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/
>>
>> Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal
>>
>> Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
>> this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
>> E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook Groups:
>> http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc
>>
>> Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
>> leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
>> supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
>> create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
>> inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
>> engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
>> to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me -
>> cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
>> line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
>> that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Steven Clift
>> E-Democracy.org
>>
>> P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):
>>
>> "Facebook guy tells world it needs to use more Facebook or face bad
>> times",  is that roughly the right summary of his 'insights' or am I way
>> off?
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>> (Sent from my mobile device,  please forgive brevity or typos.)
>>
>> It seems as a joke if wouldn't be posted HERE, on *Liberation tech*
>> mailing list: since when Facebook serves to the liberation of people!? I
>> must be reading a lot of fake news about Facebook the last5 ye

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Yosem Companys 
Yep, that's the sad truth.

Yosem

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Steven Clift  wrote:
> Quickly now ... I've been building an open source-based, public
> creative commons structured, non-profit, members-supported
> citizens-based network for twenty-years.
>
> Here is the sad truth:
>
> 1. The general public doesn't care ... enough anyway, they want online
> spaces that work for them - the more familiar the better
> 2. People who support this model in theory don't donate, foundations
> mostly just give freedom lip service online or fund elites
> 3. The technologists who could build out the open source tool we use don't 
> help
> 4. The resistance by most people to signing up for anything new makes
> it almost impossible to serve new communities
> 5. The economic and social diversity of people we can reach via
> Facebook is far more inclusive than on our own platform
> 6. We do generate donations from our neighborhood participants, and
> much less so from our forums that are about political city and
> state-wide politics, but all the venture money in NextDoor and their
> gated community model is finally eroding our public model where we've
> been strongest (I'll take an "open" Facebook Group any day over the
> NextDoor connect all the wealthier homeowners model any day!)
>
> So, if you value the power people get in democracy from connecting
> with each other for two-way conversations, you need to reach them
> where they are.
>
> When it comes to Facebook, I've concluded that shaping it for good,
> for more local online group formation in public life (my big passion),
> will generate more democratic value than ignoring it.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
> Steven Clift  -  Executive Director, E-Democracy.org
>cl...@e-democracy.org  -  +1 612 234 7072
>@democracy  -  http://linkedin.com/in/netclift
>http://1radionews.com - My radio app
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Yosem Companys  wrote:
>> I know. I agree.
>>
>> I have never been thrilled with Steven's selection of Facebook for
>> pro-democracy groups.
>>
>> To protect your privacy and security, stay off Facebook.
>>
>> But, to build movements, create an account on Facebook (or Twitter or any
>> other dominant centralized social network) and try to get as many people to
>> join.
>>
>> One vision we had on Diaspora was to create a HootSuite like app that would
>> integrate all of your social networking sites on one dashboard and enable
>> you to decide how public you wanted to be. You wanted to connect with a
>> friend? You could do it directly from your own server to your friend's own
>> server without an intermediary. You wanted to advertise something more
>> broadly on Facebook or Twitter? You could do that too. Unfortunately,
>> Diaspora never moved away from its pod focus to build a better HootSuite.
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Cristina [efecto99] 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 17/02/17 17:24, Thomas Delrue wrote:
>>>
>>> On February 17, 2017 1:32:46 PM EST, Steven Clift 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I invite everyone to read and comment on Mark Zuckerberg's important
>>> "Building Global Community" letter:
>>>
>>>  https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity
>>>
>>> This is a special Facebook Group I've created to connect lots of
>>> disparate communities for a unified conversation that I will share
>>> with my contacts at Facebook.
>>>
>>> You'll find a link to his letter and posts organized by the five key
>>> questions Mark asks and posts to share media reports and more:
>>>
>>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/buildingglobalcommunity/permalink/502366400151315/
>>>
>>> Or jump straight to his letter: http://po.st/zuckglobal
>>>
>>> Also, while I don't have my first tele meeting with a foundation on
>>> this until next week, now seems like a good time to share
>>> E-Democracy's draft proposal for Local Civic Facebook Groups:
>>> http://po.st/civicfacebookgroupsgoogledoc
>>>
>>> Zuckerberg's letter highlights the absolutely vital role of "engaged
>>> leaders" creating "meaningful groups." E-Democracy's magic mix is
>>> supporting YOU - those leaders - in local communities working to
>>> create local community and civic life Facebook Groups that foster
>>> inclusive and supportive local online communities that foster civic
>>> engagement and informed communities. So, if you want to add your city
>>> to the list of the 22 cities with volunteer interest, email me -
>>> cl...@e-democracy.org - with "Civic Facebook Groups" in the subject
>>> line. We drafted most of this proposal in December, so we are ecstatic
>>> that Facebook's next mission is so well aligned with our scrappy work.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Steven Clift
>>> E-Democracy.org
>>>
>>> P.S. You can jump in deeper now (we are just getting started):
>>>
>>> "Facebook guy tells world it needs to use more Facebook or face bad
>>> times",  is that roughly the right summary of his 'insights' or am I way
>>> off?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thomas
>>> (Sent from my mobile device,  please forgive br

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Thomas Delrue 
On 02/19/2017 12:09 PM, Steven Clift wrote:
> Quickly now ... I've been building an open source-based, public
> creative commons structured, non-profit, members-supported
> citizens-based network for twenty-years.

I am not criticizing your efforts nor your goals, I am criticizing your
choice of technology and platform with and on which you choose to
organize and will (continue to) lambaste that particular choice.
That's a super-important distinction I would like to point out!

I've included a relevant mail from rsk -a member of and contributor to
this list- from back in 2014) to illustrate why using a surveillance
platform like facebook, google or twitter to organize is an /incredibly/
bad idea. I really recommend reading it.
Since you are in the space of citizen-movement and democracy and all,
you may at some point find yourself in the cross-hairs of an unfriendly
adversary, whether that is domestic or abroad, because you have or will
soon have the power to affect change in your area. When that moment
comes about, you'll regret having put your organization, your supporters
and yourself under total surveillance and basically having done your
adversary's work for them for free.

> Here is the sad truth:
>
> 1. The general public doesn't care ... enough anyway, they want online
> spaces that work for them - the more familiar the better

By using surveillance platforms, you (may) exclude people who REALLY
care about these things; you know, the zealots (like me?) you actually
want on your side.
I'd love to help you out & I think that what you're trying to accomplish
is valuable; but I don't allow any of my devices to talk to any entity
that is related to known surveillance platforms (I do a lot of blocking
on multiple levels and using a variety of technologies - the resemblance
to an arms-race does not need to be pointed out to me and is subject to
a separate discussion). So sadly, I can't help you out.

Secondly, by using surveillance platforms, you actively and explicitly
endanger the lives of those who you interact with on said platforms. I
refer to the included mail from rsk for a more detailed description of
this. (really, read it!)

Thirdly, you say that "the general public doesn't care enough" to be
compelled to go to a different URL than facebook (literally, that's what
we're talking about). That's a pretty low bar right there. But yet they
care enough about democracy to do 'something'?
Am I the only one who thinks there's a bit of discrepancy there? If they
won't follow you out of facebook, I'm pretty sure they won't follow you
anywhere.
You're either (a) not giving enough credit to this general public, (b)
you're deluded or (c) you're barking up the wrong tree/population.

If they care about democracy to be useful for your goals, I'm sure
clicking on a URL that brings them to a website that does NOT look like
FB won't put them off. If it does put them off, think carefully what
kind of supporters of your cause they are and whether or not having them
makes a difference.

I think the problem here is the organizer being 'a bit lazy' in setting
up (+ maintaining) something by himself.

> 2. People who support this model in theory don't donate, foundations
> mostly just give freedom lip service online or fund elites

I'm unclear about what you mean by "this model".

> 3. The technologists who could build out the open source tool we use
don't help

Welcome to liberationTech, where we discuss how we can help and what can
be done... Occasionally, we also talk about which approaches would be
'sub-optimal', like today.
As you point out: you use open source tools, you have access to the
source. That is what open source is about. You're not locked in to the
current maintainers/developers of the tool, in contrast to closed source
tools (like facebook, I might add).
I understand you and yours may not have the skill-set to modify said
source, but you can find & pay someone else to do it since you have
access to the source. Snap the source, modify it and redistribute it for
the good of humanity and your cause. You have the freedom to make the
tool (or a fork thereof) do what you need it to do.
I'm sure there are a couple of folks on this list who can help you out
with this.

> 4. The resistance by most people to signing up for anything new makes
> it almost impossible to serve new communities

See my response to #1, but their resistance to actively supporting
democracy is there, right? *That* is something they will do! A different
URL is a big no-no, but *doing something* is a definite YES?

> 5. The economic and social diversity of people we can reach via
> Facebook is far more inclusive than on our own platform

You are correct and it is a problem. And by continuing to use facebook,
you are part of the problem and are only making it bigger & bigger and
worse & worse. By continuing to use facebook, you are (unknowingly)
complicit in the very thing you're fighting (e.g. apathy, decrease in
democracy, etc.).
This is

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Al Billings 
Someone remind me again what the alternatives are to Facebook that are actually 
easy to use for "normal" users and which they will be able to quickly sign up 
and use...

If you say "Diaspora," I'm deleting your email because it isn't, not even a 
little, easy for normal folks to use nor does it have the abilities even a 
Facebook group does for organizing.-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Thomas Delrue 
On 02/19/2017 01:46 PM, Al Billings wrote:
> Someone remind me again what the alternatives are to Facebook that
> are actually easy to use for "normal" users and which they will be
> able to quickly sign up and use...

This is a joke, right?

These "normal" users are not the ones setting up the server, they're the
ones typing in your URL and visiting your site. No special skill is
needed to visit a site or interact with it.
I'm sure 'normal users' can interact with a UI that does not look like
facebook (for the love of all that is good, please let at least that be
true...).

Even setting up your own server isn't that hard, in case you're talking
about the creation and administration of the server.

I'll hand it to you that Diaspora is not a solution though.

-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Thomas Delrue 
On 02/19/2017 01:46 PM, Al Billings wrote:
> Someone remind me again what the alternatives are to Facebook that
> are actually easy to use for "normal" users and which they will be
> able to quickly sign up and use...

Oh, and before I forget, why the need to "sign up"? Why is that a
requirement? If you're doing something that at some point could be
deemed subversive, why would you maintain a list of members of said
activity/thinking that can easily be requisitioned or compromised?

Why does everyone need everyone else to sign up and hand over
information in order to use a simple website? Why does everyone want to
lock up everything behind a login-wall?

Maybe that's the big problem... Everyone thinks that you need to
maintain a list of users and a login form in order to run a simple
website...

-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Yosem Companys 
First of all, I want to commend Steven for all he has done over the years.
He was a pioneer of e-democracy in the 1990s, when the Internet was a mere
curiosity for most people. And Steven has worked arduously over the years
to help foster e-democracy around the world. That is to be commended and
thanked.

That said, Thomas, you raise important points. If we look at the
alternatives out there for grassroots organizing, they tend to be
proprietary like NationBuilder. I do not know any open-source alternatives
off hand.

Please review Rand Strauss's list at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jz_X1ZVCtX2W3etsgjX5iCBylsMBPyUKD7I05ZF0FuI/edit.
Kudos to Rand for putting the list together.

If I want to look for good open-source solutions to start a movement and
I'm not tech savvy, I need either someone to build it for me or I want it
to be easily installed on a server.

That is why Bram Wets' suggestions were so on point -- I repost them here
in case you missed them:

Idea 1:
> An idea list where the Liberationtech community can post ideas for
> projects, upvote (and downvote) them, put your name with an idea to
> contribute.
> This would facilitate your call for ideas/projects ;-)
> I actually like the format of software bugtracking. It maybe can be used
> for such an idea list. Or a github-like structure with pullrequests...
>
> Idea 2:
> An overview of tips, good practices, tools and apps for secure
> communication and digital privacy. And the organisations and platforms that
> work on this topic.
> Yes, there is a lot out there and some organizations already have done
> terrific work. So the focus has to be on the overview, not on doing all
> there work over again.
> Additionally we can add good practices in how to reach people and teach
> them those privacy tools.


Just having a simple wiki of tools and people willing to help for free or a
nominal fee would be a contribution. Being able to evaluate tools with up
or down votes would also be a contribution.

In the meantime, if you go to sites like Progressive Exchange, you will see
that pretty much everyone recommends closed-source software with
questionable security for online organizing. Putting all your activist
friends on NationBuilder, for example, is a security risk. We don't know if
NationBuilder under a different management team might be tempted or forced
to give the entire list to the government for surveillance purposes.

And Rick has outlined the risks of Facebook already, as Thomas writes, so I
won't reiterate those. Maybe we need to build another Diaspora and this
time build it right: open-source, best encryption, Napster-like one-to-one
capabilities, hosting of data in servers in privacy-friendly regimes,
ability to connect to the large social networking sites like Hootsuite for
widespread dissemination, non-profit or at least cooperative status, and so
on.

If this is a project folks are interested in, we can start doing some
research on what it should look like and look for funding sources to make
it happen.

Best,
Yosem

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Delrue 
wrote:

> On 02/19/2017 01:46 PM, Al Billings wrote:
> > Someone remind me again what the alternatives are to Facebook that
> > are actually easy to use for "normal" users and which they will be
> > able to quickly sign up and use...
>
> Oh, and before I forget, why the need to "sign up"? Why is that a
> requirement? If you're doing something that at some point could be
> deemed subversive, why would you maintain a list of members of said
> activity/thinking that can easily be requisitioned or compromised?
>
> Why does everyone need everyone else to sign up and hand over
> information in order to use a simple website? Why does everyone want to
> lock up everything behind a login-wall?
>
> Maybe that's the big problem... Everyone thinks that you need to
> maintain a list of users and a login form in order to run a simple
> website...
>
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/
> mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change
> password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
>
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Thomas Delrue 
On 02/19/2017 02:36 PM, Yosem Companys wrote:
> Maybe we need to build another Diaspora and this time build it right:
> open-source, best encryption, Napster-like one-to-one capabilities,
> hosting of data in servers in privacy-friendly regimes, ability to
> connect to the large social networking sites like Hootsuite for 
> widespread dissemination, non-profit or at least cooperative status,
> and so on.
> 
> If this is a project folks are interested in, we can start doing
> some research on what it should look like and look for funding
> sources to make it happen.

I'll put my money where my mouth is: You got yourself a software
engineer and privacy zealot (the latter of which can work for /and/
against you - just sayin'...).

-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Alberto Cammozzo 
There is a "privacy divide" emerging issue there.

Using FB may help to reach the masses, but some people (activists and
not) will never use a FB account and will be unreachable.
Same for Google: for instance, the link below to Google Docs is
unavailable with my privacy setting.

Some open source and selfhosted alternative to FB is listed here


Alberto


On 19/02/2017 20:36, Yosem Companys wrote:
> First of all, I want to commend Steven for all he has done over the
> years. He was a pioneer of e-democracy in the 1990s, when the Internet
> was a mere curiosity for most people. And Steven has worked arduously
> over the years to help foster e-democracy around the world. That is to
> be commended and thanked.
>
> That said, Thomas, you raise important points. If we look at the
> alternatives out there for grassroots organizing, they tend to be
> proprietary like NationBuilder. I do not know any open-source
> alternatives off hand.
>
> Please review Rand Strauss's list at
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jz_X1ZVCtX2W3etsgjX5iCBylsMBPyUKD7I05ZF0FuI/edit.
> Kudos to Rand for putting the list together.
>
> If I want to look for good open-source solutions to start a movement
> and I'm not tech savvy, I need either someone to build it for me or I
> want it to be easily installed on a server.
>
> That is why Bram Wets' suggestions were so on point -- I repost them
> here in case you missed them:
>
> Idea 1:
> An idea list where the Liberationtech community can post ideas for
> projects, upvote (and downvote) them, put your name with an idea
> to contribute.
> This would facilitate your call for ideas/projects ;-)
> I actually like the format of software bugtracking. It maybe can
> be used for such an idea list. Or a github-like structure with
> pullrequests...
>
> Idea 2:
> An overview of tips, good practices, tools and apps for secure
> communication and digital privacy. And the organisations and
> platforms that work on this topic.
> Yes, there is a lot out there and some organizations already have
> done terrific work. So the focus has to be on the overview, not on
> doing all there work over again.
> Additionally we can add good practices in how to reach people and
> teach them those privacy tools.
>
>
> Just having a simple wiki of tools and people willing to help for free
> or a nominal fee would be a contribution. Being able to evaluate tools
> with up or down votes would also be a contribution.
>
> In the meantime, if you go to sites like Progressive Exchange, you
> will see that pretty much everyone recommends closed-source software
> with questionable security for online organizing. Putting all your
> activist friends on NationBuilder, for example, is a security risk. We
> don't know if NationBuilder under a different management team might be
> tempted or forced to give the entire list to the government for
> surveillance purposes. 
>
> And Rick has outlined the risks of Facebook already, as Thomas writes,
> so I won't reiterate those. Maybe we need to build another Diaspora
> and this time build it right: open-source, best encryption,
> Napster-like one-to-one capabilities, hosting of data in servers in
> privacy-friendly regimes, ability to connect to the large social
> networking sites like Hootsuite for widespread dissemination,
> non-profit or at least cooperative status, and so on.  
>
> If this is a project folks are interested in, we can start doing some
> research on what it should look like and look for funding sources to
> make it happen.
>
> Best,
> Yosem
>
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Delrue  > wrote:
>
> On 02/19/2017 01:46 PM, Al Billings wrote:
> > Someone remind me again what the alternatives are to Facebook that
> > are actually easy to use for "normal" users and which they will be
> > able to quickly sign up and use...
>
> Oh, and before I forget, why the need to "sign up"? Why is that a
> requirement? If you're doing something that at some point could be
> deemed subversive, why would you maintain a list of members of said
> activity/thinking that can easily be requisitioned or compromised?
>
> Why does everyone need everyone else to sign up and hand over
> information in order to use a simple website? Why does everyone
> want to
> lock up everything behind a login-wall?
>
> Maybe that's the big problem... Everyone thinks that you need to
> maintain a list of users and a login form in order to run a simple
> website...
>
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google.
> Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
> .
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Robert W Gehl 
Hello, all --

This discussion is a good moment for me to seek feedback on a project of
mine, the Social Media Alternatives Project (S-MAP, available at
www.socialmediaalternatives.org). The project is meant to capture
screenshots and basic metadata about alternatives to Facebook and other
corporate social media.

It has a blog (a bit inactive now, but will pick up again soon), Omeka
archive, and bibliography.

I'd like feedback on the project, either on this list or off (to
rob...@robertwgehl.org).

The premise of the project is that these alternatives are just as worthy
of study as the mainstream corporate systems, and that they may provide
solutions to problems that this discussion of Facebook is revealing.

There are problems with the S-MAP: for one, I will have to buy a cert to
make it a secure site to protect visitors' privacy. I finally have the
funds to do so and will do so soon.

But a bigger problem is the labor of it. I'd love help: it's hard to
keep track of alternative projects. Many come online for a while and
then disappear. Some make a splash (ello, diaspora). But it's hard to
keep up. Perhaps there's a way to turn it into a more community-driven
archival project than what it is (somewhat a labor of love done by
myself and a PhD student at Utah)?

Again, feedback is welcome. I'm hoping the S-MAP could help groups such
as LibTech.

Regards,

Rob


On 02/19/2017 12:57 PM, Alberto Cammozzo wrote:
> There is a "privacy divide" emerging issue there.
> 
> Using FB may help to reach the masses, but some people (activists and
> not) will never use a FB account and will be unreachable.
> Same for Google: for instance, the link below to Google Docs is
> unavailable with my privacy setting.
> 
> Some open source and selfhosted alternative to FB is listed here
> 
> 
> Alberto
> 
> 
> On 19/02/2017 20:36, Yosem Companys wrote:
>> First of all, I want to commend Steven for all he has done over the
>> years. He was a pioneer of e-democracy in the 1990s, when the Internet
>> was a mere curiosity for most people. And Steven has worked arduously
>> over the years to help foster e-democracy around the world. That is to
>> be commended and thanked.
>>
>> That said, Thomas, you raise important points. If we look at the
>> alternatives out there for grassroots organizing, they tend to be
>> proprietary like NationBuilder. I do not know any open-source
>> alternatives off hand.
>>
>> Please review Rand Strauss's list at
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jz_X1ZVCtX2W3etsgjX5iCBylsMBPyUKD7I05ZF0FuI/edit.
>> Kudos to Rand for putting the list together.
>>
>> If I want to look for good open-source solutions to start a movement
>> and I'm not tech savvy, I need either someone to build it for me or I
>> want it to be easily installed on a server.
>>
>> That is why Bram Wets' suggestions were so on point -- I repost them
>> here in case you missed them:
>>
>> Idea 1:
>> An idea list where the Liberationtech community can post ideas for
>> projects, upvote (and downvote) them, put your name with an idea
>> to contribute.
>> This would facilitate your call for ideas/projects ;-)
>> I actually like the format of software bugtracking. It maybe can
>> be used for such an idea list. Or a github-like structure with
>> pullrequests...
>>
>> Idea 2:
>> An overview of tips, good practices, tools and apps for secure
>> communication and digital privacy. And the organisations and
>> platforms that work on this topic.
>> Yes, there is a lot out there and some organizations already have
>> done terrific work. So the focus has to be on the overview, not on
>> doing all there work over again.
>> Additionally we can add good practices in how to reach people and
>> teach them those privacy tools.
>>
>>
>> Just having a simple wiki of tools and people willing to help for free
>> or a nominal fee would be a contribution. Being able to evaluate tools
>> with up or down votes would also be a contribution.
>>
>> In the meantime, if you go to sites like Progressive Exchange, you
>> will see that pretty much everyone recommends closed-source software
>> with questionable security for online organizing. Putting all your
>> activist friends on NationBuilder, for example, is a security risk. We
>> don't know if NationBuilder under a different management team might be
>> tempted or forced to give the entire list to the government for
>> surveillance purposes. 
>>
>> And Rick has outlined the risks of Facebook already, as Thomas writes,
>> so I won't reiterate those. Maybe we need to build another Diaspora
>> and this time build it right: open-source, best encryption,
>> Napster-like one-to-one capabilities, hosting of data in servers in
>> privacy-friendly regimes, ability to connect to the large social
>> networking sites like Hootsuite for widespread dissemination,
>> non-profit or at least

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Shelley 

On February 19, 2017 11:57:23 AM Alberto Cammozzo  wrote:


There is a "privacy divide" emerging issue there.

Using FB may help to reach the masses, but some people (activists and
not) will never use a FB account and will be unreachable.
Same for Google: for instance, the link below to Google Docs is
unavailable with my privacy setting.

Some open source and selfhosted alternative to FB is listed here


Alberto


Thank you, Alberto.  For the link and for your comment.  I'm one who 
doesn't use Google and have never/ will never use Facebook.  Both are run 
by a corporate mindset and fiscal model that is openly and unapologetically 
hostile to anonymity and to the privacy of 'normal' users by design.  Their 
use poses an unthinkable risk to h/ac(k)tivists, especially in these times.


I thank Yosem for his suggestions as well.

Shelley



On 19/02/2017 20:36, Yosem Companys wrote:
> First of all, I want to commend Steven for all he has done over the
> years. He was a pioneer of e-democracy in the 1990s, when the Internet
> was a mere curiosity for most people. And Steven has worked arduously
> over the years to help foster e-democracy around the world. That is to
> be commended and thanked.
>
> That said, Thomas, you raise important points. If we look at the
> alternatives out there for grassroots organizing, they tend to be
> proprietary like NationBuilder. I do not know any open-source
> alternatives off hand.
>
> Please review Rand Strauss's list at
> 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Jz_X1ZVCtX2W3etsgjX5iCBylsMBPyUKD7I05ZF0FuI/edit.

> Kudos to Rand for putting the list together.
>
> If I want to look for good open-source solutions to start a movement
> and I'm not tech savvy, I need either someone to build it for me or I
> want it to be easily installed on a server.
>
> That is why Bram Wets' suggestions were so on point -- I repost them
> here in case you missed them:
>
> Idea 1:
> An idea list where the Liberationtech community can post ideas for
> projects, upvote (and downvote) them, put your name with an idea
> to contribute.
> This would facilitate your call for ideas/projects ;-)
> I actually like the format of software bugtracking. It maybe can
> be used for such an idea list. Or a github-like structure with
> pullrequests...
>
> Idea 2:
> An overview of tips, good practices, tools and apps for secure
> communication and digital privacy. And the organisations and
> platforms that work on this topic.
> Yes, there is a lot out there and some organizations already have
> done terrific work. So the focus has to be on the overview, not on
> doing all there work over again.
> Additionally we can add good practices in how to reach people and
> teach them those privacy tools.
>
>
> Just having a simple wiki of tools and people willing to help for free
> or a nominal fee would be a contribution. Being able to evaluate tools
> with up or down votes would also be a contribution.
>
> In the meantime, if you go to sites like Progressive Exchange, you
> will see that pretty much everyone recommends closed-source software
> with questionable security for online organizing. Putting all your
> activist friends on NationBuilder, for example, is a security risk. We
> don't know if NationBuilder under a different management team might be
> tempted or forced to give the entire list to the government for
> surveillance purposes.
>
> And Rick has outlined the risks of Facebook already, as Thomas writes,
> so I won't reiterate those. Maybe we need to build another Diaspora
> and this time build it right: open-source, best encryption,
> Napster-like one-to-one capabilities, hosting of data in servers in
> privacy-friendly regimes, ability to connect to the large social
> networking sites like Hootsuite for widespread dissemination,
> non-profit or at least cooperative status, and so on.
>
> If this is a project folks are interested in, we can start doing some
> research on what it should look like and look for funding sources to
> make it happen.
>
> Best,
> Yosem
>
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Delrue  > wrote:
>
> On 02/19/2017 01:46 PM, Al Billings wrote:
> > Someone remind me again what the alternatives are to Facebook that
> > are actually easy to use for "normal" users and which they will be
> > able to quickly sign up and use...
>
> Oh, and before I forget, why the need to "sign up"? Why is that a
> requirement? If you're doing something that at some point could be
> deemed subversive, why would you maintain a list of members of said
> activity/thinking that can easily be requisitioned or compromised?
>
> Why does everyone need everyone else to sign up and hand over
> information in order to use a simple website? Why does everyone
> want to
> lock up everything behind a

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Thomas Delrue 
On 02/19/2017 03:11 PM, Robert W Gehl wrote:
> There are problems with the S-MAP: for one, I will have to buy a cert to
> make it a secure site to protect visitors' privacy. I finally have the
> funds to do so and will do so soon.

I'll point you at https://letsencrypt.org/
I'm not making any statements on their reputability, neither positive
not negative.

-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Rand Strauss 
Thanks for sharing the doc with the list, Yosem.  A shorter URL for the doc is: 
  http://bit.ly/political-sites 
Your additions, corrections and suggestions are welcome.
I just started adding a section to the doc for Wisdom Councils (crowdsourcing 
solutions). 

I don’t want to hijack the list, but I see movement-building as part of the old 
us-vs-them paradigm.  We need movements because there seems to be no other 
reliable way of bringing new ideas to a population and getting palpable 
political support. Marches and rallies that lead to winning elections are 
palpable.

But what if there were a way? What if we invent one?

I’ve designed one and have built most of it, but am a bit stuck. Rather than 
flood the list with my words, I wrote an intro in my blog, if you’re interested:

http://blog.peoplecount.org/project/intro-to-political-power-and-accountability/
 


Thanks,
-Rand Strauss, Mountain View, CA

-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-19 Thread Yosem Companys 
Thanks, Rand, for your message. I am going on a business trip tomorrow, but
I will definitely read your proposal when I return.

In the meantime, I hope others in the list give you feedback. We have an
excellent history of vetting proposals and software code. You just have to
have a thick skin because people will be honest about all the gaps in your
proposed program.

Best,
Yosem

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 6:02 PM, Rand Strauss  wrote:

> Thanks for sharing the doc with the list, Yosem.  A shorter URL for the
> doc is:   http://bit.ly/political-sites 
> Your additions, corrections and suggestions are welcome.
> I just started adding a section to the doc for Wisdom Councils
> (crowdsourcing solutions).
>
> I don’t want to hijack the list, but I see movement-building as part of
> the old us-vs-them paradigm.  We need movements because there seems to be
> no other reliable way of bringing new ideas to a population and getting
> palpable political support. Marches and rallies that lead to winning
> elections are palpable.
>
> But what if there were a way? What if we invent one?
>
> I’ve designed one and have built most of it, but am a bit stuck. Rather
> than flood the list with my words, I wrote an intro in my blog, if you’re
> interested:
> http://blog.peoplecount.org/project/intro-to-political-
> power-and-accountability/
>
> Thanks,
> -Rand Strauss, Mountain View, CA
>
>
-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of 
list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, 
change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at 
compa...@stanford.edu.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-24 Thread Rich Kulawiec 
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 02:23:18PM -0800, Yosem Companys wrote:
> To protect your privacy and security, stay off Facebook.
>
> But, to build movements, create an account on Facebook (or Twitter or any
> other dominant centralized social network) and try to get as many people to
> join.

[ rhetorical "you" throughout ]

I think this is a really bad idea: it's a trap.

These aren't tools that exist to facilitate your cause: these are data
harvesting and surveillance engines that will collect and collate every
scrap of data and metadata your adversaries need.  And once that corpus
exists, it WILL be acquired: it's much too valuable and much too easily
transmitted to have the slightest chance of staying in one place.

This is obvious on inspection: every architectural decision, every design
decision, every operational decision, every policy decision ever made
by these operations supports the goal of data acquisition.  It's what
they were built to do.

All the other stuff?  Shiny distraction.  Bait.  Scam.  Propaganda.

Whether the data's acquired by overt contractual arrangement, whether it's
acquired by force of law, whether it's acquired under the table, whether
it's acquired by hacking, whether it's acquired via individual employees,
it WILL be acquired.

Nobody leaves that rich a source of actionable intelligence just sitting
on the table untouched.

So all that you will accomplish by using "social networks" is:

(a) building the database your enemies need to destroy you and
your allies and your cause

(b) building it in a place where they can easily get it --
if they haven't already had it from the moment you created it.

For example:

If I were working for fill-in-the-blank, I would already have
my own people in place at Twitter and Eventbrite and Meetup
and Facebook and all the rest -- either full-time employees,
or people I've co-opted via bribes, blackmail, or other means.
They'd be there long before you were, just waiting for you to
show up and start spending your time and your effort and your
money handing them as much data/metadata as you possibly can.

I would do much the same thing if I were a sufficiently-organized,
sufficiently-funded group intent on propagating racism or fascism
or poverty or pollution or any of the things likely to trigger
opposition.

Why not?  It's cheap.  It's easy.  It's low-risk.  It's
sustainable.  It's simple.  It's deniable.  It's scalable.
In contrast to other spying/surveillance operations, which can
be expensive, complex, and risky, this is a cakewalk *because
they already built everything for me at their expense*.

What possible reason would I have for not taking advantage of it?

You'll give me data on your supporters, your allies, your
movements, their movements, your family, their families, your
friends, their friends, you employer, their employers, their
spending habits, their operating systems, their web browsers
and mail clients, your meetings -- and much more.

I'm going to end up knowing far more about you and your people
than YOU know.

If you're trying to "liberate" someone or something, the first thing
you need to do is liberate yourself from "social networks".  You should
be trying as hard as you possibly can NOT to generate this data/metadata
at all, anywhere -- instead of not only doing so deliberately, but doing
it in a place that you have zero control over and that your adversaries
can access far more easily than you can.  (Please don't even try to tell
me stuff like "my Facebook group is private".  The only possible response
to a fairy tale like that is mocking laughter.)

If you insist on blundering ahead with "social networks" anyway, because
you're too stubborn to listen or too naive to think it can happen to
you, then as soon as you become a problem for an adversary with the
requisite resources -- that is, as soon as you become effective at
annoying someone with money or power -- they're going to exploit this.

---rsk

p.s. And as if this wasn't enough, in case you haven't noticed, the US
is now demanding "social network" passwords from people entering the
country.  Howls of protest have gone up, and a joint letter from a
coalition of human rights and civil liberties organizations has been
penned.  The combined impact of all this will be zero.  This administration
doesn't care for facts or reason or petitions or protests, only about
imposing its will.  All that's necessary is shouting "TERRORISM!" repeatedly
and accusing opposers of weakness and lack of patriotism and supporting
the bad guys: this is more than enough to get the stupid segment of the
population -- which is the majority -- to support this nonsense.

And by the time it's replaced with a sane one, IF it's replaced with a
sane one, the damage will be done: this

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-24 Thread Yosem Companys 
This is a great email, Rich. I agree with many, if not all, of your points.

Now that Liberationtech is becoming independent, should it try to remain a
mailing list, or should it also pursue ambitious projects to try to solve
these problems?

I pose the question to Rich but also more broadly.

More to come...

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 02:23:18PM -0800, Yosem Companys wrote:
> > To protect your privacy and security, stay off Facebook.
> >
> > But, to build movements, create an account on Facebook (or Twitter or any
> > other dominant centralized social network) and try to get as many people
> to
> > join.
>
> [ rhetorical "you" throughout ]
>
> I think this is a really bad idea: it's a trap.
>
> These aren't tools that exist to facilitate your cause: these are data
> harvesting and surveillance engines that will collect and collate every
> scrap of data and metadata your adversaries need.  And once that corpus
> exists, it WILL be acquired: it's much too valuable and much too easily
> transmitted to have the slightest chance of staying in one place.
>
> This is obvious on inspection: every architectural decision, every design
> decision, every operational decision, every policy decision ever made
> by these operations supports the goal of data acquisition.  It's what
> they were built to do.
>
> All the other stuff?  Shiny distraction.  Bait.  Scam.  Propaganda.
>
> Whether the data's acquired by overt contractual arrangement, whether it's
> acquired by force of law, whether it's acquired under the table, whether
> it's acquired by hacking, whether it's acquired via individual employees,
> it WILL be acquired.
>
> Nobody leaves that rich a source of actionable intelligence just sitting
> on the table untouched.
>
> So all that you will accomplish by using "social networks" is:
>
> (a) building the database your enemies need to destroy you and
> your allies and your cause
>
> (b) building it in a place where they can easily get it --
> if they haven't already had it from the moment you created it.
>
> For example:
>
> If I were working for fill-in-the-blank, I would already have
> my own people in place at Twitter and Eventbrite and Meetup
> and Facebook and all the rest -- either full-time employees,
> or people I've co-opted via bribes, blackmail, or other means.
> They'd be there long before you were, just waiting for you to
> show up and start spending your time and your effort and your
> money handing them as much data/metadata as you possibly can.
>
> I would do much the same thing if I were a sufficiently-organized,
> sufficiently-funded group intent on propagating racism or fascism
> or poverty or pollution or any of the things likely to trigger
> opposition.
>
> Why not?  It's cheap.  It's easy.  It's low-risk.  It's
> sustainable.  It's simple.  It's deniable.  It's scalable.
> In contrast to other spying/surveillance operations, which can
> be expensive, complex, and risky, this is a cakewalk *because
> they already built everything for me at their expense*.
>
> What possible reason would I have for not taking advantage of it?
>
> You'll give me data on your supporters, your allies, your
> movements, their movements, your family, their families, your
> friends, their friends, you employer, their employers, their
> spending habits, their operating systems, their web browsers
> and mail clients, your meetings -- and much more.
>
> I'm going to end up knowing far more about you and your people
> than YOU know.
>
> If you're trying to "liberate" someone or something, the first thing
> you need to do is liberate yourself from "social networks".  You should
> be trying as hard as you possibly can NOT to generate this data/metadata
> at all, anywhere -- instead of not only doing so deliberately, but doing
> it in a place that you have zero control over and that your adversaries
> can access far more easily than you can.  (Please don't even try to tell
> me stuff like "my Facebook group is private".  The only possible response
> to a fairy tale like that is mocking laughter.)
>
> If you insist on blundering ahead with "social networks" anyway, because
> you're too stubborn to listen or too naive to think it can happen to
> you, then as soon as you become a problem for an adversary with the
> requisite resources -- that is, as soon as you become effective at
> annoying someone with money or power -- they're going to exploit this.
>
> ---rsk
>
> p.s. And as if this wasn't enough, in case you haven't noticed, the US
> is now demanding "social network" passwords from people entering the
> country.  Howls of protest have gone up, and a joint letter from a
> coalition of human rights and civil liberties organizations has been
> penned.

Re: [liberationtech] Facebook: Building Global Community - What's your response to Mark Zuckerberg?

2017-02-24 Thread j...@smartercleanup.org 
No need to reinvent the wheel, Tim Berners Lee (creator of the World Wide Web) 
is on it!

https://solid.mit.edu/

One of the core problems with the web is that there is no identity layer 
controlled by the user. SOLID (social linked data) aims to inverse the current 
feudalism model of social media (you are a serf who rents property from the 
real estate monopoly under the agreement that they install surveillance in 
every corner of your digital life).

Instead, you own your identity and all digital services must ask your 
permission to be a part of your life under your terms which you can revoke at 
any time.

This is not a new concept, and many attempts to reform identity management on 
the internet have failed, OpenID and Mozilla's BrowserID/Persona project come 
to mind.

I say we explore and expand on Tim's work and the small community around it. 
He's been thinking hard about this stuff ever since http://

Also, sad to see the news about LiberationTech, but glad that the torch 
continues to burn :D


 On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 11:09:09 -0800 Yosem 
Companys wrote  

This is a great email, Rich. I agree with many, if not all, of your points. 

Now that Liberationtech is becoming independent, should it try to remain a 
mailing list, or should it also pursue ambitious projects to try to solve these 
problems?


I pose the question to Rich but also more broadly.


More to come...


On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Rich Kulawiec  wrote:
On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 02:23:18PM -0800, Yosem Companys wrote:
 > To protect your privacy and security, stay off Facebook.
 >
 > But, to build movements, create an account on Facebook (or Twitter or any
 > other dominant centralized social network) and try to get as many people 
to
 > join.
 
 [ rhetorical "you" throughout ]
 
 I think this is a really bad idea: it's a trap.
 
 These aren't tools that exist to facilitate your cause: these are data
 harvesting and surveillance engines that will collect and collate every
 scrap of data and metadata your adversaries need.  And once that corpus
 exists, it WILL be acquired: it's much too valuable and much too easily
 transmitted to have the slightest chance of staying in one place.
 
 This is obvious on inspection: every architectural decision, every design
 decision, every operational decision, every policy decision ever made
 by these operations supports the goal of data acquisition.  It's what
 they were built to do.
 
 All the other stuff?  Shiny distraction.  Bait.  Scam.  Propaganda.
 
 Whether the data's acquired by overt contractual arrangement, whether it's
 acquired by force of law, whether it's acquired under the table, whether
 it's acquired by hacking, whether it's acquired via individual employees,
 it WILL be acquired.
 
 Nobody leaves that rich a source of actionable intelligence just sitting
 on the table untouched.
 
 So all that you will accomplish by using "social networks" is:
 
 (a) building the database your enemies need to destroy you and
 your allies and your cause
 
 (b) building it in a place where they can easily get it --
 if they haven't already had it from the moment you created it.
 
 For example:
 
 If I were working for fill-in-the-blank, I would already have
 my own people in place at Twitter and Eventbrite and Meetup
 and Facebook and all the rest -- either full-time employees,
 or people I've co-opted via bribes, blackmail, or other means.
 They'd be there long before you were, just waiting for you to
 show up and start spending your time and your effort and your
 money handing them as much data/metadata as you possibly can.
 
 I would do much the same thing if I were a sufficiently-organized,
 sufficiently-funded group intent on propagating racism or fascism
 or poverty or pollution or any of the things likely to trigger
 opposition.
 
 Why not?  It's cheap.  It's easy.  It's low-risk.  It's
 sustainable.  It's simple.  It's deniable.  It's scalable.
 In contrast to other spying/surveillance operations, which can
 be expensive, complex, and risky, this is a cakewalk *because
 they already built everything for me at their expense*.
 
 What possible reason would I have for not taking advantage of it?
 
 You'll give me data on your supporters, your allies, your
 movements, their movements, your family, their families, your
 friends, their friends, you employer, their employers, their
 spending habits, their operating systems, their web browsers
 and mail clients, your meetings -- and much more.
 
 I'm going to end up knowing far more about you and your people
 than YOU know.
 
 If you're trying to "liberate" someone or something, the first thing
 you need to do is liberate yourself from "social networks".  You should
 be trying as