This summer, we're doing a series of events on #OpenSocialMedia—the new explosion of alternative platforms and protocols. Up first:
OPEN SOCIAL MEDIA: ORIGIN STORIES
Next Tuesday, online and free for all. Learn more & register: https://www.colorado.edu/lab/medlab/2023/06/06/open-social-media-origin-stories
Nathan Schneider
in reply to Media Economies Design Lab • • •jonny
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •sounds like fun 😀
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •@ntnsndr @rose_alibi @ben @arstechnica @jonny @ingrid @pluralistic @jalcine @mathewi @brewsterkahle @thedextriarchy @robin @natematias @futurebird @bkeegan @cfiesler @interfluidity @jeffjarvis
I'd be happy to come to support Christine, but you're creating a false equivalency between an open standard, ActivityPub, and a couple of commercial land grabs by a billionaire.
I think this is a bad premise for an event.
Nobody should put their time, energy or attention into Blue Sky or Nostr.
Nathan Schneider
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •@evan Thanks for this. I certainly have my own preferences about which kind of ecosystem I hope to see succeed. But these are all approaches that have generated momentum in diverging directions. Putting them in conversation based on that momentum does not mean judging their value equally.
Notably, we're not hearing from the Bluesky or Nostr commercial teams, but from someone involved in early protocol thinking for Bluesky and a longtime open-protocol person who chose to build on top of Nostr.
Nelson Chu Pavlosky
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •@ntnsndr @evan It may not mean judging their value equally, but it doesn't mean that it is a good idea or that it will have good effects on the world.
If RFK Jr. shares a debate stage with Joe Biden, few people will believe he is a serious candidate with a chance of winning, or that he deserves to win. (Perhaps even fewer after watching him speak.) But it will give him airtime to promote anti-vaxx conspiracies, which kill people.
Platforming or "putting them in conversation" is not neutral.
Nathan Schneider
in reply to Nelson Chu Pavlosky • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •Nathan Schneider
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Nelson Chu Pavlosky
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •@ntnsndr Fair, and perhaps I weakened my point by using an extreme example. But I think "we're just hosting conversations" is a cop-out.
Imagine you were forming a panel, and all the speakers were white guys. They might be nice guys doing good work, but the selection of speakers was not neutral.
Imagine a panel about mitigating global heating, with a speaker who is a carbon capture expert. Carbon capture has "momentum," but many consider it a counterproductive distraction. You're taking a side
Nathan Schneider
in reply to Nelson Chu Pavlosky • • •Nelson Chu Pavlosky
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •@ntnsndr Ok, I can respect that.
I'm also a little worried about what might be a reverse ad hominem, or perhaps reputation laundering.
If businesses can hire respected community members for questionable projects, it can be hard to criticize the project because the person running it is well-liked. But just like the worst person you know can make a good point, good people sometimes make bad choices. I want to be able to say Bluesky sucks without it being a referendum on the lead's character.
Nathan Schneider
in reply to Nelson Chu Pavlosky • • •Nelson Chu Pavlosky
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •Nathan Schneider
in reply to Nelson Chu Pavlosky • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •jonny
in reply to Nathan Schneider • • •