23 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2020
    1. The reason I’m optimistic is not that I think QAnon will disappear in a year but that something like QAnon is proof that people care and people like being involved in pursuit of truth. In QAnon that care and pursuit are dangerously twisted. But it gives people who feel unwelcome in lots of places a sense of purpose. You can make projects and build community that harnesses that positively. The same way bad actors can look at QAnon and find a playbook, so can good actors. We can find similar ways to motivate alienated people in a more constructive way. At least I hope so.
  2. Apr 2020
    1. Finally, any certificate that affords special status, like the ability to work while others are quarantined, will create incentives for people to deliberately infect themselves or game the system with counterfeits. Immunity passports would unfairly “favor individuals who didn’t comply with social distancing and got sick early on,” said Alexandra Phelan of Georgetown University, who works on legal and policy issues related to infectious diseases. And “the idea that there would be a midpoint where some people could resume the right to be citizens and others could not is effectively an apartheid system,” said Sharon Abramowitz, a consultant at UNICEF who studies community responses to pandemics. “It might serve specific public-health ends, but in this society would be very problematic.” History affirms that concern: When yellow fever hit the American South in the 19th century, “immunoprivilege” worsened existing forms of discrimination while creating new ones.

      Morlokowie

    1. I say humility because, as it turns out, unimaginable says more about the limits of our imagination than about reality itself.

      Imagination!

  3. Feb 2020
    1. This is an example of how a smart city could work: a place through which you move in relative anonymity, identified only when needed, and under conditions that allow for significant controls over what can be done with your data. Such a city depends on a responsive, legitimate government, and on devices that are open and transparent, freely auditable and secured through widespread scrutiny of their inner workings. It is a city and a technology and a government oriented around its people, designed to treat people “as an end in themselves and not as a means to something else”.

      Dobry cytat dla władz Warszawy.

    1. But Washington’s extreme dysfunction forces decision-making onto cities and states. To make matters worse, extremists on both the far left and the far right—who make up the majority of voters in low-turnout local primary elections—now hold most of the power. When that happens, balanced decision-making goes right out the window. So instead of weighing the pros and cons of each public policy, reaching a compromise, and then giving everyone certainty and resolution, tech regulation today is a battle zone.
    1. Our digital century was to have been democracy’s Golden Age. Instead, we enter its third decade marked by a stark new form of social inequality best understood as “epistemic inequality.” It recalls a pre-Gutenberg era of extreme asymmetries of knowledge and the power that accrues to such knowledge, as the tech giants seize control of information and learning itself.

      A rare case of a non-privacy argument made against platforms - in this case, it's about inequality of access to knowledge (about ourselves!)

  4. Jan 2020
    1. “Privacy aside, they are building tech to mine our attention and manipulate our behavior just as Web 2 has. There’s nothing particularly decentralized, user-centric, or self-sovereign about their approach.”

      Good argument about going beyond privacy issues.

    1. When I defend internet platforms against what I see as media’s growing moral panic, irresponsible reporting, and conflict of interest, I’m defending the internet itself and the freedoms it affords from what I fear will be continuing regulation of our own speech and freedom.

      Moral panic in reporting about platforms makes it difficult to address the real challenge - of balancing the power of platforms and (authoritarian) governments as they aim to curb freedoms of use.

    2. But as I sat there I saw something missing: the larger goal and soul of the effort and thus of the company and the communities it wants to foster. They have structured this effort around a belief, which I share, in the value of freedom of expression, and the need — recognized too late — to find ways to monitor and constrain that freedom when it is abused and used to abuse. But that is largely a negative: how and why speech (or as Facebook, media, and regulators all unfortunately refer to it: content) will be limited.Facebook’s Community Standards — in essence, the statutes the Oversight Board will interpret and enforce and suggest to revise — are similarly expressed in the negative: what speech is not allowed and how the platform can maintain safety and promote voice and equality among its users by dealing with violations.

      Jarvis raises the issue of a lack of positive vision for online space / communication

    1. Minimizing interaction has some knock-on effects—some of them good, some not. The externalities of efficiency, one might say.

      Byrne makes a good point that interactions, maybe even humanism, become an externality of efficiency in the artificial culture.

    1. The surveillance capitalists didn’t just sell more deodorant; they had built one of the most powerful tools ever invented for winning elections. Roughly the same suite of technologies helped elect Obama, a pragmatic liberal who promised racial progress and a benevolent globalism, and Trump, a strident nationalist who adeptly employs social media to stoke racial panic and has set out to demolish the American-led world order.

      The fact that Obama, and not just Trump used political micro-targetting is often overlooked.

      More importantly, we still lack data as to the actual effects of such microtargetting on electoral behavior.

    1. "Movements," as opposed to institutions, tend to go somewhere, and then they stop. So "Making" was an eclectic tumbleweed of a lot of moving novelties that I enjoyed learning about, such as Web 2.0, open source hard ware, 3Dprinting, artisanal electronics, shareables, fabrication labs, public hacker events, sneaking weird cyberpunk DIY personal projects into dead Italian factories, and even more! I'm happy I was involved with that. It was truly illuminating, and worth every minute. Thanks to Making, I'm much more at ease with topics and activities that would likely have been forever closed to me as a career novelist. I know a lot more about material culture now, and I'm even far more personally handy than I once was. However, fifteen years is a rather long time for any "movement." Nobody talks about "Web 2.0" any more; the Internet was famously "built with O'Reilly books," but Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent, those vast post-Internet entities are not built with O'Reilly books, and O'Reilly was the source of Make, the way Whole Earth was the source of the WELL.

      Sooooo relevant to Creative Commons, is it in a post-movement phase?

    1. One protest sign at the youth climate strike put it succinctly: “You’ll die of old age. We’ll die of climate change.” Today’s kids never had the chance to believe in a simple progress narrative.

      This is the key point, albeit not made very strongly - this is not about progress / wealth - this is abot changing outlooks on survival. Which leads for example to psychological, not economic / social outcomes - like existential dread / anxiety.

  5. Dec 2019
  6. Nov 2019
    1. with books lining the walls of study spaces but not jutting out perpendicularly like the old, high-capacity stacks, so as to leave most of the floor open for tables, chairs, and spaces for group work.

      and for laptops to be used...

  7. Sep 2019
    1. In approaching these challenges, policy makers should avoid the trap of treating all emerging ecosystems as commercial monsters in need of control. Ecosystems can provide new ways of bridging private benefit and public good. IDEO’s CoLab circular economy portfolio advises firms in the textile and food sectors on reconfiguring their ecosystems to encourage the reuse of resources and the reduction of waste. Traipse’s My Local Token provides localized digital currencies for U.S. downtowns that reinforce connections between residents and tourists on one hand and local businesses on the other. Velocia is creating a rewards ecosystem that encourages the use of public transit alongside on-demand services such as carpooling and carsharing to improve people’s commutes.

      Funny to see positive examples of very small ecosystems after earlier examples of big ecoystems that indeed are in need of control

  8. Aug 2018
    1. The idea about an alternative internet may actually be somewhat relevant to our endeavours

      This is an important question - to what extent are we framing an alternative internet (and with it, an alternative public space) and to what extent are we reframing policy shaping the current internet?

  9. Apr 2018
    1. The bigger a platform gets, the harder it is to maintain a particular sense of style. By opening the platform, Pieratt had tried to “convert from a human-driven community into a machine,” he explains. “When we lost the exclusivity, people didn’t really care anymore.” Svpply’s innate sense of uniqueness didn’t survive: “If everyone’s editing Vogue, it wouldn’t be Vogue.”

      This suggests that Big and Open will never be a Commons, as there is no shared sense of uniqueness, identity, commonality. there's just a big open space.

    1. At other times, Zuckerberg tried to repeat a trick he’d deployed successfully in front of the Senate. When asked about data Facebook collects about users, he answered by talking about the data users upload to Facebook. “The content you share, you put there,” he told Democrat Bobby Rush shortly after the congressman asked him the difference between Facebook’s techniques and “the methodology of the American political pariah J Edgar Hoover”. Zuckerberg continued: “You can take it down at any time. The information that we collect, you can choose to have us not collect. You can delete any of it, and, of course, you can leave Facebook if you want.”

      blog

      Good quote distinguishing the content and data layer

  10. Apr 2017
    1. The “domain of one’s own” isn’t owned; it’s leased

      There's a possible solution to this, which would involve having control over a high level domain, and then finding a sustainable way not to collect fees for domains in this TLD. There is a precedent of sorts, from Poland around the turn of the century: the Polish domain registrar registered the art.pl domain, and within that domains artists could get a domain for free. Not sure how the sustainability / economics of that worked.

  11. Jan 2017