[liberationtech] Fw: [progressiveexchange] Facebook interfering with activism Pages

[Jen Savage]

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Top-down administrative control lends itself to that.

I guess you could do p2p social networking, but there could be speed issues.
Federated servers like with jabber would work best. Then have a bunch of
servers that keep track of "twitter"/"<insert social networking service
here>" servers that you can submit to, much like submitting your key to a
public key server.

But ultimately, if it takes any amount of work for a user to configure, it
won't catch on.

-Jen
p.s. I'm not attacking the idea of corporate control by saying this, but I
do think corporations need competition to keep them honest.


On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Jim Youll <jyoull at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> I think it's not "corporate structure" at issue. I think we would do well
> to stay away from attacks on the "nature of corporations" and so on. These
> arguments tend to paint with a very broad brush. Truth is, every business is
> different, run by different people, afraid of different things. Corporations
> can be very predictable, yes, but individually predictable, not as a class.
>
> Also, the corpo-bash thing tends to not be listened to because it's been so
> over-used.
>
> It's not corporations we are against, it's censorship.
>
> Top-down administrative control has historically been the most efficient
> (least code, fewest never-before-solved issues) way of dealing with what
> most would agree /are/ flagrant abuses of a communication space.. what do
> you do about a "Yosem Companys is a serial axe murderer" page, trademark
> infringement (let's say true infringement), or other instances of difficult,
> illegal or threatening material? Facebook owns the database and can just
> "fix" it.
>
> I worked on a draft and demo project a few years ago in which we modeled a
> self-moderation public forum in which the system (not a person, but code)
> was responsive to the collective actions of the users in accepting/rejecting
> topics for discussion, discussion content, and users themselves.. but then
> you can get into a "tyranny of the majority" situation, so we also had a way
> for the least popular views to be seen or at least found... turtles all the
> way down...
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 21, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Yosem Companys wrote:
>
> This is why we need peer to peer solutions like Diaspora to provide a
> platform for activists.  Otherwise the corporate structure of these tech
> firms can always interfere in one way or another to direct activity.
>
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Jillian C. York <jilliancyork at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi - Jillian York here (have been lurking for a couple of weeks).  I was
>> interviewed for that article and would like to add this just-released paper
>> I wrote on the same subject: http://bit.ly/8ZN8PH
>>
>> The paper ("Policing Content in the Quasi-Public Sphere") looks at the
>> content regulation policies of 5 social media platforms--Twitter, Flickr,
>> Blogger, Facebook, and YouTube.  I won't give away the ending ;)
>>
>> -Jillian
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Katrin Verclas <katrinverclas at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Thoughts, colleagues!
>>>
>>> ------Original Message------
>>> From: Colin Delany
>>> Sender: Progressive Exchange
>>> To: Progressive Exchange
>>> ReplyTo: Colin Delany
>>> Subject: [progressiveexchange] Facebook interfering with activism Pages
>>> Sent: Sep 20, 2010 3:34 PM
>>>
>>> Activists upset with Facebook
>>> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42364.html
>>>
>>> Claims they've violated terms of service.  Discuss.
>>>
>>>
>>> --cpd
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ~~~----~~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
>>> Group Links:
>>>
>>>  * To reply to sender (Colin Delany):
>>>   cpd at epolitics.com
>>>
>>>  * To view sender's profile, click this link:
>>>   http://www.progressiveexchange.org/profile.htm?mode=vp&pid=2401
>>>
>>>  • To visit this group on the web, go to:
>>>   http://www.progressiveexchange.org/group.htm?igid=3
>>>
>>>  • To send email to entire group:
>>>   Discuss at progressiveexchange.org
>>>
>>>  • To email the group moderator(s) (Eve, Jonathan, Steve, Marc):
>>>   Discuss-moderator at progressiveexchange.org
>>>
>>>  • UNSUBSCRIBE or change delivery settings:
>>>
>>> http://www.progressiveexchange.org/p.htm?m=qs&em=katrinverclas@gmail.com&sk=vTtA2Z
>>>
>>> Powered by GoLightly, ProgressiveExchange's Collaboration Platform of
>>> Choice.
>>> http://www.golightly.com/
>>> ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~~~~-~--~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent via BlackBerry
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> liberationtech mailing list
>>> liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
>>>
>>> Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
>>>
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Berkman Center for Internet and Society |
>> https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/jyork
>> jilliancyork.com | @jilliancyork | tel: +1-857-891-4244
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> liberationtech mailing list
>> liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
>>
>> Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
>>
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> liberationtech mailing list
> liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
>
> Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
>
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> liberationtech mailing list
> liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu
>
> Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to:
>
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20100921/ff855d93/attachment.html>