From Open(?) Source(?)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


"For a dictionary entry, I defined commons simply as “resources managed by a community for joint use. ” (Stalder 2017)"

"Or Hess (2008) defines commons as „a resource shared by a group where the resource is vulnerable to enclosure, overuse and social dilemmas. Unlike a public good, it requires management and protection in order to sustain it.”"

"On a more expansive view, commons are conceptualized as something “beyond market and state” (Bollier & Helfrich, 2012)."

"When I speak of the commons here, I want to put into focus a relationship between a group of persons (or sometimes a single person) and a set of cultural objects and/or institutions. That relationship is not characterized by the framework of (public or private) property, but rather by the framework of responsibility, care, custodianship or something similar."

"It is first of all about taking time to foreground processes that tech-giants want us to stay out of sight."

"What does it mean that you communicate through commercial platforms? What would become of your documents if Dropbox / YouTube / Google Drive / Facebook / WhatsApp … radically changed its terms of service?"

"By ignoring the elephant in the room, you seem to accept that your computational practice depends on the fortunes of Sillicon Valley billiardaires. You allow tech giants to embed themselves into institutional life, into publicly funded cultural initiatives, including ones that are dedicated to transformation, political love and commoning. You pull your public, your participants, your co-workers, your students deeper into the intricate webs of commercial agencies that weave themselves into and around us."

"Collectively, we can develop other imaginations for what technology could mean. It is a process of transition: from expecting efficiency to allowing curiosity; from scarcity to multiplicity and from solution to possibility."

  36 times scrolled - 36 times too much

"Im Zeitalter des Internets haben wir weniger Rechte als in der materiellen Welt"

"Anonymous macht viele verschiedene Sachen. Meistens geht Anonymous mit vielen Leuten an die Tür eines Unternehmens-Webauftritts; sie sind eine Menge und können so jemanden den Weg versperren. Das ist mit dem Protestieren vor dem Gebäude eines Unternehmens in der materiellen Welt vergleichbar. Und das erkennen wir als demokratische, politische Aktivität. Also sind die Webproteste von Anonymous auch demokratische, politische Aktivität. Natürlich wollen die Mächte der Unterdrückung dies eher als Verbrechen denn als Protest definieren, und sie nutzen den technologischen Wandel effektiv als Gelegenheit, Proteste zu kriminalisieren. Eine andere Sache, die, so glaube ich, Anonymous-Mitglieder gemacht haben, ist das Ändern von Texten in Webseiten, um die Organisation, deren Webauftritt das ist, zu kritisieren. Das ist das virtuelle Äquivalent eines kritischen Slogans auf einem Plakat, was ganz normale demokratische politische Aktivität ist, doch man nennt es Angriff auf die Webseite. Das Wort Angriff soll den Eindruck vermitteln, dass dies etwas anderes als ein politischer Protest ist und Menschen für das Protestieren ins Gefängnis bringt."

"Hacken, als allgemeiner Begriff, ist eine Lebenseinstellung. Was macht Ihnen Spaß? Wenn das Finden von spielerischen schlauen Möglichkeiten, die für unmöglich gehalten wurden, Ihnen Spaß macht, dann sind Sie ein Hacker."

"Aber mit Software ist das Problem, dass sie viel komplizierter ist als alles andere. Der Grund ist, dass Software von Natur aus einfacher zu entwerfen ist als materielle Produkte"

"Es ist ein verunglimpfenderer Begriff! Sie wollen sagen, dass die gemeinsame Nutzung das moralische Äquivalent für den Angriff auf Schiffe ist. Ich stimme mit dieser Position nicht überein, also nenne ich die gemeinsame Nutzung nicht Piraterie. Ich nenne es Teilen."

"Was sie machen können ist die Nutzer jedesmal zu warnen, wenn sie eine Sitzung starten: ‚Vorsicht! Alles, was du hier postest ‑ selbst wenn du angibst, dass es nur bestimmte Personen sehen sollen ‑ könnte aufgrund von Ereignissen außerhalb deiner Kontrolle veröffentlicht werden. Also denke zweimal über alles was du hier posten willst nach. Und denke daran, dass, wenn du dich das nächste Mal um einen Arbeitsplatz bewirbst, das Unternehmen verlangen könnte, alles in deinem Benutzerkonto anzuzeigen. Deine Schule könnte das ebenso fordern. Und wenn deine Mitteilung wirklich privat sein soll, sende sie nicht auf diese Weise.‘ Das ist eine Sache, die sie machen sollten."

"Freie Software bedeutet Software, die die Freiheit des Nutzers und die Gemeinschaft des Nutzers respektiert. Bei Software gibt es nur zwei Möglichkeiten; entweder der Nutzer kontrolliert das Programm oder das Programm die Nutzer. Der erste Fall ist Freie Software, weil, damit die Nutzer eine wirksame Kontrolle der Programme haben, wir bestimmte Freiheiten benötigen. Diese Freiheiten sind die Kriterien für Freie Software. Wenn die Nutzer nicht das Programm kontrollieren, dann kontrolliert das Programm die Nutzer und der Entwickler das Programm. Das bedeutet, dass das Programm ein Instrument ungerechter Macht ist. Freie Software ist also Software, die die Freiheit des Nutzers respektiert, und die Idee der Freie-Software-Bewegung ist: unfreie Software ist eine Ungerechtigkeit, lassen Sie uns damit Schluss machen. Lassen Sie uns zunächst entkommen, und dann lassen Sie uns helfen, jeden anderen zu entkommen. Lassen Sie uns mit dieser Ungerechtigkeit Schluss machen."

"“GNU social was created as a companion to my earlier project, GNU FM, which we created to build the social music platform, After only a few short months, had over 20,000 users and I realized I didn’t want to be another social media silo like MySpace or Facebook, so I came up with this vague idea called GNU social. A few prototypes were built, and eventually we started making GNU social as a series of plugins for Evan Prodromou’s StatusNet project, with some help from Ian Denhardt, Craig Andrews and Steven DuBois.”

You could think of all this as Fediverse 0.1, the gestation that was happening as it slumbered in the world wide womb, waiting to be born.

“Later”, continues Matt, “StatusNet, GNU social and Free Social… would merge into a single project called GNU social.”

After this was announced in 2013, lots of people who had still been running StatusNet sites, and getting concerned about the lack of active development as Evan worked in, started migrating to the first release of GNU Social, and other folks started setting up new GNU Social servers. Some of them continued to or started to federate using OStatus. Users who had been missing StatusNet since switched to (including yours truly) started finding and joining GNU Social servers. The Fediverse 1.0 is born."

"The growing GNU Social Fediverse then sets out to try and make friends with some of the other kids in the federated social networking neighbourhood; particularly established players like, Diaspora*, Friendica (formerly Mistpark), and Hubzilla (formerly Red Matrix), but also up and coming projects like Tent, the Matrix, and the skinny jeans wearing rebels of the IndieWeb"

"Back in the Fediverse, a few developers get bored with trying to hack around a bunch of baked in architectural limitations in GNU Social (or maybe PHP itself, I’m guessing, I don’t know their reasons), and develop a bunch of add-ons or replacements for the GNU Social server software (formerly StatusNet, remember?), in a few different languages. Qvitter, started by Hannes in 2013, is a Javascript layer used on the Quitter sites to give a more Twitter-ish user experience. In 2016, Maiyannah Bishop forks GNU Social to start the PostActiv project, which is not GNU Social but still part of the Fediverse, and Eugen Rochko starts working on Mastodon in Ruby on Rails, which is not even a GNU Social fork but is still part of the Fediverse and uses the same GNU AGPL software license. With a cluster of different server-side packages available for those who want to set up their own node in the OStatus-powered federated network that started with StatusNet/ GNU Social, this is the point where I feel I can say the Fediverse has turned 2.0.

So to sum up, there’s been a lot of different things under a lot of different names."

"One of such labels is that of the federated network, a term often mentioned when talking about the architecture of (alternative) social networks such as Diaspora or Lorea. What is a federated network, though? The word itself hints at similarities with the political concept of a federation"

"Baran envisions a network as an interconnected set of nodes, agents that can send and receive data. These nodes can then be organized in various ways, and this organization is what distinguishes the types of network architecture from each other."


  • Network: A collection of interlinked nodes that exchange information.
  • Node: The most basic part of the network; for example, a user or computer.
  • Link: The connection between two nodes.
  • Server: A node that has connections to a relatively large amount of other nodes"

"The “traditional” network architecture is the centralized network, where all nodes send their data to one central node (a server), which then sends the data to the intended recipient. Then there’s the distributed network, where there’s no central server and each node is connected to various other nodes; data simply “hops” through whichever nodes allow for the shortest route to the recipient. Finally there’s the decentralized network, which could be characterized as a distributed network of centralized networks."

"Writing about the alternative social networks Diaspora and Lorea, she notes that “[decentralization] means that data is not stored on the servers owned by one central actor, but on federated servers”. In this instance, decentralization and federation do seem to be more or less two ways of saying the same thing, where “federation” is a mode of server organization that makes the network of these servers decentralized."

"According to the announcement of their Federated Social Web Summit in 2010, federation (in the context of social networks) is “letting people on different social networks follow each other”. The focus is in this case not so much on network architecture, but rather on data exchange"

"Looking at just the “federated” label, what most authors seem to agree on is that a federated network is the same “distributed network of centralized networks” that Baran called decentralized. So in that sense, “federated” has replaced “decentralized” in its original meaning, while “decentralized” has been adopted in various different ways, mostly as an umbrella term"

"The most workable middle ground, then, seems to be that a federated network is a distributed network with each node of this distributed network being a centralized network. Such a federated network is a type of decentralized network, with another type of such a network being the distributed network."



can I be a DJ now?

How can I move the timeline?

I need a rhythm.

How can I view the whole timeline?

How can I edit the rhythm track?

Okey, I will just do a new one.

And now a background sound.

Uh what noise is this?

Maybe I need to read some tutorials...


Oh nice, a short introduction!

Why does it not cut the video?

Ah in this manner it works way more intuitively.

Haha, this is funny.

Cool, i think I know how it works.


All in One!

I want to have all my mail-accounts in here!

Newest mails should be on top of the list.

That was easy!