Strypey (was at Quitter.se) is a user on mastodon.nzoss.nz. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.

Strypey (was at Quitter.se) @strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz

Nora Bateson interviewed by Doug Rushkoff for his podcast, where they discuss , complexity, and Nora's concept of
teamhuman.fm/episodes/ep-106-n

Stephen Reid interviews Sarah Vero for his podcast, about collaborative retraining of personal habits using Stephen's app
anchor.fm/stephenreid321/episo

Anyone tried this? It's an app designed to help users set up integration with the various free code services hosted by
git.fosscommunity.in/disroot/d

Thinking about getting paid for writing about the commons reminds me of another paradox. If nobody pays me for my writing, it's obvious to everyone that whatever I write is just my opinion. How people rate the accuracy of my writing is based purely on my reputation for doing good research and analysis (or not). If I'm getting paid to write, it risks introducing doubt about my editorial independence. This is a problem that could help to solve. But what do I do in the meantime?

Rich has described his experiments with using Patreon, Medium, and LeanPub to seek revenue for his writing in this piece on the blog:
blog.p2pfoundation.net/paywall

@strypey

I still think the best compromise is simply AGPL and then using crowdmatching via @snowdrift and enterprise-focused solutions like tidelift.com and other approaches to get funding…

Kino.social is a quiet site where you can watch nice films without any distractions or tracking:

kino.social

All of the movies are creative commons or public domain titles, embedded from either PeerTube or Archive.org. (There are no YouTube titles due to YT's invasive privacy policies.)

The selection is still very small as we've just started, and we're trying to avoid the "firehose" approach of archive.org.

Post a reply if you have suggestions for films to be added.

Just did some work on my 'commercial freedom forges' page, collecting a list of businesses that make a sustainable living from developing or deploying free code software. Any suggestions for others to add? Corrections? Other comments?
coactivate.org/projects/disint

I notice that @richdecibels is using to work on a book on 'Patterns for Decentralised Organising'. It's not the sort of platform I'd normally be attracted to (not , dependencies on goOgle and DropBox, puts writing behind a paywall etc). But I'm tempted to try using it to finish 'Email Ate My Life', mainly for the opportunities for reader feedback, and the integrated payment system. Does anyone know of a free code platform that does the same things?
leanpub.com/patterns-for-decen

, according to it's website, is "Humanity's first robot farmers for home, educational, and commercial use. 100% Open-Source". But to what degree is it ?
farm.bot/

@bhaugen I saw your comment on Loomio about annoying auto-playing videos on web pages. I highly recommend the plug-in as a way of stopping this from happening. It stops any third-party JS being run in your browser without your permission, which prevents auto-playing media, but also stops a whole bunch of trackers (), malware, and so on. Since I installed it, my browser runs much faster and never crashes, which it used to do regularly.

To be fair, the article I'm responding to was written in 2016, and Matt's CV is full of exactly the kinds of extractive capitalists people are trying to protect their commons from. Not surprisingly he rails against copyleft and the AGPL just as hard as he rails against the Fair Source license. But in the case of AGPL, I think it's Matt who needs to accept that the world is moving on.

What Matt doesn't want to accept, is that is precisely the answer people are looking for when they try to apply things like the license, the , or the (Peer Production License) to software. They want to protect the software commons from extractive capitalists, who don't want to contribute back to the pool they draw from. Copyleft was created to achieve exactly that protection of the software commons.

Matt needs to reread 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar'. The different between the "free software" and "open source" discourses has never been copyleft vs. non-copyleft, that's a separate debate. It hinges on whether coders are a subset of users, just as writers are a subset of readers ("the bazaar"), or whether they are the digital equivalent of medieval clerics, who can legitimately deny users the ability to read the code of the software they use ("the cathedral").
techrepublic.com/article/fair-

is a new about the growing use of as digital technology stewardship organizations, both small-scale, worker-owned tech shops, and large-scale :
shiftchange.org/about/

I just attended a conference on where we took the group photo next to a "Glory to Labour" monument, and closed the final plenary with a sing-along of 'Solidarity Forever'. Then I come across this book, claiming that the cooperative movement is some kind of management conspiracy to undermine organized labour:
amazon.com/Myth-Mondragon-Coop

Some funds from this pot could also be donated upstream, to the developers of free code packages that the tech cooperatives use in their work, both comercial and pro bono.

I'm particularly intrigued by the way Outlandish use CoBudget to
> "put surplus profit into a central pot and assign funds to pro bono projects

I wonder if this could work on a larger scale? What if a global network of ethical tech cooperatives used a shared CoBudget instance to pool some funds in a central pot, and decide together how to distribute this as funding for pro bono work?