Strypey @strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz

#NZherald.co.nz, the website of one of our largest daily newspapers, also serves a bunch of third-party user-tracking scripts:
* crwdcntrl.net
* googletagmanager.com
* imrworldwide.com

But not as many as The Spinoff it seems, as their carbon emissions per page view are a tenth of that, at 1.8g:
https://www.websitecarbon.com/website/www-nzherald-co-nz/

Still from dirty energy though.

If you think the smokestack sticking out of RNZ's website is bad, the same site calculates that digital magazine The #Spinoff.co.nz, emits a whopping 18g of carbon with every page view, also from dirty energy:
https://www.websitecarbon.com/website/thespinoff-co-nz/

Maybe that's something to do with serving scripts from at least 12 third-party domains, including known trackers like:
* addthis.com
* googletagmanager.com
* imrworldwide.com
* opmnstr.com
* parsely.com

Perhaps RadioNZ's #Mediawatch program could do a segment reporting on this?

For example, take rnz.co.nz, the website of the totally ad-free and publicly-funded #RadioNZ. What possible use could they have for third-party trackers? But it has no less than 5:
* chartbeat.com
* google-analytics.com
* googletagmanager.com
* imrworldwide.com
* newrelic.com

With estimated carbon emissions of 1.4g for every page visit, and according to:
https://www.websitecarbon.com/website/www-rnz-co-nz/

... it's not even powered by #RenewableEnergy despite #NZ's power supply being mostly from renewable sources.

One of the things I find most fascinating about using the #NoScript add-on with my web browser, is seeing how popular third-party script are, and just how many third-party domains some sites are subjecting their visitors to.
https://noscript.net/

"We must remember that considering the impact of our words and the register in which they are spoken is not genuflection to the oppressor, but love and respect for our peers."

Beatifully put, and bang on.

"At its best, activism is not merely opposition to what is, it is also constructive of what will be. Ours is not a utopia of negatives– a world without this, without that, and so forth– but also a world of affirmatives and possibilities. This swirling gyre of rage and ressentiment is a terrible artefact of oppression, and one we ought not consign ourselves to. It is not a wormhole to liberation, however much we may wish it to be."

Yes! Yes! Yes! Exactly!

"I have long argued (privately) that our current phase of online activism is very much hobbled by the logic of neoliberalism and its emphasis on the individual, in ways that many of us are completely unaware of. Much online activism exalts the particular at the expense of the collective, rewarding individual episodes of catharsis and valuing them with considerably higher esteem than the more hard-nosed and less histrionic work that sustains a community."

Again exactly Fisher's point.

I've always thought this is the most effective way to think about deprogramming folks getting sucked down crypto-fascist rabbitholes. Not railing against nationalism and nations, but advocating forms of patriotism that are inclusive, cooperative, and, hospitable, rather than exclusive, grasping, and paranoid. Inter-nationalism, not national chauvinism. Indigenous liberation movements offer many helpful examples.

"... moving beyond nativism does not mean abandoning nationality, but it does mean thinking of local identity as not exhaustive, and therefore not being anxious to confine one’s self to one’s own sphere, with its ceremonies of belonging, its built in chauvinism, and its limiting sense of security.”
- #EdwardSaid, quoted by Katherine Alejandra Cross

"Time and again, I speak to people of my background in the whisper filled shadows of corners and corridors, quietly fretting about “getting it wrong” or being accused of collaboration or being a sell-out for voicing such criticisms. Even when such whispers have the audacity to become a loud conversation (behind locked doors) they rarely grow into public debates– too many of us fear we’re alone."

Been there.

This article discusses the author's fear of the way her radical community might overreact to some of the things she wants to write about, and the silencing effect this has.

Also, this!
"So much online social justice activism has become hyper-vigilant against sin, great or small, past or present."
- #KatherineAlejandraCross

https://quinnae.com/2014/01/03/words-words-words-on-toxicity-and-abuse-in-online-activism/

"But I’ve been guilty of writing off folks because they said something transphobic, or something ableist, when as a cis person and an able-bodied person the better thing to do may have been to address it honestly, with an open mind, and head on. Not writing off our people, folks that are part of our communities, because they fucked up once? Spending time educating someone on an issue that you’ve had the privilege to get educated on? That’s what operating in #solidarity looks like."

This!

Now this - plus a bit of class analysis of why it's happening - was essentially what the late #MarkFisher was saying in the infamous 'Exit the Vampire Castle'. So why did Andrew Flood prefer Veronica's version over Mark's version, which has so much more in common with his own politics? Perhaps the answer is that Mark was just similar *and* different enough to be in Andrew's outgroup?
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/

"What’s worse, both in real-world organizing and online, this behavior is often rewarded: with pats on the back, social status, followers. We’re waiting and ready to cut folks out when they say the wrong thing. We’ve created an activist culture in which the worst thing we can do is to make a mistake."
- #VerónicaBayettiFlores

http://feministing.com/2013/12/20/on-cynicism-calling-out-and-creating-movements-that-dont-leave-our-people-behind/

"I am so ready to let go of the America’s Next Top Radical model of social justice; it’s unsustainable, unproductive, and frankly a pretty bad strategy. It seems as though some of us – us being folks invested in the advancement of social justice in some way or another – are calling folks out sometimes not to educate a person who’s wrong, but to position themselves a rung above on the radical ladder."
(1/2)

Damn. That was meant to read:
>Yahoo's new owners *refused to allow* the groups to be archived before they deleted them all

#MeaCulpa

The struggle of the last 20 years has been over whether that world outside and beneath the net can be remade in the image of the networked #commons we've built online with #FreeCode software and user-edited encylopedias, so that people can get fed and housed and so on for doing commons work. Or, whether the digital world will be remade in the image of 20th century corporate capitalism. We haven't lost yet, even if it feels like it, but I think we're approaching the endgame.

The #DigitalCommons has always seemed like an excellent proof of concept of this idea of "prefiguration" or "building the new society in the shell of the old". But the digital can only survive nested inside a society that can manufacture computers, generate electricity, and maintain networks, and that's not even the minimum conditions. That society also needs to be able to sustain humans with clean air and water, food, shelter, etc, and provide an education and a level of social safety.