Re: [GNU/consensus] [SocialSwarm-D] This Is (NOT) The War Room

[Nick Jennings]

I second that motion!

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Michael Rogers <address@hidden> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hellekin, thanks for that much needed intervention. I agree that "What
is it you want to achieve?" is the question we should ask ourselves. I
think we'll discover a surprising amount of agreement in our answers.

Answering for myself, I want to support freedom of _expression_, freedom
of association, and the right to a private life. I don't think current
communication systems support those things well enough, so I want to
build communication systems that support them better. I hope we're all
more or less in agreement there.

Where I think we differ is on the question of means. Some of us have
been disagreeing on that question, more or less vocally, since we
first met, and I don't expect we'll ever reach consensus.

THAT'S ABSOLUTELY FINE.

We don't have to agree about means. We don't have to find one
approach, or one project, that we can all get behind and push. We can
and should look at the problem from many angles, try many approaches
in parallel, fork and merge, imitate and appropriate, reuse pieces we
found on the scrapheap. THAT'S HOW SHIT GETS BUILT. Not by bickering
about what "we" should be doing, but by each of us doing something.

Which means it's time for me to shut up and write some code.

Cheers,
Michael

On 20/11/13 16:17, hellekin wrote:
> "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the War Room! What is
> going on here? I demand an explanation." -- President Muffley, in
> Dr. Strangelove
>
> Interestingly, the conversation we're having on the GNU consensus
> and the SocialSwarm mailing lists illustrate a critical point of
> our struggle for privacy on the Internet: that the technology is
> secondary to politics.
>
> When politics does the right thing, then technology can apply;
> when politics goes wrong, whatever the technology, politics will
> try and mussel it.
>
> The workshop at 30C3 is--in my remote understanding--mostly about
> raising a common technical front for most-private-possible
> implementations, to short-circuit politics gone wrong.  There is
> an emergency on that front, as politics is way off the mark
> regarding how user's privacy is constantly violated in electronic
> communications. So we need not only to re-establish political
> control, but also provide technically sound counterparts to the
> will-to-watch-and-listen that all the politicians without exception
> have been showing.
>
> I wish there was a bit more discernment in the reactions of all
> parties involved regarding the objectives of our efforts.  This
> lack of dialogue is counter-productive and no, I'm not interested
> in whose fault is it.  We're not kids.  Just pull yourselves
> together and stop whining.  What is it you want to achieve?
>
> == hk
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSjQceAAoJEBEET9GfxSfMItcIAIy98uRGCs5xSFUUAy0VXCkZ
FgbbjF3kCu2XMrrg0/EqtG+ldc2eNuoKrU9SbOtB5d/IjWEqSrOtoQXYKbSQUMRs
6LW6aWkElVX3O9K8J4T94EvTgH3HDg6Za+nM2n3DZgqov9NYrRbsOhJn7A/W85yb
KWH9mgLqBhcJePrubh7A1OUiucs9izPCaKDaBPQEdaZP1ARvXBOCwQRJKRKyw0Pq
bvSgfupj5LZ1HwZ1VYPLe0mFOFF9ZdJXcfva3f7o4NISly0jVEZiP6XUe0GAIz5+
lSbQ1IqsObOkyQg9UUyKW7+PvJzZwo/YijxOW9Kfs2TGA2ApIvq6x/nDCLhsqUw=
=bRa+

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
SocialSwarm mailing lists:       https://socialswarm.net/en/participate/
Websites:        https://socialswarm.net/  https://wiki.socialswarm.net/
Liquid Feedback:                       https://socialswarm.tracciabi.li/
Digitalcourage, Bielefeld, Germany         address@hidden