Constructive measures to help people communicate freely
Andreas Nilsson
an at bahnhof.se
Mon Mar 26 06:14:23 UTC 2018
Hi.
I think this is an important topic. I do not know much about what you
call "social media", I would prefer to have a personal site where I
post the data I want the public to see. I use Facebook almost solely
for instant messaging with close friends, so speaking of IM what tools
are there for this kind of communication? I didn't see you bring
anything up about that.
There is also conference communication and phones, also important topic
to bring up I think.
I for example do not have a mobile phone, but I do have an IP based
phone and I am not particularly fond of calling without the option to
encrypt the dialog.
Ani
On Sun, 2018-03-25 at 18:08 +0200, Paul Boddie wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There has been a lot said recently about Facebook, Google, and other
> entities
> that facilitate online communication through services that have
> hidden impacts
> on people's freedoms. But as I noted before, it is more constructive
> to focus
> on how we in the Free Software community can help others communicate
> using
> more respectful tools and services.
>
> This isn't just in the context of recent discussions about Mozilla
> and
> Facebook: I also mentioned it when Daniel suggested a plugin to
> remind people
> about how their use of proprietary, exploitative services might be
> impacting
> their freedom and those of others. While I understand what the
> motives are for
> doing something like this, telling people that they are bad only
> really
> appeals to people who like punishing themselves or who admit to
> weakness and
> want someone else to apply the discipline.
>
> Now, it is often the case that any negative message is accompanied by
> a
> positive one. One might suggest a range of alternatives that are
> better for
> people. So, people have already suggested that the FSFE and the
> community in
> general promote things like Diaspora, GNU Social, Mastodon, or
> whatever. But I
> don't think this goes far enough.
>
> In the context of the FSFE, one may consider the campaigns that are
> occasionally run by the organisation. An interesting example is the
> PDF
> Readers campaign which attempted to promote Free Software PDF reader
> applications and to demand that public organisations advertising the
> proprietary Adobe Reader stop doing so.
>
> Much of the focus of the PDF Readers campaign appeared to be on
> getting those
> organisations to stop giving Adobe's software free advertising. I
> support such
> efforts and even attempted to participate in them. But the other side
> of the
> campaign involved promoting the Free Software alternatives, and it
> was in this
> area where I think much more should have been done.
>
> Anyone going to the pdfreaders.org site will see a list of
> applications, and
> the diversity of Free Software means that there is plenty of choice,
> but a
> consequence of this is that it would have been awkward for people to
> take the
> intended positive action when confronted with such information.
> Admittedly, it
> is a complicated problem to solve: how can such a campaign suggest a
> relatively simple, concrete action that helps the user to do the
> right thing?
>
> But it goes beyond whether people can get started with the right
> solutions.
> Many of us will have been faced with documents that need certain
> features in
> the application we are using. Things like forms in PDF documents,
> for
> instance. It is likely that some of the suggested solutions do not
> support
> forms, and others may have problems with whatever Adobe's authoring
> tools
> emit. Standards-compliance is difficult, especially when proprietary
> software
> companies often indulge in a bit of "front-running" to lock people
> into their
> own products.
>
> In other words, promotion and advocacy are not enough. Support has to
> be given
> for people to actually develop and improve the solutions we suggest.
> And the
> combination of solutions suggested for meeting people's needs must be
> coherent
> and provide an obvious path for them to follow. Where there are
> deficiencies
> or gaps in those solutions, support has to be given to make the
> campaign
> message credible rather than "here's some cool stuff, you're on your
> own now".
>
> Another relevant example involves things like the use of encryption
> technologies for personal communications. How many times have we been
> told
> that encryption is important only to be confronted with lengthy
> "instructive"
> texts full of caveats and the hedging of positions on things like
> key
> management? That maybe the way to adopt such things is to become an
> expert
> yourself and, by the way, good luck! People just get put off from
> doing
> anything at all because at any moment someone might berate them for
> "doing it
> all wrong".
>
> With such considerations in mind, does anyone else think that the
> topic of
> genuinely free communication might be worthy of a comprehensive
> campaign? One
> that would focus on solutions and not problems.
>
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at lists.fsfe.org
> https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>
> This mailing list is covered by the FSFE's Code of Conduct. All
> participants are kindly asked to be excellent to each other:
> https://fsfe.org/about/codeofconduct
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20180326/0b412b27/attachment.sig>
More information about the Discussion
mailing list