I don't understand the prevalent techno-pessimism. Today, technological empowerment is at the greatest level ever in human history. Our computers can run @debian, our phones can run @GrapheneOS and @fdroidorg, our TVs can run @Kodi, we can turn to @wikipedia for vast troves of human knowledge, we can explore the world using @openstreetmap, and we can communicate privately using @matrix or publicly using @Mastodon.
Of course, not everyone is using these great tools. But that's nothing but Kantian self-imposed immaturity.
#opensource #debian #grapheneos #fdroid #kodi #wikipedia #openstreetmap #matrix #mastodon
@hweimer I think the missing component in your perspective is the large personal and social costs involved in making all those things happen.
The people who have burned out or who we have otherwise lost, as a consequence of various factors relating to power and agency over technology; abusers, bad governance, the fundamental power differential vs. tech corps, and so on.
Most of these initiatives exist *in spite of* immense social forces acting against them, and people frequently pay for them with their personal and/or community health, which is not a sustainable approach in the long term.
I think that is where the techno-pessimism is coming from; the knowledge that we are going to lose these things in the not-so-far future if something doesn't change about the larger power differentials involved.
@hweimer I'm sure it looks that way from a user perspective, but from the perspective of the people actually building these things, it frequently just happens out of desperation, with all the psychological toll that that involves.
Don't mistake popularity or scale for sustainability.
@joepie91 Call me cynical, but worsening political and social environments have historically delivered a boost to open solutions. Open source software saw a big boost after Microsoft became Too Big to Regulate. Similarly, the Fediverse saw its biggest influx of new users shortly after Musk took over Twitter.