mirror of
https://github.com/markqvist/Reticulum.git
synced 2026-10-25 18:40:17 -04:00
Cleanup
This commit is contained in:
Mark Qvist
parent
9397114f56
commit
900b4c607c
4 changed files with 40 additions and 44 deletions
|
|
@ -1014,18 +1014,18 @@ Headcount
|
|||
|
||||
This "movement" does have a headcount. It is not in the hundreds, and it is not in the dozens. It is a small number of people who appear, in various combinations and under various names, in the following roles:
|
||||
|
||||
* Creators of the machine-generated "Reticulum implementations" examined in this chapter
|
||||
* Creators of the machine-generated "Reticulum implementations" examined in this chapter.
|
||||
* Creators of articles praising those implementations and lamenting the state of the
|
||||
reference, its moral shortcomings, its unavailability or lack of something it already has.
|
||||
* Commenters "defending" the implementations when they are evaluated reasonably and critically,
|
||||
most often by attempting simply to derail the discussion.
|
||||
* Critics of the Reticulum License on "open source" grounds
|
||||
* "Concerned community members" objecting to the maintainer's conduct
|
||||
* Critics of the Reticulum License on "open source" grounds.
|
||||
* "Concerned community members" objecting to the maintainer's conduct.
|
||||
* Campaigners on online platforms; and
|
||||
* In some cases, a single individual performing *several* of these roles at once, under
|
||||
different names, in the same week.
|
||||
|
||||
The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppet accounts are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.
|
||||
The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppets are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.
|
||||
|
||||
This is the most interesting single fact about the "movement": **It isn't one. It is a synthetic cast**, held together mostly by LLM-glue, reddit handles and hysteria. A cast is not a constituency. It performs; it does not represent. The difference matters quite a bit, because a great deal of this "movement's" imagined power comes from the assumption that the *plural form* is actual evidence of plurality. If that sentence seemed opaque, notice how many times a statement or article uses "we" instead of "I", and it will be less so.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1091,7 +1091,7 @@ The register of the campaign is almost always the register of solicitude: "we ar
|
|||
|
||||
**Event seizure**
|
||||
|
||||
Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to *prior agreement with said moderator*) becomes "the maintainer shutting down dissent". Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes "the founder retreating". The license becomes "the enclosure". The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.
|
||||
Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to *prior agreement with said moderator*) becomes "the maintainer shutting down dissent". Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes "the founder retreating". The license becomes "the enclosure". The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.
|
||||
|
||||
**The legitimacy circuit**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1108,11 +1108,11 @@ A Persistent, But Fragile Triad
|
|||
|
||||
This chapter as a whole has documented three fronts: The legal-ideological attack on the license (:ref:`Open Source Means Open Source<brandolinis-opensource>`), the substitution and usurpation pattern in machine-generated implementations (:ref:`Assistance Versus Machine Substitution<brandolinis-assistance-versus-substitution>`), and the takeover narratives examined in this section. They are three fronts of the same operation, run by the same cast.
|
||||
|
||||
* The license attack and other urgency-engineered narratives are the *cover*\ : They supply
|
||||
* The license attack and other urgency-engineered narratives are the *cover*: They supply
|
||||
the ideological justification for treating the reference as illegitimate, and needing replacement.
|
||||
* The ports are the *inventory*\ : they supply the "replacements" that the narrative claims
|
||||
* The ports are the *inventory*: they supply the "replacements" that the narrative claims
|
||||
the ecosystem needs.
|
||||
* The takeover narrative is the *objective function*\ : the repeated, persistent, escalating claim that
|
||||
* The takeover narrative is the *objective function*: the repeated, persistent, escalating claim that
|
||||
the reference should be replaced, and that the speakers themself are the natural heirs.
|
||||
|
||||
Each front depends on the others, and all three depend on a single, fragile assumption: That their audience cannot count. Restore the count, and the charade collapses into what it is:
|
||||
|
|
@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ appearance of a constituency they do not have, in service of a takeover they can
|
|||
What The Pattern Is Not
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
||||
It is important, to also say what this pattern is *not*\ , exactly because the campaign depends on being mistaken for such things.
|
||||
It is important, to also say what this pattern is *not*, exactly because the campaign depends on being mistaken for such things.
|
||||
|
||||
**It is not criticism**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ The Reticulum community has always had lively, rigorous criticism - of decisions
|
|||
|
||||
**It is not a community**
|
||||
|
||||
Communities *build things*\ , maintain them, and have skin in the game; long-term users, operators of nodes, authors of real applications, people whose traffic flows through the network every day. A community has a stake. The "movement" only has an agenda.
|
||||
Communities *build things*, maintain them, and have skin in the game; long-term users, operators of nodes, authors of real applications, people whose traffic flows through the network every day. A community has a stake. The "movement" only has an agenda.
|
||||
|
||||
**It is not a debate**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1158,7 +1158,7 @@ The consequences are very real:
|
|||
editorial embellishments; they are the mechanism by which real users are induced to run
|
||||
unverified, and often destructive software.
|
||||
* **Erosion of the currency of trust**. Every manufactured scandal, every fluently polite smear, every
|
||||
fabricated "movement" debases the currency of trust and degrades it for **everyone**\ ;
|
||||
fabricated "movement" debases the currency of trust and degrades it for **everyone**;
|
||||
including, most of all, the honest projects that come after. This is deep harm, and
|
||||
it is the primary reason this chapter exists.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1181,8 +1181,7 @@ For anyone who encounters the pattern fresh, here is a proposal on how to recogn
|
|||
* Sockpuppet theater: The same person or footsoldiers thereof appearing as several "supporters"
|
||||
(and occasionally slipping up mid-performance).
|
||||
* Articles, ports, and forum threads that cite and reference each other in a closed loop.
|
||||
* The immediate, reflexive turn to "bullying", "exclusion" and "toxicity" whenever the record is
|
||||
documented.
|
||||
* The immediate, reflexive turn to "bullying", "exclusion" and "toxicity" whenever a claim is refuted.
|
||||
* A complete absence of engagement with the substance of the answers given, and a complete
|
||||
absence of stake in the network itself.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1303,7 +1302,7 @@ Defence Of The Commons
|
|||
|
||||
The networks need defending - not because they are under severe physical attacks (yet), but because attention, talent and resources is being stolen from them, trust is being mined against them, and its newcomers are being harvested by the machinery documented in this chapter. Defence, for a commons, has specific shapes, and it is not what the theater would like it to be.
|
||||
|
||||
* Defence is **documentation**: Records, kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
* Defence is **documentation**: Records kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
answered, and what turned out true.
|
||||
* Defence is **a headcount**: Calm, unexcited reminders that a "movement" might just be a dozen
|
||||
people having a tantrum.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1002,18 +1002,18 @@ the surface is where this project invested.</p></li>
|
|||
<span id="brandolinis-headcount"></span><h3>Headcount<a class="headerlink" href="#headcount" title="Link to this heading">¶</a></h3>
|
||||
<p>This “movement” does have a headcount. It is not in the hundreds, and it is not in the dozens. It is a small number of people who appear, in various combinations and under various names, in the following roles:</p>
|
||||
<ul class="simple">
|
||||
<li><p>Creators of the machine-generated “Reticulum implementations” examined in this chapter</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Creators of the machine-generated “Reticulum implementations” examined in this chapter.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Creators of articles praising those implementations and lamenting the state of the
|
||||
reference, its moral shortcomings, its unavailability or lack of something it already has.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Commenters “defending” the implementations when they are evaluated reasonably and critically,
|
||||
most often by attempting simply to derail the discussion.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Critics of the Reticulum License on “open source” grounds</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>“Concerned community members” objecting to the maintainer’s conduct</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Critics of the Reticulum License on “open source” grounds.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>“Concerned community members” objecting to the maintainer’s conduct.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Campaigners on online platforms; and</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>In some cases, a single individual performing <em>several</em> of these roles at once, under
|
||||
different names, in the same week.</p></li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
<p>The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppet accounts are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.</p>
|
||||
<p>The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppets are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.</p>
|
||||
<p>This is the most interesting single fact about the “movement”: <strong>It isn’t one. It is a synthetic cast</strong>, held together mostly by LLM-glue, reddit handles and hysteria. A cast is not a constituency. It performs; it does not represent. The difference matters quite a bit, because a great deal of this “movement’s” imagined power comes from the assumption that the <em>plural form</em> is actual evidence of plurality. If that sentence seemed opaque, notice how many times a statement or article uses “we” instead of “I”, and it will be less so.</p>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section id="recycled-wine-fermenting">
|
||||
|
|
@ -1066,7 +1066,7 @@ is not the last resort of the wronged; it is the standard reflex of the exposed.
|
|||
<p><strong>Weaponized concern</strong></p>
|
||||
<p>The register of the campaign is almost always the register of solicitude: “we are worried about the ecosystem”, “we just want what is best for the community”, “this is about the future of the project”. The concern is directed, without exception, at the things the campaign wants changed, and the change it wants is always the same: <strong>The replacement of the reference’s authority with its own</strong>. Concern is the <em>costume</em>; capture is the choreography. It is the oldest form of cheap power grab in the book.</p>
|
||||
<p><strong>Event seizure</strong></p>
|
||||
<p>Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to <em>prior agreement with said moderator</em>) becomes “the maintainer shutting down dissent”. Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes “the founder retreating”. The license becomes “the enclosure”. The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.</p>
|
||||
<p>Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to <em>prior agreement with said moderator</em>) becomes “the maintainer shutting down dissent”. Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes “the founder retreating”. The license becomes “the enclosure”. The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.</p>
|
||||
<p><strong>The legitimacy circuit</strong></p>
|
||||
<p>The campaign invests heavily in the places where legitimacy is minted: Conference talks, blog platforms, social threads, and forums - presented as if these appearances constituted some sort of ecosystem-wide groundswell rather than the same dozen people moving through the same circuit. The LLM-generated articles cite the LLM-generated ports; the ports are praised in the articles; the managers of the ports spread the articles, and echo them on the forums and internet platforms; the conference presentations cite the forums. Random bypassers with the need for a cause watch the conference presentations and take on the holy duty of Internet Soldier. The circuit is closed, self-referential, and (to a reader encountering it fresh) convincing. It is also, entirely, <strong>a loop of bullshit</strong>.</p>
|
||||
<p><strong>The prior-work minefield</strong></p>
|
||||
|
|
@ -1131,8 +1131,7 @@ work of plurality.</p></li>
|
|||
<li><p>Sockpuppet theater: The same person or footsoldiers thereof appearing as several “supporters”
|
||||
(and occasionally slipping up mid-performance).</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Articles, ports, and forum threads that cite and reference each other in a closed loop.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>The immediate, reflexive turn to “bullying”, “exclusion” and “toxicity” whenever the record is
|
||||
documented.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>The immediate, reflexive turn to “bullying”, “exclusion” and “toxicity” whenever a claim is refuted.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>A complete absence of engagement with the substance of the answers given, and a complete
|
||||
absence of stake in the network itself.</p></li>
|
||||
</ul>
|
||||
|
|
@ -1224,7 +1223,7 @@ the same as being part of it, and it is <strong>not</strong> the first thing you
|
|||
<span id="brandolinis-defence-of-commons"></span><h3>Defence Of The Commons<a class="headerlink" href="#defence-of-the-commons" title="Link to this heading">¶</a></h3>
|
||||
<p>The networks need defending - not because they are under severe physical attacks (yet), but because attention, talent and resources is being stolen from them, trust is being mined against them, and its newcomers are being harvested by the machinery documented in this chapter. Defence, for a commons, has specific shapes, and it is not what the theater would like it to be.</p>
|
||||
<ul class="simple">
|
||||
<li><p>Defence is <strong>documentation</strong>: Records, kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
<li><p>Defence is <strong>documentation</strong>: Records kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
answered, and what turned out true.</p></li>
|
||||
<li><p>Defence is <strong>a headcount</strong>: Calm, unexcited reminders that a “movement” might just be a dozen
|
||||
people having a tantrum.</p></li>
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -855,18 +855,18 @@ A resolution of this claim requires one step: Count them.
|
|||
|
||||
This “movement” does have a headcount. It is not in the hundreds, and it is not in the dozens. It is a small number of people who appear, in various combinations and under various names, in the following roles:
|
||||
|
||||
* Creators of the machine-generated “Reticulum implementations” examined in this chapter
|
||||
* Creators of the machine-generated “Reticulum implementations” examined in this chapter.
|
||||
* Creators of articles praising those implementations and lamenting the state of the
|
||||
reference, its moral shortcomings, its unavailability or lack of something it already has.
|
||||
* Commenters “defending” the implementations when they are evaluated reasonably and critically,
|
||||
most often by attempting simply to derail the discussion.
|
||||
* Critics of the Reticulum License on “open source” grounds
|
||||
* “Concerned community members” objecting to the maintainer’s conduct
|
||||
* Critics of the Reticulum License on “open source” grounds.
|
||||
* “Concerned community members” objecting to the maintainer’s conduct.
|
||||
* Campaigners on online platforms; and
|
||||
* In some cases, a single individual performing *several* of these roles at once, under
|
||||
different names, in the same week.
|
||||
|
||||
The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppet accounts are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.
|
||||
The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppets are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.
|
||||
|
||||
This is the most interesting single fact about the “movement”: **It isn’t one. It is a synthetic cast**, held together mostly by LLM-glue, reddit handles and hysteria. A cast is not a constituency. It performs; it does not represent. The difference matters quite a bit, because a great deal of this “movement’s” imagined power comes from the assumption that the *plural form* is actual evidence of plurality. If that sentence seemed opaque, notice how many times a statement or article uses “we” instead of “I”, and it will be less so.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -930,7 +930,7 @@ The register of the campaign is almost always the register of solicitude: “we
|
|||
|
||||
**Event seizure**
|
||||
|
||||
Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to *prior agreement with said moderator*) becomes “the maintainer shutting down dissent”. Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes “the founder retreating”. The license becomes “the enclosure”. The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.
|
||||
Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to *prior agreement with said moderator*) becomes “the maintainer shutting down dissent”. Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes “the founder retreating”. The license becomes “the enclosure”. The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.
|
||||
|
||||
**The legitimacy circuit**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1010,8 +1010,7 @@ For anyone who encounters the pattern fresh, here is a proposal on how to recogn
|
|||
* Sockpuppet theater: The same person or footsoldiers thereof appearing as several “supporters”
|
||||
(and occasionally slipping up mid-performance).
|
||||
* Articles, ports, and forum threads that cite and reference each other in a closed loop.
|
||||
* The immediate, reflexive turn to “bullying”, “exclusion” and “toxicity” whenever the record is
|
||||
documented.
|
||||
* The immediate, reflexive turn to “bullying”, “exclusion” and “toxicity” whenever a claim is refuted.
|
||||
* A complete absence of engagement with the substance of the answers given, and a complete
|
||||
absence of stake in the network itself.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1113,7 +1112,7 @@ None of this is a high bar. It is the bar the reference implementation has met,
|
|||
|
||||
The networks need defending - not because they are under severe physical attacks (yet), but because attention, talent and resources is being stolen from them, trust is being mined against them, and its newcomers are being harvested by the machinery documented in this chapter. Defence, for a commons, has specific shapes, and it is not what the theater would like it to be.
|
||||
|
||||
* Defence is **documentation**: Records, kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
* Defence is **documentation**: Records kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
answered, and what turned out true.
|
||||
* Defence is **a headcount**: Calm, unexcited reminders that a “movement” might just be a dozen
|
||||
people having a tantrum.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1014,18 +1014,18 @@ Headcount
|
|||
|
||||
This "movement" does have a headcount. It is not in the hundreds, and it is not in the dozens. It is a small number of people who appear, in various combinations and under various names, in the following roles:
|
||||
|
||||
* Creators of the machine-generated "Reticulum implementations" examined in this chapter
|
||||
* Creators of the machine-generated "Reticulum implementations" examined in this chapter.
|
||||
* Creators of articles praising those implementations and lamenting the state of the
|
||||
reference, its moral shortcomings, its unavailability or lack of something it already has.
|
||||
* Commenters "defending" the implementations when they are evaluated reasonably and critically,
|
||||
most often by attempting simply to derail the discussion.
|
||||
* Critics of the Reticulum License on "open source" grounds
|
||||
* "Concerned community members" objecting to the maintainer's conduct
|
||||
* Critics of the Reticulum License on "open source" grounds.
|
||||
* "Concerned community members" objecting to the maintainer's conduct.
|
||||
* Campaigners on online platforms; and
|
||||
* In some cases, a single individual performing *several* of these roles at once, under
|
||||
different names, in the same week.
|
||||
|
||||
The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppet accounts are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.
|
||||
The overlap is well documented at this point, across time and different platforms. The same phrasing, the same arguments, the same links, the same reactive reflexes, the same handful of accounts appearing in the same threads at the same moments. When the sockpuppets are unmasked (and they frequently unmask themselves) the cast does not grow, but rapidly shrinks.
|
||||
|
||||
This is the most interesting single fact about the "movement": **It isn't one. It is a synthetic cast**, held together mostly by LLM-glue, reddit handles and hysteria. A cast is not a constituency. It performs; it does not represent. The difference matters quite a bit, because a great deal of this "movement's" imagined power comes from the assumption that the *plural form* is actual evidence of plurality. If that sentence seemed opaque, notice how many times a statement or article uses "we" instead of "I", and it will be less so.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1091,7 +1091,7 @@ The register of the campaign is almost always the register of solicitude: "we ar
|
|||
|
||||
**Event seizure**
|
||||
|
||||
Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to *prior agreement with said moderator*) becomes "the maintainer shutting down dissent". Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes "the founder retreating". The license becomes "the enclosure". The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.
|
||||
Any event - a license change, a platform move, a forum moderation decision, a subreddit closure, a security notice, even the most banal messages from maintainers or known contributors - are seized, stripped of their actual context, and re-narrated as evidence of the same pre-written story. The subreddit that was closed after its moderator vanished and ceased moderating (according to *prior agreement with said moderator*) becomes "the maintainer shutting down dissent". Moving away from a highly centralized online platform becomes "the founder retreating". The license becomes "the enclosure". The pattern is so reliable that the story could be pre-written by a lightly mechanized quill; only the date changes. The actual real-world context of these events is documented, in public, in each case; the re-narration proceeds regardless.
|
||||
|
||||
**The legitimacy circuit**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1108,11 +1108,11 @@ A Persistent, But Fragile Triad
|
|||
|
||||
This chapter as a whole has documented three fronts: The legal-ideological attack on the license (:ref:`Open Source Means Open Source<brandolinis-opensource>`), the substitution and usurpation pattern in machine-generated implementations (:ref:`Assistance Versus Machine Substitution<brandolinis-assistance-versus-substitution>`), and the takeover narratives examined in this section. They are three fronts of the same operation, run by the same cast.
|
||||
|
||||
* The license attack and other urgency-engineered narratives are the *cover*\ : They supply
|
||||
* The license attack and other urgency-engineered narratives are the *cover*: They supply
|
||||
the ideological justification for treating the reference as illegitimate, and needing replacement.
|
||||
* The ports are the *inventory*\ : they supply the "replacements" that the narrative claims
|
||||
* The ports are the *inventory*: they supply the "replacements" that the narrative claims
|
||||
the ecosystem needs.
|
||||
* The takeover narrative is the *objective function*\ : the repeated, persistent, escalating claim that
|
||||
* The takeover narrative is the *objective function*: the repeated, persistent, escalating claim that
|
||||
the reference should be replaced, and that the speakers themself are the natural heirs.
|
||||
|
||||
Each front depends on the others, and all three depend on a single, fragile assumption: That their audience cannot count. Restore the count, and the charade collapses into what it is:
|
||||
|
|
@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ appearance of a constituency they do not have, in service of a takeover they can
|
|||
What The Pattern Is Not
|
||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||
|
||||
It is important, to also say what this pattern is *not*\ , exactly because the campaign depends on being mistaken for such things.
|
||||
It is important, to also say what this pattern is *not*, exactly because the campaign depends on being mistaken for such things.
|
||||
|
||||
**It is not criticism**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ The Reticulum community has always had lively, rigorous criticism - of decisions
|
|||
|
||||
**It is not a community**
|
||||
|
||||
Communities *build things*\ , maintain them, and have skin in the game; long-term users, operators of nodes, authors of real applications, people whose traffic flows through the network every day. A community has a stake. The "movement" only has an agenda.
|
||||
Communities *build things*, maintain them, and have skin in the game; long-term users, operators of nodes, authors of real applications, people whose traffic flows through the network every day. A community has a stake. The "movement" only has an agenda.
|
||||
|
||||
**It is not a debate**
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1158,7 +1158,7 @@ The consequences are very real:
|
|||
editorial embellishments; they are the mechanism by which real users are induced to run
|
||||
unverified, and often destructive software.
|
||||
* **Erosion of the currency of trust**. Every manufactured scandal, every fluently polite smear, every
|
||||
fabricated "movement" debases the currency of trust and degrades it for **everyone**\ ;
|
||||
fabricated "movement" debases the currency of trust and degrades it for **everyone**;
|
||||
including, most of all, the honest projects that come after. This is deep harm, and
|
||||
it is the primary reason this chapter exists.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1181,8 +1181,7 @@ For anyone who encounters the pattern fresh, here is a proposal on how to recogn
|
|||
* Sockpuppet theater: The same person or footsoldiers thereof appearing as several "supporters"
|
||||
(and occasionally slipping up mid-performance).
|
||||
* Articles, ports, and forum threads that cite and reference each other in a closed loop.
|
||||
* The immediate, reflexive turn to "bullying", "exclusion" and "toxicity" whenever the record is
|
||||
documented.
|
||||
* The immediate, reflexive turn to "bullying", "exclusion" and "toxicity" whenever a claim is refuted.
|
||||
* A complete absence of engagement with the substance of the answers given, and a complete
|
||||
absence of stake in the network itself.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -1303,7 +1302,7 @@ Defence Of The Commons
|
|||
|
||||
The networks need defending - not because they are under severe physical attacks (yet), but because attention, talent and resources is being stolen from them, trust is being mined against them, and its newcomers are being harvested by the machinery documented in this chapter. Defence, for a commons, has specific shapes, and it is not what the theater would like it to be.
|
||||
|
||||
* Defence is **documentation**: Records, kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
* Defence is **documentation**: Records kept public, of what was claimed, what was
|
||||
answered, and what turned out true.
|
||||
* Defence is **a headcount**: Calm, unexcited reminders that a "movement" might just be a dozen
|
||||
people having a tantrum.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue