FreeSchool: Learn Respect Love @freeschool@social.cleverlibre.org

@jupiter_rowland Ok great to learn more about you - most skip this part or take offence too quick so I can work *with* how you are already like or what you like more than not... Kudos I wanted to say before anything

So even not doing much now I'd agree and say video not for now or not yet. Even for me video is so much bloat (unless really impactful or people loving per second)... but I can see some solutions to what you might see as a problem currently just for warming up to idea of 'something'

It might be a deal breaker now but really seems these things below might not be or can be simplified..

So for the video there are techniques that solve these problems:

█ about talking more than the video and needing it to stop to explain
● answer: that's what B-roll is for
BUT yes I'd also think b-roll is unneeded and even bullshit for this long but it is done currently or does need drastic reduction in time talking (unless your B-roll is really good)

- good example of above is how many times have we 'watched' a user in operating system play with his mouse on screen, kind not doing much or waiting for next part to click! (we have watch a lot all of us!)
So I mean it's enough for you to be inside app or on screen with what you talk about (your Mastodon interface for example) and that would be watchable and 'kill' time (even though I'm a audio person for ecological reasons and for more-pure education)...
●but yeah I'll help with that even I can screen record or suggest enough... I think for key things like setting up a wallet or scary stuff it really helps and people care for higher things than eye-candy
●ALTERNATIVE you can also do audio parts with pictures in between (like a blog post) so to modularise your presentation and even use it in different order in other presentations (you need to cut things anyway for naming it all individual parts so this can help by default to move things like you would in a playlist and even put it into next video by putting in video joiner, sorting the order and clicking "join videos" )

Anyway basically we can test our smaller parts of the idea quite quickly like this and call it workable or failure... but yeah you might have to roll with me and believe a bit :)

==================

█I hear you coming from 3-D world so appreciate you looking here :)
I would like to know what your goal is or even why... to enjoy that with you as mostly we are coming from these types of 'normal' video or ideas as a world but happy to see or hear more...

█Not sure what to say about catering for visually-impaired users but

● I'd solve that with audio commentary track or alternate video version describing what's on screen or background
I do assume some of that is not even important to visually-impaired users like it isn't to anyone else as videos have LOTS of unneeded filler stuff... so mostly it's * if * it's worth it for people either visually or for the audio...
● even better would be if author summarised or explained it all... audibly... less-impaired would also like that...

I appreciate you care about those things, and hope it's ok it's unusual or uncommon for me to see but I think we can change that with whatever we like!!

█The way I do things or the way I enable others is always this kind of "let's do this test" way and calling fails out so happy to have done or do most of the work to see what can work -

Overall
I think if you can lower yourself to audio then it is possible and then from there even could prep that for video (by me or others)
(creative commons release hopefully would help that)

@selea I get the same feeling for people that post online and never answer my comments or direct messages to them

@strypey @erincandescent I have that link open to look at later today or tomorrow -

I will look at it BUT let me tell you a bit of my doubts below about "contact with people more than websites..." since I guess the link will just be eye-candy or good food for thought mostly- and not much more that....(we'll see but my thoughts anyway as a piece of writing)

------------------------------
So below is tangential but for anyone who cares about contact from others / interested "strangers" / etc and how effective sites are to getting contact and conversation

TLDR / In short - not just static info or robotic response, not people isolated / detached in paid-positions often not knowing or interested as much...
and more talking to and from people knowing / doing things... even if their attitudes could also be better facing the public or even non-coders or non-same people...
------------------------------

The way I think will work more often, is for people to actually talk to me and ask me after giving the signal about it on Fediverse!

More specifically and added to that I mean that a website also seems so impersonal now... and broken as a way... who I will cold-contact etc... the contact often isn't even there or I have to beg for attention. If I'm not a professional or cash money or if I don't say my real name [privacy, browser tracking] then I'm ignored... or something something... so lots of tech and human nuance etc etc = FAIL and totally more unhuman that seeing real people even without real name !

So what I'm saying is just about what works more (even my browser can see the site and all the other layers of stuff making it harder). Not your fault or of co-ops but just saying why it all seems futile and why EVERYTHING done on Fediverse (almost literally) = people, much more than tech bells and whistles or added ways and layers and people...

I'm saying to the world I look for someone here to talk to me and that's the start I look for !

Not saying "I'm perfect for the job" either... BUT EVERYONE needs lots of circling to get to the right point and maybe we thought the less human-direct ways gets us there... nope.

People obviously sometimes need to get used to nicknames or not being so defensive when I communicate from info THEY put online!! (like "where did you get my info / why are you contacting me" even though I've stated it lol ) but overall it happens and persistence pays to see I'm not an AI bot or trying anything but mutual stuff.

So Fediverse for the way
Because other ways FAILS more often on this human level (apart from Facebook etc as a way or buying something online - those can work in those ways)

@jupiter_rowland So I'm happy with that explanation and seems like you've put yourself in with half a chance to do such a small video and even prepped it now!
Even this as audio with pics... even here native... I'd listen (not sure elsewhere if I'd click).

So as side-note I'll be happy to help you produce such a thing and even invite you to send similar points by audio (your text above as script already pretty much lol) and I'll arrange it and send back to you complete!

Ok so suggestion and a offer aside, it makes sense what you say and I think I can move on!
(great huh!)

If I can move on to next major point... without too many left...
Here is the next thing people feel:

The whole difference between almost any Fediverse instance and then one owned by Massive Corporate Entity - call it MCE just for fun is clearer a different fish 🐟 (or shark 🦈 we don't know but any big business I guess has to do it's thing)

So the next point is trust vs. commercial entity.
In the same mindset as before where you explained about people scared about "copying my data", could you also have a stab at "how can you trust capitalism" lol... I mean trust Bluesky not to exploit and use everything it can for profit or other political reasons... or not be taken over, rug-pulled etc" lol asking the world 🌐 here :)

Again that point seems prevalent as others, and as we have instances now, even if they could get data they don't care and are too small.

It's a heroic thing to read my words and answer in similar way but seems we can both handle it (other are in short text world)

What we know historically as capitalism (through no fault of Bluesky or even /Meta/Threads - but the nature of those things means it's an entirely different beast we invite... 🐻 🦈 !

As a slightly fun or typical extreme take - "what about the Nazis" is usually a serious fear too but seriously even they care less online and have more innocent fun, whereas I can imagine corporations suddenly changing the game or suddenly changing their position that could leave any believer or Jack Dorsey stunned... just very little control or too much control from top...

So some here think we are growing overall nicer smaller, more innocent hubs of cmmunity and separation of protocol made that choice easier and fairer in terms of these politics / commercialisation considerations... I think we know the politics of capitalism... POWER!

(ending only for theatrics but helps you answer if you wish how these differences are in people's minds)

Thanks and liked your last writing and not too long at all for me!

@sergeant If this picture doesn't make you laugh (click this post) -
then you don't have a heart ❤️
Unlike these two love birds who definitely do have a heart.
They know what they love...

THAT'S THE ROSE OF WAR THEY ARE HOLDING!!! 🌹

Nice story from @robpike on his blog about how simplicity can be seen as harmful 'productivity'.
How less code can be bad!

ℹ️ Also I have feelings of being very good at my work (in the past) and efficient but coming up against management frequently as a result of that, asking them "what's the problem" because it really did seem to change the whole stand, perspective and even the company I was working for... and that isn't often 'good' though didn't stop me lol!

From Robs @robpike blog...

"He reduced the complexity of the system. Less code, less to test, less to maintain. His coworkers loved it.

But there was a catch. During his performance review, he learned that management had a metric for productivity: lines of code.

Tom had negative productivity. In fact, because he was so successful, his entire group had negative productivity. He returned to Research with his tail between his legs.

And he learned his lesson: complexity is endemic. Simplicity is not rewarded."

https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2023/12/simplicity.html

------------------------------
The rest pasted below for longevity Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.. I really recommend visiting his blog also so you get to keep this and get more of the same logic and gems.
------------------------------

FULL VERSION:
Wednesday, December 06, 2023
Simplicity

In May 2009, Google hosted an internal "Design Wizardry" panel, with talks by Jeff Dean, Mike Burrows, Paul Haahr, Alfred Spector, Bill Coughran, and myself. Here is a lightly edited transcript of my talk. Some of the details have aged out, but the themes live on, now perhaps more than ever.

---

Simplicity is better than complexity.

Simpler things are easier to understand, easier to build, easier to debug, and easier to maintain. Easier to understand is the most important, because it leads to the others. Look at the web page for google.com. One text box. Type your query, get useful results. That's brilliantly simple design and a major reason for Google's success. Earlier search engines had much more complicated interfaces. Today they have either mimicked ours, or feel really hard to use.

That's google.com. But what about what's behind it? What about GWS? How you do you invoke it? I looked at the argument list of a running GWS (Google Web Server) instance. XX,XXX characters of configuration flags. XXX arguments. A few name backend machines. Some configure backends. Some enable or disable properties. Most of them are probably correct. I guarantee some of them are wrong or at least obsolete.

So, here's my question: How can the company that designed google.com be the same company that designed GWS? The answer is that GWS configuration structure was not really designed. It grew organically. Organic growth is not simple; it generates fantastic complexity. Each piece, each change may be simple, but put together the complexity becomes overwhelming.

Complexity is multiplicative. In a system, like Google, that is assembled from components, every time you make one part more complex, some of the added complexity is reflected in the other components. It's complexity runaway.

It's also endemic.

Many years ago, Tom Cargill took a year off from Bell Labs Research to work in development. He joined a group where every subsystem's code was printed in a separate binder and stored on a shelf in each office. Tom discovered that one of those subsystems was almost completely redundant; most of its services were implemented elsewhere. So he spent a few months making it completely redundant. He deleted 15,000 lines of code. When he was done, he removed an entire binder from everybody's shelf. He reduced the complexity of the system. Less code, less to test, less to maintain. His coworkers loved it.

But there was a catch. During his performance review, he learned that management had a metric for productivity: lines of code. Tom had negative productivity. In fact, because he was so successful, his entire group had negative productivity. He returned to Research with his tail between his legs.

And he learned his lesson: complexity is endemic. Simplicity is not rewarded.

You can laugh at that story. We don't do performance review based on lines of code.

But we're actually not far off. Who ever got promoted for deleting Google code? We revel in the code we have. It's huge and complex. New hires struggle to grasp it and we spend enormous resources training and mentoring them so they can cope. We pride ourselves in being able to understand it and in the freedom to change it.

Google is a democracy; the code is there for all to see, to modify, to improve, to add to. But every time you add something, you add complexity. Add a new library, you add complexity. Add a new storage wrapper, you add complexity. Add an option to a subsystem, you complicate the configuration. And when you complicate something central, such as a networking library, you complicate everything.

Complexity just happens and its costs are literally exponential.

On the other hand, simplicity takes work—but it's all up front. Simplicity is very hard to design, but it's easier to build and much easier to maintain. By avoiding complexity, simplicity's benefits are exponential.

Pardon the solipsism but look at the query logging system. It's far from perfect but it was designed to be—and still is—the only system at Google that solves the particular, central problem it was designed to solve. Because it is the only one, it guarantees stability, security, uniformity of use, and all the economies of scale. There is no way Google would be where it is today if every team rolled out its own logging infrastructure.

But the lesson didn't spread. Teams are constantly proposing new storage systems, new workflow managers, new libraries, new infrastructure.

All that duplication and proliferation is far too complex and it is killing us because the complexity is slowing us down.

We have a number of engineering principles at Google. Make code readable. Make things testable. Don't piss off the SREs. Make things fast.

Simplicity has never been on that list. But here's the thing: Simplicity is more important than any of them. Simpler designs are more readable. Simpler code is easier to test. Simpler systems are easier to explain to the SREs, and easier to fix when they fail.

Plus, simpler systems run faster.

Notice I said systems there, not code. Sometimes—not always—to make code fast you need to complicate it; that can be unavoidable. But complex systems are NEVER fast—they have more pieces and their interactions are too poorly understood to make them fast. Complexity generates inefficiency.

Simplicity is even more important than performance. Because of the multiplicative effects of complexity, getting 2% performance improvement by adding 2% complexity—or 1% or maybe even .1%—isn't worth it.

But hold on! What about our Utilization Code Red?

We don't have utilization problems because our systems are too slow. We have utilization problems because our systems are too complex. We don't understand how they perform, individually or together. We don't know how to characterize their interactions.

The app writers don't fully understand the infrastructure.

The infrastructure writers don't fully understand the networks.

Or the apps for that matter. And so on and so on.

To compensate, everyone overprovisions and adds zillions of configuration options and adjustments. That makes everything even harder to understand.

Products manage to launch only by building walls around their products to isolate them from the complexity—which just adds more complexity.

It's a vicious cycle.

So think hard about what you're working on. Can it be simpler? Do you really need that feature? Can you make something better by simplifying, deleting, combining, or sharing? Sit down with the groups you depend on and understand how you can combine forces with them to design a simpler, shared architecture that doesn't involve defending against each other.

Learn about the systems that already exist, and build on them rather than around them. If an existing system doesn't do what you want, maybe the problem is in the design of your system, not that one.

If you do build a new component, make sure it's of general utility. Don't build infrastructure that solves only the problems of your own team.

It's easy to build complexity. In the rush to launch, it's quicker and easier to code than to redesign. But the costs accumulate and you lose in the long run.

The code repository contains 50% more lines of code than it did a year ago. Where will we be in another year? In 5 years?

If we don't bring the complexity under control, one day it won't be a Utilization Code Red. Things will get so complex, so slow, they'll just grind to a halt. That's called a Code Black.

More money you spend, worse productivity you are doing working with people directly...

(above a certain amount of comfort or trying to live, just change of the people's mentalities to choose better things to do from there and for better/more measured reasons)...

So with 'fairly minimal' stuff like a Mastodon instance, it is possible to maximise advancing people's mindset and upgrading to better thoughts by talking more often like a therapy to it all of history we have come to absorbing and being aware of.

Mostly as 2 measurable ways to help my statement
(and this is not a rant just logically 2 main things!):

█1.█ Spending money means you are unlikely to be doing the people work (measurable and guesstimated by adding all sectors and how much money goes to humanistic work and how much not. So is it for profit and taking advantage of people (and even war?) or is money for helping consciousness and compassion and perpetuating that to the next generations? <--- LOL you know the answer ! Near 0 or even whatever good cause lesser than this with 'charities' even having to turn over a profit before anything)

█2.█ Money is bad material or:

M=[M x debt]

so = infinite / constant debt?... as a power balance... deliberately?

Quite a shitload of debt
= shitload of depressed people RIGHT?

And overall giving power to others as currency turns everything into tax obviously IS UNcaring / actually help people war using currency/our labour as their main source, even if you can't imagine living almost exactly the same without your government taxing you on everything so heavily.

█ℹ️█ If none of the above makes sense ask yourself if you like Banks or think giving debt is a service to the world an good way of doing things?

@robpike
❣️ Use your anger well ! (Let me know if interested in converting your anger and passions better! It's the best fuel for change )

Anger is healthy when it's directed to "do something about it" so I see this as the right kind of "do something" and if both angry mutually you can kind of fight for a better world like sparring does to keep fit in a martial arts class... and all are buddies in love with the sport...

💁 small advert from me about consciousness and AI if interested (as Fediverse AUDIO!):

https://qoto.org/@freeschool/111930634690194387

Internet and Electricity keeps the magic of us alive, and can also be cut dead.

What we do NOW without these outages, disconnections, shut down will be importance for when we do.

So what do you do or will do without so much Internet time or with limited connection?

And could you live with people around you as main source of entertainment etc? Would they listen?

(Many escaped to internet because people around were not understanding and even punishing (even though internet has that too) - maybe that's the good work to be done offline also but seems impossible actually to convince real people if I'm honest and wait for them to get old and die)...

@Sentientism
I wanted to say the common connection with MANY things I'm connecting to currently is relating to- being conscious.

I boosted a shed load of Sentientism's stuff (all REAL GOOD, both as one-liners and also what's behind it). Audio / video related too.

SO IF sentientism is to do with consciousness, and consciousness important to anything AI, then have a look at my latest audio below which Gary Ackerman @garyackerman I think ties up nicely and I, merely as assistant appreciate also in editing.

I wouldn't edit it or advertise it if I didn't believe...

https://qoto.org/@freeschool/111930634690194387

BEST POINTS ABOUT INCOMING COMMERCIAL INVASION: 💣 💥

💥 THREADS/FACEBOOK INVASION

💥 BLUESKY INVASION

ℹ️ UPDATED 15/02/2024 - Best first below.....

(will re-draft weekly - let me know if it's unwanted to be CC-d in, because I respect your comments and think you can be game-changers so add acc name here for now so you get credit)

This is almost like dial-up and broadband all over again!

--------------------------

Follow and optionally notification 🔔 for similar topics.

--------------------------

█ Opt-out is not consent.

Everyone knows this and yet many #Mastodon admins continue to abuse us.

Where are the good guys?

● @happyborg
https://fosstodon.org/@happyborg/111926784690582141

--------------------------

█ Native #openweb is "permissionless" this is how #ActivityPub works and why it works. Is #bluesky native to the #openweb?

● @witchescauldron

--------------------------

█ ⚔️ This is a "trust" vers "control issue and yes people are pushing #closedweb thinking and code, we need to think this through better.

● @witchescauldron
https://kolektiva.social/@witchescauldron/111926403671342182

--------------------------

█ Signing up for #Bluesky was a mistake. I have gotten so many #spam calls in the past few days. The sudden spike only makes sense if they're selling the phone number I used for 2FA.

● @o76923
https://kitty.social/notes/9pok05pec10yv5uv

--------------------------

█ QUOTE> The point of the fediverse is to connect with others, with full control and safety. It's for making connections between networks of different sizes and implementations."

I say, bc at some point, it might matter that this isn't quite the system you want.

● @maegul
https://hachyderm.io/@maegul/111927386224381574

--------------------------

█ It's not the federation that is the issue... [snip] But "copy this data of mine to a non-AP company network via a bridge where the rules are different" is a different question, and checking with someone first is reasonable.
[snip]

It's beyond the scope of reasonable expectation to assume "usage implies opt in".

● @Crell
https://phpc.social/@Crell/111926941771490396

█ [snip...] Not to mention that a lot of Mastodon users don't understand how Mastodon works. They think it must have a pool of all accounts and all posts and all that somewhere, and the BridgyFed Bluesky bridge will give Bluesky unlimited access to it all.

They also think that Bluesky will be able to post nasty stuff to everyone, even those who aren't connected to anyone on Bluesky.

They think the same about Threads, because in their heads, they're still on Twitter where the secret-sauce algorithm would probably allow for that to happen.

● @jupiter_rowland
https://hub.netzgemeinde.eu/item/b59ac1d1-100c-4b2f-a6d6-825e8fceb9e1

@jupiter_rowland @scott
#Mastodon
Hi Jupiter I like the framing of this "How does Mastodon work?" post as it describes 'me' or a typical user and prompts them to then think "so how if not all the account and posts somewhere?" etc etc...

I think it's a good way to educate actually, and could you reply again what you would reply typically to your own post if someone asked "ok so how is it if not that?" since I / they would be ready to hear at that point

- and then kind of rounding your words towards how it will not be true that "Bluesky bridge will give Bluesky unlimited access to it all." (or at least the commercial company access and plans to exploit things unlike existing others on the Fediverse and like never before... (not even the smaller Nazi's probably because they don't have no money or care, but Capitalism... I'm not so sure!)

@ramonita Do you have a list Fediverse instances blocking or against Bluesky/Threads/Meta/ ?
Would be nice to see what they think or how they frame it as I don't get all these posts and would like to hear more. Because I am also up in the air personally about it I think reading will help me.

#QOTO #FEEDBACK #QUESTION

Is everyone ok with merging with Thread/Meta/Facebook on the Fediverse ?

And merging it's own politics / beliefs of commercialisation ?
(If I'm right we signed up here and with Mastodon almost against ALL of those things, and now it's encroaching...)