Here’s the testing report for VOICE testing session #2. TL;DR we tested with three people and had a pretty good voice chat, although figuring out how to get group chat going took a bit of experimentation. Thanks to Naughtylus (@Naughtylus@fosstodon.org) for the write-up.

As I mentioned in the report on the first testing session, VOICE (VOICE Organized Investigation of Chat Engines) is an informal app testing group, trialing free code apps to see how well they handle voice chat, especially with groups. We aim to have a group chat testing session at least once a month, on a Sunday, starting at 8:00 UTC, with the first Sunday of the month as the default. We are currently using a Matrix chat room to confirm the timing of testing sessions, as well as for discussion about available apps and related topics: #voicechat:matrix.org

VOICE Scheduled Testing Session #2

Sunday 21 July, 8:00 UTC

Candidate: Jami (previously known as GNU Ring)

Previous Session: Test Session #1

Comments by: @Naughtylus@fosstodon.org

VOICE (VOICE Organized Investigation of Chat Engines) is an informal app testing group, trialing free code apps to see how well they handle voice chat, especially with groups. We aim to have a group chat testing session at least once a month, on a Sunday, starting at 8:00 UTC, with the first Sunday of the month as the default. We are currently using a Matrix room to confirm the timing of testing sessions, as well as for discussion about available apps and related topics: #voicechat:matrix.org

For this second instance of our scheduled test sessions, we tried the distributed text, voice, and video chat app Jami. Jami is part of the GNU project, was previously known as Ring, and used SIP technology for voice and video calls. As of late, though, Savoir-faire Linux has begun shifting the technology stack of the app from centralised (using servers) to distributed (using peer-to-peer technologies), and rebranding it as Jami. The app currently features one-to-one text, video, and audio chat, as well as audio and video conferencing (but not text as of yet). Everything is encrypted by default (there’s not even an option to turn it off) and the only servers used are the bootstrap nodes for the DHT and those used to lookup users from their username, but both are configurable.

So we set out to test the audio conference feature, we would have liked to try the video as well, but one of us was staying at a hotel and didn’t have the bandwidth for it. While an audio call is simple enough to place in Jami (there are big buttons where you’d expect them), an audio conference (with more than two participants) is an other beast entirely. If @AmarOk@mastodon.social (one of the Jami devs) hadn’t asserted the feature was implemented I’m not sure we would have found it.

To set up a conference in Jami, first call one of the intended participants, then once the call is established, call a second one. That will put the first call on hold. At this point you have two ongoing calls, if you resume the first one, you’ll be able to hear and speak to the two other participants, but they won’t hear each other. That’s not what we want, so what you actually have to do, is drag and drop the first call onto the second one (or the other way around, we still haven’t figured that one yet). Now your UI should show two ongoing calls, but everyone is able to hear each other. On their end, though, their UI should display only an ongoing call with you, which prompts me to think your node is actually acting as relay and there is no direct connection between the other two participants.

In this experiment the longest conversation we’ve sustained was 22min long, with a 5min monologue with no noticeable delay and very few skips in audio, so an overall quality on par with what we previously tested with Jitsi in Riot. It should also be noted that some of us were 22 000 km apart from each other and that the major source of instability in the audio was the poor hotel wifi.

We also tried to mess around with the UI to see if and how we could break it, and it really wasn’t that difficult. First, if you’re hosting the call (that is if you’re the one that did the drag and drop voodoo), you can’t mute your audio, clicking mute on any of the two ongoing calls updates the UI but doesn’t do anything. (I’m not sure if that’s intentional, but I suspect it has to do with the host acting as a relay and piping the audio of the other participants. So muting would in effect mute them as well.) Second, putting any of the calls on hold when you’re hosting flat out breaks the whole conference, you can’t resume anything after that. Just don’t do it.

There was only three of us, so this is about the extent of what we were able to test, and I’m curious to see how it plays out with more participants.

So overall, impressive quality for a peer-to-peer solution, but the UI/UX could use some improvement.

Filed August 2nd, 2019 under Uncategorized

It’s a great relief to see long serving political satire website The Civilian back online, after an unexplained outage last week. Along with the web videos of White Man Behind A Desk, The Civilian, which bills itself as “all the news that’s fit on a page”, is one of the few exponents of political satire left in Aotearoa. In tribute to both of them, here is a piece inspired by the ill-informed sabre-rattling about regulating social media companies, by officials in NZ. In case anyone is in any doubt, this is satire!

 <satire>

Global government network Facebook has put social platform NewZealand on notice that stricter regulation may be on the way. “NewZealand may have more than four million users”, said Facebook Local Government Minister Nick Clegg, “but that doesn’t mean it can expect to operate as a law unto itself”. In a public statement on the tragic deaths of more than fifty users using the Mosque feature of Christchurch, a branded subsidiary of NewZealand and part of the SouthIsland suite of services, Clegg accused NewZealand of allowing serious “hate speech” on its platform. “The management of NewZealand are responsible for everything that happens on its platform”, he said, “they can’t hide behind claims of being service providers allowing people to interact freely with each other. They are the publisher, not the postman”, he said, adding “their NZPost service is the postman, not them.”

Clegg also hit out at NewZealand for failing to pay all its advertising taxes, claiming that the platform only gives Facebook a few million dollars a year, despite having millions of Facebook citizens using its services. He also pointed out that Facebook citizens upload large volumes of free lifestyle and business content to NewZealand each year, allowing its executives to bring in millions of dollars in campaign contributions.

As a former executive of rival platform UnitedKingdom, Clegg is intimately familiar with the responsibilities and challenges involved in managing a large social platform. UnitedKingdom was formed as a merger between three older social platforms, England, Scotland, and TheOtherOne. They also acquired Ireland, but later spun it off as a separate entity, keeping only the marketing and communications wing, Northern. When asked about the reasons for the split with Ireland, UnitedKingdom pointed to poor quarterly returns to the parent company, and alleged harassment against the staff of the other platforms.

Clegg was also involved in the launch of Brexit, a massively popular user polling app that led to UnitedKingdom trying to split away from the federated platform EU, which has become popular in Europe. EU allows users to move back and forth between member platforms, using the same address and password, as if they all had a user account on each one. While some UnitedKingdom executives continue to claim that their users gain far more from the services of other European platforms than they provide to their users, others claim that membership of the EU constrains the ability of UnitedKingdom to set their own Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, or that their servers and bandwidth have been overwhelmed by the numbers of users coming in from other platforms.

While Facebook has yet to announce any policy on the Brexit app, they have made public statements echoing those directed at NewZealand, pointing out that UnitedKingdom has to take responsibility for the effects of the Brexit app on users. If the UnitedKingdom Board of Directors is unable to come to a decision about the future of their server-sharing arrangements with the EU, Facebook may be forced to use anti-trust rules in its Terms of Service to split up UnitedKingdom, allowing some of its apps to continue inter-operating with the EU, while others become stand-alone services.

</satire>

Filed April 19th, 2019 under Uncategorized

In late July, I will be attending the Open 2018 conference in London, thanks to the encouragement of one of the organizers, who participates in the Open App Ecosystem (OAE) group on Loomio. If you’re going to be there, let me know, and I’ll do my best to make sure you know about any open space sessions that might interest you. Hopefully we’ll have open space time for folks interested in the OAE and the Collaborative Technology Alliance reboot to get together, as well as a session for those who orbit the Peer-to-Peer Foundation and the Commons Transition project.

I’ll be in London for a week or so before the conference, so if you’re not going to be at the conference, but you are based somewhere around the greater London area, feel free to get in touch. I love to meet up with a diverse range of people when I travel, and geek out about the potential for the net and digital technology to better serve human and environmental needs.

I’ve got a lot of blog posts in the pipeline, but this will probably be my last post until after the conference, and maybe even until I get back to the studio. I will do my best to post some live updates from the conference using my new fediverse account (thanks to the NZ Open Source Society), and possibly some kind of Etherpad or CryptPad for live note-taking.

Filed July 4th, 2018 under Uncategorized

Two years ago, Nadia Eghbal published a blog piece about how she hates the term “open source”, and not for the usual reasons; the way it misses the point of software freedom, emphasizing corporations’ freedoms to use the work of the free code community without reciprocity, instead of peoples’ freedoms to modify and share the software they use. Instead, her argument is that “open source”, as defined by the Open Source Initiative, is too specific and exclusive, and proposes that we start using a vaguer and more inclusive term like “public software”.

In that piece, she pulled a quote from another blog post by Mike Perham of Sidekiq, stripping it from the context of what Mike is arguing, and giving the initial impression that he is saying something totally different (and arguably incorrect). Upon reading Mike’s piece, where says …

“Open Source != Free Software”

… he clearly does not mean that open source software is not Free Software, as defined by the Free Software Definition (“libre” or “free-as-in-speech”). What he is saying is that open source software does not have to be free-of-charge (“gratis” or “free-as-in-beer”). Being gratis is not a requirement for being Free Software either:

“we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can. If a license does not permit users to make copies and sell them, it is a nonfree license.”

The two different meanings the word “free” has in English have always caused confusion, and this was probably the main reason the phrase “open source” took off in the Anglophone world (speakers of French and Spanish always know which meaning of “free” they’re using because they have words like libre and gratis). But the software freedom movement has always been concerned with finding ways to pay people to work on free code software. A recent example is the talk by Denver of JMP at LibrePlanet 2018 about Free Software business models.

The open source movement, on the other hand, was founded by people whose goal was to get people working on free code software paid for by corporations, entities that are highly allergic to concepts like “freedom”, “sharing”, and “cooperation”. The open source movement has been very successful with this, but with the consequence that most of that free code consists of back-end libraries under non-copyleft licenses (“MIT”, “BSD”, Apache 2.0 etc) which corporations then use to make proprietary apps for end users (including GitHub).

In his piece, what Mike recommends is licensing your code under a strong copyleft license (eg GNU AGPL), then selling exceptions to companies who don’t want to comply with the copyleft obligations of that license, like X-wiki Labs do with software like Cryptpad. Where this means a company is using and funding free code under a copyleft license, where they otherwise would have been using and funding proprietary software, this seems like good strategy. But this is more of an argument for using copyleft licenses than it is an argument for watering down or replacing the term “open source”.

If you’re looking for a more general term for collaborative work to create a common good, which is what people usually mean when they say “open source” outside of software (like Open Source Ecology, OpenStreetMap, WikiHouse, and WikiSpeed), I suggest “peer production”. If you need a term for people dumping their “IP” into an unstewarded commons, using something like CC Zero or the WTFPL, I think “public domain” does the job nicely. Perhaps there needs to be another term for things like Tesla offering free licenses for their electric car patents, because while this was a public-spirited offer, it is not “open source” by either common definition of the term (free code or peer production).

But I honestly don’t understand what purpose Nadia wants a term like “public software” to serve. How does it help anyone to fudge free code (open source/ Free Software/ FOSS/ FLOSS) together with “shared source” (you can see it but not use it), and “fair source” (basically shareware), and code placed in the public domain, and unlicensed code (which defaults to ARR copyright in the US and most jurisdictions), and arguably inappropriate use of CC licenses for code (to create proprietary freeware), as if these are all the same thing? Because whatever the motivations behind them, these approaches have very different consequences.

Filed May 30th, 2018 under Uncategorized

Update 13/10/2017: According to recent comments in the Open App Ecosystem group, the Digital Life Collective have already started using their own instance of MatterMost, a free code replacement for Slack. My apologies for the mistake.

——————–

In my recent comments in the introduction thread of the Loomio group for the Open App Ecosystem project, I referred to a concept of “cancerous growth” resulting from open membership web platforms. I’d like to discuss this in more detail, in the context of a proposal for another approach to running web hosting organisations for the common good. It’s not a new approach, in fact Indymedia used it, RiseUp.net have been using it for some time, and if I understand their intentions correctly, Social.coop and the Digital Life Collective are using it too (although I’ll continue to be skeptical of “DigiLife” until they replace their use of Slack with a self-hosted, free code chat system like Riot/ Matrix).

A little background. As discussed by a number of folks recently including Doug Rushkoff, Aral Balkan, and Dan Lyons, the “startup” resource model (I prefer this term to “business model”) depends on unsustainable growth. This is because their goal is not providing user-driven services for the long haul, but selling their audience of users to capitalists, either by getting eaten by a bigger fish (”acquisition”), or by selling shares (”IPO” or “Initial Public Offering”). Web platforms created by such startups are commonly set up as “walled gardens” or “data silos”, where users can only interact with others who have an account on the platform, setting up a situation where users end up doing unpaid promotion for the platform, so that there are more users for them to use the platform services with. Because of this, it makes sense to let anyone with an internet connection and an email address set up an account, and grow as fast as you can, exponentially if possible; cancerous growth.

This way of operating has become so normal, for so long, there is now an expectation that any new web platform should have open membership, and be able to scale up its services regardless of how many users swarm to the platform. Yet this norm of unpredictable and open-ended growth creates massive problems for any hosting group who are not a startup, seeking to build fast and cash out. When new hosting groups start out with high ethical standards and a commitment to serving their users (not advertisers or future owners), their positive reputations lead to them being flooded with more users than they can really cope with, creating cancerous growth in hosting costs and technical debt, and increasing strain on system maintainers, who are often volunteers. Because they’re emulating a resource model that has diametrically opposite goals, ethically-orientated hosts risk becoming victims of their own success. Some examples off the top of my head include Identi.ca (micro-blogging using StatusNet then pump.io), GoblinRefuge (media hosting using MediaGoblin), and more recently OpenMailBox (email hosting with RoundCube and file storage with ownCloud, now using NextCloud)

I believe we need to establish a new normal, where prospective users have to request membership, and consider paying a regular membership free (eg weekly, monthly, or yearly). A normal where it’s seen as a privilege, or a generous gesture on the part of the hosts, to allow gratis use of their web services. As mentioned above, there have been groups experimenting with private or semi-private web platforms for some time. The problem has been that this can feel like a strategy of “gated communities” on the web, with access to libre technology limited to those who have the required technical knowledge, contacts, or money for fees. For those of us who care passionately about software freedom for all computer users, this can feel exclusive and unjust. But just as we cannot solve homelessness by inviting every homeless person we meet to live in our own home, we cannot solve ‘hostlessness’ by inviting every ‘hostless’ person into the web platform we use.

Instead, we can replace cancerous growth of a small number of hosting groups, with ‘growth by replication’, creating tools that make it easier to set up more, small hosting groups (stack documentation, organisational playbooks etc). These hosting groups may serve networks of people who know each other primarily through existing online social networks. But I suspect the real future of this approach is in groups of people who know each other face-to-face. I imagine the set-up becoming so simple that every family, community, or organisation could become self-hosting, or come together to form coops to provide each other with web services on a larger scale. I’m fascinated by the idea of experimenting with a hosting platform that has no account registration available on the public web, so the only way of getting an account is to meet with an admin in person. Watch this space.

As more free code web software moves towards federation, allowing users to interact across different hosts as we always have with email, it becomes less important for users to get everyone they know to sign up for the same services. But federation also makes it easier for a given user to have all the apps they use directly tied into a single sign-on by the hosts of the platform they use. Eventually, we probably need all the gory details of apps and protocols to sit quietly behind generally understood concepts, like “phone” or “radio” or “television”, so users can choose services based on what they’re trying to get done. We don’t need to know anything about the technology behind television broadcasting to know how to turn on a “TV” to watch audio-visual programs, and change “channel” to select the programs that interest us at the time. We’ve pretty much reached that point with “email”, and I’m looking forward to “social media” being broken down into a more service specific set of generalizations.

Filed October 11th, 2017 under Uncategorized

I’ve posted very little over the past month or so, since the end of my CCMusic project for NZ Music Month. June/ July is the middle of winter here in Aotearoa, and I like to take a bit of midwinter downtime, to observe the winter solstice (”midwinter Christmas”) and celebrate Matariki, the “Māori new year”, marked by the reappearance above the southern horizon of the constellation known in European cultures as the “Pleiades” or “Seven Sisters”, and to the Japanese as “Subaru” (from which the car company gets it’s name and logo).

But I did see the John Oliver’s video about net neutrality and figured I might as well as join all the USAmericans taking up Oliver’s invitation to tell the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), the US government department that regulates broadcast media and telecommunications, to GoFCCYourself.com. Here’s the message I sent to the FCC, and I invite the NZ government and any government department involved in drawing up and enforcing regulations that affect the operation of the net and the web to take note.

The internet is and must remain an international common carrier, just like the postal system, the telegram system, and the telephone system before it. All internet-connected network operators, whether commercial or non-commercial, must be legally allowed, indeed obliged, to pass on all traffic as it arrives, without prejudice, discrimination, or tollgates. Only under these conditions is the internet is a level playing field, in which services and ideas can compete on their own merits, rather than buying influence through backroom “payola” deals with network operators.

Over the next few weeks I’ll be doing a new year evaluation of my various projects, and setting some priorities for the next few months. Watch this space.

Filed July 11th, 2017 under Uncategorized

640px-SoundscapeHamilton.jpg 

(SoundScape Hamilton 2011, by Nzwj - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link)

New Zealand Music Month (NZMM) is over for another year. I managed to promote 37 CreativeCommons-licensed kiwi music releases on the Fediverse, 38 if you count the one that ended up being posted a couple of minutes into June, and 39 if you count this year’s Turnbull Mixtape (#5: Time to get schooled). These releases covered 35 different music acts, across a diverse range of genres (no ukelele bands yet!).

To be honest, I was originally worried that I might  be scraping the barrel to get to 31 (one for each day in May). In the end, I ran out of May long before I ran out of releases to promote, mainly thanks to the Turnbull librarians and their mixtapes from the last few years. Thanks Turnbull folks!

A couple of thoughts on CC Aotearoa/ NZ engagement with kiwi musicians going forward. Firstly, it would be great to contact as many of these artists as possible about their CC use, and how they feel its worked for them (or not). Trying to interview all of them before next NZMM would be an average of about one a week, which would be a huge ask, so it might be good to aim to get a handful of interviews across a set of categories. Some of the obvious categories are;

  • always use CC
  • only used CC for one release
  • used to use CC then stopped for newer releases
  • started using CC after numerous ARR releases.

Another distinction I noticed was digital downloads offered gratis with no obvious way to pay/ donate, downloads on a ‘pay what you want’ basis, and downloads with a fixed price, just like a physical record. Some may have even used multiple styles across different web platforms (eg fixed price on BandCamp, free streaming/ download on SoundCloud). Again, it would be interesting to find out what motivated musicians’ choices here, how they feel it worked out for them, and whether they intend to experiment with a different approach in future.

Secondly, there’s definitely enough music acts using CC licenses to put on some amazing concerts for next year’s NZMM. Maybe even a CC music festival, or a touring roadshow! This would be a great chance to raise awareness of CC licensing among musicians and their audiences, and creative communities generally. Roll on NZ Music Month 2018!

Filed June 5th, 2017 under Uncategorized

You will have all seen Zuckerberg’s answer to Mein Kampf, heard about the Trump campaign’s strategic use of FarceBook to discourage their opponents from voting, and glanced at the various “e-democracy” apps funded by the same venture capitalists who brought us FarceBook, PayPal, Uber, and Palentir. You may also be aware that a number of kiwi political parties, including some who should know better (Greens and TOP), are using NationBuilder. I laid out a few of the *many* reasons why this is a bad idea in an open letter to the Greens a couple of months ago.

In the face of this, to focus on preventing the corruption of the voting process is to miss the point. Elite interests don’t need to control or corrupt the voting process, if they can control and corrupt the public discourse that informs whether or not people vote, and what they look for in the candidates and parties they vote for. The problem is that when such powerful discursive manipulation systems an be applied anywhere, from anywhere in the world, “representative democracy” (or more accurately, temporary elected dictatorship) is fundamentally impossible to secure against such attacks.

Digital voting can’t fix this, and neither can keeping elections paper-based. Whatever voting system is used, the only way to reduce the damage caused when they get pwned, is to stop using voting to elect an elite of individuals to form governments and then give them absolute state power, even temporarily. To replace it with a system where the powers of the state are strongly limited, and highly distributed, and where decision-making is participatory, not representative. Deep democracy, whether using digital platforms, public meetings, or a combination of both (which is probably ideal) is now our best possible future.

Now it’s true that these systems too will also be attacked, both directly and by discursive manipulation. For as long as economic power, and ownership of the mainstream news media, is concentrated in a handful of global corporations, democracy will always be under attack. Economic organisations and media too need radical democratization, and cooperative companies and not-for-profit social enterprises are making exciting progress on developing models for doing this. But in the meantime, it’s much harder for the 1% to effectively monitor and manipulate a flood of millions or billions of distributed, ‘citizen government’ decision-making processes, than to monitor and manipulate a trickle of representative government decisions that happen one at a time, per country.

Deep democracy is not a perfect solution, there’s no such thing. But as far as I can see, it’s the only alternative to a corporate-controlled technocracy, where elections and political “news” remain as a circus to distract the people from where the real decisions are being made.

Filed May 29th, 2017 under Uncategorized

A fully free network would itself be a commons only in a very abstract sense, in the same way that the planet is a commons. In the sense that Elinor Ostrom uses the word commons (a shared resource with a shared governance structure), a free network would actually be a federation of commons, each operating at one or more network layers. To illustrate, here are some commons (existing and potential) operating at different layers, taken from a comment I posted to the Commons Transition group on Loomio.

device (hardware and software of the computers used to access networks)

  • free digital (or “open source”) hardware design projects (where the design patterns for computer hardware are released under a license allowing it to be freely used, modified, and redisitributed)
  • customer-owned and/or worker-owned hardware manufacture and distribution cooperatives
  • projects developing and distributing free code software that runs on end user devices (eg the projects that maintain the various software components used in GNU/Linux distributions)

standards (defining how computers will interact productively across networks)

connections (cables, wireless access points, and routers, allowing data to flow from computer to computer across the networks):

  • community mesh networks (P2P wireless between PCs or mobiles)
  • community access wireless networks (collectively-owned wireless tower)
  • open wireless (voluntary sharing of private wireless networks by customers with uncapped upstream internet connections)
  • customer-owned and/or worker-owned ISP cooperatives (collectively-owned cable and router infrastructure, at any scale from neighbourhood to country to world)

hosting (servers providing access to databases over the networks):

  • projects developing and distributing free code software that runs services (whether on end user computers or dedicated server hardware)
  • P2P networks (eg BitTorrent clients, trackers, and search engines, or BitCoin and other blockchains)
  • home of office servers (consumer grade PCs running free code server packages, or combinations of them eg FreedoxBox, FreedomBone, YunoHost)
  • server colocation (or “colos”, small data centres run collectively by a group of server operators who provide and maintain their own hardware, eg RiseUp.net and MayFirst/ PeopleLink have their servers in a colo)
  • customer-owned and/or worker-owned ISP cooperatives (collectively-owned datacentres leasing the use of “bare metal” servers, virtual servers, or use of shared servers)

My point in laying all this out is that we don’t need to start from scratch, and certainly not from the top down. Many projects are already underway, and can already be used, joined, supported, cross-promoted, and partnered with.

Federating into more ambitious new meta-projects adds a ’social coordination’ layer to the stack. Various organisations have attempted to work at this layer, but there are no guarantees of success at this layer either. The ground behind is littered with the corpses of ambitious pioneers like the Free Network Foundation, and the various failed attempts at an open hardware organisation. But there are also many successful social layer projects, from early pioneers like the Free Sosftware Foundation/ GNU Project and Open Source Initiative, to more recent organisations like the P2P Foundation/ Commons Transition, Open Source Hardware Association, Collaborative Technology Alliance, and Tech Co-op Network (North America).

Filed April 30th, 2017 under Uncategorized

For a few years now, there has been a copyright statement at the top of the front page of the Disintermedia wiki. It stated that the contents of the wiki, and this blog, are under a CreativeCommons-Attribution-Share-Alike (CC-BY-SA) license, but it never said which version. The latest version of the CC license suite is 4.0, which folded the jurisdictional licenses for each country into a single set of international licenses, so I’ve added that to the copyright statement. Inspired by recent research into free code software licensing, I’ve decided to add an “or later” clause, so that content from this project can be used under future versions of the CC licenses whether or not I ever get around to making a specific statement to that effect.

The only downside is that if changes are made to future versions of the CC-BY-SA licenses that I don’t agree with, I can’t stop people using Disintermedia content under that version. By giving the “or later” permission, I’m saying that I’m confident the stewardship of the CC license suite is in good hands, and long may it remain that way.

Filed April 30th, 2017 under Uncategorized
Next Page »
  • Annual Events

  • Digital Freedom Foundation
  • LibrePlanet
  • Aotearoa

  • Aotearoa Indymedia
  • BallaNZ
  • Creative Commons Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Creative Freedom Foundation
  • DigitalNZ
  • Enspiral
  • Fair Deal Coalition
  • GreenStage
  • InternetNZ
  • Island Bay World Service
  • Living Economies
  • Localise
  • Loomio
  • Matrix FM
  • Nicky Hagar
  • No Right Turn
  • NZ Council for Civil Liberties
  • NZ Makers
  • NZ Makers Map
  • NZ Māori Internet Society
  • NZ Open Source Awards
  • NZCommons
  • OASIS
  • Open Government Ninjas of NZ
  • Open Source Society of NZ
  • Open Standards NZ
  • Open Ur Eyes
  • Pacific Media Centre
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • PledgeMe
  • Radio Chomsky
  • Regulation
  • Scoop
  • Tech Liberty
  • Timebank Aotearoa
  • Transition Towns Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Uncensored Magazine
  • Waatea News
  • Waikato Linux Users Group
  • What If
  • Wiki NZ
  • Zenbu
  • archives

  • ArchiveTeam
  • Critical Commons
  • Ibiblio
  • Internet Archive Community Software Collection
  • Open Archives Initiative
  • Blogroll

  • Abject
  • Access Now
  • Ars Technica
  • BadScience
  • Banjo - RoboBlog
  • Boing Boing
  • Born out of Binary
  • Centre for Media and Democracy
  • Choke Point Project
  • Copyrighteous
  • Create Digital Music
  • Creative Commons International
  • Cryptogon
  • Digital Standards Organisations
  • Disinfo
  • E-Democracy
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • Ever Vigilant
  • Freedom Box Foundation
  • Freedom of the Press Foundation
  • Gaming On Linux
  • Global Indymedia
  • Gondwanaland (Mike Linksvayer)
  • Institute for the Future of the Book
  • Institute of Network Cultures
  • Internet Governance Project
  • InternetNZ
  • Island Bay World Service
  • Iterating Towards Openness
  • Knowledge Ecology International
  • LinkedListCorruption
  • Linuxed - Exploring Linux Distros
  • Localise
  • Moved by Freedom - Powered By Standards
  • Nanowares
  • New Zealand Māori Internet Society
  • Nicky Hagar
  • No Right Turn
  • NZ Council for Civil Liberties
  • NZCommons
  • O'Reilly Radar
  • OASIS
  • OERu Technology Blog
  • Open Educational Resources Foundation
  • Open Knowledge Foundation
  • Open Rights Group
  • Open Social Web
  • Open Source Conscious Intelligence Network
  • Open Source Food
  • Open Stand
  • Open Ur Eyes
  • OpenCollective
  • OpenDotDotDot
  • OpenSource.com
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • Plumi
  • Public Interest Journalism Foundation
  • Punk Rock Permaculture
  • Question Copyright
  • Replicant (OS)
  • Rob Meyers
  • Schneier on Security
  • Scoop
  • Shareable
  • Slashdot
  • Software Freedom Law Centre
  • Software in the Public Interest
  • SourceMap
  • Sustento Institute
  • Tech Liberty
  • TechRights
  • The Tin Hat
  • Tinkering Down Under
  • TorrentFreak
  • TransitionMovement
  • Translation Project
  • Trisquel GNU/ Linux
  • United Diversity
  • Waatea News
  • We Speak for Freedom
  • Why Your Boss is Programmed To Be a Dictator
  • code bank

  • Allura
  • BitBucket
  • FusionForge
  • GITHub
  • GITLab
  • Gogs
  • Internet Archive Community Software Collection
  • LaunchPad
  • NotABug
  • Savannah
  • Software Freedom Conservancy
  • Software Heritage
  • Sourceforge
  • community economics

  • Commons Transition
  • Fruit Tree Planting Foundation
  • In Our Back Yards
  • Institute for Local Self-Reliance
  • Libre-Living
  • Living Economies
  • Sensorica
  • Sustainable Economy Law Centre
  • Timebank Aotearoa
  • TransitionMovement
  • cooperative

  • Loomio
  • Snowdrift Coop
  • crowdfunding

  • ArtistShare
  • BountySource
  • Causes
  • CauseVox
  • Crowdfunder
  • Crowdjustice
  • Crowdrise
  • Crowdsupply
  • Flattr
  • Fundit.buzz
  • GiveaLittle
  • Goteo
  • In Our Back Yards
  • KickStarter
  • KissKissBankBank
  • Liberapay
  • Mighty Cause
  • OpenGift
  • Patreon
  • PledgeMe
  • PledgeMusic
  • Pozible
  • Snowdrift Coop
  • StartSomeGood
  • Taproot Foundation
  • The Working World
  • Tidelift
  • Events

  • IndieWebCamp
  • free code

  • April
  • Black Duck Open Hub
  • DistroWatch
  • Ever Vigilant
  • F-Droid
  • Free Software Directory (GNU FDL 1.3 or later)
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Free Your Android
  • FreshCode
  • Gogs
  • Gun.io
  • Internet Archive Community Software Collection
  • LILA
  • LinuxTracker
  • NotABug
  • OERu Technology Blog
  • Peers Community
  • Plumi
  • PublicLab
  • Replicant (OS)
  • Software Heritage
  • Urchn Studios
  • Free Media

  • Communes Collective
  • Copyrighteous
  • Create Digital Music
  • Definition of Free Cultural Works
  • Dyne Foundation
  • FLOSSManuals
  • Free Culture Foundation
  • Ibiblio
  • Librivox
  • LILA
  • Open Video Conference
  • Show Me Do
  • Translation Project
  • Urchn Studios
  • WikiLeaks
  • freelancing

  • BountySource
  • Gun.io
  • independent media

  • Aotearoa Indymedia
  • BallaNZ
  • EngageMedia
  • Freedom of the Press Foundation
  • LILA
  • Matrix FM
  • Pacific Media Centre
  • Public Interest Journalism Foundation
  • Radio Chomsky
  • Radio Heritage Foundation
  • Uncensored Magazine
  • Waatea News
  • libre gaming

  • Gaming On Linux
  • Makers

  • GreenStage
  • Libre-Living
  • Mediamatic
  • NZ Makers
  • NZ Makers Map
  • Open ROV
  • Renewable PCs
  • Rob Meyers
  • Sensorica
  • maps

  • GeoForAll
  • GeoNames
  • Green Map System
  • Map Tools
  • Open Geospatial Foundation
  • Open Street Map
  • open governance

  • Crowdfunding
  • D-Cent
  • Deep Democracy Institute International
  • E-Democracy
  • Fight for the Future
  • Holacracy
  • Internet Governance Project
  • Kettering Foundation
  • Knowledge Sharing Toolkit (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • Open Government Ninjas of NZ
  • Open Policy Network
  • Open Space World (CC-BY-SA 2.5)
  • Open Stand
  • Open Standards NZ
  • Participedia
  • Sunlight Foundation
  • Transition Towns Aotearoa/ NZ
  • What If
  • WikiLeaks
  • open hardware

  • H-Node
  • Makey Makey
  • Meeblip Open Source Bass Synth
  • Open Hardware Summit
  • Open ROV
  • Open Source Hardware Association
  • Orgs

  • Access Now
  • Apache Foundation
  • April
  • Autistici/Inventati
  • Collaborative Knowledge Foundation
  • Commons Transition
  • Communes Collective
  • Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
  • Creative Commons Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Creative Freedom Foundation
  • Critical Commons
  • D-Cent
  • Deep Democracy Institute International
  • Digital Due Process coalition
  • Digital Freedom Foundation
  • Digital Standards Organisations
  • DigitalNZ
  • Dyne Foundation
  • E-Democracy
  • Electronic Frontiers Foundation
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • Fair Tracing Project
  • Fight for the Future
  • Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives
  • Free Culture Foundation
  • Free Network Foundation
  • Free Software Foundation
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Free Software Support Network
  • Freedom of the Press Foundation
  • Guifi
  • Ibiblio
  • Identity Commons
  • Institute for Local Self-Reliance
  • Internet Engineering Taskforce
  • Internet Governance Project
  • ISA Commons
  • Kettering Foundation
  • LEAP Encryption Access Project
  • LILA
  • Living Economies
  • Loomio
  • May First/ People Link
  • Mediamatic
  • NZ Māori Internet Society
  • NZ Open Source Awards
  • Open Architecture Network
  • Open Archives Initiative
  • Open Geospatial Foundation
  • Open Policy Network
  • Open Source Hardware Association
  • Open Source Society of NZ
  • Open Web Foundation
  • OpenADR Alliance
  • OpenCorporates
  • Outreachy
  • Participatory Culture Foundation
  • Peers Community
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • Privacy International
  • Public Citizen
  • Public Interest Journalism Foundation
  • Public Knowledge
  • Public Patent Foundation
  • Question Copyright
  • Radio Heritage Foundation
  • ReDecentralize
  • Reform Government Surveillance
  • Regulation
  • Rhizome
  • RiseUp
  • Science Commons
  • Software Carpentry Foundation
  • Software Freedom Conservancy
  • Sunlight Foundation
  • Sustainable Economy Law Centre
  • Taproot Foundation
  • Transition Towns Aotearoa/ NZ
  • Waikato Linux Users Group
  • Wiki NZ
  • World Wide Web Consortium (WC3)
  • Xiph.org
  • XMPP Standards Foundation
  • Peer2Peer

  • BitCoin
  • FreeCoin
  • Permaculture

  • Appropedia (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • Fruit Tree Planting Foundation
  • Future Scenarios
  • OrganicDesign
  • Permaculture in NZ
  • TransitionMovement
  • We Speak for Freedom
  • Privacy

  • Access Now
  • Digital Due Process coalition
  • Ever Vigilant
  • Fight for the Future
  • International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance
  • LEAP Encryption Access Project
  • OASIS
  • Privacy International
  • Reform Government Surveillance
  • What If
  • protocols and licensing

  • Definition of Free Cultural Works
  • Digital Standards Organisations
  • Greenlots
  • ISA Commons
  • Open Archives Initiative
  • Open Stand
  • Open Standards NZ
  • Open Web Foundation
  • OpenADR Alliance
  • Regular Events

  • Libre Graphics Meeting
  • Open Hardware Summit
  • science and datasets

  • AllTrials
  • Collaborative Knowledge Foundation
  • DigitalNZ
  • Fair Tracing Project
  • ISA Commons
  • Open Geospatial Foundation
  • Open Hand Project
  • SourceMap
  • Wiki NZ
  • Zooniverse
  • Tools

  • Autistici/Inventati
  • BitCoin
  • Black Duck Open Hub
  • CoActivate
  • Crowdfunding
  • DistroWatch
  • Dyne Foundation
  • F-Droid
  • FLOSSManuals
  • Fork the Cookbook
  • FreeCoin
  • GITHub
  • GNU Operating System
  • GreenStage
  • H-Node
  • How To Escape the GoogleMax Panopticon
  • Knowledge Sharing Toolkit (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • LEAP Encryption Access Project
  • LinuxTracker
  • Loomio
  • Map Tools
  • May First/ People Link
  • Meeblip Open Source Bass Synth
  • Monolith
  • Open Hand Project
  • Open Source Ecology
  • Open Space World (CC-BY-SA 2.5)
  • Open Street Map
  • OpenCorporates
  • OpenMailBox
  • Participatory Culture Foundation
  • Plumi
  • Renewable PCs
  • Replicant (OS)
  • RiseUp
  • Savannah
  • Show Me Do
  • Sourceforge
  • SourceMap
  • TransforMap
  • Translation Project
  • Web Platform
  • Zenbu
  • Transition

  • Green Map System
  • Health After Oil
  • Localise
  • OrganicDesign
  • Wiki

  • Appropedia (CC-BY-SA 3.0)
  • Foundation for Peer-to-Peer Alternatives
  • Instructables
  • LibrePlanet
  • Open (Government) NZ
  • Participedia
  • SourceWatch
  • WikiEducator
  • wireless mesh

  • Guifi
  • workplace democracy

  • Enspiral
  • The Working World