digitalcourage.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Diese Instanz wird betrieben von Digitalcourage e.V. für die Allgemeinheit. Damit wir das nachhaltig tun können, erheben wir einen jährlichen Vorausbeitrag von 1€/Monat per SEPA-Lastschrifteinzug.

Server stats:

822
active users

#interoperability

8 posts7 participants1 post today

"The point is that hiding secrets in devices that belong to your adversaries is very bad security practice. No matter how good a bank safe is, the bank keeps it in its vault – not in the bank-robber's basement workshop.

For a hiding-secrets-in-your-adversaries'-device plan to work, the manufacturer has to make zero mistakes. The adversary – a competitor, a tinkerer, a grad student – only has to find one mistake and exploit it. This is a bedrock of security theory: attackers have an inescapable advantage.

So I think that DRM doesn't work. I think DRM is a legal construct, not a technical one. I think DRM is a kind of magic Saran Wrap that manufacturers can wrap around their products, and, in so doing, make it a literal jailable offense to use those products in otherwise legal ways that their shareholders don't like. As Jay Freeman put it, using DRM creates a new law called "Felony Contempt of Business Model." It's a law that has never been passed by any legislature, but is nevertheless enforceable.

In the 25 years I've been fighting anticircumvention laws, I've spoken to many government officials from all over the world about the opportunity that repealing their anticircumvention laws represents. After all, Apple makes $100b/year by gouging app makers for 30 cents on ever dollar. Allow your domestic tech sector to sell the tools to jailbreak iPhones and install third party app stores, and you can convert Apple's $100b/year to a $100m/year business for one of your own companies, and the other $999,900,000,000 will be returned to the world's iPhone owners as a consumer surplus."

pluralistic.net/2025/05/14/pre

pluralistic.netPluralistic: Are the means of computation even seizable? (14 May 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

"The point is that there were always greedy bosses, and since the turn of the century, they'd had the ability to use digital tools to enshittify their services. What changed wasn't the greed – it was the law. When Bruce Lehman disarmed every computer user, he rendered us helpless against the predatory instincts of anyone with a digital product or service, at a moment when everything was being digitized.

This week's episode recovers some of the lost history, an act I find very liberating. It's easy to feel like you're a prisoner of destiny, whose life is being shaped by vast, impersonal forces. But the enshittificatory torments of the modern digital age are the result of specific choices, made by named people, in living memory. Knowing who did this to us, and what they did, is the first step to undoing it.

In next week's episode, we'll tell you about the economic theories that created the "five giant websites filled with screenshots of the other four." We'll tell you who foisted those policies on us, and show you the bright line from them to the dominance of companies like Amazon. And we'll set up the conclusion, where we'll tell you how we'll wipe out the legacies of these monsters of history and kill the enshitternet.

Get "Understood: Who Broke the Internet?" in whatever enshittified app you get your podcasts on (or on Antennapod, which is pretty great)."

pluralistic.net/2025/05/13/ctr

pluralistic.netPluralistic: Who Broke the Internet? Part II (13 May 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

""Who Broke the Internet?" is a new podcast from CBC Understood that I host and co-wrote – it's a four-part series that explains how the enshitternet came about, and, more importantly, what we can do about it. Episode one is out this week:

cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/135

The thesis of the series – and indeed, of my life's work – is that the internet didn't turn to shit because of the "great forces of history," or "network effects," or "returns to scale." Rather, the Great Enshittening is the result of specific policy choices, made in living memory, by named individuals, who were warned at the time that this would happen, and they did it anyway. These wreckers are the largely forgotten authors of our misery, and they mingle with impunity in polite society, never fearing that someone might be sizing them up for a pitchfork.

"Who Broke the Internet?" aims to change that. But the series isn't just about holding these named people accountable for their enshittificatory deeds: it's about understanding the policies that created the enshittocene, so that we can dismantle them and build a new, good internet that is fit for purpose, namely, helping us overcome and survive environmental collapse, oligarchic control, fascism and genocide."

pluralistic.net/2025/05/08/who

CBC ListenDon't Be Evil | Understood | CBC Podcasts | CBC Listen Google Search was the gold standard — a product born in a dorm room during the internet’s early, idealistic era. But when internal emails surfaced they revealed a deeper conflict inside the company: was Google making Search worse, on purpose, to boost ad revenue? Google says its changes are all about benefiting users. Critics say it’s all part of a bigger pattern — one that host Cory Doctorow calls enshittification: the slow, deliberate decay of platforms in the name of profit. Guests in this episode include Ed Zitron, Emmaneul Goldstein, Clive Thompson, and Steven Levy. 
Continued thread

“...urges the @ec.europa.eu to implement existing #interoperability obligations under the #DMA and look into extending interoperability obligations to online social networking services”. Hey EC: I wrote a new Article 7(a) for the DMA doing this for you in May 2023 😉 (and discussed it with IMCO)

a woman in a red dress is sitt...

Bluesky SocialEuropean Commission (@ec.europa.eu)News and information from the European Commission. Social media and data protection policy: http://europa.eu/!MnfFmT

I am SO impressed by the latest version of #Beeper! So user-friendly (although Meta threw up a few security alerts while connecting my multiple accounts on its services).

This really demonstrates what good #interoperability for secure messengers can do — including features (like low priority messages) not even present in the original clients!

The universal #inbox is HERE! 🤩

Open Document Format turns 20, but Microsoft Office still reigns supreme

“It’s been 20 years since the Open Document Format (ODF) became a standard, marking a milestone in the push for open, vendor-neutral file formats — and the beginning of a long but largely unsuccessful attempt to loosen Microsoft Office’s grip on the ...continues

See gadgeteer.co.za/open-document-

A festive sparkler candle forming the number "20," glowing against a dark background, symbolizing celebration.
GadgeteerZA · Open Document Format turns 20, but Microsoft Office still reigns supreme“It's been 20 years since the Open Document Format (ODF) became a standard, marking a milestone in the push for open, vendor-neutral file formats — and the

> @Discourse shares #Fediverse focus on openness, decentralization and data ownership. That's why we have invested in establishing #interoperability via #ActivityPub, we see it as a natural extension of our values and an important step towards a more connected, open web.

> Whether you're sharing announcements, hosting technical discussions, or collaborating across communities, federation makes it easier to extend your reach and engage with users where they already are.

blog.discourse.org/2025/04/dis

Discourse · Discourse and the Fediverse!The Fediverse offers ways to expand the reach of Discourse communities and help them build bridges with people active in other spaces, all while keeping the conversation civil, meaningful and focused.