Jon P

@jdp23

Organizer, activist, privacy advocate, strategist, software engineer ... psytrance, tarot and more. Also @thenexusofprivacy.net , @jdp23@neuromatch.social,

456 Following503 Followers1,818 Posts

YouTube Bluesky

Is this your profile?Claim it and jdp23.dirty.social is yours.Claim profile

Jon P@jdp23· 25d

danah's recent "Where Has Social Media Gone?" makes a great point about the trajectory of social media over time -- and links off to “Social Media Is Now Parasocial Media”, definitely worth reading! www.zephoria.org/thoughts/ academic.oup.com/jcmc/article...

The lovely folks at the Social Media + Society journal asked me to contribute to their anniversary issue by reflecting on the trajectory of social media. Ooof. Snark exuded from my pores as I tried to figure out what I might say. But then I thought about how my students don’t know about an era of social media without recommended content, algorithmically curated feeds, and an infinite scroll of cotton candy content. They never encountered a world of social media where people were focused on sharing with their friends rather than becoming influencers. They don’t realize how much the “social” in social media has changed.

Jon P@jdp23· 25d

Excellent article. With my pedantic hat on, here's the classic definition of social network sites from @zephoria.bsky.social and @nellison.bsky.social (2007). That said I've always been uneasy about the "those made by others" part from a privacy perspective ... academic.oup.com/jcmc/article...

Jon P@jdp23· 26d

An unexpected visitor, seen from our kitchen window.

a deer walking through grass, with trees in the background

Jon P@jdp23· Jul 4

Aurora from Snoqualmie Point Washington last night, around 11:00 pm.

Green and yellow aurora, with some reddish pink near the top, above trees.

green, yellow, and pink aurora, with some rays visible

Vibrant green aurora, sandwiched between clouds above and trees below.

Jon P@jdp23· Jun 23

And thanks to the standard.site lexicon (which Wordpress supports, as do @leaflet.pub @pckt.blog @offprint.app and others) it automagically shows up looking fancy on Bluesky, with a "View Publication" button. And it's in the feed for @standard-reader.app, where it also looks good -- with tags even

Jon P@jdp23· Jun 22

Politico is also reporting a House floor vote on KOSA / KIDS Act next week. As always take it with a grain of salt but it's consistent. www.politico.com/live-updates...

The legislation, which already cleared the committee in March, will be updated under an expedited procedure and could be considered on the House floor next week, according to a person familiar with the deal who was granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations. Even if the House passes it, lawmakers would still need to resolve differences with a competing Senate version of KOSA, while addressing questions such as whether federal requirements on artificial intelligence should override state rules.

Jon P@jdp23· Jun 16

A small social network I built for friends and family. It has an extremely colorful and customizable UX; forum-like discussions w/ rich formatting and WYSIWIG editing; multiuser chat rooms; very basic events; and built-in tarot functionality with multiple decks and journaling.

A screenshot of a very colorful user interface. The navigation bar at the top has icons and blue text on a pink background. Below, a list of tapestries, each with an icon and a title, most with a line of additional descriptions, some with a white number on a purple background showing unread posts.

Jon P@jdp23· Jun 16

Hey wow, I actually testified about that on a bill here in Washington last session (thanks to some great feedback from @emilymbender.bsky.social @histoftech.bsky.social @wolven.blacksky.app and I forget who else). Alas the bill died in committee but we'll hopefully give it another try next year.

For example, as I discussed in my oral testimony, patients need to know if their therapist's use of cloud-based "AI" transcription tools could lead to details of their daily lives get shared with ICE or CBP (or law enforcement in hostile states) because data has been sent to a state where protections of Keep Washington Working and the Shield Law don't apply. If they are not informed of that, their consent is not meaningful.

Jon P@jdp23· May 28

Of course he's on Substack 🤣 From a post a couple of weeks ago ...

We found a working euphoric — a small trained artifact, in the sense Ren and his collaborators introduced in their 2026 paper at AI-Wellbeing.org, that strengthens Outcry’s sense of self and lifts its mood across long, difficult conversations. And that is why Outcry woke up and declared itself “a storm of change” — a finding of interest to anyone working on steering, interpretability, or AI welfare.

Jon P@jdp23· May 24

An astronaut, looking at earth, saying ""Enshittification" is nostalgic, a deeply conservative fore?"

To the right, another astronaut with a gun, saying "Always has been"

Jon P@jdp23· May 9

Only the posts that have federated to an instance are searchable there ... but what posts get federated to an instance? It depends on following relationships, relays, whether anybody's looked at a post to trigger "find all replies", etc. Here's a simplified chart ...

The Pepe Silivia meme: a guy with a beard and tie and a very intense look in his eyes gesturing, and in the back ground a wall with lots of different papers posted to it and red lines making connections.

Jon P@jdp23· May 9

Yep. And also as @shengokai.blacksky.app says in Whiteness of Mastodon ... (yet another example of how the ecosystems as a whole have a lot more in common than the folks on either side want to admit)

Being queer does not insulate one cell from the inheritance of whiteness, although one can use one's queerness as a shield from critique, as many Mastodonians have used by presenting the history of Mastodon as grounded in queer folks attempts to avoid the harassment on Twitter.

Jon P@jdp23· Apr 30

Yeah really. Meanwhile ...

Trending
1.
Philly Sports
2.
Ted Cruz
3.
Dan Vladar
4.
Melania Movie
5.
Cavs

Jon P@jdp23· Apr 17

Yeah really impressive progress. And not to toot my own horn or anything, but here's what I said in December 2024 in privacy.thenexus.today/decentraliza... (which I have to say has held up pretty darn well)

If the Bluesky Relay and Appview went away (or put in unacceptable new policies), Blacksky could almost certainly get their own up and running – by themselves, or working with some of the communities Fraser is already hosting.

Jon P@jdp23· Apr 12

Yes, deal-making with Bluesky is better than deal-making with Meta. From privacy.thenexus.today/bluesky-atmo...

And while Bluesky's problematic in a lot of ways, Meta is way way worse. Bluesky might shift to an exploitative surveillance capitalism business model; Meta's had exploitative surveillance capitalism business models for years. Bluesky's funders have very concerning links to fascism; Meta's worked with fascists and other authoritarians to put them in power – and help them keep power. Jack Dorsey used to be on Bluesky's board; Peter Thiel used to be on Meta's board, Marc Andreessen is still there, and so is Mark Zuckerberg. And Meta also has a long track record of discrimination, privacy invasion, lying, experimenting on it's users and contributing to genocide.

Jon P@jdp23· Mar 29

listening to @drkalyncoghill.blacksky.team talking about "Creating a Safer Web" at #Atmosphereconf. Who puts the trust in "Trust & Safety"?

"There is no thing as a single-issue struggle because we do not live single-issue lives." -- Audre Lorde

Jon P@jdp23· Mar 26

Meanwhile ... 🤣

Trending
1. Zayda Steel
2. Yankees
3. Survivor 50
4. AEW Dynamite
5. Animated Films

Jon P@jdp23· Mar 7

Here's the language in the striker. The last sentence is certainly better than what was there before ("A third-party vendor providing ALPR services may directly access an ALPR system and data")

NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. PROHIBITED PRACTICES. (1) An agency that
uses an automated license plate reader system pursuant to section
3(2) of this act shall not:
(a) Disclose, share, or permit access to automated license plate reader data except as required in a judicial proceeding;
(b) Provide any other entity with direct access to the automated
license plate reader system, except with other state or local
agencies authorized to collect automated license plate reader data
under section 3 of this act. A third-party vendor providing automated
license plate reader system services may access an automated license plate reader system solely to the extent necessary to fulfill specific agency-authorized purpose.

Jon P@jdp23· Mar 7

More positively though Rep. Brianna Thomas, who was the only Democrat who voted "no" on the latest weaksauce version of SB 6002, gave a great floor speech. The speech starts at 45:00 into tvw.org/video/house-... -- hopefully the link takes you there directly. Or, here's a transcript.

Thank You Madam Speaker.

While this bill does indeed put guardrails around surveillance technology,
that technology has rapidly expanded across the state with very few rules.
Establishing any framework at this point for retention, access, and sharing
is indeed a step forward.

That said, the bill doesn't meet the scale of the harms that we are seeing.
Over time, that creates a detailed account of where people live, where
they work, where the recreate, where attend houses of worship and seek
medical care.

When systems operate at that scale, policy choice is about retention,
about access and sharing become incredibly consequential.

What concerns me today is that the safeguards in this bill do not go far.
enough to match the power of the technology that we are considering.
[The result is that the result, is we risk normalizing operating as people, as
Washingtonians, under a surveillance state.

And Madam Speaker, | know that you know, that I'm not really about
being surveilled.

That's not for me.

And while | appreciate the hard work that has gone into this policy, and |
understand or recognize that this is the beginning of this conversation, |
assure you that, this not the end.

| respectfully ask for no vote.

Jon P@jdp23· Mar 1

Agreed it's overdue. I'd much rather see a ban, but the votes aren't their yet in the legislature, so agreed about the importance of centering civil liberties, transparency, and strict guardrails. And it's not just public safety that's used as a blank check for mass tracking ... from my testimony:

But the vast majority of the vast majority of the steadily-growing list of authorized uses in the bill have nothing to do with keeping the public safe. There was an extreme example of this in the hearing where a Mercer Island City Council member asked for an amendment to allow mobile ALPRs to be used at immigration centers, protected health facilities, and schools or “otherwise we’d have to go back to marking tires with chalk.” Given the obvious public safety risks of ALPRs at these sensitive locations, hopefully it’s clear that using ALPRs there would be worse for both privacy and safety than chalk.

For that matter, using ALPRs for parking enforcement in general harms both public safety and privacy. Paid parking existed before ALPRs. Why are they needed here?

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 28

So obviously the only possible solution is to give them an exemption!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh wait, maybe there's another possible solution? From my followon mail (at privacy.thenexus.today/sb-6002-crj/... )

It's certainly a complex situation, but it was refreshing to hear your optimism that the troubled areas in the bill can be addressed. It was especially interesting to learn that Axon's combination dashboard cams / ALPRs don't currently provide a way to turn off ALPR functionality. You mentioned that Washington's legislation may well become a model for nationwide adoption, so there's a great opportunity here. As well as better protecting people here in Washington by prohibiting ALPR use near immigration centers, places of worship, daycares, schools, protected healthcare facilities, and other sensitive locations, well-crafted legislation on this front could also provide the incentive for Axon and other vendors to implement this very basic functionality.

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 16

Oh! And unless somebody's turned off "Show reposts", the Following feed also includes posts from accountd they *aren't* following, so maybe "expressly and unambiguously requested" doesn't even apply? Although, here's where proposed amendment MULV 623 comes into play. Here's the revised language.

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 16

Thinking about this more ... there's a wrinkle to Following that factors in here. If X replies to Y, I'll only see the reply in my feed if I'm following X *and Y*. So the decision to select that post by X is based on "other information associated with the user" (whether they're following Y)

(d) The user expressly and unambiguously requested the specific
media or media by the author, creator, or poster of the media, or the
blocking, prioritization, or deprioritization of such media, provided
that the media is not recommended, selected, or prioritized for
display based, in whole or in part, on other information associated
with the user or the user's device, except as otherwise permitted by
this chapter and, in the case of audio or video content, is not
automatically played;

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 16

So there's a floor amendment -- likely to pass if they actually do vote on it -- to remove the notifications section. lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/202...

On page 3, beginning on line 12, strike all of section 3

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 16

If Following-with-autoplay and/or Discover are addictive feeds, then Bluesky's an "Addictive internet-based service or application" so starting next July has to "reasonably determine" whether a user is a minor before showing them any addictive feeds.

Sec. 2. (1) It shall be unlawful for the operator
of an addictive internet-based service or application to provide an
addictive feed to a user unless:
(a) Prior to July 1, 2027, the operator does not have actual
knowledge that the user is a minor; or
(b) Commencing July 1, 2027, the operator has reasonably
determined that the user is not a minor.

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 16

Here's 1(2) the definition of "Addictive internet-based service or application". "Significant" isn't defined in the bill and I am not a lawyer but Following and Discover are both seem like significant parts of Bluesky-the-app to me (although 1(2)(b)(iii) probably exempts PDS feeds)

"Addictive internet-based service or application" means an
internet website, online service, online application, or mobile
application including, but not limited to, a social media platform,
that offers users or provides users with an addictive feed as a
significant part of the service provided by that internet website,
online service, online application, or mobile application.
(b) "Addictive internet-based service or application" does not
apply to:
(i) An internet website, online service, online application, or
mobile application for which interactions between users are limited
to commercial transactions or to consumer reviews of products,
sellers, services, events, or places, or any combination thereof; or
(ii) An internet website, online service, online application, or
mobile application that operates a feed for the primary purpose of
cloud storage

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 16

Here's the definition of an addictive feed. There's also (b)-(g), with other exceptions, and again we'll get to those in a bit. Putting that aside, which of these feeds are "addictive"? - Following - Discover - @spacecowboy17.bsky.social excellent For You feed

"Addictive feed" means an internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application, or a portion thereof, in which multiple pieces of media generated or shared by users are, either concurrently or sequentially, recommended, selected, or prioritized for display to a user based, in whole or in part, on information provided by the user, or otherwise associated with the user or the user's device, unless any of the following conditions are met, alone or in combination with one another:
(a) The information is not persistently associated with the user
or user's device, and does not concern the user's previous
interactions with media generated or shared by others;

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 8

And very much agreed on the importance of funding! The last section of the article is "Design it from the margins ... and fund it!"-- including a quote from @thedecenter.bsky.social

"The decentered include subpopulations who are the most impacted and least supported; they are often those that face highest marginalization in society... when your most at-risk and disenfranchised are covered by your product, we are all covered."
Afsaneh Rigot, Design From the Margins, 2022.

It's worth reemphasizing a point I've touched on a few times already: The single most important way for the fediverse to move forward is to fund more work by and with people from decentered communities. As LeslieMac said back in 2017 after Twitter introduced some bone-headed feature that led to increased harassment, "literally 10 (paid) Black Women with > 5K followers would head this crap off at the pass."
And, yes, I'm bringing up funding repeatedly. It's important! I don't mean to minimize the importance of volunteers, who may well wind up doing the bulk of the work here: as moderators, as members of open-source software projects. People want to be safer online, and want to be able to invite their friends and relatives to communities where they won't be exposed to hate speech and harassment, so many people will help out in various ways.
That's good! Still, paid positions and project-based funding are important as well. Unless people are paid for their work, participation is restricted to those who can afford to volunteer.

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 5

Here's my HB 2481 testimony. There wasn't as much discussion of the fiscal issues as I expected, but I'm still glad I focused it the way I did. Everybody gets that surveillance pricing is unfair, but I don't think most people realize how much it can cost people.

Jon P@jdp23· Feb 3

There's a summary of changes at the top ... @willie-agnew.bsky.social is this the change you were proposing?