No images in this repository’s iceberg at this time
Download raw (34.4 KB)
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?> <!DOCTYPE html> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <title>unlike-us-reader-30</title> <link href="css/unlike-us-reader.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> </head> <body id="unlike-us-reader" xml:lang="en-GB"> <div> <h1 id="toc_marker-29" class="article-title"><a id="Towards-a-Free--Federated-Social-Web---Lorea-Takes-the-Networks-" />Towards a Free Federated Social Web: Lorea Takes the Networks!</h1> <p class="slash">/</p> <h2 class="author-name"><a href="unlike-us-reader-34.xhtml#cabello">03744</a>, Marta G. <a href="unlike-us-reader-34.xhtml#franco">Franco</a> and <a href="unlike-us-reader-34.xhtml#hache">89</a></h2> </div> <div> <p>2007. Everybody talks about Facebook. In the corridors of research centers, Web 2.0 is the new Holy Grail that will solve all problems at stake: the lack of social cohesion and formal citizenship, and digital and socio-economic exclusion. Internet researchers finally become hype as they dig into the sociabilities deployed by social networking sites (SNS): how they enable to bridge and (mostly) bond social capital, how they effect intimacy and privacy, and how they are redesigning social relations all over the place. At that time, critical analysis of their status as for-profit companies, their negative impact on net neutrality and decentralized web architecture,<sup><a id="footnote-311758-1-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-1">1</a></sup> and last but not least, their potential for social and political transformation were not yet issues of interest. </p> <p><a id="Anker-1195" />Some of the limitations of Web 2.0 have motivated the development of alternatives, which share the commonality of reclaiming a free and decentralized social web. Among them is Lorea, a federation of free social networks with a substantial community of ‘inhabitants’. Lorea offers a wide variety of features for cooperation and secure communication targeted at civil society as a whole, i.e. citizens and social collectives, and political change organizations that are motivated by the desire to interact, share, devise solutions, and change things together. Given these features, the use of its networks has increased in parallel to the popular assemblies held in public squares and the cooperative social economy collectives boosted by the 15th of May Spanish movement. </p> <h3 class="text_subtitle">Free and Federated Social Networks</h3> <p>The importance of building and sustaining your own social networking tools is not something most citizens or even activists are aware of. Through such tools it is possible to improve connections between individuals and groups, deal with identification, the sharing and exchange of resources, and even further, to enhance the development of networks of trust through ensuring the existence of affinity groups and their right to fork, the easing dialogues of darknets, conspiracy, and the building of worlds based upon justice.</p> <p>Still, civil society has never limited itself to the passive use of technological tools developed by others (rich white men named Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, for example). Contributing to the design and development of technopolitical tools enhances ‘technological sovereignty’. There are examples of such a rich contribution by citizens, for example the development of communal radio and television broadcasting, the launch of the first non-military satellite into orbit, the invention of free software and licenses, and even the first news portal on the internet with an open and anonymous publication system, set up by the Indymedia network in 1999.<sup><a id="footnote-311758-2-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-2">2</a></sup> Concerning a free social networking system however, it was hard to find any viable alternative (save for some rare exceptions) until at least 2008. This delay, in comparison with commercial social networks, could perhaps have various reasons: a lack of material and economic resources (how does one compete with the storage, communications and entrepreneurship capacity of Google?), a disinterest for what many considered to be an adolescent fad, and the fact that cloud computing usually entails giving up the right to have a look at the code of the software you are running (which is an inalienable feature to most free software lovers). Additionally, social movements seem to have an inability to capitalize and innovate the fundamental principles they put into practice in cyberspace themselves: participation, horizontality and collective intelligence. </p> <p>During the last years, the growing social concern about the risks associated with Web 2.0 (perfect paranoia is perfect awareness!) and web initiatives aiming at building free and decentralized social networks have finally shaped a field of operational experiences. Among them are BuddyPress, Crabgrass, Cryptocat, Cyn.in, Elgg, Identi.ca, Jappix, Kune, Pinax, Briar, Diaspora, Friendika, Secureshare, and Lorea, as well as protocols such as Google Wave Federation Protocol, OStatus, StatusNet and XMPP. Alternative approaches include desktop applications that run on your computer and communicate with other applications using open protocols, as well as browser apps based on universal authentication systems for profiles and identities. A second option is the decentralized network, which can be either distributed or federated. The latter means installing software on a trusted server application that communicates with other trusted servers. A distributed network uses P2P networks, which may not even need a dedicated server. Both are still in an early phase but are gaining interest among developers and activists.<sup><a id="footnote-311758-3-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-3">3</a></sup> </p> <p>Commercial social networks look for maximum financial returns, and their business model has been based on collecting and monitoring data. This has led to cloud computing and software as a service (SAAS) approaches, where applications depend on remote servers. A loss of the ability to examine and modify the source code and associated databases is the result. Free social network alternatives are not compelled to gain commercial returns or to develop such a business model. Their concern is developing software and infrastructures that comply with their ethics and keep users in control of their data (whatever this exactly means in the end). </p> <p>To achieve this they need to become sustainable, meaning they need to persist over time and meet their development aims in order to not become another ‘steamware’ project. They need to reach out to their public (because they are doing this for somebody other than themselves, right?) and see if they are considered useful and meaningful enough to be seeded and scaled. The perfect plan would be to achieve both steps at the same time, that is, to develop and improve free software and hosting autonomy for the movements, and to interact all the way with target communities, leaving channels for suggestion and active involvement open, accessible and easy to use. This may seem like a perfect model on paper, but it is far from easy to develop. Very often it turns out that too much time is consumed in system administration, and software development and time devoted to engaging, interacting, and training are more difficult to achieve. Together, this can lead to a burn-out, especially if it is a small team of developers who are also largely volunteers. </p> <p>A possible solution would be the involvement of people with a ‘low-techie’ background: people who are able to understand the core coders’ work and slang and help them document what they’re doing, so tasks are more distributed. Documentation ‘for human beings’ – as underlined by Ubuntu’s slogan, the operative system that popularized free operative system – would make the incorporation of newbies to the project much easier. Processes of technological sovereignty where communities and individuals become aware of their needs in term of information, communication, and networking, and consequently value being part of and/or supporting free alternatives to cover those needs are crucial elements to overcome current pitfalls. Engaging outside commercial and privative SNS is part of a legacy brought by communication guerrilla groups who share the common belief that ‘the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house’. As with any process towards autonomy, it is in the long trip where the opportunities of its development lie. </p> <h3 class="text_subtitle">Lorea<strong></strong></h3> <p>The case of Lorea deserves our attention because of the level of technical development and involvement it has generated in Spain, and because of our proximity to the team of developers. The project arises from a loose collective of people concerned about security and privacy in the social web, all of them with a background of free software and technological activism. Its launch was held in Madrid at the 2009 Hackmeeting, an annual gathering of hackers that took place at the squatted social center Patio Maravillas. Two already existing networks based on Elgg (the most common social networking free software at that time), Arte Libre Digital (ALD), and N-1, converged and decided to join efforts to further develop free, federated and self-managed networks. ALD was a meeting place for free culture artists and N-1 was started by media activists related to Indymedia Estrecho (the Indymedia node for Andalucia and Northern Morocco).<sup><a id="footnote-311758-4-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-4">4</a></sup> This explains the strong initial identification with antagonist social movements that continues to set the tone for a major part of the contents displayed in Lorea’s networks. </p> <p>Lorea means ‘flower’ in Basque and uses the metaphor of seeds to refer to each of the networks planted in a federated field of experimentation. The developer community has grown all across Europe and Latin America and is made up of virtually all of the people who inhabit the social networks. They are not ‘users’ of a service but ‘inhabitants’ of a technopolitical project: several thousand people consciously using networks, many of them active in the development work, server maintenance, reporting and resolving of bugs, documentation, help to residents, and dissemination of the project. The project continues to grow without any formalized management, and survives day-to-day thanks to the work of inhabitants, the organization of virtual assemblies<sup><a id="footnote-311758-5-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-5">5</a></sup> enabled by the social software itself, and mutual cooperation over monetary exchanges. The aim is to ultimately only operate within alternative economies based on barter, exchange, and digital currencies, but for now the inevitable basic expenses, related fundamentally to server maintenance, are covered by voluntary donations. Recently, Lorea has adopted the Move Commons<sup><a id="footnote-311758-6-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-6">6</a></sup> ‘Non-Profit, Reproducible, Reinforcing the Digital Commons, Grassroots’ badge for defining and illustrating its core organizational principles, and aims at implementing it inside its software to allow groups to label themselves similarly if they wish to do so. </p> <p>After more than two years of development with a strong emphasis on security and the creation of tools for group work, the LibrePlanet<sup><a id="footnote-311758-7-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-7">7</a></sup> ‘GNU Social/Project’ comparative analysis draws Lorea as one of the most interesting options for cooperative work and networking inside environments that do not aim to invade privacy, nor monitor, censor, or sell data to third parties. The project is firmly committed to implementing technologies that ensure messages circulating on its networks can only be read by their intended target. To that end, Lorea uses GPG (GNU Privacy Guard) encryption on some messages, and is currently working to extend this to all data exchanges. However, the project understands that ‘privacy’ in digital networking environments is an ambiguous notion, and pushes its inhabitants to improve their own security practices. Contrary to commercial platforms, Lorea ensures its networks are not ‘configured by default’, however it also believes that people seeking strong security should opt for other toolsets such as peer-to-peer networks, anonymizer software, and strong encryption tools.</p> <p>Technically, the code for Lorea was a fork of Elgg, probably the most popular free software for social networking sites, and has now evolved into being a distribution that incorporates federation protocols and foreign languages. Regarding the specificities of Lorea’s functionalities, over those that enable configuring one’s own profile or working desktop, the real strong emphasis is on tools that ease information and communication processes within groups. Inside Lorea networks there is a shift from focusing solely on individual subjectivity and its particular ego towards the group as a node for achieving cooperation and political transformation. Building upon the idea that all groups share similar needs, such as having a space to express themselves (blog, wiki, etherpad), tools for discussion with each other (mailing list, forum, chat), tools to coordinate their activities (calendar, tasks manager, polls), and tools to share and build documentation processes (documents, links, images, videos sharing and assemblies management), Lorea networks emphasize a design of groups that acts as one stop shop for activating all resource needs. Another presumption being that through this easy mechanism more people will contribute actively to documentation and communication tasks, therefore democratizing access to information by all members of the collectives involved. </p> <h3 class="text_subtitle">Lorea Features</h3> <p>Features include:</p> <ul> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Custom profile page and dashboard (inhabitants can choose which plugins or features to display).</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Multimedia galleries, wikis, pages, pads (based on EtherPad), blogs, bookmarks, task manager.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Status updates, private and open messaging and chat among inhabitants.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Events calendar.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Inhabitants groups that can be open, closed or invisible and provide the tools listed above, plus a chat room and a discussion forum that every inhabitant can configure to work as a mailing list.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Privacy-awareness: supports GPG encryption for messages and encourages sensible practices among inhabitants. The level of visibility is configurable for each item: private, for friends, members of a certain group, network inhabitants or fully open and indexable.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Federation: supports Ostatus (updates across different seeds), OpenID (unique login for multiple sites), XMPP (instant messaging) and FOAF (currently as a tool for experimentation for future features.</li> <li class="unordered-list-last"><span class="bullet">-</span> Each seed admin can install additional plugins (those developed by the Elgg community are suitable) and configure them according to their needs.</li> </ul> <p>Impending implementation (fall 2012 new distribution Foxglove):</p> <ul> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Upgrade to Elgg 1.8 compatibility.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Assemblies and decision-making plugin.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Poll plugin.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> License attribution to contents produced in the seed, attribution of Move Commons badges to groups.</li> <li class="unordered-list"><span class="bullet">-</span> Translation for contents created by groups.</li> <li class="unordered-list-last"><span class="bullet">-</span> New CSS and layout.</li> </ul> <p>Lorea currently counts fourteen federated networks<sup><a id="footnote-311758-8-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-8">8</a></sup> inhabited by collectives of social and political transformation dealing with social innovation, social economy, hacktivism, degrowth, and squatting, even though it should be noted that many of those networks are not active at this time. This is due to the demands from collectives to create their own seed without understanding that being on the net does not translate into networking, neither does having a free social networking tool translate into communities willing to share and cooperate. Our experience so far indicates that successful seeds are the ones with active community managers, virtual gardeners taking care of orientating new inhabitants, fighting spam, detecting bugs and also organizing face-to-face events in order to provide training and raise awareness (for instance: n-1.cc<sup><a id="footnote-311758-9-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-9">9</a></sup>, cooperativa.ecoxarxes.cat<sup><a id="footnote-311758-10-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-10">10</a></sup> and anillosur<sup><a id="footnote-311758-11-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-11">11</a></sup>). </p> <p>Through Lorea a high number of workshops are delivered to activists for free. This clearly takes into account the need to develop a dynamics based on inclusion, and the understanding that people who do free software development and system administration (sysadmin) work for a community, have a need to interact. This long-time involvement in the field, of the people engaged in the Lorea development team, might explain why N-1 exploded in the days following the massive demonstrations called for by the platform Real Democracy Now on May 15th, 2011. At the time, the squares of most Spanish cities were taken by people assemblies and turned into citizenship ‘agoras’, with the number of inhabitants in that seed multiplied by ten in less than one month. Many participants of those popular assemblies felt that they did not want to be neither ‘merchandise in the hands of politicians and bankers’ (as the motto for the May 15th demo stated), nor products in the hands of commercial internet companies. The new M15 inhabitants of N-1 wanted to strengthen their communication channels by using free and self-managed networks. This could ensure the continuity of the movement through the process of decentralization, when camps were dismantled and assemblies moved towards districts and villages.<sup><a id="footnote-311758-12-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-12">12</a></sup> </p> <p>After a year and a half, many things have happened. The pace of growth of inhabitants has slowed down and many have left Lorea networks due to a variety of reasons: instability, such as search engine failures, log in problems and server crashes are part of the routine, making activist sysadmin very stressful (these have been partially fixed with the new FoxGlove Distribution); problems of usability where even tough requests have often been poorly reduced to interface adaptation so that they resemble known sites like Facebook or Twitter (the networks do need many usability improvements); incapacity to use it as a megaphone for reaching and mobilizing people (no critical mass of millions of users); lack of fun for procrastination or hanging around (the software is not helpful to make friends or random roaming); or the inhabitants simply lost interest in the M15 movement (once the surprise effect and the mainstream public opinion condescension are over). </p> <p>On the other side, the stream of activity and publications has remained high and there is an increasing number of inhabitants involved in assemblies and cooperatives that choose N-1 for their internal communication, coordination and documentation. This seed includes over 5,000 groups and 44,000 inhabitants. On the other side, new alliances are beginning to emerge. Recently part of the Lorea team meet in Argentina and Brazil, creating many links with activists and collectives over there.<sup><a id="footnote-311758-13-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-13">13</a></sup> There are different projects aimed at integrating new functionalities into Lorea seeds, foreseen for the next years. For instance, the madcajan integration which enables geolocalization; modules for social money exchange, market places, and improved encryption; multilanguage possibilities; and federation facilities. </p> <h3 class="text_subtitle">Towards New Pathways</h3> <p>In the Web 2.0 commercial paradigm, there is an uncertainty factor that has yet to be analyzed: the possible failure of data as a business model.<sup><a id="footnote-311758-14-backlink" class="footnote-link" href="#footnote-311758-14">14</a></sup> Facebook Inc. began selling stock to the public and trading on the NASDAQ in May 2012. By summer, the stock had lost half of its initial value and comments on the lack of reliability of earnings are flooding the economic press. The public offering of Twitter has been delayed several times and is still to be confirmed, while their attempts to create advertisement formats bearable for users are not reported to be commercially successful. It is too soon to know how the big companies on the social web are going to react, but in a worldwide financial crisis context, venture capitalists are not likely to keep the flow of funds needed to ensure their oligopolistic positions for long. The way out could be a bigger commitment to open source software, which could be used by the developers and users community to push for more open policies (i.e., the development of Kune is taking big advantage of Google’s release of Waves under an Apache 2.0 free license). We should be aware of new opportunities in the near future, as the free software community has always been able to make synergy with companies exploiting open source as a solid business model.</p> <p>On the other side of the coin, Lorea social networks are not interested in emulating the commercial SNS. The aim of the inhabitants of Lorea social networks lies in the development of tools that facilitate coordination among horizontal collectives and enables self-management dynamics. Their development should be self-sustainable as long as their inhabitants take care of the technopolitical tools they are using/shaping. That is to say that people should see software as a resource that needs care, so their community works for its preservation.</p> <p>The self-management objective of the Lorea social networks has been a redundant issue over the development of the project. The transition of new inhabitants used to commercial services to a project with a need for personal commitment to contributing, and participating in its management, has not been really successful. Recently, the most involved people in the community have spotted many areas that require better communication and documentation so that every inhabitant can understand where they are standing and how they can help. As said on the index page: ‘Don’t ask yourself what the networks can do for you but what you can do for the networks’. Sustainability and scalability will only be achieved if a solid community understands that achieving technological sovereignty means to engage in N-1 dynamics, to contribute to the synergies of the commons. We are optimists even though we know that technological sovereignty is still a remote target and that we’ll first have to tackle technological fetishism and programmed obsolescence, which are firmly rooted in consumerist ways of lives.</p> <p>The other challenge is bottom-up and comes from the people that are participating in those global movements that started around 2011 in public square camping and occupation. The M15/Occupy network is tirelessly using social media to spread their messages, but as the initial outrage for the economic and political situation is being transformed into the collective construction of viable alternatives, the necessity of tools especially designed for self-organization and direct democracy grows more evident. The importance of ‘technological sovereignty’ can spread through this breeding ground and be accepted as one of the core demands of a movement that is overcoming the traditional technophobia found in radical movements, and in that way see hackers and internet geeks as human beings who can work together with (other) activists.</p> <p>Focusing again on Lorea as a paradigmatic example, we will see the release of a new version of the Lorea software, and the mainstreaming of more documentation regarding self-management dynamics and how that could enable the overall sustainability of the project. Still, the adoption rates of the new version and the increasing number of inhabitants involved in management tasks will indicate if community-driven developments like this can lead to stable and solid alternatives. </p> <p class="text-last">To make the most of these opportunities, decentralization and distribution are key elements. There is no viable possibility, and no desire either, to create monsters like Facebook or Twitter. On the contrary, the point is to create a whole constellation of interconnected autonomous territories. Whether people are willing to inhabit Lorea or prefer any one of the projects listed previously is irrelevant, as long as they choose software with which they can manage their online identity autonomously. In other words, technological sovereignty regarding social networking systems still needs to be addressed in a wider way, but hopes are still high... Expect us.</p> <h6 class="references_title">References<strong></strong></h6> <p class="references">Berners-Lee, Tim. ‘Long Live the Web: A Call for Continued Open Standards and Neutrality’, <em>Scientific American</em>, 22 November 2010, <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=long-live-the-web">http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=long-live-the-web</a>.</p> <p class="references">Cabello, Floren. ‘Hackeando la Frontera. Presentación de Indymedia-Estrecho’, <em>Razón y Palabra</em> 49 (2006), <a href="http://www.razonypalabra.org.mx/anteriores/n49/mesa1.html">http://www.razonypalabra.org.mx/anteriores/n49/mesa1.html</a>. </p> <p class="references">Franco, Marta G. ‘Toma las Plazas, Toma las Calles, Toma las Redes’, <em>Diagonal</em>, 20 July 2011, <a href="http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/Toma-las-plazas-toma-las-calles.html">http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/Toma-las-plazas-toma-las-calles.html</a>. </p> <p class="references">‘GNU Social/Project Comparison’, Libreplanet , 21 September 2010, <a href="http://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Group:GNU_Social/Project_Comparison">http://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Group:GNU_Social/Project_Comparison</a>. </p> <p class="references">Grasso, Daniele. ‘N-1: Una Red Social no Mercantilizada es Posible’, <em>Diagonal</em>, 20 July, 2011, <a href="http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/N-1-una-red-social-no.html">http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/N-1-una-red-social-no.html</a>. </p> <p class="references">Halleck, DeeDee. ‘Indymedia: Building an International Activist Internet Network’, WACC, 2003, <a href="http://archive.waccglobal.org/wacc/publications/media_development/archive/2003_4/indymedia_building_an_international_activist_internet_network">http://archive.waccglobal.org/wacc/publications/media_development/archive/2003_4/indymedia_building_an_international_activist_internet_network</a>. </p> <p class="references">Kidd, Dorothy. ‘Indymedia.org: A New Communications Commons’, in Martha McCaughey and Michael D. Ayers (eds) <em>Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practice</em>, New York: Routledge, 2003, pp. 47-69.</p> <p class="references">Padilla, Margarita. ‘La Web 2.0 es una Paradoja Hecha de Grandes Negocios y Pasión por Compartir”, <em>Público</em>, 10 April 2009, <a href="http://blogs.publico.es/fueradelugar/55/la-web-20-es-una-paradoja-hecha-de-grandes- negocios-y-pasion-por-compartir">http://blogs.publico.es/fueradelugar/55/la-web-20-es-una-paradoja-hecha-de-grandes- negocios-y-pasion-por-compartir</a>. </p> <p class="references-last">Social Web Incubator Group. ‘A Standards-based, Open and Privacy-aware Social Web: W3C Incubator Group Report’, W3C, 6 December 2010, <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/">http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/</a>.</p> <div class="footnotes"> <h6 class="references_title">Notes</h6> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-1" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-1-backlink">1</a>.	Tim Berners-Lee, ‘Long Live the Web: A Call for Continued Open Standards and Neutrality’, <em>Scientific American</em>, 22 November 2010, <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=long-live-the-web">http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=long-live-the-web</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-2" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-2-backlink">2</a>.	See, Dorothy Kidd, ‘Indymedia.org: A New Communications Commons’, in Martha McCaughey and Michael D. Ayers (eds) <em>Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practice</em>, New York: Routledge, 2003, pp. 47-69 and DeeDee Halleck, ‘Indymedia: Building an International Activist Internet Network’, WACC, 2003, <a href="http://archive.waccglobal.org/wacc/publications/media_development/archive/2003_4/indymedia_building_an_international_activist_internet_network">http://archive.waccglobal.org/wacc/publications/media_development/archive/2003_4/indymedia_building_an_international_activist_internet_network</a>. </p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-3" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-3-backlink">3</a>.	See, Social Web Incubator Group, ‘A Standards-based, Open and Privacy-aware Social Web: W3C Incubator Group Report’, W3C, 6 December 2010, <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/">http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/</a>. </p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-4" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-4-backlink">4</a>.	Floren Cabello, ‘Hackeando la Frontera. Presentación de Indymedia-Estrecho’, <em>Razón y Palabra</em> 49 (2006), <a href="http://www.razonypalabra.org.mx/anteriores/n49/mesa1.html">http://www.razonypalabra.org.mx/anteriores/n49/mesa1.html</a>. </p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-5" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-5-backlink">5</a>.	For more information see, <a href="https://n-1.cc/pg/pages/view/1048569">https://n-1.cc/pg/pages/view/1048569</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-6" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-6-backlink">6</a>.	For more information see, <a href="http://movecommons.org/en/">http://movecommons.org/en/</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-7" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-7-backlink">7</a>.	‘GNU Social/Project Comparison’, Libreplanet, 21 September 2010, <a href="http://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Group:GNU_Social/Project_Comparison">http://libreplanet.org/wiki?title=Group:GNU_Social/Project_Comparison</a>. </p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-8" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-8-backlink">8</a>.	N-1, Anillo Sur, Arte Libre Digital, Cooperativa Integral Catalana, REdesenred, MonedaBCN, Intermonedes, Cuenca, Ecoseny, Cooperatech, Sementeira, Red DRY, Enekenbat, and Luzablue.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-9" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-9-backlink">9</a>.	For more information see, <a href="https://n-1.cc">https://n-1.cc</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-10" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-10-backlink">10</a>.	For more information see, <a href="https://cooperativa.ecoxarxes.cat/">https://cooperativa.ecoxarxes.cat/</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-11" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-11-backlink">11</a>.	For more information see, <a href="https://red.anillosur.cc/">https://red.anillosur.cc/</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-12" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-12-backlink">12</a>.	See, Marta G. Franco, ‘Toma las Plazas, Toma las Calles, Toma las Redes’, <em>Diagonal</em>, 20 July 2011, <a href="http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/Toma-las-plazas-toma-las-calles.html">http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/Toma-las-plazas-toma-las-calles.html</a>; and Daniele Grasso, ‘N-1: Una Red Social no Mercantilizada es Posible’, <em>Diagonal</em>, 20 July, 2011, <a href="http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/N-1-una-red-social-no.html">http://www.diagonalperiodico.net/N-1-una-red-social-no.html</a>. </p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-13" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-13-backlink">13</a>.	For more information see, <a href="http://synap.tk/">http://synap.tk/</a> and <a href="https://n-1.cc/pg/groups/489432/synaptk/">https://n-1.cc/pg/groups/489432/synaptk/</a>.</p> </div> <div class="footnote"> <p class="xfootnote"><a id="footnote-311758-14" class="footnote-anchor" href="#footnote-311758-14-backlink">14</a>.	See, Margarita Padilla, ‘La Web 2.0 es una Paradoja Hecha de Grandes Negocios y Pasión por Compartir”, <em>Público</em>, 10 April 2009, <a href="http://blogs.publico.es/fueradelugar/55/la-web-20-es-una-paradoja-hecha-de-grandes- negocios-y-pasion-por-compartir">http://blogs.publico.es/fueradelugar/55/la-web-20-es-una-paradoja-hecha-de-grandes- negocios-y-pasion-por-compartir</a>.</p> </div> </div> </div> </body> </html>