Add new comment

"Additionally, does collaboration need to be face-to-face in order to be meaningful?"

That is a major plus. "Unmediated relations", right? It creates a stronger bond and also makes it possible to develop ties, relationships, or maybe just have a bit of fun together as human beings. But there's the benefits from assigning each other tasks f2f, then meeting up to report on progresses, problems, discoveries, limitations. I haven't been hanging out in git communities, but I suppose that the bond's always uncertain, in how devs, no matter their commitment for a while, can just disappear without anyone knowing what's up with them. It's still a process divided by a curtain.

As for me, well, I ain’t sure I feel comfortable enough with online projects. Or strongly motivated by, at this point. I guess the real necessity here is to be gauging other people’s motivation and interests when starting something with them, like in general. But that in itself is a process... the motives are often rooted on specific factors.

So I'm somewhat with anon 08:07 on that (tho there ARE anarchies that "take off the ground", tho they surely won't be tagged "anarchism" all over... they just won't make anarchists do billions or form a sizeable army, tho was that ever the point?). Look at the background of most devs on the net. They're developing programs and systems together within the context of classes or paid jobs, or at best as sidelines from these, as group "ventures" between devs, so to put on their resumes. So they "pay off" one way or another for those people involved. If they also connect locally IRL, like hacker collectives n shit, and that's another important benefit. They aren't altruistic projects as much as they look like on the surface.

On the other hand there's been so many cool online projects that fizzled out or died off over the years, probably due to the nature and character of the (productive) social bond -or lack thereof- in combination with the odd, dehumanizing theatrality of interacting with a screen, vs people IRL.

You wanna know the true reason why Facebook got big? Because there aren't real Facebook nerds. People went to Facebook because they're even lazier than me at terminal consoles, at doing shit by themselves on a computer. They're on that railroad where the computer/device does everything for them. It's a Nanny State technocracy, where they are getting organized by their metaphorical parents to "connect with others". Hence, it’d be very surprising if the next big thing on the internet ain’t some other corporate or State gimmick.

Perhaps we need to keep pushing things like GPL, blockchain and end-to-end encryption IRL, not as underdog tech alternatives but as solutions that are entirely different. And also take note that it's also through real-life sociological patterns that Facebook went so big.

I hope there's something here that answers your questions.