Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

2 New Social Networks With Very Different Political Twists

Posted by timothy on from the choose-your-paradigm dept.

judgecorp writes "Frustrated at the off-topic chatter on Twitter, British MP Louise Mensch has launched a supposedly rival service. Despite the name, Menshn, this is apparently not a hoax, but a site aimed at 'on-topic' conversation, initially around the U.S. election. Mensch is a former 'chick lit' author, and a Member of Parliament since 2010. She has taken part in questioning of Rupert and James Murdoch, and urged control of social media." If "control of social media" urged by sitting politicians strikes you as undesirable, or the hyper-focused content seems constraining, take heart: an anonymous reader points out an online community of a different stripe — a social network launched by Wikileaks, intended to be "a secure, surveillance-resistant social network purpose-built for Friends of WikiLeaks." Whether or not your politics line up with those of most Wikileaks supporters, you might wish for some of the features FoWL is designed to provide: "By design your details are encrypted, and hidden from everyone except your immediate contacts. Even we can't access them. Connected by FoWL, friends of WikiLeaks will communicate however they like, including using secure person-to-person methods. As the network grows away from the site infrastructure, it becomes autonomous and decentralized, opaque to observers and impossible to compromise."

32 of 99 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will Ecuador accept Julian Assange's friend request?

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  2. Re:Irony by jguevin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is it that hard to distinguish between individual privacy and abusive and/or illegal secrecy in government?

  3. Impossible? by DrData99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "...impossible to compromise."

    Sounds like a challenge for NSA!

  4. We already have this by vlm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    a site aimed at 'on-topic' conversation

    We already have this, its called the comments section of our local dying newspaper. I would assume your local newspaper, if any, is similar. The comments on articles are exclusively filled with sloganeering by "both" sides written by paid political hacks. The problem with the business model is its already dying, because on a percentage basis, roughly no one wants to read idiotic "divide and conqueror" sloganeering. Why sling meaningless slogans on a new site, if you're already slinging them on the old site?

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  5. Sad.. by Kupfernigk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When she was elected, I thought Louise Mensch might actually be some use in Parliament. Certainly a lot of the attacks on her have been (a) unmerited and (b) seem to come from people who are not quite right in the head. But Arianna Huffington she is not. And it is pretty clear that, no matter how MPs of all parties may complain about News International and its proprietor, David Cameron is determined that no harm shall come to Murdoch, his cashflow, or (given the retention of Hunt) Murdoch's moles. Rather than waste time on a website doomed to oblivion, shouldn't she be trying to get her own party on board the prevention of foreign media interference in the UK Government?

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Sad.. by SkunkPussy · · Score: 2

      After all, it was Cameron (and/or Osborne) that decided to put someone aggresively in favour of news international with personal relationships with key staff in charge of the bid. So if Hunt is bad, Cameron (and/or Osborne) is/are worse.

      --
      SURELY NOT!!!!!
    2. Re:Sad.. by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      Certainly a lot of the attacks on her have been (a) unmerited and (b) seem to come from people who are not quite right in the head.

      Or (c) come from people who heard her imbecilic comments about protesters drinking coffee and being able to afford tents on HIGNFY.

  6. Louise Mensch by Des+Herriott · · Score: 4, Informative

    For an example of her (lack of) grasp of politics, or indeed common sense: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WvAkhW-XNI

    1. Re:Louise Mensch by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      And the postscript to that story is that the queue stretching outside the door of Starbucks wasn't even for coffee. It was to use the toilets. People wanting to purchase coffee could just go straight to the counter.

      That's not to say that no protester ever bought coffee from Starbucks. I'm sure they did. Starbucks not being a bank isn't actually responsible for the banking crisis. However the basic premise of Mench's comments couldn't be more wrong since it wasn't people buying coffee that made the long queue. Everyone's got to pee, from bankers to protesters. It's a great leveller.

      If there were still plenty of public conveniences around, people wouldn't have to impose on Starbucks and McDonalds when they're caught short.

  7. New social networks? by zrbyte · · Score: 2

    Whatever happened to Diaspora?

    1. Re:New social networks? by IRGlover · · Score: 5, Funny

      It went away.

    2. Re:New social networks? by Johann+Lau · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's fine: http://diasporaproject.org/

      There's also Friendica, which is cross-network (you can even add diaspora users to it) and contrary to diaspora will run on quite a few shared hosts: http://friendica.com/ Though public pods aren't easy to come by... care to run one? :D It may not be the fastest or the prettiest, but that's why I post the link on slashdot, and not on grandma's wall ^^ I also LOVE the tagline. "The internet is our social network." That's the spirit, and something to build on.

      Also, this is a few days old and nothing is on it yet, but I'll certainly watch it: http://socialswarm.net/ We don't need more networks, we need protocols and microformats! Most of this stuff goes completely over my head, but I hope in a few years there will be tutorials for noobs, so that even I can make my own CMS interact with social networks... IMHO, apathy and resignation just isn't on. We all have text editors, so there are no excuses. Run a little node, federate some love, get down tonight.

  8. So when will Mensch's resign? by sqldr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Given that she has chosen not to work full time as an MP any more while she goes off to start another "lifestyle company", I assume she doesn't need to earn £66k of tax payers' money, let alone all the expenses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_parliamentary_expenses_scandal) every year as a result.

    So.. where is the resignation letter, Louise?

    --
    I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    1. Re:So when will Mensch's resign? by u38cg · · Score: 3, Interesting

      MPs don't resign, and discouraging MPs with external interests is a bad idea, unless you like the Ed MIlibands of this world.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    2. Re:So when will Mensch's resign? by sqldr · · Score: 2

      and discouraging MPs with external interests is a bad idea

      No it isn't. It's a very good idea. They're there to do a job, and external interest = bias.

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    3. Re:So when will Mensch's resign? by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      By the Ed Millibands of this world, you presumably mean MPs who concentrate their time on the parliamentary work that they are paid for, rather than sending time writing novels and setting up vanity project websites.

      Obviously by your comment you're a conservative. But I'm sure even the Tories must have at least some MPs who aren't moonlighting to make extra cash.

    4. Re:So when will Mensch's resign? by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      By the Ed Millibands of this world, you presumably mean MPs who concentrate their time on the parliamentary work that they are paid for, rather than sending time writing novels and setting up vanity project websites.

      The flip side is well, you also want legislators who have current real-world experience, not some career politician who's been at it for 30 years and completely out of touch (e.g., the ivory tower). As long as these interests are revealed well ahead of time and the appropriate people recluse themselves from voting on said topics.

      Those who concentrate on their jobs find themselves the target of lobbyists because they know they don't know the real world so are vulnerable to people telling them "how it really is." (This goes for both sides).

    5. Re:So when will Mensch's resign? by BasilBrush · · Score: 2

      The flip side is well, you also want legislators who have current real-world experience, not some career politician who's been at it for 30 years and completely out of touch (e.g., the ivory tower).

      Oh absolutely, MPs need real world experience. It's a terrible idea for people to go straight into politics from University. They should go out and experience the real world for a far period of time before standing for parliament. But not when they actually are MPs. Then, there job is to be an MP. And that's a demanding and time consuming job. If they're doing it properly there shouldn't be time for other jobs.

      Not only that but current employment means that they can't be independent. They are almost inevitably employed either because it gives their employers a vehicle for lobbying, or because it gives them information that they shouldn't be privvy to.

      And it's part of the job for MPs to listen to people telling them "how it is", because even if they moonlight they only get experience of a small niche of "real life". And generally it will be people sitting round a table talking politics, just as it is in parliament. Moonlighting as a city company director, or an author, or a web entrepreneur won't give them insight to the health service, or education, or policing, or transport. They have to go and find out about those things. It's part of their job. And a part of the job that they will distracted from if they're using time outside of parliament to persue a particular moonlighting avenue.

      Yes this applies to both sides. But it would be remiss not to notice that this is far more prevalent on the Tory benches.

  9. Won't last. by CimmerianX · · Score: 2

    And the U.S. Government seizes those domains in 5..4..3..2..

  10. Attractive female politician + coder?! by zidium · · Score: 2

    I cannot even fathom a U.S. politician being 1) a young female, 2) an attractive young female, or 3) an attractive young female who releases new web apps.

    It’s phenomenal :O

    I wish there were more women of this calibre to go around.

    --
    Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
    1. Re:Attractive female politician + coder?! by nschubach · · Score: 2

      I can't wait for the day when the person's sex doesn't matter in what they do.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    2. Re:Attractive female politician + coder?! by u38cg · · Score: 3, Informative

      She wasn't involved with the coding, and she's not (that) young, either, but she is a refreshingly different face from the political old guard.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    3. Re:Attractive female politician + coder?! by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You'll probably have to wait until men can gestate, give birth to, and then nurse a baby.
      Until then, sex will matter.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  11. Beware beware the NSA security letter by pla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Whether or not your politics line up with those of most Wikileaks supporters, you might wish for some of the features FoWL is designed to provide: "By design your details are encrypted, and hidden from everyone except your immediate contacts.

    Does anyone seriously believe the founders of Wikileaks still have any control whatsoever of such a valuable source of information about leakers?

    Nothing but a pure sweet grade-A honeypot. Oh bother.

  12. British "imperialism"! by k(wi)r(kipedia) · · Score: 2

    What's this, a web site owned by a British MP available only in the United States?

  13. Give my personal informatino to wikileaks? by kelemvor4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who in their right mind would give private information to an organization that has made it's reputation on exposing private information to the public. Seems like a no brainer to avoid that site if you ask me.

    1. Re:Give my personal informatino to wikileaks? by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This again? Find me one person whose name was on the list and who was NOT already known to be an informant. Good luck. Finally, as to the original poster's point -how much different would it be from a) a corporation selling it to other corporations and governments, and b) if it is really as secure as they say - and they should release the code, who cares where it comes from?

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    2. Re:Give my personal informatino to wikileaks? by camionbleu · · Score: 2

      To be fair to Wikileaks, they recognize that there are legitimate secrets. They are an organization for publishing information supplied by whistle-blowers.

  14. Re:Irony by Nadaka · · Score: 2

    No...

    Wikileaks has always sought to protect the identity and lives of the people who reveal the secrets of corporations and governments who would seek to harm them.

  15. Off-Topic Chatter? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

    Ok, people might not "get" Twitter or feel it has a use for them, but since when is anything off-topic on Twitter. It's like a giant mixer where people discuss anything and everything. You aren't forced to focus on just one topic. You can discuss cooking with one tweet and then reply to a political comment with another and then ask your followers about a recently released movie in a third. Why does Mensch think Twitter conversation *needs* to be focused on any one subject (politics)?

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  16. Re:Right. by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

    I spy sarcasm with my little eye.
    - I didn't know Wikileaks launched a social network. So too did Alex Jones with PlanetInfowars. And of course google started one a few months ago. "Launching social websites" must be the new fad.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
  17. Why I joined Friends of WikiLeaks by Aristophon · · Score: 2

    I'm nobody, but at least my voice can bear witness. That matters. If this makes the NSA waste time on me, then it has been a good thing. At the age of 16 I worked on a labor crew in Saudi Arabia composed of Yemeni's and Pakistani's. We dug ditches for laying telephone lines. They were just like you and me, though without our advantages of money and education. I'm ashamed of what the United States is doing to their grandchildren. I realize more and more how great and good the White Rose resistance movement was in Germany. Their backgrounds and habits of mind are so startlingly similar to my own. As they did so can you bear witness to your neighbors and community. I do in my day to day interactions. You can too.

    --
    "Nothing we despise in the other person is entirely absent from ourselves." -- Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer